Changing Concepts of Nature and Conservation Regarding

Faculteit Letteren en Wijsbegeerte.

Academiejaar 2010-2011.

Changing Concepts of Nature and Conservation Regarding

Eastern Mau Forest.

A Case Study of the Mariashoni Ogiek.

“When you speak about forest, you have touched the Ogiek.”

A master‟s dissertation presented by:

Charline Spruyt

00603040

[email protected]

In partial fulfillment of the requirements for obtaining the degree of

MASTERS OF AFRICAN LANGUAGES AND CULTURES.

AX00001A

Promoter: Prof. Dr. Koen Stroeken

Local Promoter: Dr. Sylvester Elikana Anami

mailto:[email protected]

2

Acknowledgements.

It is a pleasure for me to thank those who made this assessment possible. I would like to take a

moment to show my gratitude to those special people whom I could not have done this project

without. First off, I would like to thank my promoter Prof. Dr. Koen Stroeken for believing in my

subject and for having the faith I was capable of completing a three month research in Kenya. I am

also grateful for his patience, good advice and guidance that have encouraged me throughout. His

ideas and insights have helped me to put my research and experiences down in writing.

I would also like to express gratitude to VLIR/UOS, which saw enough potential in my project to

offer me a scholarship and gave me the opportunity to carry out this research.

All my thanks go out to my local promoter, Dr. Sylvester Elikana Anami. Without him, this

undertaking would not have been possible. He was there from the very beginning, giving me

feedback on different possible research subjects and eventually presenting me the idea of working

around Mau Forest. He offered me his professional support, his friendship and admirable generosity

for which I will always be grateful. Dr. Anami opened his home to me in Lakisama, Nairobi and

showed me what it meant to carry through. When times get rough I can still hear him say “But you

know, Charline, you have to sacrifice!”, putting me back in my place and pushing me to keep on

going. He taught me how to keep an open mind and stay flexible. New things will always come our

way, especially in the field, do not panic and just deal with it. I will never forget his valuable

lessons and I will always be indebted to him and his amazing family. They opened their home and

hearts to me, and made me feel part of the family. I thank Christina for her hospitality, her warm

spirit and listening ear; baby Stephanie for always making me laugh, and Jennifer for teaching me

how to make delicious chapatti, showing me around the neighbourhood and being a good friend. I

hope we will all one day sit in front of the house again, and watch the sun go down.

I am grateful to Ms. Valentine Ochanda, friend and colleague to Dr. Anami, for her time and effort

during this project. She stood by me during my first exciting introduction in the field and supported

me by getting in contact with ProMara. I would also like to thank ProMara, the Chief of Party Mr.

Ian Deshmukh for providing me a working place in their office in Nakuru and his staff for

explaining me their experiences in Mau. I would especially like to show my appreciation towards

Mr. Lazarus Kubasu Nolasaco whom I could turn to whenever I had any questions or doubts, during

the research and when I was back in Belgium. Mr. Ian Deshmukh also introduced me to Mr. Cosmas

Kipkemoi Saibala, who assisted me when taking interviews, translated for me and introduced me to

Mariashoni and the Ogiek community. He was an amazing guide and a good friend, someone I

could trust and depend on, for which I am tremendously thankful for. I would also like to thank the

Ogiek community I worked with, for their kindness and welcoming personality. I thank all the

3

people who have helped me to enter their life world and who were willing to share their stories with

me.

I thank my friends and family for supporting this enterprise and believing in me. My mum and dad

for letting me go in the first place, for their assistance and blessing. Furthermore, my sister

Laurence for enduring my sometimes crazy demeanour whilst writing, taking the time to read my

work and helping me clear out some basic grammatical mistakes.

And finally, a special thought goes out to Helder, who made it so hard for me to leave, but, that

much easier for me to come back home. Accomplishing this project without my love and confident

beside me was not a simple task. I thank him for always pushing me to the fullest and giving me

enough confidence to carry out this journey. I can only hope he is proud of what his girl has

achieved.

This work is dedicated to two special people. Fabien Delsaux, for being my guardian angel. Merci

de veiller sur moi, comme je t‟ai toujours connu. Ta présence m‟a donné la force de continuer.

Désiré Delsaux, for stimulating my interest in Africa and for exhilarating me at the onset of this

expedition. On n‟a pas eu assez de temps de parler de mes aventures. J‟avais encore tant de choses à

te dire. Voici ma façon de te raconter mon expérience, et de te dire merci pour ton encouragement et

ton enthousiasme.

Charline „Tiepkoros‟ Spruyt.

Gent, 2011.

4

Contents

Contents ............................................................................................................................................... 4

List of abbreviations............................................................................................................................. 6

Glossary. ............................................................................................................................................... 7

List of Figures. ..................................................................................................................................... 8

Introduction. ......................................................................................................................................... 9

Methodology. ..................................................................................................................................... 11

Part I: Literature review, the Forest and the People. .......................................................................... 18

1 Mau Forest. ................................................................................................................................ 18

1.1 Ecological introduction. ...................................................................................................... 18

1.2 Ecological and economic importance of Mau Forest. ......................................................... 20

1.3 Environmental challenges. .................................................................................................. 22

1.4 Mau Forest Rehabilitation Programme. .............................................................................. 24

2 The Ogiek. .................................................................................................................................. 27

2.1 Let‟s get acquainted; Who are the Ogiek? A history. .......................................................... 27

2.2 Social and political organisation. ........................................................................................ 31

2.3 The dispossession and (re)settlement of the Ogiek; an overview. ...................................... 35

3 An introduction to the field; Mariashoni.................................................................................... 39

Part II: Nature..................................................................................................................................... 42

1 The „Then‟ and the „Now‟. ......................................................................................................... 42

2 Ogiek perceptions of nature – human relationships. .................................................................. 44

2.1 The forest is our home. ........................................................................................................ 44

3 Changing environment, changing lifestyles. .............................................................................. 48

3.1 Ogiek landscape and land tenure. ........................................................................................ 48

3.2 Hunting and gathering to farming. ...................................................................................... 56

3.3 “Culture and honey rhyme together.” .................................................................................. 63

3.4 Traditional medicine. ........................................................................................................... 68

4 Tradition and Ogiek identity. ..................................................................................................... 71

5 Conclusion Part I. ....................................................................................................................... 72

Part III: Conservation. ........................................................................................................................ 75

1 Indigenous people. ..................................................................................................................... 75

1.1 The concept of an „indigenous people‟. .............................................................................. 75

1.1.1 The Ogiek as an indigenous people in Kenya. ............................................................. 77

1.2 Indigenous people and conservation. .................................................................................. 80

2 The Ogiek and conservation. ..................................................................................................... 82

2.1 Ogiek traditional knowledge for biodiversity and conservation. ........................................ 82

5

2.2 Present-day actions for conservation. .................................................................................. 85

2.3 Local concepts of conservation. .......................................................................................... 86

3 Ogiek and the Mau Forest Rehabilitation Programme............................................................... 89

3.1 Ogiek representation in the Mau Forest Rehabilitation Programme. .................................. 90

3.1.1 Council of Elders. ........................................................................................................ 91

3.1.2 Ogiek Registration. ...................................................................................................... 92

3.2 Are the people aware? ......................................................................................................... 96

3.3 First steps towards conservation.......................................................................................... 98

3.4 Future aspirations. ............................................................................................................. 101

4 Conclusion Part II. ................................................................................................................... 104

Conclusion. ...................................................................................................................................... 106

Samenvatting Nederlands. ............................................................................................................... 108

Reference list.................................................................................................................................... 111

Annexs. ............................................................................................................................................ 121

6

List of abbreviations.

ACHPR: African Commission of Human and Peoples‟ Rights

CBO: Community Based Organisation

CFA: Community Forestry Association.

CIPDP: Chepkitale Indigenous Peoples' Development Programmeme

ERMIS-Africa: Environmental Research Mapping and Information Systems in Africa

FPCN: Friends of Peoples Close to Nature

GIS: Geographic Information System

ICS: Interim Coordination Secretariat

ILO: International Labour Organisation

IUCN: International Union for Conservation of Nature

KFS: Kenya Forest Service

KIFCON: Kenya Indigenous Forest Conservation Programme

NGO: Non Governmental Organisation

OPDP: Ogiek Peoples‟ Development Programme

OPNA: Ogiek Peoples National Assembly

ORIP: Ogiek Rural Integral Projects

OWC: Ogiek Welfare Council

P3DM: Participatory Three-Dimensional Modelling

UN: United Nations

WHO: World Health Organisation

7

Glossary.

Bodaboda: motorbike

Matatu: small van, public transportation

Mzee: old man

Konyun Kotinye Temenik mut: my house has five branches

Konoito: clan owned land

Koret (pl. Korosiek): family owned land within clan territory

Ripet op timto: protect of the forest

Ripet lutondop emet: protect the physical appearance of the land

Sogoot (pl. Sogek): leaf (house of leafs)

Ugali: Eastern African porridge-like dish out of maize flour

Five ecological zones of Mau Forest:

Soyua: open bushy forest from 1800 to 2100 meters where one can find elephants and buffalos.

Sasaontent: forest with glades and fields, mostly inhabited by tree hyrax and bushbuck.

Tirap: thick forest from 2400 to about 2600 meters.

Sisiyuet: thick bamboo forest increases.

Mau: where the forest becomes open moorland.

8

List of Figures.

Fig. 1 Five ecological zones.

Fig. 2 Traditional Ogiek hut.

Fig. 3 Contemporary Ogiek housing.

Fig. 4 Mariashoni Trading Centre.

Fig. 5 Ogiek ancestral three-dimensional map (1).

Fig. 6 Ogiek ancestral three-dimensional map (2).

9

Introduction.

This research project is part of the master‟s programme 'African Languages and Cultures' at Ghent

University, Belgium. I set out this project in 2010 with the idea of doing something involving

biodiversity. After all, 2010 was the United Nations‟ year of the biodiversity. After a long search and

with the help of my local promoter Dr. Sylvester Elikana Anami, I decided to work with Mau

Forest, one of the largest closed canopy forests of Kenya. The project was officially set in 2011,

coincidentally or not, the United Nations‟ year of the forest. People all over the world, scientists,

anthropologists, politicians, have made efforts in order to conserve the earth‟s forests and its rich

biodiversity. However, many of those projects are based on Western assumptions that humans are

autonomous from the natural world. According to them, the world of nature and the world of

humans are entirely separated. Western scientific conservation manages conservation efforts by

sealing parts of forests, restricting or even banning any human interference. And yet, the livelihoods

of more than 1.6 billion people all over the world depend on forests. And so I wondered, how do

they perceive their relationship with the forest and their environment? For forest dependent people,

and in particular hunters and gatherers, there are no two worlds. Humans and nature act as one. This

work is based on the same premise that nature and human culture cannot be regarded as two

separate units. Man and his environment are intrinsically linked with each other. Whatever impact

man has on nature, nature has its own impact on man. This also means that whatever changes occur

in the environment, it has an effect on the relevant populations and vice versa. The recent history in

the Mau Forest Complex has been one of constant change. With this study I intend to shed more

light on the human aspect of conservation. How are people affected by the changes in their

environment, what do the people on the ground actually know about the ongoing measures taken

again biodiversity loss, and how do they respond to those changes and measures?

During this study I will focus on the Ogiek, traditionally hunters and gatherers of honey, who are

said to be the last remaining forest dwellers of Kenya and who maintain an intrinsic relationship

with Mau Forest. They will form the key players in this study on how local Ogiek concepts of

nature and conservation have changed as a result of the changes in their environment and the

present day Mau Forest Rehabilitation Programme.

The Mau Forest Complex is one of the largest closed canopy forests of Kenya, and is one of its

most important water towers. The complex represents the green lung of Kenya that offers water and

thus life to its surrounding territories. She is indispensable to local communities and communities

surrounding the forest, to regional waters, national and international wild life reservations and to the

10

whole world as a green force fighting climate change. Over the past 20 years, the forest has lost

more than 27% of its cover due to deforestation, land degradation, illegal logging, mismanagement

and a constantly growing population. This has led the current Kenyan government to put together a

Task Force in 2008 in order to make a clear overview of the situation in the Mau Forest Complex.

The “Mau Forest Complex Programme” was established in 2010, based on this Task Force‟s

findings and recommendations. The rehabilitation programme is composed out of four components.

The first one entails some institutional reforms to ensure the implementation of the conservation

programme. The second component consists of recovering the occupied areas. The third segment

encompasses the rehabilitation process and the last component would stand in for the enhancement

of Mau Forest‟s economic force. It is especially the second component of the rehabilitation

programme that will be of most significance for this study. This component particularly entails that

the people who live inside the protected areas of the forests, or in regions which are highly

degraded, will have to or already have been evacuated. The evacuation of people points towards the

Western dichotomy of humans and nature. And yet, there have been measures taken by the Kenyan

government to allow community forestry management. My aim in this study is to explore how local

perceptions of nature, the environment and of conservation have changed. I believe the study of

cultural and social change is a crucial point in studies dealing with sustainable conservation. This

debate has mainly been dominated by biological ecology and its scientists in the past, ignoring

human presence within forested areas. My objective is to do my best to support the voice of the

Ogiek people living with Mau Forest on a daily basis, knowing that we can never fully know the

experience of others. I am not proclaiming to speak in the name of the Ogiek. Instead, this work is

the outcome of my own consciousness during this research since we can only experience our own

life.1 During the examination of the data I had collected, I have still tried to maintain certain

objectivity and look for local meanings of nature and conservation in their stories. I attempted to get

a sense on how man and nature are interconnected, in this case how Mau Forest is intrinsically

linked with Ogiek lives. I wondered what has changed in people‟s everyday lives, socially and

culturally. How is their relationship with Mau Forest and how has it changed? How do they look at

conservation and more specifically at the current rehabilitation programme? Those are some of the

questions I will attempt to answer in this work, focusing on Ogiek local concepts of nature and

conservation. I believe knowledge on how these concepts have changed will give us more insight on

how the conservation programme is experienced locally and how the Ogiek people are dealing with

the changing relationships between them and their environment.

1 Turner, V. and Bruner E. M., ed. The Anthropology of Experience: University of Illinois Press, 1986.

11

Methodology.

1 Some background to the research.

The presented research will be an historical anthropological study on the Ogiek and their changing

environment, Mau Forest. When setting out this research I had a broad design in my mind of what I

was interested in investigating. I wanted to find out how relationships between humans and nature

are constructed, and how they alter due to external pressures and transformations in the natural

environment. I thought of several small tribes or communities in Kenya that had an intrinsic

relationship with their environment. I was also interested in what was happening in Mau Forest and

the recently government launched rehabilitation programme. I began asking questions how local

people responded to the rehabilitation plans, where they represented and how? Many communities

inhabit the Mau escarpment, and so I had to specify which one I would be concentrating on. I had

been reading on the Ogiek, an indigenous community claiming to have lived on the Mau from time

immemorial. They are depended on the Mau Forest in various ways, relating to their social,

economic and cultural lives. As I was interested in human-nature relationships and how these have

changed over time, it only seemed logical to me to focus on this community.

I started this research from the observation that local communities are all too often left out when

conservation programmes are concerned. This, and my interest in human-nature relationships have

formed the basis on which I able to define my research questions.

How do the Ogiek perceive the environment in which they live?

How have Ogiek lives and their relations with their environment changed over time?

What does conservation mean to them?

How are they represented in the current Mau Forest Rehabilitation Programme, and what is

their stand towards it?

Although I had set out some basic research questions at the commencement of my research, most of

my findings, theories and perspectives portrayed in this paper are based on the observations I have

made in the field. I have tried to cross-reference my findings with theories of other researchers and

indicated where they correlated but also where I found something different.

12

2 Demarcation of the study.

The findings of this research are confined to Eastern Mau. More specifically, they are further

confined to the areas occupied by the Ogiek community. A first inspection in Mau Forest entailed an

introduction to the field. During this simple inspection of the context of my research I got

acquainted with the environment and had an introduction to the Ogiek communities of Nessuit and

Mariashoni. This enabled me to establish my exact field of study and to narrow it down to the

community of Mariashoni. Most of the data collected was retrieved from Mariashoni located in

Nakuru district of the Rift Valley Province, although additional expeditions to Nessuit and Kiptunga

have also been resourceful to the study.

3 Qualitative research.

Brockington and Sullivan explain that by using qualitative methods we can explore the meanings of

people‟s worlds. I was eager to understand the world of Ogiek, their perceptions of and interactions

with the environment. Instead of sitting behind a desk and reading on the available literature, I

wanted to collect my data from a natural setting, make observations myself and try to make sense of

a situation so far removed from my own, geographically and environmentally. Qualitative research

includes a variety of methods and techniques, from group discussions to observations and semi-

structured interviews. Brockington and Sullivan describe qualitative research methods as exciting

and revelatory techniques, assuring an enjoyable and challenging fieldwork.2 As for me, I can only

be of the same opinion.

Interviews.

Interviews can be of all forms possible, from open conversations to highly structured

questionnaires. During my research I have used almost all forms of interviews, with the exception

of a strict questionnaire. As this is an anthropological study, I believe presenting someone a list of

questions will form a restriction to that person. By performing the interviews as natural as possible,

more like a conversation, I believe I have obtained more information and knowledge on how Mau

Forest is perceived and I am able to understand more about the relationship between the people and

22

Brockington, D. and Sullivan S. "Qualitative Research." In Development Fieldwork: A Practical Guide, edited by

Scheuvens R. and Storey D. London: Sage, 2003.

13

their environment. Most of the data collected through interviews was retrieved from Ogiek residents

in Mariashoni. I had an Ogiek translator with me, Mr. Cosmas Saibala, who translated during the

interviews and showed me around the area of Mariashoni. This was necessary since the majority of

my respondents did not speak sufficient English. My basic understandings of Kiswahili were also

not fluent enough to conduct the interviews. The interviews were semi-structured. I carried an item

list with me to make sure I had most of the information I needed. I kept working on the item list

during the entire fieldwork, depending on the information I got from previous interviews. This

enabled me to get more profound information on certain topics of interest. The respondents were

either introduced to me by my translator, or met coincidentally while sitting in a local bar at the

Mariashoni trading centre or in other people‟s homestead without any prior arrangement. Using this

method, I was able to interview eight women and twelve men.

This research is part of wider concern of environment and conservation, hence the importance of

completeness of the study to also indentify some key informants before going to the field. The

people were identified by virtue of their position in the Ogiek society as well as their knowledge on

conservation. I was able to interview Mr. Joseph Towett, chairman of the Ogiek Council of Elders

working closely with the ICS. Other key informants included the chief of Mariashoni and the

chairman of the community forest association (CFA) of Mariashoni location. However, I did not

manage to get an interview with the chief forester of the Mariashoni Forest Service. These

interviews were more structured depending on the respondent‟s area of expertise.

In total, I was able to conduct 24 interviews, four of which had specific knowledge of the

conservation efforts. The twenty other respondents were people from the ground, some of them

were farmers or had a small shop at the trading centre, and others had a particular profession who

could provide me with more information on some specific aspects of Ogiek life. For example, I was

able to meet a herbalist and a traditional midwife who taught me more about the medicinal value of

Mau and who helped me enter their world through showing me plants and herbs, letting me taste

them and explaining which particular discomfort was treated.

My interviews were conducted in family homesteads or in a local bar at the trading centre when I

met interesting persons by coincidence.

Focus groups.

Before being allowed to conduct research in the Ogiek community, I had to identify myself and

explain what the purpose was of the study. I was then welcomed by local elders, who one by one

explained to me the history of the Ogiek. I was able to attend four group discussions, one in

Mariashoni, one in Nessuit and two in Kiptunga. These group discussions were very interesting. By

14

paying close attention not only to what they were saying, but also to how they were saying it, I was

able to find out what aspects of their history were important to the entire community and which

ones were important to an individual speaker. It was however notable how most people generally

said what they thought they should say according to the community. I heard a united voice,

composed out of different individual voices I could identify by listening to how others responded

when someone was speaking.

Fieldwork diary.

I kept a day-to-day record of the work I had done, observations I had made and events that had

happened. Though subjective, this diary was an important aspect of my methodology. It enabled me

to make additional comments, formulate new questions that needed answers, and basically have an

idea of my emotional state during the research. Performing a qualitative research remains a

subjective experience that I have tried taking into account while writing my findings.

Phenomenological observations.

Though I did not have the chance to actually spend an entire period of time with the Ogiek

community and live as one of them due to time pressure I did however had the occasion to explore

Mariashoni with the help of my translator. He showed me around the area and introduced me to the

several faces of Mau Forest. Mariashoni was mostly covered by exotic trees. But when the Ogiek

talked about „forest‟ they talked of the indigenous forest, not about the pines and cypresses covering

Mariashoni. Mr. Cosmas Saibala took me all the way up to Kiptunga, where most of the indigenous

forest is still intact. I had the opportunity to discover what the Ogiek meant with „forest‟. I was able

to experience the immense density of the forest, its beauty and its strength. This gave me more

insight on the matter, and I could comprehend and appreciate more than when merely having a

conversation with a member of the community. I had the chance to see both sides of only one Mau

Forest.

Library research.

At the beginning of my study I did a research on the internet to get an insight in what I was going to

be dealing with. I retrieved a lot of information on the Mau Forest Rehabilitation Programme and

some accounts on the Ogiek as well. Most of the library research however was conducted in

Nairobi. I often went to the libraries of the British Institute of East Africa and the National

15

Museums to read up on early anthropological researches on the Ogiek. I got my hands on books I

would not have been able to get while in Belgium.

4 Limitations of the study.

Twelve weeks in Kenya was not enough to conduct the research as thoroughly as I had hoped for. I

wanted to conduct the research on an independent basis because I was afraid that if I would be

attached to an organisation that might influence Ogiek responses towards me. In other words, I

wanted to try and see whether it was possible to make contact with the Ogiek without the help of

any organisation. I found out that this was not the case and lost a lot of time because of this. With

the help of my local promoter in Kenya, Dr. Sylvester Elikana Anami and his colleague Mss.

Valentine Ochanda, I got in contact with ProMara, the Mau Forest Initiative set up by USAid.

ProMara, or „for the Mara‟, intends to improve sustainable management of Kenya‟s rich natural

resource areas that are essential to the protection of the human environment and natural

ecosystems.3 They had an office in Nakuru, where I resided during field work. However, it took

time to contact them and to get an approval to conduct my study under their organisation.

When setting out the research and developing a strategy, I initially wanted to hear life stories of

people, narratives from a first-person account focusing on individual experiences. However, I found

out very quickly that my respondents were not eager to talk about their own lives, but instead gave

an account of Ogiek past life. It seemed as if they would tell me what they thought I wanted to hear,

or what the community wanted them to narrate. I had too little time to create a deeper relationship

with my respondents in order for them to really entrust me with their personal stories. However,

community identity is very vivid among the Ogiek. A conversation always depends on what matters

in recounting the past, what should be remembered. In this case, it was Ogiek past forest life. These

stories however, provided me with enough information on what the Ogiek value as part of their

identity and allowed me to search for small discrepancies within the community.

Another limitation was the matter of transport. During the research I stayed in Nakuru, not far from

the office of ProMara. The roads towards Mariashoni were mainly dirt roads used by timber lorries.

I conducted my research during the rainy season, which meant that the dirt roads were often

converted into flows of mud. I was recommended to hire a jeep to be able to reach my area of study.

This however formed a problem, given the fact that I did not have enough financial resources to be

able to pay for this kind of transportation. I found myself in quite of a pickle, but managed to sort

out a different approach. Instead of hiring a jeep I could not afford, I used public transportation like

3 USAID Land Tenure and Property Rights Portal.

http://usaidlandtenure.net/news/kenya-promara-project-gets-underway (retrieved 24 July 2011)

http://usaidlandtenure.net/news/kenya-promara-project-gets-underway

16

any other Kenyan would use. This meant that I had to get up early in the morning, catch a matatu in

Nakuru that brought me all the way to Elburgon. From there I had to take a bodaboda, a motorbike,

which went up to Mariashoni. I found myself going up and down using this mode of transportation

for the entire time I did my field work. It would have of course been much easier if I would have

been able to hire the jeep. It could have given me more space and time to do the research, but I had

to make shift with what I had. Overall, the challenges I have met helped me to „grow the African

muscle‟, as the people I met would say.

5 Structure of the paper.

The dissertation „Changing Concepts of Nature and Conservation Regarding Eastern Mau Forest. A

Case Study of the Mariashoni Ogiek.‟ is an historical anthropological study with an interest in

socio-linguistic elements. Linguistic data can provide important clues to underlying cultural

knowledge. By analyzing the textured material I have gathered through interviews and ordinary

discourse, I will try to get a grasp on the relationships between the Ogiek and Mau and how they

have changed.4 It is with this perspective that I enter into the field of ecological anthropology.

Ecological anthropology emphasises the relationships between people and their environment, and

tries to have a better understanding on how these relationships have changed over time and space.

During this work I have tried to manage a holistic model of the components and interrelations of the

Mau Forest ecosystem. A system is an integral whole and no part can be understood apart from the

entire system, therefore the Ogiek cannot be understood apart from Mau Forest and vice versa. This

research has been essentially a qualitative and descriptive process handling a diachronic approach. 5

I believe that the case of the Ogiek and Mau Forest is an interesting one exactly because

relationships within the ecosystem are and have been changing for quite some time now. This

makes a study over time and space even more intriguing.

The dissertation contains three main components, each split up into different, smaller chapters. The

first section is a literature study of the two key players in the study; Mau Forest and the Ogiek. It

offers a general reading of where Mau Forest and the Ogiek. Furthermore, it gives an introduction

into the field of Mariashoni. This is to lead the reader into the research, presenting him enough

background to understand the findings of the study. These findings are focused on nature and

conservation, representing the other two sections of the dissertation. Both sections focus on how

4 Holland, D. and Quinn N., ed. Cultural Models in Languag and Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,

1987. 5 Morán, E. Human Adaptability: An Introduction to Ecological Anthropology. New York: Westview Press, 2000.

17

nature and humans are regarded as part of only one world. The section on „Nature‟ provides an

account how the Ogiek perceive their environment and human-nature relationships. It also

highlights how Ogiek life has changed. However, to quantitatively study the changes in Ogiek life I

had to simplify these complex interactions between the Ogiek and Mau. By listening to the stories

presented to me I identified several aspects important to Ogiek life. These aspects are then further

defined in order to understand the changes and how the Ogiek perceive them. We will then explore

how the Ogiek characteristics which they call tradition, are part of who they are. The third and last

section highlights „Conservation‟. We will look into the concept of indigenous people and how the

Ogiek are identified as such. Indigenous people are more and more being taken into account within

conservation practices and policies. This section will illustrate what the Ogiek understand when

talking about conservation and how they have been represented in the Mau Forest Rehabilitation

Programme.

Finally, the conclusion will present a reflection of the dissertation, providing the arguments we have

discovered in relation to the research questions.

18

Part I: Literature review, the Forest and the People.

The Mau Escarpment is one of the largest remaining blocks of indigenous trees found in East Africa

and is the largest closed canopy forest of Kenya. The forest has been split up into seven different

blocks being: Eastern Mau, Western Mau, South-western Mau, Southern Mau, Trans-Mara and Ol

Posimori. The seventh block is Maasai Mau. This territory is classified as a Trust land, and is

maintained by the Narok County Council. The Ogiek are found in all forest blocks but as most of

the research is done in Mariashoni, we will dig a little deeper into the current changes on Eastern

Mau as well as in its history. Questions on how Eastern Mau has been affected by former forest

excisions and how the current Mau Forest Rehabilitation Programme has affected the area up to

today, will be answered in this piece of writing. Next we will meet the Ogiek and learn more about

their social organisation and their history of dispossession and resettlements. At last, we will sketch

an image of the research field, Mariashoni.

1 Mau Forest.

In order to have a clear understanding of this research it is essential to examine the larger ecological

setting of Mau Forest. So let us first of all become acquainted with Mau Forest. What does this

enormous montane forest represent? What challenges did she face these last few decades, and how

did the current government of Kenya react to these challenges? We will take a look at what the

rehabilitation programme, established in the Prime Minister‟s Office in 2009, entails to create a

broader social context in which this research took place.

1.1 Ecological introduction.

Being one of the last remaining continuous forest blocks in Kenya, Mau Forest symbolises one of

the most powerful green forces the country has to offer. The Mau Forest Complex is situated in Rift

Valley Province and is one of the most massive forest areas in Kenya. Mau Forest comprises 22

forest blocks of which 21 are gazetted forest reserves. The last forest block, Maasai Mau Trustland

Forest, is a Trust Land and is managed by the Narok City Council. A Trust Land belongs to the local

communities, families and individuals of that particular area, in accordance with applicable

19

customary law.6 Being the largest closed-canopy montane forest, the complex is stretched over

approximately 400.000 hectares, straddling four districts: Kericho, Bomet, Nakuru and Narok,

while each having their own specific trades boosting the Kenyan economy. The Kericho and Bomet

districts are known for their large tea plantations. Nakuru is home to the famous flamingos at Lake

Nakuru, and the Narok district is home to an impressive wildlife population of which the wildebeest

migration is an important tourist attraction.

Mau forest is located on an escarpment, at an altitude of 1800 - 3000 meters above sea level. It

experiences an annual rainfall of about 2000 ml spread throughout the year, depending on the sites

within Mau Forest. Rainfall is higher on the western side of the forests, with an annual rainfall of

2000 ml and above. The eastern side experiences a bimodal rainfall of about 1000 to 1500 ml a year

with a moist climate. Being on an escarpment, the yearly temperatures tend to decrease and the

amount of rainfall tends to increase moving upward.7 The vegetation cover varies from shrubs to

thick, impenetrable bamboo forest, according to the altitude. Overall, we can differentiate a broad

altitudinal zonation from west to east. Below 2300 metres, at the edge of the plains, we find a lower

montane forest, which is in its best condition in the South Western Mau Reserve. Other areas where

this forest type occurs has been severely damaged by logging, excisions and encroachments. Above

2300 metres we see a more dense forest, a mixture of bamboo, forest and grassland vegetation. On

the steep slopes near the top of the mountain, we discover a moist montane forest which is

characterized by evergreen, semi-deciduous and deciduous trees with an average canopy height of

about 20 metres. Glades are a common view in Mau Forest, most of which are the result of fires as a

way to clear land for agricultural purposes; although I have been told some of them are natural and

used by the Ogiek as settlement areas surrounded by forest. Mau forest is also a habitat to an

impressive amount of large animals such as buffalos, leopards, hyenas, antelopes, elephants, some

of which are of international conservation concern. The forests are also a home to a rich variety of

birds and is said to represent the richest montane avifauna in Eastern Africa.8 The Mau Forest

shelters a rich biodiversity in flora and fauna that should be maintained.

This rich biodiversity in flora and fauna sheltered by the Mau Forest is now in jeopardy due to the

advancing deforestation.

