Tana Delta Irrigation Project, Kenya: An Environmental Assessment

REHABILITATION OF THE 

TANA DELTA IRRIGATION PROJECT 

KENYA 

AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 

WRITTEN BY 

QUENTIN LUKE 

NATIONAL MUSEUMS OF KENYA 

RICHARD HATFIELD 

AFRICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION 

PAMELA CUNNEYWORTH 

WAKULUZU: FRIENDS OF THE COLOBUS TRUST LTD. 

JULY 2005 

FUNDED BY

Rehabilitation of the Tana Delta Irrigation Project, Kenya: An Environmental Assessment. 

ii


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

To be successful, conservation investments must consider the natural resource base, traditional cultures, 

tenure of all resources, economic aspects, as well as the history of activities in the area. 

This environmental assessment strives to address all these aspects in equal regard in order to provide 

recommendations to the Tana and Athi River Development Authority (TARDA), the Japanese Bank for 

International Cooperation (JBIC), communities reliant upon the Lower Tana Forests and other relevant 

stakeholders. These findings will help ensure that any re-establishment of the Tana Delta Irrigation Project 

(TDIP) will have positive impacts on sustainable community livelihoods, long-term conservation of the 

forests, and the survival of the two Critically Endangered primates, the Tana River red colobus Procolobus 

rufomitratus and Tana River mangabey Cercocebus galeritus, flagships for all the threatened species that 

rely on these forests. 

These recommendations are made on the basis of three independent, but intrinsically linked, studies: 

• Socio-economic study 

• Botanical/Ecological study 

• Census of the Tana River red colobus and Tana River mangabey 

The three studies presented in this report represent the current state of the area for the proposed 

rehabilitation of TDIP (established in 1986) that was severely damaged by the floods associated with the El 

Nino in 1997/1998. The history and details of this development are available elsewhere and need not be 

reiterated here. 

Each of above studies stands alone as an independent statement of the current status of the specific sector. 

However, there are several concurrent themes in each of the studies that form the basis of this executive 

summary. 

These recommendations present a once off opportunity in re-establishing the TDIP that, if combined, will: 

• Alleviate poverty amongst the local Pokomo and Orma tribes, as well as other pastoral groups that 

seasonally rely upon this area and; 

• Expand forest cover and forest health and, ultimately, improve the long-term conservation of the two 

species of threatened primates. 

This is a rare opportunity that combines development investment with conservation priorities to 

repair the environmental damage and negative community attitudes in a critical area of Kenya. 

To achieve these goals will require a long-term and creative approach. Commitments by all stakeholders’ to 

any new approach needs to be honoured in a timely fashion. 

The conclusions and recommendations from the three studies are as follows: 

Socio-economic Study 

Significant levels of poverty and vulnerability characterise the Pokomo agricultural and the Orma or Wardey 

pastoralist communities associated with the Lower Tana River. The greatest constraint to their livelihoods 

stated by the communities was the low and highly seasonal rainfall. The communities believe that the 

irrigation rice scheme holds the potential to contribute significantly to improvement of their lives by allowing 

dry season production of crops, at little cost to the TDIP. However, the historic relationship between TARDA 

and the communities is characterised by mistrust and bad feeling. 

These communities identified (1) that there are three types of woodlands integral to their livelihoods, and (2) 

express the desire for the forests to be conserved, rehabilitated, and expanded. The three forest types are: 

• Riverine forests adjacent to the river course; 

• Floodplain forests (‘madzini’) a short distance from the river course and of greatest importance to the 

local communities; 

• Thicket woodlands (‘gubani’) on dryer areas away from the flood plain. 

This environmental assessment focuses on the riverine and floodplain forests. 

iii

The major perceived causes of forest decline include: 


• Increased community demand; 

• Lack of seasonal flooding due to the change in the course and flooding regime of the Tana River and 

• Poor enforcement of use regulations. 

Communities believe the most effective solutions for forest conservation lie in increased community 

management allied to appropriate technical assistance. 

The ‘headline’ recommendations are that: 

• The proposed rehabilitation should attempt to redress the TDIP communities’ state of livelihood 

vulnerability and lack of development options, which will also serve to reduce pressure on the 

declining natural resource base. 

• Appropriate design and implementation must engage the communities as partners, and be 

characterised by information sharing, consultation and collaboration. 

• Participatory forest management (PFM) be piloted and based on the twin goals of indigenous forest 

conservation, and forest expansion (both indigenous and exotic). 

• Community-related interventions – whether concerning forest or livelihoods – are implemented 

through mutually agreed agencies and processes. 

Botanical/Ecological Study 

The forests of the Lower Tana River are of great importance for the conservation of biodiversity for there are 

many species of plants and animals that are dependant upon these forests, including several endemic, 

threatened species. This study has identified 320 plant taxa in the area; 58 of them tree species, of which 

two can be considered Critically Endangered in a global sense. Twenty one per cent of the plants are of 

conservation concern. All of these threatened species need to be taken into account in designing the 

programme to re-establish that Irrigation Scheme. 

The most significant find is that the forest cover has declined by 37% over 10 years with a related reduction 

in the quality of the cover. Past interventions have aggravated the situation by the introduction of invasive 

plants and the exacerbation of community differences and conflict. 

The impact on these critically important forests of the Lower Tana River has been devastating; both by the El 

Nino weather event of 1997/8 and the increasing human pressure. The latter is due directly to the lack of 

livelihood alternatives as promised at the inception of this donor funded Tana Delta Irrigation Scheme. 

Assessment of the current size, composition, health and conservation status of these forest fragments shows 

an urgent need for bold and innovative intervention if the habitat of two of the world’s most threatened 

primates, and the livelihoods of the local communities, are to be protected and improved. 

Opportunities for practical actions to achieve positive change both in primate habitat and in the lives of the 

local people are many. These include: an increase in environmental awareness; the full involvement of the 

people in participatory forest management (PFM) and design; the immediate start of nurseries for selected 

indigenous and exotic species; the linking of existing forests by corridors; the establishment of woodlots; and 

the initiation of simple, effective community income generating ventures. 

Primate Study 

The most fundamental finding of the primate study is a decrease from the 2001 group numbers for both the 

red colobus and mangabeys, as well as changes in distribution of these primates in the forests of the survey 

area. 

The total number of red colobus has declined significantly from the 1994 census, decreasing from 260 to 

127. Mangabey individuals have stayed stable (144 in 1994, >149 in 2005). 

This study found approximately 20 groups of red colobus in 11 forests (46 per cent of the forests surveyed) 

and 14 groups of mangabey in nine forests (38 per cent of forests surveyed). As illustrated in the table 

below, there is a direct relationship between the size of the forest and the number of primate groups present. 

Red colobus were observed in varying forest sizes while mangabeys appear to have favoured the larger 

forests, as they were found only in the six largest forest blocks censuses and two small isolated patches. 

Forests with one or more groups of red colobus and mangabey 

iv


Forest Name Forest # 

1994 

(ha) 

Area of forest 

2001 

(ha) 

2005 

(ha) 

Number of red 

colobus 

groups 

v 

Number of 

Mangabey 

groups 

Human 

Activity 

2004 

Hewani West 1 58 34 65.7 20.83 7 3Clearing 

Hewani East 2 60 2 4.2 1.9 2 0Moderate 

Hewani South 2 64 124 116.4 48.51 1 4 

Wema West 3 55 13 45.1 16.86 1 0Light 

Lango La Simba 67 15 79.2 9.88 1 0 

Kulesa West 1 49 1 11.1 3.76 1 0 

Hewani East 1 59 3 11.4 1.57 1 0Clearing 

Bvumbwe North 65 53 136.5 46.16 0 1 

Wema East 4 68 63 63.2 43.14 0 1Clearing 

Kulesa East 1 48a 30 19.3 30.4 0 1 

Sailoni 1 46 5 12.5 2.83 0 1 

Mitapani 1 69 3 27 1.15 0 1Light 

There are two subpopulations of red colobus in the study area; a small subpopulation in the northern part of 

the TARDA managed area and a larger subpopulation centred on the Hewani West 1 Forest (58). Many of 

these forests important to these two species of primates are also cited in the socio-economic study as 

providing important resources for the local communities. 

Forest Hewani West 1 (58) and Hewani South 2 (64) are important for mangabeys as they are the only 

forests with more than one troop (three and four respectively), only #58 had significant troop numbers of both 

mangabeys and colobus making it the most crucial forest in terms of requirements for conservation. 

The primate study recommends that: 

• Assessments should be made on the two groups of colobus in the northern section of the census 

area to determine their long term survival risk and to review potential management strategies to 

incorporate them into the main population area depending on appropriate available forest habitat. 

• An assessment should be made to establish the suitability of erecting colobridges between isolated 

trees, forest patches and over the Main Canal, the Tana River and Main Access Roads to allow 

movement between forest fragments and across barriers. 

Overall Recommendations 

There is no one simple and immediate solution to the conservation of the forests and species of the Lower 

Tana River. The recommendations described below, if applied in a cautious and sustained approach over 

many years, may contribute to alleviating poverty, and to improving the forest health and forest cover to 

ensure the long-term survival of the Critically Endangered primates. They may also create opportunities for 

alternative livelihoods. 

In order to overcome the current situation: all actors; especially the local communities involved in 

development, humanitarian and conservation initiatives along the Lower Tana need to work together. Their 

activities, whilst distinct, must complement each other so that the overall impact is greater than the sum of 

the individual actions. 

There is an urgent need to develop a concerted effort to alleviate the current levels of poverty that ultimately 

threatens the remaining forest fragments. 

There are several proposed creative solutions proposed which need acceptance by the local communities if 

they are to be regarded as viable opportunities that satisfy both community livelihood aspects and the habitat 

needs of the primates. 

Raising awareness 

There is paucity of understanding and awareness of the importance of the forests, their functions and 

benefits to the local communities, as well as to the conservation the threatened primates. 

As a first step in building trust between the communities and other organisations, a programme of 

environmental awareness needs to be established that serves as a means to introduce subsequent stages of


the rehabilitation project. There are a number of village-based committees that would serve as an 

appropriate entry point into the community. Ultimately, it is envisaged that these committees would be 

involved in reforestation activities and act as village scouts to protect the newly planted seedlings. 

Priority sites 

The three studies identify several forests that are vital both to the local communities for their livelihoods and 

also to the red colobus and mangabey. These forests should be targeted for reforestation efforts. This 

would serve to increase the much needed forest resources, improve the connectivity of the forests, and 

expand the habitat available to the primates and hundreds of other forest-dependant species. There are two 

main aspects to achieve this. 

Riverine forests 

It is vital to restore the riverine forests along both sides the Tana River course to a distance of 30 

meters. The benefits of this are manifold including (but are not limited to) stabilising the riverbank, 

providing many of the forest products used by the communities, and increasing connectivity the 

preferred habitat of the primates. In so doing, the tree planting should encompass all of the Hewani 

West 1 Forest (58) to allow for easier movement of colobus and mangabeys between this important 

forest and other fragments, and to expand the forest habitat available to both species. 

An immediate step to reforest this strip could be achieved by planting pole-sized fig cuttings of Ficus 

sycomorus as a pioneer species. This will encourage other forest tress species to regenerate. 

These forests could also be enriched with mango trees to provide as additional source of fruit. 

Floodplain ‘madzini’ forests 

These floodplain or ‘madzini’ forests were acknowledged by the communities as the primary source 

many for their basic needs including; medicinal products, building materials and fuel wood. The 

socio-economic study also highlighted the fact that these forests have declined significantly and that 

communities would consider replanting programmes to expand the forest area. Specific 

recommendations include. 

• Expand the area of natural forest through planting indigenous trees. 

• In forest blocks used extensively by communities, planting important species around the 

periphery should reinforce the remaining forest. 

• Expand the forest habitat by linking the following forest fragments to create three corridors, 

each of which is linked to the riverine corridor. 

• Kulesa East (48) and Bvumbwe North (65). 

• Bvumbwe South (66) Wema East 4 (68), Wema East 1 (56) and Wema East 2 (d) 

(57). 

• Lango La Simba (67), Hewani South 1 (63) and Hewani South 2 (64). 

• Conduct enrichment planting of important medicinal and primate food plant species in 

existing forest fragments. 

• Create new floodplain forest through tree planting and irrigating polders. This will increase 

the diversity of habitat types available. 

• Establish community-managed woodlots of both exotic fast growing and indigenous trees. 

• Explore the potential of planting Jatropha curcas and other species to produce biodiesel. 

• Include fruit trees in the mosaic so that the fruits can be consumed locally as well as sold in 

local markets. Communities should also engage in activities to preserve the fruit (drying and 

juicing fruit). 

As can be seen from the map (Figure 1) that was produced as part of the botanical assessment, 

implementing these recommendations will dramatically transform the area of forest cover. 

Compromises will have to be negotiated both with the communities and with TARDA. 

Ethnobotanical survey of important species 

It is clear from the socio-economic study that medicinal plants were some of the most important forest 

resources, however, the species harvested have yet to be described. An ethnobotanical survey identifying 

the most important species should be undertaken to ensure that these are planted as part of the reforestation 

scheme. 

Diversifying livelihoods 

vi


Poverty is recognised as being directly responsible for environmental degradation and this is clearly 

demonstrated in the Lower Tana Forests. Most households exist in an extremely precarious state. 

Households are unable to meet their own subsistence requirements, especially during exceptionally wet 

years and during exceptionally long dry seasons, and consequently rely heavily on forest products during 

these times. This situation has been exacerbated by a shift, caused by a natural change in the Tana River’s 

course, from traditional land-use practices, in tune with the seasonal inundation of the floodplains, to the 

current and unstable system of rain fed crops. 

The irrigation scheme provides an opportunity to produce food crops other than rice and maize. This would 

have the added advantage of not only improving the health of the local populations but also create a local 

economy through selling excess produce in markets, especially supplying vegetables throughout the dry 

season. 

Methods aimed at reducing the waste from harvests, especially mangos, needs to be introduced. New 

markets and opportunities for novel products such as dried mango and other products that can be extracted 

locally need to be exploited. 

In addition, the promotion of other alternative nature-based livelihood activities should be investigated that 

would consolidate the relationship between the forests and livelihoods through the non-destructive use of the 

natural resource base. Examples of this include the introduction of modern bee-keeping techniques, 

harvesting wild silk (Gonometa sp) and natural products based upon neem and compounds from other plants 

that could be extracted locally. Alternative crops that would yield good harvests on a commercial scale 

under irrigation should also be investigated. 

Ensuring the long-term conservation of the primates 

The conservation status of the Tana River red colobus and mangabey is directly related to the extent of 

forest cover and overall health of the forests. Not surprisingly, the larger forests hold more groups of red 

colobus and mangabeys than the smaller forests. Whilst there are some similarities in the needs of both 

species, mangabeys are more tolerant of fragmented forests and able to move across the grasslands. 

The most important conservation intervention in the long run will be to increase the area of suitable forest 

available for the primates and in so doing, linking the existing remnants of forest. Artificial connections (i.e. 

colobridges) between forest patches may distribute pressure on individual forests until newly planted trees 

have matured sufficiently. 

Crop protection 

The socioeconomic study shows the need for both the Orma and Pokomo villagers to guard their fields from 

March through June. For the communities to have faith in the commitment of any development and 

conservation initiatives this problem needs to be addressed. 

Several primate pest management strategies have been developed by Colobus Trust that may be 

implemented as part of the actions to assist the communities in crop protection while maintaining local 

primate populations. 

Ecotourism opportunities 

Part of a long-term approach to securing community benefits from tourism would be to assess the market 

potential for ecotourism ventures. As the tourist destinations Lamu, Malindi and Watamu within a few hours 

drive, there may be commercial potential for tourists to visit the Lower Tana to view the red colobus and 

mangabeys, and other species of plants and animals, and learn about the natural history and traditional 

cultures of the area. 

Potential for carbon storage and trading 

Forests and high biomass landscapes represent a solid carbon store, reducing atmospheric greenhouse gas 

levels in the atmosphere, and mitigating climate change. Kenya's recent ratification of the Kyoto Protocol 

opens the door to trading carbon emission reduction credits (CERS) though the Clean Development Market 

and voluntary carbon markets. 

Glenday (2005) found that riverine forests adjacent to the Tana River have significantly greater carbon 

densities (250 metric tons carbon per hectare) than the nearby drier forest and woodlands (170 metric tons 

carbon per hectare). Thus improved forest management in the TDIP area has the potential to preserve 

existing terrestrial carbon stores and sequester added carbon dioxide. 

vii


Tree planting in open areas and maintaining forest along riverbanks are likely to produce the greatest carbon 

benefit per unit area. Reforesting the corridors proposed within TDIP (Figure 1) could store a total of 90-120 

thousand metric tons of carbon that could be traded. Most pertinent to this area is the possibility of obtaining 

saleable carbon emission reduction credits through a small-scale afforestation-reforestation project as part of 

community based initiatives. 

The Lower Tana River forests represent a rare and declining habitat that has been negatively affected by 

developments. If this trend continues unabated it will result in a significant increase in poverty levels of the 

local communities leading to further environmental degradation and the extinction of many species reliant on 

these forests - not just primates. 

viii


Figure 1. Recommendations for reforestation in the TDIP project 

area. 

(i) Planting a 30 meter strip of riverine forest along the Tana 

River and 

(ii) Increasing connectivity among the forest patches 

ix

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................III 

Botanical/Ecological Study............................................................................................iv 

SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT .......................................................................................3 

Summary ..........................................................................................................................4 

Introduction......................................................................................................................4 

Study Area Description ...................................................................................................5 

Methodology ....................................................................................................................5 

Results .............................................................................................................................6 

Community Livelihood Strategies..................................................................................6 

Basic demographics....................................................................................................6 

Occupational structure ................................................................................................6 

Seasonal Calendar......................................................................................................7 

Market Linkages and Investment Vehicles ..................................................................9 

Coping strategies ........................................................................................................9 

Livelihood Vulnerability and Constraints Assessment ..............................................10 

Vulnerability...............................................................................................................10 

Constraints to livelihoods and development ..............................................................12 

Implications & Conclusions .......................................................................................12 

Institutional Linkages....................................................................................................14 

Primary linkages........................................................................................................14 

Relationship with TARDA ..........................................................................................14 

Other institutional relationships .................................................................................15 

Implications & Conclusions .......................................................................................16 

Natural Resources: key resource patterns, changes & challenges...........................16 

Water ........................................................................................................................16 

Land..........................................................................................................................17 

Forests ......................................................................................................................17 

Table 10: Household forest costs, levels and trends..................................................20 

Conclusions...................................................................................................................24 

A. Livelihood strategies, vulnerability and constraints ...............................................24 

B. The forest resource..............................................................................................25 

C. Institutional linkages .............................................................................................26 

Recommendations ........................................................................................................26 

Acknowledgements.......................................................................................................27 

References .....................................................................................................................27 

BOTANICAL/ECOLOGICAL STUDY ....................................................................................31 

Summary ........................................................................................................................32 

Introduction....................................................................................................................32 

Methodology ..................................................................................................................32 

Results ...........................................................................................................................33 

Forest classification and affinities..............................................................................33 

Species diversity .......................................................................................................34 

Growth Forms ...........................................................................................................34 

Species of Conservation Concern .............................................................................34 

Exotics ......................................................................................................................35 

Utilisation ..................................................................................................................35 

Woodlots ...................................................................................................................36 

Carbon Study ............................................................................................................36 

Discussion .....................................................................................................................36 


Awareness ................................................................................................................40 

Nurseries...................................................................................................................40 

1


Exotic and Invasive species ......................................................................................42 

Strengthen/establish Village Environment Committees .............................................42 

Village Guards/Wardens ...........................................................................................42 

Riverbank Strip Forest Development.........................................................................42 

East/West Connections .............................................................................................43 

Woodlots - Flood irrigation ........................................................................................43 

Buffer zones..............................................................................................................43 

Recovery Programme Redlisted Species ..................................................................43 

Baboon control ..........................................................................................................43 

Pastoralists................................................................................................................44 

Community Development Projects – Income Generation ..........................................44 

Tourism .....................................................................................................................44 

Mangos .....................................................................................................................44 

Acknowledgements.......................................................................................................44 

References .....................................................................................................................44 

CENSUS OF THE TANA RIVER RED COLOBUS (PROCOLOBUS RUFOMITRATUS) AND 

TANA RIVER CRESTED MANGABEY (CERCOCEBUS GALERITUS): ..............................87 

Summary ........................................................................................................................88 

Introduction....................................................................................................................88 

Methodology ..................................................................................................................88 

GIS Mapping...................................................................................................................89 

Forests Surveyed Map ..............................................................................................89 

Transects Map ..........................................................................................................90 

Troop Locations Map.................................................................................................90 

Tana River Red Colobus Map ...................................................................................90 

Tana River Crested Mangabey Map..........................................................................90 

Results ...........................................................................................................................90 

Forest Size and Location...........................................................................................90 

Spatial Distribution ....................................................................................................91 

Temporal Trends.......................................................................................................92 

Status and Distribution of Sykes Monkeys and Yellow Baboons ...............................99 


Forest Reference Chart ...............................................................................................100 

Field Team Members ...................................................................................................101 

Acknowledgements.....................................................................................................101 

References ...................................................................................................................102 

Consultants’ contacts .................................................................................................103 

Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund ........................................................................104 

2


SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT 

By 

Richard Hatfield 

3


SUMMARY 

Following extensive damage resulting from the 1997 El Nino rains, it has been proposed that 

Polder 1 of the Tana Delta Irrigation Project (TDIP) be rehabilitated. In relation to the socioeconomic 

context dynamics, pertinent conclusions and recommendations relevant to the 

future of proposed rehabilitation of the rice irrigation scheme (TDIP) are summarised in 

Section 6 of this report. The ‘headline’ conclusions are: 

• Communities acknowledge the importance of the forest patches to their livelihoods – 

particularly for coping mechanisms during the long, dry season, and express the desire 

for the forests to be conserved - and even expanded. 

• Communities acknowledge the decline of forest patches. The major perceived causes of 

forest decline include (i) increased community demand (ii) lack of seasonal flooding due 

to the change in the course of the Tana River (iii) poor enforcement of use regulations 

• Communities believe the most effective solutions for forest conservation lie in increased 

community management; allied to appropriate technical assistance. 

• Significant levels of both poverty and vulnerability characterize the TDIP-associated 

communities, with the greatest constraint being lack of rainfall. At the same time, the 

irrigated rice scheme – if targeted correctly - holds the potential to contribute significantly 

to livelihood improvement and, by extension, more sustainable use of forest patches, at 

relatively low cost to the project. 

• However, the relationship between TARDA and the communities is characterised by 

mistrust and bad feeling, due to historical factors. 

The ‘headline’ recommendations are that: 

1. Participatory forest management (PFM) be piloted, based on twin goals of indigenous 

forest conservation and forest expansion (both indigenous and exotic) 

2. The proposed rehabilitation should attempt to redress the TDIP communities’ livelihood 

vulnerability and lack of development options, through which will also serve to reduce 

pressure on the declining natural resource base. 

3. In order for sustainable outcomes to be achieved, appropriate design and implementation 

must necessarily engage the communities as partners, and be characterised by 

information sharing, consultation and collaboration. 

4. Community-related interventions – whether concerning forest or livelihoods – are 

implemented through mutually agreed, third party agencies rather than through the 

TDIP managing body, TARDA. 

INTRODUCTION 

The study terms of reference (see Annex 1) with respect to the socio-economic aspect of the 

TDIP rehabilitation in broad terms involve rapid assessment of the socio-economic context; 

forest resource use; and the interaction between the two; specifically: 

• Description of community livelihood strategies 

• Assessment of reliance of livelihoods on the natural resource base 

• Identification and analysis of key natural resources: use, access, attitudes, behaviour 

• Assessment of constraints to community livelihoods 

The expectation was that the results would lead to the identification of and recommendations 

for opportunities to mitigate threats to the forests, in an economically viable and socially 

acceptable manner. 

This approach is broadly based on the Sustainable Livelihood Assessment framework 

developed by IDS (Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex, UK) and adopted 

by DFID (Department for International Development, UK) - an approach increasingly 

recognised as an sector standard for assessing socio-economic real or potential intervention 

impacts. The central premise behind the approach is that any intervention – conservationrelated 

or otherwise – must be considered in the context of livelihood dynamics in order to 

arrive at meaningful conclusions and/or design. 

4


Further background complimentary to this report can be found in a number of other reports 

commissioned by TARDA (the Tana and Athi River Development Authority) 1 . 

STUDY AREA DESCRIPTION 

The study area involves the Polder 1 development of the TDIP (Tana Delta Irrigation Project), 

an approximately 2000 hectare area of fertile floodplain converted to commercial rice 

production from 1991-1999, with assistance from the Japanese Government and managed by 

TARDA (Tana and Athi River Development Authority). The El Nino floods of 1997 

subsequently significantly decreased the size of the viable production area, with the 

rehabilitation of the original area now proposed. 

Six villages are commonly associated with the TDIP Polder 1 area, and are therefore 

considered to be legitimate stakeholders. Land falling with the traditionally-demarcated 

boundaries of three of these - Kulesa, Wema and Hewani – was incorporated into the project, 

whilst the other three villages – Bfumbwe, Sailoni and Baandi - border the project area, and 

have traditionally utilized ‘common property’ resources within the project area, and continue to 

do so - typically the floodplain forests, and available grazing areas. 

All the villages are inhabited by traditional Pokomo cultivators, with exception of Baandi, 

which is inhabited by traditional Orma pastoralists. Baandi has existed on a permanent basis 

in close proximity to Hewani village since 1988 after being forced to leave their previous 

permanent village, Gardeni – a few hundred metres further south – due to flooding as a result 

of government road construction of the nearby Malindi-Lamu highway. The Orma residents of 

Baandi distinguish themselves amongst pastoralists as being ‘permanent’ within the Tana 

River delta, as opposed to ‘nomadic’, as is characteristic of the majority of pastoralists using 

the delta for dry-season grazing– whether Orma, Wardey, or Somali. 

Other villages, both Pokomo cultivators and Orma or Wardey pastoralists, located further 

away from the project area have also traditionally used the project area; however, this study 

confines itself to the immediate six villages, and therefore does not consider the impact the 

outlying villages. During the course of the study, it was found that, according to the study 

villages, the “stake” in forest resources by outlying villages is not significant. However, this 

claim would require further validation in the event of any planned intervention impacting forest 

management. 

METHODOLOGY 

The socio-economic rapid assessment involved three methodology types: 

A. Household ‘occupational structure’ questionnaire survey. Key informants from each 

village were asked to ascertain the distribution of each village’s population between what 

they perceived to be ‘poor’, ‘medium’ and ‘rich’ categories. A sample of 15 households 

per village was selected, stratified according to the relative size of the wealth categories 

for that village i.e. where a village contained 50% ‘poor’, 50% of households sampled 

(N=7) were ‘poor’. Key informants then completed an occupational/activity questionnaire 

for each selected household, in order to determine livelihood dependence. 

B. Household ‘vulnerability’ and ‘forest use’ questionnaire survey. 20 households were 

randomly sampled from each village, but stratified according to the same wealth category 

distribution as in (A) above. The survey focused on forest benefit- and cost-types; 

importance to the household; and perceived trends in demand and supply. 

1 A. ‘Analysis of the Situation on the Ground report 12-27 th September 1999’ - draft, TDEAP (Tana Delta 

Environmental Awareness Programme), Oct. 1999 

B. ‘Environmental Interface’, Chapter 14 Tana River Irrigation Project (Extension) Feasibility Study Vol. 11, 

August 1983 

C. ‘Environmental Study’, Annex 5 Tana Delta Irrigation Project Definitive Development Plan Vol. IV, year 

unknown. 

5


C. Village focal groups. Two focus group discussions were held in each village – one 

consisting of mixed age-and-gender ‘elders’; and one consisting of mixed gender youth. 

The discussions were structured around five topics: 

• Occupational structure, seasonal calendars (for men and women), and level of 

dependence on external inputs 

• Constraints to livelihoods and coping strategies 

• Institutional linkages, both external and internal, either positive or negative 

• Key resources, use patterns, issues and solutions 

• Attitudes towards and conflicts concerning natural resource conservation 

The purpose of the focus groups was two-fold: 

(a) To complement the surveys, in terms of reinforcement or contradiction of survey 

findings. 

(b) To understand the factors driving the current dynamics of community livelihoods 

and natural resource use. 

(c) To discuss possible management solutions. 

Tests of statistical significance have not been employed, due to the rapid and exploratory 

nature of the study, a priority that precluded incorporation of sufficiently large sample sets: in 

this regard, the study is more useful in setting up such studies. 

RESULTS 

Results are organised as follows: 

• Community Livelihood Strategies 

• Livelihood Vulnerability and Constraints 

• Institutional Linkages 

• Natural Resources: key resource patterns, dynamics and challenges 

Relevant background and specific methods are also provided under each component, where 

relevant. 

COMMUNITY LIVELIHOOD STRATEGIES 

Basic demographics 

Table 1 contains basic demographic data, illustrating village population and a sample average 

household size of 6.8 people, with 40% actively contributing to household livelihood, on 

average. 

