Question 3,000 report (including references), excluding captions, tables and appendices with essential supporting material etc. Powerpoint submission of final presentation through Blackboard. Students will work on a project for which they will write the brief. Students will present their work at key stages for review during the semester.
Key Subjects: Wildlife Protection, Green Hard Infrastructure (Rail), Green belts and Urban Fringe Landscapes, Green Infrastructure Planning Student Number: 150203982 Module: TCP8097 GI & Landscape Planning 2 Course: MSc Urban Planning Word Count: 2,877 words in report; excluding captions
A Mitigation Strategy by Savannah Wildlife Agency for Nairobi National Park following the construction of the Standard Railways Gauge (SGR)
VISION A healthy bio culturally diverse national park in which people can feel satisfied about its status. &
MISSION Enhance Nairobi Natural Park’s wildlife corridors and promoting its value to all people, helping them connect with the wildlife in the park. 150203982
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS 1) INTRODUCTION & METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................... 6 METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................................................... 6 AIM & OBJECTIVES .................................................................................................................. 6 LOCATION ............................................................................................................................... 7 OVERVIEW .............................................................................................................................. 7 2) BACKGROUND CONTEXT ....................................................................................................... 8 STANDARD GAUGE RAILWAY ................................................................................................. 8 LAW AND POLICY STATEMENT ............................................................................................... 9 3) ISSUES & QUERIES ............................................................................................................... 10 STEINITZ FRAMEWORK ......................................................................................................... 10 SGR IMPACTS ON WILDLIFE ................................................................................................. 11 KEY ISSUES ............................................................................................................................ 13 4) STRATEGY: BIO CULTURAL DIVERSITY APPROACH ............................................................. 13 OVERVIEW ............................................................................................................................ 13 MANAGEMENT PROPOSALS ................................................................................................. 15 EDUCATION & CORRIDOR SURVEILLANCE ....................................................................... 15 SANCTUARY EXPANSION & TREE PLANTING .................................................................... 20 5) CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................. 23 POTENTIAL IMPACTS ............................................................................................................ 24 FUNDING AND STAKEHOLDERS ............................................................................................ 25 IMPLEMENTATION TIMESCALE............................................................................................. 26 APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................ 27 APPENDIX 1 GENERAL METHODOLOGY ............................................................................... 27 APPENDIX 2 PROGRESSIVE DEVELOPMENT NETWORK GUIDE ............................................ 27 BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................................................ 28
150203982
3
“We are an independent organisation specialised in management and research across the global Savannah (areas of mixed woodland-grassland ecosystem). We aim to preserve wildlife in this vulnerable region from the growing threat of Climate, thus promoting efficient, sustainable use of natural resources.”
150203982
4
LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1A METHODOLOGY ....................................................................................................... 6 FIGURE 1B LOCATION OF NAIROBI NATIONAL PARK ................................................................. 7 FIGURE 2A STANDARD GAUGE RAILWAY................................................................................... 8 FIGURE 2B LEGISLATIVE IMPLICATIONS ..................................................................................... 9 FIGURE 2C PARTNERSHIP ORGANISATIONS ............................................................................. 10 FIGURE 3A STEINITZ FRAMEWORK .......................................................................................... 11 FIGURE 3B SWOT SGR IMPACTS ON NNP ................................................................................ 11 FIGURE 3C KEY ISSUES SGR IMPACT ON NNP .......................................................................... 12 FIGURE 4A PROJECT PHASING ................................................................................................. 13 FIGURE 4B RATIONALE: CORRIDOR SURVEILLANCE ................................................................ 