6 Lambrechts, C. "Maasai Mau Forest Status Report 2005."

http://www.iapad.org/publications/maasai_mau_report.pdf (Retrieved 3 August 2011) 7 Blackburn, R. "In the Land of Milk and Honey: Okiek Adaptations to Their Forests and Neighbours." In Politics and

History in Band Societies, edited by Leacock E. and Lee R.: Cambridge University Press, 1982. 8 Lynette Obare and J. B. Wangwe. “Underlying causes of deforestation and degradation of Mau Forest.”

http://www.wrm.org.uy/deforestation/Africa/Kenya.html (retrieved 24 July 2011)

http://www.iapad.org/publications/maasai_mau_report.pdf

http://www.wrm.org.uy/deforestation/Africa/Kenya.html

20

1.2 Ecological and economic importance of Mau Forest.

Kenya holds five major water towers, Mount Elgon, Mount Kenya, Aberdare Range, Cherangai

Hills and the Mau Forest Complex. Of those five towers, Mau Forest is considered the most

important one. The rainfall experienced by the forest areas of Mau are the most intense in the entire

country. We could say that the complex functions like a sponge. It slurps up a lot of water during

the rainy seasons and releases it during the dry seasons, providing sufficient water to the

surrounding rivers, lakes and communities. This reference is not coincidental. The major wetland or

swamp, located at the top of the Eastern Mau Escarpment near Kiptunga forest, is named

Napuyapui, which in Ogiek language literally means 'spongy'9. It is the major source of the Mara

river. This small but important detail already provides us with an initial image of the complex's

ecological and economical value. Mau Forest is the biggest water provider to crucial rivers such as

the Njoro, the Makalia and the Nderit, some of them partially or exclusively feeding national lakes

like the river Mara which provides water for Lake Baringo, Lake Naivasha and Lake Nakuru. They

even supply the international lakes such as the river Sondu that drains into Lake Victoria, which

straddles three East African countries; Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda. While being the most

important water supplier of the Lake Victoria Catchment, Mau Forest is also essential to the White

Nile of which the Victoria catchment is its major source. In other words Mau Forest is not only a

powerful irrigation system of great national importance, it is also of huge transboundary

significance. We could say Mau Forest is the heart, and the rivers and lakes are the veins providing

water and thus life to the surrounding areas. Those areas not only comprise important protected

areas and national parks such as Lake Nakuru National Park, the Maasai Mara National Reserve and

Serengeti National Park in Tanzania, Mau Forest also sustains local communities that depend on

forest products such as honey, medicinal herbs and fire wood, and on regular water flowing for their

farming and livestock holding. The enormous ecological importance of Mau Forest is hard to

overlook. Adjacent to a continuous stream flow regulation nurturing lakes, rivers and surrounding

areas, and offering other ecological services such as soil stabilization, the forests are also of major

value to the existing biodiversity of flora and fauna in East Africa.10

Besides being of indispensable value to the country's ecology, as well as to the entire East African

region, Mau Forest is a key motor sustaining multiple economic sectors such as energy, tourism

agriculture and the timber industry. The Mau Forest sustains the local and surrounding forest

9 See annex 3

10“Rehabilitation of the Mau Forest Ecosystem: Programmeme Document” Prepared by the Interim Coordinating Secret

ariat, Office of the Prime Minister, on behalf of the Government of Kenya, with support from the United Nations Enviro

nment Programme, 2010

(www.unep.org/roa/kcp/Mau/Docs/ProgrammemeDoc_Mau.pdf) (Accessed 21 July 2011)

http://www.unep.org/roa/kcp/Mau/Docs/ProgrammeDoc_Mau.pdf

21

dependent communities such as the Ogiek, the Kipsigis, Nandi and Maasai by providing numerous

goods and services such as fertile and stable soils for agriculture, fuel wood, honey, wild fruits,

regular water flow to the surrounding urban areas like Elburgon, Nakuru, Narok, Njoro, Kericho,

Bomet and more. At a national level, Mau Forest is more than able to be a powerful energy

provider. Approximately 57 per cent of the total electricity in Kenya is produced by hydropower

plants. This is not only one of the cheapest but, more importantly, one of the most environmental

friendly sources of energy. There are already a number of sites developed in the Mau, the most

famous one being the Sondu Miriu hydropower Scheme in the South West Mau Reserve. Others are

currently still being developed or are in the proposal stage. The UNEP estimates the hydropower

potential of the rivers flowing in Mau Forest to be at an annual value of roughly 80 million euros.

Kenya receives most of its energy from her neighbouring country Uganda. Energy is thus one of the

country's scarcities. Because of the enormous potential in power resources, the Mau Forest can

reduce Kenya's dependence on Uganda for electrical energy import and can even help stem the

overall power shortages. To be able to exploit these resources it is necessary to conserve and further

protect the forest and insure the continuous water flows. Tourism is another key economic sector in

which Mau Forest plays a vital role. The tourist industry is one of Kenya's largest sources of

international income, and it offers a number of jobs that cannot be underestimated. Up till now there

are only few tourist events, despite Mau being an impressive birdlife sanctuary, hosting over 450

bird species, and providing a habitat for several endangered mammals like elephants, leopards, etc.

... But even though its tourist potential has not thoroughly been explored, Mau Forest still provides

important ecological services to other national parks. The Mau forms a continuous supplier of water

and is therefore a crucial lifeline to the survival of the well-known flamingos in Lake Nakuru and

the amazing wildlife population in Maasai Mara, which are two of Kenya's main tourist

destinations. One of Kenya's most important cash crop productions are the tea plantations of which

it derives a large per cent of its foreign income. Three main micro-climatic conditions must be met

in order to experience optimal tea growth. The conditions are constant moisture, a soil temperature

between 6 and 25° C, and air temperature between 10 and 30° C. Conditions several areas of Mau

forest easily meets. The largest tea growing plantations are located near Mau Forest. Besides being

an important source of national income, the tea production produces not only numerous jobs but

also provides in the livelihood of small farmers.11

Not only is Mau Forest ecologically and economically essential to Kenya and her surrounding

countries, it is also indispensible to the entire global community. Mau Forest works as a reservoir of

carbon dioxide (CO²), which is the major greenhouse gas behind global warming and climate

11

Ibid.

22

change. In other words, Mau Forest represents a source of life on all kind of levels, local, regional,

national, international and global.12

1.3 Environmental challenges.

Environmental experts claim that up to 10 per cent of forest cover of the total land mass is needed

to maintain a regular water supply. Up to a decade ago, forests represented 2 per cent of Kenya's

total land area. This has unfortunately decreased even more with forests now only covering 1.7 per

cent of the country. Kenya has very little forest cover compared to its own land mass and to the

forest cover of other African countries that have an average of about 9.3 per cent. And yet forest

cover loss is one of the country's most striking environmental problems.

The forest areas of the Mau are crucial to Kenya's ecological and economic well-being and are

indispensable to the local communities depending on the forests' resources. But today, the complex

is one of the most degraded areas of the country. Over the past few decades the Mau Forest

Complex has been facing some severe challenges leading to degradation and deforestation. This

resulted into rapidly experienced large-scale environmental changes felt not only within the forest

but also in the surrounding areas. To avoid any confusion we will refer to deforestation and

degradation using the definitions held by the Food and Agricultural Organisation of the United

Nations (FAO). Deforestation involves a decrease in forest covered areas. It is a continuous

conversion of forests to other land uses, most commonly in favour for agricultural or settlement

purposes. We speak of deforestation when there is no guarantee the forest cover will be maintained

and a reduction in tree cover is rampant. Degradation does not in any way refer to a reduction of

forested areas, but to a decrease of the condition of its vegetation layer, the soil, fauna etc... 13

The

effects are tremendous. Not only does the continuing degradation and deforestation of these natural

resources affect the local communities, it has had an enormous impact on the surrounding rivers,

lakes and regions. Five of the six major rivers flowing into the Rift Valley have become seasonal in

the past few years running in spate and then drying up. One of the rivers, Makalia has dried up

almost completely and its once impressive waterfall is now a mere trickle of water, only flowing

during the rainy season. 14

The main cause for this massive land degradation and forest excisions is

said to be the continual growth of the population. Over 80 per cent of the Kenyan population

depend on agriculture. With an on-going population pressure, the demands for excision of more

12

Ibid. 13

Mau Forest Interim Coordinating Secretariat

http://www.maurestoration.go.ke/ (Retrieved 21 July 2011) 14

Towett, J. Ogiek Land Cases and Historical Injustices 1902-2004. Vol. 1. Nakuru: Ogiek Welfare Council, 2004.

http://www.maurestoration.go.ke/

23

land for agricultural purposes are high and it is most often the forested areas who suffer from it. But

population growth is not the only accountable factor. As we will see when further discussing Mau

Forest, intensive forest cover loss is due to a combination of causes such as extensive logging for

economical ends, population pressure and mismanagement of forestland.

Mau Forest is thus facing a number of threats due to a number of causes. It has been affected by

illegal and uncontrolled forest resource extractions, irregular settlement planning and conversion of

forest land for agricultural purposes. The biggest direct threats to Mau Forest and its biodiversity

are the changes in land use, changes in ownership from public to private, illegal and extensive

logging and a growing population pressure. One of the changes in land use is the establishment of

tree plantations. In the 1930‟s, large parts of Mau Forest had been cleared to make way for new

plantations of exotic trees to meet the growing demands of wood.15

The Mau Forest was declared

Crown Land by the colonial government in 1932 and was officially gazetted as a natural reserve in

1954 under the 1942 Forest Act Cap. 385. This Forest Act granted the minister in charge of forests

the power to determine which areas of the country are forest lands, and which areas should cease to

be a forest area, hence available for other uses. To declare forest land as an area for settlement or

other uses such as agriculture the minister in charge placed a notice of gazettement in the Kenya

gazette. The initial intention of the colonial government to declare the Mau a reserve was to create a

buffer zone between the settler‟s „White Highlands‟ and the Natural Reserve of the Maasai that

would separate both of their cattle.16

In addition to creating the „Highlands‟ for the new white

settlers, the forest was also used as a supplier of wood to starting industries and to the new „Kenya-

Uganda‟ rail network. The then steam driven trains were the highest demanders of wood, which led

the colonial government to establish tree plantations to guarantee a continuous supply of wood. But

because the indigenous species alone could not meet the growing demand of wood due to their slow

growth, the plantations consisted of fast growing exotic species that mainly comprised cypress,

pines and eucalyptus species.17

Another change with great impact on land use is the conversion of

forests into agricultural lands and the carving out of forests for human settlement. The

establishment of plantations did relieve pressure on the indigenous trees. In this way, the plantations

provided at least some kind of protection to the remaining indigenous forests. Because of the

growing demand for land however, most of these plantations have been cleared for agricultural and

settlement purposes, which means that the indigenous trees were again vulnerable. During the past

two decades, Mau Forest has been confronted with excisions, widespread encroachment and

15

Lynette Obare and J. B. Wangwe. “Underlying causes of deforestation and degradation of Mau Forest.”

http://www.wrm.org.uy/deforestation/Africa/Kenya.html (retrieved 24 July 2011) 16

Sang, J. "The Ogiek in Mau Forest." In From Principle to Practice: Indigenous Peoples and Protected Areas in Africa,

edited by Nelson J. and Hosscak L.: Forest Peoples Project, 2001. 17

Ochieng, R. M. "The Mau Forest Complex, Kenya: A Review of Degradation Status and Possible Remedial

Measures." Norderstedt: GRIN Verlag, 2009.


24

irregular land allocations, followed by illegal logging and charcoal production, which have

especially been rampant in the encroached areas. Over the last fifteen years, conversions to

settlement and farmland have affected about 107.707 hectares of forest land, representing around 25

per cent of the Mau Forest Complex area.

The excisions of 2001 alone, whereby forest land was converted into settlements and agricultural

lands, were responsible for the loss of 61.586 hectares. These excisions have been done in an

unsystematic manner, which has had devastating effects on forestland degradation. In addition, the

massive clearance paved way for the rapid encroachment of areas next to the excised areas. But

initially, the excisions were meant to resettle over 14.000 Ogiek families and victims of the 90's

'land clashes‟, which were the result of political violence in 1992 when the grievances of land

access were politically manipulated to displace possible opposition voters. Nevertheless, instead of

the land being allocated to the supposed beneficiaries, most of it was actually given to government

officials, political leaders and their families, economically strong companies.

1.4 Mau Forest Rehabilitation Programme.

The forests of Mau cover an area of 416.542 hectares. Today the forests are one of the most

degraded territories in Kenya. Between 1973 and 2003 there has been a substantial loss of

vegetation cover due to forest excisions and encroachment. During Kenya‟s independence, the

gazetted forests were about 28 per cent larger than they are today. In 2005 UNEP did a study on

changes in forest cover in the five water towers of Kenya, including Mau Forest. They collected

data by using satellite images of 2005 that were referenced against corresponding images of 2003.

They registered a total loss of about 9.813 hectares within Mau Forest of which 9.295 hectares was

cleared under indigenous forest cover. The disturbing factor here is that a lot of the indigenous

clearings were actually done in the new sites of indigenous forests. This meant that deforestation

was not only more extensive in 2005 than in 2003, it was also spreading to the new recovering

sites.18

This massive destruction of forestland within the Mau has reached a state of national emergency,

which has prompted the government to look for a sustainable solution. The office of the Prime

Minister therefore engaged all the stakeholders to participate in a consultative forum to address the

on-going degradation of Mau Forest. The forum was attended by representatives of government

institutions, members of parliament, the private sector, community-based organisations (CBO's),

18

"Changes in Forest Cover in Kenya's Five "Water Towers" 2003-2005." edited by Department of Resource Surveys

and Remote Sensing and Kenya Forests Working Group. Nairobi, 2005.

25

local non-governmental organisations and international organisations. A multi-stakeholder Task

Force was then established by the Prime Minister‟s office in 2008 to officially address the crisis in

the Mau Forest and to make recommendations for the Kenyan government on how to deal with the

faced challenges. The Task Force was completed and submitted in March 2009. The objective of the

Task Force was to build a consensus and to formulate recommendations regarding the restoration

and conservation of Mau Forest. The Task Force first of all pointed out the poor management

system, which was in charge of the decisions made in Mau. It stated that the Mau Forest Complex

had always been managed from a forestry perspective instead of a natural asset providing important

economic and environmental services to the entire nation. One of the recommendations led to new

reforms which set the base for a more effective management. Another point on the agenda

concerned the relocation of the people residing in the forests. Thirdly, recommendations were made

regarding the restoration of the degraded forest areas and critical water catchments. And last, the

Task Force focused on how to mobilize resources to implement all the above mentioned

recommendations and objectives, and to keep securing the sustainability of the entire ecosystem.

Based on the findings and recommendations of the Task Force, the Kenyan government established

the „Mau Forest Rehabilitation Programme‟ in 2009. The mission of the programme is:

“To rehabilitate the Mau Forest ecosystem so that the region can once again play its essential role as

a national and international watershed, providing ecosystem services that conserve biodiversity,

support livelihoods locally, regionally and internationally, sustain economic development, and

contribute to mitigating and adapting to global climate change.”19

An Interim Coordinating Secretariat (ICS) was established in September 2009, in line with the Task

Force recommendations. This secretariat, headed by former Rift Valley Provincial Commissioner

Hassan Noor Hassan, is responsible for the coordination of the proposed activities of the „Mau

Forest Rehabilitation Programme‟ and of the implementation of the short term recommendations

made by the Task Force. This coordination exists to ensure an orderly implementation involving all

the concerned stakeholders and government ministries. The actual implementation is carried out by

the relevant ministries and stakeholders. The ICS was established in the Office of the Prime

Minister and has a lifespan of two years, which means its term is almost ending. After its mandate,

the responsibilities and duties should normally be taken over by the „Mau Forest Complex

19

“Rehabilitation of the Mau Forest Ecosystem: Programmeme Document” Prepared by the Interim Coordinating Secret

ariat, Office of the Prime Minister, on behalf of the Government of Kenya, with support from the United Nations Enviro

nment Programme , 2010

(www.unep.org/roa/kcp/Mau/Docs/ProgrammemeDoc_Mau.pdf) (Toegang 21 januari 2010)








26

Authority‟, another recommendation made by the Task Force. The ICS has been responsible for a

number of projects taken in Mau. One of the first actions taken was to create a strategy on how to

repossess forestland. They developed a five-phase plan in which the people residing inside

protected areas of Mau Forest, or in areas which have been severely degraded or that are near to

important water catchments, will be evacuated and the areas reclaimed by the government. The first

three phases have already been completed or are still in progress. Phase I entailed the repossession

of areas in Eastern Mau that were affected by the 2001 excisions. Although the areas were excised

for human settlement, and most of them had been parcelled, phase I only included those that were

not occupied. The total are of forestlands that were repossessed during this first phase was about

4,530 hectares. The second phase included areas in South West Mau which were considered

protected forest lands but had been encroached by illegal squatters. The government was able to

repossess about 19,000 hectares. The people residing the forests did not have title deeds or any

other documentation to present that would support their stay inside the forest. The area has never

been set aside for settlement schemes, but instead remained a protected forest. Phase III is to move

toward recovery of the titled land in Maasai Mau block and in Ol Posimoru who reside in highly

degraded areas but do hold title deeds to their lands. This has stalled and is not likely to happen

soon. Maybe after the 2012 elections the activities will be picked up again. Political balancing and

the likelihood of political implications have had their influence on the stalling. Phase IV will entail

the repossession of areas in Eastern Mau that, to the contrary of the first phase, is being occupied.

The fifth and last phase of the repossession of the Mau includes areas in Ol Posimoru. The ICS also

made efforts to restore lost or degraded forest land by establishing tree nurseries and donating tree

seedlings. It also continues to identify important water catchment areas and biodiversity hotspots,

establishing organisations and creating relationships with NGO‟s to continue the restoration of the

Mau and raise awareness on this restoration and the ecological importance of Mau Forests and its

catchment areas. Another and more important aspect for this research is the fact that the ICS is

trying to provide for a long-term solution for the Ogiek people. The ICS established the Ogiek

Council of Elders to represent the entire Ogiek community and to enter in dialogue with them. This

section will be explained more thoroughly in the next chapter.20

Forests have a significant role to play as a reservoir of resources to boost human development. They

offer timber for the construction sector, fuel wood for surrounding tea plantations and provide

subsistence to the local communities. Besides offering utility products, forests also supply a variety

of non-wood products of which everyone benefits indirectly. They are essential for carbon

20

Ibid.

27

sequestration, offer a regular flow of water, support irrigation schemes for agriculture and are

important in conservation of biodiversity and they form a habitat to wildlife. These direct and

indirect uses of forests make them one of the most important natural assets for economic,

environmental, social and cultural values. A natural resource like Mau Forest, providing all those

ecological and economic services, should be cared for. In order to stop further degradation and

deforestation the government of Kenya established a rehabilitation programme, coordinated by the

ICS.

2 The Ogiek.

The Ogiek people are hunters and gatherers of honey by tradition and are said to be the last

remaining forest dwellers of Kenya. They live in and around Mau Forest, and are scattered over its

seven major forest blocks. The Ogiek will form the key player in this study on how concepts of

nature and conservation have changed as a result of the present day Mau Forest Rehabilitation

Programme. Up until now there has been no clear evidence to counter the statement that the Ogiek

are the earliest dwellers in and around the Mau Escarpment.

In this section we will try to form a first representation of who the Ogiek are. We will not only take

a look at how the Ogiek identify themselves as a people, but also how they have been perceived by

other groups and researchers in the past and even up to today. This section will be a broad overview

of Ogiek history, their language and general social organisation around the 1940‟s and before. In

what follows we will consider the social organisation of the Ogiek and how they experienced

numerous dispossessions, settlements and resettlements. This is to create a more extended image of

a people who are widely dispersed over the Mau Escarpment, split up into different local groups but

yet feel a great sense of unity amongst each other

2.1 Let‟s get acquainted; Who are the Ogiek? A history.

The Ogiek are said to be the original inhabitants of Mau Forest and live in an intimate relationship

with their environment. Traditionally the Ogiek are hunters and gatherers who depend on the forests

resources for their basic survival, as well as for their social and cultural lives. Although they are

divided into different local groups and clans, and live dispersed in and around the Mau Escarpment,

they feel a strong connection and consider themselves to be one people, the Ogiek. The majority of

the Ogiek live in Nakuru district. Other groups reside near Mt Elgon, Koibatek, Nandi, Samburu

28

and Narok in Western and Rift Valley provinces of Kenya, while another group lives in Tanzania.

The Ogiek people are hunters and honey gatherers by tradition living in the highlands of Mau

Forest. They live in local groups dispersed over the territory, near one or more other Ogiek groups.

'Ogiek' is also the mother tongue of the Ogiek people. This is a Kalenjin dialect, and is part of the

Southern Nilotic language group. The Ogiek also live near non-Ogiek groups such as the Maasai,

Kipsigis, Nandi and Kikuyu. The earliest writings found on the Ogiek mainly refer to them as

'Dorobo'. This name was also commonly used in historical literature to refer to all hunter-gatherer

groups found in East Africa. These 'Dorobo' that we find in early literature can thus refer to

historically and linguistically very distinct groups, who have very little in common despite a similar

way of subsistence. Yet they were easily lumped together as belonging to one big 'Dorobo' group. In

other words, hunting and gathering cannot refer to only one single group, as it is a mode of

subsistence and production. There has been a lot of misconceptions on hunting and gathering

societies in past researches. This particular mode of subsistence was generally represented as being

one of the earliest 'stages' in development. Groups depending on hunting and gathering were

therefore labelled as „backward‟ and yet to be developed. They were also often portrayed as being

remnants of a much bigger group who had been forced to change their livelihoods in times of

physical and/ or social adversity.21

As van Zwanenberg puts it:

“Dorobu everywhere can be defined, understood and identified as scatter groups; very often they

were remnants of people who had at one time been destroyed … lost their cattle or people who had

been thrown out by their communities”22

This continual reference to 'Dorobo' resulted in a lot of misconceptions about the Ogiek23

and a lot

of confusion when first studying the them. For who are these 'Dorobo' and how was it possible that

this term dominated the early literature concerning hunting and gatherer societies? The term

'Dorobo' or 'Ndorobo' actually derives from the Maasai word 'Il Torobbo' which was used to

describe hunters or people without cattle. Berntsens studies on the Maa-speaking pastoralists have

given us more insight on the subject. The word 'Dorobo' could refer to pastoralists who lost their

cattle, and who were thus considered to be poor in the eyes of the Maasai. Yet it can also be used to

name their non-Maasai neighbouring communities who lived in the forests and 'whose relations

21

van Zwanenberg R. "Dorobo Hunting and Gathering: A Way of Life or a Mode of Production?" African Economic

History, no. 2 (1976): 12-21. 22

Ibid. 23

See also Kenny, M. "Mirror in the Forest: The Dorobo Hunter-Gatherers as an Image of the Other." Africa: Journal of

the International African Institute 51, no. 1 (1981): 477-95.

29

with the Maasai were limited to trade in honey and other forest and animal products' 24

. This is the

part where the fog around the 'Dorobo' was lifted. Berntsen pointed out that the word 'Dorobo' or

„Il Torobbo‟ actually has a number of different meanings depending upon the context. He also

identified the 'Dorobo' of the Maasai as belonging to several linguistic groups, one of which were in

fact the Ogiek known for their honey gathering. Yet instead of being called by their own name, they

were named after how others, in this case the Maasai, would refer to them. Even though other

neighbours such as the Kipsigis or Nandi would call them by their own name, seeing as they are all

Kalenjin speakers, the Ogiek were still referred to with the Maasai term in the early and middle

nineteenth century literature. This small but important element reflects the realities of that time

when the Maasai had considerable influence on the Swahili trade. Many colonialists used the names

that Swahili traders had adopted from the Maasai to identify other Rift Valley peoples.25

The Ogiek

still refuse to be called 'Dorobo' because of the negative connotation that they are a poor people.

They are considered that way by the Maasai because of the small size of Ogiek cattle herds

compared to theirs, even though the number of cattle one owns is not all that important to the

Ogiek. But although the cultural perceptions of the Maasai and the Ogiek on who is 'rich' and who

is 'poor' differ, this negative assumption still remains. Instead they identify themselves, and prefer to

be identified, by their own name 'Ogiek'. As my translator Mr Cosmas Saibala explained to me, the

word „Ogiek‟ originally derives from the Ogiek word „sogoot‟ which literally translated means „a

single leaf‟, plural „sogek‟ meaning a „house of leafs‟. The significance of „sogek‟ refers to the

forest. You could then say that the Ogiek „derive‟ from the forest, and are in this way connected to

it. The word „Ogiek‟, according to Sang, signifies „caretaker of all animals and plants‟.26

Although the Ogiek people are said to traditionally be a hunter-gatherers society, they have

gradually diversified their economy by adding agriculture and herding to their lives as new forms of

subsistence. It is also because of these 'new' ways of life and subsistence that hunters and gatherers

have mostly been perceived as disappearing. This resulted in misconceptions of hunter and gatherer

societies and in a neglection in past studies of their neighbouring relationships of whom they often

learned those new ways of subsistence. They were regarded as unimportant or not 'truly' belonging

to the traditional hunter-gatherer way. Yet these relationships and changes in subsistence are as

much part of the society's history as is hunting and gathering. It is within these interactions that the

Ogiek have managed to maintain culturally and economically distinct, and it is within these

relationships and changes that we must try to understand the Ogiek; or any society for that matter.

24

Berntsen, J. "The Maasai and Their Neighbors: Variables of Interaction." African Economic History, no. 2 (1976): 1-

11. 25

Distefano, J. A. "Hunters or Hunted? Towards a History of the Okiek of Kenya." History in Africa 17 (1990): 41-57. 26

Sang, J. "Land Rights: A Central Issue in Conflict Resolution and Management among the Ogiek of Kenya." In

Reclaiming Balance: Indigenous People, Conflict and Sustainable Development, edited by Tauli-Corpuz V. and Cariño

J. Baguio City: Tebtebba Foundation, 2004.

30

The idea of a stable society has long been out-dated.

The Ogiek people have always interacted with their neighbours, even to that level that many Ogiek

groups have learned their neighbours' language in addition to their own. Most of the Ogiek groups

live near one of the principal Kalenjin-speaking peoples like the Kipsigis and the Nandi. The

consequence of this is that their dialect is usually more similar to their Kalenjin-speaking

neighbours than to the dialect of other Ogiek groups. Most Ogiek also speak the language of their

non-Kalenjin neighbours, mostly the Maasai.27

This led many researchers to believe that the Ogiek

may be ethnically derived from another larger group, and fed the assumption that the Ogiek are in

fact remnants of offshoots of these larger tribes. Kratz argues that this dialect resemblance or the

knowledge of their neighbours‟ language to their own is mostly because the Ogiek people have

more experience with Maasai culture, Kipsigis culture or other neighbouring cultures then the other

way around. Because of their wide dispersion over Mau Forest, local Ogiek groups have had

different historical interactions with different neighbours as well as with each other. There seems to

be a general Ogiek characteristic when we look at the way they interact with and sometimes even

adjusted themselves to the neighbouring communities. All Ogiek groups seem to be relatively at

ease passing between different cultures. Kratz emphasises though that, although this might

strengthen the vagueness surrounding the Ogiek, it does not at all mean that they have no sense of

having their own culture or identity. On the contrary, it seems that their historical dispersion over

the forested highlands in west central Kenya just added an extra dimension to each local group's

identity, and facilitated a certain comfort in dealing with other cultures. But the most important

sense of identity is formed within and with other Ogiek communities, let us be clear on that.

Though each local group has had its own history, with its own migrations and interactions with

other people, there are still commonalities that unite the groups how widely separated they might

be. Economic, linguistic, cultural, ecological and social similarities are maintained through

interaction and relations between Ogiek groups. According to Kratz each group shares an

identification of being the original inhabitants of Kenya, a statement I myself have heard several

times during the research. As one Ogiek mzee explained to me, 'I was born here, my father was born

here, my grandfather was born here. So this is our home, we call it our home. We live, the forest.

We were here before the forest.' Up until now there has been no evidence to counter that statement.

According to Huntingford, even Nandi and Maasai traditions describe that they found the Ogiek in

Mau Forest when they first came to this eastern part of Africa. But there are still a lot of questions

around the „true‟ origins of the Ogiek, their early habitation of central Kenya and their relationship

to other Nilotic speakers. Huntingford was one of the first anthropologists to take a chance in

27

Blackburn, R. "In the Land of Milk and Honey: Okiek Adaptations to Their Forests and Neighbours." In Politics and

History in Band Societies, edited by Leacock E. and Lee R.: Cambridge University Press, 1982.

31

explaining Ogiek origins. He presented three theories. The first one was that the Ogiek are an

autochthonous people. They were found in East Africa by the Nandi and the Maasai and assimilated

the Nandi or Maasai language and some of their customs and religious ideas. Another hypothesis is

that the Ogiek are part of the parent-stock of the Maasai-Nandi group. And a third and last theory

stipulates that the Ogiek are part of the Nandi subgroup who broke off from the main body much

earlier than the other tribes. Because they were separated for so long, they had forgotten their

original relationship and through time they came in contact again.28

Although these hypotheses

remain unclear, one thing is certain according to Huntingford, in that the Ogiek ancestors were

forest people. Blackburn also stipulates that all Ogiek he talked to say that they originally depended

on hunting and gathering honey, something I encountered as well. Most Ogiek recall acquiring

cultivation techniques or cattle keeping since late 19th

century, beginning of the 20th

century.

Although in spite of all these theories there is still a vagueness surrounding the Ogiek and their

origins, it is certain that they are associated with a high altitude forest adaptation29

.This brings me to

another, very important commonality that unites the Ogiek, Mau Forest. The way they perceive,

sense and conceptualize the forest areas in which they live forms their deepest sense of self. The life

of the forest is intertwined with every aspect of their own lives, economically, socially and

culturally. When studying the Ogiek, the forest cannot be left out of the research. Moreover, it is

essential to understand just how the forest is perceived and lived with if one wishes to understand

the Ogiek and their struggle.

2.2 Social and political organisation.

Because of the existing misconceptions on the Ogiek in previous literature it is essential to take a

look at how they were organized socially and politically. This following description is based on

historical literature. I will try to give an historical overview on how the Ogiek people used to

socially organize their lives.

According to Blackburn, an American researcher who did most of his fieldwork with the Ogiek in

Narok district during the end of the 1960‟s, all Ogiek people identify themselves as Ogiek and in

addition by their local group affiliation to distinguish themselves from other neighbouring Ogiek

local groups. These local groups are a socio-geographic category, meaning that the identity of the

members of such a group is primarily derived from proximity. As Blackburn explains, they feel a

28

Huntingford, G. W. B. "Modern Hunters: Some Account of the Kamelilo-Kepchepkendi Dorobo (Okiek) of Kenya

Colony." The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 59, no. 333-378 (1929). 29

Blackburn, R. "Okiek History." In Kenya before 1900: Eight Regional Studies, edited by B. A. Ogot. Nairobi: East

African Publishing House, 1978.

32

close connection among each other from living together in daily face-to-face interaction. This

proximity facilitates the development of personal and social ties between the members. Most of the

marriages are also endogamous, in other words the majority of the Ogiek tend to marry within their

local groups. Blackburn further illuminates that each group is in its turn composed of a number of

endogamous lineages. Those belonging to the same lineage acknowledge a patrilineal relationship.