Table 1: Demographic information on ‘TDIP villages’ 

Villages 

Estimated No. of 

households* 

Sample average household 

(HH) size (n=20) 

% active members in 

sampled HHs 

Bfumbwe 70 5.85 58 

Kulesa 120 7.35 48 

Sailoni 123 6.5 28 

Wema 210 7.9 46 

Hewani 150 6.1 34 

Baandi 200 7.5 23 

AVERAGE 145 6.8 40 

* estimates by key informants 

Occupational structure 

Table 2 illustrates activities (irrespective of significance level) engaged in by households, from 

the key informant questionnaire. The main result of interest is the percentage of households 

engaged in a particular activity. This shows a high reliance on natural resource based 

activities: farming (Pokomo) / livestock (Orma) (99%); fishing (48%); natural resource for 

home consumption (100%); and natural resources products – either as an input into 

livelihoods, or for sale (78%). 46% of households sampled were engaged in casual, as well 

as full-time employment, respectively (the role of TARDA/TDIP being significant, employing 

54% of those sampled in casual employment and 42% full-time). 

6


Table 2: Household occupational structure of TDIP villages (composition of activities) 

Sampled 

households 

(n=120) 

engaged 

in: 

Farm / 

livestock Fish 

Natural 

resource 

home 

use 

Natural 

resource 

products Business Artisan 

Casual 

labour Employed Other 

TOTAL: 

(%) 

119 

(99) 

58 

(48) 

120 

(100) 

94 

(78) 

22 

(18) 

32 

(27) 

55 

(46) 

54 

(46) 

45 

(37) 

Bfumbwe 20 13 20 17 4 11 8 13 13 

Kulesa 19 10 20 19 5 4 2 4 2 

Sailoni 20 19 20 20 2 2 1 3 10 

Wema 20 12 20 18 4 11 16 15 17 

Hewani 20 2 20 19 4 3 11 8 1 

Baandi 20 2 20 1 3 1 17 11 2 

Seasonal Calendar 

The following set of graphics illustrates type, importance and timing of specific tasks carried 

out by farming (Pokomo) and pastoralist (Orma) men and women, respectively – as 

elucidated by focal groups. They are largely self-explanatory, depicting organisation of 

Pokomo activities around the (double rainy season) farming calendar; and the dominance of 

livestock in Orma activities. Of particular note are: the amount of effort expended on crop 

protection (‘guarding’); and the incorporation of (limited, river bank) cultivation by Orma. 

7


Pokomo men - Seasonal activity 

Orma men - Seasonal calendar 

6 

5 

4 

3 

2 

1 

0 

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 

Honey 

Fishing 

Other 

Harvesting 

Weeding 

Guarding 

Planting 

Ploughing 

6 

5 

4 

3 

2 

1 

0 

Jan 

Feb 

Mar 

Apr 

May 

Jun 

Jul 

Aug 

Sep 

Oct 

Nov 

Dec 

Harvesting 

Fishing 

Planting 

Guarding 

Ploughing 

Livestock sales 

Milk herd 

Herding 

Herd Planning 

Pokomo women - Seasonal calendar 

Orma women - Seasonal Calendar 

7 

6 

5 

4 

3 

2 

1 

0 

Children 

Household 

Other 

Harvesting 

Weeding 

Guarding 

Planting 

Ploughing 

8 

7 

6 

5 

4 

3 

2 

1 

0 

Other 

Children 

Household 

Sheep/goats 

Milk sales 

Harvesting 

Weeding 

Guarding 

Planting 

Ploughing 



8


Market Linkages and Investment Vehicles 

External versus internal needs (determined from focal groups) are summarised as follows: 

Internal supply 

Tilled crops 

Fruit crops 

Fish 

Poultry 

Goats 

Cattle/sheep (Orma only) 

Honey 

Firewood 

Building materials/thatch/rope 

Limited charcoal 

Other wood-related raw materials 

Micro-finance (merry-go-round) 

External supply (cash market) 

Sugar / tea / rice 

Salt 

Cooking oil 

Posho mill 

Generator 

Diesel 

Kerosene 

Doctor/medicine 

Clothes 

School education 

Market/personal transport 

Corrugated iron (‘mabati’) 

Roof timbers 

Nails 

Mattresses 

Radio 

Bicycle 

* Malindi preferred due to lower prices, if the opportunity arises 

Market location 

Garsen* 

Garsen 

Garsen 

Malindi 

Malindi 

Garsen 

Garsen 

Garsen 

Garsen* 

Local 

Garsen 

Malindi 

Malindi 

Malindi 

Garsen 

Garsen* 

Garsen* 

The above chart shows a relatively limited reliance on outside supplies, limited to essential 

staples. This is largely a factor of distance combined with lack of transport. 

In addition, investment options are limited to: 

1. Livestock (Orma) 

2. Postbank savings (Garsen) – cheaper than conventional bank 

3. Village business e.g. food kiosk, hotel, posho mill (no outside business) 

Coping strategies 

The following two tables summarise focal group information concerning survival, or coping, 

mechanisms utilised by households during stress periods (which typically occur particularly in 

the long-dry season each year). Table 3 indicates mechanism types and importance, and 

includes perceived trend in availability/viability. Of note is that some 50% of mechanisms are 

seen to be in decline, with no alternative replacement. Table 4 summarises mechanism 

sources. The latter indicates that the forests play a vital role in coping strategies, followed by 

the Tana River and associated lakes. The dry land woodlands (‘Gubani’) beyond the 

floodplain area are also important (being the dominant source of building poles); whilst casual 

employment by TARDA is also an important coping mechanism (however, the value of the 

latter as a viable coping mechanism source has been severely compromised due to delayed 

(up to one year) and/or partial payment for labour carried out). 

9


Table 3: Household coping mechanisms during stress periods (income generators, 

unless otherwise stated). H=high reliance M=medium reliance L=low reliance 

Blank=no reliance 

Village 

Group/ 

Tribe 

Livestock** 

Share food* 

Fish** 

Water lilies* 

Building poles 

Firewood 

Charcoal 

burning 

Weaving mats 

Edible forest 

foods* 

Rope 

Honey** 

Casual labour 

(TARDA) 

Banana** 

Mango** 

Kulesa Pokomo L L M L L L L L L L 

Bfumbwe Pokomo H L H L L L L 

Sailoni Pokomo L M L L L L L M 

Wema Pokomo L L M L L L L L L L H 

Hewani Pokomo L L M L L L L L L 

Baandi Orma H M L L L L L 

Frequency 

1 1 5 3 6 6 6 6 4 3 3 6 1 

cited 

RESOURCE 

SUPPLY 

TREND 

* for home consumption 

** for both home consumption and sale 

Table 4: Summary of coping sources cited across villages: 

Activity Frequency cited % of options 

Forest products (‘Madzini’ or ‘floodplain’ forests) 23 51 

Lakes/river 7 16 

Forest products (‘Gubani’ or dry land forests/woodlands) 5 11 

Casual labour (TARDA) 5 11 

Agriculture 2 4 

Livestock (Orma) 1 2 

Relief food 1 2 

Share food 1 2 

LIVELIHOOD VULNERABILITY AND CONSTRAINTS ASSESSMENT 

Vulnerability 

Vulnerability can be assessed from three measures: 

1. Key informants assessment of distribution of population between wealth levels within 

each village (also used to stratify the household forest survey sample) 

2. A simple set of four standard vulnerability indicators, measured by the household survey: 

housing; food supply; income options; and capacity to school children 

3. Village focal group discussion results 

A. Key informant vulnerability results 

The distribution of village populations across three wealth categories – poor, medium, rich – 

was estimated by key informants from each village, as follows: 

Table 5: Distribution of village populations amongst wealth categories 

% Poor % Medium % Rich 

Bfumbwe 50 43 7 

Hewani 47 40 13 

Kulesa 75 21 4 

Sailoni 64 24 12 

Wema 71 24 5 

Baandi 60 30 10 

Average across villages 61 30 9 

10


B. Household survey vulnerability results 

In the household forest survey, households were ranked 1-4 for each vulnerability category 

(housing, food supply, income, education) according to the following classification: 

Vulnerability 

1 2 3 4 

category & rank: 

HOUSING Permanent house Mabati roofed 

house but not 

permanent house 

Thatched/patched 

roofed house 

Thatched/patched 

roofed and 

patched walls 

FOOD SUPPLY Produce enough 

food for the 

household from 

the farm 

Adequate food 

and reliable (but 

not significant) 

sources of 

income 

Struggles or 

cannot produce 

enough food from 

the land 

No land farmed 

INCOME 

SOURCES 

EDUCATION 

Regular access to 

significant cash 

income i.e. source 

of off-farm income 

Household can 

support children in 

primary & 

secondary 

schools 

Assets (farm 

land) is a more 

important source 

of livelihood than 

cash income 

All children will 

complete primary 

schools, with only 

some in 

secondary school 

Dependent on 

selling labour for 

food or cash 

Children will/have 

completed primary 

school only 

Dependent on 

selling labour for 

food or cash 

Children did 

not/will not 

complete primary 

school, or no 

children in primary 

school 

Table 6 summarises results by average score for each vulnerability category, where ‘1’ 

represents lowest vulnerability and ‘4’ represents highest vulnerability. The scores indicate 

that, on average, households live in non-permanent houses; struggle to produce sufficient 

food; are either reliant on the land for income, or on selling labour in the absence of a viable 

land base; and either have enrolled some of their children in secondary school, or not at all. 

Table 6: Average household vulnerability by village and basic indicator 

Housing Food supply Income source Education 

Bfumbwe 2.2 2.7 2.6 2.4 

Hewani 1.9 2.4 2.9 2.8 

Kulesa 1.9 1.9 2.1 2.3 

Sailoni 2.5 3.1 2.9 2.8 

Wema 2.6 2.2 2.8 2.2 

Baandi 1.5 2.5 2 2.1 

Average 2.1 2.4 2.6 2.5 

C. Village focal group vulnerability results 

A third measure of vulnerability was obtained from the elder focal groups, from which it was 

estimated that on average, in a normal year, 54% of the population suffers food shortage. In 

addition, in only two villages – Bfumbwe and Baandi – did a proportion of the population (40% 

and 30% respectively) produce surplus crops for sale over-and-above food needs. In 

Bfumbwe this is credited better farming methods; whilst Baandi’s surplus is represented by 

their livestock herds – their primary coping mechanism. 

11


Table 7: Focal group vulnerability indicators 

Indicator: Per cent 

population 

encountering 

food shortage 

in normal year 

Per cent 

population 

producing 

surplus 

crops for 

income 

Per cent 

enrolled in 

primary 

school 

Per cent 

enrolled in 

secondary 

school 

Per cent 

completing 

secondary 

school 

Bfumbwe 30 40 100 100 90 N/A 

Hewani 75 0 98 80 50 N/A 

Kulesa 80 0 100 50 30 N/A 

Sailoni 60 0 100 50 30 N/A 

Wema 50 0 100 90 60 15 

Baandi 30 30 60 30 30 N/A 

Average 54 12 93 67 48 

Per cent 

population 

externally 

employed 

Constraints to livelihoods and development 

Figure 1 below summarises constraints and barriers to development, as articulated by village 

focal groups. The central constraint identified by all villages is poverty. Further constraints 

are either depicted as contributors to - or ‘causes’ of - poverty (below), or ‘effects’ of poverty 

(above). 

The underlying causes can be divided into groupings (left to right): lack of cultivable land; low 

per-acre productivity; lack of infrastructure to access markets; and insecurity of land tenure as 

well as property. 

These result in a set of conditions that reinforce poverty: lack of adequate food supply; lack of 

income; 

lack of alternative income sources; and diminishing coping mechanisms; accompanied by a 

set of concomitant effects - indicated in the top part of the diagram - that tend to continue the 

cycle of poverty. 

Implications & Conclusions 

• The matrix of multiple underlying development challenges associated with subsistence 

farming results in a lack of community capacity to accumulate needed capital, in order to 

precipitate investment into strategies that break the cycle of poverty. 

• These underlying challenges are exacerbated by insecurity of land tenure; banditry; and 

loss of primary resource to TDIP. 

• It should be noted that the ‘problem tree’ diagram is also useful in identifying potentially 

effective development interventions: for example, it is interesting to note that if villages 

farmers were allowed to cultivate rice on their traditional land within the (improved) TDIP 

project area, selling to TDIP – as has been suggested in the past, and indeed expected by 

villages at the project’s inception (see Section 5.3.2) - the rehabilitation of the TDIP, 

directly and indirectly, has the potential to contribute positively towards diminishing all four 

basic causes of local poverty, as identified by communities, namely: 

o lack of cultivable land 

o low per-acre productivity 

o lack of infrastructure to access markets and 

o insecurity of land tenure, as well as insecurity of property 

12


Fig. 1: The problem tree: identified constraints to livelihood 

Lack of 

assets / 

capital 

Lack of 

education / 

training 

Poor 

productivity 

Hunger 

Ill health 

Rice paddy 

flooding by 

TDIP 

POVERTY 

Lack of adequate 

food supply 

Lack of 

income 

Lack of alternative 

income sources 

Diminished coping 

mechanisms 

Lack of surplus 

production 

Inability to 

access markets 

Lack of 

development 

Lack of 

cultivable 

land 

Low crop 

productivity 

Increased 

reliance on 

common 

Increased 

use of 

common 

b 

Population 

pressure 

Land 

annexed 

by TDIP 

Lack of 

storage 

Lack 

of 

market 

Lack of 

transport 

High crop 

loss to pests, 

ildlif 

Insufficient, 

unreliable 

rainfall 

Lack of 

seasonal 

flooding 

Lack of 

improved 

methods 

Lack of 

capital 

Insecurity 

banditry) 

Lack of 

land 

security 

Population 

pressure 

13

INSTITUTIONAL LINKAGES 

Primary linkages 

The following diagram summarizes village focal groups’ perception of existing linkages 

between their village and both internal and external institutions, in terms of: 

(a) closeness of institutional relationship with village (represented by distance from 

‘village’ below) 

(b) positive or negative relationship (positive to the left of village; negative to the right) 

(c) impact of institution on village welfare (represented by size of institution’s circle) 

Church 

groups 

Youth 

& 

women 

Village 

Comm 

ittees 

Village 

TARDA 

NGO 

s 

Provincial 

Administration 

POSITIVE IMPACT (yellow) NEGATIVE IMPACT (green) 

Note: lack of depiction equates to lack of existing relationship 

Relationship with TARDA 

As can be noted above, the dominating institutional relationship for villages is the proximal 

and negative impact of TARDA. Heated expressions concerning the negative impact of 

TARDA were encountered in every village, without exception, and in some cases threatened 

to derail focal group discussion. The negative impacts of TARDA fall into three general 

categories: 

1. Loss of resources to the TDIP. Effects include: 

• Loss of both use and ownership of prime agricultural land, villages’ central resource 

(subject of an unresolved court case brought against TARDA in 1994 by Hewani, 

Kulesa and Wema villages, the latest hearing/possible verdict being expected in 

February 2005). 

• Loss of prime dry-season grazing, a key component of pastoralist livelihood (Orma) 

• Increased illness and disease, especially malaria, due to TDIP rice-paddy flooding 

14


2. Non-delivery of promised benefits from TARDA/TDIP that constituted a commitment on 

TARDA’s part, in return for Hewani and Kulesa 2 agreeing to transfer (traditional) 

ownership of prime village land to the TDIP, principally: 

• Rice cultivation by the communities on the portion of village lands annexed by the 

project, accompanied by sale of rice to TARDA at a fair market price. The expected 

available area per household in Wema, for example, was 2 hectares. 

• Building of schools and clinics. 

• Building of a bridge over the Tana River connecting upper TDIP area (Sailoni) with 

Garsen town, to assist with transport and market access. 

• All-weather road connecting villages to main Malindi-Lamu highway, to assist with 

transport and market access. 

• 

3. Arrogant attitude of TARDA towards villages : 

• Whilst TARDA actions can and do impact negatively on village livelihoods, TARDA 

neither consults with villages before taking action, nor informs villages when/after 

taking action. 

• TARDA does not pay casual workers in a timely manner, or always in cash as 

agreed. 

• TARDA only engages the villages when problems are encountered on TARDA’s part, 

and does not take the subsequent views expressed by the community seriously. 

• A benevolent attitude by TARDA towards communities is expected, given that TDIP 

represents a development-focused project in a poverty-stricken area. 

The only aspect in which TARDA has been seen to deliver benefits during the 15-year course 

of the project was the pre-1997 El Nino period, where the TDIP provided significant casual 

employment to villages, paid in a timely manner. Such a source of non-farm cash income 

represented an important contribution to household livelihoods, particularly as an additional 

coping strategy in dry-season periods of stress. However, since 1997, whilst the TDIP has 

continued to employ villagers as casual labour (to a lesser degree), such employment is 

considered to be of little value due to late (up to one year) and often partial payment; payment 

in rice rather than needed cash; and the fact that the real value of casual employment is seen 

as a coping strategy in periods of food stress – a strategy made relatively worthless in the 

face of late payments. 

One of the problems contributing to continued disaffection is the (apparent) lack of a written 

‘contract’ between TARDA and the communities outlining the nature and details of the 

relationship surrounding TDIP – certainly the communities have not aware of the existence of 

such a document. Whilst 

Other institutional relationships 

Remaining institutional relationships – either positive or negative – are relatively undeveloped. 

The greatest institutional influence is derived from village-based community organizations, 

principally women, youth, and church groups – which are well represented in each village. 

Many groups are involved in poultry propagation, whilst the youth groups play an active role in 

HIV-AIDS education. However, many of these groups lack financial resources to meet 

expectations (for example, women’s micro-finance “merry-go-round groups), however groups 

appear to be active and motivated. There is little reliance on external organizations beyond 

support from the region’s sizeable array of church denominations, including Catholic, 

Anglican. Pentecostal, and Seventh-day Adventist amongst others. 

Otherwise, a number of NGOs – principally CRS (Catholic Relief Services), Red Cross and 

World Vision – have provided limited but significant help, principally with hand pumps (CRS, 

Red Cross) and limited school bursaries (World Vision). 

2 The case of Wema Village is different: Wema never agreed to transfer of its lands to the TDIP. 

Whilst the TDIP did annex that part of Wema traditional lands, the project to date has never utilized 

this land – in recognition of this fact. 

15


The local Provincial Administration is seen neither as an aid, nor a hindrance – except in 

terms of withholding information from the village populations. Other government institutions, 

most notably the Forest Department (under whose jurisdiction the forest patches lie), KWS 

(the Kenya Wildlife Service, responsible for wildlife-related issues), and the Ministries of 

Water, Agriculture and Livestock are perceived to have, effectively, no presence in the area. 

For example, villages claim they have not seen an agricultural extension agent during the last 

20 years. 

Implications & Conclusions 

• The attitude of villages towards TARDA is extremely negative, based on tangible losses to 

livelihoods; perceived unfulfilled agreements on the part of TARDA; and the arrogant 

attitude of TARDA towards the community. 

• Any attempt on TARDA’s part to engage in partnership with the community will likely not 

succeed, due to the community’s distrust of TARDA 

• Short-tern advancement of the relationship between TARDA and the community will, out of 

necessity, need to based on TARDA’s willingness to provide villages with tangible 

benefits, under community control 

• A necessary pre-requisite to the long-term advancement of the relationship between 

TARDA and the community is the engagement of the community by TARDA as equal 

partners 

• Villages lack strong positive links with external institutions, with only occasional and lowlevel 

assistance from development NGOs 

• Internal institutions play the most significant role in community development. The 

effectiveness, however, is hampered by lack of resources 

• Positive engagement and/or assistance from government agencies is, essentially, nonexistent 

Natural Resources: key resource patterns, changes & challenges 

There are three key resources critical to TDIP community farming (Pokomo) livelihoods: 

• Water 

• Land 

• Forests 

Each is considered, followed by a summary of key resources relating to the single pastoralist 

(Orma) community (Baandi). 

Water 

A. Traditional use pattern 

All the farming villages of the TDIP are located in close proximity to the Tana River, on its 

eastern bank. The greatest implication of this was the reliance on seasonal (usually semiannual) 

flooding of the fertile flood plains by the river, affording then the benefit of both 

costless ‘irrigation’ supply and rich alluvial soil deposits. This process supported a diverse 

array of crop types suited to differing moisture levels, and resulting in an extended growing 

season, thereby minimising food supply stress. 

B. Current situation 

The current situation is vastly different. According to villages, in 1994 - shortly after the 

advent of the TDIP scheme (although unrelated to it) - the Tana River changed its course 

between Mnazini (upstream) and Dumi (downstream), moving westwards (away from the 

village flood plains). This halted the seasonal flooding of community lands, and heralded a 

fundamental shift in the viability of their livelihoods. Today, villages are solely reliant on rainfed 

agriculture. The result is both decreased as well as erratic levels of crop production; 

accompanied by a shift towards a more monoculture-based farming based on maize, which 

appears to be more suited to rain-fed cultivation. Yields, however, remain low. 

C. Implication/Conclusion 

Water currently remains the greatest single constraint to crop production – and by extension, 

food and livelihood security. 

16


Land 

A. Traditional Use Pattern 

The most important farming resource is the low-lying, fertile flood plains adjacent to the Tana 

River, flooded seasonally and supporting crop diversity. All Pokomo land, including flood 

plains, is allocated between villages along traditionally demarcated boundaries. Each village 

in the TDIP area contains two major land-use zones: the fertile flood plains, and the 

surrounding ‘gubani’ woodlands at higher altitude beyond the flood plains. All activity is 

concentrated on labour-intensive, low capital-input subsistence farming in the floodplain area, 

where up until recently, the land area per village has been sufficient to allow increased crop 

production through expansion of the tilled area as population (and therefore labour supply) 

increased. By contrast the ‘gubani’ woodlands are little used, being infertile and difficult to till. 

The Orma pastoralists of Baandi move out of the sodden Tana delta during the long rains 

(March-April), utilizing outlying grazing areas until stocks are diminished, and returning to the 

delta as the long dry-season progresses (August-September). They then remain in the delta 

until the following year’s long rains return. Access to grazing on and around the wetter 

floodplains of the current TDIP, through both the long and short dry-season, represents a 

critical component of their livelihood survival. 

B. Recent Dynamics/Current Situation 

Three major dynamics have impacted the productivity of the land resource over the past 15- 

20 years, both for Pokomo cultivators and Orma pastoralists. 

I. The halt of seasonal flooding due to the shifting of the Tana River’s course (see 2.1 

above). 

II. The inception of the TDIP rice scheme, which removed 2500 acres 3 (1042 hectares) of 

either utilized or available cultivable floodplain land lying within Pokomo-demarcated 

lands as part of the project’s total of 10,000 acres. The TDIP in the process also 

converted former grazing lands. 

III. Natural population growth, necessitating an increase in the cultivated floodplain area 

available to villages. The result is that currently, all but one village (Wema) is now 

cultivating all available floodplain land. In addition, according to Baandi residents, 

continued land degradation outside the delta combined with population growth has 

resulted in greater pastoralist herd influxes into the delta area, to the extent that 

movement in search of new grazing within the delta has become constricted due to 

diminished availability; resulting in individual groups/villages more jealously guarding 

and defending specific grazing areas – all of which both necessitates and results in 

increasingly ‘fixed’ home bases. 

C. Implication/Conclusion 

• The absence of either irrigation and/or capital to intensify per acre productivity has 

resulted in a fixed upper limit to household and community food production, directly related 

to erratic rainfall levels. Whilst the maximum yield of the major crop – maize – is 15 bags 

per acre during sufficient rains, typical yields average 2-3 bags per acre (this contrasts 

with maximum yields of 25 bags per acre in other parts of the country, where inputs are 

available). Most significantly, average production per year is typically lower than basic 

food needs. 

• Conversion of critical grazing lands combined with increased competition for grazing 

continues to compromise local Orma livelihoods. 

Forests 

The following section gives a more detailed consideration of forest use patterns, dynamics 

and issues, since forests are the primary interest of the current study. 

A. Traditional Use Patterns 

Villages distinguish between 3 types of forest within their lands: 

(a) the forest patches immediately adjacent to the existing (or recent) river course. 

3 According to Wema, Kulesa, and Hewani villages 

17


(b) the ‘madzini’ or ‘floodplain’ forest patches further away from the river course and located 

within the farmed floodplain. 

(c) the ‘gubani’ or ‘bush’ woodlands that characterise the land beyond the floodplain. 

Forest use differs amongst the three types: the more mature ‘madzini’ forests are considered 

the most important, primarily because they contain species not found in the less mature, riverbank 

forest patches. Whilst less used, the ‘gubani’ woodlands are important as a source of 

building poles (see Section 1.5. As has been seen in Section 1 of this report, in addition to 

their importance in providing basic needs (e.g. firewood), the forests are particularly important 

as a traditional coping strategy in regular times of hardship and stress. 

Traditional authority of the forests lies with the GASA – the Pokomo Elders Council, a general 

body in which traditional Pokomo law is vested, who implement and enforce traditional law 

through GASA representatives within each village. All forests continue to be governed by a 

similar set of rules and regulations. However, more recently it is the government Forest 

Government that has official jurisdiction over these forests – administered through its local 

office in Garsen. 

B. Recent Dynamics/Current Situation 

Forests Uses/Benefits 

(a) Occupational structure results 

Table 8 summarises results of household forest activities, based on the occupational structure 

survey, both for home consumption (e.g. firewood) as well as for livelihood. Results show 

high incidence of firewood, building sticks, medicinal plants and weaving material use, in 

addition to traditional beds and sticks for farming. 

Table 8: Percentage of households using forest products (occupational survey) 

Forest 

use 

type 

(n=120) 

Firewood 

Charcoal 

Medicinal 

plants 

Sticks - 

building 

Poles - 

building 

Sticks - 

farming 

Sticks - 

livestock 

Grazing 

/thatch 

Log hives 

Carvers 

Weaving 

Trad’l 

beds 

Canoes 

% HH 94 26 78 94 16 52 16 2 4 12 61 55 19 

(b) Household forest survey results 

The results from the household forest survey generally reinforce the findings above. Table 9 

summarises current forest uses, including importance to the household, use levels, and 

demand-supply trends. The survey highlights the relative importance of various forest 

benefits, as opposed to incidence, as per Table 8 above. 

18


Table 9: Household forest product importance, use, and demand-supply trends 

High Collection Increase in 

importance frequency HH demand 

to HH (weekly) over time? 

Benefit to House Hold 

(HH) 

Increase in 

community 

demand over 

time? 

(% HH 

agree) 

Decrease in 

supply of 

forest 

products? 

(% HH) 

(% HH agree) 

(% HH agree) 

Firewood 81 1.5 57 65 12 

Other tree products 

62 2.2 42 70 12 

(building poles, timber, 

charcoal) 

Grazing 26 5 27 61 11 

Medicinal plants 40 1.3 37 40 29 

Edible plants 26 1.9 24 26 0 

Handicraft materials 36 1.1 31 36 18 

Tree seeds/seedlings 0 0 0 0 0 

Materials for farming (e.g. 22 1/7 20 29 12 

stakes) 

Income from sale of 

13 4.2 15 18 0 

wood products 

Spiritual importance 0 - - - - 

Historic importance 13 - - - - 

Other - - - - - 

Highlights: 

• The ‘high importance’ products are identified as firewood (81% of households); other 

tree products (62%); medicinal plants (40%) and handicraft materials e.g. mats 

(36%). 

• A significant proportion of households (57, 42, 37,and 31% respectively) surveyed 

agreed that household demand for these uses is increasing over time; whilst demand 

at a community level was perceived as even greater (70,61, 40 and 36 respectively). 

• At the same time, fewer households agree that the availability of ‘high importance’ 

products is decreasing. 

• These findings reinforced by the village focal (both elder and youth) group 

discussions, which were unanimous in the agreement that forest resources are 

dwindling, that the current use levels are unsustainable, and that the continued 

existence of the forest patches is threatened (see below). 

(c) Forest patch use by village 

The main forest patches used by villages in approximate order of importance, by patch 

number, is as follows (please refer to the Botanical study Appendix 6): 

• Sailoni village: 65, 46 

• Kulesa village: 65, 48, 56, 68, 46, 47, 49, 50, 53, 54 

• Bfumbwe village: 66, 68 and the ‘gubani’ forests/woodlands 

• Wema village: 68, 56, 57, 53, 54, 55 

• Hewani village: 64, 63, 67, 60, 61, 58, 59, 62 

• Baandi village: 64 “plus two others not appearing on the map” – one to the north and 

one to the west of the village, on the east side of the river. 

According to villages, use patterns are determined by (a) proximity to village (b) availability 

of/suitability for particular products (c) village boundaries, whereby use by outside villages is 

restricted. 

No attempt was made to estimate demand/use levels by village due to time constraints, 

however, such a study is recommended as a primary step in exploring forest management 

further. 

Forest Costs 

Table 10 depicts household survey findings relating to forest costs. The greatest costs are 

crop loss and associated time loss guarding against loss, followed by danger to human life 

(from e.g. buffalo, elephant, etc.). The majority of those households surveyed believe that 

19


crop and time loss are growing (61 and 64% respectively). A growing trend, according to the 

focal groups, that is reflected here is the attraction of the forest resource to outsiders. 17% of 

households listed ‘fines for illegal use’ as significant; however, it is unclear whether these 

refer to community-imposed fines, since the Forest Department (as well as KWS) appear to 

have an almost non-existent profile with respect to management of the forest patches. 

Table 10: Household forest costs, levels and trends 

High Collected / 

significance encountered 

to HH how many 

times each 

Benefit to Household (HH) 

week? 

Getting 

worse 

(better) for 

HH over 

time? 

Getting 

worse 

(better) for 

community 

over time? 