16 FIGURE 4C PROPOSED: CORRIDOR SURVEILLANCE ................................................................. 18 FIGURE 4D PROPOSED: EDUCATION AND FILM ROUTES ......................................................... 19 FIGURE 4E RATIONALE: TREE SELECTION................................................................................. 21 FIGURE 4F PROPOSED: TREE PLANTING ACTIVITY ................................................................... 22 FIGURE 5A POTENTIAL PROPOSAL IMPACTS ........................................................................... 24 FIGURE 5B FUNDING STRATEGY .............................................................................................. 25 FIGURE 5C STRATEGIC TIMELINE ............................................................................................. 26
LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1A NAIROBI NATIONAL PARK CONTRIBUTIONS .............................................................. 7 TABLE 4A PHASING RATIONALE ............................................................................................... 14 TABLE 4B PROSPECTIVE TREE NURSERIES................................................................................ 21
ABBREVIATIONS SGR – Standard Gauge Railway NNP – Nairobi National Park KWS – Kenya Wildlife Service
150203982
5
1) INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY 1.1 METHODOLOGY 1.11Savannah Wildlife Agency has prepared this project strategy with the purpose of proposing a sustainable solution to mitigate the effects caused by the construction of the Standard Gauge Railway (SGR) existing in Nairobi National Park (NNP). 1.12The Strategy mainly focuses on issues of wildlife crossing and habitat fragmentation, but closely considers cultural community impact. Thus, the Strategy considers a biocultural diversity approach; in which culture and biodiversity are unavoidably linked hence the effect on one intimately affects, and thus consideration of both elements matter (UNESCO, 2020). 1.13The Strategy is guided by a proposed design methodology (Appendix 1) for habitat modelling and restoration (Figure 1A). DETERMINATION OF KEY REGULATORY AND MAINTENANCE ECOSYSTEM SERVICES
SERVICE INDICATORS
Predation
Movement Patterns
MAPPING OF SGR CONTACTED NATURAL CAPITAL
Predator count Prey Count
NOTE AVAILABLE NATURAL CAPITAL DELEVERING SERVICES
SUPPLEMENTARY CONSIDERATIONS Public Engagement Activity
Predator Control
KEY SPECIES/ FUNCTIONAL GROUP
Open Grassland Savannah
Large
Endangered
Riverine Forest
Mammals
Highland Dry Foresrt
CONECTIVITY ANALYSIS
MAPPING OF SGR CONTACTED WILDLIFE CORRIDORS
Core Strategy Proposals
Corridor Zoning & Surveillance
Sanctuart Expansion
Sanctuary Expansion
Subsidiary Strategy Proposals
Map Suggestions
Corridor Surveillance
Habitat Control
Cultural Identity
CORE HABITATS
RANKING INTEGRATION
DETERMINATION OF SUPPLEMENTARY CONSIDERATIONS
South of Park Athi Basin Dam and Mbagathi River
Provisional Shelters
Central Grassland
Figure 1A Methodological Application on Nairobi National Park
1.2 AIM AND OBJECTIVES 1.21The aim of this Strategy is to enhance NNPs existing wildlife corridors, and to promote its engagement and value to all people, helping them connect with the wildlife in the park. 1.22The following objectives are set to achieve this aim: ▪ Rebuild the narrative of NNP by redefining its identity and purpose ▪ Introduce sanctuaries to stimulate the restoration of lost wildlife ▪ Create new opportunities for public engagement ▪ Strengthen the indicative management & monitoring activity for improved habitat control & predator control ▪ Rejuvenate & promote the unique value of NNP 150203982
6
Figure 1B Nairobi National Park and Surroundings
1.3 LOCATION 1.31Nairobi National Park was established as Kenya’s first park in 1964; located South of the city centre the conservation area covers 117km2 (Figure 1B). NNP is believed to be the only one of its kind, in the sense that it is a reserve in the urban city core; thus, the park is of national importance bringing vital ecological, economic, and socio-cultural benefits. 1.32The active functions of the park include: Environmental
Economic Socio-Cultural
(a)Vital carbon sink for the city, (b)Wildlife conservatory, (c)Water Source; Rivers and Dams, (d)Indigenous Species Habitat, (e)Migration Route & Grazing Land (a)Revenue to tourism industry, (b)Employment in the tourism sector, (c)Research, education & film, (d)Special events: weddings, camping (a)Nature-based tourism, (b)Historical Monument-Ivory burning site, (c)Unique Urban National Park, (d)4 of Big 5 Game Table 1A Nairobi National Park Contributions
1.4 OVERVIEW 1.41The term wildlife supersedes the commonly believed definition of animals and extends towards any wild and indigenous animal, plant micro-organism, or parts thereof within their essential habitat on land or in. (National Environmental Policy, 2013, p. 54). 1.42Wildlife can further be divided into species, a population of individual organisms capable of mating amongst each other ensuring production of fertile offspring in a
150203982
7
natural and longevity within their setting. Species will share common and specialised characteristics from others. 1.43Human species within their subgroups of cultures are essential in their unique knowledge and value. In Kenya, the loss of cultural diversity and local knowledge is particularly threatening tribal pastoralist communities, many who graze at the south of the park (Mbatia, undated).