The reason why the relationships of the members of local groups are based on proximity and less on

genealogical relationships is that some members may leave their natal local group to reside with

another local group. After some time the relocated lineage ceases to be referred to as „people of‟

their former local group, but become known as part of their new group. Lineages on the other hand

are based on a genealogical relationship. Persons belong to the same Ogiek lineage when they are

able to trace their descent patrilineally to a common ancestor. This lineage is the most important

social unit of the Ogiek.30

According to Huntingford however, it is the clan who is the principal

social institution. He studied the Ogiek on the edge of the Tinderet Forest, in the northern part of the

Mau Forest Complex. Interestingly enough, the Ogiek I worked with in Mariashoni and Kiptunga

also spoke of clans instead of lineages. The difference between a clan and a lineage is that a clan is

defined in terms of a common ancestor, and in the case of the Ogiek derived only through the male

line. While members of one lineage can also trace back their ancestry to one person, they can only

do so through some five to ten generations back. Members of a lineage share a genealogical

relationship, which is not always the case with clan members. It is possible that the genealogical

myths of a clan are altered to incorporate new members with no biological relation to the clan.

Although the Ogiek community I worked with spoke of „clans‟ to refer to those who were related to

each other, I did not quite figure out whether they actually knew the difference between clan and

lineage or whether they just used the word „clan‟ because of its wide range of use to refer to a

common ancestry. But it became clear that their social unit of clan holds the same function and

importance the lineages hold which Blackburn encountered. Blackburn explains that within a local

group there can be up to twelve lineages. An Ogiek mzee also informed me that they have twelve

clans within their location of Mariashoni, in total there are about 21 Ogiek clans.

“We have twelve clans. When you ask this clan, when you go to the Nessuit you will be told that

this clan is existed. Even if you further to Nessuit were we call Suhu. In those twelve clans they

know each other and they respect each other. They know the territory of each territory where each

clan has its own forest.”31

30

Ibid. 31

Interview 2 Mariashoni Ogiek Mzee (18 March 2011)

33

This quote makes it clear that the twelve clans of Mariashoni location form a unit, „they know each

other‟, they are part of the same local group all residing in East Mau. Each clan holds its own

territory, it is a unit of residence. In other words, it seems to me that these clans could be of the

same land-holding unit Blackburn gives to lineages. In addition they are also the social unit

responsible for negotiating marriage relations. Like so, the land is first of all communally owned.

The lineage, or in this case study the clan, has the right to use the forest for the purpose of collecting

honey, gathering herbs and hunting. The entire clan has the right to natural materials provided by

the forests. Natural features such as rivers, important trees, glades and sacred sites were used as

boundaries to mark each clan territory. Each clan had their own parcel of land, they knew which

territory belonged to what clan and they respected the boundaries. Because the Ogiek themselves

constantly referred to „clan‟ I as well will use this throughout the text to indicate a genealogical

relationship.

In terms of political structure the Ogiek people lack corporately organized institutions that would

represent the entire community. At least according to Blackburn‟s findings. He stipulates that

“There are no chiefs, clan leaders or formal councils. Indeed, at no time do all the members of a

local group, or representatives of these members, participate in formally organized activities, either

economic, political or religious.”32

Blackburn is correct when he says that the Ogiek do not have a chief, at least in the past they did

not. Nowadays they have a chief, but he is a representative of the government. The Ogiek in

Mariashoni were given their first chief in 198933

. But before that time my findings correlate with

those of Blackburn. Until pretty recently there was indeed no central leadership represented by only

one person. On the other hand the Ogiek community I worked with clearly indicated that they did

have a council of elders dealing with matters of conflict and security within the community.

“In the older days there were no chiefs. But now there are chiefs and council of elders. So both.

Council of elders are representers of the community, chief is representer of the community but he's

an agent from the government.”34

Respondents in Mariashoni instructed me more about this council of elders. They explained to me

32


African Publishing House, 1978. 33

Kamau, J. “The Ogiek: The Ongoing Destruction of a Minority Tribe in Kenya.” Nairobi: Rights News and Features

Service, 2000. 34

Interview 3 Mariashoni Joseph (24 April 2011)

34

that in the „olden days‟ they used to call for a big meeting, whereby every clan had its

representatives. Only those elders who had the knowledge to take care of the community made part

of the council, with no regard for clan membership. There was also no maximum on the number of

members within the council of elders. After the elders were elected they were told to move aside so

that the community could discuss whether there was anybody not fit for the responsibilities or

whether one of them had any scandals. If an elder was found to be clean, he would be elected. Only

those who had been appointed were elected to officially represent the community. But in the past

there were no means of communication, at least not as there are today. There were no vehicles, no

cell phones. So when they wanted to organize for a meeting they used to reach each other through

youths. These youths were also elected. They had to be reliable because they were used as

important messengers. Whenever there was information related to other villages, they were the ones

who were responsible for it. Whenever there was something touching the Ogiek, the youths were

sent to give the right information to the elders from Mariashoni, Kiptunga and Nessuit who would

then come together and form a meeting. The elders from Mariashoni, Kiptunga and Nessuit seemed

to form some kind of union, like a local group Blackburn refers to in his works. Even up to today

they are still one. But the election of the council of elders did change over time. As I mentioned

earlier, the Ogiek people did not have a chief in the past. When electing a new council in these

present times they should first inform the local chief first and wait for his permission. It is not

possible to do the election without his office knowing. When I asked why, my respondent told me

that „they want to know why you want to elect the council without informing the government.

Maybe there are some bad intentions behind it.‟ The chief is the community‟s link to the

government, he is an agent but he‟s not necessarily elected by the community. My respondent

insisted that it is the government who advertises for the vacancy and only those who meet the

formal requirements are able to apply, even without consent of the community. The one who passes

the tests and interviews becomes chief in a certain location, in this case study Mariashoni location.

The information I got from the ground did not really accord with Blackburn‟s findings. The Ogiek

did not have a chief until recently, and Blackburn did his research long before the first chief was

appointed. But in the area I worked in there used to be a local council of elders dealing with local

problems, disputes and conflicts. We must however take into account that Blackburn did his study

in Narok District, more south in Eastern Mau Forest. Mariashoni and Kiptunga are located more to

the north. But as mentioned before, different local groups have had different histories and different

interactions with their neighbors. This also means that there must be some difference not only in

language use or costume between different Ogiek groups, but that there are variations in social

organisations as well. Nevertheless, no matter how far dispersed local groups are or how different

they might be in language use or social organisations, they still identify themselves and recognise

35

each other as Ogiek.

2.3 The dispossession and (re)settlement of the Ogiek; an overview.

The Ogiek are an interesting people with a relatively small population. Their wide dispersal over

high altitude forests gives each local Ogiek group unique traits. Yet they still consider themselves to

be one people, no matter how far the distance and even differences between them. They are found

near Mount Elgon, Cherangany, Koibatek, Nandi and in the Mau Forest region. This research is

concentrated on Mau Forest, and the Ogiek population in the Eastern Mau Forests. But in order to

get a clear view on what the Ogiek have experienced as a people, and later on to concentrate more

on the Ogiek in Eastern Mau, it is necessary to first present an overview of what they have gone

through, their dispossessions and continuous relocations.

The first records I found on Ogiek land dispossession was about a conflict in 1856. The Ogiek and

the Maasai had a struggle over land right in Laikipia and in the Mau. This dispute eventually led to

war between the two tribes, whereby many lives were lost. In the end, the Ogiek lost their areas

around Lake Naivasha to the Maasai, but they were able to retain their land around Nakuru. The

local Ogiek groups who lived in the Mau and near Laikipia got dispersed as a result from the defeat.

But the feud between the tribes did not end there. In 1903 the Maasai and the colonial

administrators started to negotiate over land rights. The negotiations finally culminated in an

agreement in 1911 which stated that the Maasai would hand over rights to land in Nakuru, Naivasha

and Laikipia to the new white settlers. What in fact happened was that the lands the Maasai lost to

the colonial administrators actually belonged to the Ogiek. The handing over of land in Nakuru was

in effect a victory to the Maasai who had failed to take over these lands in the war of 1856. This

marked the first forceful eviction of the Ogiek. The colonial administration used African soldiers

under their employ to evict the Ogiek from Mau in Nakuru to Narok. A second eviction of the

Ogiek from their ancestral lands was executed in 1918, when the colonial authorities wanted to

move the Ogiek from East Mau to Olposimoru in Narok. Eventually, most of the Ogiek found their

way back into the forests. Further evictions took place in 1926 – 1927 whereby the Ogiek who

remained on their land that had been converted to settler farms were pushed back into the forest.

The only problem was that by that time the forests had already been declared Crown Land. In other

words, the Ogiek were not allowed to enter these forests and so more evictions took place. But the

Ogiek would not leave the forest without a battle. They responded with strong resistance that

ultimately led to a cease-fire in 1932. This was the same year they were invited to testify before the

Carter Land Commission. This commission was constituted by the colonial government to take a

36

look at the land issues in Kenya. Ogiek elders appeared before a Mr. Harris Carter, and presented

their stand that they would not move out of the forest. If the Ogiek were dispersed even further they

risked being extinguished as a community. But the Commission denied their stand and their claim to

their ancestral lands. Instead, the Commission recommended that the Ogiek people should be

moved to reserves of bigger tribes, for example the Maasai or the Kalenjin, to whom they have

close affinity with. That way, they thought, the Ogiek would be assimilated by the tribes and at long

last they would just disappear as a people. Consequently, they would not be able to make any

further claim on their ancestral lands.35

Nevertheless the Ogiek refused to be evicted and instead the

colonial administration moved them to stay in villages awaiting the government‟s decision. This

new organisation of residence in villages contradicted their traditional clan-based land tenure

system. The colonial government encouraged the Ogiek to take up jobs in the Forest Department or

nearby white settlers‟ farms. The Ogiek who stayed near forest stations, like in Mariashoni, were

employed as labourers to plant exotic tree species.36

One of my respondents used to work with the

forest department and he assured me that they were not forced to work for the forest guard but

rather that they interacted with the colonial people.37

They were provided with schools and social

facilities like medical centres, but since then the Ogiek have been living in the forests still not

knowing what will happen to their ancestral lands.38

During the 1960‟s, a strong wind moved throughout the entire African continent. Colonization came

to an end with the independence of the new African states. However, colonization did leave a strong

mark on the newly independent states though. The post-colonial government continued the policy of

non-recognition of minority groups and more in particular, Kenya did not recognise the Ogiek. This

led to further political, economic and social marginalization of the Ogiek. Ogiek land was formally

put under control of the colonial government by the 1957 Forest Act. When independence came, the

Ogiek thought that this might change the wind. But when the Forest Act was revised in 1964, it did

not address the issue of the Ogiek. Initially they were to get a trust land, like many other tribes did.

But when the Ogiek found that the land was not suitable for their cultural and social organisation

they refused to take it up. The land was thus declared free land, and they were not given an Ogiek

reserve appropriate for their lifestyle. In the first fifteen years of independence, the Ogiek were

pretty much left alone. The Kenyan government did not really interfere with the Ogiek, up until

1977 when they invaded Western Mau Forest. Government forces assaulted Ogiek communities,

torched their houses and arrested several Ogiek community members and charged them of being

35

Towett, J. Ogiek Land Cases and Historical Injustices 1902-2004. Vol. 1. Nakuru: Ogiek Welfare Council, 2004. 36

Kamau, J. “The Ogiek: The Ongoing Destruction of a Minority Tribe in Kenya.” Nairobi: Rights News and Features

Service, 2000. 37

Interview 10 Mariashoni, forester mzee. 38

Sang, J. "The Ogiek in Mau Forest." In From Principle to Practice: Indigenous Peoples and Protected Areas in Africa,

edited by Nelson J. and Hossack L.: Forest Peoples Project, 2001.

37

illegal squatters. In 1987, ten years later, the Kenyan government changed the rule governing

hunting and made it illegal to hunt. Moreover they banned livestock keeping and farming activities

in the forests. Remarkably enough the ban only applied for non-Kalenjin communities, and

therefore it also targeted the Ogiek. As a result, the Ogiek were forced to look for other ways of

subsistence which led to the closure of all the schools in East Mau, affecting some 500 Ogiek

school children. Around that same period the government initiated a settlement scheme whereby

members of the Kipsigis community would be settled alongside the Ogiek. The Ogiek refused to

take part in the scheme. 39

The government of Kenya has systematically been carving out big parts of Mau Forest for the

settlement of other communities. They have been doing so since 1993, which was the start of the

infamous 2001 excisions. The Ogiek see this massive destruction of the forests as a threat to their

home and to their existence. This has resulted in a continuous conflict. Also 1993, the government

re-gazetted the current Ogiek locations and sub locations of Nessuit, Mariashoni, Baraget, Tinet and

Kiptororo. The initial purpose of the re-gazettement was to resettle the Ogiek. The Kenya

Indigenous Forest Conservation Programme (KIFCON), a project of the Ministry of Environment

and Natural Resources, noted that the Ogiek people were scattered across the forest and

recommended that they should be resettled to secure long-term conservation and protection of

biodiversity hotspots. They did a survey and identified 3000 Ogiek families to be resettled.40

In ‟94,

the government announced the Ogiek land claims approval whereby the land was subdivided in the

traditional way, on the basis of clans and individual ownership but still under communal tenure and

protection. But the Kenyan government refused to recognise the Ogiek land demarcation. Instead,

they sent surveyors to do the work over again to pave way for new settlers. What happened next

was that ministers and other political forces used their influence and power to subdivide and

allocate land to those who were politically „correct‟ instead of the Ogiek, as intended. When the

settlement programme started the number of Ogiek families who were identified had tripled.41

The

original list was modified and the Ogiek name was misused to insure that other people could benefit

from the settlement scheme. One respondent explained to me what happened on the ground, and

gave me a better understanding of the situation. In the year 1992 he came with his family to

Mariashoni because they had heard about the excisions and the allocation of land.

“The year 1992 they came here simply because of the excisions. They heard that Mariashoni will be

39

Ibid. 40

"Report of the Government's Task Force on the Conservation of the Mau Forest Complex." edited by Office of the

Prime Minister. Nairobi, 2009.

http://www.maurestoration.go.ke/index.php/downloads (Accessed 6 August 2011) 41

Ibid.

http://www.maurestoration.go.ke/index.php/downloads

38

subdivided to the Ogiek. So they decided to come early in the year 1992 but the excision took place

in 1997. So the excision actually found them here when they were living here, because he knew that

the land was given purposely for the Ogiek they end up selecting area where he sees that it is nice

for him. So each and every one go and select where he prefer to own a piece of land. But later on

their houses where demolished by Moi, by the government. By these people who were brought in.

You know they were assisted by the government so that they can own those land so Ogiek actually

were pushed further to move away from those lands.”42

In other words, he had heard about the subdivision of land in Mariashoni and moved with his family

ahead of the actual excisions. Because the land was supposed to be allocated to the Ogiek, he

figured he would just settle somewhere nice and wait for the allocations. What happened was that

although the excisions were initially to benefit the Ogiek, the land went to those who had ties with

the government. But the Ogiek did not remain silent. They tried to prevent the other people from

entering the forest by building houses and fences so that they could not move any further. A lot of

Ogiek were arrested because of this protest and for the reason that they were refusing to let other

people enter their land. The Ogiek needed to look for other measures if they wanted to secure their

land. They organized meetings and hired a lawyer to help them in this quest. They prepared a

memorandum to be circulated to all Members of Parliament and they engaged an advocate in an

effort to defend their rights. Finally, the Ogiek were compelled to file a constitutional land suit in

June 1997, seeking nullification of the government‟s settlement scheme and the recognition of their

traditional way of life and practices in Mau Forest. This case is still pending in High Court. Other

than that, the Ogiek sought other legal measures through lobbying and filing other suits as

individuals. The court put a restriction to further allocations of the disputed land until all issues in

court were resolved. This, however, was not the case.43

The government decided to resume the

alienation of Ogiek ancestral land in 2001. The largest excisions affected East Mau Forest, of which

more than 50 per cent of the forest was erased, and South Western Mau Forest, of which more than

25% was excised.44

The result is that up to this day, most of the Ogiek population in Mariashoni do

not own any title deeds, proving ownership of their lands.

42

Interview 24 Mariashoni Stephen, member CBO (12 May 2011) 43


"Eastern and South West Mau Forest Reserves: Assessment and Way Forward." United Nations Environment

Programme, 2006.

www.unep.org/dewa/Portals/67/pdf/E_and_SW_Mau_v3.PDF (Accessed 6 August 2011)

http://www.unep.org/dewa/Portals/67/pdf/E_and_SW_Mau_v3.PDF

39

3 An introduction to the field; Mariashoni.

This study focuses on Eastern Mau Forest in Rift Valley Province, one of the four forest areas of the

Upper Mara Catchment, of which the others are South-Western Mau, Transmara and Ol Posimori

forests. All gazetted forests in Eastern Mau are under the management of the Kenya Forest Service.

The research is concentrated on the location of Mariashoni, situated in Nakuru District. It is located

in Eastern Mau Forest, near the town Elburgon and is subdivided into three sublocations,

Mariashoni, Kiptunga, and Kitiro. The whole of Mariashoni covers 912,65 ha.45

The first phase of

the repossession stage, as recommended by the Mau Task Force, selected that all unparcelled or

unoccupied forestland in Eastern Mau Forest Reserve was to be recuperated. And so some 2,950 ha

of land has already been recuperated in Mariashoni.46

Mariashoni holds a dense Ogiek population

that constitute about 90 percent of the entire population.

This research has been focusing mainly on Mariashoni sublocation where most of the interview data

has been gathered. Some part of the study has also been conducted in Kiptunga, although not in the

same intense matter as in Mariashoni. This is because Kiptunga was a bit more secluded, and it was

harder to reach the area due to the rainy season. This will be a sketch of Mariashoni to situate the

research and to give an idea of its recent history and the current organisation of the area.

When I first came to Mariashoni I had no idea what to expect. In my mind, „Mau Forest‟ was a

scenic picture of a dense forest with lots of trees and beautiful green colours. But when I arrived, all

I could ask myself was; where are all those gigantic trees? And then it hit me. My naive romantic

image of an indigenous forest had gotten the best of me, and because of the excitement of doing

fieldwork for the very first time I failed to remember the information gathered during my earlier

literature research work that Mariashoni was part of the 2001 excisions. Mariashoni location was

part of the settlement scheme of 1997 and the following 2001 excisions when the government

initially proposed to allocate land to the Ogiek. Some 8300 ha were excised in Mariashoni location.

The excisions started in the year 1996. The intended beneficiaries were some 1500 Ogiek families,

but instead most of them saw their land being allocated to other people.47

The allocation of land was

then put to hold in ‟97 through a court injunction until all cases in court were resolved. However,

the government did not take any note of the restriction and continued the excisions and allocations.

45

"Changes in Forest Cover in Kenya's Five "Water Towers" 2000-2003." edited by Department of Resource Surveys

and Remote Sensing and Kenya Forests Working Group. Nairobi, 2003. 46

"Report of the Government's Task Force on the Conservation of the Mau Forest Complex." edited by Office of the

Prime Minister. Nairobi, 2009.

http://www.maurestoration.go.ke/index.php/downloads (Accessed 6 August 2011) 47

Ibid.


40

Most of the Ogiek living in Mariashoni now do not own any title deeds or other documentation to

prove ownership of their lands. The land in Mariashoni is very sparsely occupied by some 12,000

people in total. The Ogiek are about 3000 to 4000. Mariashoni is mostly a deforested area now, with

not much more than some pines and cypresses for trees. All I could see were some pine trees and

cypresses amidst open clearings, trees which I knew from previous discussions and research were

not originally part of Mau Forest. When the colonial powers came to Mariashoni they found only

the indigenous trees and Ogiek settlements. Mariashoni also got its name from colonial settlers. One

lady explained to me that according to the history, a white man met an old Ogiek mzee and asked

him his name. The mzee responded him „Marashone‟. And so this is where the name of the location

was derived from. Mariashoni eventually became a forest station. It was at Mariashoni where the

Ogiek were first used as labourers to cut down the indigenous trees for the timber industry and to

replant the area with exotic trees. They also brought in people from other communities, mostly

Kikuyu from Central Kenya, to cultivate the indigenous trees and to replace them with pines or

cypresses. These trees were used for the timber industry because they grew faster than the

indigenous trees. This was around 1914. It is also around this time when Nessuit and Kiptunga

became permanently settled areas. Slowly but surely, Mariashoni transformed from an indigenous

forest to a settlement surrounded by exotic trees. There were some villages created next to every

forest station, as well as in Mariashoni. The forest workers were given some forest land to clear and

to replace with exotic trees. They were allowed to grow food crops alongside the exotic tree crops.

The workers cared for the tree crops for two or three years, and after a successful establishment they

were allocated new lands where the process started all over again. This is known as the Shamba

system, a form of agroforestry.48

Kiptunga on the other hand was nothing like Mariashoni. Kiptunga

is located at the top of the Mau escarpment, some 2600 meters above sea level. There were open

glades where settlements were vested and only few exotic trees to be spotted. Kiptunga was located

near an indigenous forest that had remained almost intact. According to the history, Kiptunga got its

name pretty much the same way as Mariashoni did. The same lady who enlightened me about the

origin of the word „Mariashoni‟ told me that the word „Kiptunga‟ is actually a woman‟s name.

When the white settlers came to the area they met a woman. When she was asked to identify herself

she answered them that her name was „Kiptunga‟.

Mariashoni used to be a sublocation of Elburgon, a forest town at the foot of the Mau Escarpment

that boomed in the 1980‟s because of the then vibrant timber industry. In the beginning of the

nineties it became a location, and they were given their first chief. Kiptunga is a sublocation of

Mariashoni, and is governed by an assistant chief. The chief is an agent of the government. He is

48

Ochieng, R. M. "The Mau Forest Complex, Kenya: A Review of Degradation Status and Possible Remedial

Measures." Norderstedt: GRIN Verlag, 2009.

41

the one responsible to sensitize the government‟s activities to the people. He is also the one to

prevent everything in his location that could demoralize the government. This is also the reason

why the local council of elders should be created with his knowing and his approval. The chief

makes sure that the people under his jurisdiction are within government lines. Moreover he is

responsible for the coordination of the schools and the local health centre. In general, the chief‟s

major part to play is thus to coordinate all government activities within his location. There is also a

trading centre in Mariashoni which was established around the year 2000. Before the establishment

the local people used to go all the way to Elburgon, some 20 km from the centre of Mariashoni, to

do their trading. The trading centre is located near the main road from Elburgon to Kiptunga and

has several small bars, shops and a medical centre. The chief and forester‟s offices are located there

as well whilst Ogiek family settlements are scattered around the trading centre.

42

Part II: Nature.

Contemporary Ogiek lives are similar to the lives of most rural Kenyans. As with all people and in

all different parts of the country they are shaped by local histories and understandings, which make

them distinctive and unique. In this part of the research we will try to find out how the relationships

between the Ogiek and the forest have changed over time. This part will be a more ethnographic

description. Through a historical reconstruction we will try to understand how the Ogiek have

started to accumulate new subsistence patterns to their hunter and gatherer-way of life. During this

reconstruction we will pay attention to how the Ogiek have portrayed a double image of themselves.

In order to create a solid account on Ogiek lives we will need to incorporate these two versions of

them. The first section of this chapter will deal with this double image and how we should

comprehend this representation. There will be referred to this throughout the entire chapter. In the

next section we will take a closer look on Ogiek human-nature relationships. Questions on how the

Ogiek perceive Mau Forest and how they relate to their environment will be raised and answered

here. The third part of this chapter is a reconstruction of their history, an account on the changes

Ogiek people have experienced these last decades. We will focus on aspects of Ogiek life that are

considered to be essential in Ogiek identity, even though things have changed quite a bit. These

aspects were identified by listening closely to their stories. And last we will examine how this

double image that has been portrayed throughout this entire chapter is in fact part of their tradition

and identity as a community and as an individual.

1 The ‘Then’ and the ‘Now’.

To have an actual and present-day description of Ogiek lives, we need to include several versions of

those lives. Versions of how Kratz calls it the 'Then' and the 'Now'. Ogiek discourses about

themselves and their environment portray a double image. This „Then‟ and „Now‟ is represented in

different lights and at different times. The „Then‟ refers to those times when the Ogiek were living a

forest life and followed the honey seasons. They did not have regular gardens with different sort of

crops or livestock as they do nowadays. The „Now‟ is the time when the Ogiek started settling,

adding agriculture to their mode of subsistence and keeping domestic animals. The Ogiek started to

cultivate, they began participating in the money economy and their children were going to school.

This „Now‟ encompasses a number of changes and challenges they have faced. They noticed

43

changes in their environment, which resulted into changes in land tenure and use that had its effects

on their social organisation. Kratz further specifies that the „Then‟ in fact only talks of relatively

recent history, from just before the 1900. Tradition is here represented as unchanging and

continuous and yet also varies in different historical periods and between generations. The „Then‟ is

represented as the start in the current narration of local history. This history is punctuated by fights,

famine and some few important colonial events. But the striking thing is that they represent the

period of game and honey as largely undifferentiated in daily practice. The Ogiek talk of themselves

as staying in the forest, hunting wild game, gathering honey, basically doing what they had always

done. However, they did visit the growing trading centres like in the forest town Elburgon to trade,

some men even spent several years working in security forces or forest services in late colonial

times and they gradually added agriculture and livestock keeping as new ways of subsistence. These

new activities however are not directly mentioned when talking about „the olden days‟. The Ogiek

actually have two opposite versions of their forest life during the „Then‟. One negative view, to

justify the economic diversification. Kratz speaks of over-dramatization of food uncertainty, hunger

and cold, practically used as an excuse for why they started adding new ways of subsistence to

explain that they had no other choice but to adapt if they wanted to survive. The other version is a

more positive one that emphasises the bounty of meat and honey enjoyed deep in the forest. These

stories are more like narratives, almost with a mythical atmosphere. Nonetheless it is only by

listening carefully to those mythical stories that we can understand what the tellers perceive as

exclusively 'Ogiek', as the essential aspects that help define their specific identity. Even though

these aspects are no longer as prevalent now as they once were, Ogiek history and tradition as

forest-dwelling honey gatherers and hunters are up to this day still central in their sense of who they

are.49

These are the stories that are of importance to this study. They enable us to recognise those

aspects that mark Ogiek identity. But in this research we will try to dig a little deeper than that.

These same stories will allow us to understand how the Ogiek have experienced the changes in their

environment and how this has in fact affected their lifestyle. This is where it becomes delicate. The

dualistic representation of the „Then‟, where everything was better and pure, and the „Now‟, where

most things have changed, actually masks a historical process. At one point, diversification began to

grow between the traditional patterns of subsistence, hunting and collecting honey, that are

represented as central to Ogiek identity and the actual Ogiek daily practice. The economic

diversification occurred slowly and gradually over time, but this representation of „Then‟ and „Now‟

in fact flattens that change. Kratz explains that within this dualistic representation the historical

processes that created the structure of Ogiek life up to about 1940 are in fact hidden in an image of

49

Kratz, C. Affecting Performance: Meaning, Movement and Experience in Okiek Women's Initiation. Washington:

Smithsonian Institution Press, 1994.

44

uniform continuity that they had always been hunting and gathering. We risk projecting a

homogeneous model of circumstances and processes onto the „Then‟, when actually these processes

have continued to shift and change up to now. Contemporary Ogiek life is radically transformed, yet

it is still organized and lived through the same basic social structure, although in different

circumstances and with important differences and additions that cannot be overlooked.50

When talking about „Then‟ and „Now‟ Ogiek focus their attention on particular topics and practices.

They concentrate two domains, the forest life and ceremony. In this study, we will limit ourselves to

the forest life. This domain connects a habitat of highland forest to the patterns, practices and values

of a hunting and honey gathering livelihood.51

By listening and analysing these stories about forest

life of „Then‟ and „Now‟, and with the help of some background literature, we will be able to learn

more about these practices that are essential to Ogiek identity. In what follows, we will take a closer

look at all these elements. We will try to discover what has changed and how the Ogiek have still

managed to preserve the significance of those elements. The next sections are therefore divided

corresponding to what I believe are elements essential to Ogiek forest life and identity, according to

the entire community. Ogiek identity is connected to a strong sense of community linked to

common traditions, a shared history, traditional homelands and economic difference. Those aspects

of Ogiek forest life that were entrenched within the „Then‟ and „Now‟ stereotypes were in this

research considered to be essential to what the Ogiek still find to have value to who they are. When

discussing how aspects of Ogiek life have changed, there will be sufficient attention to the

maintained „Then‟ and „Now‟ discourse and its stereotypes.

2 Ogiek perceptions of nature – human relationships.

2.1 The forest is our home.

A first significant remark needs to be made when talking about Mau Forest. Mau Forest is

composed out of two different kinds of forest, the indigenous one and the exotic one that was

introduced by the colonial powers. When the Ogiek talk about „Mau‟ or „the forest‟ they only refer

to the indigenous forest. To them, and to this study, there is a great difference. We should take

notice during this study when talking of the forest it only refers to the indigenous forest, following

the Ogiek view. Whenever the exotic forest comes up it shall be referred to as such. The Ogiek call

50

Ibid. 51

Kratz, C. ""We've Always Done It Like This... Except for a Few Details": "Tradition" and "Innovation" in Okiek

Ceremonies." Comparative Studies in Society and History 35, no. 1 (1993): 30-65.

45

the indigenous forest their home, their source of life. We must be aware that every aspect of their

lives used to be intertwined with this indigenous forest, how it was organized, where they got their

food and medicine from, the manner in which they practiced their cultural believes. Although much

of this has changed now, the cultural meaning of the indigenous forest is still vivid within the

community. In the eyes of the Ogiek, the indigenous forest cannot be replaced by exotic trees that

have no meaning nor purpose whatsoever to them. The trees do not provide the flowers needed for

the bees to make their sweet honey, nor do they offer the same medicinal powers used to cure

diseases and discomforts.

“I do not consider that as a forest. It is meant to benefit somebody. And to destroy someone who is

near that tree. Anything I call forest is made of indigenous trees. Whenever I see pine or cypress I

do not see forest, I see somebody doing business”52

is what one Ogiot told me. When I dug a little deeper to find out how they really felt about the pines

and cypresses I could sense a slight disgruntlement towards them. These trees do not belong in Mau

Forest I heard, they are said to pollute and give away a smell. To the Ogiek, they seem to represent

the exact opposite of the indigenous trees. The indigenous trees are oxygen, they are air and they

give life. The exotic trees on the other hand pollute, the glue from the pine trees is said to be

poisonous and the top of the trees seem to be surrounded with a fog. The way the Ogiek refer to the

exotic trees is drenched with superstition and exaggerations. Though it is apparent that the exotic

trees have no cultural value to the Ogiek, it seems that this made them to be associated with the

image of the „Now‟. Exotic trees represent the change from „Then‟ to „Now‟. Their entry in Mau

Forest through the colonial authorities marks the process of change and economic diversification. In

contrary to the indigenous trees, which represent fully the period of „Then‟ where life used to be

uncomplicated and good. Their forest lives of „Then‟ depended entirely on the indigenous forests.