Loss/damage to human life from 

24 3.2 12 (53) 20 (52) 

wildlife 

Crop loss 58 5.7 61(1) 62 (0) 

Time lose to crop protection 57 5.8 64 (1) 64 (1) 

Children unable to attend school 

18 2.2 16 (46) 28 (42) 

regularly in order to guard crops 

Other HH’s children are employed 0 - - - 

to guard crops 

Fines for illegal access 17 1 11 (36) 0 (33) 

Attracts outsiders 21 2.5 34 (20) 43 (17) 

Conclusions relating to Forest Benefits and Costs 

• Results show high incidence of firewood, building sticks, medicinal plants and 

weaving material use, in addition to traditional beds and sticks for farming. 

• The ‘high importance’ products are identified as firewood; other tree products (e.g. 

poles, sticks, charcoal); medicinal plants and handicraft materials. 

• A significant proportion of households surveyed agreed that household demand for 

these uses is increasing over time; whilst demand at a community level was 

perceived as even greater. 

• Fewer households agree that the availability of ‘high importance’ products is 

decreasing. However, this is somewhat at odds with the findings from the village 

focal (both elder and youth) group discussions, which were unanimous in agreement 

that forest resources are dwindling, that the current use levels are unsustainable, and 

that the continued existence of the forest patches is threatened 

• The greatest costs are crop loss and associated time loss guarding against loss, 

followed by danger to human life. The majority of those households surveyed believe 

that crop and time loss are growing. 

Forest Management Issues 

Four basic conclusions were articulated across all villages during focal group discussion: 

1. Communities acknowledge the importance of the forest patches to their livelihoods, 

particularly in terms of (a) microclimate and (b) coping strategies. 

2. Communities acknowledge the current unsustainable decline of forest patches. 

3. Communities acknowledge the danger of imminent disappearance of the resource. 

4. Communities expressed a desire for the forests to be conserved, and even 

expanded. 

The following section reports on developing a way forward to achieving the objective of 

conservation and expansion, from the community’s perspective – based on discussion of the 

causes of forest decline, and appropriate mechanisms to reverse that trend. 

Causes of Forest Decline 

Table 11 below summarises the causes of forest decline as perceived and volunteered by (as 

opposed to systematically asked of) separate elder- and youth-focal discussion groups across 

all villages. ‘X’ depicts citation as a cause of forest decline, while ‘XX’ depicts citation as a 

major cause. In totalling the frequency with which a particular cause was cited, ‘X’ was 

weighted as ‘1’ with ‘XX’ weighted as ‘2’. 

20


Table 11: Causes of Madzini (floodplain) forest decline, volunteered amongst elders & 

youth within villages 

Fire 

Poor use/ 

Population pressure 

Poor enforcement 

Lack of seasonal 

flooding 

Commercial 

exploitation from 

outside 

Over-grazing 

Wine tapping 

TARDA/ TDIP 

clearing 

Internal (I) External (E): I E I E I E 

Bfumbwe Elders XX XX X XX X X 

Youth X X X 

Kulesa Elders X X X X 

Youth X X 

Sailoni Elders X X X XX X 

Youth X X X 

Wema Elders X XX X XX X X X 

Youth X X X X 

Hewani Elders X XX X 

Youth X XX XX 

Baandi Elders X X 

Youth XX X XX X 

SCORE 6 4 2 13 5 8 11 3 2 1 2 

Ranking the importance of various causes based on the citation frequencies in Table 11 

yields the following summary: 

Table 12: Ranking of importance of causes of forest decline (frequency in brackets) 

Overall rank 

(score) 

Cause 

Rank by 

elders (score) 

Rank by 

youth (score) 

1 (13) Internal population growth 1 (7) 1 (6) 

2 (11) Lack of seasonal flooding 2 (6) 2 (5) 

3 (8) Poor enforcement 3 (4) 3 (4) 

4 (6) Fire 3 (4) 5 (2) 

5 (5) External use due to population growth 7 (2) 4 (3) 

6 (4) Poor techniques (internal i.e. within villages) 5 (3) 6 (1) 

7 (3) Commercial exploitation by outsiders 5 (3) 9 (0) 

8 (2) Excessive grazing 9 (1) 6 (1) 

8 (2) Poor techniques used by outsiders 8 (2) 9 (0) 

8 (2) TDIP clearing of forests 9 (1) 6 (1) 

11 (1) Wine tapping 9 (1) 9 (0) 

As can be seen, there are a number of perceived causes of forest decline, with a large degree 

of agreement between elders and youth perceptions – particularly on the main causes: 

pressure due to internal population growth; lack of seasonal flooding; and poor enforcement – 

with fire (set by pastoralists) ranking as an important cause. 

Causes of Forest Decline 

Table 13 presents solutions volunteered by focal groups (both elders and youth, separately). 

Results centred on five options (in order of importance): restore local authority and 

management; title or allocate forest patches; forestation and afforestation (involving both 

indigenous and exotic species); raise good-practice awareness; and involve youth in 

management. These are elaborated below in Section 5.4.3.6 

21


Table 13: Solutions volunteered to halt Madzini forest decline according to elders & 

youth within villages 

Are forests declining? 

Do you think the forests 

should be conserved? 

Restore local authority 

& management 

Forests need allocating 

&/or titling 

Forestation/ 

reforestation 

E=Exotics 

I=Indigenous 

Education/ training on 

good practice 

Youth involvement 

necessary 

Bfumbwe 

Kulesa 

Sailoni 

Wema 

Hewani 

Baandi 

Yes/No Yes/No 

OPTION 

Option B Option C Option D Option E 

A 

Elders Y Y E, I 

Youth Y Y • • • E, I • • 

Elders Y Y • • 

Youth Y Y • 


Youth Y Y • • • 

Elders Y Y • • • E, I • 

Youth Y Y • • E, I • 

Elders Y Y • • • E, I • 

Youth Y Y • • • E, I • • 


Youth Y Y • • • • 

SCORE 12 12 10 10 12 6 8 

22


Discussion & Elaboration on Causes of and Solutions for Forest Decline 

1. Internal population growth. Villages acknowledge that the current situation is being 

driven by increased community demand for forest products, fuelled by primarily firewood 

needs, coupled with the need for an income source during periods of seasonal food 

shortage. 

2. Lack of seasonal flooding. This is resulting in (a) dying trees and (b) depressed forest 

productivity. 

3. Poor enforcement. Whilst internal population growth and depressed forest regeneration 

may be at the heart of the demand-supply equation, villages maintain that the 

unsustainable situation is being exacerbated by poor enforcement. This is a result of 

placing forest authority and management under ineffective government organisations, 

particularly the Forest Department (FD), whose closest office is located at nearby Garsen. 

Despite the proximity of their office, communities have no interaction with either the FD, 

claiming that, in particular, commercial utilization of the forests (see below) is being 

carried out with the blessing – official or otherwise – of the FD. In addition to presiding 

over poor management, the FD’s authority serves to undermine the traditional GASA 

authority. The result is a situation that equates to ‘open access’, with concomitant lack of 

wise use. Such ‘open access’ has served to attract outsiders, many of whom – it is 

claimed – have no traditional knowledge regarding forest use, and therefore employ poor 

techniques e.g. fire; excessive grazing; cutting of immature or inappropriate trees; etc.; or 

worse, are taking advantage of the current management vacuum in order to commercially 

exploit the forests. 

4. Fire. Indiscriminate seasonal burning of pasture against e.g. ticks and old growth by 

pastoralists in the vicinity is blamed for the continued shrinking of forest patches. 

5. Commercial exploitation of the forests. The claim of commercial exploitation, primarily 

for timber, was commonly raised. It is not known who is engaging in this practice, 

however, trees are cut with chain saws under cover of darkness. Neighbouring villages 

either do not investigate, believing the activity to be in “another village’s forests”; or 

confront the cutters, who escape before being identified. 

6. Forest demarcation/local management. These are the primary factors leading to view 

community’s that the forests should be returned to local authority and management, with 

the necessary accompanying requirement of official (government) demarcation and 

allocation of forests patches to individual villages – based on existing traditional 

boundaries. 

7. Village management bodies. Most villages recognise that the undermining of the 

traditional regulatory body, GASA, necessitates the development of a more modern 

regulatory body. In particular, the youth across all villages maintain that they should be 

involved in order for effective local management to be achieved. The main rationale is 

that, given the prevalence of outsider use, the youth are need for forest monitoring and 

enforcement. Two villages (Wema and Bfumbwe) have functioning environmental 

committees that are actively involved in forest management, and in both cases these 

incorporate youth. 

Wema. Wema village contains a registered CBO (community-based organisation) 

‘Chamado Nsugu ya Wayume’ whose governing committee consists of both GASA elders 

and youth, and whose goals are to (i) conserve the forests and (b) develop the long-term 

tourism potential of their ‘gubani (woodland) lands beyond the floodplain area. Current 

activities focus on monitoring and management of forest use by Wema residents. The 

CBO falls under a regional umbrella CBO, the ‘Salama Mwina Wetlands Farmers’ (of 

which Kulesa and Sailoni villages are also members). Wema’s CBO has also proposed 

that 100 acres of the disputed 2500 ceded by the village to the TDIP, but up-to-now 

unused, be allocated to forest expansion. Wema youth representatives also sit on the 

Village Development Committee, which oversees all village initiatives. 

Bfumbwe. Bfumbwe’s village Environmental Committee consists of both GASA elders 

and youth. They continue to set village regulations for forest use; and carry out replanting 

23


of seedlings within their adjoining ‘gubani’ woodlands, in an effort to counter removal of 

trees for building poles. The main problem they cite is that much of the damage and/or 

inappropriate use is being carried out by outsiders and particularly after dark, making 

identification difficult. Other villages contain Environmental Committees, however, a 

divide tends to exist between what should constitute the appropriate body for local 

management, with elders maintaining that the GASA should be reinstated; while the 

youth maintain that the GASA’s traditional mode of operating needs modernizing in order 

to manage what is today a more complex, interdependent environment. In addition, all 

the villages contain active and organised youth groups involved in other spheres of village 

development e.g. HIV/AIDS awareness, poultry income generation and, in many cases, 

today’s better educated and exposed youth are educating village elders (see Part 3 

‘institutional linkages’). 

8. Demarcation challenges. Ideally, villages would prefer to enlist TARDA’s assistance in 

obtaining title to their traditional demarcated lands. Villages would then own and manage 

the resources, including forest patches, falling within their boundaries – a practice 

pursued traditionally, and officially sanctioned by the GASA Council following a decision 

in 1993 that villages should be separate and that “each village looks after its own land”. A 

second challenge is the issue of non-Pokomo claims to the forest resource. Baandi 

village claims that land, including forests, should be demarcated along the location 

boundary separating Salama Location to the north (which contains the TDIP-related 

Pokomo villages) and Galili Location to the south (which, according to them, has 

traditionally been used by pastoralists). In terms of the TDIP area, the location boundary 

bisects forest blocks 64 and 67 (see Botanical study Appendix 6). This demarcation 

would impact on forests/land traditionally demarcated and allocated to Hewani village: in 

fact, Baandi village was originally established with the permission of Hewani village. 

9. Reforestation and forest education/awareness creation. As Table 13 above 

demonstrated, communities indicate that this is a desirable option, and maintain an 

interest in expansion of both indigenous and exotic species. 

10. Implications & Conclusions relating to Forest Management Issues. 

• Communities perceive the most important causes of forest decline to be (a) increasing 

internal demand (b) lack of seasonal flooding (c) poor enforcement and (d) fire. 

• Communities perceive the most effective solutions for sustainable forest management to 

be (a) devolution of forest authority and management to village level, accompanied by (b) 

issuance of titles of traditional village lands (c) forestation/reforestation and (d) technical 

assistance and awareness creation on best-practice. 

• Two villages, Bfumbwe and Wema, contain functional environmental committees 

containing youth, active in forest management as well as other conservation actions. The 

other villages contain functional elder, women and youth institutions, active in various 

development activities, but not as yet representing functional, active environmental 

management capacity. 

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

For sake of convenience, the various implications and conclusions related to the socioeconomic 

assessment are summarized below. These are followed by recommendations 

arising from those conclusions. 

CONCLUSIONS 

A. Livelihood strategies, vulnerability and constraints 

• Communities are almost exclusively reliant on subsistence farming (in the case of Pokomo 

villages) or livestock production (in the case of Orma villages), with the great majority of 

the population unable to produce surplus for meeting increasing cash needs. In addition, 

very limited opportunities exist for alternative sources of income. The result is a high 

degree of vulnerability characterized by regular good shortage; lack of permanent housing; 

inability to educate children. 

• The matrix of development challenges results in a lack of community capacity to 

accumulate capital, in order to break the cycle of poverty. 

24


• The underlying viability of community livelihoods has been most significantly and 

adversely impacted by the discontinuation of seasonal flooding by the Tana River, due to 

its change of course in 1994, shortly before the advent of the TDIP. 

• Water currently remains the greatest single constraint to crop production – and by 

extension, food and livelihood security. 

• Communities are cultivating all available productive land which, in the absence of either 

irrigation and/or capital to intensify per acre productivity, has resulted in a fixed upper limit 

to household and community food production, characterised by low levels of productivity 

directly related to erratic rainfall levels. Most significantly, this upper limit is typically lower 

than food needs. 

• Conversion of critical grazing lands combined with increased competition for grazing 

continues to compromise local Orma livelihoods. 

• The nearby forest patches are important for daily needs (particularly firewood and building 

material). In addition, they play a role as the most important source of coping mechanisms 

during regularly encountered periods of stress. 

• The TDIP represented to villages a significant development opportunity that would 

compensate for the adverse impact of the shift in river course. 

• The matrix of multiple underlying development challenges associated with subsistence 

farming results in a lack of community capacity to accumulate needed capital, in order to 

precipitate investment into strategies that break the cycle of poverty. 

• These underlying challenges are exacerbated by insecurity of land tenure; banditry; and 

loss of primary resource - land - to TDIP. 

• It is interesting to note that if villages farmers were allowed to cultivate rice on their 

traditional land within the (improved) TDIP project area, selling to TDIP – as has been 

suggested in the past, and indeed expected by villages at the project’s inception (see 

Section 5.3.2) - the rehabilitation of the TDIP, directly and indirectly, has the potential to 

contribute positively towards diminishing all four basic causes of local poverty, that is: lack 

of cultivable land; low per-acre productivity; lack of infrastructure to access markets; and 

insecurity of land tenure as well as property. 

B. The forest resource 

• Communities acknowledge the importance of the forest patches to their livelihoods, 

particularly in terms of (a) microclimate and (b) coping strategies. 

• Results show high incidence of firewood, building sticks, medicinal plants and weaving 

material use, in addition to traditional beds and sticks for farming. 

• The ‘high importance’ products are identified as firewood; other tree products (e.g. poles, 

sticks, charcoal); medicinal plants and handicraft materials. 

• A significant proportion of households surveyed agreed that household demand for these 

uses is increasing over time; whilst demand at a community level was perceived as even 

greater. 

• Fewer households agree that the availability of ‘high importance’ products is decreasing. 

However, this is somewhat at odds with the findings from the village focal (both elder and 

youth) group discussions, which were unanimous in agreement that forest resources are 

dwindling, that the current use levels are unsustainable, and that the continued existence 

of the forest patches is threatened 

• The greatest costs are crop loss and associated time loss guarding against loss, followed 

by danger to human life. The majority of those households surveyed believe that crop and 

time loss are growing. 

• Communities acknowledge the current unsustainable decline of forest patches. 

• A section of the communities acknowledge the danger of imminent disappearance of the 

resource. 

• Communities expressed a desire for the forests to be conserved, and even expanded. 

• Communities perceive the most important causes of forest decline to be (a) increasing 

internal demand (b) lack of seasonal flooding (c) poor enforcement and (d) fire. 

• Communities perceive the most effective solutions for sustainable forest management to 

be (a) devolution of forest authority and management to village level, accompanied by (b) 

official issuance of titles of traditional village lands (c) technical assistance and awareness 

creation on best-practice and (d) forestation/reforestation. 

• Two villages, Bfumbwe and Wema, contain functional environmental committees 

containing youth, active in forest management as well as other conservation actions. The 

25


other villages contain functional elder, women and youth institutions, active in various 

development activities, but not as yet representing functional, active environmental 

management capacity. 

C. Institutional linkages 

• The attitude of villages towards TARDA is extremely negative, based on tangible losses to 

livelihoods; perceived unfulfilled agreements on the part of TARDA; and the arrogant 

attitude of TARDA as experienced by communities, whereby communities are not even 

informed of TARDA plans and/or decisions, let alone consulted. 

• Any attempt on TARDA’s part to engage in partnership with the community will likely not 

succeed, due to the community’s distrust of TARDA. 

• Short-tern advancement of the relationship between TARDA and the community will, out of 

necessity, need to be based on TARDA’s willingness to provide villages with tangible 

benefits, under community control. 

• A necessary pre-requisite to the long-term advancement of the relationship between 

TARDA and the community is the engagement of the community by TARDA as equal 

partners 

• Villages lack strong positive links with external institutions, with only occasional and lowlevel 

assistance from development NGOs. 

• Internal institutions play the most significant role in community development. Whilst active 

and motivated, their effectiveness, however, is hampered by lack of resources. 

• Positive engagement and/or assistance from government agencies is, essentially, nonexistent. 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

The following is recommended with respect to the proposed rehabilitation of the TDIP, 

assuming that the rehabilitation contains the twin objectives of environmental and social 

sustainability: 

1. The proposed rehabilitation should take account of, and attempt to redress, the 

TDIP communities’ state of poverty, vulnerability and lack of development options. 

The TDIP holds significant potential to contribute to resolving a significant number of the 

underlying conditions that maintain villages in a cycle of poverty. Specifically: 

1. Engage the communities as development partners, through shared consultation, 

information, planning and implementation. 

2. Consider delivering on the original expectation that communities would be able to 

cultivate rice within those traditional lands that fall within the TDIP, and sell to the 

TDIP at fair prices. 

3. Continue providing employment opportunities, with payment executed in a timely 

manner. 

4. Consider the feasibility of assisting communities with periodic water supply for crops. 

2. That efforts be made to conserve the forests by piloting participatory or community 

forest management (PFM/CFM), given the importance of the forests to community 

livelihoods; their historical management by communities; and their threatened 

existence. Specifically: 

A. To conduct a detailed forest utilization study, in conjunction with the communities, on 

use levels, use types, and species involved within each forest patch, in order to 

identify preferred species, rates of use, and threat status of each. 

B. To explore devolution (limited or otherwise) of authority over and management of 

forests to communities, preferably in conjunction with a co-management agent to 

provide enforcement and technical assistance, and oversight. 

C. Officially endorsed demarcation (by title or otherwise) of forest patches between 

villages based on traditional village boundaries. Special consideration needs to be 

given to accommodating Baandi village claims, suggested as the boundary 

separating Salama and Galili Locations. Consideration will also need to be given to 

any claims by other communities on the forests associated with the TDIP, to be 

addressed in an appropriate manner. 

26


D. That PFM/CFM be based on the twin goals of forest conservation and forest 

expansion, with consideration given to development of (exotic) woodlots, with full 

ownership of the process by communities. 

E. On the basis of A, B and C above: initiate pilot community forest management in the 

villages of Bfumbwe and Wema; given the organised and active status of their village 

environmental bodies. 

F. That technical assistance be made available, particularly in terms of best practice in 

forest management; and awareness creation/education within the TDIP villages. 

G. To ascertain the stake (if any) of other villages in the target forest patches. 

3. That any forest conservation initiative be accompanied by a separate, but linked, 

community development component, given the relationship between poverty and forest 

decline, and based on the rationale that forest conservation twinned with positive community 

development will have a higher likelihood of long-term success as compared to forest 

conservation carried out in isolation. For example, it is likely that much of the 

forestation/reforestation work will be carried out in periods where villages are free from cropgrowing 

activities; however, these periods are also stress periods in terms of food supply. 

Appropriate investment into enhancing food production will ideally decrease food shortage, 

enabling people to be able to work effectively during stress times. Other examples are 

potential synergies resulting from a twin forest-livelihoods approach include the ability of 

households to afford fuel-efficient stoves (that typically burn one-third of normal wood supply), 

through improved crop production. 

4. That interventions emanating from rehabilitation of the TDIP - whether concerning 

forest management and/or community livelihoods - be managed and implemented 

through effective, trusted, neutral, and mutually agreed third parties, for example, the 

East African Wildlife Society (EAWLS) in the case of forest conservation; and World Vision or 

Action Aid, in the case of community livelihoods – rather than through TARDA, given the level 

of distrust between villages and TARDA. 

5. That TARDA engage the TDIP communities as partners in the rehabilitation of the 

project - through information sharing, consultation and collaboration - as a necessary 

process for designing and implementing win-win solutions. It is further recommended 

that this report be shared with the TDIP communities, as a first step towards engaging them 

as bonafide stakeholders in the process. 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 

Thanks is due to Dr. Abe of JBIC for input into the scope of work; to Richard Mwendandu of 

TARDA for his continued support throughout; to CEPF for interest and funding, and especially 

John Watkin of CEPF for bringing the study to fruition; and particularly to Quentin Luke for his 

support, patience and oversight of the rapid assessment study. In the field Shadrack 

Kibindyo of TARDA provided excellent assistance; whilst special thanks go to the village 

enumerators and focus groups (whose names are contained in Annex 2), who willingly 

provided a rich insight into their livelihoods, challenges and hopes. Lastly, thanks goes to 

Angela Moraa for patience and support. 

REFERENCES 

Carney D, 2001, ‘Sustainable Livelihoods Approaches: Progress and Possibilities for 

Change’, DFID (Department for International Development), UK. 

TARDA (Tana and Athi River Development Authority) (1983) ‘Environmental Interface’, 

Chapter 14 Tana River Irrigation Project (Extension) Feasibility Study Vol. 11, August. 

TARDA (Tana and Athi River Development Authority) (Year unknown) ‘Environmental Study’, 

Annex 5 Tana Delta Irrigation Project Definitive Development Plan Vol. IV. 

TDEAP (Tana Delta Environmental Awareness Programme) (1999) ‘Analysis of the Situation 

on the Ground report 12-27 th September 1999 – Draft’, October. 

Rietbergen-McCracken J. and D. Narayan (1998) ‘Participation and Social Assessment: 

tools and techniques’, World Bank, Washington DC. 

27


Annex 1: Terms of Reference for the Socio-Economic Study 

Overview: the research will concern itself with the relevant socio-economic aspects 

(particularly relating to stakeholder communities) with respect to the proposed protection of 

existing indigenous forest patches, extension of forest patches, and creation of connecting 

corridors between forest patches, within the project area. 

The socio-economic component will comprise three main elements: 

1. Desk Study 

Carry out review of extensive existing literature and reports, in order to 

• Understand the socio-economic context of the environment 

• Understand past initiatives, results and consequences that will impact the project 

• Identify the most important issues relating to the livelihoods-environment interface 

• Identify data needs 

2. Fieldwork 

Design appropriate field methodology and supervise data collection to be carried out by 

locally accepted enumerator(s) over a 2 week period. Participatory research by the 

community will be used as much as possible, and be tested in advance. Due to prior 

research exposure and fatigue amongst the community, dependable key informants will 

also be used to cross-check the validity of participatory findings. In addition the 

methodology will also incorporate unbiased, independent data collection where possible. 

It is anticipated that TARDA personnel will be able to assist greatly in the design of 

representative sampling/data collection. Data needs will be targeted towards: 

A. Prior identification of bona fide community stakeholders (both inside and outside the 

project site – key informants) 

B. Assessment of resource and asset base (natural, human and social – participatory/key 

informants) 

C. Assessing the relationship and dynamics of the natural resource-livelihood 

interface (emphasizing forest-livelihood links) – participatory/key 

informants through e.g. 

‣ Description of livelihood community strategies 

‣ Assessment of reliance of livelihoods on the natural resource base 

‣ Identification of key natural resources 

‣ Analysis of key resources: access, use, attitudes towards, and behaviour 

‣ Community needs assessment – both general and in relation to key resources 

‣ Assessment of livelihood constraints 

3. Data analysis and Report 

Conduct analysis of field data and compile a report in conjunction with the other elements of 

the project. The main elements are expected to include: 

A. Threat analysis of the impact of the proposed project on livelihood strategies 

and key resources respectively, and vice-versa – including (i) direct and (ii) 

indirect effects 

B. Identification of and recommendations for opportunities to mitigate threats. 

These are expected to include: 

‣ Guidelines for adopting an appropriate form of Participatory Forest 

Management ( PFM) 

‣ Identification of suitable existing structures and resources 

‣ Outline of a process for and the main components of an appropriate FM/NRM 

action plan 

28


Annex 2: List of participants and enumerators 

Participants (* denotes especially articulate individuals, recommended to be included in any 

follow-up consultation with the communities) 

Kulesa 

Mixed adults Mixed youth Enumerators 

Matiya Amuma Daido Ntusa Komora Lucas Jillo Philip 

John Luku 

Peter Kiyesa Komora 

Rahel Wayu 

Chudi Omara Diana 

Rahab Luku 

Millie Naiko Jillo 

Philip Rhova Amuma 

Geoffrey Omara Bilashi 

Daud Igwo Omara 

Bfumbwe 


Moses Abajila Buya* Rachel Kyambi John Buya Moses Keyhodos 

Jonathan Komora* 

Philemon Maitha 

Paul Rudolf 

Jillo Alfayo 

Gideon Eliza 

Buya G Keyhodos 

Justin Buya 

John Moses 

Komora Soye 

Buya Keyhodos 

Komora Eliza 

Juliet Buya 

Jonathan Penina 

Kawuni Kiachu 

Keyhodos Buya 

John Joseph 

Martin Jonathan* 

Sailoni 


Alpheat Abadeho Selita Komora Gabriel Mandisa 

Mary Martin 

Newtone Kiroti 

John Bekar 

Susan Alfayo 

Haron Buko Komora 

David Jara 

Alex Komora* 

Mramba Enos 

Gerard Komora 

Gedion Wario 

Daniel Ibrahim 

Jillo Luka 

Christopher Komora 

Buya Jilloh 

Wema 


Geoffrey Enock Malio (Nominated Blandwa Nkaduda* 

Lawrence Jillo 

Councillor & Village Environmental 

Committee)* 

Benedictus Gololi (Chairman, Laura Malioh 

Salama Mwina Wetlands Framers 

CBO & Village Environmental 

Committee)* 

Charles Yeziel* 

Peter Ndege 

Justin Hiribae (Chairman, GASA Timothy Samwana 

Council of Elders) 

Katarina Fanuel 

Adrian makanka 

Rehema Mpuye 


Joseph Mbizi 

Blandwa Nkaduda* 

Urban Tito Mshambara (Headman, 

Wema Village & Village 

Environmental Committee)* 


29


Hewani 


Esta Kaumbi Jillo Sethwalichi* Levy Jillo 

Garise Elisha Mtumaini* 

Dara Garise 

Eva Martin 

Wachu Waluta 

Mary Ngomango* 

Humphrey Garise (Headman, 

Hewani) 

Choice Sammy 

Haigwo Nkuwa 

Baandi 


Ali Gobole (Headman, Baandi)* Godana Boneya Aaliyah Salad 

Goriso Gollo Gobu Alii* Sofia Salad 

Handada Gollo* Gollo Abdallah Godana Boneya 

Omar Boneya* Alliyah Salad Yusuf Mohamed 

Dokota Maalim 

Sofia Salad* 

Hukicha Sawena 

Yusuf Mohammed 

Halima Ali 

Kanchoru Gollo* 

Ibrahim Guyole 

Hussen Abarea 

Alii Kanchoru 

30


BOTANICAL/ECOLOGICAL STUDY 

By 

W. R. Quentin Luke 

31


SUMMARY 

Although intended to be ‘rapid’, this study has taken twice the intended time. The impact on 

these critically important forests of the Tana River has been devastating, both by the El Nino 

weather event of 1997/8 and the increasing human pressure directly due to the lack of 

alternatives promised at the inception of this donor funded Rice Irrigation Scheme. 

Assessment of the current size, composition, health and conservation status of these forest 

fragments shows an urgent need for bold and innovative intervention if the habitat of two of 

the world’s rarest primates and the livelihoods of the local communities are to be protected 

and improved. 

♦ 

♦ 

♦ 

♦ 

There are 320 plant taxa in the area; 58 of them trees, and 2 of them can be considered 

Critically Endangered in a world sense. 21% of the plants are of conservation concern. 

Forest cover has declined by 37% in 10 years AND the quality of the cover has suffered 

similarly. 

Past interventions have aggravated the situation by the introduction of invasive plants, 

and the exacerbation of community differences and conflict. 

Opportunities for action to achieve realistic change in both primate habitat and the lives of 

the local people are many and varied. These include: an increase in environmental 

awareness; the full involvement of the people in participatory forest management (PFM) 

and design; the immediate start of nurseries for indigenous and selected exotic species ; 

the linking of existing forests by corridors; the design of productive woodlots; and the 

initiation of simple, effective community income generating ventures. 

INTRODUCTION 

The Project area was first visited by the author in 1988, during the WWF funded Coast Forest 

Survey (CFS) (Robertson & Luke, 1993). At that time, the irrigation scheme was in the 

process of implementation and the construction of many of the dykes was causing forest 

destruction in several of the forest patches (eg 48, 57, 65). Attempts were made to address 

this and much discussion was entered into with the Japanese (Nippon Koei Company) and 

TARDA engineers regarding a more environmentally acceptable design (eg Robertson letter 

11 th August 1989). Further studies were carried out (Medley et al, 1989) with particular 

reference to the impact on the two endemic primates. 