2) BACKGROUND CONTEXTS 2.1 STANDARD GAUGE RAILWAY 2.11Considering the SGR has already been constructed in NNP, this Strategy focuses on wildlife conservation of endangered large mammals with cultural significance, along with the corridors and wildlife conditions sustaining them. 2.12The SGR is an improvement of the former inactive rail system. The SGR diesel-electric transportation system replaced a metre gauge railway system. It is being built to link the wider East African community of South Sudan, Rwanda, Tanzania, and Uganda. It has a sustainable potential to operate electrically; however, this operation is lacking funds.
Figure 2A Existing SGR Route Option 4
2.13Route 4 of seven (Figure 2A) was the successful development choice; it runs a central 6km viaduct (18m high and 15m wide) dividing east and west of NNP. The viaduct allows for the passage of tourists vehicles, wildlife, aircrafts, and ensures uninterrupted natural water flow. However, it has been acknowledged as having the capability of changing movement and general behaviour of wildlife in NNP (Kenya Railway Corporations, 2016,p.244). 2.14Trains operating on the SGR have improved freight capacity in the country, reducing the need for vehicular and air travel. Although not the most environmentally friendly option, it was of low construction and operational cost (Kenya Railways Corporation, 2016, p51). Furthermore, the passage of the track through Tsavo National Park and NNP is an effort to boost tourism. In NNP, viaducts and culverts reduce potential accidents. Thus the development is primarily considered economically beneficial, and in some respects, environmentally and socially beneficial 150203982
8
2.15Initial criticism arose with the track first built through Tsavo National Park, a significantly larger park (20,812km2) consequentially affected by wildlife fragmentation. Due to public opposition, there have been attempts to win favour through incorporation of locally valued features into the design of train terminals and through job creation. However, the strategy concern is strictly focused on NNP.
2.2 LAW AND POLICY STATEMENT
Figure 2B Legislative Statement Summary
2.21KEY LAW & POLICY: PARK STATUS. Currently, only an unrevised draft policy exists, and thus is not binding to this Strategy (Draft Wildlife Policy, 2011). Relevant points have been considered from the document; however, this statement will focus on the Wildlife (Conservation and Management Act) 2013. Fundamental law to as regards to NNP and the park status are listed: ▪ Park listed as a Critical Endangered Ecosystem ▪ Lion Conservation Unit: National endangered specie ▪ Black Rhino Sanctuary: National critically endangered specie
150203982
9
2.22PERMISSIVE STATEMENT. Makes allowance for efforts in the Strategy. Within the Act, the following are particularly useful: ▪ The developer is liable for rectifying and mitigating damage caused by SGR, thus less a financial strain on wildlife management; A cooperative approach is required for an effective process. ▪ Agreeable suitable and encouraging solutions have been detailed in the Statement summary (Figure 2B) relative to this Strategy.
2.23REGULATORY/BARRIER STATEMENT. Requires verification and permission from the Kenya Wildlife Service before anything is attempted; the state corporation can stop and hinder any process of the Strategy thus: ▪ Permission is required from the state, and a board of directors for any strategic solutions suggested and works. ▪ Definition of wildlife corridor limited in scope.
2.24FINANCIAL STATEMENT. KWS facilitates opportunities than generate funding for wildlife management and conservation. KWS primarily generates funds through tourism but is also in partnership with organisations that make funds available for the collective benefit of the same goal, to manage and conserve wildlife globally. Within the Act: ▪ Funds can be applied for and made available for specific solutions highlighted in law; goals in harmony with the KWS agenda.