To the Ogiek, only the indigenous trees represent the forest. The exotic trees on the other hand are

merely for business. They are associated with the timber industry, responsible for cutting down the

indigenous trees. And yet, when the topic of conservation came up it was very clear that the Ogiek

were willing to protect both types of trees. Although they were not happy about the introduction of

the exotic trees, they are there now. Even though they are of no use to the Ogiek culturally, the

Ogiek have acknowledged that they have their own purpose and they also need protection.

Having this distinction made clear, we can further stipulate the relations between the Ogiek and the

indigenous forest. When talking to the Ogiek community and asking about what Mau Forest means

52

Interview 12 Nakuru Victor Prengei (3 May 2011)

46

to them, almost all respondents literally said that the forest was their home. One lady described it

very beautifully to me; she said

“When you speak about forest, you have touched the Ogiek. You have spoken about the Ogiek

because the forest is home, it is a source of life.”53

We can evaluate this selection of words in different manners, pointing towards how this sentence

embodies the relationship between the forest and the Ogiek. A first examination of the sentence

calls out our attention to the way the lady refers to the relationship between the Ogiek and the

forest. An interesting element in this saying is „you have touched the Ogiek‟. She speaks of people

talking about the forest and proclaims that in doing so one „touches‟ the Ogiek. The word „touch‟

can express an influence on something or somebody. The Oxford Dictionary describes „touch‟ as „to

produce an emotion in (a person)‟.54

In other words, through speaking about the forest one produces

an emotion in the Ogiek. The damage caused in Mau has indeed touched the Ogiek down to their

very soul. Every act, destruction or regeneration made in Mau will influence the Ogiek community

negatively or positively. More explicitly said, choosing the word „touch‟ articulates the

interconnection between the Ogiek and Mau. We should however not restrict ourselves to the strict

content of the word „touch‟ in any way, but instead look beyond and try to find a deeper meaning.

Besides „producing an emotion in a person‟ signifying a shared and equal relationship between the

Ogiek and the Mau, the choice of the word „touch‟ could also represent a sensory experience of this

relationship. A culture has its own sensory models, based on the significance it gives to different

senses. The main sensory model is expressed in customs, beliefs as well as in language of which I

believe this sentence is a good illustration.55

„Touch‟ can refer to the Ogiek life world of being „in

touch‟ with the world. It is a mode of active, perceptual engagement with their environment.

„Touch‟ is an important sensory modality, especially in a dense forest where you are able to touch

the leaves and feel the branches of plants and trees. Sentience is a perceptual activity of feeling the

world around us, touching it, smelling it and tasting it. There is a constant contact with the

environment and with the forest. In the words of the renowned sensory anthropologist Howes, the

Ogiek seem to “see, hear, taste, touch, and smell their social and cosmic order all around them”. In

other words, the body is „in touch‟ with the environment.56

When she says „source of life‟ she means that without the forest the Ogiek will not only lose a way

53

Interview 14 Mariashoni Linah (5 May 2011) 54

Oxford Dictionary and Thesaurus: Oxford University Press, 2009. 55

Classen, C. "Sweet Colors, Fragrant Songs: Sensory Models of the Andes and the Amazon." American Ethnologist

17, no. 4 (1990): 722-35. 56

Howes, D. Sensual Relations: Engaging the Senses in Culture and Social Theory: The University of Michigan Press,

2003.

47

of subsistence but also their cultural beliefs. The Ogiek will lose that „touch‟, this active and

reciprocal engagement with the forest. The Ogiek view themselves and the forest as part of one big

family that shares both ancestry and origins. Their claim of always having lived in the forest

corresponds with this theory. Even the word „Ogiek‟ is derived from „sogek‟, meaning a „house of

leafs‟. As mentioned before we could then state that that the Ogiek „derive‟ from the forest, they are

originated from the forest. In this way, the forest acts like a parent within this large family. Like

Ingold explains, the environment gives the wherewithal of life to people. Recognising the forest as a

parent is to recognise that at the core of it all, the fundamental quality of intimate relationships with

non-human and human components of the environment is the same. 57

This family of shared history

is an extended ecological family where all the natural elements of an ecosystem are regarded as

„kin‟. And similar to a family with blood ties, what happens to this family has an effect on the

Ogiek and, in turn, the Ogiek have their influence on the life surrounding them. This awareness and

world vision that life can only be complete when acknowledging your interactions with the life

surrounding you is called „kincentric ecology‟. According to E. Salmón, indigenous cultural models

of nature include humans as only one aspect of the complexity of life.58

When I hear the Ogiek

telling their stories I can only but conclude that they have a similar ecology. One of my respondents

said to me that

“Mau is home. When we talk about Mau, Mau is my home. It is my ancestral land. And in Mau

there are many species of which they considered with me.”59

The Ogiek view themselves as part of the life and space in which they live. They do not see the

world divided into natural agencies and themselves, instead their world is an integrated entity as

Bird-David explains. The Ogiek know the forest, the plants and animals, the way they know other

people. They spend time in the forest and they invest in their relations with it through caring and

feeling like one does with family and friends. It is through dwelling in a landscape, living and

residing in an environment and through incorporating its features into a pattern of everyday

activities that it becomes home.60

It allows them to keep in „touch‟ with their environment, and it

creates and strengthens their intimate relationships. These metaphors of the forest being a home and

by speaking of the forest you touch the Ogiek, enables them to make sense of their environment and

57

Ingold, T. "Human Worlds Are Culturally Constructed: Against the Motion (I)." In Key Debates in Anthropology,

edited by T. Ingold, 112-18. London: Routledge, 1996. 58

Salmón, E. "Kincentric Ecology: Indigenous Perceptions of the Human-Nature Relationship." Ecological

Applications 10, no. 5 (2000): 1327-32. 59

Interview 7 Mariashoni Francis (29 April 2011) 60

Ingold, T. "Human Worlds Are Culturally Constructed: Against the Motion (I)." In Key Debates in Anthropology,

edited by T. Ingold, 112-18. London: Routledge, 1996.

48

it guides their actions within it. 61

3 Changing environment, changing lifestyles.

3.1 Ogiek landscape and land tenure.

Ogiek traditional land tenure systems and its categorisations of the different ecological zones of

Mau forest were as relevant „Then‟ as it is „Now‟. Although the land tenure systems are remarkably

changed in complicated ways, they still play a major role in Ogiek identity and social construct.

The hunting and gathering livelihood was based on natural resources from Mau Forest such as wild

meat, honey and medicinal plants. The collecting of honey gave rise to a distinctive cultural

landscape. Mau Forest‟s vegetation cover varies from shrubs to thick, impenetrable bamboo forest,

according to the altitude. This divided Mau Forest into different ecological zones. The lowest zone,

soyua in Ogiek language, is earmarked by an open bushy forest consisting of about 1800 to 2100

square meters where one can find elephants and buffalos. Higher on the map we find sasaontent, a

forest with glades and fields, mostly inhabited by tree hyrax and bushbuck. Tirap is a thick forest

from 2400 to about 2600 meters. In the fourth zone, sisiyuet, thick bamboo forest increases. And

finally, there is mau where the forest becomes open moorland. These differences in flora and fauna,

altitude and rainfall create different honey seasons in each of the ecological zones. Diverse

vegetation cover and variations in rainfall throughout the forest zones result in one zone flowering

after the other. The bees produce honey from the different flowering plant and tree species that

occur in each forest zone. The Ogiek used to migrate according to the honey seasons, leaving a

testimony constituting the landscape. A landscape is not just a neutral background to human

activities, nor is it a particular symbolic ordering of space. I follow Ingold when he argues we

should adopt a „dwelling perspective‟ on landscape. This perspective situates the actor in the context

of an active engagement with all elements of its surroundings, moving around in it and playing its

part in its formation. Instead of taking the self-contained individual as starting point, we look at the

agent-in-an-environment. In other words, this active engagement with the environment, the lives of

past and current generations who have dwelt within it, constitute the landscape. Landscape is not

just a mere object.62

It is not just a pre-existing physical world that waited to be marked by a

cultural significance. Instead, it is a living process made by men and continued to be made.63

The

61

Bird-David, N. "Beyond 'the Hunting and Gathering Mode of Subsistence': Culture-Sensitive Observations on the

Nayaka and Other Modern Hunter-Gatherers." Man 27, no. 1 (1192): 19-44. 62

Inglis, F. "Nation and Community: A Landscape and Its Morality." Sociological Review, no. 25 (1977): 489-514. 63

Ingold, T. The Perception of the Environment: Essays in Livelihood, Dwelling and Skill. New York: Routledge, 2000.

49

landscape is a chronicle of life and dwelling, it is a story pregnant with the past.64

65

66 Fig. 1 Five ecological

zones.

Mau Forest used to be divided according to clans into bands of land crossing five different

ecological zones recognised by the Ogiek. The clan-owned land, konoito, is stretched along the

escarpment slope and crosses the zones, providing the families of each lineage access to honey

throughout the entire year. Each konoito is in its turn divided into smaller areas called koret

(korosiek pl.). These korosiek are assigned to individual families belonging to the clan. They are of

great economical importance for the opportunities they provide for gathering honey. The Ogiek

actually replicate the same separation of people in terms of rights to honey as found in the larger

konoito.67

The Ogiek followed the honey seasons. The availability of honey determined their moves

and migration patterns and the animals they hunted depended on where the honey was ripe at that

time. The land was held patrilineally and the rights of use and the possession of beehives were

inherited by sons only.68

In the olden days, men were permitted to only hang their beehives in their

own clan territory and own koret. Nobody was allowed to cross these boundaries to another territory

without the permission of the other clan, at least not in the area of Mariashoni where I did my

64

Adam, B. Timescapes of Modernity: The Environment and Invisible Hazards. London: Routledge, 1992. 65

See also Meyers, R. E. Pintupi Country, Pintupio Self: Sentiment, Place, and Politics among Western Desert

Aborigines. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1986. 66



Fig. 1 Ogiek ecological zones. 67


History in Band Societies, edited by Leacock E. and Lee R.: Cambridge University Press, 1982. 68



50

research. Even during hunting, when an animal had crossed the boundaries they first had to seek

permission from the neighbouring clan before entering their forest. This was not the case in

Blackburn‟s study, who did most his research with the Ogiek from Narok District. He found out that

the Ogiek were allowed to do anything they want in any konoito, hunting, living or collecting

berries or medicinal plants, except gathering honey. Placing hives, making hives or collecting honey

was only permitted in one‟s own konoito. This is an interesting contrast with the Ogiek from

Mariashoni. Mariashoni is located near the White Highlands. Much of the land was lost due to the

creation of settler farms and the growth of the timber industry where the indigenous forest was

replaced by exotic trees. The lack of diverse vegetation has created a decrease in wild game as

major consequence. In other words, meat was relatively scarce which made it an object of

competition. If it would not have these stronger regulations, it might lead to bigger problems of

social control. This example actually supports the hypothesis that restricted access to resources

applies to scarce resources.69

Crossing another clan‟s boundary in my area of study was not allowed

unless you sought permission. Those who went against the rules were punished, for this was

considered to be theft and destruction of the area. In other words, without permission you were seen

as an enemy. Ogiek patterns of settlement and land tenure has changed completely over the past

decades. The Ogiek do not officially own any clan territories or koret with title deeds, nor are they

settled along those lines anymore. But initially, Ogiek used to live in little shelters or huts, built in

open glades in the forest. The huts are made out of a framework of sticks forming a domed roof,

covered with leaves. They were occupied for about three months, after which they become ruinous.

The family then follow the bees to the next flowering ecological zone and move to a fresh site.70

When they started to diversify their economy by adding agriculture or stock-keeping the Ogiek

began building permanent settled houses. General land demarcation in Kenya was legislated in

1969, dividing land into individual plots. Through the capital generated from land sales, the Ogiek

began building frame houses with an iron-sheet roof and developed their farms. Contemporary

Ogiek housing consists of three single structures, one iron-sheeted which is the kitchen area, one

has a thatched roof and is the main living and sleeping area and the third structure constitutes a

granary made out of wooden boards. A common feature in Ogiek homesteads are the traditional

beehives ready to be hanged. The constructions are surrounded by farmland.

69


History in Band Societies, edited by Leacock E. and Lee R.: Cambridge University Press, 1982. 70


Colony." The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 59, no. 333-378 (1929).

51

71Fig. 2 Traditional

Ogiek hut.

71

Blackburn, R. "Fission, Fusion, and Foragers in East Africa: Micro- and Macroprocesses of Diversity and Integration

among Okiek Groups." In Cultural Diversity among Twentieth-Century Foragers, edited by Susan Kent. Cambridge:

University Press, 1996.

Fig. 2 Ogiek traditional hut.

52

72 Fig. 3 Contemporary Ogiek housing.

1 Wooden entry

2 Traditional beehives

3 Granary

4 Kitchen

5 Living and sleeping space

6 Livestock enclosure

7 Wooden fences

8 Farm land

The general land demarcation made some Ogiek groups disperse. Mariashoni however has a very

strong and united Ogiek community, constituting 90 percent of the total population, and live

scattered around the trading centre. The trading centre is located near the main road from Elburgon

to Kiptunga.. The health centre and chief‟s office are located at the centre, as well as the forester‟s

office. It holds several small shops and bars.

72

Fig. 3Contemporary Ogiek housing. (see annex 4)

53

73 Fig. 4 Mariashoni Trading Centre.

1. Main road coming from

Elburgon

2. Mariashoni Primary School

3. Exotic trees

4. Main road to Kiptunga

5. Shops and bars

6. Emily‟s bar, setting of some

interviews and casual

conversations

7. Tree nursery

8. Medical centre

9. Chief and forester‟s office

Ogiek landscape and land tenure have changed over the last decades. And yet, some important

aspects still remain. Although we stated very clearly that the Ogiek do not live according to their

lineage-owned territories any longer and instead live scattered around forest stations, this however

does not mean that the territories are of no longer of any use. The elder men and women I talked to

still know the boundaries of every territory of each clan. And although the younger generations do

not have the knowledge to that extent, they do know their own clan territories and its boundaries.

An important consequence of this is that up to this day most of the beehives in the indigenous forest

are still hanged according to those territories. The landscape of Ogiek lives have changed

significantly and it is a process that will keep on changing. It is an account of past generations, a

story that needs to be told. But what if the story of the past is too far removed from the current

73

Fig. 4 Mariashoni trading centre. (see annex 5)

54

landscape for the younger generations to grasp? Ogiek children of today have little or no affinity

with past land tenure or landscape, that were so important to the Ogiek hunting and gathering way

of life and still are to their claims to their ancestral lands. One strategy of securing past land tenure

and assisting indigenous peoples‟ claim to their land and natural resources is the mapping of

indigenous land, a strategy also employed by the Ogiek. In 2006, a participatory three-dimensional

modelling (P3DM ) exercise was implemented by the NGO Environmental Research Mapping and

Information Systems in Africa (ERMIS-Africa). The P3DM tries to form a bridge between people

on the ground and Geographic Information System (GIS) that analyzes, manage and captures

different types of geographically referenced data. P3DM merges GIS-generated data and peoples‟

knowledge to produce stand-alone relief models.74

The exercise took place in Nessuit in Nakuru

District and provided the Ogiek with an opportunity to map and visualize their land and natural

resource loss. Using aerial orthophotomaps member of 21 Ogiek clans, with technical assistance,

identified ancestral landmarks and defined the clan‟s territorial boundaries. Justification for the

boundaries was carried out through their validation of elders from neighbouring clans. Trees,

beehives, water points and other landmarks were represented by different pins of various colours,

sizes and shapes. Place names were located with labels, rivers and other clan boundaries were

represented by threads of different colours and land units by different uniform colours or patterns.75

Indigenous mapping has been a powerful tool in indigenous peoples‟ fight for their rights and their

claims to their ancestral lands. The mapping of ancestral lands is an advocacy tool. It was initially

employed by the Ogiek in order to strengthen their court cases. Mr. Towett, the chairman of the

Ogiek Council of Elders working with the ICS, however explained to me that this mapping was

developed privately with a NGO and therefore they could not use it in court. It was done without

the consultation of the Kenyan government. The government declared that it has the surveillance of

Kenya registered under the Surveillance and Physical Planning Act, which made the map illegal to

use in court. Besides this political action, the mapping is also seen as a way of preserving their

culture, and passing on valuable knowledge to younger generations. We should however not forget

that the mapping was founded on the land use during the 1940‟s and earlier, based on the

understandings of the Ogiek elders. But this has since changed radically.

74

Rambaldi, G. and Callosa-Tarr. "Participatory 3-D Modeling: Bridging the Gap between Communities and Gis

Technology." Paper presented at the International Workshop on 'Participatory Technology Development and Local

Knowledge for Sustainable Land Use in Southeast Asia, Chiang Mai, 2001. 75

Rambaldi G., Muchemi J., Crawhall N. and Monaci L. "Through the Eyes of Hunter-Gatherers: Participatory 3d

Modelling among Ogiek Indigenous Peoples in Kenya." 2007.

55

76 Fig. 5 Ogiek

ancestral three-

dimensional map

(1).

77 Fig. 6 Ogiek

ancestral three-

dimensional map

(2).

76

Fig. 5 Ogiek ancestral three-dimensional map. (author‟s picture) 77

Fig. 6 Ogiek ancestral three-dimensional map. (author‟s picture)

56

Besides the political action and goals, indigenous maps may also serve to strengthen cultural

affinity within the community. The younger generations have no tangible connection to the

landscape of the older generations, and yet this landscape is alleged to be distinctive in Ogiek

identity. The landscape is formed through clan territories, an essential element in being Ogiek. The

mapping of this landscape can be helpful to keep on telling the stories of previous generations and

to pass on the knowledge to the youths. This documentation can be used in schools to reinforce

cultural identity. We should however remain cautious about this 3D modelling of indigenous

ancestral lands. Although it did help several indigenous people to achieve their political goals, the

Maori were compensated for their land loss78

, the demarcation of Nisga‟a land led to the signing of

treaties over land claims79

, we should be cautious for the impact mapping can have at the local

level. Indigenous mapping of ancestral lands could lead to conflicts between and within

communities and could increase the privatization of land. The distribution of mapping projects is far

from even, and it could contribute to different levels of access to information within a certain area.

In other words, the technology could simultaneously empower as well as marginalize

communities.80

In addition, we could ask ourselves some questions whether this P3DM technology

is truly a bridge between people and GIS specialists making it possible to preserve indigenous

knowledge, or does the technology in fact disfigure this knowledge with Western patterns of

thought?81

Effects of the mapping on the Ogiek society have not been studied yet, although this

might be an interesting field in the future when the land issues have been resolved. Although the

mapping did not benefit their political goals, Ogiek people are excited about the tangible 3D map. It

is located in a school in Nessuit, and serves to teach young children about their history and their

cultural community. Every landscape is a chronicle of life and dwelling. This mapping allows

people from all ages to engage with their landscape and heritage. The categorisations of forest zones

and honey seasons are still relevant „Now‟ as they were „Then‟, even though land tenure and

patterns of settlement and honey gathering shifted gradually over time.

3.2 Hunting and gathering to farming.

Hunting and gathering is a mode of subsistence whereby, according to Woodburn, people “obtain

their food from wild products by hunting wild animals, by fishing and by gathering wild roots,

78

See Harmsworth, G.. Maori values for land use planning. New Zealand Association of Resource Management

(NZARM) Broadsheet, 37–52. 1997. 79

See also Sterrit, N. "The Nisga'a Treaty: Competing Claims Ingored." BC Studies 120 (winter) (1998). 80

Fox J., Surayanta K., Hershock P. and Pramono A. Mapping Power: Ironic Effects of Spatial Information Technology.

Honolulu: East-West Center, 2003. 81

Chapin M., Lamb Z. and Threlkeld B. "Mapping Indigenous Lands." Annual Review of Anthropology 34 (2005):

619-38.

57

fruits and the honey of wild bees.”82

This view, however, resulted in many misconceptions of hunter

and gatherer societies. Hunter-gatherers have often pursued other, additional subsistence activities.

Yet those have often been neglected or regarded as unimportant because according to this orthodox

point of view, they do not „truly‟ belong to the traditional hunter-gatherer way of life. But these new

ways of subsistence are part of the society in question. Most modern hunting and gathering

societies, including the Ogiek, actually combine both ways of life, shifting between hunting and

gathering and other activities such as farming, keeping livestock, trade and sometimes even waged

labour. It is within these interactions that the Ogiek have tried to maintain their hunting and

gathering ways and remain culturally and economically distinct. It is necessary to find out how they

added those new activities of agriculture and stock-keeping, and what effect this has had on them, in

order to understand contemporary Ogiek lifestyle and their continuous affiliation with past times.

The Ogiek used to hunt according to their lineage divided tracts of land. As earlier stated, they were

only allowed to hunt within their own konoito. Even if the animal crossed over to another clan‟s

territory they had to seek permission to cross the boundaries and enter the other territory before

tracking down the animal again. All kinds of animals were chased, but in the olden days it depended

mainly on where the Ogiek had migrated to following the honey seasons. The Ogiek did not just

hunt any animal. The hunters made sure firstly that the animal in question was not a young animal,

and secondly, that they would only shoot older males. They would only hunt those animals with

large populations, and simply to fulfil their own domestic needs. Hunting was done with spears and

bows and arrows. I was further explained by an Ogiek mzee that the men grouped together to go

hunting, ten sometimes even up to twenty men, and used dogs to trace the animals. If found, the

hunters surrounded the animal in different directions and then:

“they shoot. With bow and arrow. So many arrows. It depends on the strength you have. You can

even kill with one arrow depending on the area you have shot. If you shoot directly to the heart it

dies. So you have to shoot either the head or here (points to the neck) the artery.”83

Hunting was a man‟s job, combined with making the beehives and collecting honey. The daily work

was divided according to gender lines. The role of women was very different from the role of men,

but they both had their own responsibilities and duties to sustain the survival of their family.

Although both roles were essential, a man‟s work was considered to be culturally more prominent

82

Woodburn, J. "Hunters and Gatherers Today and Reconstruction of the Past." In Soviet and Western Anthropology,

edited by E. Gellner. London: Gerald Duckworth & Co Ltd, 1980. 83

Interview 24 Mariashoni Stephen, member CBO (12 May 2011)

58

and was highly valued. Honey and hunting are central in Ogiek identity, men and women. They

took care of the beehives and made sure there was enough wild meat available. The women took

care of the children and the house, prepared the food, made traditional cloths out of hyrax fur,

maintained the firewood and water supplies etc… Although honey gathering was primarily men‟s

work, women often joined them to help carry the traditional beehives or help bring back the harvest.

But the incorporation of new subsistence practices led to shifts in the traditional labour

organisation. To divert the problem of risking projecting a homogenous model on the past, or the

„Then‟, we must realise that the transition from hunting and gathering to farming and keeping

livestock happened gradually. This shift to new subsistence practices is actually more a process of

diversification. Diversification, and not substitution, because the Ogiek still continued to hunt

regularly and kept on making beehives and collecting honey. Farming and stock-keeping was just

another practice that was added to their traditional subsistence practices. At the beginning, the

gardens were not that expanded and so the Ogiek could still migrate into the forest and follow the

honey seasons. The men‟s primary occupation was still hunting at that time. So initially, the new

subsistence patterns did not completely contradict their forest lives. Cultivation was at that time still

too small of a scale to actually have a deep impact on their usual activities in the forest.84

But when

the Ogiek began to enlarge their agricultural plots, there was one specific aspect of Ogiek forest life

that became very important for further developments. In contrast to other African hunter-gatherer

societies, the vegetable foods gathered by Ogiek women only had a very small part in their

traditional subsistence. Kratz argues that because of this, Ogiek women were, in comparison, freer

to expand their work and additionally concentrate more on cultivation when it became more time-

consuming. Men did the clearing of the land which was necessary to start a new agricultural plot,

but once this was done they continued with their hunting and honey collecting. Women on the other

hand had a whole other job to attend to. They took on most of the work, like sowing the seed and

generally taking care of the garden, while men only helped occasionally when needed during the

harvest. Nevertheless, as time went by, the gardens became larger and maize became the new staple

food. The pressure on men to maintain their families‟ survival by providing forest food reduced

progressively. As the balance shifted more towards agriculture, fewer men went to the forest

regularly and even fewer stayed there for a longer period. 85

They had to be more active in the

gardens. One elderly woman told me that

“the role of women has already changed simply because in the olden days the work was very

84


Smithsonian Institution Press, 1994. 85

Ibid.

59

minimal. … But nowadays women versus men have already changed because they are farmers.

Today they are going for farming together. But they also collect fire woods, water and the like. They

are nowadays sharing the work with the men. Unlike during the olden days, when men were doing

their own work while women were doing the same.”

Although nowadays they perform pretty much the same work, in the olden days work was divided

according to gender. Men had their activities and women had their own as well. In the beginning,

garden work did not entail any significant departure from their usual activities. This led to the fact

that, even up till now, there is no clear gender ideology of farming that divides the tasks between

men and women. During their forest life in the „Then‟, men and women had their own specific but

complementary tasks to sustain their family. In other words, women were indispensable co-

producers of food production, though indirectly by providing daily support. But when they started

adding farming to their usual work, the contribution of women to household economy became a

matter of direct food production. Men would only contribute occasionally, which made women

more independent producers of food instead of co-producers. But although the gender lines are not

neatly organized when it comes to farming, and when the men help they in fact do the same work as

women, this shift from co-producers to independent producers did not really change anything for

women in their role of administering resources. The control of access to and the distribution of

material and socio-political resources were and are in the hands of men. Married women are still

constrained, even though they are relatively economically self-sufficient. In other words, the

process of economic diversification was based on the same socio-political organisation and the

same assumptions about gender roles where women were still regarded as inferior to men and so

were not allowed to have control over resources.86

Although most of the women I talked to mainly

emphasised the fact that they are now sharing work with the men, some did however make it clear

that the men were in control of the resources.

But then the question remains, when and why did the Ogiek start adding new ways of subsistence to

their usual forest work? The answer to this question varies when studying different Ogiek local

groups. All changes in Ogiek life were shaped in the setting of their relationships with their

neighbours and other Ogiek groups. Ogiek that are located more in the south or in West Mau lived

closely near Maasai and Kipsigis. They learned how to keep livestock and how to adopt agriculture

mostly from them. The Ogiek living near Mariashoni where I did my research had a slightly more

different story. They were more located near the White Highlands and came into early contact with

the colonial administration and other Kenyans who came to the settler farms as labourers.87

When

86

Ibid. 87

Ibid.

60

talking to an old forest guard, he validated this by telling his story of when the Ogiek experienced

change. He told me that working with the forest department changed the Ogiek to wearing clothes

and brought them in contact with other Kenyans.

“Those people who were working with the forest department, and the people who were translocated

from Nairobi, Kikuyus to work with the forest department. Those are the people who brought

changes. The Ogiek end up adopting new life that they saw from them, both the white and the

Kikuyus who were basically farmers. That's how they adopted farming. Livestock, they borrowed

from the Maasai community. That's how they changed slowly.”88

The Ogiek lived near land that was appropriated to the White Highlands. In addition, Mariashoni

was where the Ogiek were first hired by the colonial government to cut down the indigenous trees

and replace them with exotic ones. The colonial powers brought in the Kikuyu from Central Kenya

to help cultivate and substitute the indigenous trees. The Kikuyu showed the Ogiek how to farm.

The Maasai were the source and model for keeping livestock. Originally, the Ogiek regarded

domestic animals mainly as just another source of meat. They would not drink the milk, nor did

they need females for offspring. Nowadays most of the Ogiek own a small livestock next to

agriculture and their forest life that they still try to maintain.

When talking about previous forest life and hunting and gathering, the Ogiek seemed to present it as

the „Golden Ages‟, as Kratz would describe.89

Their stories emphasised the bounty of meat and

honey inside the forest. They were represented as basically the only forest products they needed in

order to have a good life.

“Modern food is a problem. The introduction of so many food has been accompanied by many

diseases. Not like the olden days whereby we had only two types of food, honey and wild meat”90

“The early years it was good because they were used to eat a small little food of which it can take

you even one day without getting hungry. And now … But now the life has changed, even the

stomach itself it needs a lot of food every now and then. And also it brings even sickness. You feel

sick most of the time.”91

88

Interview 2 Mariashoni Ogiek Mzee (18 March 2011) 89



Interview 21 Mariashoni Woman (11 May 2011) 91


61

These were generally standard answers when the topic we were discussing handled past life styles

and their life inside the forests. In the olden days everything seemed to be better, almost mythical.

Kratz argues that when asking about why the Ogiek have changed and added new ways of

subsistence they tended to overstress the negative side of forest life as a way to justify this

economic diversification.92

I have heard this negative view on forest life, although it was not so

common. Most of the time this view was expressed by the younger generations.

“There before life was somehow hard. Today we learned many things to plant, to sell. Sometimes

you can go in to get honey, you can sell. Now there are many ways from getting money. Life has

become more better now.”93

I noticed a difference between generations. The younger ones were more eager to talk about the

now and its advantages. About how they appreciate some developments, even though they seemed

to hold on to the time of „Then‟.

“He is different from what the elders are suggesting that the olden days were nice. But today is

better, you do your own job, farming. Maybe after that you go for small business. Not like in the

olden days where you went hunting in the forest without doing any other development. He prefers

the 'modern' life.”94

Younger generations seemed to talk about past forest life almost automatically, as if this was the

story I wanted to hear or the community wanted to be told. However, after some time they would

casually drop a hint which I could follow, leading me to discover that contemporary life actually

had its benefits. Only when I kept lingering on the subject the older people would also admit that

maybe farming was not all that bad, and that at least now they could sell and do business. But the

fact that today‟s major subsistence activities are farming or stock-keeping does not in the least mean

that the Ogiek have given up hunting or collecting honey, on the contrary. When listening to the

Ogiek, and especially to the men since hunting and collecting honey were their activities, telling

stories about the olden days we can see that the forest life is still a great aspect of who they are.

Even up to this day, men still go hunting with bows and arrows in the forest and they still collect

honey from their beehives. Most of the older men I talked to insisted that they still hunt during the

92




Interview 6 Mariashoni Philemon (29 April 2011)

62

weekends, although they clearly stated that their most prominent activity is farming and market

work. We should however make it clear that only those of an elderly age told me they still entered

the forest to go hunting. Younger generations are too occupied with farming or other activities. I

suspect however that their skills are not as trained as those of the older generations. Even though

they were learned the basic skills, they were brought up with a farmers existence where hunting was

already a supplementary activity. However, when talking about the community they did identify

hunting as an important activity. This tells us that hunting is still regarded as part of their culture

and way of life. The fact that some Ogiek still continue to hunt is proof of their persistence to

maintain their cultural identity of being hunters and gatherers. Prior to the Forest Act of 2005, the

old forest law had been in place since colonial times and prohibited entry into the gazetted forest

areas, as well as the use of forest products. This entailed that hunting was also banned under

provisions contained in the Wildlife Act. However, the new forest law was enacted to improve the

forestry situation and to provide for community management of forests. This also meant that hunter-

gatherer societies would be able to practise their lifestyles inside forests. When recognised forest

communities would have management control over the forests there would be room to negotiate

sustainable hunting rights. Though we are not quite there yet, this means that the ban on hunting in

fact still applies.95

When confronting this to my respondents most of them looked at me with a

dastardly smile. They all told me that seeing they were hunters, it was allowed for them to still go

inside the forest and hunt. One of them told me that

“They are allowed because that is our food. If the law is actually followed, it is not allowed. But

because the government knows very well that they are there and they are relying on wild animal,

assuming. So they are not disturbing us.”96

According to this mzee, the Ogiek were allowed to hunt because they relied on it. This intrigued me.