This present study comprises three elements; the primate survey, the socio-economic (S-E) 

survey and the botanical/ecological (B/E) survey (Appendix 1). It was designed after 

meetings with JBIC and TARDA officials in July/August 2004, followed by approval of funding 

by CEPF in September 2004. The B/E survey began with a desktop study of all previous 

vegetation surveys, project reports, EIAs etc in Nairobi, followed by a 10-day field visit in 

November/December 2004. The other two studies were carried out independently with only a 

brief overlap in the field with the consultant of the S/E study. 

METHODOLOGY 

No satellite or aerial photography was available and thus the positions of the forest patches 

were determined by the 1: 50,000 topo sheet for the area (179/1 & 179/3) and maps in project 

reports notably Fig 1-1-2 (Appendix 2). TARDA officials assisted in meeting and selecting 

one elder from each of three villages (Sailoni, Wema and Hewani) to act as guides and 

informants during the fieldwork. Each forest was then visited with the entire team of 4 (3 + 

one TARDA employee) and was carried out in a roughly north to south order, starting with No 

65 and ending with No 69). During the survey the team was joined by the head of TARDA’s 

Environment Department (Photo 1). 

The survey involved a random walk through each forest patch, attempting to cover all 

vegetation types and noting species encountered in a purely opportunistic manner. Species 

readily identifiable were recorded as sight records (sr) and, for plants whose identification was 

in doubt, a voucher specimen was collected. When the rate of recording new taxa had 

dropped to almost nil (approximately no new records for more than 30 minutes), the survey 

32


for that patch was considered complete. The local informants were able to give some local 

names and uses and to explain some examples of disturbance. It became very obvious that 

the deterioration in forest quality since the visits in 1988 was extremely high and that it would 

be of little use to attempt to quantify the level of disturbance. All forests were thus noted as 

experiencing a high level of disturbance. 

Larger forests took approximately six hours to survey with the remainder of the day spent in 

data entry and specimen pressing and drying. It was possible to carry out surveys of two 

smaller forests in any one day. 

On return to Nairobi collected specimens were sorted, labelled and identified using standard 

botanical references (FTEA etc) and compared with material in the East African Herbarium. 

The records were then added to the database of previous records for the area and a complete 

species list prepared. 

RESULTS 

Although the main focus was on the primate habitat, some grassland species were included 

but by no means all. Thus the total plant taxa listed for the TDIP area of approximately 40 sq 

km (4000 Ha) (Butynski & Mwangi, 1994) after this survey is 320 (Appendix 3). Additional 

collections of the grasses, sedges and aquatics within the ‘fields’ will no doubt increase this 

by anything up to 10% (350 taxa). 

Forest classification and affinities 

4.1.1 Phytogeography 

The history of East African coastal forest is known to be made up of cycles of wet and dry 

periods allowing for the periodic expansion and contraction of forested areas with the wettest 

periods allowing forest cover to extend unbroken across the continent from east to west. 

During the longer connections, the most recent probably 8000 yrs BP (Butynski & Mwangi, 

1994), West African species have been able to spread to the east (and vice versa) and 

subsequently remain as western or Guinea-Congolian (GC) elements in the East African flora 

(White, 1983) or to then evolve in isolation. The drier savanna/bushland that has increased 

as the forests shrink, is very extensive both north and south and the plants particular to this 

area are classified as Somali-Maasai (SM) and contribute a number of species to the Tana 

forests. Most of the remaining species in this area belong to a third category, that of the 

Zanzibar-Inhambane regional mosaic (ZI). A major part of this phytochoria is represented in 

the CEPF Eastern Arc and EA Coastal Forests Hotspot, and in the WWF Eastern Africa 

Coastal Forest Ecoregion. 

A few examples of each ‘regional element’ in the TDIP vegetation are as follows: 

GC - Diospyros ferrea; Synsepalum msolo 

SM - Cyathula coriacea; Phyllanthus somalensis; Megalochlamys trinervia 

ZI - Ecbolium amplexicaule, Culcasia orientalis, Pteleopsis tetraptera 

There are other elements recognisable such as the Afromontane and the Zambezian, 

however, in the phytogeographic code used by CFS (Robertson & Luke, 1993), these are not 

distinguished in the coding. The approached used is to concentrate on the local and ZI 

endemics (codes 1 & 2) and refer plants that are more widely distributed into another 

phytochoria as code 3 or ZI + 1. 

Referring to Appendix 3, the following totals for each coding is as follows: 

Kenya Coast Endemic (1 or 1?) = 4 ZI Endemic (2 or 2?) = 52 

SM endemic (2X, 2X?) = 12 ZI + 1 = 55 

Pan African (4 or 4?) = 89 Pan Tropical (5 or 5?) = 96 

Not know or taxon not 

Fully determined (?) = 12 

33


The total taxa that are classified as local or ZI endemics are 56 or only 17.5%. Comparing 

this with coastal forests in Kwale or Kilifi Districts, where the percentage is nearer 30%, 

indicating that TDIP is possibly approaching the landward edge of the ZI region. 

Classification 

These forests have been sustained within an arid surround by the presence of the Tana River 

and, in particular in the past, by regular flooding (Andrews et al, 1975). This regime has 

changed in recent history with the building of hydroelectric dams upriver that have disrupted 

the rate and extent of the flooding and hence the availability of both water and rich sediment 

to the forest patches away from the immediate riverbank. This has been further impacted by 

the change of the main river course in 1989. 

The main classification of these forest is therefore « Lowland Riverine Forest » with the 

understanding that, unlike many of the other EA coastal forests, and because they are 

riverine, they are mostly ‘evergreen’. Work on the soils and water availability (Njue, 1992) 

has shown how rapidly the water table drops with each metre away from the riverbank. Thus 

it is not surprising that the forest some distance away from water (63, 66, 67,68), show a 

slightly different composition, with the presence of Cynometra lukei being most likely in the 

forests furthest from the river (Appendix 4). Tree species that appear to be common 

throughout, and therefore characteristic of the TDIP forests, are Rinorea elliptica, Garcinia 

livingstonei, Mimusops obtusifolia and Phoenix reclinata. 

Species diversity 

These forests have been noted for their low floristic diversity (Medley et al, 1989) and indeed 

a forest patch of roughly 150 Ha in Kwale District, Kaya Muhaka has a list of 337 taxa as 

compared to the 4000 Ha of TDIP with 320 taxa. 

The TDIP area has plant taxa in 80 families distributed amongst some 235 genera. The family 

represented with the most species is Rubiaceae (23), closely followed by Euphorbiaceae (22). 

The most represented genus is that of Diospyros, in the family Ebenaceae, with 7 different 

species. 

Growth Forms 

Again referring to Appendix 3, the plants have the following numbers in each « habit » class: 

Tree (T) = 58 Scandent Shrub (SS) = 21 Woody Herb (WH)= 40 

Small tree (ST) = 56 Liane or Climber (L) = 63 Herb (H) = 41 

Shrub (S) = 36 Epiphyte (E) = 1 

Hemi-parasite (P) = 2 

Fern (F) = 2 

The exceptional number of scandent or climbing plants is possibly an indicator of heavy 

disturbance, although a high proportion of lianes has been noted in the forests of TRNPR 

(Medley, 1992) and is possibly a feature of frequently flooded riverine forest. 

Species of Conservation Concern 

The last column of Appendix 4 shows the present IUCN threat category of the plants of 

TDIP. There are only 7 plants RED LISTED as follows: 

Endangered (EN) - Cynometra lukei 

Vulnerable (VU) - Oxystigma msoo, Angylocalyx braunii, Dalbergia vaciniifolia, 

Chytranthus obliquinervis, Diospyros greenwayi, Pavetta linearifolia 

The need for a more complete and up-to-date assessment of all the plants within the Eastern 

Arc & EA Coastal Forest Hotspot has been recognised (CEPF, 2003) and hence by referring 

to the list of potentially threatened species (Gereau & Luke, 2003), a further 63 plants are 

noted in the area as being candidates for review. Thus some 21% of the plants in this area 

are of conservation concern. 

34


Of particular note is the woody herb Megalochlamys tanaensis, previously only known from 

the type collection by Gillett around 1970, and found during the survey in forests 65 and 68. 

Both populations were extremely small and the plant should be considered « Critically 

Endangered » with the need for urgent intervention. 

Other species recorded in TDIP that are annotated RARE (R or R?) in CFS are: 

Rosifax sabuletorum C.C.Towns. A woody herb with pinkish inflorescence only know from Somalia 

and 2 collections in Kenya 

Dichapetalum sp 1 of CFS 

An un-described liane previously recorded from TRNPR but 

never found fertile. 

Psydrax kaessneri (S.Moore) Bridson A scandent shrub in the coffee family found in forests 48, 66, 67, 

68. 

Rytigynia sp L of FTEA? 

A shrub, also in the coffee family and most likely this unnamed 

taxon noted by Verdcourt in FTEA 

Tylophora apiculata K.Schum. A weak twiner, R&L 5308 determined as this species by Uli 

Meve. 

Cynometra lukei Beentje 

A tree already noted above as being Redlisted. Only described 

in 1988 from forest 67. 

Marsilea fadeniana Launert? Probably this species of small aquatic fern, but needs further 

checking. 

There are a further 20 taxa listed as RARE KENYA (RK or RK?) and some 25 listed as RARE 

KENYA COAST (RKC or RKC?). 

The discovery of several trees of Cassipourea gummiflua in forest 48 was only the second 

time this species has been recorded in coastal Kenya and possibly only the 3 rd time in Kenya. 

The other coastal record is from Buda FR in Kwale District (Luke 5958). 

Exotics 

The most obvious introduced plant in the area is Prosopis juliflora or Mathenge, as it is known 

locally. This has spread to large areas of the unutilised/destroyed paddy fields particularly 

those near forest 64 and poses a serious problem both for the rehabilitation of the Rice 

Scheme and for any woodlot establishment. Some form of intervention is critical, perhaps in 

terms of bounty payments or assisted mechanical removal. The second most invasive 

species in the TDIP area is Azadirachta indica, NEEM or Mwarubaini/Mukilifi. Although an 

extremely useful tree, it is highly invasive and nearly all the forest patches had seedlings 

beginning to establish. It is not noted as being one of the endangered primates’ 14 food trees 

(Mbora, 2003) but then neither are several figs nor several very similar species to those listed, 

which suggests that further study could add many more trees to the list. If Neem was found 

to be palatable to one or other of the primates, there could be an argument in favour of using 

more in mixed woodlots but this would be detrimental to the natural vegetation. 

Other exotic trees found in the area that have been planted in reforestation programmes 

(Nippon Koei, 1998) are: Pithecellobium dulce, Senna siamea, Eucalyptus spp (Glenday, 

2005), Albizia saman, Leucaena latisiliqua, and Parkinsonia aculeata. A few species 

indigenous to Kenya but not to the area were also encountered as planted such as 

Spathodea campanulata (Nandi flame) and Afzelia quanzensis (Mbambakofi). 

Crops 

A fairly standard range of crop species was observed including: Mangifera indica (mango), 

Anacardium orientale (cashew), Musa spp (banana), Citrus auratifolia (lime), Manihot 

esculenta (cassava), Cajanus cajan (pigeon pea) and many others. 

Utilisation 

As mentioned above, all forests were found to be heavily utilised. Charcoal burning of 

Newtonia erlangeri (MUKAMI) and a large Albizia glaberrima (MSADSASUMBII) felled in 

forest 65 were noted (Photo 2). Heavy grazing, charcoal pits and the collection of firewood 

were observed in forest 68 (Photo 3). Many forests showed signs of palm-wine tapping from 

Phoenix reclinata (MKINDU), particularly in forest 48 (Photo 4). This species is under severe 

pressure as it is also over harvested for weaving and poles (Photo 5). It is the prime food 

35


source for the mangabeys (Butynski, pers. comm.) The tree Cassipourea gummiflua, 

mentioned above as rare in coastal Kenya, was also observed being cut in forest 48. 

Several forests showed signs of burning around the edges presumably to increase grazing for 

the pastoralists in the area. 

Woodlots 

Previous efforts to establish woodlots using species mentioned above have met with little 

success. Areas marked on the map by TARDA/Nippon Koei as having been afforested were 

observed to be mostly empty of trees (Appendix 2). Indeed part of the area marked CS for 

Cassia siamea (now Senna siamea) outside forest 65 appeared to be the area selected for 

sugar cane trials (Photo 6). It is understood that much damage to the woodlots happened 

during the El Nino event of 1997 (Nippon Koei, 1998), however further loss must have 

happened since the report was compiled. The only area with significant cover was that 

adjacent to the Gamba TARDA HQ. 

Carbon Study 

The TDIP portion of another CEPF funded study (Glenday, 2005) was carried out soon after 

the fieldwork for this study. Important quantitative data on biomass, basal areas and 

frequency were collected from all the TDIP forests giving the baseline from which to measure 

future impacts on them. 

The species dominance levels have been used in Appendix 5, although some species 

recorded as being in the top 5 dominants were not observed by QL. These are highlighted, 

as are two species not recorded in the TDIP area by QL. Unfortunately some confusion over 

species identification using local names and conversion to scientific names using published 

works (Beentje, 1993; KIFCON, 1993) was experienced (Glenday pers. comm.). The three 

tables, Dominants, Frequencies and Coverage are shown in Appendix 6. 

DISCUSSION 

The prime importance of the Tana forests, both for the conservation of endangered 

species/habitat and for the support and improvement of livelihoods of the local communities, 

has been repeated in a multitude of studies. The data have been collected, analysed, 

summarised and published over more than thirty years. During this time, instead of a halt to 

degradation and the beginning of some improvement, the downward trend has continued. 

The socio-economic study (Hatfield, 2005) presents a clear picture of the attitudes of the local 

inhabitants, their negative feelings towards TARDA, their need for long-term solutions to 

income shortfalls and their basic desire to preserve the forests. 

It was noted during fieldwork that, even now, many of the local residents are unaware of the 

importance of the primates in a world context. This is being addressed through a new 

programme under EAWLS. Thus the next stage must be an action based project to provide 

local employment in a project, outside direct TARDA control, to set up village nurseries and 

implement a planned expansion of the woodlots and the forest patches using suitable exotics 

AND indigenous species. 

Research on the primates has produced some basic demands that must be met to keep their 

populations healthy and reproductive. The need for suitable large fruit trees and the apparent 

positive correlation between forest perimeter lengths and population abundance for the red 

colobus (Mbora & Meikle, 2004) gives the main direction for the design of interventions. 

36


Photo 1: Survey Team (left to right) Jonathan Wachu, Dismus Wario, Kamora Phanuel, 

Richard Mwendandu and Shadrack Kibindyo (All photos © Quentin Luke) 

Photo 2: Recently poached tree in Forest 65 

37


Photo 3: Woman collecting firewood outside Forest 68 

Photo 4: Palm wine tapping from Phoenix reclinata (MKIUNDU) Forest 48 

38


Photo 5: Phoenix reclinata (MKINDU) poles stacked in Forest 48 

Photo 6: Sugarcane trials next to forest 65 (Background) 

39



Awareness 

As stated above, there is an urgent need to ensure that the local communities are fully aware 

of the conservation importance of these forests and the steps that donors are prepared to 

take to increase their participation and benefit from a conservation agenda. It is understood 

that EAWLS and CEPF are already designing/implementing such an awareness programme. 

Nurseries 

The TARDA tree nursery has not been a success (Glenday, pers. comm.), largely due to 

inappropriate species selection and inadequate understanding of local soil types and water 

table variability. Trial plots should have been set up in 1989 and monitored. There is 

insufficient time available to delay rehabilitation until such data is produced, however a 

concurrent monitoring of successes and failures can be used to modify the proposed 

programme on a regular ‘feed-back’ basis. The following indigenous species are a bare 

minimum of those that should be seed-sourced, wildling-sourced or vegetatively propagated 

and planted from the outset of the rehabilitation project: 

SPECIES FAMILY Local Name/Comment 

Lannea schweinfurthii (Engl.) Engl. var Anacardiaceae MHANDARAKU* 

stuhlmannii (Engl.) Kokwaro 

Sorindeia madagascariensis DC. Anacardiaceae MWAMBEMBE, 

MNYAMBEMBE 

Kigelia africana (Lam.) Benth. Bignoniaceae M'BWOKA 

Cordia goetzei Guerke Boraginaceae MDOKO 

Cassia abbreviata Oliv. Ssp beareana (Holmes) 

Brenan 

Caesalpiniaceae 

(Leguminosae) 


Caesalpiniaceae MKUNUMBI, MPAKATA 

(Leguminosae) 

Oxystigma msoo Harms 

Caesalpiniaceae MTSO, MCHO? 

(Leguminosae) 

Tamarindus indica L. 

Caesalpiniaceae MKWAYU 

(Leguminosae) 

Pteleopsis tetraptera Wickens Combretaceae MKURUBO BARA 

Diospyros abyssinica (Hiern) F.White ssp 

abyssinica 

Diospyros bussei Guerke 

Ebenaceae 

Ebenaceae 

MUYUHI 

Diospyros ferrea (Willd.) Bakh. Ebenaceae MUNYIZA, MNYIZA 

Diospyros kabuyeana F.White 

Ebenaceae 

Diospyros mespiliformis A.DC. Ebenaceae MKURU 

Bridelia micrantha (Hochst.) Baill. Euphorbiaceae MKULOTSO 

Drypetes natalensis (Harv.) Hutch. var leiogyna Euphorbiaceae 

Brenan 

Spirostachys venenifera (Pax) Pax Euphorbiaceae MCHALAKA, MTSAKA 

Garcinia livingstonei T.Anderson 

Guttiferae (Clusiaceae) MCHOCHOZI, MPEKETSO. 

FRTS, UJI 

Strychnos mitis S.Moore Loganiaceae MUWARE 

Ekebergia capensis Sparrm. 

Meliaceae 

Trichilia emetica Vahl Meliaceae MUWAHI* 

Acacia robusta Burch. Ssp usambarensis Mimosaceae 

MUNGA. CHARCOAL 

(Taub.) Brenan 

(Leguminosae) 

Acacia rovumae Oliv. 

Mimosaceae 

MUNGA NGOWE* 

(Leguminosae) 

Albizia glaberrima (Schumach. & Thonn.) Benth. Mimosaceae 

MPHUMPE, 

var glabrescens (Oliv.) Brenan 

(Leguminosae) MSADSASUMBII. CANOES 

Newtonia erlangeri (Harms) Brenan 

Mimosaceae 

MUKAMI. CHARCOAL 

(Leguminosae) 

Ficus bubu Warb. 

Moraceae 

40


Ficus bussei Mildbr. & Burret Moraceae HIDOLE 

Ficus natalensis Hochst. Moraceae HIDOLE, MVUMA* 

Ficus scassellatii Pamp. Ssp scassellatii Moraceae 

Ficus sycomorus L. Moraceae MKUYU, MKUJU*. CANOES 

Phoenix reclinata Jacq. Palmae (Arecaceae) MKINDU 

Zanthoxylum chalybeum Engl. var chalybeum Rutaceae 

Dobera loranthifolia (Warb.) Harms Salvadoraceae MUKUPHA, MUKUBFA*. 

FRTS 

Blighia unijugata Baker Sapindaceae MUBO 

Lecaniodiscus fraxinifolius Baker ssp scassellatii Sapindaceae 

MHUMBI-MWEUPE, 

(Chiov.) Friis 

KIWAMBWE-KINKUNDU 

Majidea zanguebarica Oliv. 

Sapindaceae 

Manilkara mochisia (Baker) Dubard Sapotaceae MURAIDHE 

Mimusops obtusifolia Lam. Sapotaceae MNGUVWE 

Sideroxylon inerme L. ssp diospyroides (Baker) Sapotaceae 

J.H.Hemsl. 

Synsepalum msolo (Engl.) Pennington Sapotaceae MCHAMBYA 

Cola clavata Mast. Sterculiaceae MNOFU-WA-NKUKU 

Sterculia appendiculata K.Schum. Sterculiaceae MFUNE 

All these 42 tree species occur naturally in the TDIP area. There are several other species 

that are indigenous to the coastal areas of Kenya, but not to this area. Some examples of 

species that could be included in trials are as follows: 

Acacia elatior 

Acacia tortilis ssp raddiana 

Albizia adianthifolia 

Albizia amara 

Albizia gummifera 

Albizia versicolor 

Antiaris toxicaria 

Apodytes dimidiata 

Bivinia jalbertii 

Boscia angustifolia 

Boscia mossambicensis 

Calophyllum inophyllum 

Cassia afrofistula 

Cephalospaera usambarensis 

Combretum molle 

Combretum schumannii 

Cordyla africana 

Croton megalocarpoides 

Croton sylvaticus 

Dalbergia boehmii 

Delonix elata 

Dialium orientale 

Dobera glabra 

Drypetes reticulata 

Erythrina sacleuxii 

Ficus usambarica 

Grewia plagiophylla 

Gyrocarpus americanus 

Milicia excelsa 

Millettia usaramensis 

Parkia filicoidea 

Populus ilicifolia 

Ricinodendron heudelotii 

Sterculia schliebenii 

Syzygium guineense 

Terminalia prunioides 

Terminalia sambesiaca 

Terminalia spinosa 

Warburgia stuhlmannii 

Xylopia spp 

This list is not exhaustive. It has been suggested that the local schools could play a major 

part in these trials as part of their environmental education programmes. The 

recommendation is that these trials be supervised either by TARDA or by a local NGO. Once 

some direction is evident from this experimentation, then the nursery operations should be 

« privatised » i.e. handed over to village environment committees or to individuals who are 

interested in the business. All enrichment planting, corridor planting and woodlots would be 

contracted out to these nurseries. 

41


Exotic and Invasive species 

TARDA has so far relied on 4 exotic tree species for its woodlot programme: 

a) Azadirachta indica. As stated previously (4.5), the invasive nature of Neem disqualifies 

this as a suitable species for reforestation and, unless it is found that the primates utilise 

the leaves or fruits, a programme of removal of the existing trees and seedlings should be 

planned. 

b) Pithecellobium dulce has not been very successful in the woodlots but was seen growing 

very well as individuals in the villages. It is probably a potential food species for the 

Mangabeys and perhaps more work is needed to determine whether this is a tree valued 

by local communities and whether establishment can be improved. 

c) Senna (Cassia) siamea. This widely used species probably has its value in further 

reforestation efforts but should be evaluated against other species. 

d) Eucalyptus camaldulensis. It is not known how successful this species has been, 

however, with the worldwide advances made in selecting new and better Eucalypt 

hybrids, their pole wood and firewood values cannot be discounted and they should 

continue to be evaluated within the woodlot programme. 

An additional species that has shown great promise further south, in Malindi District, is Albizia 

lebbeck. This should be included with any other novel species suggested by KEFRI or ICRAF 

in trials. 

The Prosopis problem is now countrywide and cannot be solved by TDIP alone. However, 

every effort should be made to remove it where feasible and to persuade local pastoralist 

communities to stop feeding pods to their livestock which assists greatly in spreading 

« Mathenge ». Innovative ideas must be sought to at least tame this weed even if there is 

little hope of eradication. 

Strengthen/establish Village Environment Committees 

As the first stage in moving towards some form of village management of the forest or PFM, 

the village committees need to be strengthened and an environmental subcommittee created 

where none exist. In a similar manner to the approached used by CFCU in Kwale and Kilifi 

Districts (now also Malindi District), these village committees should be encouraged to 

appoint Forest Guards or Wardens that draw some honoraria, initially from the donor project, 

but eventually from committee funds raised from sale of wood products and from fines. 

Village Guards/Wardens 

These should be appointed by the Village Committees on the following basis: 

i. Must be local resident of village 

ii. One guard or warden per 10 Ha (with obviously a minimum of 1 guard for forests less 

than 10 Ha). Thus Forest 48 with its reported size of 30 Ha would initially have 3, 

increasing as necessary with expansion and corridor creation). 

iii. The ‘honorarium’ should not be considered a salary. This needs further discussion as 

to whether the « Kaya system » is workable, but a possible combination of nursery 

contracts with these ‘honoraria’ should be explored. 

Riverbank Strip Forest Development 

Two of the most striking facts about the primates’ habitat preferences are that they like 

riverine forest and that they like the forest perimeter. One of the most effective ways of 

creating new habitat is thus to utilise the riverbank and the protection this is afforded by 

Kenyan legislation. Prior to the enacting the Environment Management Act, it was standard 

that 30m on either side of a river should NOT be cultivated. Although this was often 

contravened with impunity, it is probable that it is enforceable using the new legislation. With 

the advantage of the high water-table, it should be the quickest and easiest place to establish 

a forested strip using fig stakes of Ficus sycomorus. Overtime a more generous strip can be 

negotiated with the village committees, extending it to perhaps 100 metres (Appendix 6). 

The use of this strip to interplant mango trees will be beneficial to both the villagers and the 

endangered primates. 

42


It should be noted that the S-E study produces evidence that the pastoralist communities use 

some of this strip for cultivation. The use of the law to move them should be coupled with 

integration into the irrigation project with the allocation of their own plots. 

East/West Connections 

Concurrent with the roughly north/south establishment of the ‘River Strip’, these then need to 

be cross linked to the existing forest patches. Three corridors are envisaged (Appendix 6): 

• Sailoni/Kulesa – linking 65 to 48 to the riverbank 

• Wema/Bvumbwe – linking 66 to 68 to 56 to the riverbank 

• Lango ya Shimba/Hewani/Baandi – linking 67 to 63 to 64 to the river bank 

Although somewhat bigger that the area originally set aside by TARDA for reforestation, the 

only real loss to the paddy fields are two areas, one in Block B between forests 66 and 68 and 

another in Block E between forests 63 and 64. The width of the corridors has been chosen 

arbitrarily and can be adjusted to suit various parameters. 

Woodlots - Flood irrigation 

Both the Socio Economic and the Primatological studies suggest that the irrigated fields 

should not be operated for rice production alone. Diversification into other irrigated crops 

(vegetables, fruit trees etc) will be of huge benefit to the local communities and, with the 

inclusion of some cattle fodder production, be a much needed mechanism for bringing the 

pastoralist community into the scheme and lessen the historical conflict between them and 

the agriculturalists. 

It is recommended here that, as part of this diversification, the mixed woodlots and some of 

the proposed corridors are flood irrigated where possible. This will have a huge impact on the 

rate of establishing them (therefore lessen the time before first harvest) and increase 

production of wood products per unit area. 

Buffer zones 

This is a possible idea for the bigger areas in which fuel wood harvest is allowed on edges 

only, with faster growing species planted on outside and indigenous nearer the core. 

Management issues that should be considered are: 

i. The areas where different extractive forest uses are permitted must be very clearly 

defined so that there can be no misunderstanding about it. 

ii. Community members must be involved in mapping, demarcating and deciding how 

these areas are utilised. (Similar to what is being done at Dida, in Arabuko-Sokoke FR. 

Perhaps a visit to this area for some TDIP community members should be planned). 

Recovery Programme Redlisted Species 

The two species that deserve some consideration are the tree Cynometra lukei and the 

woody herb Megalochlamys tanaensis. The former is known from a similar habitat in the 

Selous GR and Kalunga forest, both in Tanzania. It is also known from further upriver in 

TRNPR and is therefore not considered in need of major intervention at this time. The efforts 

to preserve and extend the existing Cynometra rich forests 66, 67, and 68 should be 

sufficient. 

On the other hand, the Megalochlamys appears to be very much « critically endangered » 

and immediate effort should be made, in conjunction with NMK, to collect some material and 

begin cultivation and multiplication. This plant will probably respond well to vegetative 

propagation, but seed collections should also be made. The TARDA nursery should hold a 

reservoir and supervise the eventual reintroduction programme to the forests when and where 

suitable. 

Baboon control 

Much ill feeling was expressed by villagers towards forest conservation and enlargement if 

this meant increased numbers of baboons. It was stated that, although TARDA had 

encouraged KWS to remove baboons from the area early in the history of the project, very 

43


little was being done to keep the numbers under control. This is one of the prime 

opportunities for TARDA to repair its relationship with the local communities and thus baboon 

control must be made a priority. 

Pastoralists 

The conflict and distrust that exists between the two groups, the Pokomo on the one hand 

and the Wardey, Somali and Orma on the other, impacts negatively on all aspects of natural 

resource management. Efforts were being made by TARDA and at a political level to improve 

the situation. It is imperative that more effort is made towards understanding and integration. 

Part of the solution lies in ensuring that the pastoralists do not continue to feel 

ignored/dispossessed, and that the agriculturalists do not continue to feel threatened. A 

donor-funded rehabilitation project should include a component of livestock health and 

improvement alongside the suggested experimentation with irrigated fodder crops. 

Community Development Projects – Income Generation 

Tourism 

It is well understood within TARDA management that there is a strong potential for tourism 

activities in the area. It is easily accessible to low budget tourists that travel by bus to Lamu. 

Offering an affordable night’s stay/campsite with bird and monkey walks could encourage 

them to stop for a night on their way. Higher budget tourist who fly to Lamu or stay at 

Watamu/Malindi could be offered day trips. This income source can only be tapped if some 

investment is made in training local guides. 

Mangos 

The primates like mangos and so do the people, they grow fast, and often intermix with 

indigenous species. However, production during the fruiting season is greater than demand. 