Figure 2C Partnership organisations that have financially contribute to NNP in the past
3) ISSUES AND QUERIES 3.1 STEINITZ FRAMEWORK 3.11In the past NNP faced the following challenges, which are still threats to date: ▪ Poaching and illegal hunting ▪ Urbanisation: Infrastructure & Development ▪ Human-wildlife conflict ▪ Urban Waste and pollution ▪ Wildebeest migration collapse and further migration blockage ▪ Climate Change: Increased Droughts ▪ Habitat Destruction: Illegal logging ▪ Wildlife decline 150203982
10
Figure 3A Steinitz Framework
3.12The variety of threats vary from recurring to anthropogenic. Steinitz Framework was a useful and effective tool for assessing the specific threats posed in the Strategy, while considering the overarching issue rich biodiversity is facing. The Strategy saw the need to question the problems of change, representation and decision. 3.13Following the framework considerations of specific green and grey infrastructures questioned as to their feasibility, for example, the design of the viaduct and culvert in place, along with relevant alternatives of other implementable wildlife-friendly interventions. The park holds various sizeable animals such as tall giraffes and herds of buffalos, which were noted to be considered in the SGR design and under KWS Standards. Thus representation can also be considered on a broader scale than that of the KWS standards, an additional, comprehensive view of public opinion.
3.2 SGR IMPACTS ON WILDLIFE
Figure 3B SWOT SGR IMPACTS ON WILDLIFE
150203982
11
3.21In the 1800s human populations were too small and scattered to have adversely impact wildlife species whether through direct consumption or hunting for secondary products, they now, however, face threats of local extinction (Chongwa, 2012). 3.22In recent years, NNP suffered environmentally due to the increased loss of the traditional dispersal and migration areas due to a wide range of human disturbances to the south of NNP. It is notable that the African elephants were transplanted from this region to reduce human-wildlife conflicts. 3.23However, increased human-wildlife conflict is only an underlying issue of increased urbanisation. The small size and proximity to the urban landscape of NNP, compared to many of the country’s national parks, has not come without threatening pressures from urban sprawl as the SGR shows. Previous monitored data of the African lion, Maasai giraffe and black rhinoceros, among others, suggests that these species could crush and be locally extinct if any perturbations or stochastic (unexpected events that negatively impact the species) in NNP appear (Kenya Railway Corporation, 2016, p.165-167). The addition of the SGR, a factor of urban sprawl that brings the concern of the city spreading into the park, which may provide leeway for the pre-existing threats.
3.3 KEY ISSUES
Figure 3C Existing and Potential Key Issues
3.31Major infrastructural developments like the SGR are a priority for governments across the African continent in achieving economic, social and environmental objectives; however, these come with challenges. 3.32The investigated issues are revealed as environmental and socioeconomic. These issues range from being visible to potential. Existing issues are of major concern and will directly be answered in this study, whereas potential issues will be planned for at a minimum forewarning scale
150203982
12
4) STRATEGY 4.1 OVERVIEW 4.11 To enriches the state definition of a wildlife corridor(Wildlife Act 2013) which states a “corridor” means an area used by wild animals when migrating from one part of the ecosystem to another periodically, the following is put forward as a consideration: “Wildlife corridors” are to be defined by the effective coherence and connection of their features of conservation value to the wider landscape. Adopted from (Benson & Roe, 2007)
Figure 4A Project Phasing
4.12 The Strategy aim, and objectives will interact in two porous phases to produce effective results (See 1.2). The rationale behind the project phasing included an evaluation of species, habitats and their system functions; this was achieved by the use of the initial methodology structure an additional guide for developing a progressive habitat development network (Appendix 2). These are described in detail in Table 4A.