Did this mean that if they were to encounter a forest guard while hunting, they would actually just

let them be? According to them apparently yes. My respondent further continued

“You find that there are no wild life rangers here. Simply because they know very well Ogiek are

here. But sometimes they come. When they encounter the Ogiek, you find that the Ogiek they do

not fear. They are telling them this is our food, it is not for business. It is for consumption. So it is

95

Sena, K. "Mau Forest: Killing the Goose but Still Wanting the Golden Eggs." (2006).

http://www.iwgia.org/iwgia_files_publications_files/IA_4-06_Mau.pdf (retrieved 2 August 2011) 96

Interview 20 Mariashoni Stephen, member CBO.

http://www.iwgia.org/iwgia_files_publications_files/IA_4-06_Mau.pdf

63

allowed.”97

“But the government knows that the Ogiek in order to survive they have to hunt. The Ogiek are not

killing them all. If they were, they could have exhausted everything. So the government won't

interfere. Unless they are other tribes that are not Ogiek. They allow the Ogiek. Other communities

will face the law.”98

This is yet another argument for how hunting is still considered to be part of Ogiek identity. The

Ogiek are permitted, but the other communities are not. Although the new forest act leaves space for

forest products to be used for consumption, I am not entirely convinced by their arguments.

Unfortunately I did not have the chance to talk to the forester at Mariashoni forest station and cross

reference the information. The environment has certainly changed for this practice to be abundantly

continued. Next to the clearings of the forests which led to a decrease in wild game, there are also

laws trying to restrict hunting. Whether or not the laws are in fact followed, remains a different

question. But the Ogiek have made one thing abundantly clear, that although they are prominently

farmers doing business with agricultural surpluses and keeping livestock some of them still go into

the forest, but they still consider hunting as an important part of their identity that should be passed

on to the younger generations.

3.3 “Culture and honey rhyme together.”99

The Ogiek are primarily known for their honey. Honey is of primary importance in Ogiek society,

culture and personality. Even in utilising the forest, their primary interest is not hunting but

collecting honey, though it only comprises but a very small percentage of their diet. According to

Blackburn, the Ogiek expended up to 50 times more time and effort for a pound of honey than for a

pound of meat.100

Honey is yet still regarded as their staple food in the olden days, combined with

wild meat. One even made the comparison that honey is like modern ugali. The konoito are their

rights to exclusive use for the purpose of general forest activities. Although the Ogiek are allowed

to hunt, live and collect berries or wild fruits in their own clan‟s konoito, this is not the case with

gathering honey. As explained earlier, the konoito is subdivided into different korosiek, smaller

areas assigned to individual families. The rights to honey are organized through this division within

97

Interview 24 Mariashoni Stephen, member CBO (12 May 2011) 98

Interview 3 Mariashoni Joseph (24 April 2011) 99



History in Band Societies, edited by Leacock E. and Lee R.: Cambridge University Press, 1982.

64

the clan‟s territory. It was a means of allocating natural resources while avoiding interpersonal or

interlineage competition.101

A man was only allowed to place his beehives in his family‟s koret, or

plot of land, and can only collect honey from their own beehives. When someone would collect

honey from a beehive that was not his, the Ogiek believe he would be cursed. It was also considered

a crime to collect honey from another man‟s beehive, and one would be severely punished for it.

The stealing of honey or hives is relatively rare though.102

The family‟s plot and beehives are the

two most essential productive resources. Ogiek beehives were their capital, even up to today they

are considered to represent a man‟s wealth and worth. An Ogiek mzee told me on one occasion that

somebody who does not own a beehive is a lesser man. Blackburn even went as far as to state that

the Ogiek have a honey-complex. He compared their obsession with honey with the Maasai and

their cattle. Kratz argues that this comparison is actually quite appropriate. Hives yield honey year

after year, just like cows yield calves and milk.103

This comparison was even brought up several

times by the Ogiek I talked to. An Ogiek mzee told me literally that

“To own a beehive it means you're a rich person. Like someone who has cows. So if you have a

beehive you are a rich man because you will get food, you will get those honey and you exchange

for something in which you get interested in.”104

The more beehives one owns, the more honey one can collect and therefore the greater a man‟s

social and material status would be. Hives were individually made and owned, inherited from father

to son. They are made out of trunks of trees. The trunk was then split into identical halves. Through

various technique, the two halves were made hollow and were then joined together using wires.

Afterwards, the trunk was covered with barks of trees. In the middle of the honey barrel there is a

hole left, large enough to admit the hand and be able to collect the honey inside. This is then stuffed

with a bunch of leaves, closing the hive. The beehive is then placed high in a tree, on forked

branches. It is strategically placed with the opening facing downwards, a strategically good position

for harvesting. 105

The Ogiek have their way of collecting the honey. When actually gathering the

honey, the Ogiek bring two honey bags with them, made out of the skin of an antelope. To take the

101

Ibid. 102

Blackburn, R. "Fission, Fusion, and Foragers in East Africa: Micro- and Macroprocesses of Diversity and Integration

among Okiek Groups." In Cultural Diversity among Twentieth-Century Foragers, edited by Susan Kent. Cambridge:

University Press, 1996. 103




Sang, J. "The Ogiek (Dorobo) of Kenya: Community Resource Management." In Indigenous Knowledge for

Biodiversity and Development: Proceedings of the National Workshop on Indigenous Knowledge, edited by Christine

H. S. Kabuye. Nairobi: National Museums of Kenya, 1996.

65

honey, they first make a small fire and put it in one of the bags. Next they climb up the tree to the

beehive and take out the fire from the bag. The small fire is blown until it creates a decent smoke.

They then hold the smoke to the hole of the hive to scare away the bees. After waiting a little while,

they are able to insert their hand into the barrel and remove the honey.106

When I asked Ogiek men

whether or not they were afraid of beestings, they just laughed and told me they were only minor

stings. If you could not take it, you were not a real man. Up to this day, the beehives are made the

same way they used to be. At least, up to a certain degree. When entering an Ogiek homestead, I

watched a man while he was making a beehive. Or let us say he was remaking it. The beehive was

held together by modern ropes made out of plastic. The Ogiek mzee was in fact removing the plastic

ropes and replacing them by traditionally made ropes he had been making ever since I arrived to his

homestead. The ropes are made out of a specific tree, and according to the old man they were much

stronger than the plastic ones. That was also the main reason why he replaced them. The Ogiek used

to migrate following the honey seasons. The five zones of forest types correspond to different

elevations, different species of trees and plants and different animals. The bees produce honey from

the different flowering plant and tree species that occur in each forest zone. The variations in

rainfall throughout the forest zones result in one forest flowering after another. This makes it

possible for the honey to be available throughout the year.107

The Ogiek moved to the high-altitude

forest, tirap, during the dry season in December and January. Honey ripened in the low altitude

forest, soyua, from May to September, and sasaontet had honey from August to November.

Nowadays, the environment has changed. The Ogiek do not follow the bees‟ migrating patterns

anymore. Mau Forest has long been experiencing major challenges regarding land use and forest

management. The continued appropriation of highlands to white settlers and the development of the

timber industry led to increased forest clearing of Mau. These changes have affected the Ogiek and

the bees residing near the White Highlands, including the area of Mariashoni. 108

They do however

enter the remaining indigenous forest where they have their beehives hanging. But afterwards they

return quickly to their settlement. The Ogiek are complaining of reduced honey yields. They told

me that:

“Ogiek today cannot depend on honey because they are not there. The trees which they were

depending maybe to get honey are no longer there. The plantation which was typically a natural

106


Colony." The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 59, no. 333-378 (1929). 107


African Publishing House, 1978. 108



66

forest is now a planted forest, which is very unfriendly to the environment.”109

The way they refer to the planted exotic trees tells us they are not used to place beehives. The fact

that the availability of honey has decreased due to indigenous forest clearings, had its effect on the

society. Honey still retains its prominent status within the Ogiek society. Honey is more than just a

sweet substance. The uses and significance of honey exceed those of any other forest product.

Without honey and the conditions of getting it, Blackburn argues, Ogiek life would be entirely

different.110

It is part of their staple food and is used as a medicine to fight diseases or discomforts.

“Honey it is our staple food. It is part of medicine. And it is mixed with other herbs. Even

sometimes it can move somebody to be drunk (laughter) when it is mixed with certain herbs.”111

This was what an Ogiot respondent told me. He was trying to explain that when honey is mixed

with certain medicinal herbs it can cure irritations or pain. Some even said honey is used to control

malaria, or heal open wounds. While the potential of honey in mainstream modern health care is

still not well recognised, though it is shown by western studies that honey is able to accelerate

healing from infected wounds112

, it has been valued as an essential ingredient in traditional

medicine for centuries. Honey is also of great cultural value within Ogiek society. It is used for

brewing beer used during ceremonies and rituals, hence the reference that somebody can get

slightly drunk. But the important thing here is not the light headedness, more the fact that honey is

regarded as the basic „ingredient‟ for Ogiek cultural life, as one of my respondents said “culture and

honey rhyme together”.113

“Even marriages you use honey. Whenever I have given out my daughter to the other family, they

will bring me honey. Everybody is given honey to taste. We use it in certain ceremonies. There must

be honey, it is a must. Even an honourable person when he comes you should be given honey.”114

But even in formal situations such as weddings or „giving away‟ a girl, the use of honey has

changed. Honey is sparse nowadays. It is not available throughout the year anymore so the Ogiek

109

Interview 16 Kiptunga Ogiek Hunter (8 May 2011) 110

Blackburn, R. "The Okiek and Their History." Azania: Archaeological Research in Africa 9, no. 1 (1974). 111


See Lusby P. E., Coombes A. and Wilkinson J. M "Honey: A Potent Agent for Wound Healing?" Journal of WOCN

29, no. 6 (2002): 295-300. And also Zumla A. and Lulat A. "Honey - a Remedy Rediscovered." Journal of the Royal

Society of Medicine 82 (1989). 113


Interview 7 Mariashoni Francis (29 April 2011)

67

needed to find some sort of substitution, or at least something additional given the fact that Ogiek

lifestyle is not the same as it used to be in the so called olden days. Ogiek are now farmers and keep

livestock. In the situation of a marriage for example, it was indeed necessary for the boy‟s family to

bring honey. Nowadays, although the honey is still deeply valued, they use cattle as a dowry. But

albeit some minor differences or adjustments, it is generally perceived that without honey the Ogiek

are not permitted to perform any rituals or ceremonies. Besides being of medicinal and cultural

value, honey is also a medium of trade. It is an important element in Maasai ceremonies as well.

Relations between the Ogiek and the Maasai are somewhat peculiar. Although the Maasai generally

regard the Ogiek as being „poor‟ for having little cattle and in the olden days used to be forced to

eat wild animals to get meat, their relations derive from mutually complementary needs that can

only be satisfied by material trade. The trade can involve a number of different items, produced by

both groups, although honey and domestic stock are considered to be the most important. The

Maasai are in a number of ways dependent on services from the Ogiek. Maasai use honey as a food

and wine, but do not get enough from occasional natural hives to satisfy their needs. It is also

necessary to fully perform important ceremonial rituals. The Ogiek either trade the honey directly

with the Maasai or sell it to shops in trading centres. In return the Ogiek often receive cows or

sheep, although the trade has also been integrated in the money economy. The trade was, and still is

of mutual interest. The Maasai receive the precious honey, while Ogiek acquire meat and monetary

resources.115

Honey is a central aspect in Ogiek identity. Without honey, their cultural and social lives would look

entirely different. In fact it has already changed. The decrease in honey yields led to the necessity of

altering some aspects of certain ceremonies. Whereas honey used to be collected throughout the

year, even resulting in a surplus, it is now only available in two seasons. This striking decline in the

production of honey did not have any influence on its cultural value. It did however influence its

use. We can see the same development here as with the practice of hunting. The younger

generations are taught about the cultural value of honey and its significance to the community, yet

few of them still actually go and collect honey. Most younger men, women did not own beehives as

they were passed on from father to son, own a few mostly inherited beehives. Yet they do not climb

the tree to collect the honey. On the other hand, the older generation still collects. An Ogiek mzee

even proposed to me to join him into the forest to gather some honey. Unfortunately, it was not the

right season and I did not get the chance to see it with my own eyes. But even if the younger

generations do not have the skills to gather honey it is still, like hunting, perceived as one of the

most important elements of Ogiek identity. The Ogiek way of life, their adaptation to the forest,

115

Blackburn, R. "The Okiek and Their History." Azania: Archaeological Research in Africa 9, no. 1 (1974).

68

their land tenure system and landscape ecology are understandable primarily in terms of the

importance of honey.

3.4 Traditional medicine.

Medicinal plants constitute about 28 percent of all plants on earth. The WHO estimated that

approximately 70 to 80 percent of the population in developing countries rely mainly on traditional

medicine for their primary health care. In Africa, more than 80 percent depend on medicinal plants

and herbs for their primary medicinal needs or as complementary medicine.116

Foster and Anderson

defined ethnomedicine as the totality of health, knowledge, values, beliefs, skills and practices of

member of a society including all the clinical and nonclinical activities that relate to their health

needs.117

Although they constitute a major component of treatment within primary health care

systems, there have been changes in the availability and use of medicinal plants. They are

threatened by environmental degradation and the rapid disappearance of their natural habitats. In

addition, they are endangered by the shifts in local medical practices from traditional medicine to

more modern medicine.118

The Ogiek have been dependent on traditional medicine as their primary source to medical care.119

Modern medicine was introduced to the area of Mariashoni only around 2000, when the trading

centre was set in place. Up until that point, illnesses and aches have been treated mainly using

medicinal plants and herbs. But despite the introduction of modern health services, many Ogiek still

continue to use their traditional practices although mostly to supplement modern medicine.

Both the older generations as well as the young people have basic knowledge about medicinal

plants and the particular conditions each plant or herb can treat. Most medicinal plants are found in

the forest, although through my interviews I noticed that most of the older persons grew some

species in their own gardens. When talking to an herbalist he explained to me that he uses over 72

species of plants, herbs and trees for treating different diseases. The most common conditions he

treats are problems to do with the kidneys, joints and sometimes even breathing problems. Local

availability is the key determinant of which plant species are used for any particular use. But the

problem is that the medicinal plants in their immediate locality are in fact diminishing. Due to forest

and vegetation clearing for charcoal burning and agricultural purposes, a lot has been lost. Although

116

WHO Traditional Medicine

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs134/en/ (Retrieved 2 August 2011) 117

Foster, G. and Anderson B. G. Medical Anthropology. New York: John Wiley and Sons Ltd, 1978. 118

Anyinam, C. "Ecology and Ethnomedicine: Exploring Links between Current Environmental Crisis and Indigenous

Medical Practices." Social Science and Medicine 40, no. 3 (1995): 321-29. 119

Ngari E. W., Chiuri L. W., Kariuki S. T. and Huckett S. "Ethnomedicine of Ogiek of River Njoro Watershed, Nakuru-

Kenya." Ethnobotany Journal 8 (2010).

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs134/en/

69

some Ogiek have domesticated a few medicinal plants on their farms, they still need to enter deep

into the forest to collect the needed amount. The knowledge about medicinal plants is passed on

from generation to generation, usually through initiation or from parent to child. But the

understanding and knowledge of the use of the medicinal plants is slowly disappearing and are now

influenced by modern health services. Research on ethnobotany and the use of ethnomedicine

among the Ogiek showed that about five percent of the people indicated that they did not use

medicinal plants at all. They pointed to the fact that they did not trust the efficacy of medicinal

plants for diseases, nor were they fully convinced about the right dosage of the drugs.120

None of

the Ogiek I talked to mentioned anything about not trusting medicinal plants. If anything, they all

agreed that traditional medicine was in fact more helpful to them than the modern one. Ogiek

generally talk about the side effects of modern medicine.

“When somebody becomes sick you have to go and find medical herbs. Today, if you become sick

you'll go for medical services whereby you'll be given tablets but by the end of the day they do not

help instead the problem keeps on increasing.”121

It seemed that most of the Ogiek feared modern medical treatment. They were not at ease taking

something of which they did not know the substance of, they were

“not comfortable even though there is such medication. Modern medicine cannot cure completely

disease in the body. It instead reduces but cannot cure completely, not like our olden herbs.”122

is what they told me. It is said that modern medicine cannot cure you entirely and that you recover

more quickly when using traditional herbs. The Ogiek have in fact little or no affinity with modern

medicine. To make use of the words of Davis and Henley, who did their research with the Penan in

Borneo, a simple „synthetic drug cannot replace the spirits in plants who have the power to heal‟.123

It is all a matter of trust and belief.

“We believe in the herbs. If you have the belief it can easily cure you. Herbs are more important to

us than the modern treatment.”124

120

Ibid. 121

Interview 21 Mariashoni Woman (11 May 2011) 122

Interview 14 Mariashoni Linah (5 May 2011) 123

Davis, W. and Henley T. "Beyond the Images." In Penan: Voice for the Borneo Rainforest., edited by Henley T.

Davis W. Vancouver: Western Canada Wilderness Committee, 1990. 124


70

In other words, the Ogiek attach a greater value to traditional, medicinal plants than to modern

medicine. In general indigenous medicine, health is considered to be state of equilibrium between

the physical and spiritual components of the individual. In other words, health equals wholeness.125

Ogiek traditional medical practices involve medicinal plants and herbs found in the forest with

which they experience a kincentric relationship. The use of herbs and plants reinforce the

connection between the people and their environment. However, the major loss of indigenous forest

undermines this relationship. It could be that the Ogiek sense that through this loss they are not

whole anymore, and therefore there are more diseases. The initial equilibrium between the physical

and spiritual elements is out of balance. This gives rise to an almost mythical exaggeration of past

life where there were no diseases.

“In olden days diseases were very minimal. Now they are many so he is experiencing new

challenges. There are new diseases like aids, diabetes and ulcers. They were not there because the

Ogiek were using honey.”126

In general, people believe there were not as many diseases in the olden days as there are now. The

discourse of „Then‟ and „Now‟ is very much prevalent when talking to the Ogiek about traditional

medicine and diseases. Although the „Then‟ is almost mythically transformed to a time where

everything was peaceful and pure, we should not write this off as just an exaggeration. The

emphasis on the use of honey in the past implicitly refers to the decrease in yields of honey. Less

indigenous trees make less honey. Honey was used as a medicinal forest product, together with

plants and herbs. The reduced consumption of honey as a result of the loss of trees has had an effect

on their sense of wholeness. The loss of indigenous trees does not just destroy the source of

medicines, it also disrupts the integrity of their belief systems.127

128

But when we talked a bit longer I also heard other motives for favouring traditional medical

practices, mainly financial reasons. Relying on traditional health care is not as expensive as the

health facilities. The roads are not that reliable either, and not in the least during the rainy season.

The only way of reaching the modern health care centre is either on foot or by motorbike, which

again costs money. So what we find is that people generally rely on their traditional medicinal

125



Interview 5 Mariashoni Jackson, herbalist (26 April 2011) 127



See also Brossius, J. "Endangered Forest, Endagered People: Environmentalist Representations of Indigenous

Knowledge." Human Ecology 25, no. 1 (1997): 47-69.

71

practices. However, when their condition gets worse they seek the help of modern medical care. A

traditional midwife explained to me that traditional medicine can help people only up to a certain

level. She admitted that when it reaches a certain point beyond her profession she will transfer the

patient to a medical hospital for further treatment. There seems to develop a complementary

relationship between traditional and modern medicine, how this will further evolve will depend on

the preservation of the indigenous forests and the access to modern medical health care centres.

4 Tradition and Ogiek identity.

In describing Ogiek forest life from „Then‟ to „Now‟ we notice an almost mythical representation of

the olden days during the „Then‟. The Ogiek would say that they only relied on wild meat and

honey, that there were no diseases and no conflict. All was peaceful and balanced. As opposed to

„Now‟, where everything has changed, there is not much honey left and life is challenged with

diseases. This however, was an image the Ogiek presented to me. Their stories about the „Then‟

presented a strong contrast between the constant change and innovation of the modern world and

the attempt to structure at least some parts of their social life within that world as unchanging and

invariant. In other words, we could argue that the representations of the „Then‟ are a way of

inventing tradition. These parts of the social life are a set of practices that repeat certain values and

norms of behaviour.129

And yet these images and stories provided me enough groundwork to

distinguish important elements in Ogiek life. Those elements represented as tradition and

unchanging, hunting and collecting honey and medicinal herbs as outlined here above, were

identified as essential aspects of Ogiek culture. They are responses to the contemporary situation of

change and challenges and take the form of reference to older situations.130

Even though the Ogiek

have changed their way of life, these stories about the forest life of „Then‟ remain important in their

image of themselves. Some practices are regarded by younger Ogiek as ancient and unchanged,

older people remember them as pretty recently. This distinctive temporal distance between „ancient‟

or „recently‟ depends on the speakers‟ age and perspective.131

We can see this in these two small

examples:

“When he was a young boy he was brought up in a society who used to value products from the

129

Hobsbawm, J. "Inventing Traditions." In Invention of Tradition, edited by Hobsbawm J. and Ranger T. O.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992. 130

Ibid. 131


Ceremonies." Comparative Studies in Society and History 35, no. 1 (1993): 30-65.

72

forest. Food meaning was honey. When someone feels uncomfortable they were treated by the use

herbs.”132

As opposed to

“We really miss the olden days of our fathers. If they talk about it we really feel that if something

can be done we go back into that, it is great.”133

We can observe a temporal distance between „when he was a young boy‟ and „the olden days of our

fathers‟. Though both expressions imagine a primordial past, there is a clear difference in how this

past is experienced. The first phrase refers to the childhood experience and incorporates the speaker

into the society, a „we‟-group at a certain time. The „olden days of our fathers‟ relates to both his

own relatives he remembers in certain circumstances who at the same time also represent a

particular period of time. But the unchanging character of these stories and images of Ogiek life in

the forest seem to rub out these major distinctions in personal memory. The stories conjoin into a

personalized collective memory. This merger, as we might say, moves in two directions. Kratz

argues that the older memories extend the younger back in time, while younger memories overlay

the older in a forward annex.134

Fabian explains that tradition, as a cultural concept, is a way of

evaluating and understanding past experiences. It is implicated in the representations and

understandings of history and identity through time.135

In other words, these stories considered to

represent tradition are part of Ogiek ethnic identity through this temporal expansion and a

personalized collectivity. They become part of a state of being, collectively as well as individually.

5 Conclusion Part I.

In this section of the thesis, we tried to find out how the Ogiek perceive their environment and how

their forest life has changed to contemporary life. We found out that the Ogiek present a double

image of themselves; in the „Then‟ and in the „Now‟. The „Now‟ relates to time when the Ogiek

started settling, adding agriculture to their mode of subsistence and keeping domestic animals. Their

132

Interview 13 Mariashoni Forester Mzee (5 May 2011) 133

Interview 12 Nakuru Victor Prengei (3 May 2011) 134


Ceremonies." Comparative Studies in Society and History 35, no. 1 (1993): 30-65. 135

Fabian, J. "Of Dogs Alive, Birds Dead, and Time to Tell a Story." In Chronotypes, edited by Bender J. and Wellbery

D. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1991.

73

forest life changed, the Ogiek started to cultivate and they began participating in the money

economy. This „Now‟ encompasses a number of changes and challenges they have faced. They

noticed changes in their environment; the indigenous forests were cut down and they developed a

closer interaction with their neighbours, some of which they had not interacted with before like the

Kikuyu. These changes resulted into changes in land tenure and use that had its effects on their

social organisation and in new patterns of subsistence. The „Then‟ is constructed out of almost

mythical images on how Ogiek forest life used to be organized. By listening to their stories of

„Then‟ and „Now‟, we are able to discover how Ogiek lives have changed and which aspects are

still of great importance to the Ogiek community and their identity. To qualitatively examine those

stories I had to simplify them in order to identify the most prominent features of Ogiek forest life. A

first important aspect described was the way Ogiek people referred to Mau Forest. They called the

forest their home, pointing towards a holistic view of their environment. The environment is like an

extended ecological family to them, where all natural elements, including the forest, are regarded as

„kin‟. Through dwelling in an environment and incorporating its features into a pattern of everyday

activities, the forest becomes their home. This forest home was divided into different clan-owned

land, konoito, stretching along the escarpment slope and crossing the five ecological zones,

providing the families of each lineage access to honey throughout the entire year. Each konoito is in

turn divided into smaller areas called koret, distributed to individual families belonging to the

particular clan. Though Ogiek settlement patterns have developed towards permanently settled

households, we should keep in mind that every landscape is a narrative, describing past life and

dwellings. The categorisations of forest zones and honey seasons are still relevant „Now‟ as they

were „Then‟, it recounts Ogiek history. Another characteristic of the „Then‟ life was hunting and

gathering as their primary mode of subsistence. Ogiek presented a fairy-tale like image where

everything was peaceful and simple; there was neither hunger nor diseases. The Ogiek relied only

on wild meat and honey for their daily survival. However, when talking about how they started

adding agriculture to their lives, some of them changed the positive note in their stories. Suddenly,

the forest life was hard, and agriculture turned out to be a good source of income because they

could sell surpluses. Nonetheless, hunting and gathering is still practiced among the older

generation and the skills are still passed on to the young ones. One of the most significant features

of Ogiek life is honey. It is a central aspect in their identity. Though honey has been harder to

collect due to the deforestation, its fundamental value has not diminished. The Ogiek way of life,

their adaptation to the forest, their land tenure system and landscape ecology are first and foremost

understandable in terms of the importance of honey. A last identified and discussed aspect of the

forest life is the use of traditional medicine. The majority of the Ogiek population in Mariashoni

still seem to depend on traditional medicine for their primary health care. The stories of „Then‟,

74

where there were no diseases, is very much alive when talking about medicinal herbs and plants.

Health is considered to be a state of balance and stability between the physical and spiritual

components of the individual. Being healthy is being whole. However, the destruction of the forest

might just be the main reason why Ogiek believe there were fewer diseases in the past. Their home

has been destroyed and therefore do not feel whole anymore. Modern medicine has been entering

the society, though the Ogiek still place their trust primarily in traditional medicinal herbs and

plants.

These stories about the „Then‟ are in fact a representation of Ogiek tradition. They are part of their

identity, collectively as well as individually. By listening carefully, we have managed to recognise

and describe significant aspects of Ogiek identity. It is clear that all of these aspects are related to

the forest. This again shows the Ogiek perception of humans and nature belonging to one world.

75

Part III: Conservation.

In this last section of the dissertation we will focus ourselves on conservation. Western scientific

conservation is based on the premises that the world of nature and the world of humanity are

entirely separated. Conservation efforts are managed by sealing parts of forests, restricting or even

banning any human interference. Indigenous people, however, have a very different view on this.

Humans and nature are part of one world; whatever happens to nature will therefore have its impact

on humans and vice versa. Though it seems as if these two visions are incompatible, they do have

something in common; the preservation of nature. In this section we will argue that indigenous and

Ogiek way of life and their kincentric world view have the potential to be effective management

strategies for conservation practices. In order for us to argue this we will first look into the concept

of indigenous peoples and how the Ogiek are identified as such. This is an important part since it

presents the answer to the question as to why the Ogiek are recognised in the Mau Forest

Rehabilitation Programme. Before going into the programme, let us first illustrate how the Ogiek

are devoted to conservation. We will present an historical account on how the Ogiek have managed

to preserve nature and their environment in the past and explore the actions taken in the present day.

Afterwards, we will be able to analyze whether and how Ogiek perceptions of conservation have

changed over time. Thereafter, we will look at how the Ogiek are represented in the Mau Forest

Rehabilitation Programme and examine the steps that have already been taken towards conservation

of forested areas. And finally, we will consider Ogiek aspirations of the rehabilitation programme

towards the future.

1 Indigenous people.

1.1 The concept of an „indigenous people‟.

The first question to answer here is „Who is defined as an indigenous people?”. The concept

„indigeinity‟ has been one of many interpretations but they all fall back on one element, culture. The

International Labour Organisation (ILO) described indigenous communities, people and nations as

“those which, having a historical continuity with pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies that

76

developed on their territories, consider themselves distinct from other sectors of the societies now

prevailing on those territories, or parts of them. They form at present non-dominant sectors of

society and are determined to pre-serve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral

territories, and their ethnic identity, as the basis of their continued existence as peoples, in

accordance with their own cultural patterns, social institutions and legal system.”136

Indigenous communities and people are according to this description culturally, distinctive groups

overwhelmed by a society born out of a colonial domination. Nevertheless, they have managed to

maintain their own particular social, economic and political bodies. This definition holds three

important dimensions. The first dimension is one of territorial nature. Indigenous people have a

„historical continuity with… pre-colonial societies that developed on their territories‟. In other

words, they were here first. The emphasis is then put on the cultural practices of communities, their

language, the social, economic and political organisation of the given society and the traditional

knowledge systems. Thirdly, indigenous people are given the face of the „subaltern‟, those who live

in the margins of the social, political and economic structures of the society. They carry with them

an entire history of suffering and exclusion from economic and political development of the

national dominating powers. Yet the description set out by the ILO was only a working definition

given by José Martinez Cobo in 1986 when he did his research on the discrimination of indigenous

people assigned by the UN. His report formed the basis for the first composition of the UN

Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. However, this first print on the rights of

indigenous peoples caused some fundamental constitutional problems for African states rendering

its implication almost impossible. Since the composition of indigenous rights was based on a

working definition there were still many interpretations of the concept „indigeinity‟. The African

states argued that the fact that there was no explicit definition available could cause tensions

amongst Africa‟s ethnic groups, leading to possible instability within the sovereign states.

Additionally, the principle of self-determination caused quite a lot of commotion. The principle only

applied to peoples who had been under colonial and/or foreign occupation, which could be

misinterpreted to justify secession. This could again affect the political unity of the countries.

Another difficulty were the indigenous rights to land and natural resources which contrasted with

constitutional provisions, which claimed that the control is the responsibility of the state. Another

aspect has also been troublesome, that is to say the priority in time. This element is not fully

136

Pelican, M. "Complexities of Indigeneity and Autochthony: An African Example." American Ethnologist 36, no. 1

(2009): 52-66.

[Cobo 1986:5, para. 379]

77

applicable in an African context. 137

The question „who was here first‟ was considered irrelevant. All

Africans are descended from Africa‟s original people, therefore in theory all Africans are indigenous

and should have equal access to natural resources and land. This also led to questioning the

relevance of several African groups that maintain an indigenous status.138

Finally, the African

Commission of Human and Peoples‟ Rights (ACHPR) of the African Union stated that the concept

of „indigenous peoples‟ in an African context differed from its meaning in other continents. An

explicit, universal and unambiguous definition of „indigeinity‟ was therefore not desirable. Instead,

some basic features of indigenous groups in Africa have been captured, including self-identification

and recognition by other groups as a distinct collectivity, a special bond to and the use of their

traditional lands and a state of marginalization resulting from the cultural difference from the

national dominant model.139

1.1.1 The Ogiek as an indigenous people in Kenya.

When considering the basic features of what it means to be an indigenous group, can we state that

the Ogiek are able to identify themselves as such? Let us take a look at the different descriptive

aspects set out by the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People. We must be attentive to

not emphasise on Ogiek past life, however much they would correspond to the „indigenous

elements‟. It is necessary to focus on contemporary Ogiek daily practices if we are to argue that

they are able to claim an indigenous identity.