In every village there is a huge pile of rotting, unused mangos from the last season. There is 

an urgent need to improve marketing and seek new markets for novel products: export dried 

mango; mango juice; mango jam; and mango yoghurt (there is never a shortage of milk there 

either!). Increased income from the Mango crop will directly improve the community’s 

financial status and make conservation less of a luxury. 


This study was initiated by Dr Abe of JBIC and her early discussions with the various 

consultants set the scope and objectives of this work. It could not have gone forward without 

the support of Richard Mwendandu, Environment Officer of TARDA. His interest in the 

problem led to his presence in the field and participation in the survey with humour and 

energy. The following field personnel are thanked for their help and for information offered on 

local names and plant uses as well historical perspectives: Shadrack Kibindyo (TARDA), 

Kamora Phanuel (Headman, Sailoni Village), Dismus Wario (Elder, Wema Village), and 

Jonathan Wachu (Elder, Hewani Village). 

Members of the Primate Study (Pam Cunneyworth and Alex Rhys-Hurn), the Socio-economic 

study (Richard Hatfield) and the Carbon Study (Julia Glenday) are thanked for sharing their 

reports and ideas. Dr Tom Butynski was instrumental in bringing the different components 

together and shaping the whole study. CEPF, in particular John Watkin, is thanked for 

providing the funding, so that this important step in the process of rehabilitating TDIP can 

proceed in a more environmentally conscious design. Lastly, Trish Luke is thanked for 

proofing and patience. 

REFERENCES 

Andrews, P., Groves, C.P. & Horne, J.F.M., (1975). Ecology of the lower Tana River flood 

plain (Kenya). J. East Afr. Nat. Hist. Soc & Nat. Mus. 151:1-31. 

Beentje, H.J. (1993). Kenya Trees, Shrubs and Lianas. NMK, Nairobi. 

Butynski, T.M. & Mwangi, G., (1994). Conservation Status and Distribution of the Tana 

River Red Colobus and Crested Mangabey. Report for: Zoo Atlanta, Kenya Wildlife 

Service, National Museums of Kenya, Institute of Primate Research, and East African 

Wildlife Society. 

44


Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund (CEPF). (2003). The Ecosystem Profile of the 

Eastern Arc Mountains & Coastal Forests of Tanzania & Kenya Biodiversity Hotspot. 

Flora of Tropical East Africa (FTEA). (1952- ). Authors Various. Crown Agents, London & 

Balkema, Rotterdam. 

Gereau, R.E. & Luke, W.R.Q. (2003). List of Potentially Threatened Plants of the Eastern Arc 

Mountains & Coastal Forests of Tanzania & Kenya Biodiversity Hotspot. Unpublished 

Report. CEPF. 

Glenday, J. (2005). Preliminary Assessment of Carbon Storage and the Potential for Forestry 

Based Carbon Offset Projects in the Lower Tana River Forests of the Tana Delta 

Irrigation Project and the Tana River National Primate Reserve. Unpublished Report to 

CEPF. 

Hatfield, R. (2005). Rehabilitation of TDIP (Tana River Irrigation Project) Polder 1: Rapid 

Environmental Impact Assessment - Socio-Economic Assessment. Unpublished Report 

to CEPF. 

IUCN. (2002). The 2002 Red List of Threatened Species. IUCN, Cambridge and Gland. 

Kenya Indigenous Forest Conservation Project (KIFCON). (1993). Tana River National 

Primate Reserve Forests Survey Report. Unpublished Report. 

Marsh, C. W. (1976). A Management Plan for the Tana River Game Reserve. Report to the 

Kenya Department of Wildlife Conservation and Management, Nairobi. 

Medley, K. E., Kinnaird, M. F. & Decker, B. S. (1989). A survey of the riverine forests in the 

Wema/Hewani vicinity with reference to development and the preservation of endemic 

primates and human resources. Utafiti 2(1):1-6 

Medley, K. E. (1992). Patterns of forest diversity along the Tana River, Kenya. Journal of 

Tropical Ecology 8:853-371 

Mbora, D. N. M. (2003). Habitat quality and fragmentation and the distribution and 

abundance of the Tana River red colobus (Procolobus rufomitratus) in eastern Kenya. 

Ph. D. Dissertation. Miami University. 

Mbora, D. N. M. & Meikle D.B. (2004). Forest Fragmentation and the Distribution, 

Abundance and Conservation of the Tana River Red Colobus (Procolobus rufomitratus). 

Biological Conservation, 118:67–77 

Nippon Koei Co. Ltd. (1998). The Environmental Impact Study of Tana Delta Irrigation 

Project, Final Report. African Biodiversity Institute Group. Unpublished 

Njue, A. (1992). The Tana River Forest, Kenya: hydrologic and edaphic factors as 

determinants of vegetation structure and function. PhD Thesis, University of California, 

Davis. 

Robertson, S.A. & Luke, W.R.Q. (1993). Kenya Coastal Forests. Unpublished report. WWF, 

Nairobi. 

Wakuluzu: Friends of the Colobus Trust. (2005). Census of the Tana River Red Colobus 

(Procolobus rufomitratus) and Tana River Crested Mangabey (Cercocebus galeritus 

galeritus) in the TDIP Area: Population and Distribution Changes 1972 – 2005. 

Unpublished report to CEPF. 

White, F. (1983). The vegetation of Africa. A descriptive memoir to accompany the 

UNESCO/AETFAT/UNSO Vegetation Map of Africa. Paris, UNESCO 

Wieczkowski, J., Mbora, D.N.M., Kariuki, A., and Strum, S., (2002). Tana River primate 

and habitat monitoring project. Unpublished progress report for Conservation 

International – Margot Marsh Biodiversity Foundation. 

45


Appendix 1. Terms of Reference for Botanical/Ecological study 

Desk study 

a) Carry out review of previous reports and surveys with regard to species inventories, forest 

composition, impacts and trends 

b) Interpretation of Satellite/Aerial photos to give historical perspective on change in forest 

cover throughout range 

Fieldwork 

Rapid assessment of current status of forests in the project area, select methodology that can 

give rugged results in short period. Select with assistance from TARDA and train 2-3 

community workers in survey techniques. 

Visit each patch, set out permanent sample plots if feasible time-wise (part of long-term 

monitoring?) 

Measure forest quality in terms of acceptable primate habitat – mean basal area of 14 food 

tree species (Mbora & Meikle 2004). Select 3 for survey? Spatial-temporal trends to help set 

priorities 

Update species list (Robertson & Luke 1993) – comments on endangered/threatened species 

(IUCN 2002), potentially endangered/threatened species (Gereau & Luke 2003), and species 

of economic value to the local communities. Exotic species imported by previous 

development eg Prosopis spp 

Measure of human impact on forest and compare level of impacts in different forests. Select 

methodology consistent with other CEPF projects (Frontiers TZ?) 

Data Analysis and Report 

Complete species identifications and analyse field data to produce recommendations in the 

following main areas: 

A. Design and Impact of Woodlots 

Selection criteria for exotics with minimum adverse affect 

Estimate production figures and demand (from Socio-economic study) 

Mix in suitable ‘fast’ growing indigenous species eg Albizia versicolor, Milicia excelsa and 

primate food species Ficus sycomorus etc, depending on ground water availability (distance 

from river) 

Check potential invasive species eg Neem. Prosopis eradicate? 

B. Corridors 

Design as per primatologist recommendation (recent history of connectivity, the metapopulation 

question) 

Economics – land lost to scheme and per hectare cost of planting 

Methodology – Nurseries, Planting schedule, Controls 

Enrichment Planting 

Selection of Sites 

Selection of Species 

Methodology (as per B above) 

Orma 

Design of corridors for access to water 

Fencing necessary? Cheaper alternatives – provide water beyond project area or Pokomo 

cultivated strip? 

46


Appendix 2. TARDA Figure 1-1-2. Distribution of Riverine Forests, Afforestation and 

Proposed Afforestation 

47


Appendix 3. Species Checklist of the Tana Delta Irrigation Project (Families alphabetical) 

SPECIES FAMILY Collector 

No. 

Sublocality 

Rarity Phyto 

g 

Habit 

Anisotes sp Acanthaceae R&L sr Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South ? S 

Local Name/Comment 

Asystasia ansellioides C.B.Clarke Acanthaceae L 10731 Sailoni Village RKC 3 H photo 

Asystasia gangetica (L.) T.Anderson s.l. Acanthaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 – 653 5 WH 

Barleria ramulosa C.B.Clarke forma Acanthaceae R&L 5340 Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 2X WH Glandular form 

Ecbolium amplexicaule S.Moore Acanthaceae R&L 5341 Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 2 S 

Elytraria acaulis (L.f.) Lindau Acanthaceae L sr063 Forest 67 - Lango la Simba, Pt 666 - 66 4 H 

Justicia schimperiana (Nees) Lindau Acanthaceae R&L 5328 Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 3 WH 

Justicia stachytarphetoides (Lindau) 

Acanthaceae R&L 5337 Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South RK? 2 WH 

C.B.Clarke 

Megalochlamys tanaensis Vollesen Acanthaceae L 10727 Forest 68 - Wema East4, Pt 657 - 659 R 1 WH photo. RARE ENDEMIC. 2nd 

Collection 

Megalochlamys trinervia (C.B.Clarke) 

Acanthaceae L 10726 Forest 68 - Wema East4, Pt 658 2X WH photo 

Vollesen 

Rhinacanthus gracilis Klotzsch Acanthaceae R&L 5338 Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 4 WH 

Ruellia amabilis S.Moore Acanthaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 3 WH 

Ruellia patula Jacq. Acanthaceae L sr053 Forest 48 - Kulesa East, Pt 654 - 656 5 WH 

Glinus oppositifolius (L.) A.DC. Aizoaceae L sr112 Forest 63 - Hewani South1, Pt 670 5 H 

Alangium salviifolium (L.f.) Wangerin ssp 

salviifolium 

Alangiaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 

653 

RK? 5 ST MULUNAE, MULONAE, 

MNUNAE* 

48


Limnophyton obtusifolium (L.) Miq. Alismataceae R&L 5324 Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South RKC 5 H 

Achyranthes aspera L. Amaranthaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 5 WH 

Cyathula coriacea Schinz Amaranthaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 2X WH 

Digera muricata (L.) Mart. ssp trinervis Amaranthaceae L sr Nr Wema 4 WH 

C.C.Towns. var trinervis 

Gomphrena celosioides Mart. Amaranthaceae L sr Nr Wema 5 H 

Psilotrichum scleranthum Thwaites Amaranthaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 5 WH 

Pupalia lappacea (L.) A.Juss. Amaranthaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 2/5 WH 

Rosifax sabuletorum C.C.Towns. Amaranthaceae L 10760 Forest 63 - Hewani South1, Pt 670 R? 2X WH 1st Tana District 

Crinum sp Amaryllidaceae L sr Nr Wema ? H 

Scadoxus multiflorus (Martyn) Raf. ssp 

multiflorus 

Amaryllidaceae L&R sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North 5 H 

Lannea schweinfurthii (Engl.) Engl. var Anacardiaceae L sr Wema Forest Patch pt 665 4 T MHANDARAKU* 

stuhlmannii (Engl.) Kokwaro 

Mangifera indica L. Anacardiaceae L sr001 Forest 59 - Hewani East1, Pt 669 5 T Naturalised. MUEMBE* 

Rhus natalensis Krauss Anacardiaceae R&L 5353 Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 5 ST 

Sorindeia madagascariensis DC. Anacardiaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 5 T MWAMBEMBE, MNYAMBEMBE 

Annona muricata L. Annonaceae L sr035 Forest 59 - Hewani East1, Pt 669 5 ST Cultivated 

Asteranthe asterias (S.Moore) Engl. & Diels 

ssp asterias 

Annonaceae L sr066 Forest 48 - Kulesa East, Pt 654 - 656 2 ST 

49


Monanthotaxis trichocarpa (Engl. & Diels) Annonaceae L 10703 Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 2 SS 

Verdc. 

Uvaria leptocladon Oliv. ssp septentrionalis Annonaceae R&L 5344 Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 3 SS MUNDAGONI 

Verdc. 

Uvaria lucida Benth. ssp lucida Annonaceae L 10753 Forest 63 - Hewani South1, Pt 670 2 SS MUNDAGONI 

Chlorophytum comosum (Thunb.) Jacq. Anthericaceae R&L 5343 Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 4 H 

Chlorophytum sp Anthericaceae L 10772 Forest 64 - Hewani South2, Pt 673 - 674 ? H 

Adenium obesum (Forssk.) Roem. & Schult. Apocynaceae L sr nr Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South, Pt 661 - 4 ST 

Alafia caudata Stapf Apocynaceae L 10775 Forest 69 - Mitapani South1, Pt 680 RK 4 L 

Alafia microstylis K.Schum. Apocynaceae L 10709 Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 3 L 

Carissa spinarum L. Apocynaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 4 S MUYAANSI 

Hunteria zeylanica (Retz.) Thwaites Apocynaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 3 ST COMBS. MTSUNGUSUNGU 

Landolphia watsoniana Romburgh Apocynaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - RK 2 L 

653 

Oncinotis tenuiloba Stapf Apocynaceae L 10720 Forest 48 - Kulesa East, Pt 654 - 656 RK 5 L MUMBUU 

Saba comorensis (Bojer) Pichon Apocynaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 4 L MAUNGO, MUUNGO 

Schizozygia coffaeoides Baill. Apocynaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 2 S 

Strophanthus courmontii Franch. Apocynaceae R&L 5313 Forest 57 - Wema East2 3 L MUBONGWENA 

Culcasia orientalis Mayo Araceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 2 L MHUNAYULIMI, MHUNAJWIMI 

Gonatopus boivinii (Decne.) Engl. Araceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 4 H 

50


Pistia stratiotes L. Araceae R&L sr Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 5 H 

Marsdenia sp cf macrantha (Klotzsch) 

Schltr. 

Pentatropis nivalis (J.F.Gmel.) D.V.Field & 

J.R.L.Wood 

Pergularia daemia (Forssk.) Chiov. 

Tacazzea apiculata Oliv. 

Tylophora apiculata K.Schum. 

Asclepiadaceae 

(Apocynaceae) 


(Apocynaceae) 


(Apocynaceae) 


(Apocynaceae) 


(Apocynaceae) 

L 10776 Forest 69 - Mitapani South1, Pt 680 RKC? 3? L 

L sr012 Forest 64 - Hewani South2, Pt 673 - 674 5 L MUNYAMIA 

L&R sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North 5 L 

R&L 5354 Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 4 L HONDO 

R&L 5308 Forest 60 - Hewani East2 R 2 L 

Azolla nilotica Mett. Azollaceae R&L sr Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South RKC 3 F 

Kigelia africana (Lam.) Benth. Bignoniaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 4 T M'BWOKA 

Spathodea campanulata P.Beauv. ssp 

nilotica (Seem.) Bidgood ined. 

Bignoniaceae L sr063 Forest 61 - Hewani East3, Pt 672 4 T Planted 

Cordia faulknerae Verdc. Boraginaceae L&R 1256 Forest 68 - Wema East4 2 SS 

Cordia goetzei Guerke Boraginaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 4 T MDOKO 

Cordia sinensis Lam. Boraginaceae L sr001 Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South, Pt 661 - 664 5 T MUHALI 

Commiphora africana (A.Rich.) Engl. ? Burseraceae R&L sr Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 2X/4 ST 

Commiphora campestris Engl. ssp glabrata 

(Engl.) Gillett 

Burseraceae L sr013 Forest 69 - Mitapani South1, Pt 680 3 T MUNSUNSU 

51


Afzelia quanzensis Welw. 

Caesalpinia volkensii Harms 

Cassia abbreviata Oliv. Ssp beareana 

(Holmes) Brenan 


Oxystigma msoo Harms 

Parkinsonia aculeata L. 

Senna occidentalis (L.) Link 

Senna singueana (Delile) Lock 

Tamarindus indica L. 


(Leguminosae) 


(Leguminosae) 


(Leguminosae) 


(Leguminosae) 


(Leguminosae) 


(Leguminosae) 


(Leguminosae) 


(Leguminosae) 


(Leguminosae) 

L sr064 Forest 61 - Hewani East3, Pt 672 4 T Planted 

L sr094 Forest 69 - Mitapani South1, Pt 680 3 L 

L sr088 Forest 64 - Hewani South2, Pt 673 - 674 4 T 

L&R 1253 Forest 68 - Wema East4 R 2 T MKUNUMBI, MPAKATA 

L&R 1240 Forest 61 - Hewani East3 RK 2 T MTSO, MCHO? 

L sr003 Forest 64 - Hewani South2, Pt 673 - 674 5 ST Exotic 

L&R sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North 5 S 

R&L sr Forest 60 - Hewani East2 5 ST MUBARAKA 

L sr047 Forest 48 - Kulesa East, Pt 654 - 656 5 T MKWAYU 

Cadaba farinosa Forssk. ssp farinosa Capparaceae L 10734 Wema Forest Patch pt 665 5 S 

Capparis sepiaria L. var subglabra (Oliv.) Capparaceae L 10733 Wema Forest Patch pt 665 4 L 

DeWolf 

Capparis viminea Oliv. Capparaceae L sr017 Forest 48 - Kulesa East, Pt 654 - 656 4 L HAMWALI. Cough Medicine 

Maerua grantii Oliv. Capparaceae L sr049 Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South, Pt 661 - 664 3 S MUSANAMAKI 

Maerua holstii Pax Capparaceae L sr044 Forest 48 - Kulesa East, Pt 654 - 656 3 SS 

Maerua kirkii (Oliv.) F.White Capparaceae L 10715 Forest 48 - Kulesa East, Pt 654 - 656 3 ST 

Maerua macrantha Gilg? Capparaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 3? SS 

Ritchiea capparoides (Andr.) Britten Capparaceae L&R 1242 Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North 4 SS MUHI YA FIGO 

Thilachium thomasii Gilg Capparaceae R&L sr Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 3 ST 

52


Gymnosporia heterophylla (Eckl. & Zeyh.) Celastraceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 4 ST 

Loes. 

Loeseneriella africana (Willd.) N.Halle var Celastraceae L sr029 Forest 68 - Wema East4, Pt 657 - 659 4 L CHII 

richardiana (Cambess.) N.Halle 

Maytenus undata (Thunb.) Blakelock Celastraceae R&L 5332 Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 5 T 

Salacia erecta (G.Don) Walp. Celastraceae L 10710 Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 4 L 

Salacia stuhlmanniana Loes. Celastraceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 3 L IMPO 

Combretum butyrosum (G.Bertol.) Tul. Combretaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - RK? 2 L 

653 

Combretum constrictum (Benth.) Laws. Combretaceae L 10732 Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South, Pt 661 - 664 4 L MUSUNGUJAI. Frt causes 

hiccups! 

Combretum hereroense Schinz ssp volkensii Combretaceae L 10755 Forest 63 - Hewani South1, Pt 670 2X ST 

(Engl.) Wickens var parvifolium (Engl.) 

Wickens 

Combretum paniculatum Vent. ssp 

Combretaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 4 L 

paniculatum 

Pteleopsis tetraptera Wickens Combretaceae L&R 1260 Forest 68 - Wema East4 2 T MKURUBO BARA 

Terminalia brevipes Pampan. Combretaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 3 ST MKOKOA 

Aneilema calceolus Brenan Commelinaceae L 10777 Forest 69 - Mitapani South1, Pt 680 RK 2 H 

Commelina benghalensis L. Commelinaceae L sr069 Forest 67 - Lango la Simba, Pt 666 - 66 5 H 

Commelina bracteosa Hassk. Commelinaceae L 10750 Forest 63 - Hewani South1, Pt 670 4 H 

Commelina erecta L. Commelinaceae L&R 1248 Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North 3 H 

Commelina sp cf petersii Hassk. Commelinaceae L 10778 Forest 69 - Mitapani South1, Pt 680 RKC? 3? H 

Aspilia mossambicensis (Oliv.) Wild 

Compositae 

(Asteraceae) 

L sr023 Forest 59 - Hewani East1, Pt 669 4 S 

53


Blepharispermum ellenbeckii Cufod.? 

Eclipta prostrata (L.) L. 

Launaea cornuta (Oliv. & Hiern) C.Jeffrey 

Microglossa hildebrandtii O.Hoffm. 

Pluchea dioscoridis (L.) DC. 

Pluchea ovalis (Pers.) DC. 

Tridax procumbens L. 

Vernonia aemulans Vatke? 

Vernonia cinerea (L.) Less. var cinerea 

Vernonia hildebrandtii Vatke 

Compositae 

(Asteraceae) 

Compositae 

(Asteraceae) 

Compositae 

(Asteraceae) 

Compositae 

(Asteraceae) 

Compositae 

(Asteraceae) 

Compositae 

(Asteraceae) 

Compositae 

(Asteraceae) 

Compositae 

(Asteraceae) 

Compositae 

(Asteraceae) 

Compositae 

(Asteraceae) 

R&G 6595 Forest 68 - Wema East4 RKC? 2X? S 

R&L 5312 Hewani to Wema 5 WH 

L sr Nr Wema 4 H 

R&L 5351 Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 2 SS RIJI 

L sr002 Forest 69 - Mitapani South1, Pt 680 5 S 

L 10748 Forest 63 - Hewani South1, Pt 670 RKC 4 S 

L sr049 Forest 61 - Hewani East3, Pt 672 5 H 

L 10761 Forest 63 - Hewani South1, Pt 670 4? WH 

L sr029 Forest 59 - Hewani East1, Pt 669 5 WH 

L sr006 Forest 48 - Kulesa East, Pt 654 - 656 3 SS MALIWASA 

Agelaea pentagyna (Lam.) Baill. Connaraceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 5 L 

Hewittia malabarica (L.) Suresh Convolvulaceae L&R sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North 5 L 

Ipomoea aquatica Forssk. Convolvulaceae L sr054 Forest 61 - Hewani East3, Pt 672 5 L 

Ipomoea garckeana Vatke Convolvulaceae L sr012 Forest 56 - Wema East1, Pt 660 3 L 

Ipomoea shupangensis Baker Convolvulaceae L 10704 Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - RK 4 L 1st Tana District 

653 

Jacquemontia ovalifolia (Vahl) Hallier f. Convolvulaceae L sr Nr Wema RKC 4 L 

Coccinia grandis (L.) Voigt Cucurbitaceae L sr006 Forest 56 - Wema East1, Pt 660 5 L 

54


Kedrostis abdallai A.Zimm. Cucurbitaceae L 10735 Wema Forest Patch pt 665 3 L 

Kedrostis foetidissima (Jacq.) Cogn. Cucurbitaceae L 10752 Forest 63 - Hewani South1, Pt 670 5 L 

Momordica trifoliolata Hook.f. Cucurbitaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 5 L MHOMBOHOMBO. Smoke for 

bees 

Bolboschoenus maritimus (L.) Palla Cyperaceae L 10744 nr 63 RKC 5 H 

Dichapetalum sp 1 of CFS Dichapetalaceae L 10717 Forest 48 - Kulesa East, Pt 654 - 656 R? 1? SS 

Sansevieria conspicua N.E.Br. Dracaenaceae R&L sr Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 4 S 

Sansevieria powellii N.E.Br. Dracaenaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 3 S 

Diospyros abyssinica (Hiern) F.White ssp Ebenaceae L 10706 Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 4 T MUYUHI 

abyssinica 

Diospyros bussei Guerke Ebenaceae R&L sr Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 2 T 

Diospyros consolatae Chiov. Ebenaceae R&L sr Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 3 ST 

Diospyros ferrea (Willd.) Bakh. Ebenaceae L&R 1258 Forest 68 - Wema East4 5 T MUNYIZA, MNYIZA 

Diospyros greenwayi F.White Ebenaceae L 10728 Forest 68 - Wema East4, Pt 657 - 659 2 ST MUNYISA 

Diospyros kabuyeana F.White Ebenaceae L 10770 Forest 64 - Hewani South2, Pt 673 - 674 2 T 

Diospyros mespiliformis A.DC. Ebenaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 4 T MKURU 

Diospyros natalensis (Harv.) Brenan Ebenaceae L&R 1255 Forest 68 - Wema East4 5 ST 1st Tana District? 

Euclea divinorum Hiern Ebenaceae L 10768 Forest 64 - Hewani South2, Pt 673 - 674 4 ST 2nd Tana District? 

55


Euclea racemosa Murr. Ssp schimperi 

(A.DC.) F.White ? 

Ebenaceae L 10741 Forest 67 - Lango la Simba, Pt 666 - 66 4? ST 

Erythroxylum fischeri Engl. Erythroxylaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 

653 

RKC 4 ST MLUHI-NDERA. POLES 

Acalypha echinus Pax & K.Hoffm. Euphorbiaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 2 S MVUNJA KIUNDU 

Acalypha fruticosa Forssk. Euphorbiaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 3/5 S 

Acalypha indica L. Euphorbiaceae L sr006 Forest 64 - Hewani South2, Pt 673 - 674 5 WH 

Antidesma venosum Tul. Euphorbiaceae L 10757 Forest 63 - Hewani South1, Pt 670 4? ST MSANSUZI* 

Bridelia cathartica G.Bertol. Euphorbiaceae L&R sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North 4 ST 

Bridelia micrantha (Hochst.) Baill. Euphorbiaceae L sr044 Forest 59 - Hewani East1, Pt 669 4 T MKULOTSO 

Caperonia fistulosa Beille Euphorbiaceae L&R 1251 Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North 4 WH 

Croton menyharthii Pax Euphorbiaceae R&L sr Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 4 S MWALIKADJI 

Dalechampia scandens L. var cordofana Euphorbiaceae R&O 6424 nr Wema 5 L 

(Webb) Muell.Arg. 

Drypetes natalensis (Harv.) Hutch. var Euphorbiaceae L sr032 Forest 69 - Mitapani South1, Pt 680 2 T 

leiogyna Brenan 

Erythrococca kirkii (Muell.Arg.) Prain Euphorbiaceae L&R sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North 3 S 

Euphorbia indica Lam. Euphorbiaceae R&L 5309 Hewani-Wema 5 H 

Euphorbia tirucalli L. Euphorbiaceae R&L sr Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 5 ST MTONGTONGO 

Flueggea virosa (Willd.) Voigt ssp virosa Euphorbiaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 5 ST MUKWAMBA 

Phyllanthus reticulatus Poir. Euphorbiaceae L sr013 Forest 67 - Lango la Simba, Pt 666 - 66 5 S 

Phyllanthus somalensis Hutch. Euphorbiaceae R&L sr Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 2X S 

56


Ricinus communis L. Euphorbiaceae L sr055 Forest 61 - Hewani East3, Pt 672 5 S MUBONYE. Naturalised 

Spirostachys venenifera (Pax) Pax Euphorbiaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 3 T MCHALAKA, MTSAKA 

Suregada zanzibariensis Baill. Euphorbiaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 5 ST 

Tragia furialis Bojer Euphorbiaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 5 L UGENI 

Tragia hildebrandtii Muell.Arg. Euphorbiaceae R&L 5311 Hewani-Wema 3 H 

Flagellaria guineensis Schumach. Flagellariaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 4 SS MURHURHUKI, MURHURHUCHI 

Enicostema axillare (Lam.) A.Raynal ssp 

axillare 

Gentianaceae L&R 1249 Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North 5 H 

Brachiaria 2 

Brachiaria 3 

Brachiaria xantholeuca? 

Cyrtococcum trigonum (Retz.) A.Camus 

Indet 

Oryza eichingeri Peter 

Oryza longistaminata A.Chev. & Rochr. 

Panicum maximum Jacq. 

Panicum sp 

Sorghum arundinaceum (Desv.) Stapf 

Gramineae 

(Poaceae) 

Gramineae 

(Poaceae) 

Gramineae 

(Poaceae) 

Gramineae 

(Poaceae) 

Gramineae 

(Poaceae) 

Gramineae 

(Poaceae) 

Gramineae 

(Poaceae) 

Gramineae 

(Poaceae) 

Gramineae 

(Poaceae) 

Gramineae 

(Poaceae) 

L 10721 Forest 48 - Kulesa East, Pt 654 - 656 ? H 

L 10754 Forest 63 - Hewani South1, Pt 670 ? H 

L sr026 Forest 64 - Hewani South2, Pt 673 - 674 ? H 

L sr083 Forest 64 - Hewani South2, Pt 673 - 674 5 H 

L 10742 Forest 67 - Lango la Simba, Pt 666 - 66 ? H 

L 10756 Forest 63 - Hewani South1, Pt 670 RKC 5 H 

L 10763 Pt 671 RK 5 H 

L sr022 Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South, Pt 661 - 664 4 H 

L sr057 Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South, Pt 661 - 664 ? H 

L sr038 Forest 59 - Hewani East1, Pt 669 5 H 

57


Stenotaphrum dimidiatum (L.) Brongn. 

Gramineae 

(Poaceae) 

R&L 5323 Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 5 H 

Garcinia livingstonei T.Anderson 

Guttiferae 

(Clusiaceae) 

L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 4 T MCHOCHOZI, MPEKETSO. 

FRTS, UJI 

Ottelia exerta (Ridley) Dandy Hydrocharitaceae R&L 5333 Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South RKC 4 H 

Iodes usambarensis Sleumer Icacinaceae L 10774 Forest 69 - Mitapani South1, Pt 680 RK 2 L 

Basilicum polystachyon (L.) Moench 

Clerodendrum acerbianum (Vis.) Benth. & 

Hook.f. 