150203982
13
150203982
Table 4A Rationale Behind Phasing
14
4.2 MANAGEMENT PROPOSALS
4.2.1 Step 1: Monitor wildlife activity along the SGR by creating surveillance hotspots Step 2: Research and Education Filming as an activity to engage communities: Case Study Safari Live
150203982
15
4.2.1.1 Rationale behind Corridor Surveillance (Figure 4C, p.19)
4.2.1.1-A It has been emphasised that the nature of environmental conflict must be viewed on a large scale to establish the consequential implications for sustainability (Betsill and Bulkeley,2005). Doing this aids the Strategy: for example, the African lion is decreasing both locally and globally, but in the park, the number is increasing, making NNP a valued conservatory. 4.2.1.1-B Surveillance cameras more easily detect Large Species and thus, the suggestions made will impact them most. For predatory species, their change in movement and behaviour can be indicative of the prey they hunt, which may not be capture on camera (Railway Ecology, 2018). Of the listed animals below there is enough available data on the movement of the Black Rhino, African Lion and Maasai Giraffe for making suggestions
Figure 4B Large Mammals of Cultural significance Conservation Status: Global, Local and Park Comparison Adapted from: IUCN Red List, Wildlife Act, and National Wildlife Conservation Status Report
150203982
16
4.2.1.2 Rationale behind Education and Film (Figure 4D, p.20) 4.2.1.2-A Monitoring of the large mammals shows the frequency of crossing in the area before the SGR was built. This information is essential for developing effective corridor solutions in relation to the habitats and systems (Selman, 2012,p.87). After corridors are established, and monitoring methods are suggested, engagement methods must be preserved. 4.2.1.1-B The example of Safari Live, an expert hosted live safari, is broadcast directly from the African wilderness into homes. The Maasai Mara reserve in Kenya has been featured; however, NNP has not. This is primarily because the safariLIVE is founded in South Africa. Filming revenue (virtual expeditions and YouTube) has allowed for more suitable surveillance in the parks that cover long ranges and can be attached to vegetation, and additionally, it has brought employment and research opportunities.
Black Rhinoceros Movement and Frequency (Kenya Railway Corporation, 2016, p.87)
Filming allows for interaction with Parks from global home scale (safariLIVE, 2019)
African Lion Movement and Frequency (Kenya Railway Corporation, 2016, p.86)
Maasai Giraffe Movement and Frequency (Kenya Railway Corporation, 2016, p.86)
150203982
17
Figure 4C Corridor Surveillance, Adopted from Google 2020
150203982
18
Figure 4D Education and Film, Adopted from Google 2020
150203982
19
4.2.2 Step 1: Expansion of sanctuary to allow for tree nurseries Step 2: Visitor experience enhancement: volunteering opportunities for tree planting Step 3: To plant trees along SGR areas to blend with the environment and minimise visual impact
150203982
20
4.2.2.1 Rationale behind Tree Planting & Sanctuary (Figure 4E, p.23) 4.2.2.1-A For the SGR to be developed, tree cover and significant vegetation species were directly destroyed without replacement. The need for replacement is accompanied by a need to plant trees along the SGR to fuse with the environment and minimise visual intrusion. It has been found that 25m–50m wide of deciduous and coniferous trees significantly reduce noise from railway lines, compared with open space covered with grass (Benson and Roe,2007, p.199). 4.2.2.1-B The Whistling Thorn Tree (Acacia drepanolobium) is a tree favourable to locals for its sustainable charcoal logging; it is also of nutritional value for feeding many of NNPs herbivores. Its height of 6m is enough to buffer perspectives views, while its dwarf nature and density means it does not choke animal movement. Its nativity to the park makes it a suitable replacement for the open grass. (Oduor, Ngugi, and Gathui, 2012, pp. 5-19)
Figure 4E Adopted from Kenya Railways Corporation 2016
Sanctuary
Map Position
Management
Sheldrick Wildlife Trust (SWT)
A
NNP Animal orphanage
B
Primarily SWT a private charity, with support of Kenya Wildlife Service & Kenya Forest Service Kenya Wildlife Service
Giraffe centre
C
African Fund for Endangered Wildlife
Function Protect the African Elephants, Rhinoceros (Black & White, Giraffes & their ecosystems across Kenya A wild animal treatment & rehabilitation centre; mostly rescues wild mammals & birds, but also reptiles. Educate and generate appreciation for wildlife and environment with opportunity for close contact with giraffes.