That the Ogiek have a special bond to their traditional lands is the least you can say. The Ogiek

people believe Mau Forest to be their home. Even though past land tenure, where the Mau was

divided according to clan into tracks of land following the slopes of the escarpment is not applicable

anymore in the current situation. Despite the fact that the Ogiek still hold value to this land

management system, it is of no use at the present; not to them, nor to the environment. The

boundaries of the clan territories were marked by natural landmarks such as rivers, notable rock

formations or specific trees. But Mau Forest has undergone too much forest cover loss and changes

for the tenure system to still be applicable. Ogiek settlement patterns have also changed

significantly and do not follow the traditional land tenure system anymore. They do not live

according to clan, although family settlements are still common. This, however, does not implicate

137


(2009): 52-66. 138

Igoe, J. "Becoming Indigenous Peoples: Difference, Inequality, and the Globalization of East African Identity

Politics." African Affairs 105, no. 420 (2006): 399-420. 139


(2009): 52-66.

78

that the bond between them and their environment has reduced in such a way it would not even

matter anymore. On the contrary, the forest and its natural resources are intrinsically linked to each

sphere of Ogiek life, socially, culturally and politically. Although Ogiek are primarily farmers and

livestock keepers, they still hold on to an identity of hunters and gatherers and make use of the

forest mostly for collecting honey and gathering medicinal plants and herbs. The Ogiek consider

themselves culturally distinct from other Kenyan tribes because of their intrinsic relationship with

the forest. They reject any affiliation with other tribes. They feel themselves being marginalized

from the general Kenyan economic and political development. The area of Mariashoni where I did

my research neither had neither electricity nor running water. The road network was very poor, and

Mariashoni was practically unreachable when during the rainy seasons. They only have one modern

health care centre near the Mariashoni trading centre, providing medical services for the entire

location of Mariashoni, an area as large as 4000 km². Although they have about seven state primary

schools, they only have one secondary school and the literacy levels are still critically low up to this

day. There prevails a strong desire for development in the community. The Ogiek are also a small

population and therefore do not represent any political heavyweight. When the excisions started in

1997 – 2001, most of the land was allocated to the „politically correct‟ to try and influence the then

coming elections. But because the Ogiek are so few in numbers and they would not have had an

effect on the outcome of the elections the political powers let politics interfere for their own benefit

and the Ogiek were left behind. The Ogiek are excluded from the political game and do not have

any representatives in parliament. They are however represented in the Mau Forest Rehabilitation

Programme, which is the first time they are embodied as a community within government

structures. The characteristic of „being here first‟ is one which is abundantly appropriated by the

Ogiek, even though this claim can be hard to validate in an African context. The Ogiek claim to

have always lived in Mau, and declare that the forests are their ancestral lands. Moreover, they also

claim to be the first people of Kenya. It is thought that the Ogiek were actually the first people to

settle in the East African forests whereas other Kenyan tribes originally migrated from Sudan or

Congo region. Together with the Sanye and Wata of Ethiopia, they are regarded as the aborigines of

Eastern Africa. Up to this day, there has been no evidence found countering that statement.140

They

fit the „profile‟ of a distinct cultural minority that was historically repressed by those who control

the state apparatus.141

The Ogiek people have identified themselves as an indigenous people and the UN and the ACHPR

have accepted them as such. What is more is that after a long struggle, the Kenyan government has

140



Politics." African Affairs 105, no. 420 (2006): 399-420.

79

finally recognised the Ogiek as an indigenous people in 2006 after entering into a loan agreement

with the World Bank. When launching a project to promote sustainable use of water, land, forests

and other natural resources it became clear that it might have an impact on indigenous people‟s

livelihoods and their rights to land. The Kenyan government had no other choice but to comply with

international standards, including those of the World Bank‟s Operational Policy on Indigenous

Peoples.142

This means that the Ogiek are part of a global self-identified class of „indigenous

peoples‟ that emerged through the interactions of indigenous representatives at international fora.

The question now remains, how did the Ogiek have access to those fora, and how did they have the

knowledge and the awareness that they exist? The recognition of an indigenous status requires

knowledge of this global indigenous category and the implications it can have for community‟s

local struggle for resources. Above all that, access to these fora requires financial resources, which

are most commonly received as aid by international NGO‟s. They control the financial resources

and information that are critical to indigenous communities.143

However, international NGO‟s exist

on what Barth calls the macro-level within these relationships of bureaucratic structures to

indigenous identities. The question is, how does this macro-level reach the ground? Barth describes

the micro-level as characterized by face-to-face relationships. People‟s experiences, social demands

and cultural values are shaped and mediated by grassroots institutions which the people are familiar

with. However, they are not adequately experienced to articulate the needs of local communities to

this global network of international NGO‟s. This is when median-level structures emerged. These

include mostly local government structures and indigenous NGO‟s.144

The Ogiek have established

several associations to mediate between the local and the global spheres. These associations either

represent the entire Ogiek community in Kenya (the Ogiek Peoples National Assembly OPNA), or

those located near Mau Forest (Ogiek Welfare Council OWC; Ogiek Rural Integral Projects ORIP;

Ogiek Peoples‟ Development Programme OPDP) and those Ogiek groups residing near Mount

Elgon (Chepkitale Indigenous Peoples' Development Programme CIPDP). These mediating

associations are supported by several international NGO‟s such as ECOTERRA Intl. and the

Friends of Peoples close to Nature (FPCN). All of them are united on the Ogiek.org website, a

partnership between the Ogiek local organisations and human rights organisations.145

These median-

142

Indigenous peoples planning framework for the western kenya community driven development and flood mitigation

project and the natural resource management project. Republic of Kenya (office of the president, ministry of water and

irrigation and ministry of environmental and natural resources) 2006 retrieved from:

http://www.ogiek.org/indepth/2006_Kenya_WKCDD_NRMIPPF.pdf 143



Barth, F. "Enduring and Emering Issues in the Analysis of Ethnicity; Beyond 'Ethnic Groups and Boundaries'." In

The Anthropology of Ethnicity, edited by Vermeulen H. and Govers C. Amsterdam: Het Spinhuis, 2000. Reprint, 4. See

also Igoe, J. "Becoming Indigenous Peoples: Difference, Inequality, and the Globalization of East African Identity


Ogiek Website

http://www.ogiek.org/indepth/2006_Kenya_WKCDD_NRMIPPF.pdf

80

level organisations „promote‟ the Ogiek identity to attract financial means. However, the access to

financial resources offered by these international NGO‟s is often tied to the condition that they

would meet certain cultural profiles. And so, indigenous NGO‟s and other median-level structures

shape or emphasise certain cultural characteristics to fit the ideological indigenism required to

obtain the monetary funds. We could say that the Ogiek have managed to obtain an advantageous

position other groups who are not able to claim membership in the indigenous class have not.146

The

recognition of the Ogiek as an indigenous people helps them in their political struggle for their

indigenous rights and claims to the Mau Forest as their ancestral lands. This acknowledgement

gives them certain benefits and opportunities that other groups do not have. This position is also

probably the main reason why the Ogiek are recognised within the Mau Forest Rehabilitation

Programme. Now that the Kenyan government has accepted them as an indigenous people they are

obliged by signed international treaties to consider Ogiek indigenous rights to their ancestral lands.

1.2 Indigenous people and conservation.

Most lands inhabited by indigenous peoples are forested areas, or areas important for biodiversity

conservation. These areas have become the centre of conflict between indigenous people and

conservationists. Both parties tend to hold a different view and different perceptions of nature,

human impact on the natural world and conservation. Whereas Western conservation practices are

based on the assumption that humans and nature are two very separate units, indigenous peoples

perceive nature and humans as part of one world. Yet these discrepancies hide the fact that they both

have only one thing in common: the preservation of that specific region. In making efforts to

conserve and preserve a forest there are actually three concerns at stake; first of all, justice to nature

and its rich plant and animal biodiversity, secondly justice to the generations to come but also

justice to the local people, the forest dwellers as well as the non-dwelling communities.147

These

communities are often left out of conservation programmes. The programmes are habitually based

on the Western assumption of an existing dichotomy between man and nature. One consequence of

this postulation is the idea that by inhabiting an environment, humans are almost destined to alter it

from its natural state. However, this idea is based on the supposition that the only true natural

environments are those untouched from human civilisation.148

This, however, leads to the debatable

http://www.ogiek.org/ (Accessed 5 August 2011) 146



Alcorn, J. "Indigenous Peoples and Conservation." Conservation Biology 7, no. 2 (1993). 148

Ingold, T. The Perception of the Environment: Essays in Livelihood, Dwelling and Skill. New York: Routledge,

2000.

http://www.ogiek.org/

81

conclusion that by sealing of forests from any kind of human interaction, nature will return to a kind

of natural state, free from human presence. The notion of a „pristine wilderness‟ is very vivid in this

mindset. It is the conviction that certain ecosystems exist that have not felt any human presence yet

and, more importantly, that ecosystems can return to this state. Yet nature, in this way of thinking, is

presented as a static object, whereby ecological changes caused by human influence are regarded as

unnatural and forced upon nature. This idea has been refuted by studies focusing on the reciprocal

relationships between man and nature.149

For indigenous peoples, there are no two separate worlds

of nature and man. Both are part of one big world. Humans are only small segment of this one

world, no greater than any other. Humans are, and will always be, connected with the natural

world.150

Indigenous people can be possible allies when it comes to conservation and preservation

of forests. They not only bring considerable knowledge and expertise to conservation projects, but

also maintain an emotional and moral commitment to them. They have had generations of

experience with accurate land use of the environment, adapted to its particular conditions.151

There

have been efforts to include indigenous peoples in conservation programs. The International Union

for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) has incorporated indigenous issues on the agenda and calls for

more community-based forest management. There have also been congresses organised by the

IUCN and the Forest Peoples‟ Programme dealing with the future of indigenous peoples and

conservation. However, these international assemblies have often limited impact on national

programmes and even less on the practice on the ground. They are not legally binding, and can

therefore only influence conservation policies. And yet, indigenous people can be important

partners in conservation policies. Their way of life and kincentric world view have the potential be

effective management strategies for conservation practices.152

Traditional ecological knowledge is

attached to a specific physical space locality. All the aspects of this locality are connected.

Therefore, it is the entire ecological community that is the focus of conservation. If environments

are shaped by the activities of living beings, then it is always evolving and changing. Indigenous

ecological knowledge is linked to this environmental change. Though indigenous knowledge is

often referred to „traditional‟ knowledge, we should not make the mistake it cannot change. Each

generation makes observations, compares them to their experiences and the knowledge older

generations have passed on onto them. In other words, „traditional‟ ecological knowledge is not

fixed but instead is, together with the environment, constantly changing. This can lead to new

149

West, P, James Igoe and Dan Brockington. "Parks and People: The Social Impact of Protected Areas." Annual Review

of Anthropology 35 (2006): 255-77. 150

Pierotti, R. and Wildcat D. "Traditional Ecological Knowledge: The Third Alternative (Commentary)." Ecological

Applications 10, no. 5 (2000): 1333-40. 151

Stevens, S., ed. Conservation through Cultural Survival: Indigenous Peoples and Protected Areas. Washington:

Island Press, 1997. 152

Brossius, J. P. "Indigenous Peoples and Protectd Areas at the World Parks Congress." Conservation Biology 18, no. 3

(2004): 609-12.

82

insights to Western science, who still present nature as a stable object. This constantly evolving and

multidisciplinary character of indigenous ecological knowledge, in that it connects both human and

non-human aspects of the environment, could be useful in resolving conflicts between different

stakeholders regarding use of natural resources. This multidisciplinary spirit may form a bridge

between them, shaping a shared conceptual framework through which the different stakeholders can

negotiate more effectively.153

2 The Ogiek and conservation.

Some people have casted doubt upon the role of indigenous people able to play in conservation

projects. It seems that not everyone is convinced about their authenticity concerning environmental

and conservational aspirations. Scientists like Redford and Stearman have questioned the

foundations of indigenous peoples‟ commitment to conservation. They state that indigenous

communities will cease to conserve the biodiversity of their environments once they are actively

pursuing modern development.154

Others believe that indigenous peoples‟ dedication to

conservation and preservation are only but an image portrayed to attract international donors. That

they have adopted Western projections of them being „ecologically noble savages‟, the assumption

that all indigenous peoples live in harmony with nature.155

Although there certainly are cases of

both forethoughts, I will try to counter those statements regarding the Ogiek. I will attempt to do

this by first presenting an ethnohistorical account of preservation methods and how this is passed on

from generation to generation. I will then continue by examining contemporary efforts of the Ogiek

to protect their environment. Finally, I will try to analyze whether and how Ogiek perceptions of

conservation have changed over time. By looking at local concepts of conservation, and trying to

understand what the Ogiek mean when talking about conservation, we can investigate whether or

not they have abandoned their environmental concerns.

2.1 Ogiek traditional knowledge for biodiversity and conservation.

Traditional Ogiek education is based on participation and observation. Ogiek children learn

153

Pierotti, R. and Wildcat D. "Traditional Ecological Knowledge: The Third Alternative (Commentary)." Ecological

Applications 10, no. 5 (2000): 1333-40. 154


Carneiro da Cunha, M. and M. de Almeda. "Indigenous People, Traditional People, and Conservation in the

Amazon." Daedalus 129, no. 2 (2000): 315-38.

83

everything they need to know through experience, whether this is at the homestead, during

ceremonial occasions or in the forest. Throughout this learning school, the children are made

conscious of the relationships that bond the family, the clan and the entire Ogiek community with

its immediate environment and Mau Forest. Children are taught how to use and control the physical

environment. They are made aware how their future and that of the ethnic community depend on

the understanding of the biosphere. Every elderly person has their share of responsibility in the

growth of the child. Parents and Ogiek elders were all expected to be models for good behaviour

and conduct to the society and the children.156

Each individual was taught the different techniques on how to sustain the environment in which

they live. They learned that each and every one had their own duty and responsibility to conserve

the forest for their own survival. The techniques were passed on from generation to generation

through close examination of the elders and partaking in their activities. The nature of this practical

education was gender-centred. For example, boys‟ education was determined by their father‟s

occupation. They were given bows and arrows to shoot birds while joining the older men in the

forest. Education of girls was related to the mother‟s feminine roles. But in general, every child

learned about the weather, animals, trees and plants. They were taught how to make use of these

resources, and more importantly how to preserve them for future generations.157

The Ogiek had

their own ways of not exhausting their natural resources. It started with their land tenure system,

how they managed their forests. This system did not only give each clan rights to exclusively utilize

the natural resources within their territory, it also came with great responsibility. Each clan was in

charge of the trees, plants and animals their own territory. They had to make sure that the

community used the territory in a sustainable manner. The division of the forests into clan territories

was a strategy for conserving the environment, and ensuring that no one hunted or cut down trees

without permission of the clan responsible for the particular forest land. The land tenure rights share

the natural resources and their benefits across the community and exclude non-community

members. The overlapping individual rights protect the Ogiek from outside acquisition of their

forest and from exclusive use by anyone who might be able to destroy it.158

When hunting, they

only hunted those animals of which they knew had large population in the forest. Moreover, they

would leave the young and the females for what they were and instead chase only the older males.

Hunting actually served two purposes. Besides providing meat for the family, the hunters surveyed

the forest at the same time. This way, they could look for any signs of destruction and make sure no

156

Ronoh T.K., Barasa F. S. and Matheka R. M. . "Contextualising Ogiek's Indigenous Environmental Education

through Oral Literature for Sustainable Conservation of Mau Forest, Kenya." Indigenous Voices, Indigenous Research

(2010). 157

Ibid. 158

Alcorn, J. "Indigenous Peoples and Conservation." Conservation Biology 7, no. 2 (1993).

84

unwanted visitors entered their forests. Up to this day, hunters still survey the territory. If there was

any destruction they used to inform the local council of elders, nowadays they notify the foresters in

their area. The Ogiek were very attentive not to exhaust their natural resources. Trees which provide

good flowering plants for beekeeping were banned from cutting. When making the traditional

honey barrels they made sure that the barks used to cover the trunk were retrieved from different

trees instead of destroying one tree by removing its entire bark. That way, the tree could easily

recover. Or when collecting medicinal herbs and plants, they were very careful not to collect them

in only one area. They picked them out randomly as to not overexploit the soils. During their forest

life the Ogiek depended directly on their physical environment. They had to develop several means

and ways of preserving it. To implement these practical ways of protecting the environment, the

Ogiek had norms and rules which were taught to the younger generations not only through

observation and participation in daily activities, but also through proverbs and legends. Proverbs are

more used in casual conversations. They pass on wisdom in an informal manner and help enhance

the instructions for maintaining the environment set up by the elders. For example, “Konyun

Kotinye Temenik mut”, means „my house has five branches‟. This proverb emphasised the

importance of branches of trees and called for the need to preserve the trees. Why cut down the

trees and branches of your own house?159

Legends were mostly understood as tales whereby stories

were fabricated to account for events that had taken place. It prevented the Ogiek from cutting

down certain species of trees that were ecologically important to the environment. Other places or

areas that are crucial to the biodiversity, like swamps or river banks, were described as sacred

grounds that could not be entered. If they did not listen to the tales and disobeyed the norms, they

would be cursed by their ancestors and experience many diseases or accidents. In other words,

proverbs and legends were used as warnings for the community and pointed out to the appropriate

management of the forest. This way, children were constantly reminded of the need for conserving

the environment by using its natural resources cautiously.160

Practices on how to maintain the biodiversity in their natural environment are grounded in a series

of rules and norms. Their implementation involves an intimate participating relationship with the

forest and their belief system strengthened through proverbs and tales. Ecological knowledge and

awareness is united with every day activities.

159

Ronoh T.K., Barasa F. S. and Matheka R. M. . "Contextualising Ogiek's Indigenous Environmental Education

through Oral Literature for Sustainable Conservation of Mau Forest, Kenya." Indigenous Voices, Indigenous Research

(2010). 160

Ibid.

85

2.2 Present-day actions for conservation.

Up to this day, Ogiek still try to pass on their norms and values of the forest on to the younger

generation. But things have changed. They used to conserve and protect the forest as a community.

Now, Ogiek settlement patterns have changed and they are not alone in the forest anymore. But

when talking about conservation and different ways of preserving the environment, the Ogiek first

mentioned the techniques used not to exhaust the forest and its natural resources when forest life

was still more prominent. Although the environment has changed, and their lifestyles have been

adjusted to it, the Ogiek have not remained motionless when it comes to preservation of the forest.

They claim to still take notice of these past methods, and to apply them frequently whenever

possible. As I mentioned before, when the Ogiek used to enter the forest to hunt they would also

survey the area and search for any sign of destruction. While most of the Ogiek do not hunt

anymore, or at least not on a regular basis, some of them still enter the forest looking for marks that

point out to the demolition of trees. A number of them actually team up and survey the forest,

sometimes without any other activity. Others combine this survey with their forest activities such as

gathering medicinal herbs and plants. Whenever they find any destruction they report it to the local

forest service. Sometimes it happens that they catch someone, right there on the spot, felling trees

for charcoal or destroying river banks by doing their laundry in the rivers. Although most people

immediately go to the forester of Mariashoni and report the situation, a number of them actually

take the matter into their own hands. They would in fact confront the person destroying the trees,

and ask him whether or not he realises what he‟s doing. It has happened on occasion that someone

caught a person cutting down trees and actually arrests him. When I asked whether or not this was

even allowed, one Ogiot responded me that

“We have the permission because we believe the forest is ours. So if there is somebody who is

trying to temper, you get permission from the community or the forest service then you go and

responsibility and arrest that person. And then you forward.”161

After catching the person, he would then bring him directly to the administration of the forest

service and let the forester handle the rest. Because of the current ban on logging, the person in

question will probably get fined.

Another activity in trying to preserve the environment, and one I myself find pretty notable, is the

planting of indigenous trees or medicinal herbs at their homestead. They would get the seedlings

161

Interview 19 Mariashoni Samson (10 May 2011)

86

from inside the forest and then plant a part of their land with trees and plants. Others would actually

enter the forest and start planting trees on areas that have been destroyed through illegal logging.

This action is done individually as well as in group. Some Ogiek have grouped together in self-help

groups. These are small groups of seven to twenty people, registered at the department of Social

Services in Nakuru. The self-help groups are support groups that set several objectives for the

community. Some groups are making conservation efforts. Promoting of planting indigenous trees

on their homestead or in degraded or destroyed areas of the forest are one of their actions. A lot of

self-help groups are also eager to establish nurseries or plantation areas, but lack the financial

resources. Some groups give workshops on how to farm more ecologically, and use animal drops

instead of modern fertilisers. Other groups strive to retain certain aspects of Ogiek culture. They

have established a cultural centre where they want to revive important cultural activities.

“It is a place purposely for performing our cultural practices… That's the place we choose. Because

we no longer have a very big forest whereby each and every clan has their own. As a whole land,

we separated a small area whenever we have such a thing to go and do it there.”162

The older generations train the young about the olden lifestyle; they teach them how to make

traditional honey bags, storage devises, traditional clothes made out of hyrax skin etc.

It is clear that the Ogiek are more than aware that the forests are in danger and are in fact taking

action. In order to try and fight environmental degradation of their surroundings, they are actively

trying to conserve the forest and hold on to the norms and values of the past.

2.3 Local concepts of conservation.

Before asking this question, we should first call to mind how the forest is being perceived in Ogiek

daily life. The forest is their home, it is linked with every sphere of their lives. The Ogiek seem to

have a kincentric relationship with the forest of which their relatives are all the natural elements of

the life surrounding them. They see themselves as part of one big ecological family. And similar to

every close family, they look out for each other. What happens to Mau Forest has its effect on them,

and what happens to the Ogiek will have a consequence on Mau. We have seen how several aspects

of Ogiek life has changed over time and how changes in the Mau have influenced those shifts. The

Ogiek are very conscious that humans affect nature and nature affects humans. They are aware that

their lives are shared with the life forms of their environment and that they are responsible for their

162

Interview 21 Mariashoni Woman (11 May 2011)

87

mutual survival. This awareness influences their interactions with the environment. Their kincentric

relationship with the forest results in a reciprocal attitude. The reciprocal relationship between the

Ogiek and Mau Forest becomes clear when they talk about conservation. J. Alcorn argues that

although there can be great heterogeneity within and between indigenous groups on what is

understood when they talk about conservation, there are general patterns to be discovered. Firstly,

there is no direct translation for the word „conservation‟ in any non-European language. Secondly,

we have to take into account this kincentric ecology. „Conservation‟, according to Alcorn, is

generally translated and understood as „taking care of things‟ or „respecting Nature‟.163

This

corresponds with how Ogiek perception of environment and their role in it. The word „Ogiek‟,

according to Sang, even signifies „caretaker of all animals and plants‟.164

The manner in which

Ogiek perceive themselves within their environment is symbolized through their own name. One

respondent explained the relationship Ogiek-nature to me beautifully. He said

“The environment, the conservation and our livelihood need to be interacted well so that we do not

destroy the environment and the environment does not destroy us. So mingling is I take care of the

environment and the environment also takes care of my life. When I hang my beehive in the forest,

I put it at the top of a tree. That tree really takes care of my beehive. At the same time I also take

care of that tree because nobody can interfere with that tree. We believe that if somebody hangs a

beehive in a tree we should never ever interfere with it. That correlation should exist. So that we can

I call it intermarry with the forest? Yes, that relationship.”165

In other words, there is a reciprocal relationship. They take care of the forest and the forest takes

care of them. The tree protects the beehive, from which the Ogiek get their precious honey from.

And at the same time, the placing of that beehive is in fact a protection of the tree as well. Ogiek

social life is organized through a set of rules and norms. In this given example the rule is that one is

not allowed to temper with someone else‟s beehive, nor with the tree holding it. Alcorn‟s view that

indigenous translation of conservation is more in the sense of taking care of the environment

corresponds with Ogiek perceptions. This kincentric ecology and taking care of the environment

entails that they have to maintain relationships with the environment, just as they would with other

human beings. The forest is not just a passive container filled with natural resources one can just

163


Sang, J. "Land Rights: A Central Issue in Conflict Resolution and Management among the Ogiek of Kenya." In

Reclaiming Balance: Indigenous People, Conflict and Sustainable Development, edited by Tauli-Corpuz V. and Cariño

J. Baguio City: Tebtebba Foundation, 2004. 165


88

take abundantly of.166

In an earlier section of this work handling Ogiek perceptions on human-

nature relationships we argued that the forest the forest acts like a parent within this kincentric

ecology. However, we have just shown that the environment is not just a giving environment.

Nature provides food and other natural resources, but it requires appropriate conduct in return. So

instead of proclaiming the forest acts like a parent where resources are given unconditionally, we

can now argue even further and state that the forest is constructed more as a reciprocating ancestor.

If the Ogiek follow the customary code of behaviour, the ancestors, and thus the forest, bless them

with success in their hunting and cultivation.167

If they do not, like cutting down trees, they will be

challenged with sickness and accidents. This kincentric relationship between the Ogiek and the

forest results in a reciprocal attitude, whereby the forest takes care of the Ogiek and the Ogiek take

care of the forest.

When talking some more about conservation and how they personally understand this concept, I

have heard other perceptions on conservation than „taking care‟. The most prominent one was the

idea that conservation meant protection; protection from trees being cut down, from wetlands and

riverbanks being destroyed, or from fires extinguishing the forest. This holds a very different

connotation than „taking care of the forest‟ where the reciprocal relationship has been a central

thought. Protection means to guard the forest from possible external threats. I would like to argue

that this other understanding of conservation is in fact evidence that the Ogiek perception of

conservation has gradually shifted. The Ogiek have two ways of talking about conservation. „Ripet

op timto‟ which means „protect of the forest‟ and „Ripet lutondop emet‟ signifying to „protect

physical appearance of the land‟. The subtle difference between „the forest‟ and „the physical

appearance‟ makes me think of the same subtlety between „taking care of the forest‟ and „protecting‟

it. „Ripet op timto‟ refers to the whole forest. Not only applying to its appearance but also including

Ogiek relationship with it. The forest as a whole embraces the Ogiek. Protecting the forest is here

maintaining their relationship with it. In the olden days, there was no real need for protection in the

strict sense of the word, „to keep (a person, thing) safe (from danger, enemies, attack)‟168

, with the

exception of the Maasai who occasionally entered Ogiek territory. But during the earlier forest life

there were no severe ecological dangers threatening the entire ecosystem of which the Ogiek are

part of. Ogiek dependency on the forest was their greatest motivation for conserving the forest. Any

destruction in the forest would mean the undermining of their own cultural and social existence.

Today‟s situation however, is entirely different. We cannot underestimate the pressure Mau Forest

has felt these last few decades. Besides the large-scale degradation and tremendous forest cover loss

166

Ingold T. The Perception of the Environment: Essays in Livelihood, Dwelling and Skill. New York: Routledge, 2000. 167

Bird-David, N. "The Giving Environment: Another Perspective on the Economic System of Gatherer-Hunters."

Current Anthropology 31, no. 2 (1990): 189-96. 168

Oxford Dictionary and Thesaurus: Oxford University Press, 2009.

89

due to transformations of forest land for agricultural purposes and the excision schemes, the forests

are also being threatened by illegal logging. People enter the forests and start cutting down trees for

their own businesses. Taking care in the sense of monitoring one‟s own behaviour, maintaining their

relationship with the forest and not exhausting the forest‟s natural resources has shifted to the

protection against outsiders. Although Ogiek forest life is generally overshadowed by farming and

stock-keeping, the kincentric relationship with Mau has not disappeared. The protection of the

forest is the most obvious evidence of this. The Ogiek implement this protection by making sure

that if a person gets caught cutting down a tree, he will be reported to the forest service of the area.

We could argue here that the Ogiek have not abandoned environmental concerns though there has

been a shift in how conservation is perceived. Today‟s conception of conservation is more of a

blend between taking care of the forest and protecting it. The relationships with the forest are still

central. Besides actively protecting it through surveys of certain areas, the Ogiek also nurse the

forest by replanting trees on destructed areas and still hold high the values and norms of the olden

days. The Ogiek people have for a long period of time been dependent on their local environment

for their daily survival. This dependency has made them develop a sense of conserving this

environment and protecting its biodiversity. Their practices are grounded in a series of norms and

rules, passed on from generation to generation. Where they are still applicable, the Ogiek seem to

keep carrying them out. Their environment has changed over times. New communities have entered

the forest, indigenous trees have been brought down or replaced by exotic ones. However, new

actions to protect the forest, such as surveillances and replanting of indigenous trees in destroyed

areas, not only point to the fact that Ogiek have not abandoned their commitment to Mau but mostly

that they have managed to react on the changing environment. They are aware that other measures

need to be taken. This characteristic of flexible preservation actions is distinctive to their holistic

world view where man and nature is connected. Environments are constantly changing, ecological

knowledge changes with them.

3 Ogiek and the Mau Forest Rehabilitation Programme.

In order to stop further degradation and deforestation, the government of Kenya decided to establish

a Task Force in 2008 to do a survey in the Mau. Based on that survey some recommendations were

made to start the rehabilitating process. The Kenyan government launched the Mau Forest

Rehabilitation programme in 2009 and established the ICS who is responsible for the

implementations of those recommendations. In this short piece of writing we will take a look at how

90

the Ogiek community is represented in that rehabilitation programme. We will search for some

answers to questions like; in what way is the ICS looking for a long term solution for the Ogiek?

How will the government be able to negotiate with the Ogiek in order to create a sustainable

solution and what actions have already been made as the first steps towards it?

