VZCZCXRO8109
PP RUEHAST RUEHHM RUEHLN RUEHMA RUEHPB RUEHPOD RUEHROV RUEHTM
DE RUEHNR #2710/01 3390636
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 040636Z DEC 08
FM AMEMBASSY NAIROBI
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 7796
INFO RUEHZN/ENVIRONMENT SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY COLLECTIVE
RUEHRC/DEPT OF AGRICULTURE WASHDC
RUEHC/DEPT OF INTERIOR WASHDC
RUEAEPA/HQ EPA WASHDC
RUCNIAD/IGAD COLLECTIVE
RUEHDR/AMEMBASSY DAR ES SALAAM 6204
RUEHDJ/AMEMBASSY DJIBOUTI 5465

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 NAIROBI 002710 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPT FOR AF/E, OES FOR ISABELLE DETWILER, OES/ENV, OES/EGC, 
ADDIS FOR REO, LONDON, PARIS FOR AFRICA WATCHERS 
 
AGRICULTURE FOR US FOREST SERVICE 
 
INTERIOR FOR US GEOLOGICAL SURVEY DR. JANE BELNAP 
 
E.O.12958: N/A 
TAGS: PGOV PREL PHUM KDEM ENRG SENV SOCI KE
SUBJECT: GOK EFFORT TO PRESERVE VITAL FOREST HITS POLITICAL 
OBSTACLES 
 
REF: NAIROBI 2220 AND PREVIOUS 
 
------- 
Summary 
------- 
 
¶1. The Kenyan government's (GOK) attempt to preserve and 
restore the environmentally and economically important Mau 
Forest Complex (the Mau Forest) by evicting legal and 
illegal settlers (reftel) has caused political problems 
within Prime Minister Raila Odinga's Orange Democratic 
Movement (ODM) party.  ODM Members of Parliament from the 
Kipsigis community - which would be most affected by the 
evictions - have threatened to withdraw support for Odinga 
unless either the evictions are stopped or alternate land 
is provided to both legal and illegal settlers.  Evictions 
planned for October have been delayed until a study group 
reports in January 2009 its recommendations on how to 
proceed.  In the meantime, Odinga has rallied other ODM 
constituencies who have significant interests in restoring 
the Mau Forest watershed to support the evictions.  We 
believe that Odinga is succeeding in isolating opponents of 
the evictions, and that the evictions will take place in 
return for an increased offer of alternative land. 
Odinga's patient and principled stand on the issue is 
commendable and will help protect Kenya's increasingly 
distressed water supply.  End Summary. 
 
-------------- 
The Mau Forest 
-------------- 
 
¶2. The Mau Forest watershed comprises about 400,000 
hectares beginning near Narok Town in Rift Valley Province 
and extending west toward the Lake Victoria region.  Rivers 
flowing from the Mau Forest are part of the Nile basin, on 
which Tanzania, Uganda, Sudan, and Egypt depend.  It is a 
significant water source for the Rift Valley and western 
Kenya, providing water for drinking and agricultural use 
for approximately 15 per cent of Kenya's population. 
Rivers flowing from the Mau Forest feed the Maasai Mara 
nature preserve, Kenya's most lucrative source of tourism 
revenue, as well as the Serengeti National Park in 
neighboring Tanzania.  They also feed Lake Nakuru, another 
significant source of tourism revenue, and other major 
lakes in the Rift Valley as well as several power 
generation plants. 
 
-------------------------------- 
Land Policies Threaten Watershed 
-------------------------------- 
 
¶3.  The Mau Forest was traditionally home to small hunter- 
gatherer communities, known collectively as the Ogiek.  The 
Ogiek did not live in permanent settlements and their 
footprint on the Mau Forest was minimal.  The current 
problems of the Mau Forest date to the 1990s, when the 
administration of former President Daniel Arap Moi 
converted large tracts of the Mau Forest Reserve land to 
farmland and allocated title to politicians as a reward for 
supporting the regime.  The Moi-era conversion resulted in 
an influx of three types of settlers: a group who bought 
land from politicians who received it from Moi; a second 
group who bought additional plots which had been excised 
from the Mau Forest by corrupt land officials; and a third 
group of squatters who had no plausible claim to any land. 
The majority of settlers were ethnic Kipsigis, whose 
burgeoning population was stressing land in their native 
South Rift Valley.  However, Kikuyu and Maasai also settled 
in the Mau Forest during this time. 
 
¶4. In contrast to the traditional inhabitants, the new 
settlers cleared large tracts of the forest for agriculture 
and to make charcoal, a cheap and common fuel in Kenya.  In 
addition, illegal logging became rampant.  The GOK estimates 
that approximately 25 percent of the Mau Forest has been 
lost over the past 20 years.  Precipitation levels have 
fallen with the loss of forest cover, with additional 
 
NAIROBI 00002710  002 OF 003 
 
 
negative consequences. 
 
¶5.  The United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP) 
estimates that Kenya loses nearly $300 million annually due 
to the degradation of the Mau and other forests.  The 
livelihoods of thousands of people in the region, as well 
as the flora and fauna in ecosystems such as the Mara 
Conservancy are at risk.  Reduced water flows from the Mau 
Forest have impacted a major electricity generation project 
at Sondu Miriu, allowing only one of two turbines to be put 
into service.  If no action is taken to address falling 
water levels, the fate of two planned hydro-electric power 
projects is also at risk.  Rivers flowing from the complex 
to Lake Nakuru and the Maasai Mara are drying up, putting 
the region's lucrative tourism industry at risk. The Kenya 
Wildlife Service estimates that Lake Nakuru may dry up in 
eight years if urgent measures to restore the watershed are 
not taken.  Other lakes affected are Baringo, Bogoria, 
Natron and Turkana.  Sudan and Egypt will also suffer from 
decreased water flowing from the Mau Forest. 
 