Statement Planted 65,962 trees in 2019 & established nurseries in other areas of Kenya, outside NNP An education centre promoting public engagement with wildlife(200,000 visitors a year). Limited to animals, there is scope for vegetation Inclusion of a tree nursery, beneficial to giraffe species, will enhance visitor experience, engagement, & education of wildlife
Table 4B Existing Location Options for Tree Nurseries
150203982
21
Figure 4F Tree Planting, Adopted from Google 2020
150203982
22
5) CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 POTENTIAL IMPACTS (Figure 5A, p.25) 5.11The expected impacts touched on for all three proposals (Corridor Surveillance, Tree planting, and Education and Film) are evaluated in terms of socio-cultural and environmental standing. All proposals are expected to have beneficial impacts however, some potential adverse effects must be considered and evaluated in terms of potential mitigations schemes. 5.12Of all proposals corridor surveillance is the least intrusive as it already builds on the existing intrusive infrastructure, the SGR. Environmental concern is also minimal, however socially pastoralists living and grazing by the southern boundary of NNP may be affected in terms of privacy. This may be made more intrusive with the proposition of education and filming. Thus it is important to establish early communication and consent with sensitive groups, and continuously hold consultations. 5.13Education and filming proposal pose more environmental concern due to the potential of vehicles causing disturbances in animal behaviour. To reduce the effects of vehicle traffic, filming should occur when the park is closed to visitors, between 1700hrs and 0600hrs. Despite such effects, the education and filming proposition should strongly be considered as it brings several new benefits to NNP. For example, currently, the Coronavirus disease 2019 Virus has significantly reduced the number of visits NNP receives (Roussi, 2020); this proposal would directly respond to this issue by globally enabling visits through streaming and online expeditions. Thus, filming would not only reinstate the value of NNP as a unique ecosystem but increase opportunities for research and revenue. 5.14Tree planting as a proposal is highly socially beneficial; granting benefits for both pastoralists who use the whistling thorn tree for firewood, and further collaborative partnerships between KWS and various groups. Environmentally the SGR would directly be mitigated in terms of noise reduction and visual intrusion. The major challenge tree planting faces is from climate change; there is a need to manage the threat of bush fires that increased temperatures bring, thus, land assessments should be done to evaluate the spread of suitable tree densities to effectively reduce risk of fast-spreading fires.
5.2 FUNDING AND STAKEHOLDERS (FIGURE 5B, p.26) 5.21This strategy considers grants, direct revenue, equity, loans and voluntary donations as funding streams, detailed in Figure 5B. Due to the scale and significance of the proposal, application for start-up grants, from partnering organisations of KWS are suggested. This can then enable activity such as education for tree planting and competitions, and in longer term television filming revenue. With education as significant driver, besides wildlife organisations, target groups include catchment educational institutions.
5.3 IMPLIMENTATION TIMESCALE (FIGURE 5C, p.27) 5.31The proposals are expected to work in interlocking stages with the bulk of corridor surveillance occurring first, followed by activities of tree planting which will then pave opportunity and demand for education and film. Key processes of the future considerations within this timeline have been marked distinctively in black in Figure 5C in consideration of stakeholders and the proposal effects. 150203982
23
Figure 5A Potential Impacts, Adopted from Google 2020