Leucas urticifolia (Vahl) R.Br. var 

angustifolia Sebald 

Premna velutina Guerke 

Labiatae 

(Lamiaceae) 

Labiatae 

(Lamiaceae) 

Labiatae 

(Lamiaceae) 

Labiatae 

(Lamiaceae) 

L sr040 Forest 67 - Lango la Simba, Pt 666 - 66 4 H 

L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 3 S MPUMPU 

L 10767 Forest 64 - Hewani South2, Pt 673 - RKC 2X WH 

674 

L 10711 Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 3 SS 

Barringtonia racemosa (L.) Spreng. Lecythidaceae R&L sr Forest 60 - Hewani East2 5 ST MTOLO 

Lemna sp Lemnaceae R&L sr Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 5 H 

Utricularia inflexa Forssk. var inflexa Lentibulariaceae R&L 5346 Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South RKC 5 H 

Strychnos mitis S.Moore Loganiaceae L 10713 Forest 48 - Kulesa East, Pt 654 - 656 4 T MUWARE 

58


Agelanthus sansibarensis (Engl.) Polh. & Loranthaceae R&L sr Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 3 P MNYUNI 

Wiens ssp sansibarensis 

Oncella curviramea (Engl.) Danser Loranthaceae L sr111 Forest 63 - Hewani South1, Pt 670 2 P on Indigofera 

Nesaea stuhlmannii Koehne Lythraceae L&R 1250 Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North RK 2 WH 

Abutilon pannosum (Forst.f.) Schlecht. Malvaceae R&O 6425 nr Wema 5 WH 

Abutilon zanzibaricum Mast. Malvaceae L 10749 Forest 63 - Hewani South1, Pt 670 3 WH 

Hibiscus calyphyllus Cav. Malvaceae L sr057 Forest 48 - Kulesa East, Pt 654 - 656 RKC? 2X? WH 

Hibiscus cannabinus L. Malvaceae L sr Nr Wema 4 WH 

Hibiscus hildebrandtii Sprague & Hutch.? Malvaceae L sr072 Forest 67 - Lango la Simba, Pt 666 - 66 3? WH 

Hibiscus micranthus L.f. Malvaceae L&R sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North 5 WH MVUNJAHUKUMU 

Hibiscus panduriformis Burm.f. Malvaceae L 10719 Nr Wema RKC 5 WH 

Thespesia danis Oliv. Malvaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 3 ST MUORO, MUDANISA 

Marsilea fadeniana Launert? Marsileaceae R&L 5318 Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South R 2 F 

Azadirachta indica A.Juss. Meliaceae L sr008 Forest 59 - Hewani East1, Pt 669 5 T Exotic invasive 

Ekebergia capensis Sparrm. Meliaceae L 10779 Forest 69 - Mitapani South1, Pt 680 RKC 4 T 

Trichilia emetica Vahl Meliaceae L&R sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North 5 T MUWAHI* 

59


Anisocycla blepharosepala Diels ssp Menispermaceae L 10707 Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 2 L 

tanzaniensis Vollesen 

Cissampelos mucronata A.Rich. Menispermaceae L 10746 Forest 59 - Hewani East1, Pt 669 RKC 4 L MUCHOVE 

Cissampelos pareira L. var hirsuta (DC.) Menispermaceae L&R sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North 5 L 

Forman 

Tiliacora funifera (Miers) Oliv. Menispermaceae L sr080 Forest 63 - Hewani South1, Pt 670 4 L 

Acacia mellifera (Vahl) Benth. 

Acacia pentagona (Schumach. & Thonn.) 

Hook.f. 

Acacia robusta Burch. Ssp usambarensis 

(Taub.) Brenan 

Acacia rovumae Oliv. 

Acacia senegal (L.) Willd. 

Acacia stuhlmannii Taub. 

Acacia zanzibarica (S.Moore) Taub. var 

zanzibarica 

Albizia glaberrima (Schumach. & Thonn.) 

Benth. var glabrescens (Oliv.) Brenan 

Albizia saman (Jacq.) F.Muell. 

Leucaena latisiliqua (L.) Gillis 

Mimosa pigra L. 

Neptunia oleracea Lour. 

Newtonia erlangeri (Harms) Brenan 

Pithecellobium dulce (Roxb.) Benth. 

Mimosaceae 

(Leguminosae) 

Mimosaceae 

(Leguminosae) 

Mimosaceae 

(Leguminosae) 

Mimosaceae 

(Leguminosae) 

Mimosaceae 

(Leguminosae) 

Mimosaceae 

(Leguminosae) 

Mimosaceae 

(Leguminosae) 

Mimosaceae 

(Leguminosae) 

Mimosaceae 

(Leguminosae) 

Mimosaceae 

(Leguminosae) 

Mimosaceae 

(Leguminosae) 

Mimosaceae 

(Leguminosae) 

Mimosaceae 

(Leguminosae) 

Mimosaceae 

(Leguminosae) 

L sr031 Forest 68 - Wema East4, Pt 657 - 659 4 T MUSOVASA 

L&R 1241 Forest 61 - Hewani East3 4 L TSEHWAA. 1st Tana Distr? 

L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 3 T MUNGA. CHARCOAL 

L sr033 Forest 48 - Kulesa East, Pt 654 - 656 3 T MUNGA NGOWE* 

L sr058 Forest 61 - Hewani East3, Pt 672 4 T 

L sr001 Forest 64 - Hewani South2, Pt 673 - 674 4 ST MUDSEDSEWE 

R&L sr Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 3 ST MURIELLA 

L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 4 T MPHUMPE, MSADSASUMBII. 

CANOES 

L sr059 Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South, Pt 661 - 664 5 T Exotic 

L sr069 Forest 61 - Hewani East3, Pt 672 5 ST Exotic 

R&L 5347 Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 5 S 

L sr nr Forest 67 5 WH 

L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 2 T MUKAMI. CHARCOAL 

L sr059 Forest 61 - Hewani East3, Pt 672 5 T Exotic 

60


Prosopis juliflora DC. 

Mimosaceae 

(Leguminosae) 

L sr059 Forest 67 - Lango la Simba, Pt 666 - 66 5 T Exotic 

Ficus bubu Warb. Moraceae L sr093 Forest 48 - Kulesa East, Pt 654 - 656 4 T 

Ficus bussei Mildbr. & Burret Moraceae L sr065 Forest 48 - Kulesa East, Pt 654 - 656 3 T HIDOLE 

Ficus natalensis Hochst. Moraceae L sr047 Forest 56 - Wema East1, Pt 660 4 T HIDOLE, MVUMA* 

Ficus scassellatii Pamp. ssp scassellatii Moraceae L 10729 Forest 68 - Wema East4, Pt 657 - 659 4 T 

Ficus sycomorus L. Moraceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 5 T MKUYU, MKUJU*. CANOES 

Eugenia capensis (Eckl. & Zeyh.) Sond. ssp Myrtaceae R&L 5326 Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 2 ST 

multiflora Verdc. 

Eugenia nigerina A.Chev. Myrtaceae L&R 1259 Forest 68 - Wema East4 3 S 

Boerhavia erecta L. Nyctaginaceae L sr012 Forest 61 - Hewani East3, Pt 672 4 WH 

Nymphaea lotus L. Nymphaeaceae L sr056 Forest 61 - Hewani East3, Pt 672 5 H 

Ochna thomasiana Engl. & Gilg Ochnaceae R&L 5317 Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 2 ST 

Ximenia americana L. var caffra (Sond.) 

Engl. 

Olacaceae R&L sr Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 4 ST 

Jasminum fluminense Vell. Oleaceae L sr039 Forest 63 - Hewani South1, Pt 670 4 L 

61


Opilia amentacea Roxb. Opiliaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 4 L 

Microcoelia exilis Lindl.? Orchidaceae R&L 5322 Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 4? E 

Borassus aethiopum Mart. 

Elaeis guineensis Jacq. 

Hyphaene compressa H.Wendl. 

Phoenix reclinata Jacq. 

Palmae 

(Arecaceae) 

Palmae 

(Arecaceae) 

Palmae 

(Arecaceae) 

Palmae 

(Arecaceae) 

R&L sr Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 4 T MHABFA* 

L sr022 Forest 59 - Hewani East1, Pt 669 5 T MUVUTSE 

R&L sr Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 3 T MKOMA 

L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 4 T MKINDU 

Abrus precatorius L. ssp africanus Verdc. 

Aeschynomene uniflora E.Mey. var uniflora 

Alysicarpus glumaceus (Vahl) DC. ssp 

glumaceus var glumaceus 

Angylocalyx braunii Harms 

Clitorea ternatea L. 

Crotalaria laburnoides Klotzsch var 

laburnoides 

Dalbergia vacciniifolia Vatke 

Indigofera schimperi Jaub. & Spach var 

schimperi 

Rhynchosia micrantha Harms 

Rhynchosia minima (L.) DC. var minima 

Papilionaceae 

(Leguminosae) 

Papilionaceae 

(Leguminosae) 

Papilionaceae 

(Leguminosae) 

Papilionaceae 

(Leguminosae) 

Papilionaceae 

(Leguminosae) 

Papilionaceae 

(Leguminosae) 

Papilionaceae 

(Leguminosae) 

Papilionaceae 

(Leguminosae) 

Papilionaceae 

(Leguminosae) 

Papilionaceae 

(Leguminosae) 

L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 5 L 

R&L 5348 Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 5 WH 1st Tana District? 

R&L 5349 Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South RKC 5 WH MGOMBA NFOFI? 

L 10758 Forest 63 - Hewani South1, Pt 670 2 ST 

L sr015 Forest 56 - Wema East1, Pt 660 5 L 

L 10762 Forest 63 - Hewani South1, Pt 670 5 WH 

R&L 5329 Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 2 SS 

L 10736 Forest 67 - Lango la Simba, Pt 666 - 66 4 S 

L 10765 Forest 61 - Hewani East3, Pt 672 4 L 

A 

L 10730 Forest 56 - Wema East1, Pt 660 5 L 

B 

62


Rhynchosia sp 

Rhynchosia sublobata (Schumach.) Meikle 

Sesbania quadrata Gillett 

Sesbania speciosa Taub. 

Teramnus labialis (L.f.) Spreng. ssp arabicus 

Verdc. 

Papilionaceae 

(Leguminosae) 

Papilionaceae 

(Leguminosae) 

Papilionaceae 

(Leguminosae) 

Papilionaceae 

(Leguminosae) 

Papilionaceae 

(Leguminosae) 

L sr007 Forest 67 - Lango la Simba, Pt 666 - 66 ? L 

L 10765 Forest 63 - Hewani South1, Pt 670 5 L 

B 

L sr Nr Wema RKC 3 WH 

R&L 5350 Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South RK 2 WH 

L 10766 Forest 61 - Hewani East3, Pt 672 5 L 

Adenia gummifera (Harv.) Harms var 

Passifloraceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 4 L 

gummifera 

Adenia rumicifolia Engl.? Passifloraceae L sr040 Forest 59 - Hewani East1, Pt 669 4? L 

Polygala sadebeckiana Guerke Polygalaceae L 10743 Forest 67 - Lango la Simba, Pt 666 - 66 4 WH 

Persicaria senegalense (Meisn.) Sojak Polygonaceae L sr Nr Wema RKC? 5 WH 

Talinum portulacifolium (Forssk.) Schweinf. Portulacaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 4 H MUNONO 

Scutia myrtina (Burm.f.) Kurz Rhamnaceae L sr046 Forest 67 - Lango la Simba, Pt 666 - 66 5 L 

Ziziphus mauritiana Lam. Rhamnaceae L sr044 Forest 61 - Hewani East3, Pt 672 5 ST 

Cassipourea gummiflua Tul. ? var 

ugandensis (Stapf) J.Lewis 

Rhizophoraceae L 10718 Forest 48 - Kulesa East, Pt 655 RK ? T 1st Tana District 

Afrocanthium peteri (Bridson) Lantz Rubiaceae L 10724 Forest 68 - Wema East4, Pt 657 - 659 RK 2 ST 

63


Canthium mombazense Baill. Rubiaceae R&L 5335 Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 3 ST 

Catunaregam sp nov Rubiaceae L 10714 Forest 48 - Kulesa East, Pt 654 - 656 2 ST Previously known as 

Catunaregam spinosa 

Coffea sessiliflora Bridson ssp sessiliflora Rubiaceae R&L 5336 Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 1 ST 

Gardenia volkensii K.Schum. ssp volkensii Rubiaceae L 10751 Forest 63 - Hewani South1, Pt 670 4 ST 

Geophila repens (L.) I.M.Johnston Rubiaceae L sr094 Forest 48 - Kulesa East, Pt 654 - 656 RKC 5 H 

Ixora narcissodora K.Schum. Rubiaceae L&R 1246 Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North 3 ST MPAMAWANO 

Keetia zanzibarica (Klotzsch) Bridson ssp Rubiaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 2 SS 

zanzibarica 

Kohautia obtusiloba (Hiern) Bremek. Rubiaceae R&L 5310 Hewani-Wema 2 H 

Kraussia kirkii (Hook.f.) Bullock Rubiaceae L&R 1257 Forest 68 - Wema East4 2 S MUKUANO 

Lamprothamnus zanguebaricus Hiern Rubiaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 2 ST MUTSOME 

Pavetta linearifolia Bremek. Rubiaceae L&R 1254 Forest 68 - Wema East4 RK 2 S 

Polysphaeria multiflora Hiern Rubiaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 5 ST MRORA 

Polysphaeria parvifolia Hiern Rubiaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 4 S MRORA 

Psychotria amboniana K.Schum. var 

Rubiaceae R&L 5339 Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 2 S 

amboniana 

Psychotria amboniana K.Schum. var 

Rubiaceae R&L 5320 Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 2 S 

velutina (Petit) Verdc. 

Psychotria capensis (Eckl.) Vatke ssp riparia Rubiaceae L&R sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North 4 ST 

(K.Schum. & K.Krause) Verdc. var riparia 

Psychotria punctata Vatke Rubiaceae L 10708 Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - RKC? 2X? S MPUGE 

653 

Psychotria schliebenii Petit Rubiaceae L 10705 Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - RK? 3 S 

653 

Psydrax kaessneri (S.Moore) Bridson Rubiaceae L 10716 Forest 48 - Kulesa East, Pt 654 - 656 R? 2 SS 

Rytigynia sp L of FTEA? Rubiaceae L&R 1247 Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North R? 1? S 

64


Spermacoce sp cf tenuior L. Rubiaceae L 10730 Forest 56 - Wema East1, Pt 660 RK 5? WH 2nd for Kenya? (= TPR535) 

A 

Uncaria africana G.Don ssp africana Rubiaceae L&R 1245 Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North RK? 5 L 

Citrus aurantifolia (Christm.) Swing. Rutaceae L sr081 Forest 63 - Hewani South1, Pt 670 5 ST Lime - Escape 

Vepris eugeniifolia (Engl.) Verdoorn Rutaceae R&L 5334 Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 3 ST NDONGORE 

Zanthoxylum chalybeum Engl. var 

chalybeum 

Rutaceae L sr044 Forest 69 - Mitapani South1, Pt 680 4 T 

Flacourtia indica (Burm.f.) Merr. Salicaceae L sr046 Forest 48 - Kulesa East, Pt 654 - 656 5 ST MWAMBA NGOMA 

Oncoba spinosa Forssk. Salicaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 5 ST MPUJU 

Scolopia zeyheri (Nees) Harv. Salicaceae L 10769 Forest 64 - Hewani South2, Pt 673 - 

674 

RKC 4 ST 1st Tana District 

Azima tetracantha Lam. Salvadoraceae R&L sr Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 5 SS 

Dobera loranthifolia (Warb.) Harms Salvadoraceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 3 T MUKUPHA, MUKUBFA*. FRTS 

Salvadora persica L. Salvadoraceae L sr037 Forest 67 - Lango la Simba, Pt 666 - 66 2X/5 SS MNFUBFA* 

Allophylus rubifolius (A.Rich.) Engl. var Sapindaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 4 S 

alnifolius (Baker) Friis & Vollesen 

Blighia unijugata Baker Sapindaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 4 T MUBO 

Cardiospermum halicacabum L. var 

Sapindaceae L 10747 Forest 59 - Hewani East1, Pt 669 5 L 

halicacabum 

Chytranthus obliquinervis Engl. Sapindaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 2 ST MADANGHUI, MUDJANSUWE 

Deinbollia borbonica Scheff. forma glabrata 

Radlk. 

Sapindaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 4 ST MNKONDONKONDO 

65


Haplocoelum foliolosum (Hiern) Bullock ssp Sapindaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 2 ST MHUMBI-MWEUSI 

mombasense (Bullock) Verdc. 

Lecaniodiscus fraxinifolius Baker ssp 

scassellatii (Chiov.) Friis 

Sapindaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 2 T MHUMBI-MWEUPE, 

KIWAMBWE-KINKUNDU 

Majidea zanguebarica Oliv. Sapindaceae L sr064 Forest 48 - Kulesa East, Pt 654 - 656 3 T 

Paullinia pinnata L. Sapindaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 5 L MKAWA 

Manilkara mochisia (Baker) Dubard Sapotaceae L sr055 Forest 67 - Lango la Simba, Pt 666 - 66 4 T MURAIDHE 

Mimusops obtusifolia Lam. Sapotaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 5 T MNGUVWE 

Sideroxylon inerme L. ssp diospyroides Sapotaceae R&L sr Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 5 T 

(Baker) J.H.Hemsl. 

Synsepalum msolo (Engl.) Pennington Sapotaceae L&R sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North RK 4 T MCHAMBYA 

Harrisonia abyssinica Oliv. Simaroubaceae L&R sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North 4 SS CHEEWA, MWIYENGWA 

Solanum sp Solanaceae L 10771 Forest 64 - Hewani South2, Pt 673 - 674 ? S DULUWAYA 

Solanum zanzibarense Vatke Solanaceae L 10759 Forest 63 - Hewani South1, Pt 670 3 SS 1st Tana District? 

Cola clavata Mast. Sterculiaceae L 10723 Forest 48 - Kulesa East, Pt 654 - 656 2 T MNOFU-WA-NKUKU 

Melochia corchorifolia L. Sterculiaceae L&R 1252 Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North 4 WH 

Sterculia appendiculata K.Schum. Sterculiaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 3 T MFUNE 

Sterculia rhynchocarpa K.Schum. Sterculiaceae R&L sr Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 3 T MUKARIKARI, MUKARARI 

66


Synaptolepis kirkii Oliv. Thymelaeaceae L sr039 Forest 69 - Mitapani South1, Pt 680 2 SS 

Grewia capitellata Bojer Tiliaceae L 10737 Forest 67 - Lango la Simba, Pt 666 - 66 2 SS 

Grewia densa K.Schum. Tiliaceae L 10740 Forest 67 - Lango la Simba, Pt 666 - 66 2 ST MKOLWE, MKOI, MKOLI* 

Grewia kakothamnus K.Schum.? Tiliaceae R&L sr Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 4? S 

Grewia truncata Mast. Tiliaceae R&L 5331 Forest 66 - Bvumbwe South 3 S 

Trema orientalis (L.) Blume Ulmaceae L sr041 Forest 61 - Hewani East3, Pt 672 5 ST 

Rinorea elliptica (Oliv.) Kuntze Violaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 3 ST MNOFU-WA-NKUKU, MRHIGATI 

(GWANO) 

Ampelocissus africana (Lour.) Merr. var Vitaceae L sr004 Forest 57 - Wema East2, Pt 675 4 L 

africana 

Cissus phymatocarpa Masinde & 

Vitaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 3 L MUNEKE 

L.E.Newton 

Cissus rotundifolia (Forssk.) Vahl var 

Vitaceae L sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North, Pt 652 - 653 4 L MURHABARHABA 

rotundifolia 

Cissus sciaphila Gilg Vitaceae L&R 1243 Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North 2 L 

Cyphostemma adenocaule (A.Rich.) Wild & Vitaceae L sr057 Forest 61 - Hewani East3, Pt 672 4 L 

Drummond ssp adenocaule 

Cyphostemma duparquetii (Planch.) 

Vitaceae L&R sr Forest 65 - Bvumbwe North 2? L 

Descoings? 

Cyphostemma kirkianum (Planch.) Wild & Vitaceae L&R 1244 Forest 65 – Bvumbwe North 3 L 

Drummond ssp kirkianum 

Cyphostemma sp2 Vitaceae L sr032 Forest 56 - Wema East1, Pt 660 ? L 

Rhoicissus revoilii Planch. Vitaceae R&L sr Forest 66 – Bvumbwe South 5 L 

67


Abbreviations: COLLECTORS PHYTO-GEOGRAPHIC CODES 

L = Luke WRQ 

L&R = Luke WRQ & Robertson SA 

1 = Kenyan Coast Endemic 

2 = Zanzibar-Inhambane (ZI) Endemic 

R&L = Robertson SA & Luke WRQ 3 = ZI + 1 

R&O = Robertson SA & Ochiago 

R&G = Robertson SA & Gabio 

4 = Pan African 

5 = Pan Tropical 

sr = sight record 

HABIT CODES 

RARITY 

R = Rare in World Sense 

RK = Rare in Kenya 

RKC = Rare on Kenya Coast 

E = Epiphyte 

P = Hemi-parasite 

F = Fern 

H = Herb 

WH = Woody Herb 

NB * against local name from Glenday, (2005) 

L = Liane or Climber 

SS = Scandent Shrub 

S = Shrub 

ST = Small Tree 

T = Tree 

68


Appendix 4. Species Distribution throughout TDIP Forests, IUCN Threat Status & Primate Food Trees 

(Families arranged according to modified Bentham/Hooker order as per EAH) 

NB : Numbers represent dominance level (Glenday, 2005), highlights represent species not recorded by QL 

SPECIES 48 56 57 59 60 61 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 Threa 

t 

Status 

Azolla nilotica Mett. X X 

PFT 

Marsilea fadeniana Launert? X P 

Annona muricata L. X 

Asteranthe asterias (S.Moore) Engl. & Diels ssp asterias X P 

Monanthotaxis trichocarpa (Engl. & Diels) Verdc. X X P 

Uvaria leptocladon Oliv. ssp septentrionalis Verdc. X 

Uvaria lucida Benth. ssp lucida X X X X X X X P 

Nymphaea lotus L. X 

Anisocycla blepharosepala Diels ssp tanzaniensis Vollesen X X X X X X X X X P 

Cissampelos mucronata A.Rich. X X X X 

Cissampelos pareira L. var hirsuta (DC.) Forman X 

Cadaba farinosa Forssk. ssp farinosa X X X 

Capparis sepiaria L. var subglabra (Oliv.) DeWolf X 

Capparis viminea Oliv. X X X X X X X X 

Maerua grantii Oliv. X 

Maerua holstii Pax X P 

Maerua kirkii (Oliv.) F.White X 

Maerua macrantha Gilg? X X X X 

Ritchiea capparoides (Andr.) Britten X X X X X 

Thilachium thomasii Gilg X P 

69


Rinorea elliptica (Oliv.) Kuntze 3 X X X X X X X X X X 2 

Polygala sadebeckiana Guerke X 

Glinus oppositifolius (L.) A.DC. X 

Talinum portulacifolium (Forssk.) Schweinf. X X X X X 

Persicaria senegalense (Meisn.)Sojak 

Achyranthes aspera L. X X X X X 

Cyathula coriacea Schinz X X X X X X X P 

Digera muricata (L.) Mart. ssp trinervis C.C.Towns. var trinervis 

Gomphrena celosioides Mart. 

Psilotrichum scleranthum Thwaites X X 

Pupalia lappacea (L.) A.Juss. X X P? (if var 

argyrophylla or 

glabrescens) 

Rosifax sabuletorum C.C.Towns. X 

Nesaea stuhlmannii Koehne X X P 

Synaptolepis kirkii Oliv. X X X X P 

Boerhavia erecta L. X 

Adenia gummifera (Harv.) Harms var gummifera X X 

Adenia rumicifolia Engl.? X 

Coccinia grandis (L.) Voigt X X X X X X X 

Kedrostis abdallai A.Zimm. 

Kedrostis foetidissima (Jacq.) Cogn. X 

Momordica trifoliolata Hook.f. X X X X X X X X X X 

Ochna thomasiana Engl. & Gilg X X X X X X X P 

Eugenia capensis (Eckl. & Zeyh.) Sond. ssp multiflora Verdc. X X X X X P 

Eugenia nigerina A.Chev. X X X X X X 

70


Barringtonia racemosa (L.) Spreng. X 2 X 1 1 

Combretum butyrosum (G.Bertol.) Tul. X X X X X X X X X P 

Combretum constrictum (Benth.) Laws. X X X P 

Combretum hereroense Schinz ssp volkensii (Engl.) Wickens 

X 

var parvifolium (Engl.) Wickens 

Combretum paniculatum Vent. ssp paniculatum X X X X X X X 

Pteleopsis tetraptera Wickens X 1 X 1 X P 

Terminalia brevipes Pampan. X X X X X 3 X X 

Cassipourea gummiflua Tul. ? var ugandensis (Stapf) J.Lewis X 

Garcinia livingstonei T.Anderson 5 X 3 X X X 1 2 X X X 2 4 

Grewia capitellata Bojer X X X X X X X X X P 

Grewia densa K.Schum. X X 5 X X X X X P 

Grewia kakothamnus K.Schum.? X 

Grewia truncata Mast. X 

Cola clavata Mast. X X X X P 

Melochia corchorifolia L. X 

Sterculia appendiculata K.Schum. X X 

Sterculia rhynchocarpa K.Schum. X X 

Adansonia digitata 3 

Abutilon pannosum (Forst.f.) Schlecht. X X X X X X X X X 

Abutilon zanzibaricum Mast. X X X X P 

Hibiscus calyphyllus Cav. X 

Hibiscus cannabinus L. 

Hibiscus hildebrandtii Sprague & Hutch.? X 

Hibiscus micranthus L.f. X X X 

71


Hibiscus panduriformis Burm.f. 

Thespesia danis Oliv. 4 X X X 3 4 X 4 X X 

Erythroxylum fischeri Engl. X 2 5 X X 

Acalypha echinus Pax & K.Hoffm. X X X X X X X P 

Acalypha fruticosa Forssk. X X 

Acalypha indica L. X 

Antidesma venosum Tul. X 

Bridelia cathartica G.Bertol. X X X X X X X X X X 

Bridelia micrantha (Hochst.) Baill. X 

Caperonia fistulosa Beille X X X 

Croton menyharthii Pax X 

Dalechampia scandens L. var cordofana (Webb) Muell.Arg. X X X X X X X X X X 

Drypetes natalensis (Harv.) Hutch. var leiogyna Brenan X X X P 

Erythrococca kirkii (Muell.Arg.) Prain X 

Euphorbia indica Lam. 

Euphorbia tirucalli L. X 

Flueggea virosa (Willd.) Voigt ssp virosa X X X X X X X X X X X 

Phyllanthus reticulatus Poir. X X X X X X 

Phyllanthus somalensis Hutch. X P 

Ricinus communis L. X 

Spirostachys venenifera (Pax) Pax X X 1 4 5 5 X 

Suregada zanzibariensis Baill. X X X 

Tragia furialis Bojer X X X 

Tragia hildebrandtii Muell.Arg. X 

72


Dichapetalum sp 1 of CFS X X X X P (should be listed) 

Afzelia quanzensis Welw. X 

Caesalpinia volkensii Harms X 

Cassia abbreviata Oliv. ssp beareana (Holmes) Brenan X X 

Cynometra lukei Beentje 4 2 1 2 1 EN 

Oxystigma msoo Harms X X 2 5 VU 

Parkinsonia aculeata L. X 

Senna occidentalis (L.) Link X 

Senna singueana (Delile) Lock X X X X 

Tamarindus indica L. X X Y 

Acacia mellifera (Vahl) Benth. X 

Acacia pentagona (Schumach. & Thonn.) Hook.f. X X X X X X 

Acacia robusta Burch. ssp usambarensis (Taub.) Brenan 1 X X X X X X X X Y 

Acacia rovumae Oliv. X 

Acacia senegal (L.) Willd. X 

Acacia stuhlmannii Taub. X X X 

Acacia zanzibarica (S.Moore) Taub. var zanzibarica X X X X X P 

Albizia glaberrima (Schumach. & Thonn.) Benth. var glabrescens (Oliv.) Brenan X X X Y 

Albizia saman (Jacq.) F.Muell. X 

Leucaena latisiliqua (L.) Gillis X 

Mimosa pigra L. X X 

Neptunia oleracea Lour. 