---------------------------- 
Prior Attempt to Evict Fails 
---------------------------- 
 
¶6. During President Kibaki's first term the Kenyan 
government (GOK) acknowledged the need to protect the Mau 
Forest.  President Kibaki commissioned a report on illegal 
land allocations in 2004, which concluded that, although 
the transfers had followed legal procedure they were ill- 
informed.  Based on this report, the government attempted 
to evict Mau Forest settlers in 2005.  However, political 
pressure brought by the affected communities and protests 
by human rights groups due to the lack of alternate land 
allocations for those to be evicted forced the government 
to drop plans to evict settlers. 
 
-------------------- 
Odinga to the Rescue 
-------------------- 
 
¶7. Early Prime Minister Odinga recognized the importance of 
preserving and restoring the Mau Forest to Kenya's economic 
and environmental wellbeing.  In July, Odinga, along with 
John Michuki, the Minister for Environment and Natural 
Resources (Party of National Unity-PNU), and Noah Wekesa, 
the Minister of Forestry (PNU), convened a stakeholders' 
conference including representatives of various ministries, 
UNEP and environmental conservation organizations which 
concluded that the Mau Forest must be protected and 
restored.  As a result of this forum, Odinga constituted a 
21-member task force to relocate 1,960 people whose title 
deeds the government regarded as genuine.  The task force 
would then work with local communities to demarcate and 
fence off the area from which that population was to be 
evicted.  The evictions were to begin on October 30. 
 
¶8. Odinga's support for evictions was opposed by a number 
of Kalenjin ODM Members of Parliament from Rift Valley 
Province.  The most vocal opponents of the eviction are 
from the Kispigis sub-clan of the Kalenjin, who constitute 
the majority of Mau Forest settlers.  Kipsigis ODM MPs have 
demanded that the evictions either be stopped or that the 
government provide alternative land to both legal and 
illegal settlers.  They have mobilized residents of the Mau 
Forest to resist attempts to evict them.  Kipsigis leaders 
have also linked the evictions with lingering 
dissatisfaction on the number of Kipsigis included in the 
Cabinet.  As a result, they have threatened to leave the 
ODM if their demands are not met.  ODM leaders from other 
Kalenjin sub-clans have shown solidarity for the Kipsigis' 
stand, complicating matters further for Odinga. 
 
¶9.  With PNU-controlled ministries driving the evictions 
and opposition to the plan led by ODM politicians, the 
Prime Minister has been forced to take the lead in pushing 
the project through.  Odinga's response has been to assuage 
Kipsigis leaders by delaying implementation of the 
 
NAIROBI 00002710  003 OF 003 
 
 
evictions combined with the formation of a study group to 
determine how to best proceed.  This group is expected to 
report its conclusions in January 2009.  Odinga also worked 
to undercut support for the Kipsigis leaders, however. 
Minister for Lands James Orengo (ODM) impugned the motives 
of the Kipsigis leadership, stating that several had 
benefited from the Moi-era land allocation and then sold on 
their parcels to those now facing eviction. 
 
¶10. Odinga has rallied the Maasai community to speak out in 
favor of the evictions.  (Note: The Maasai-dominated Narok 
County administers the area surrounding the Mau Forest. 
Its main income generator, the Maasai Mara nature reserve, 
is threatened by the degradation of the Mau Forest.  End 
Note.)  In November, the influential Minister of Cultural 
Affairs and National Heritage, William Ole Ntimama (ODM), 
criticized the Kipsigis (and other Kalenjin leaders who 
have been railing against Odinga on this and other issues) 
as shortsighted and selfish. 
 
¶11.  Ntimama's criticism was followed by a proxy battle 
between the Narok County Council, which is controlled by 
allies of Ntimama, and the Kipsigis County Council which is 
controlled by allies of the leader of the Kipsigis ODM MPs, 
Julius Kones.   In mid-November, the Narok County Council 
threatened to evict squatters from the land if the GOK 
failed to take action. The Kipsigis County Council issued a 
statement calling Narok County's threat an incitement to 
tribal clashes in the area.  In late November, Odinga 
convened a meeting of ODM leaders to discuss the Mau Forest 
evictions and a range of other issues in which the Kalenjin 
(and others) were resisting Odinga's leadership.  After 
Odinga's meeting, the Kipsigis leaders toned down their 
rhetoric and have shown a willingness to go along with 
evictions if the government offers alternate land to both 
legal and illegal settlers. 
 
------- 
Comment 
------- 
 
¶12.  The economic and environmental facts present a strong 
argument for action to preserve the Mau Forest.  Odinga's 
steady support for preservation and restoration of the Mau 
Forest appears, to his credit, to be motivated by a genuine 
desire to do what is best for Kenya, despite the possible 
political cost to him and his party.  By effectively 
isolating opponents of the evictions, Odinga is 
demonstrating, once again, his political and strategic 
skills.  We are optimistic that evictions will take place 
in 2009.  Post will continue to follow the issue closely, 
both as an indicator of Odinga's leadership as well as a 
test case for how the government deals with sensitive land 
issues.   End Comment. 
RANNEBERGER