150203982
24
Figure 5B Funding Strategy
150203982
25
Figure 5C Strategic Timeline
150203982
26
APPENDICES APPENDIX 1: General Methodology (Liquete et al., 2015)
APPENDIX 2: Guide for developing a progressive development network (Selman, 2012, p.87)
150203982
27
BIBLIOGRAPHY 2018. Guidelines For The Conservation Of Lions In Africa. [ebook] Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals, p.50. Available at: <https://www.cms.int/sites/default/files/publication/GCLA%20%20181220%20%28E%29_0.pdf> [Accessed 25 April 2020]. Ambani, M. M. (2017). GIS Assessment of environmental footprints of the standard gauge railway (SGR) on Nairobi National Park, Kenya (Doctoral dissertation). Benson, John F. & Roe, M. H. (eds)(2007) Landscape and Sustainability (Routledge). Berg, D., 2018. Give Me My Bottle!. [image] Available at: <https://www.flickr.com/photos/darrenberg/42506517690/> [Accessed 24 April 2020]. Betsill, M. and, Bulkeley, H. (2005) Cities and Climate Change: Urban Sustainability and Global Environmental Governance (Routledge Studies in Physical Geography & Environment). Bitran, R., 2013. Tawny-Flanked Prinia (Prinia Subflava) Nairobi National Park, Kenya 2013. [image] Available at: <https://www.flickr.com/photos/bitranbirdsoftheworld/34602517305/> [Accessed 9 March 2020]. Borda-de-Água, L., Barrientos, M., Beja, P., and Pereira, H. M. (2017) Railway Ecology. Springer. Brody, A. K., Palmer, T. M., Fox-Dobbs, K., and Doak, D. F. (2010). Termites, vertebrate herbivores, and the fruiting success of Acacia drepanolobium. Ecology, 91(2), pp.399-407. Chongwa, M. B. (2012, January). The history and evolution of national parks in Kenya. In The George Wright Forum (Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 39-42). George Wright Society. Des Souza, 2016. An Amazing View Spoilt By An Unnecessary Railway At The Nairobi National Park Kenya. [image] Available at: <https://www.flickr.com/photos/139651897@N05/44200674295/> [Accessed 9 March 2020]. Flickr, 2016. Nairobi. [image] Available at: <https://www.flickr.com/photos/sterminator/27354477702/> [Accessed 9 March 2020]. Gichohi, H W. 2003. “Direct Payments as a mechanism for conserving important widlife corridor links between Nairobi National Park and its wider Ecosystem: The Wildlife Lease Program.”. Gredler, V., 2017. Upperhill From Nairobi National Park. [image] Available at: <https://www.flickr.com/photos/145233855@N03/37298597776/> [Accessed 9 March 2020]. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. 2020. The IUCN Red List Of Threatened Species. [online] Available at: <https://www.iucnredlist.org/> [Accessed 24 April 2020]. IUCN, S. (2006). Cat Specialist Group. Conservation strategy for the lion (Panthera leo) in Eastern and Southern Africa. Jackson, S.D. (2000). Overview of Transportation Impacts on Wildlife Movement and Populations. pp. 7-20 In Messmer, T.A. and B. West, (eds) Wildlife and Highways: Seeking Solutions to an Ecological and Socioeconomic Dilemma. The Wildlife Society. Kenya Railways Corporation, 2016. PROPOSED STANDARD GAUGE RAILWAY PROJECT FROM NAIROBI SOUTH RAILWAY STATION-NAIVASHA INDUSTRIAL PARK-ENOOSUPUKIA, NAROK. ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSME2NT (ESIA) STUDY. Nairobi: Kenya Railways Corporation, China Communications Construction Company Ltd, Habitat Planners, pp.51, 54, 58, 65, 238-239. 150203982
28