Newtonia erlangeri (Harms) Brenan X X X X X P 

Pithecellobium dulce (Roxb.) Benth. X 

73


Prosopis juliflora DC. X 

Abrus precatorius L. ssp africanus Verdc. X 

Aeschynomene uniflora E.Mey. var uniflora X 

Alysicarpus glumaceus (Vahl) DC. ssp glumaceus var glumaceus X X 

Angylocalyx braunii Harms X X VU 

Clitorea ternatea L. X X X 

Crotalaria laburnoides Klotzsch var laburnoides X 

Dalbergia vacciniifolia Vatke X VU 

Indigofera schimperi Jaub. & Spach var schimperi X X X X X 

Rhynchosia micrantha Harms X 

Rhynchosia minima (L.)DC. var minima X 

Rhynchosia sp X X X 

Rhynchosia sublobata (Schumach.) Meikle X 

Sesbania quadrata Gillett 

Sesbania speciosa Taub. X P 

Teramnus labialis (L.f.) Spreng. ssp arabicus Verdc. X 

Flacourtia indica (Burm.f.) Merr. X 

Oncoba spinosa Forssk. X X 

Scolopia zeyheri (Nees) Harv. X 

Ficus bussei Mildbr. & Burret X Y 

Ficus natalensis Hochst. X X Y 

Ficus scassellatii Pamp. ssp scassellatii X X 

Ficus sycomorus L. X X 4 4 X 2 X X X X Y 

Gymnosporia heterophylla (Eckl. & Zeyh.) Loes. X X X X X X X X 

74


Loeseneriella africana (Willd.) N.Halle var richardiana (Cambess.) N.Halle X X X X 

Maytenus undata (Thunb.) Blakelock X X X 

Salacia erecta (G.Don) Walp. X X X X X X X X X 

Salacia stuhlmanniana Loes. X X X X X X X X 

Iodes usambarensis Sleumer X X P 

Azima tetracantha Lam. X X X X 

Dobera loranthifolia (Warb.) Harms X X X X X X X X 

Salvadora persica L. 4 X X 

Ximenia americana L. var caffra (Sond.) Engl. X 

Opilia amentacea Roxb. X X X X X X X 

Agelanthus sansibarensis (Engl.) Polh. & Wiens ssp sansibarensis X 

Oncella curviramea (Engl.) Danser X P 

Scutia myrtina (Burm.f.) Kurz X X 

Ziziphus mauritiana Lam. X 

Ampelocissus africana (Lour.) Merr. var africana X X 

Cissus phymatocarpa Masinde & L.E.Newton X X X X X P 

Cissus rotundifolia (Forssk.) Vahl var rotundifolia X X X X X X X X X 

Cissus sciaphila Gilg X X X X X P 

Cyphostemma sp2 X X 

Cyphostemma adenocaule (A.Rich.) Wild & Drummond ssp adenocaule X 

Cyphostemma duparquetii (Planch.) Descoings? X P 

Cyphostemma kirkianum (Planch.) Wild & Drummond ssp kirkianum X X X 

Rhoicissus revoilii Planch. X 

Citrus aurantifolia (Christm.) Swing. X 

75


Vepris eugeniifolia (Engl.) Verdoorn X X X 

Zanthoxylum chalybeum Engl. var chalybeum X X 

Harrisonia abyssinica Oliv. X X X X X X 

Commiphora africana (A.Rich.) Engl. ? X 

Commiphora campestris Engl. ssp glabrata (Engl.) Gillett X X X X X 

Azadirachta indica A.Juss. X X X X X X X X 

Ekebergia capensis Sparrm. X 

Trichilia emetica Vahl X X X X X X X X X 

Allophylus rubifolius (A.Rich.) Engl. var alnifolius (Baker) Friis & Vollesen X X X X X X X X 

Blighia unijugata Baker X X X X X Y 

Cardiospermum halicacabum L. var halicacabum X 

Chytranthus obliquinervis Engl. X X X 3 X X X X X VU 

Deinbollia borbonica Scheff. forma glabrata Radlk. X X X X 

Haplocoelum foliolosum (Hiern) Bullock ssp mombasense (Bullock) Verdc. X X X X X X X X X P 

Lecaniodiscus fraxinifolius Baker ssp scassellatii (Chiov.) Friis 2 5 X 3 X X X P 

Majidea zanguebarica Oliv. X X X Y 

Paullinia pinnata L. X X X X X X X X X X X 

Lannea schweinfurthii (Engl.) Engl. var stuhlmannii (Engl.) Kokwaro X X 

Mangifera indica L. X 3 Y 

Rhus natalensis Krauss X X X 

Sorindeia madagascariensis DC. X X 1 X 3 X X X X X 3 X Y 

Agelaea pentagyna (Lam.) Baill. X X X X X X 

Alangium salviifolium (L.f.) Wangerin ssp salviifolium X X Y 

Diospyros abyssinica (Hiern) F.White ssp abyssinica X X X 

76


Diospyros bussei Guerke X X P 

Diospyros consolatae Chiov. X X 

Diospyros ferrea (Willd.) Bakh. X X X X X X X X X 

Diospyros greenwayi F.White X X VU 

Diospyros kabuyeana F.White X X P 

Diospyros mespiliformis A.DC. X X X X X X X X X X X X Y 

Diospyros natalensis (Harv.) Brenan X X X X 

Euclea divinorum Hiern X X 

Euclea racemosa Murr. ssp schimperi (A.DC.) F.White ? X X 

Manilkara mochisia (Baker) Dubard X X 

Mimusops obtusifolia Lam. X X X X 2 4 2 5 X 2 X X X 

Sideroxylon inerme L. ssp diospyroides (Baker) J.H.Hemsl. X 

Synsepalum msolo (Engl.) Pennington X X X X X X Y 

Strychnos mitis S.Moore X 5 X X X 

Jasminum fluminense Vell. X X 

Adenium obesum (Forssk.) Roem. & Schult. 

Alafia caudata Stapf X 

Alafia microstylis K.Schum. X 

Carissa spinarum L. X X X X X 

Hunteria zeylanica (Retz.) Thwaites X X X X 

Landolphia watsoniana Romburgh X X X X P 

Oncinotis tenuiloba Stapf X 

Saba comorensis (Bojer) Pichon X X X X X X 

Schizozygia coffaeoides Baill. X X X 

77


Strophanthus courmontii Franch. X X X X 

Marsdenia sp cf macrantha (Klotzsch)Schltr. X 

Pentatropis nivalis (J.F.Gmel.) D.V.Field & J.R.L.Wood X X X X 

Pergularia daemia (Forssk.) Chiov. X X X X 

Tacazzea apiculata Oliv. X X X X 

Tylophora apiculata K.Schum. X X P 

Afrocanthium peteri (Bridson) Lantz X P 

Canthium mombazense Baill. X 

Catunaregam sp nov X X P (should be listed) 

Coffea sessiliflora Bridson ssp sessiliflora X X X X X P 

Gardenia volkensii K.Schum. ssp volkensii X X X X 

Geophila repens (L.) I.M.Johnston X 

Ixora narcissodora K.Schum. X X X X X X X 

Keetia zanzibarica (Klotzsch) Bridson ssp zanzibarica X X X X X X X X X P 

Kohautia obtusiloba (Hiern) Bremek. X P 

Kraussia kirkii (Hook.f.) Bullock X X X X X X P 

Lamprothamnus zanguebaricus Hiern X X X X X X X X P 

Pavetta linearifolia Bremek. X X VU 

Polysphaeria multiflora Hiern ssp multiflora X X X X 4 3 4 X X X X 3 

Polysphaeria parvifolia Hiern X X X X X X X 

Psychotria amboniana K.Schum. var amboniana X X P 

Psychotria amboniana K.Schum. var velutina (Petit) Verdc. X P 

Psychotria capensis (Eckl.) Vatke ssp riparia 

X X X X X 

(K.Schum. & K.Krause) Verdc. var riparia 

Psychotria punctata Vatke X X 

78


Psychotria schliebenii Petit X X X P 

Psydrax kaessneri (S.Moore) Bridson X X X X P 

Rytigynia sp L of FTEA? X X X P 

Spermacoce sp cf tenuior L. X 

Uncaria africana G.Don ssp africana X X X 

Aspilia mossambicensis (Oliv.) Wild X 

Blepharispermum ellenbeckii Cufod.? X 

Eclipta prostrata (L.) L. X 

Launaea cornuta (Oliv. & Hiern) C.Jeffrey 

Microglossa hildebrandtii O.Hoffm. X X X X X X P 

Pluchea dioscoridis (L.) DC. X X X X X X X X X 

Pluchea ovalis (Pers.) DC. X 

Tridax procumbens L. X 

Vernonia aemulans Vatke? X 

Vernonia cinerea (L.) Less. var cinerea X X X 

Vernonia hildebrandtii Vatke X X X X X P 

Enicostema axillare (Lam.) A.Raynal ssp axillare X X 

Cordia faulknerae Verdc. X X X X X X X X P 

Cordia goetzei Guerke X X X X X X 4 

Cordia sinensis Lam. X X 

Solanum sp X 

Solanum zanzibarense Vatke X P 

Hewittia malabarica (L.) Suresh X X X X 

Ipomoea aquatica Forssk. X 

79


Ipomoea garckeana Vatke X X X X P 

Ipomoea shupangensis Baker X 

Jacquemontia ovalifolia (Vahl) Hallier f. 

Utricularia inflexa Forssk. var inflexa X 

Kigelia africana (Lam.) Benth. X X X X X 

Spathodea campanulata P.Beauv. ssp nilotica (Seem.)Bidgood ined. X 

Anisotes sp X P? (if A.parvifolius) 

Asystasia ansellioides C.B.Clarke X 

Asystasia gangetica (L.) T.Anders. s.l. X X 

Barleria ramulosa C.B.Clarke forma X 

Ecbolium amplexicaule S.Moore X P 

Elytraria acaulis (L.f.) Lindau X 

Justicia schimperiana (Nees) Lindau X 

Justicia stachytarphetoides (Lindau) C.B.Clarke X X P 

Megalochlamys tanaensis Vollesen X X P 

Megalochlamys trinervia (C.B.Clarke) Vollesen X X X P 

Rhinacanthus gracilis Klotzsch X 

Ruellia amabilis S.Moore X X X X X 

Ruellia patula Jacq. X X X X 

Basilicum polystachyon (L.) Moench X 

Clerodendrum acerbianum (Vis.) Benth. & Hook.f. X X X X X X 

Leucas urticifolia (Vahl) R.Br. var angustifolia Sebald X 

Premna velutina Guerke X X P 

Ottelia exerta (Ridley) Dandy X 

80


Limnophyton obtusifolium (L.) Miq. X 

Aneilema calceolus Brenan X 

Commelina sp cf petersii Hassk. X 

Commelina benghalensis L. X X 

Commelina bracteosa Hassk. X X 

Commelina erecta L. X X 

Flagellaria guineensis Schumach. X X X X X X X X X X X 

Crinum sp 

Scadoxus multiflorus (Martyn) Raf. ssp multiflorus X 

Chlorophytum comosum (Thunb.) Jacq. X 

Chlorophytum sp X 

Culcasia orientalis Mayo X X X X X X X X X P 

Gonatopus boivinii (Decne.) Engl. X X 

Pistia stratiotes L. X X 

Lemna sp X 

Sansevieria conspicua N.E.Br. X 

Sansevieria powellii N.E.Br. X X X 

Borassus aethiopum Mart. X X X X X X X X 1 

Elaeis guineensis Jacq. X 

Hyphaene compressa H.Wendl. X X 

Phoenix reclinata Jacq. X X X 1 X X X X X X X X Y 

Microcoelia exilis Lindl.? X X 

Bolboschoenus maritimus (L.) Palla 

Brachiaria 3 X 

81


Brachiaria xantholeuca? X 

Cyrtococcum trigonum (Retz.) A.Camus X 

Oryza eichingeri Peter X 

Oryza longistaminata A.Chev. & Rochr. 

Panicum maximum Jacq. X X X 

Panicum sp X P? (if 

P.pleianthum) 

Sorghum arundinaceum (Desv.) Stapf X 

Stenotaphrum dimidiatum (L.) Brongn. X X X X X 

TOTAL TAXA RECORDED 117 47 33 43 20 71 111 98 121 128 77 77 93 

TOTAL PRIMATE FOOD TREES RECORDED (Y) 12 6 6 6 4 6 6 8 9 4 3 5 6 

SIZE Ha. (Wakuluzu, 2005) 30.4 4.0 1.6 1.6 1.9 2.5 12.2 48.5 46.2 4.9 9.9 43.1 1.2 

82


Appendix 5. Tree species - Dominants, Frequencies and Coverage (Glenday, 2005) 

Forest # 

mean basal area 

(m3/ha) 

mean stem 

density (trees/ha) 

dominant 

species 1 

dom value 

Dominant 

species 2 

dom value 

dominant 

species 3 

dom value 

dominant 

species 4 

dom value 

dominant 

species 5 

dom value 

48 17.6 1039. Acacia robusta 42.2 Lecaniodiscus 

9 

% fraxinifolius ssp 

scassellatii 

56 27.7 1508. Terminalia prunioides 38.7 

9 

% 

57 41.8 1867. Sorindeia 

48.6 Barringtonia 

3 madagascariensis % racemosa 

59 38.4 562.1 Phoenix reclinata 65.9 

% 

60 34.2 1138. Barringtonia 

52.4 

4 racemosa 

% 

61 16.6 813.2 Barringtonia 

70.9 

racemosa 

% 

63 26.2 562.9 Garcinia livingstonei 52.4 

% 

64 38.7 526.4 Garcinia livingstonei 34.3 

% 

65 36.6 1217. Spirostachys 

6 venenifera 

39.5 

% 

25.1 Rinorea elliptica 24.9 Thespesia danis 21.6 Garcinia livingstonei 17.6% 

% 

% 

% 

Erythroxylum fischeri 35.8 Salvadora persica 29.9 Adansonia digitata 21.7 Strychnos mitis 18.1% 

% 

% 

% 

33.5 Garcinia livingstonei 20.6 Ficus sycomorus 19.5 Erythroxylum fischeri 15.7% 

% 

% 

% 

Oxystigma msoo 54.6 Mangifera indica 42.6 Ficus sycomorus 36.9 Sorindeia 

26.7% 

% 

% 

% madagascariensis 

Mimusops obtusifolia 51.4 Sorindeia 

45.7 Ficus sycomorus 35.8 Polysphaeria multiflora 23.3% 

% madagascariensis % 

% 

Ficus sycomorus 45.0 Chytranthus 

29.5 Mimusops 19.9 Oxystigma msoo 17.5% 

% obliquinervis 

% obtusifolia 

% 

Cynometra lukei 39.2 Mimusops obtusifolia 33.9 Polysphaeria 25.8 Terminalia prunioides 22.2% 

% 

% multiflora 

% 

Terminalia prunioides 28.7 Mimusops obtusifolia 22.9 Cordia goetzei 21.4 Thespesia danis 17.6% 

% 

% 

% 

Cynometra lukei 24.4 Lecaniodiscus 23.9 Mimusops 19.6 Thespesia danis 15.9% 


% obtusifolia 

% 

scassellatii 

66 30.1 483.8 Cynometra lukei 80.9 Mimusops obtusifolia 48.8 Cordia goetzei 18.8 Spirostachys 18.1 Thespesia danis 15.9% 

% 

% 

% venenifera 

% 

67 9.2 808.3 Cynometra lukei 37.4 Thespesia danis 34.3 Terminalia brevipes 31.9 Terminalia 28.5 Spirostachys venenifera 23.3% 

% 

% 

% prunioides 

% 

68 27.8 1075. Cynometra lukei 55.8 Sorindeia 

32.3 Garcinia livingstonei 29.2 Acacia rovumae 19.2 Spirostachys venenifera 17.6% 

4 

% madagascariensis % 

% 

% 

69 34.5 882.8 Borassus aethiopum 35.0 Polysphaeria 

26.9 Rinorea elliptica 26.8 Garcinia 

18.1 Cordia goetzei 13.9% 

% multiflora 

% 

% livingstonei 

% 

83


Forest # 

frequent 

species 1 

stem 

density 

(trees/ha) 

% of forest 

total 

frequent 

species 2 

stem 

density 

(trees/ha) 

% of forest 

total 

frequent 

species 3 

stem 

density 

(trees/ha) 

% of forest 

total 

frequent 

species 4 

stem 

density 

(trees/ha) 

% of forest 

total 

frequent 

species 5 

stem 

density 

(t /h ) 

% of forest 

total 

48 Thespesia 

danis 

56 Erythroxylum 

fischeri 

57 Barringtonia 

racemosa 

59 Phoenix 

reclinata 


racemosa 


racemosa 

63 Polysphaeria 

multiflora 

64 Terminalia 

prunioides 

65 Spirostachys 

venenifera 

66 Cynometra 

lukei 

67 Acacia 

rovumae 

68 Garcinia 

livingstonei 

69 Rinorea 

elliptica 

597.1 24.5% Rinorea elliptica 597.1 24.5% Lecaniodiscus 

fraxinifolius ssp 

scassellatii 

796.2 32.8% Terminalia 597.1 24.6% Adansonia 

prunioides 

1409.5 43.7% Garcinia 

livingstonei 

digitata 

597.1 18.5% Sorindeia 

madagascariensi 

s 

597.1 24.5% Garcinia 

livingstonei 

398.1 16.3% Acacia 

robusta 

398.1 16.4% Strychnos mitis 247.8 10.2% Polysphaeria 

multiflora 

564.5 17.5% Erythroxylum 398.1 12.3% Ficus 

fischeri 

sycomorus 

398.1 82.0% Oxystigma msoo 63.7 13.1% Ficus sycomorus 15.9 3.3% Mangifera indica 8.0 1.6% Deinbollia 

borbonica 

495.6 37.4% Sorindeia 288.3 21.7% Grewia densa 199.0 15.0% Polysphaeria 199.0 15.0% Mimusops 


multiflora 

obtusifolia 

s 

1035.5 60.2% Chytranthus 

obliquinervis 

796.2 23.3% Garcinia 

696.2 20.3% Terminalia 

livingstonei 

prunioides 

4793.2 30.5% Thespesia danis 2693.0 17.1% Polysphaeria 

multiflora 

3383.7 34.1% Thespesia danis 1592.3 16.1% Lecaniodiscus 

fraxinifolius ssp 

scassellatii 

354.2 57.3% Mimusops 

obtusifolia 

2189.4 24.9% Terminalia 

brevipes 

1281.8 28.4% Sorindeia 


s 

2985.6 40.6% Polysphaeria 

multiflora 

597.1 34.7% Ficus sycomorus 55.7 3.2% Sorindeia 


s 

414.3 12.1% Hunteria 

zeylanica 

2006.7 12.8% Garcinia 

livingstonei 

1592.3 16.1% Hunteria 

zeylanica 

16.3 0.9% Oxystigma 

msoo 

398.1 11.6% Phoenix 

reclinata 

1994.3 12.7% Acacia 

robusta 

995.2 10.0% Cynometra 

lukei 

231.5 37.5% Spirostachys 

venenifera 

16.3 2.6% Cordia goetzei 16.3 2.6% Cynometra 

lukei 

2047.3 23.3% Thespesia danis 1990.4 22.7% Spirostachys 812.4 9.3% Cynometra 

venenifera 

lukei 

973.9 21.6% Cynometra lukei 944.1 20.5% Spirostachys 446.8 9.9% Acacia 

venenifera 

rovumae 

1656.0 22.5% Cordia goetzei 670.1 9.1% Sorindeia 


s 

398.1 5.4% Rauvolfia 

mombasiana 

104.8 4.3% 

207.0 8.5% 

112.1 3.5% 

199.0 7.5% 

103.5 7.8% 

8.0 0.5% 

398.1 11.6% 

852.9 5.4% 

511.2 5.2% 

511.2 5.2% 

656.4 7.5% 

446.8 9.9% 

398.1 5.4% 

84


Forest # 

coverage spp 1 

basal area 

coverage 

% of forest total 

Coverage spp 2 

basal area 

coverage 



basal area 

coverage 



basal area 

coverage 



basal area 

coverage 


48 Acacia robusta 11. 

2 

22.5 Lecaniodiscus 


scassellatii 

8.8 17.6 Rinorea elliptica 8.4 16.8 Sorindeia 

% 

% madagascariensis 

7.8 15.6 Mimusops 

% obtusifolia 

5.8 11.6 

% 

56 Terminalia 

6.9 24.9 Salvadora persica 5.3 19.0 Adansonia digitata 4.2 15.3 Strychnos mitis 3.0 10.7 Acacia robusta 2.3 8.4% 

prunioides 

% 

% 

% 

% 

57 Sorindeia 

23. 28.3 Barringtonia 19. 23.6 Ficus sycomorus 18. 21.7 Garcinia livingstonei 8.4 10.0 Mimusops 7.0 8.5% 

madagascariensis 6 % racemosa 

6 % 

0 % 

% obtusifolia 

59 Oxystigma msoo 12. 50.8 Mangifera indica 6.4 26.1 Phoenix reclinata 3.9 15.8 Ficus sycomorus 1.8 7.4% Phoenix reclinata 8.1 7.8% 

5 % 

% 

% 

60 Mimusops 

24. 46.4 Barringtonia 10. 19.9 Sorindeia 

8.0 15.2 Oxystigma msoo 2.9 5.6% Ficus sycomorus 2.9 5.6% 

obtusifolia 

2 % racemosa 

4 % madagascariensis 

% 

61 Barringtonia 32. 52.4 Ficus sycomorus 19. 31.7 Mimusops 

5.7 9.3% Chytranthus 2.3 3.8% Oxystigma msoo 1.2 1.9% 

racemosa 

3 % 

5 % obtusifolia 

obliquinervis 

63 Garcinia livingstonei 41. 36.7 Mimusops 25. 23.0 Cynometra lukei 15. 14.2 Phoenix reclinata 6.3 5.6% Spirostachys 5.4 4.8% 


7 % 

9 % 

venenifera 

64 Garcinia livingstonei 34. 18.8 Terminalia 23. 12.9 Sorindeia 

19. 11.0 Mimusops 

19. 10.8 Polysphaeria 13.3 7.4% 

0 % prunioides 

4 % madagascariensis 8 % obtusifolia 

6 % multiflora 

65 Spirostachys 36. 34.2 Cynometra lukei 19. 17.9 Kigelia africana 7.6 7.1% Thespesia danis 7.2 6.7% Mimusops 6.9 6.4% 

venenifera 

9 % 

3 % 

obtusifolia 

66 Cynometra lukei 40. 85.4 Mimusops 4.3 9.0% Cordia goetzei 1.8 3.8% Spirostachys 0.8 1.8% Mimusops 6.9 6.4% 


venenifera 

obtusifolia 

67 Cynometra lukei 28. 29.6 Terminalia 21. 22.5 Acacia rovumae 15. 16.6 Spirostachys 10. 10.5 Terminalia 5.5 5.8% 

2 % brevipes 

4 % 

8 % venenifera 

0 % prunioides 

68 Cynometra lukei 55. 46.8 Garcinia 

21. 19.1 Sorindeia 

17. 15.4 Acacia rovumae 8.7 7.7% Rinorea elliptica 4.3 3.7% 

2 % livingstonei 

7 % madagascariensis 5 % 

69 Borassus aethiopum 74. 52.3 Rinorea elliptica 21. 14.9 Polysphaeria 11. 8.2% Cordia goetzei 10. 7.5% Ficus natalensis 7.0 4.9% 

8 % 

3 % multiflora 

7 

7 

85


Appendix 6. Proposed River Strip and East/West Corri dors 

86


CENSUS OF THE TANA RIVER RED COLOBUS (Procolobus 

rufomitratus) AND TANA RIVER CRESTED MANGABEY 

(Cercocebus galeritus): 

POPULATION AND DISTRIBUTION CHANGES 1972 – 2005 

By 

Pamela Cunneyworth 

87


SUMMARY 

A census was carried out to clarify the conservation status of the Tana River red colobus and 

Tana River crested mangabey to assess the current situation within a spatial and temporal 

framework. Intermittent data is available for the 23 forests in the lower Tana River delta area 

beginning in 1972 with the last census carried out in 2001. The 2001 data shows that 

approximately 20 groups of red colobus in eleven forests (45.8% of the forests surveyed) and 

14 groups of mangabey in nine forests (37.5% of forests surveyed) remained. 

This study observed/heard 14 groups of colobus in six forests and in one previously 

unlabelled forest patch. In addition, a single colobus individual remains in an eighth forest. 

Total forest patches having colobus is 34.8%. Twelve groups of mangabeys were seen in 

seven (31.8%) forest patches. The results show a decrease from the 2001 group numbers of 

six and two groups, for red colobus and mangabeys respectively. The numbers of colobus 

individuals have reduced significantly from the 1994 census, decreasing from 260 to 127 

whereas mangabey individuals have stayed stable (144 in 1994, >149 in 2005). 

Colobus distribution has continued with a fairly regular pattern over the census years of two 

populations, a very small one in the northern part of the TARDA managed area and a larger 

population centred on forest #58. Colobus were observed in varying forest sizes while 

mangabeys appear to have favoured the larger forests, as they were found only in the six 

largest forest blocks censused and two small isolated patches. 

GIS maps in this report illustrate forest area surveyed, troop locations for colobus, 

mangabeys, sykes and baboons. In addition, changes in distribution over time are presented 

for colobus and mangabeys. 

INTRODUCTION 

A census of the Tana River red colobus and Tana River crested mangabey in the Tana and 

Athi River Development Authority (TARDA) area of the lower Tana River delta was carried out 

between 3 rd January and 11 th January 2005. The census was carried out to assess the 

conservation status and distribution of these endemic and endangered species. The 

assessment is part of an overall project to develop habitat corridors included in the TDIP 

project. 

METHODOLOGY 

A primate census was carried out in forests in the TARDA area of the lower Tana River, 

Kenya. Using the Marsh/Decker forest designation system, 22 patches plus one unnumbered 

patch were censused: #46 to #69 inclusive, excluding #51 and #52. See Forests Surveyed 

map. 

The field map used for this census was a 19xx TARDA irrigation scheme technical drawing 

which included delineations of forest boundaries. Forest boundaries in the field were 

estimated based on change of vegetation generally from forest and isolated trees and bush to 

bushland or grassland. 

Census data was gathered between January 3 rd and 11 th 2005. Quadratic transect data 

collection methods (based on Struhsaker, 1981) were used with transect spacing set at 50 

metre intervals with field errors ranging ±20 metres. Initially five teams were employed which 

increased to eight teams on 7 th January once the local field technician team from Wenje and 

the Colobus Trust team had spent time censusing together. During this time, the Colobus 

Trust team familiarized themselves with vocalisations and behaviours of the colobus and 

mangabeys. The Colobus Trust team was already competent in the survey techniques. Field 

teams normally consisted of one field technician responsible for setting the bearing and data 

collection and one field worker to assist in cutting the transect and observing for monkeys. 

Two of the eight teams were accompanied by a guard for security purposes. 

Morning transects were generally walked between 06:00 and 10:30 while afternoon transects 

began at 15:00. Only in the largest forest #64 did the teams continue censusing through 

midday in order to finish the survey before stopping. All forests were censused once. 

88


Teams moved through the forest at a rate of approximately 1km/hr stopping to look for and 

observe monkeys when sightings were made. At the end of each forest, discussions by the 

team were undertaken to ascertain any double troop counts. 201 transects were carried out 

with a total distance of 52.3 km. See Transects Map. 

Two data sets were recorded. The first was the transect data set filled in by each field 

technician at the start and end of transects. The forest name, transect number, GPS start 

and end locations, bearing and time start and end were recorded. 

The second data set was for the recording of primate sightings or vocalisations. The following 

information was recorded: GPS reading of group location, species, number of individuals 

counted, estimated number, behaviour of individual/troop, direction of movement and when 

possible, sex and age,. In addition, quality of group count was indicated (good/incomplete), 

and whether or not, it was a vocalisation. Counts were generally considered “good” if the 

troop was seen moving as a whole, often between trees. 

Age/sex was found to be difficult to judge accurately in colobus and mangabeys due to a 

large flight distances. Age/sex was not recorded for sykes and baboons and group size for 

both species was deemed inconsistent and was not recorded. 

Equipment used included three Garmin Etrex Legend GPS’s and eight hand bearing 

compasses of mixed brand but similar good quality. 

GIS MAPPING 

The use of Geographic Information System (GIS) was key to the analysis of the data 

collected. ESRI ArcGIS Desktop 8.1 was used to process the data contained in a Microsoft 

Access database. 

Standards are considered important in the presentation of the maps and the following 

standards apply in order that future field work may relate easily to these maps: 

• Map Projection: The projection of the maps is Transverse Mercator, with the 

Clarke 1880 Spheroid, and ARC 1960 Datum. 

• Unit of measure is Metres 

• Grid system is Universal Transverse Mercator, Zone 37 South 

• 

These standards are identical to those used on all topographic maps published by the Survey 

of Kenya, and therefore all GPS co-ordinates and grid references can be used with those 

publications. 

The analysis of the data resulted in five maps being produced that display the results clearly. 

Each map is explained in detail in the following sections. 

Forests Surveyed Map 

The areas that are shown as forest are actual areas that were censused by transects. These 

“forests” were mosaics of open and closed canopy forest and bush and grassland and cannot 

be considered actual forest size though it does give an indication of the reduction of forest 

habitat from that indicated on the 19xx map. 

The boundary of the forest displayed on this map is determined by tracing the transect start 

and end points which indicate the beginning and end of the forest. For this reason the 

boundaries and therefore the stated forest area sizes can only be considered estimates. 

These maps also display the extent of the overall census area, and defines the current path of 

the Tana River and the main infrastructure. 

Please note that these maps are very high resolution, and printouts on a standard office 

printer may not allow the clearest view. In that case refer to the supplied PDF versions of the 

maps that will allow a high degree of zoom. 

89


Transects Map 

This map displays transects that were performed during the census period. The start point of 

a transect is marked with a triangle and the end of a transect is marked with a disc. 

This data is the source of the forest boundaries. 

Troop Locations Map 

Spatial distribution of the four primate species (colobus, mangabey, baboon, sykes) is 

displayed with this map. Each species has a unique identifier and for each observation in the 

census data a mark is displayed on the map. Each mark represents one troop or a solitary 

individual. 

This map enables simple observation of spatial trends such as clustering of species in certain 

areas. 

Tana River Red Colobus Map 

Temporal trends of number of troops per forest over time for each forest for colobus are 

displayed on this map. 

Each column chart displayed on each forest shows the number of troops observed in that 

forest in a given year (e.g. Forest #61, in 1994 one troop of colobus was observed). With all 

the years displayed side by side the trend of the population in that forest can be observed. 