3.1 Ogiek representation in the Mau Forest Rehabilitation Programme.

The Mau Forest Rehabilitation Programme was launched in 2009 to address the environmental

degradation Mau Forest has been suffering from. The Kenyan government established a Task Force

to examine the degradation status and the disputed land issues. The Task Force set up short and long

term recommendations on the basis of its findings. The ICS was shortly thereafter created in order

to coordinate the implementation of the Task Force‟s short-term recommendations. After a mandate

of two years, its responsibilities and duties will be taken over by the „Mau Forest Complex

Authority‟. One of the responsibilities of the ICS is to search for a long term and sustainable

solution for the Ogiek and to coordinate the implementation of the recommendations of the Task

Force. On the Ogiek, the Task Force recommended that the irregular title deeds that were issued in

line with the stated purposes of the settlement schemes of 2001 should be regularized. The Ogiek,

who were to be settled in the excised areas and who have not been given land, should be resettled

outside critical catchment areas and biodiversity hotspots. Those who had been issued title deeds in

critical areas should be relocated. Due to past errors where the Ogiek name was abused in order to

get more land from the 2001 settlement scheme, The Task Force also recommended the

development of an adequate Ogiek register to address the settlement issues effectively. The ICS has

established appropriate Ogiek representative institutions to implement the recommendations,

namely: the Ogiek Council of Elders and the ICS Committee on Ogiek matters.169

The Ogiek maintain a special status as an indigenous people, and live in a very intimate relationship

with Mau Forest. Not only is it a place of residence, it is their home and their source of life. The

challenges Mau Forest has experienced also affected the Ogiek. The conversion of forestland into

agricultural land for other communities or into tree plantations with exotic trees and the destruction

of the indigenous trees have had its impact on them. Although they have added other ways of

subsistence to their lives, like farming and keeping livestock, they have not completely abandoned

169

“Rehabilitation of the Mau Forest Ecosystem: Programmeme Document” Prepared by the Interim Coordinating Secr

etariat, Office of the Prime Minister, on behalf of the Government of Kenya, with support from the United Nations Envi

ronment Programme, 2010



91

their former, more traditional economy. They still go out hunting, although not that often anymore,

they still maintain their beehives and get their medicinal herbs from the indigenous forests. The ICS

needed to look for ways how to recover the Mau Forest and take into account the Ogiek and their

intertwined lifestyle with the forest. It is because of this unique relationship that there have been

demands that the Ogiek should be recognised in Mau and that they should be protected.

3.1.1 Council of Elders.

The only way to combine the rehabilitation of the forest and the protection of the Ogiek culture and

traditions is to negotiate. The ICS established two Ogiek representative institutions, following an

Ogiek self-election process covering the entire Mau Forest Complex. This process entailed

consultations and participation with Ogiek community leaders. The Ogiek Council of Elders, which

was launched in 2010, is working and negotiating with the Kenyan government through the ICS.

The Council is represented in the ICS through the Committee on Ogiek Matters. It is this

Committee which is the direct link to the government, and it is with them that the government will

start the negotiations. The formal Council of Elders will hold a one year tenure and is part of the

ICS implementation of the repossession and restoration of Mau Forest. We should however make it

clear that this formal Council is not the same as the local council of elders. The local council deals

with local problems and disputes. The Ogiek people may have several local councils depending on

the local groups. The formal Council of Elders, on the other hand, holds 60 members representing

the entire Ogiek community residing in the five forest blocks of Mau. The Ogiek Council of Elders

elected seven of its members to be representatives of the council in the ICS Committee on Ogiek

matters. They elected one council member from each of the five main forest blocks. Due to the large

Ogiek community residing in Eastern and South Western Mau, two additional members were

chosen. It is the first time the Ogiek community formed its own official leadership structure within

the government structures. The Council was created to address concerns and aspirations around the

social welfare of the Ogiek community and environmental conservation. This includes the making

of proposals for the restoration of the forests and the resettlement of the Ogiek, as well as

suggestions for the support of the community‟s livelihood. One of those proposals was the

establishment of an Ogiek register based of family lineages. This will be the first step towards the

resettlement of the Ogiek. The register will, besides being a basis for the allocation of land, also

secure the Ogiek identity and their cultural values. The socio-economic data gathered during the

surveys would be able to help develop a proposal to address contemporary marginalisation of the

92

Ogiek and past injustices.170

3.1.2 Ogiek Registration.

To adequately address the land issues involving the Ogiek, the Task Force recommended that an

Ogiek register should be established. There have been other attempts to enlist the Ogiek population

but the register had been tampered with. In 1994, KIFCON recommended that the Ogiek should be

resettled to secure long-term conservation of the biodiversity and the water catchments in South

Western Mau. When the settlement schemes were about to commence, the Ogiek numbers in the

register had tripled. Other people also wanted to have a piece of the Mau cake and so the Ogiek

name was used as a key to get to land. To fight back the challenges of profiling and identifying the

Ogiek, the Committee on Ogiek matters set up a screening and registration process. This was to

ascertain the Ogiek identity so that the process of resettlement can be adequately addressed to.

Although the Ogiek were the initial beneficiaries of the 2001 excisions, most of them did not

benefit and have no legitimate land. The on-going registration process is their only hope for

ownership of a parcel of land. The registration process was conducted at the local administration

offices of the areas where Ogiek reside and was monitored by 44 persons of Ogiek origin only,

constituting registration clerks and supervisors. They made use of a questionnaire to collect all the

required information. Besides stating your name, you had to specify your clan, your clan territory

and totem and the place where you were born. One person from Kiptunga even told me that there

were about 70 entries through which you had to go through that would prove you are a „genuine‟

Ogiek. My translator Cosmas further explained to me that there were several tricks to find out

whether you were an imposter or not. For example, when you were asked you clan territory you had

to specify and give at least three names of important places in that territory. These places were

usually sacred places, names of river banks or unique trees. This showed that you were recognised

as a member of that particular clan. The purpose of such a strict identification process is to make

sure that the resettlement of the Ogiek will be executed correctly.

3.1.2.1 Ethnic identity.

But where do you draw the line? Who is part of the Ogiek ethnic group and who is not? Ethnic

identity is not a fixed. Instead, it is a fluctuating product, composed out of the view someone has of

oneself as well as views that are held by others about one‟s ethnic identity. For example, one might

170

Ibid.

93

find that in a certain situation one‟s tribal identity is the most important one, in this case Ogiek

identity. However, when interacting with another Ogiot, one‟s clan identity may take the upper

hand. In other words, ethnic identification is composed out of several levels. There is the sub-tribal

level, like the clan or lineage, the tribal, belonging to the Ogiek community, and the supra-tribal

level, being a Kenyan. Ethnic identity of an individual changes according to different settings one

might encounter. But ethnicity is more than simply a personal choice depending on one‟s

situation.171

Ethnicity is the result of both structure and agency, with structure referring to the

recurrent patterns that influence choices individuals and agency to the capacity of individuals to act

and make choices independently.172

In other words, ethnic identity is both mandatory as it is

optional. An individual can choose from a set of ethnic identities depending on the situation, but

that same set is in its turn limited to socially and politically defined ethnic categories. Ethnicity can

be politically constructed by the state. Ethnic boundaries can be shaped by designating special

treatment for particular ethnic subpopulations. In this case, Ogiek ethnic identity and boundaries are

negotiated and defined by ethnically-linked resource policies. The Ogiek are recognised in the Mau

Forest Rehabilitation Programme as the original inhabitants of Mau Forest and they are being given

special treatment by being represented in the programme through the Council of Elders. In order to

address the land issue and possible resettlement they are carrying out a profiling and registration

process. This will lead to the official and full recognition of the Ogiek. This recognition within the

programme and the benefits that might result from this actually shapes Ogiek patterns of ethnic

identification. These benefits entail a distribution of Mau‟s natural resources along ethnic lines. But

there is a huge competition for land and other natural resources between the Ogiek and their

neighbours, which makes ethnic boundaries unstable. The question „who is Ogiek and who is not‟

has become paramount, arising ethnic conflict.173

What happened to the previous registers, the

corruption and manipulation of Ogiek names, left a mark on the community. I could feel the Ogiek

were very sensitive about this subject. They have become very exclusive, lessening their relations

with their neighbours. They need this list to be a „true‟ Ogiek register. And so I wondered, who is

considered a „true‟ or „genuine‟ Ogiek?

3.1.2.2 Who is Ogiek and who is not?

171

Nagel, J. "Constructing Ethnicity: Creating and Recreating Ethnic Identity and Culture." Social Problems 41, no. 1

(1994): 152-76. 172

Barker, C. Cultural Studies: Theory and Practice. 2 ed. London: SAGE Publications LTD, 2003. 173

Nagel, J. "Constructing Ethnicity: Creating and Recreating Ethnic Identity and Culture." Social Problems 41, no. 1

(1994): 152-76.

94

Ethnicity is constructed through various elements like language, religion, culture or ancestry.174

In

this case I argue that Ogiek ethnicity is mainly based on a common ancestry. Several Ogiek groups

have more assimilated to their neighbours then others and some have even adopted another

language. But the Ogiek explicitly say that during the registration process they do not want to leave

out Ogiek origin. In order to pursue their origin, Ogiek follow the father‟s bloodline and make use

of a questionnaire helping to prove one‟s Ogiek identity. The registration process was conducted in

all five forest blocks the Ogiek inhabit. But are all Ogiek enlisted in the register or are there some

who have been left out? The initial standard answer to my question was yes, all Ogiek had been

registered. Several said that some youths still waited for their identity cards to pass through and

were therefore not enlisted. But on the overall, it seemed like nobody was left out. I found that

pretty hard to believe. Until one day, I met with an Ogiek woman who had been married to someone

from the Maasai community. We met coincidently in a local café at the trading centre in Mariashoni.

Over a cup of tea and a mandazi, Linah told me her story of how she was married to someone from

another tribe and how they had three children. But the marriage did not last and she was sent back

to her homeland. But because she had been married into the Maasai community the problem rose

whether or not she belonged to the Ogiek community. So there was the answer to my question. Yes,

there were in fact problems with the registration process, although not everyone was keen to admit

it. Women who had been married outside of the Ogiek community were no longer considered as

Ogiek. They belonged to their husbands‟ community.

“If my daughter has been married by another community, that one is not an Ogiek. But if I myself I

could marry you, you would become an Ogiek. You'll be accepted. Then you belong to that clan.”

is what they told me. So if an Ogiek man should marry a woman from outside the community she

would become part of the Ogiek community, in this example I would have been accepted. In other

words, the women who were married in to the community were put on the register as well. Women

belonged to the community of their husband. But what happens if the marriage falls apart and the

woman is sent back? This kind of situation formed a problem during the registration process. The

Ogiek had to seek a solution and so it was generally agreed that Ogiek women who had married into

another tribe could still be registered. A woman told me that no mother would leave her child

behind. When a girl is married outside of the community nobody knows whether she will stay there

peacefully or not. The girl should be able to come home. Her children however are considered to

belong to the father‟s community. Linah was thus in fact enlisted into the register, but her children

174

Ibid.

95

on the other hand were not. As earlier mentioned the Ogiek are socially patrilineal organized and

therefore follow the father‟s bloodline to assert one‟s origin. But when Linah was sent back to her

homeland, she had brought her children with her. They were still young at the time and were

brought up within the Ogiek culture and lifestyle. They do not speak Maa, the Maasai language, nor

do they have any other affinity with their father‟s tribe. Being adults now, they were not considered

during the registration process. Even though they had no affiliations with the Maasai community

whatsoever, they are still believed to belong there. The story of Linah and her children had touched

me. I began to wonder how other members of the community felt about this sort of circumstances. I

found out that most of the Ogiek I talked to agreed that when a woman marries in to another tribe

she is no longer considered part of their community. But they also felt that she should be protected

in case she is sent back home. Children on the other hand belong to the father‟s community. But in

Linah‟s case, she brought the children with her. What then? Some wove off my question saying that

the children would be fine since the mother would be registered and given land in case of

resettlement. If anything should happen to her, the children would be allowed to stay on that land

although the ownership would remain their uncles‟. Others said that, regarding children, the boys

should be sent back to where they came from, meaning their father‟s community. The girls however

were allowed to stay because they could easily be married within the community. And if they did

not, they were gone anyway marrying into another community. Another difficulty with the

registration process was a quarrel within the entire Ogiek community. The registration was

performed in all Ogiek communities in five major blocks of Mau. Some Ogiek groups have in fact

lost their mother tongue and instead adopted their neighbours‟ language and they have largely been

assimilated into their neighbouring communities, especially the Nandi.

“There are some of our members those who have brought their friends in the register. Maybe they

intermarried and they want their brother in laws to register themselves so that they get land.”175

Ogiek intermarriage with the Nandi community complicates the effectiveness of the Ogiek

registration process with the majority of Nandi who are either married to Ogiek or related to Ogiek

demanding that they be included in the register. This is actually raising a lot of tensions among the

two communities in the area, as well as among the Ogiek themselves. Identity is composed out of

different levels. Besides a clan identity, one also identifies with their close relatives and friends. In

situations that might deliver benefits, such as the registration might entitle Ogiek to land, one would

want their family to benefit too. Identity is a fluctuating product, the result of both agency and

175

Interview 17 Kiptunga Chairman CFA (8 May 2011)

96

structure. Identity, in other words, is multilayered. In this case, the Ogiek who intermarried with the

Nandi community might value its family relations as opposed to their Ogiek origin. Ogiek living

near the Nandi have largely been assimilated and have adopted the local language. Many of them do

not know how to speak Ogiek. This situation presents a high contrast with the Mariashoni Ogiek.

Due to their strong population in the area, they have continued to be a tight-knit community. There

were and still are relations and intermarriages with other communities, though they have never been

assimilated. Ogiek residing and living near the Nandi might not consider Ogiek identity as their

most important identity, but instead feel a greater affinity with the Nandi. However, the competition

for land and other natural resources in the Mau makes identity unstable. Even though they feel more

related to the Nandi this competition, and special treatment for the Ogiek in the Mau Forest

Rehabilitation Programme, makes them choose for their ethnic origin as identity. The state actually

helps to politically construct this identity through designating a special treatment to the Ogiek

people. This does not mean all other identities are thrown overboard. On the contrary even. This

case represented a good example of how identity is dependent on both structure and agency. Their

Ogiek origins seem to prevail during the registration, and yet there is still loyalty towards their other

identity of being related to the Nandi community by trying to enter them into the register.

The Ogiek Council of Elders has finished the first phase of the registration process. During the time

I was there, they were editing a draft register to present to the government through Mr. Hassan

Noor, the chairman of the ICS. The government will thereon verify and validate this register

through two approaches. First, they will cross-check the register against the official data held by the

National Bureau of Registration of Persons. After that, they will make use of grass root reports.

They will verify whether a person is Ogiek through the community. The purpose of the registration

is to secure Ogiek identity and cultural values. The hope exists that the registration will assist in the

settlement issues, and that it will help to follow the Task Force‟s recommendation to settle the

Ogiek in line with the government‟s purposes of the 2001 excisions.176

3.2 Are the people aware?

This was one of the first questions I asked myself during this research. The Ogiek are indeed

represented in the Mau Forest Rehabilitation Programme, but how far does the understanding of the

common Ogiek on the ground about the programme go? How much do they really know about the

176

“Rehabilitation of the Mau Forest Ecosystem: Programmeme Document” Prepared by the Interim Coordinating Secre

tariat, Office of the Prime Minister, on behalf of the Government of Kenya, with support from the United Nations Envir

onment Programme, 2010



97

responsibilities of the Ogiek Council of Elders and the progress that has been made?

When talking about conservation, all Ogiek knew that the government had formed a programme to

address the environmental degradation of Mau Forest. The interesting part was that they referred

immediately to the programme only as the „Task Force‟. The Task Force had performed several

surveys of the area, examining the degradation status of the forests, investigating the land issue

resulting from the 2001 excisions and paying attention to the Ogiek. The Task Force recognised the

Ogiek claim of the forests as their ancestral lands and tried to look for answers on what to do in the

future. But in order for them to establish their recommendations for future measurements, they had

to come to the ground itself. In other words, it was not all that surprising that they only talked about

the Task Force. The Ogiek were confronted with the Task Force and its executers face to face. They

had been asked questions about the 2001 excisions and the allocation of land. The people were

interviewed and they had been asked about their aspirations for the future. And then I began to

wonder, what do they actually know about the ICS and its duties? The answer is: nothing much. At

least not until you brought up the name of the chairman of the ICS Mr. Hassan Noor Hassan.

Without mentioning him, many Ogiek had no idea what I was talking about or asking for. But even

when mentioning the chairman, most of the Ogiek I talked to did not know about the

responsibilities of the ICS or how the ICS was even linked to the Task Force. Most of them knew it

had something to do with conservation, but that was about it. Not even a hand full of people could

tell me that the ICS was responsible for the coordination of the implementation of the Task Force‟s

recommendations. But the Task Force, that they knew instantly because they had come to the

ground. There had been contact. Those who had heard of the ICS and knew about its assignment

had only one thing to say, in that they remain stuck in Nairobi.

“What I know about ICS, they are not coming to the ground. They are stuck there. And we want

them to come to the ground to work. … It is still in darkness now. No implementation. There should

be more communication with the ICS people. Rather than them staying there. We do not know what

is going on.”177

The information is not being sent back to the common man. Although the Ogiek are being taken

into account, they do not really know how they are being represented. After the Task Force had

done its job on the ground, they were not given any feedback on what they have concluded. The

Ogiek are obviously aware of the Ogiek Council of Elders. The members were elected through

consultations and participation with Ogiek community leaders and members. They were called for a

177


98

meeting in Mariashoni trading centre and were told to select those elders who will be working with

the government dealing issues of conservation and resettlement. In other words, they had an active

role to play as a community in electing the members of the Council. But even here, not many people

know how the Council is negotiating with the government and how far they have gone with the

registration process. There is a need for more transparency.

3.3 First steps towards conservation.

One of the first steps made towards the rehabilitation of Mau Forest was the establishment of a

forest plantation near Kiptunga. The project was launched in January 2010 by the Prime Minister of

Kenya, Hon. Raila Odinga. The plantation of both indigenous as well as exotic trees was to

spearhead the Mau Forest Rehabilitation Programme. Several ministers and members of parliament,

representatives from international NGO‟s, foreign ministers from France, Japan and the U.K. as

well as delegates from U.N. agencies such as UNEP participated in the tree planting. Over 20.000

trees were planted in an attempt to rehabilitate the forest surrounding Napuyapui, a major wetland

which is the source of the Mara river. The establishment of the tree plantation was the official

launch for the restoration of the Mau Forest. There is even a plaque to commemorate the

event.178,179

Not long after that, the British High Commissioner planted indigenous trees in

Mariashoni forest, expressing his full support towards the rehabilitation programme.180

Mariashoni

possesses a tree nursery with infant indigenous trees as well as exotic trees. Initially the forest

service used to have its own tree nursery. Later on they experienced some financial problems, and

eventually the nursery was closed down during the excisions of 2001. Nonetheless, in 2006, an

international NGO called Green Zone entered into the picture and the tree nursery was re-

established. It is now under joint management between the Mariashoni Forest Service and the NGO

Green Zone.181

The tree nursery has two permanent workers from the Forest Service to care for the

seedlings and five casual workers. However, they have not yet been given an area to place the

reforestation process, though the seedlings have almost reached their perfect growth to be replanted.

The community is not involved in this project, although sometimes self-help groups come to ask for

seeds.

178

Jan 29, 2010 - The British High Commissioner planted trees in Mariashoni expressing full support to the

Government‟s efforts in restoring the Mau forest.

http://www.maurestoration.go.ke/index.php/achievements/102-kenyans-showed-outstanding-support-to-the-

rehabilitation-of-the-mau- (retrieved 24 July 2011) 179

See annex 180

Jan 15, 2010 - Kenyans showed outstanding support to the rehabilitation of the Mau.

http://www.maurestoration.go.ke/index.php/achievements/108-mariashoni-tree-planting-29-jan-2010 (retrieved 24 July

2011) 181

See annex 9.

http://www.maurestoration.go.ke/index.php/achievements/102-kenyans-showed-outstanding-support-to-the-rehabilitation-of-the-mau-


http://www.maurestoration.go.ke/index.php/achievements/108-mariashoni-tree-planting-29-jan-2010

99

Another improvement in order to conserve and preserve forested areas is the introduction of

community forestry in Kenya. This refers to a forest management with improving ecological

conditions in forests and local community benefits as goals. The aim is to encourage ecologically

sustainable forest use practices, to increase the social and economical benefits of forests for the

adjacent communities and to increase the forest communities‟ access and control over the forests.

Some degree of responsibility and authority is vested in the surrounding communities. In Africa,

community forest management system emerged in the 1990s. The initiatives are relatively new.182

One of Kenya‟s efforts on trying to protect its natural resources and providing space for community

forestry was a serious revision of the Old Forest Act. This used to provide the legal framework for

the management and conservation of all forest areas in Kenya and had been in place ever since the

colonial times when the government had absolute monopoly over the forests and their resources

through the chapter 385. It provided for the establishment, regulations and control over the forest

areas and over unalienated government land.183

The minister of natural resources had the power to

immediately declare any forest area a natural reserve. This meant that the minister also had the

power to change forest boundaries and define a forest area no longer as forest using just a simple

announcement in the Kenyan Gazette Notice. The government could however provide licenses for

the use of forest products. Nonetheless, they were not handed out in the benefit of the forests. When

the government realised that the policies that they had brought about actually endangered the forests

they enacted the 2005 Forest Act. The New Forest Act then was established in order to improve the

forestry situation in Kenya and to live up to the international commitments the country had entered

itself in to. It was passed by parliament in 2005 and officially implemented in 2007. The New

Forest Act, which falls within the mandate of the Kenya Forest Service (KFS), repeals the Forests

Act cap 385 and broadens the mandate of the administration of forests. The New Act recognises

local communities and the private sector as major stakeholders in the management of forests.184

In

other words, the Act provides for the forests to be co-managed by community forestry associations

(CFA‟s). This Participatory Forest Management is an approach used to achieve environmental

sustainability and biodiversity conservation of forests. This is being realised through a process of

inclusion of local communities, equity and the democratization of control of the forest resources.185

182

Charnley S. and Poe M. R. "Community Forestry in Theory and in Practice; Where Are We Now?" Annual Review

Anthropology 36 (2007): 301-36. 183


Kamira-Mbote, and Oduor J. "Following God's Constitution: The Gender Dimensions in the Ogiek Claim to Mau

Forest Complex." In Paths Are Made by Walking: Human Rights Interfacing Gendered Realities and Plural Legalities,

edited by Anne Hellum. Harare: Weaver Press, 2006. 185

Koech C. K., Ongugo P. O., Mbuvi M. T. E. and Maua J. O. "Community Forest Associations in Kenya: Challenges

and Opportunities." Kenya Forestry Research Institute (KEFRI), 2009. See also Amanor, K. S. "Natural and Cultural

Assets and Participatory Forest Management in West Africa." In International Conference on Natural Assets.

Philippines, 2003.

100

It allows the forest communities to use the natural forest products, although only for consumption

purposes, which used to be only possible when they had a license provided for by the minister of

natural resources. This actually means that the Ogiek are, according to the New Forest Act, able to

practise their customary lifestyle of hunting and collecting honey, at least in theory. Sena K.

discovered when reading the new Forest Act that the government conveniently avoided recognising

hunter-gatherer communities as indigenous peoples, and instead refer to them as forest

communities. And so the question remains, who is considered to be a 'forest community'? For a

community to be considered a forest community it must be registered as a forest association with

the presidentially appointed Kenya Forestry Board. In other words, it is still the government who

has the final say on how and by who the forests should be managed. With the presentation of a

forest management plan, it is up to the board to accept or reject the community's identification.186

There is one CFA established per Forest Service, and so there is one CFA covering the location of

Mariashoni. In the whole of Mau, eleven forest associations are located which is the biggest number

in Kenya.187

The constituents of the CFA are the communities adjacent to forest areas. Members are

registered through monthly or annual subscription fee. The chairman of the CFA living in Kiptunga

explained to me that besides the Ogiek, there are also the Maasai, Kipsigis and Kikuyus. All of them

tried to form their own CFA. As a response, those CFA‟s were converted to Community Based

Organisations (CBO‟s). The officials of those CBO‟s then came together and formed the CFA

umbrella. When the umbrella was formed, the objectives of the CBO‟s were captured to make sure

that they were friendly to conservation. At the moment of the research, the CFA was still in the

process of adopting a forest management plan. The problem is they need experts to complete the

plan, which again needs financial resources they do not have. Consequently, the local CFA has not

been absorbed by the KFS. Only after setting up a management plan that has been approved will the

CFA be able to commence a joint management system with the KFS. The communities forming the

local forest association however are not homogenous.

“There might be different objectives or aims from some other CBO's. It is not like the one for the

Ogiek. Because purposely the main reason as to why the Ogiek form CBO is to conserve the

environment. But some other people were looking for ways how to enter the forest.”188

The different CBO‟s of the Maasai community, Kipsigis and Ogiek have different aims and varying

186


http://www.iwgia.org/iwgia_files_publications_files/IA_4-06_Mau.pdf (retrieved 2 August 2011) 187


and Opportunities." Kenya Forestry Research Institute (KEFRI), 2009. 188



101

socio-economic objectives in forming the organisations. This is a major challenge for the CFA

umbrella. Conflict of interests might have an impact on the forest and its resources they are adjacent

to. Some might have set their intentions on conservation, while others‟ concern is more on

exploitation of the forests. The diversity in culture, language and aspirations could bring mistrust

among the members and counteract the collaboration. Other challenges are inadequate funding.

Lack of financial resources restricts the Mariashoni CFA in adopting a forest management plan. The

main sources of funds for the CFA‟s in general are the members‟ monthly or annual contributions.

Although this does indicate the commitment of the members supporting their associations, some

members fail to contribute sufficiently according to the needs of the CFA.189

However, in theory

community forestry is a valuable approach to forest conservation and community development. It is

presumed that central governments are more likely to give priority to national benefits and

industrial interests over local interests in forest management. Local communities will prefer their

own interest as well, but given their dependency on the forest this will also be in the interest of the

forest. Local associations are also more efficient in responding to the needs of the communities.

They are accountable to the people and understand their aspirations more than the central

government. Local control over forest management also creates more opportunities to empower the

local communities and the ability to access forest products is helpful in poverty reduction. They

help household meet their subsistence needs and provide a safety net in times of difficulties. For the

Ogiek community more specifically, I believe I have made it abundantly clear that access to the

forest and its natural resources are essential in maintaining their cultural life. Only time will tell

whether or not community forestry will benefit the Ogiek and the surrounding communities, while

protecting Mau Forest‟s ecological biodiversity. Case studies show that there are still major gaps

between community forestry in theory and in practice. Thus transference of forest management

control form state governments to local communities has been partial and disappointing, and there

seems to be more ecological than socioeconomic gains. 190

In this case however, the establishment

of the CFA, the negotiations and cooperation with the Kenyan government and the implementation

of the Mau Forest Rehabilitation Programme are still in too early of stage.

3.4 Future aspirations.

Conservation the Mau Forest is of great importance to the Ogiek. They have big expectations from

189


and Opportunities." Kenya Forestry Research Institute (KEFRI), 2009. 190

Charnley, S. and Poe M. R. "Community Forestry in Theory and in Practice; Where Are We Now?" Annual Review

Anthropology 36 (2007): 301-36.

102

the Mau Forest Rehabilitation Programme. The establishment of the Ogiek register set their hopes

up for the allocation of land. It was clear during the interviews that the land issue was a prominent

concern to the Ogiek. The majority of the Ogiek population do not own any title deeds to prove

ownership of their land. When the excisions of 2001 started, only a handful of the population were

given their promised documents. Most of the land, however, was allocated to those who were

considered to be politically correct. The Ogiek live in constant fear to be relocated somewhere

outside of Mau.

“The main problem here is about permanent allocations. When you get permanent allocation that is

when you can start to plan. You can subdivide your land, you can keep your beehives which are a

bit far in your land, you can keep a cow. People are getting such trainings. When you are in a

permanent place you can do such things, development. … We cannot do any development because

we are not permanently allocated. That is what is hurting our people.”191

This register, they hope, represents the beginning of the allocation of land. But what do the Ogiek

people in Mariashoni understand under this allocation? Though it is still not clear how the Kenyan

government will perform this task, I asked about how the Ogiek themselves wanted the issue to be

solved. Most of them wanted an Ogiek reserve, a territory allocated to the entire community. After

that it will be the community who will decide how to subdivide the land.

“Because Mau is our home, if the government will reach a point to resettle the Ogiek, purely Ogiek,

and give a big land. We will be happy and continue with our usually life and continue with our own

development. Land allocated to the community first. And inside the land should be divided to

individuals. But governed by the community.”192

The Ogiek in Mariashoni are a very tight community. They do not want any other people interfering

with their land. The register needs to be a purely Ogiek register, the land has to be allocated to the

Ogiek community alone. Mau is considered to be their ancestral lands. Most of the Ogiek I talked to

would like to see the other communities leave. When I asked them which communities they mostly

talked about the Kikuyu. The Maasai on the other hand have been their neighbours from even

before the colonial period. They migrated sometimes to the plains. In other words, Ogiek focused

only on the community that was brought in to clear the forests and replant them with exotic trees. It

felt like they had the desire to turn back time and relive their past forest lives when Mau was theirs.

191


Interview 13 Mariashoni Forester Mzee (5 May 2011)

103

Some even said they wanted to repair the old land tenure system where the land was divided

according to clans.

“It is possible to go back to the ancestral lands. Some time back there was a project, a mapping

system. That map will show the various clans and their territories. So if we can adopt that, because

it is still there, if we can adopt that we can easily go back.”193

However, I believe this idea was actually more of an expression of desire for times past, a longing

for the mythical representations of the „Then‟ instead of a grounded ambition taking the current

situation into account. But the idea of an Ogiek reserve lives strongly in the community of

Mariashoni. Nonetheless, most of them directly add that the land should thereafter, if not

immediately, be subdivided individually. Every household should have his own individual plot.

Land equals development in the eyes of the Ogiek. And land is what they are lacking.

“It is good for each of them to get their personal land. It will be easier for somebody to develop, to

construct a good house. What they are doing now is they do not have permanent houses, somebody

is not permanent where he is. Anytime he can be moved away.”194

Having no title deeds forms a barrier to poverty reduction. They have neither certainty nor

confidence that they will be able to remain where they have built their houses, planted their crops

and took care of their children. The registration process does give hope to the people, but it is still

too early how the outcome of negotiations will be.

The Ogiek are eager to cooperate with the ICS in their efforts to conserve the Mau. They have taken

several measures and action to conserve the forest, individually or through self-help groups. Though

the issue of land is prevailing, they realise that if the government decides they are settled within a

biodiversity hotspot they will have to be relocated. However, they will hold on to the demand to

reside near the forest so they can actively maintain their cultural lives.

“As a butterfly taken from Mau taken to Baringo, can it survive? It cannot survive. There are

antelopes, they are dying species in Mau. They want to be preserved. As me, should be given

shelter. And everything which is right for me to be given as a human right I should be given in Mau.

It is like a monkey in Mau. Why can you take a monkey from Mau and take into an open land

193

Interview 12 Nakuru Victor Prengei (3 May 2011) 194

Interview 18 Mariashoni Chief (9 May 2011)

104

where there is no trees.”195

The Mau is their home, the Ogiek do not want to be resettled outside of the forests. They are part of

the environment, together with the Mau Forest. How the negotiations will turn out, it is still too

early to predict. The fact that the Ogiek are recognised in the rehabilitation programme, and that

there have been considerable efforts to create a register as an onset to the negotiations of land

allocations stem the Ogiek hopeful. However, conflicts in the future will probably be inevitable. As

we mentioned earlier, the Mau Forest Rehabilitation Programme is composed out of four

components. The first one entails some institutional reforms to ensure the implementation of the

conservation programme. The second component consists in recovering the occupied areas. The

third segment encompasses the rehabilitation process and the last component would stand in for the

enhancement of Mau Forest‟s economic force. To be more concrete, this second component entails

that the people who live inside the protected areas of the forests, or in regions which are highly

degraded, will have to or already have been evacuated. It is clear that all communities, Ogiek,

Maasai, Kikuyu, will have to leave the forested areas. However, it is still not clear what kind of

implications this will have for the Ogiek because of their special status within the programme. The

Mau Forest Rehabilitation Programme has experienced some delays though. The evacuation of

people is politically sensitive. Especially with the coming elections of next year, the prime minister

Hon. Raila Odinga would not want to lose any votes. We will have to wait and see what the

outcome will be.