Kenya Wildlife Service, 2017. Conservation and Management Strategy for Lion and Spotted Hyena in Kenya.pdf. [online] Nairobi: Kenya Wildlife Service. Available at: <http://www.kws.go.ke/file/1399/download?token=BqXeOBGZ> [Accessed 25 April 2020]. Kenya Wildlife Service, 2017. KENYA BLACK RHINO ACTION PLAN (2017-2021) Sixth Edition. KENYA BLACK RHINO ACTION PLAN. [online] Nairobi: Kenya Wildlife Service. Available at: <http://www.kws.go.ke/file/2834/download?token=w8LWwNyK> [Accessed 25 April 2020]. Kenya Wildlife Service, n.d. Nairobi National Park Draft Management Plan, 2020-2030. Liquete, C., Kleeschulte, S., Dige, G., Maes, J., Grizzetti, B., Olah, B., and Zulian, G. (2015). Mapping green infrastructure based on ecosystem services and ecological networks: A PanEuropean case study. Environmental Science & Policy, 54, pp.268-280. Litoroh, M., Omondi, P., Kock, R., and Amin, R. (2012). Conservation and management strategy for the elephant in Kenya. Kenya Wildlife Service, Nairobi. Lusigi, W. J. (1978). Planning human activities on protected natural ecosystems. The conservation unit approach to the planning and management of national parks. Marchant, R., 2019. Showing The New Controversial SGR Railway Which Cuts Through The National Park.. [image] Available at: <https://www.flickr.com/photos/157321343@N05/48846478388/> [Accessed 9 March 2020]. Mbatia, T. THE PROTECTION AND MANAGEMENT OF NAIROBI NATIONAL PARK. Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources, 2017. WILDLIFE MIGRATORY CORRIDORS AND DISPERSAL AREAS Kenya Rangelands And Coastal Terrestrial Ecosystems. Nairobi: Government of the Republic of Kenya, pp.122-123, 139. Ministry of Environment, Water and Natural Resources, 2013. National Environment Policy. Nairobi: Government of Kenya, p.54. Ministry of Forestry and Wildlife, 2011. Draft Wildlife Policy. Government of Kenya, p.20. Ministry of Tourism and Wildlife, 2017. THE NATIONAL WILDLIFE CONSERVATION STATUS REPORT. Nairobi: Government of Kenya, p.145. Missouri Botanical Garden, 2006. Closeup Of Lenin Festo Preparing Specimen Of Acacia Drepanolobium.. [image] Available at: <http://www.mobot.org/MOBOT/Research/tanzania/tanzaniaimages.shtml> [Accessed 27 April 2020]. Monique, P., 2015. Savanna. [image] Available at: <https://www.thinglink.com/scene/688852064960249857> [Accessed 27 April 2020]. Mutu, K., 2019. 20190114_001. [image] Available at: <https://www.flickr.com/photos/kamweti/40421720793/> [Accessed 9 March 2020]. Mutu, K., 2019. 20190114_010. [image] Available at: <https://www.flickr.com/photos/kamweti/40421719733/> [Accessed 9 March 2020]. Ochungo, E. A., and Odira, W. O. The inaudible voice from wildlife habitat: the case of interaction between; wildlife, ecosystem and infrastructure development in Kenya. Oduor, N. M., Ngugi, W., and wa Gathui, T. (2012). Sustainable tree management for charcoal production Acacia species in Kenya.
150203982
29
Roussi, A., 2020. Poaching Fears Rise After Coronavirus Empties Kenya’S National Parks. [online] Ft.com. Available at: <https://www.ft.com/content/2fe7e457-049f-42e6-aa19-42c31156868b> [Accessed 4 May 2020]. Selman, P. (2012) Sustainable Landscape Planning, The reconnection agenda (Earthscan/Routledge). Selman, P. (2006) Planning at the Landscape Scale (London: Routledge). Shah, K., 2018. An Amazing View Spoilt By An Unnecessary Railway At The Nairobi National Park Kenya. [image] Available at: <https://www.flickr.com/photos/139651897@N05/44200674295/> [Accessed 9 March 2020]. Sheldrick Wildlife Trust. 2020. Global Challenges Facing Wildlife | Sheldrick Wildlife Trust. [online] Available at: <http://www.sheldrickwildlifetrust.org/about/challenges> [Accessed 23 April 2020]. Steiner, F (1991) The Living Landscape: An Ecological approach to Landscape Planning (New York McGraw Hill). Steinitz, C. (2012) A Framework for Geodesign: Changing Geography by Design (ESRI Press). The Director of Surveys, 1913. Mombasa-Victoria (Uganda) Railway and Busoga Railway, Nairobi Government Printers, BEA (1913). Unesco.org. 2020. Biodiversity Society Culture And Ethics | United Nations Educational, Scientific And Cultural Organization. [online] Available at: <http://www.unesco.org/new/en/naturalsciences/special-themes/biodiversity/biodiversity-culture/> [Accessed 1 May 2020]. WildEarth. 2019. Safarilive. [online] Available at: <https://wildearth.tv/safarilive/> [Accessed 27 April 2020]. Wildlife (Conservation and Management) Act. 2013.
150203982
30