Please note that due to a limitation of the GIS software, the bar graphs consider that an 

observation of zero troops to be the same as an observation of forest not censused. These 

two categorisations are very different, and display on the map as a zero reading. Please refer 

to Table 6 for data on troop counts from census records 1972-2005. 

Tana River Crested Mangabey Map 

As above. Please refer to Table 7 for data on troop counts from census records 1972-2005. 

RESULTS 

Forest Size and Location 

The current study covered 67.8% of the 1994 census area but only 29.4% of the study in 

2001 (see Table 14). It is clear that differences in the area censused between studies is likely 

to be a result of differences in the definition of “forest” as well as differences in methodologies 

and accuracy of estimates and measurements. Interestingly, though the forest area covered 

in the 2005 study is markedly less than that of the other censuses, the troop numbers have 

remained fairly consistent indicating that the core areas of troop locations are being captured 

in the main forest patches of the area. 

In some respects, forest areas generated by the transect end points of this census more 

closely resembles the forest boundaries provided by Karere et al. (2004). Main differences 

are in the forests #56, 63 and 67, all three of which have ‘a’ and ‘b’ sections of which the b 

sections were not censused in this study. The shape of #67, Lango La Simba appears to be 

more representative of the TARDA technical drawing forest shape rather than that in the 2001 

map. 

Unusual discrepancies between patch size in the 1994 and 2005 survey are marked in forest 

#48a. This forest was acacia woodland and considerable effort was made prior to the survey 

to define the start boundaries of transects in the surrounding bushland. 

Forest #64 shows a significant reduction in forest size from the TARDA technical drawing and 

what is listed in the 1994 and 2001 census. However, the overall shape of the forest is 

consistent with that of the 2001 map. 

The remnant patch of #62 has been entirely cleared for cultivation as has been noted by 

Muoria et al. (2003). 

90


Table 14. Area surveyed in ha by forest number with corresponding human activity 

levels. 

Human 

Forest Name 

Forest 

# 1994 1 (ha) 2001 2 (ha) 2005 3 (ha) 

Activity 1 

1994 

Sailoni 1 46 5 12.50 2.83 light 

Sailoni 2 47 3 28.20 3.11 light 

Kulesa East 1 48a 30* 19.30 30.40 heavy 

Kulesa West 1 49 1 11.10 3.76 light 

Kulesa West 2 50 2 28.10 2.18 light 

Wema West 1 53 2 7.60 2.89 light 

Wema West 2 54 14 18.50 11.34 moderate 

Human 

Activity 

2003 4 

Wema West 3 55 13 45.10 16.86 moderate light 

Wema East 1 56 22 28.10 4.00 heavy clearing 

Wema East 2 

heavy 

(d) 57 5 15.90 1.59 

Hewani West 1 58 34 65.70 20.83 light clearing 

Hewani East 1 59 3 11.40 1.57 moderate clearing 

Hewani East 2 60 2 4.20 1.90 light moderate 

Hewani East 3 61 1 9.60 2.35 light clearing 

Hewani West 2 62 16 10.10 0.00 light clearing 

Hewani South 1 63a 17 17.00 12.16 moderate 

Hewani South 2 64 124 116.40 48.51 moderate 

Bvumbwe North 65 53 136.50 46.16 heavy 

Bvumbwe 

South 66a 4 178.10 4.94 

Lango La 

Simba 67 15 79.20 9.88 

Wema East 4 68 63 63.20 43.14 clearing 

Mitapani 1 69 3 27.00 1.15 heavy light 

Unknown forest 2.92 

Total Forest Area Surveyed 405.00 932.80 274.48 

* forest 48a area corrected from the original figure of 3ha to the correct 30ha (Luke pers com) 

1 Butynski and Mwangi, 1994 

2 Karere et al. 2004 

3 This study 

4 Muoria et al., 2003 

Spatial Distribution 

The distribution of the four primate species observed during the census are indicated in Table 

2 and Troop Locations Map. In total, 57 groups and two solitary (S) individuals were noted of 

which 14 +1S were colobus, 12 were mangabeys, 19 +1S were sykes and 12 were baboons. 

Colobus occur in six forests and in one previously unlabelled forest patch. In one forest, a 

single individual remains. A total of 34.8% forest patches contain at least one colobus 

monkey. Mangabeys were seen in seven (31.8%) forest patches. 

From estimates of group size in the field, the number of individuals in the troops observed 

was 127 colobus and 149 mangabeys in the TARDA managed area. Vocalisations were not 

accounted for in these estimates. 

91


Table 15. Number of troops and estimated number of individuals of primates in the 

TARDA managed areas. 

Forest Forest # 

# of troops of 

Colobus 

(est. troop size) 

# of troops of 

Mangabey 

(est. troop size) Sykes Baboon 

Sailoni 1 46 0 1 (20) 1 0 

Sailoni 2 47 0 0 0 1 

Kulesa East 1 48a 0 1 (15) 3 1 

Kulesa East 2 48b NC NC NC NC 

Kulesa West 1 49 1 (8) 0 1 0 

Kulesa West 2 50 0 0 1 0 

Wema West 1 53 0 0 1 1 

Wema West 2 54 0 0 0 0 

Wema West 3 55 1 (8) 0 1 1 

Wema East 1 56 0 0 0 1 

Wema East 2 57 0 0 1 0 

Hewani West 1 58 7 

3 (3,20,V) 2 1 

(7,8,8,9,10,12,17) 

Hewani East 1 59 1 (7) 0 0 1 

Hewani East 2 60 2 (4,7) 0 1 0 

Hewani East 3 61 0 0 0 0 

Hewani West 2 62 - - - - 

Hewani South 1 63 0 0 0 1 

Hewani South 2 64 1 (9) 4 (10,20,35,V) 2 1 

Bvumbwe North 65 0 1 (15) 1 1 

Bvumbwe South 66 0 0 0 0 

Lango La Simba 67 1S 0 1 0 

Wema East 4 68 0 1 (6) 21S 1 

Mitapani 1 69 0 1 (5) 1 0 

Mitapani 2 70 NC NC NC NC 

Unknown 1 (16) 0 0 1 

NC – not censused 

V – vocalisation 

For the most part (except forest 46 and #69), mangabeys were sighted in the six largest forest 

patches (#48a, 55, 58, 64, 65, 68). This makes the population highly fragmented and prone 

to genetic isolation due to the distances between these forest patches. However, there may 

be some movement between forests as perhaps the troop of mangabeys seen in forest #49 in 

2001 is the same troop as observed in forest #46 in 2005. 

Colobus on the other hand, were found in forests of varying size. There is a clear 

concentration of colobus between forest #55 to the north and #64 to the south and on the 

west side of Tana River and on the east side between the river and the road. Clearly the 

centre of the population is in forest #58. A much smaller population lies in the northern part of 

the TARDA managed area where two troops were found but as obligatory arborealists, group 

isolation likely exists between the two populations and between populations on the east and 

west side of the river. 

Temporal Trends 

Overall, for both colobus and mangabeys, their ranges have changed over time. For colobus, 

the distribution has remained in a similar pattern with two populations, a very small one to the 

north in the forest block of #46, 47 and 49 and one to the south centred on forest #58. There 

appears to be an increasing trend of red colobus troops in forest #58 perhaps due to the 

complete loss of forest #62. The range restriction generally comes from the loss of groups in 

outlier and isolated forests, specifically forests #48, 53, 54, 56, 63, 67, 68. 

92


Even for colobus, an obligatory arboreal species, riverine forest, isolated trees and small 

forest patches may provide adequate tree cover to allow for dispersal between larger forest 

patches explaining the changes of pattern of troop locations through time, with due 

consideration to census error. Possible seasonal changes of movement must also be taken 

into account. 

On the other hand, mangabeys previously appeared throughout the census area in all but 

seven (31.8%) of the forests. As recorded in this census, their range has expanded into 

forests that previously did not report mangabeys (forest #46 and #69). Nine forests (40.9%) 

with previous records of mangabey did not have mangabeys noted in 2005. Interestingly, 

three troops are missing from the forests on the west side of the river (#54, 59, 62) in the 

vicinity of forest #58 while forest #58 has three troops more than previously reported in the 

2001 census. Inter-forest movement of groups may account for this. 

Comparing the forest area of the current census to the map of forest areas generated by 

Karere et al. (2004), this survey did not census the northern portion of forest #56 or 63b, 67b. 

Interestingly, two troops of colobus accounted for in the 2001 study (one each in forest #63 

and #67) that were not counted in this census, come from these forests. It is possible, that 

these uncounted troops were previously observed in these uncensused forest patches. 

Complete loss of both species of primate has occurred in five of the 22 areas censused 

(22.7%) however only Wema West 2 (#54), had both species missing. This forest was noted 

in 1994 for having “moderate human activity”. 

The other forests which had complete loss of groups, either colobus or mangabey had varying 

levels of human activity as noted in Table 3. Please note that the activity level noted in Table 

5 may well have changed from 1994 description as it has been stated that forest clearing has 

escalated since then (Wieczkowski et al., 2002). There may not be a direct relationship 

between forest disturbance and primate group density but that disturbance may lead to 

reduced group sizes rather than a reduction in troops (Muoria et al., 2003). 

Table 16. Levels of disturbance in forests that have lost colobus and mangabeys in 

this census. 

Colobus 

Mangabey 

Forest # Human Reference Forest # Human Reference 

Activity 

Activity 

47 Light Butynski and Mwangi 1994 49 light Butynski and Mwangi 

1994 

48 Heavy Butynski and Mwangi 1994 54 moderate Butynski and Mwangi 

1994 

54 Moderate Butynski and Mwangi 1994 56 cleared Muoria et al., 2003 

areas 

63 Moderate Muoria et al., 2003 57 heavy Muoria et al., 2003 

68 cleared 

areas 

Muoria et al., 2003 59 cleared 

areas 

Muoria et al., 2003 

93


Table 17. Red colobus census data 1972 – 2005. Adapted from Appendix A Butynski & Mwangi 1994. 

Forest # Forest 1972/74 1975 1985 1986 1987 1989 1990 1992 1994 2000 2001 2005 Est. ind. 

46 Sailoni 1 0 1 NC 0 0 0 

47 Sailoni 2 0 0 NC 1 0 0 

48a Kulesa East 1 0 1 0 0 NC 2 0 0 

48b Kulesa East 2 0 0 NC 0 NC NC 

49 Kulesa West 1 0 0 NC 1 1 8 

50 Kulesa West 2 0 NC 0 0 0 

53 Wema West 1 0 0 1 NC 0 0 0 

54 Wema West 2 0 1 NC 2 0 0 

55 Wema West 3 some 1S 0 0 1 8 

56 Wema East 1 0 1 0 1 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 

57 Wema East 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

58 

Hewani West 

1 some 1 0 0 1 1 1 3 6 5 7 67 

59 Hewani East 1 some 0 0 1 1S 1 1 1 1 1 7 

60 Hewani East 2 some 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 11 

61 Hewani East 3 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 

62 

Hewani West 

2 some 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 

63 

Hewani South 

1 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 

64 

Hewani South 

2 8 5 0 1-2 2 3 10-13 1S NC 4 1 9 

65 

Bvumbwe 

North 0 0 0 NC 0 0 0 

66 

Bvumbwe 

South 0 NC 0 0 0 

67 

Lango La 

Simba 2 0 2 (2) NC 1 1S 1 

68 Wema East 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 

69 Mitapani 1 0 1S 0 0 0 0 

70 Mitapani 2 2 3 0 0 NC NC 

Unknown 

forest 1 16 

Total: 20 14+1S 127 

S - solitary individual 

94


NC - not censused 

Data taken from: 

1972 Groves et al., 1974; Andres et al., 

1975 1985 Marsh, 1985 1992 Decker, 1994 2000 Muroia et al. 2003 

1974 Homewood, 1976 1986 and 1987 Decker & Kinnaird, 1991; Decker, 1993 Kahumbu & Davies, 

1994 

1993 2001 Karere et al., 2004 

1975 Marsh 1976, 1986 1989 and 1990 Ochiago 1990, 1991 1994 Butynski and Mwangi, 

1994 2005 This report 

95


Table 18. Crested mangabey census data 1972 – 2005. Adapted from Appendix B Butynski & Mwangi 1994. 

Forest # Forest 1972/74 1975 1985 1986 1987 1989 1992 1994 2000 2001 2005 Est. ind. 

46 Sailoni 1 0 0 NC 0 1 20 

47 Sailoni 2 0 1 NC 0 0 0 

48a Kulesa East 1 0 0 1 NC 1 1 15 

48b Kulesa East 2 0 0 NC 0 NC NC 

49 Kulesa West 1 0 0 NC 1 0 0 

50 Kulesa West 2 0 NC 0 0 0 

53 Wema West 1 0 0 0 NC 0 0 0 

54 Wema West 2 0 1-2 NC 2 0 0 

55 Wema West 3 some 0 0 1 0 0 

56 Wema East 1 0 1 1 1-2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 

57 Wema East 2 some 0 0 0 1 0 0 

58 Hewani West 1 some 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 2 0 3 >23 

59 Hewani East 1 some 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 

60 Hewani East 2 some 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

61 Hewani East 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

62 Hewani West 2 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 

63 Hewani South 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

64 Hewani South 2 2 2 2 1-2 1 1 3 4 NC 4 4 >65 

65 Bvumbwe North 0 0 0 NC 1 1 15 

66 Bvumbwe South 0 NC 0 0 0 

67 Lango La Simba some 0 0 0 NC 0 0 0 

68 Wema East 4 0 0 3 2 1 6 

69 Mitapani 1 0 0 0 0 1 5 

70 Mitapani 2 0 0 0 0 NC NC 

Total: 14 12 >149 

NC - not censused 

96


Data taken from: 

1972 Groves et al., 1974; Andres et al., 

1975 1985 Marsh, 1985 1992 Decker, 1994 2000 Muroia et al. 2003 

1974 Homewood, 1976 1986 and 1987 Decker & Kinnaird, 1991; Decker, 1993 Kahumbu & Davies, 

1994 

1993 2001 Karere et al., 2004 

1975 Marsh 1976, 1986 1989 and 1990 Ochiago 1990, 1991 1994 Butynski and Mwangi, 

1994 2005 This report 

97

Table 19. Spatial distribution and temporal trend notes by forest. 

Forest # Forest Name Comment 

46 Sailoni West 1 The one troop of red colobus reported in 1994 has not been reported 

since. A troop of mangabeys was observed that hadn’t been seen here 

before and should be considered to be a genetically isolated group. The 

only other mangabey troop in this area that could possibly be the troop 

sighted, is the troop in forest patch #49, recorded in 2001. This is only 

one of two small forest patches where mangabeys were found; the other 

forest patch is #69. 

47 Sailoni West 2 

48a Kulesa East All species recorded have been recorded for forest #48a. #48b was not 

located and no troop sightings were recorded in #48b from the 1994 and 

2001 census for either colobus or mangabey. 

48b Kulesa East As above. 

49 Kulesa West 1 The mangabey troop recorded in this forest in 2001 may have moved to 

forest patch #46. 

50 Kulesa West 2 No troops were found here previously or during the current census. 

53 Wema West 1 After mapping, we recognise that this is not the location of forest #53. 

The forest should be located further south. One troop of red colobus had 

been seen in forest #53 in 1994 but not in 2001. 

54 Wema West 2 Though this patch has not decreased considerably between the 1994 

and 2005, no troops at all were observed. 

55 Wema West 3 One troop of colobus was observed which hadn’t been seen in 2000 or 

2001. 

56 Wema East 1 Patch #56 has reduced in size markedly from 22 ha in 1994 to 4 ha in 

2005. Likely due to the massive human activity, mangabeys appear to 

have moved from patch #56 to #69 as in earlier censuses, troops were 

found in #56 but not #68 however in later census work, the reverse is 

true. 

57 Wema East 2 Two of these small patches have been reduced to isolated trees. 

58 Hewani West 1 This was by far the most interesting forest patch. Monkeys abound here. 

Colobus were more than double the numbers observed in 1994 from 

three to seven while mangabey numbers increased from two in 2000 to 

three groups. Of all the forests, forest #58 shows a clear trend of 

increasing troop numbers over time. 

59 Hewani East 1 This patch has a core area of forest and is surrounded by mango trees 

with much human activity. Only the forest area was censused. 

60 Hewani East 2 In 1994, there was one troop of colobus in each forest – #60 and #61. 

This census showed that perhaps the troop from #61 has now moved to 

#60 though the second troop was not recorded during the 2000 or 2001 

work. #60 and #61 are separated by a gap of grass and bushland. 

61 Hewani East 3 As above 

62 Hewani West 2 This forest is completely gone along with one troop each of colobus and 

mangabey both seen in 2000 but not in 2001 or during this study. 

63 Hewani South 

1 

64 Hewani South 

2 

65 Bvumbwe 

North 

66 Bvumbwe 

South 

This patch shows a progressive decrease in colobus troops from three in 

2000 to 1 in 2001 and zero in 2005. 

Strangely, the 10-13 groups of colobus sighted in 1994 were not found. 

Instead only four groups were seen in 2001 and one troop in 2005. 

Mangabeys have maintained a constant level of four troops since 1994. 

One mangabey troop seems to have moved into this patch prior to 2001 

and still remains. Little decrease in forest area was seen since 1994. 

From our mapping, this forest appears to be further south that the field 

map we were using. Could the field map be misreported as we did not 

see any other forest in the vicinity? Regardless, there were no colobus or 

mangabey previously reported in this forest. 

98


67 Lango La 

Simba 

One of the “old channel forests”. Previously this forest had one troop of 

colobus, but during this survey, only one solitary adult was seen. The 

other “old channel forest”, Hewani South 2 (#64) also had a reduction in 

colobus numbers. Further census will show if indeed there is a trend 

between loss of colobus in this type of forest as has been seen in 

senescent and dying forests #30, 33, 41, 45, 51, 52 along Channel 1 

(Butynski and Mwangi, 1994). 

This forest had a high buffalo population. There is a possibility that 

troops were missed by teams looking more closely for buffalo than for 

monkeys though all teams had been increased from two to four members 

to increase the number of people looking for both buffaloes and 

monkeys. 

68 Wema East 4 Curiously, mangabeys have not been previously sighted in this large 

forest until this survey. The move of a troop to this forest from nearby 

#56 which had steady sightings of mangabeys until 1989. 

69 Mitapani South 

1 

70 Mitapani South 

2 

Unknown forest 

Four elephants in this forest. Though four transects were started, only 

one was completed. One mangabey troop was sighted. This group is 

probably genetically isolated from the main concentration of mangabeys 

to the north. 

This forest was very difficult to find due to the change of the river course 

and the lack of canoes to transfer the team to the other side. Therefore, 

this forest was not censused however in the 2000 and 2001 censuses, 

neither red colobus nor mangabey were observed. 

Although this forest is not on the original list of forests to census, we 

observed a group of colobus while we were in the area. 

Status and Distribution of Sykes Monkeys and Yellow Baboons 

Tana River sykes monkey (Cercopithecus mitis albotorquatus) and yellow baboons (Papio 

cynocephalus cynocephalus) were observed throughout the census area. Nineteen troops 

and one solitary adult of sykes and twelve troops of baboon were recorded. Other groups 

were seen outside forest patches. Due to the inconsistency of counts of individuals, this 

information was not collected for either sykes or baboon. 


In the light of the survey carried out and the subsequent observations, the following brief 

recommendations are made: 

1. Assessments should be made on the two groups of colobus in the northern section of 

the census area to determine their long term survival risk and to review potential 

management strategies to incorporate them into the main population area depending 

on appropriate available forest habitat. 

2. Forest #58 and #64 are important for mangabeys as they are the only forests with 

more than one troop (three and four respectively), only #58 had significant troop 

numbers of both mangabeys and colobus making it the most crucial forest in terms of 

requirements for conservation. 

3. An assessment should be made to establish the suitability of erecting colobridges 

between isolated trees, between forest patches and over the Tana River to provide 

habitat corridors. Since 1997, colobridges have been successfully providing habitat 

connectivity in the Diani area (150,000 crossings per year for 22 colobridges). This 

could be an additional tool in developing corridors at the early stage, and for enabling 

connectivity between forest patches across barriers such as the Main Canal, Tana 

River and Main Access Roads. 

99


FOREST REFERENCE CHART 

The following chart serves as a reference for use with the supplied maps. Forest numbers are 

translated to forest names, and also the UTM Grid coordinates are given for each forest to 

enable future surveys to understand the forests censused. 

Table 20. Forest reference. 

Forest # Forest Name Easting 1 Northing 2 

46 Sailoni 1 630269 9762082 

47 Sailoni 2 629320 9760870 

48a Kulesa East 1 630270 9760824 

49 Kulesa West 1 629306 9760230 

50 Kulesa West 2 629430 9758876 

53 Wema West 1 629978 9758220 

54 Wema West 2 629202 9757212 

55 Wema West 3 629734 9755858 

56 Wema East 1 630388 9757212 

57 

Wema East 2 

(d) 630392 9756766 

58 Hewani West 1 630361 9754890 

59 Hewani East 1 630101 9753874 

60 Hewani East 2 630774 9753962 

61 Hewani East 3 630897 9753716 

62 Hewani West 2 630108 9753566 

63 

Hewani South 

1 632347 9752502 

64 

Hewani South 

2 630829 9752250 

65 

Bvumbwe 

North 631670 9761054 

66 

Bvumbwe 

South 633425 9755526 

67 

Lango La 

Simba 633787 9751614 

68 Wema East 4 631569 9756966 

69 Mitapani 1 629536 9747674 

0 

Unknown 

forest 630526 9761374 

1 Easting using Grid: UTM Zone 37 South, Datum ARC 1960 

2 Northing using Grid: UTM Zone 37 South, Datum ARC 1960 

100


FIELD TEAM MEMBERS 

An excellent team was developed for this survey. Team members included supervisory and 

technician staff from the Colobus Trust, as well as technician staff from Wenje who have 

participated in many of the previous surveys in this area, both at TARDA and also from the 

Mchelelo Research Station at TRPNR. 

Team Supervisors: 

Colobus Trust 

Pamela 

Cunneyworth 

Alex Rhys-Hurn 

Field Technicians: 

Colobus Trust 

Hamisi Pakia 

Robert Mwanyasi 

Wenje 

Abio Gafo 

Galana Galole 

Michael Moroa 

John Kokani 

Bakari Garise 

Field Support Staff: 

Hewani 

Silas Viha 

Buta Sammy 

Dara Garise 

Wema 

Patison Shujaa 

Sailoni 

Komora Wario 

Kulesa 

Omara Japhate 

Bvumbwe 

Justin Buya 

Security: Kenya Police 

Reserve: 

Sailoni: Dulu 

Metusala 

Wema: Jillo Yona 


The successful completion of this census required the participation of many people and 

organisations. The author and the Colobus Trust, wish to express our deep gratitude to all 

those who enabled this census project. 

Financial support was given by the Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund (CEPF), 

through John Watkin, Africa Grants Manager; 

Quentin Luke and Dr. Tom Butynski, who initially requested the census, and who 

provided valuable advice and support; 

Richard Mwendandu, TARDA Head Quarters, Nairobi for authorising access to the 

TARDA Irrigation Scheme at Gamba; 

Mr. Mbuya, Project Manager, TARDA Camp, Gamba, for his hospitality and for 

accommodating our diverse needs; 

The Area Chief, Wema, for his valuable advice on community issues and assisting us 

with community communication; 

The Kenya Police, Gamba, for their excellent security support provided by police 

reservists; 

Mr. Komora Wario, Headman of Sailoni Village, for enabling access to canoes, and 

for paddling the Tana River for our GIS; 

Our dedicated team of technicians and support staff named in section 8.0 were the 

most crucial part of our team and their dedicated long hours starting before daybreak 

and finishing after sundown was exceptional. 

The people of the villages of Hewani, Wema, Kulesa, Bvumbwe and Sailoni for their 

wonderful hospitality and friendly welcomes. 

101


REFERENCES 

Andres, P., Groves, C.P. & Horne, J.F.M., 1975. Ecology of the lower Tana River flood 

plain (Kenya). J. East Afr. Nat. Hist. Soc & Nat. Mus. 151:1-31. 

Butynski, T. M., and Mwangi, G., 1994. Conservation Status and Distribution of the Tana 

River Red Colobus and Crested Mangabey, Report for Zoo Atlanta, KWS, NMK, IPR 

and EAWLS. 

Butynski, T. M., Mbora, D. M., Kirathe, J. N., and Wiesczowski, J., 2000. Group Sizes and 

Composition of the Tana River Red Colobus and Tana River Crested Mangabey, 

Report for KWS, NMK and GEF. 

Decker, B.S. & Kinnaird, M.F. 1992. Tana River red colobus and crested mangabey: 

Results of recent censuses. Am. J. Primatol. 26:47-52. 

Decker, B.S. 1994. Effects of habitat disturbance on the behavioural ecology and 

demographics of the Tana River red colobus (Colobus badius rufomitratus). Int. J. 

Primatol. 26:47-52. 

Groves, P.G., Andrews, P. & Horne, J.F.M. 1974. The Tana colobus and mangabey. Oryx 

12: 565-575. 

Homewood, K.M. 1975. Can the Tana mangabey survive? Oryx 13:53-59. 

Homewood, K.M. 1976. The ecology and behaviour of the Tana mangabey. PhD 

Dissertation, University College, London. 

Kahumbu, P., and Davies,G. 1993. Tana River National Reserve: Primate census. March 

1993. East Afr. Nat. Hist. Soc. Bull. 23: 35–44. 

Karere, G. M., Oguge, N. O., Kirathe, J. Muoria, P. K., Moinde, N. N., and Suleman, M. A., 

2004. Population Sizes and Distribution of Primates in the Lower Tana River Forests, 

Kenya. International Journal of Primatology, Vol. 25, No. 2. 

Kinnaird, M. F., and O’Brien, T., 1991. Viable populations for an endangered forest primate, 

the Tana River crested mangabey (Cercocebus galeritus galeritus). Cons. Biol. 5: 

203–213. 

Marsh, C. W. 1976. A Management Plan for the Tana River Game Reserve. Report to the 

Kenya Department of Wildlife Conservation and Management, Nairobi. 

Marsh, C.W. 1985. A resurvey of Tana River primates. Unpublished report to the Institute of 

Primate Research, Kenya. 

Marsh, C.W. 1986. A resurvey of Tana River primates and their habitat. Primate conserv. 

7:72-82. 

Muoria, P. K., Karere, G. M., Moinde, N. N., and Suleman, M. A. 2003. Primate census and 

habitat evaluation in the Tana delta region, Kenya. Afr. J. Ecol. 41: 157–163. 

Ochiago, W.O., 1990. The Tana River red colobus (Colobus badius rufomitratus). Utafiti 

3:1-5. 

Ochiago, W. O. 1991. The demography of the Tana River red colobus, Colobus badius 

ruformitratus. MSc, Thesis, University of Nairobi, Nairobi, Kenya. 

Struhsaker, T. T., 1981. Census methods for estimating densities. In Techniques for the 

Study of Primate Population Ecology, National Academy Press, Washington, DC. 

Wieczkowski, J., Mbora, D.N.M., Kariuki, A., and Strum, S., 2002. Tana River primate and 

habitat monitoring project. Progress report for Conservation International – Margot 

Marsh Biodiversity Foundation. 

102


CONSULTANTS’ CONTACTS 

This report was compiled for CEPF by: 

W. R Quentin Luke 

National Museums of Kenya 

Coastal Forest Conservation Unit 

P.O. Box 24133 

Nairobi 00502 

Kenya 

Tel #: +254 (0)20 883449 

+254 (0)20 882240 

E-mail: quentin.luke@swiftkenya.com 

Richard Hatfield 

Senior Program Design Officer 

African Wildlife Foundation 

PO Box 48177 

Nairobi 00100 


Tel #: +254 (0)20 2710 367 

Fax: +254 (0)20 2710 372 

E-mail: RHatfield@awfke.org 

Pamela Cunneyworth 

Director 

Wakuluzu: Friends of the Colobus Trust Ltd. 

P.O. Box 5380 

Diani Beach 80401 


Tel #: + 254 (0)40 320 3519 

Fax #: + 254 (0)40 320 3519 

Web: www.colobustrust.org 

Email: pam@colobustrust.org or info@colobustrust.org 

With contributions from: 

Tom Butynski 

Director, Eastern Africa Biodiversity Hotspots 

Conservation International, c/o IUCN 

P.O. Box 68200 

City Square 

Nairobi 00200 


Tel #: +254 (0)20 3745 374 

Fax: +254 (0)20 890 615 

E-mail: TButynski@aol.com 

Julia Glenday 

2614 Augusta Drive. 

Durham NC 27707 

USA 

Tel #: +1 919-493-4299 

E-mail: Julia.Glenday@gmail.com 

103


CRITICAL ECOSYSTEM PARTNERSHIP FUND 

The Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund (CEPF) is a joint initiative of Conservation 

International, the Global Environment Facility, the Government of Japan, the John D. and 

Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation and the World Bank. A fundamental goal is to ensure civil 

society is engaged in biodiversity conservation. 

Conservation International 

1919 M Street NW 

Suite 600 

\Washington DC 20036 

USA 

Tel #: +1 202 912 1808 

Fax #: +1 202 912 1045 

E-mail: info@conservation.org 

Web: http://www.cepf.net 

104

Tana Delta Irrigation Project, Kenya: An Environmental Assessment

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?