4 Conclusion Part II.

The Ogiek people have been dependent on their local environment for their daily survival for a long

period of time. This dependency has made them develop a sense of conserving this environment and

protecting its biodiversity. They manipulated several practices to prevent natural resources from

being exhausted. These practices are grounded in a series of norms and rules, passed on from

generation to generation. When they are still applicable, the Ogiek seem to keep carrying them out.

Their environment has changed over times. New communities have entered the forest, indigenous

trees have been brought down or replaced by exotic ones. However, new actions to protect the

forest, such as surveillances and replanting of indigenous trees in destroyed areas, not only point to

the fact that Ogiek have not abandoned their commitment to Mau but mostly that they have

195


105

managed to react on the changing environment. They are aware that other measures need to be

taken. This characteristic of flexible preservation actions is distinctive to their holistic world view

where man and nature is connected. Environments change, ecological knowledge changes with

them. This is how Ogiek perceptions of the human-nature relationship and conservation can be

helpful for conservation policies like the Mau Forest Rehabilitation Programme. This flexible and

multidisciplinary approach of Ogiek ecological knowledge, where human and non-human aspects

are involved, is valuable for the preservation of Mau. The Ogiek are recognised within the Mau

Forest Rehabilitation Programme, most likely because they are part of a global self-identified class

of „indigenous peoples‟. They are represented through a Committee of Ogiek Matters and an Ogiek

Council of Elders. However, it is still not clear what role the Ogiek will be able to play within this

conservation project. A first action taken is the registration of the Ogiek in order to start the

resettlement process. The Ogiek, who were to be settled in the excised areas and who have not been

given land, should be resettled outside critical catchment areas and biodiversity hotspots. Those

who had been issued title deeds in critical areas should be relocated. The register is still in its

verification phase. The Kenyan government seems to be willing to conserve Mau Forest and other

forested areas by introducing community-based forestry management. It has made positive efforts

to address the forestry situation by adopting the New Forest Act in 2005. However, it is still too

early to tell how this will impact the rehabilitation programme. This is stalled by the upcoming

elections. The evacuation and relocation of families is always a politically sensitive subject. The

process has now been slowed down to avoid lost votes.

106

Conclusion.

A central notion in this dissertation is the separation of man and nature, so strongly held on to by

Western conservation policies and projects. Conservation programmes are still often based on the

Western assumption of an existing dichotomy between man and nature. One consequence of this

postulation is the idea that by inhabiting an environment, humans are destined to alter it from its

natural state. However, this idea is based on the supposition that the only true natural state of

environments is those untouched from human civilization. This, however, leads to the debatable

conclusion that by sealing of forests from any kind of human interaction nature will return to a

„pristine wilderness‟, supposed to be a kind of natural state, free from human presence. It is the idea

that there are ecosystems that have not felt any human presence yet and, more importantly, that it is

desirable that ecosystems can actually return to this state. However, nature is in this approach

presented as a static object, whereby ecological changes caused by human influence are regarded as

unnatural and forced upon nature. This work attempted to present a different view on human-nature

relationships. It is based on the premise that nature and human culture cannot be regarded as two

separate units. Man and its environment are intrinsically linked with each other. The Ogiek believe

humans and nature are part of one world. By focusing on Ogiek concepts of nature and

conservation, this work offers a different approach to Western conservation practices.

Ogiek refer to Mau Forest as their home, pointing towards a holistic view of their environment. The

environment is like an extended ecological family to them, where all natural elements, including the

forest, are regarded as „kin‟. Through dwelling in an environment and incorporating its features into

a pattern of everyday activities, the forest becomes their home. Ogiek settlement patterns, their

hunting and gathering way of life, extensive use of medicinal plants and herbs as basic health care

and the central importance of honey are all related, depended and interconnected with the forest.

These aspects of Ogiek forest life have indeed changed over time, and yet they are still part of

Ogiek identity, collectively as well as individually. This dependency on the forest and its resources

and their kincentric relationship has made the Ogiek to develop practices, grounded in norms and

rules, to preserve the environment and to maintain their connection to the forest. Though past

measures to prevent the natural resources from being exhausted are still implemented where

relevant, the Ogiek have built up new ways of taking care of the forest. Carrying out surveillances

in the forest to look for destroyed areas or replanting indigenous trees in their homestead as well as

in the forest are actually reactions to their changing environment. This flexible characteristic and

the Ogiek perception of human and nature belonging to one world make this ecological knowledge

107

a multidisciplinary approach. Humans are actively involved in trying to conserve the forest and

maintain their interconnected relationships. Though the Ogiek are represented within the Mau

Forest Rehabilitation Programme, and the Kenyan government has made efforts to address its

forestry situation by introducing community forest management, it is still unclear how and if the

Ogiek while be able to play their part in the conservation efforts.The main argument of this paper is

that although Ogiek life has changed, the relationship with and preservation of their environment

have remained essential to Ogiek identity and way of life up to this day. This makes the Ogiek a

valuable partner in trying to save the Mau Forest.

108

Samenvatting Nederlands.

Inleiding.

Het Mau Forest Complex is één van de weinige grote overblijvende bosgebieden in Kenia. Het

complex bevindt zich in Rift Valley Province en strekt zich uit over ongeveer 900 km². Mau Forest,

de longen van Kenia, biedt water en leven aan lokale landbouwgemeenschappen, regionale wateren,

nationale en internationale natuurgebieden en aan de globale wereld als stevige groene kracht tegen

de klimaatsverandering. De Ogiek, die beweren de oorspronkelijke bewoners van Mau Forest te

zijn, zijn traditioneel jager-verzamelaars. Dit werkstuk probeert meer inzicht te geven in hoe de

Ogiek hun omgeving en hun relatie met Mau Forest ervaren. Onderzoek naar culturele en sociale

aspecten is mijn inziens een cruciaal punt in de studie rond natuurreservaten. Het biedt ons een blik

in de manier waarop mens en natuur met elkaar verbonden zijn. Dit debat wordt echter veelal

gedomineerd door de Westerse ecologie en haar wetenschappers, die soms al te vaak steunen op de

idee dat de natuur en de mens twee afzonderlijke werelden zijn. Door echter te kijken naar lokale

concepten van de Ogiek over natuur en conservatie trachten we een ander perspectief aan te bieden.

Kennis over hoe deze veranderd zijn levert niet alleen meer inzicht in en hoe de lokale bevolking

omgaat met de veranderende verhoudingen tussen hun en hun omgeving, maar biedt ook

interessante perspectieven aan het huidige rehabilitatie programma.

Betoog.

Overal ter wereld worden inspanningen geleverd om de aarde te beschermen tegen ontbossingen en

verder verlies van biodiversiteit. Een aanzienlijk deel van deze inspanningen worden echter

uitgevoerd vanuit de instelling dat de natuur en de mens twee onverzoenbare werelden zijn. Cultuur

wordt binnen dit westers denken veelal gezien als iets puur menselijk, in tegenstelling tot natuur

waar niets menselijks aan te pas zou komen. Cultuur en natuur worden door westerse percepties dus

als twee op zichzelf staande domeinen voorgesteld. Deze interpretaties vinden we duidelijk terug in

conservatieprogramma‟s die pleiten voor een gehele afzondering van de natuur van zijn sociale

context. Door de natuur voor te stellen als een statisch object, afgezonderd van menselijke

invloeden, worden ecologische veranderingen door menselijk, culturele activiteiten als

„onnatuurlijk‟ en gedwongen beschouwd. Westerse ecologen streven eigenlijk voor de terugkeer van

de natuur naar een staat waarin ecosystemen vrij zijn van menselijke aanwezigheid. Ze geloven

m.a.w. in de notie van „pristine wilderness‟, de overtuiging dat er iets als ecosystemen zonder enige

109

menselijke aanwezigheid zouden bestaan en vooral dat ze opnieuw zouden kunnen bestaan. Hier

tegenover staat het wereldbeeld van de Ogiek die mens en natuur beleven als deel van één wereld.

Deze verhandeling is opgedeeld in drie grote delen. Het eerste deel is een literatuuroverzicht over

het Mau Forest en de Ogiek om de lezer in te leiden. Nadien worden twee belangrijke aspecten

besproken, natuur en conservatie, om de relatie tussen de Ogiek en Mau uit te diepen. In „natuur‟

werd er gekeken naar de percepties van de Ogiek over de onderlinge relaties tussen de mens en

natuur. Mau word door de Ogiek omschreven als hun thuis, waar ze sinds onheugelijke tijden al

verblijven. Mau Forest is verweven in hun dagelijkse activiteiten en leefwereld. We hebben dit

onderzocht door te luisteren naar de verhalen over „toen‟, wanneer het leven in het woud nog

prominent was. Hun nederzettingspatronen, hun jacht en verzameltechnieken, het verzamelen van

hun begeerde honing en het gebruik van medicinale planten wijst allemaal op afhankelijkheid van

Mau Forest. Ondanks het feit dat het huidige leven van de Ogiek wel degelijk veranderd is, blijven

deze aspecten nog steeds van groot belang voor hun identiteit. Deze gebondenheid heeft ertoe

geleid dat de Ogiek verscheidene technieken ontwikkelden om hun relatie met het woud te

onderhouden. Het woud is dus meer dan een thuis voor hen. De Ogiek beschouwen Mau Forest als

deel van een uitgebreide ecologische familie, van één wereld waarin alle natuurlijke elementen als

naasten beschouwd worden. En net als in een familie moeten de banden onderhouden worden.

Hoewel de technieken die gehanteerd werden tijdens hun „woudbestaan‟ nog steeds aangewend

worden waar dit noodzakelijk is, hebben de Ogiek nieuwe methodes moeten ontwikkelen om hun

relatie met Mau Forest te blijven onderhouden. Dit wordt verder onderzocht in het deel

„Conservatie‟. Hierin wordt duidelijk dat de Ogiek zich hebben moeten aanpassen aan een

veranderende omgeving. Hierdoor is ook hun perceptie van conservatie verder ontwikkeld. Terwijl

vroeger de nadruk werd gelegd op het behoud van Mau Forest en het voorkomen dat de natuurlijke

bronnen uitgeput zouden geraken, wordt de klemtoon nu eerder op bescherming gelegd. Deze

ontwikkelingen zijn reacties op hun veranderende omgeving zoals het verlies aan indigene bomen

en de instroom van nieuwe gemeenschappen. Deze flexibiliteit en het behoud van hun wereldbeeld

waarin menselijke en niet-menselijke actoren tot één wereld behoren, wijst op een multidisciplinaire

aanpak van Ogiek conservatietechnieken. Mensen zijn in dit standpunt actief betrokken in het

behouden van hun relatie met hun omgeving.

De Keniaanse overheid toont haar wilskracht voor het conserveren van haar bosgebieden door

„community-based forest management‟ te introduceren. Dit stelt de lokale gemeenschappen in staat

een rol te spelen in conservatie projecten. Mau Forest is de laatste decennia onderheven aan een

enorme vorm van landdegradatie en ontbossing. Dit heeft de huidige regering ertoe geleid om in

2008 een Task Force bijeen te roepen om een duidelijk overzicht te maken over de situatie in het

MFC. Op basis van hun bevindingen en aanbevelingen werd in 2010 het “Mau Forest Rehabilitation

110

Programme” opgericht. Één van de maatregelen opgesteld in het rehabilitatie programma is de

ontruiming van de gemeenschappen die in het woud of nabij hotspots van biodiversiteit wonen. Op

deze manier hanteert men echter opnieuw de westerse opvatting dat mens en natuur van elkaar

zouden moeten losgemaakt worden om Mau Forest opnieuw naar een zogenaamd „natuurlijke‟ staat

te laten terugkeren. Ik ben ervan overtuigd dat de Ogiek, met hun holistische visie van natuur,

conservatie, hierin een belangrijke rol kunnen spelen. De Ogiek zijn wel degelijk gerepresenteerd in

dit conservatie project via de Ogiek Council of Elders, rest enkel nog de vraag in hoeverre de

Keniaanse regering hen een rol zal toekennen als gelijkwaardige partners in het beheer van Mau

Forest.

Conclusie.

Hoewel de huidige levensstijl van de Ogiek veranderd is, blijft hun wederkerige relatie met Mau

Forest nog steeds een centrale positie behouden. Hun visie waarin mens en natuur samen leven en

hun multidisciplinaire aanpak waarin mensen actief verwikkeld zijn in conservatie inspanningen

maken hen een waardevolle partner bij het redden van Mau Forest.

111

Reference list.

Interviews.

Nessuit Focusgroep 1 (15 March 2011)

Mariashoni Focusgroep 2 (17 March 2011)

Kiptunga Focusgroep 3 (8 May 2011)

Kiptunga Focusgroep 4, Women (8 May 2011)

Interview 1 Nessuit Rael (15 March 2011)


Interview 3 Mariashoni Joseph (24 April 2011)

Interview 4 Mariashoni Woman (24 April 2011)

Interview 5 Mariashoni Jackson, herbalist (26 April 2011)

Interview 6 Mariashoni Philemon (29 April 2011)


Interview 8 Mariashoni Emily (30 April 2011)

Interview 9 Mariashoni Tree Nursery (1 May 2011)

Interview 10 Mariashoni Benson (1 May 2011)

Interview 11 Nakuru Joseph Towett (2 May 2011)


Interview 13 Mariashoni Forester Mzee (5 May 2011)

Interview 14 Mariashoni Linah (5 May 2011)

Interview 15 Mariashoni Joseph (6 May 2011)

Interview 16 Kiptunga Ogiek Mzee (8 May 2011)

Interview 17 Kiptunga Chairman CFA (8 May 2011)

Interview 18 Mariashoni Chief (9 May 2011)

Interview 19 Mariashoni Samson (10 May 2011)

Interview 20 Mariashoni Woman OWC (10 May 2011)

Interview 21 Mariashoni Woman (11 May 2011)

Interview 22 Mariashoni Tapsabei (11 May 2011)

Interview 23 Mariashoni Caroline (12 May 2011)


112

Primary sources.

"Eastern and South West Mau Forest Reserves: Assessment and Way Forward." United Nations

Environment Programme, 2006.

www.unep.org/dewa/Portals/67/pdf/E_and_SW_Mau_v3.PDF (Accessed 6 August 2011)

"Changes in Forest Cover in Kenya's Five "Water Towers" 2003-2005." edited by Department of

Resource Surveys and Remote Sensing and Kenya Forests Working Group. Nairobi, 2005.

Indigenous peoples planning framework for the western Kenya community driven development and

flood mitigation project and the natural resource management project. Republic of Kenya (office of

the president, ministry of water and irrigation and ministry of environmental and natural resources)

2006 retrieved from: http://www.ogiek.org/indepth/2006_Kenya_WKCDD_NRMIPPF.pdf

(Accessed 5 August 2011)

Lambrechts, C. "Maasai Mau Forest Status Report 2005."

http://www.iapad.org/publications/maasai_mau_report.pdf (Accessed 3 August 2011)

"Mau Forest Complex: Threats and Way Forward." edited by The Interim Coordinating Secretariat,

2009.

(http://www.kws.org/export/sites/kws/info/maurestoration/maupublications/Mau_Forests_Complex

_-_Threats_and_way_forward.pdf) (Accessed 21 July 2011)

"Report of the Government's Task Force on the Conservation of the Mau Forest Complex." edited

by Office of the Prime Minister. Nairobi, 2009.

http://www.maurestoration.go.ke/index.php/downloads (Accessed 6 August 2011)

“Rehabilitation of the Mau Forest Ecosystem: Programmeme Document” Prepared by the Interim C

oordinating Secretariat, Office of the Prime Minister, on behalf of the Government of Kenya, with s

upport from the United Nations Environment Programme, 2010


http://www.unep.org/dewa/Portals/67/pdf/E_and_SW_Mau_v3.PDF

http://www.ogiek.org/indepth/2006_Kenya_WKCDD_NRMIPPF.pdf

http://www.iapad.org/publications/maasai_mau_report.pdf

http://www.kws.org/export/sites/kws/info/maurestoration/maupublications/Mau_Forests_Complex_-_Threats_and_way_forward.pdf

http://www.kws.org/export/sites/kws/info/maurestoration/maupublications/Mau_Forests_Complex_-_Threats_and_way_forward.pdf



113

Ogiek Website

http://www.ogiek.org/ (Accessed 5 August 2011)

Mau Forest Interim Coordinating Secretariat

http://www.maurestoration.go.ke/ (Accessed 6 August 2011)

United Nations Environment Programme

http://www.unep-wcmc.org/protected_areas/index.html (Accessed 21 July 2011)

USAID Land Tenure and Property Rights Portal.

http://usaidlandtenure.net/news/kenya-promara-project-gets-underway (Accessed 24 July 2011)

WHO Traditional Medicine

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs134/en/ (Accessed 2 August 2011)

Jan 29, 2010 - The British High Commissioner planted trees in Mariashoni expressing full support

to the Government‟s efforts in restoring the Mau forest.

http://www.maurestoration.go.ke/index.php/achievements/102-kenyans-showed-outstanding-

support-to-the-rehabilitation-of-the-mau- (Accessed 24 July 2011)

Jan 15, 2010 - Kenyans showed outstanding support to the rehabilitation of the Mau.

http://www.maurestoration.go.ke/index.php/achievements/108-mariashoni-tree-planting-29-jan-

2010 (Accessed 24 July 2011)

Secondary sources.

Adam, B. Timescapes of Modernity: The Environment and Invisible Hazards. London: Routledge,

1992.

Alcorn, J. "Indigenous Peoples and Conservation." Conservation Biology 7, no. 2 (1993).

Amanor, K. S. "Natural and Cultural Assets and Participatory Forest Management in West Africa."

In International Conference on Natural Assets. Philippines, 2003.

http://www.ogiek.org/

http://www.maurestoration.go.ke/

http://www.unep-wcmc.org/protected_areas/index.html

http://usaidlandtenure.net/news/kenya-promara-project-gets-underway

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs134/en/





114

Anyinam, C. "Ecology and Ethnomedicine: Exploring Links between Current Environmental Crisis

and Indigenous Medical Practices." Social Science and Medicine 40, no. 3 (1995): 321-29.

Barker, C. Cultural Studies: Theory and Practice. 2 ed. London: SAGE Publications LTD, 2003.

Barth, F. "Enduring and Emering Issues in the Analysis of Ethnicity; Beyond 'Ethnic Groups and

Boundaries'." In The Anthropology of Ethnicity, edited by Vermeulen H. and Govers C. Amsterdam:

Het Spinhuis, 2000. Reprint, 4.

Beinhart, W. "African History and Environmental History." African Affairs 99 (2000): 269-302.

Berntsen, J. "The Maasai and Their Neighbors: Variables of Interaction." African Economic History,

no. 2 (1976): 1-11.

Bird-David, N. "The Giving Environment: Another Perspective on the Economic System of

Gatherer-Hunters." Current Anthropology 31, no. 2 (1990): 189-96.

Bird-David, N. "Beyond 'the Hunting and Gathering Mode of Subsistence': Culture-Sensitive

Observations on the Nayaka and Otjer Modern Hunter-Gatherers." Man 27, no. 1 (1992): 19-44.

Blackburn, R. "The Okiek and Their History." Azania: Archaeological Research in Africa 9, no. 1

(1974).

Blackburn, R. "Okiek History." In Kenya before 1900: Eight Regional Studies, edited by B. A.

Ogot. Nairobi: East African Publishing House, 1978.

Blackburn, R. "In the Land of Milk and Honey: Okiek Adaptations to Their Forests and

Neighbours." In Politics and History in Band Societies, edited by Leacock E. and Lee R.:

Cambridge University Press, 1982.

Blackburn, R. "Fission, Fusion, and Foragers in East Africa: Micro- and Macroprocesses of

Diversity and Integration among Okiek Groups." In Cultural Diversity among Twentieth-Century

Foragers, edited by Susan Kent. Cambridge: University Press, 1996.

115

Brockington, D. and Sullivan S. "Qualitative Research." In Development Fieldwork: A Practical

Guide, edited by Scheuvens R. and Storey D. London: Sage, 2003.

Brossius, J. "Endangered Forest, Endagered People: Environmentalist Representations of

Indigenous Knowledge." Human Ecology 25, no. 1 (1997): 47-69.

Brossius, J. P. "Indigenous Peoples and Protectd Areas at the World Parks Congress." Conservation

Biology 18, no. 3 (2004): 609-12.

Carneiro da Cunha, M. and M. de Almeda. "Indigenous People, Traditional People, and

Conservation in the Amazon." Daedalus 129, no. 2 (2000): 315-38.

Chapin M., Lamb Z. and Threlkeld B. "Mapping Indigenous Lands." Annual Review of

Anthropology 34 (2005): 619-38.

Charnley S. and Poe M. R. "Community Forestry in Theory and in Practice; Where Are We Now?"

Annual Review Anthropology 36 (2007): 301-36.

Classen, C. "Sweet Colors, Fragrant Songs: Sensory Models of the Andes and the Amazon."

American Ethnologist 17, no. 4 (1990): 722-35.

Davis, W. and Henley T. "Beyond the Images." In Penan: Voice for the Borneo Rainforest., edited

by Henley T. Davis W. Vancouver: Western Canada Wilderness Committee, 1990.

Distefano, J. A. "Hunters or Hunted? Towards a History of the Okiek of Kenya." History in Africa

17 (1990): 41-57.

Fabian, J. "Of Dogs Alive, Birds Dead, and Time to Tell a Story." In Chronotypes, edited by Bender

J. and Wellbery D. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1991.

Foster, G. and Anderson B. G. Medical Anthropology. New York: John Wiley and Sons Ltd, 1978.

Fox J., Surayanta K., Hershock P. and Pramono A. Mapping Power: Ironic Effects of Spatial

Information Technology. Honolulu: East-West Center, 2003.

116

Harmsworth, G. Maori values for land use planning. New Zealand Association of Resource

Management (NZARM) Broadsheet, 37–52. 1997.

Hobsbawm, J. "Inventing Traditions." In Invention of Tradition, edited by Hobsbawm J. and Ranger

T. O. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992.

Holland, D. and Quinn N., ed. Cultural Models in Languag and Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press, 1987.

Howes, D. Sensual Relations: Engaging the Senses in Culture and Social Theory: The University of

Michigan Press, 2003.

Huntingford, G. W. B. "Modern Hunters: Some Account of the Kamelilo-Kepchepkendi Dorobo

(Okiek) of Kenya Colony." The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and

Ireland 59, no. 333-378 (1929).

Igoe, J. "Becoming Indigenous Peoples: Difference, Inequality, and the Globalization of East

African Identity Politics." African Affairs 105, no. 420 (2006): 399-420.

Inglis, F. "Nation and Community: A Landscape and Its Morality." Sociological Review, no. 25

(1977): 489-514.

Ingold, T. "Human Worlds Are Culturally Constructed: Against the Motion (I)." In Key Debates in

Anthropology, edited by T. Ingold, 112-18. London: Routledge, 1996.

Ingold, T. The Perception of the Environment: Essays in Livelihood, Dwelling and Skill. New York:

Routledge, 2000.

Lynette Obare and J. B. Wangwe. “Underlying causes of deforestation and degradation of Mau

Forest.”

http://www.wrm.org.uy/deforestation/Africa/Kenya.html (retrieved 24 July 2011)

Kamau, J. (n.d.) Ogiek: History of a Forgotten Tribe. An In-depth Report.

http://www.ogiek.org/report/ogiek-ch1.htm (retrieved 26 July 2011)


http://www.ogiek.org/report/ogiek-ch1.htm

117

Kamau, J. “The Ogiek: The Ongoing Destruction of a Minority Tribe in Kenya.” Nairobi: Rights

News and Features Service, 2000.

Kamira-Mbote, and Oduor J. "Following God's Constitution: The Gender Dimensions in the Ogiek

Claim to Mau Forest Complex." In Paths Are Made by Walking: Human Rights Interfacing

Gendered Realities and Plural Legalities, edited by Anne Hellum. Harare: Weaver Press, 2006.

Kenny, M. "Mirror in the Forest: The Dorobo Hunter-Gatherers as an Image of the Other." Africa:

Journal of the International African Institute 51, no. 1 (1981): 477-95.

Koech C. K., Ongugo P. O., Mbuvi M. T. E. and Maua J. O. "Community Forest Associations in

Kenya: Challenges and Opportunities." Kenya Forestry Research Institute (KEFRI), 2009.

Kratz, C. Affecting Performance: Meaning, Movement and Experience in Okiek Women's Initiation.

Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1994.

Kratz, C. "Conversations and Lives." In African Words, African Voices: Critical Practices in Oral

History, edited by White L. Miescher S. and Cohen D. Bloomintong: Indiana University Press,

2001.

Kratz, C. "Are the Okiek Really Masai? Or Kipsigis? Or Kikuyu?" Cahiers d'Etudes Africaines 20,

no. 79 (1980): 355-68.

Kratz, C. ""We've Always Done It Like This... Except for a Few Details": "Tradition" and

"Innovation" in Okiek Ceremonies." Comparative Studies in Society and History 35, no. 1 (1993):

30-65.

Lusby P. E., Coombes A. and Wilkinson J. M "Honey: A Potent Agent for Wound Healing?" Journal

of WOCN 29, no. 6 (2002): 295-300.

Meyers, R. E. Pintupi Country, Pintupio Self: Sentiment, Place, and Politics among Western Desert

Aborigines. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1986.

Morán, E. Human Adaptability: An Introduction to Ecological Anthropology. New York: Westview

Press, 2000.

118

Nagel, J. "Constructing Ethnicity: Creating and Recreating Ethnic Identity and Culture." Social

Problems 41, no. 1 (1994): 152-76.

Ngari E. W., Chiuri L. W., Kariuki S. T. and Huckett S. "Ethnomedicine of Ogiek of River Njoro

Watershed, Nakuru-Kenya." Ethnobotany Journal 8 (2010).

Ochieng, R. M. "The Mau Forest Complex, Kenya: A Review of Degradation Status and Possible

Remedial Measures." Norderstedt: GRIN Verlag, 2009.

Oxford Dictionary and Thesaurus: Oxford University Press, 2009.

Pelican, M. "Complexities of Indigeneity and Autochthony: An African Example." American

Ethnologist 36, no. 1 (2009): 52-66.

Pierotti, R. and Wildcat D. "Traditional Ecological Knowledge: The Third Alternative

(Commentary)." Ecological Applications 10, no. 5 (2000): 1333-40.

Rambaldi G., Muchemi J., Crawhall N. and Monaci L. "Through the Eyes of Hunter-Gatherers:

Participatory 3d Modelling among Ogiek Indigenous Peoples in Kenya." 2007.

Rambaldi, G. and Callosa-Tarr. "Participatory 3-D Modeling: Bridging the Gap between

Communities and Gis Technology." Paper presented at the International Workshop on 'Participatory

Technology Development and Local Knowledge for Sustainable Land Use in Southeast Asia,

Chiang Mai, 2001.

Ronoh T.K., Barasa F. S. and Matheka R. M. . "Contextualising Ogiek's Indigenous Environmental

Education through Oral Literature for Sustainable Conservation of Mau Forest, Kenya." Indigenous

Voices, Indigenous Research (2010).

Ruysschaert, D. "Gouvernance Forestière Au Kenya: Le Cas De La Forêt Du Maasai Mau." IFRA

Les Cahier d'Afrique de l'Est Janvier-Mars 2007, no. 24 (2007).

Salmón, E. "Kincentric Ecology: Indigenous Perceptions of the Human-Nature Relationship."

Ecological Applications 10, no. 5 (2000): 1327-32.

119

Sang, J. "The Ogiek in Mau Forest." In From Principle to Practice: Indigenous Peoples and

Protected Areas in Africa, edited by Nelson J. and Hosscak L.: Forest Peoples Project, 2001.

Sang, J. "The Ogiek (Dorobo) of Kenya: Community Resource Management." In Indigenous

Knowledge for Biodiversity and Development: Proceedings of the National Workshop on

Indigenous Knowledge, edited by Christine H. S. Kabuye. Nairobi: National Museums of Kenya,

1996.

Sang, J. "Land Rights: A Central Issue in Conflict Resolution and Management among the Ogiek of

Kenya." In Reclaiming Balance: Indigenous People, Conflict and Sustainable Development, edited

by Tauli-Corpuz V. and Cariño J. Baguio City: Tebtebba Foundation, 2004.


http://www.iwgia.org/iwgia_files_publications_files/IA_4-06_Mau.pdf (retrieved 2 August 2011)

Smith, E. and M. Wishnie. "Conservation and Subsistence in Small-Scale Societies." Annual

Review of Anthropology 29 (2000): 493-524.

Sterrit, N. "The Nisga'a Treaty: Competing Claims Ingored." BC Studies 120 (winter) (1998).

Stevens, S., ed. Conservation through Cultural Survival: Indigenous Peoples and Protected Areas.

Washington: Island Press, 1997.

Towett, J. Ogiek Land Cases and Historical Injustices 1902-2004. Vol. 1. Nakuru: Ogiek Welfare

Council, 2004.

Turner, V. and Bruner E. M., ed. The Anthropology of Experience: University of Illinois Press,

1986.

van Zwanenberg R. "Dorobo Hunting and Gathering: A Way of Life or a Mode of Production?"

African Economic History, no. 2 (1976): 12-21.

West, P, James Igoe and Dan Brockington. "Parks and People: The Social Impact of Protected

Areas." Annual Review of Anthropology 35 (2006): 255-77.


120

Woodburn, J. "Hunters and Gatherers Today and Reconstruction of the Past." In Soviet and Western

Anthropology, edited by E. Gellner. London: Gerald Duckworth & Co Ltd, 1980.

Zumla A. and Lulat A. "Honey - a Remedy Rediscovered." Journal of the Royal Society of

Medicine 82 (1989).

121

Annex.

Annex 1.

Mau Forest, Location196

196

“Rehabilitation of the Mau Forest Ecosystem: Programmeme Document” Prepared by the Interim Coordin

ating Secretariat, Office of the Prime Minister, on behalf of the Government of Kenya, with support from the

United Nations Environment Programme, 2010



122

Annex 2.

Mau Forest Blocks197

197

Ibid.

123

Annex 3.

Napuyapui swamp, source of the River Mara.198

198

Author‟s photopgraph.

124

Annex 4.

Ogiek homestead199

199

Author‟s Photograph.

125

Annex 5.

Mariashoni Trading Centre200

200

Author‟s photograph.

126

Annex 6.

Ogiek beehives.201

201

Author‟s Photograph.

127

Annex 7.

Ogiek beehive in tree.202

202

Author‟s photograph

128

Annex 8.

Honey and honey bag.203

203


129

Annex 9.

Mariashoni Tree Nursery.204

204


Documents

Changing Concepts of Nature and Conservation Regarding