News
New law to allow killing of wildlife
A male impala antelope in the Masai Mara game reserve. The minister may grant cropping to be undertaken in game farming and ranching operations. Graphic/ELIJAH MULI
Posted Saturday, February 21 2009 at 09:50
The most glaring example is the spiriting away from lakes in the Rift Valley of tiny organisms called extremophiles in the early 1990s by giant biotechnology companies — among them US-based Procter and Gamble and Genenco — that ended up creating immeasurable fortunes for them.
It would also be comforting for communities living amidst such natural wealth because the Bill recognises their rights to share a portion of what could be generated from them.
“The Authority may issue a permit only if the applicant and the community have entered into a benefit-sharing agreement that provides for sharing by the community in any future benefits that may be derived from the relevant bioprospecting,” says the Bill.
However, the Bill has come under attack by groups that accuse Wildlife and Forestry Minister Noah Wekesa of overlooking a similar Bill drafted in 2007.
Wildlife welfare groups say the earlier Bill was drafted after Kenyans from across the country gave their input.
“In 2006, the wildlife policy underwent a national consultative review process spearheaded by the then Ministry of Tourism and Wildlife” said Elizabeth Wamba, head of communication at the International Fund for Animal Welfare.
Ms Wamba said that before the 2007 Bill was drafted, the ministry had constituted a national Steering Committee, which held sessions across the country before submitting its report to a Technical Committee that then drafted not just the Bill but also a wildlife policy.
Now, IFAW is taking issue with the fact that a “caucus” of big wildlife bodies and top ranchers have attempted to overturn the entire process.
“Any attempts at changing these documents can only be construed as hijacking the process from the people of Kenya,” said Ms Wamba.
It is only fair that any new proposals undergo a similar all inclusive consultative process before they are adopted in the draft policy and Bill,” she said.
“Furthermore,” she added, “some of the members of the technical caucus and its partners made presentations directly to the Steering Committee both in writing and verbally during the two national symposia that were held when the review process was being conducted.”
The same sentiments were expressed by a group of 20 community groups and NGOs, which have formed the Kenya Coalition for Wildlife Conservation and Management.
The group had written to Mr Wekesa on January 21, complaining of the changes.
“The coalition deems it curious and out of order for the group calling itself the Technical Caucus of Conservation Organisations in Kenya, the Kenya Tourism Federation and the Kenya Private Sector Alliance to go behind the back of the majority stakeholders and lobby the ministry to review the Bill,” says the letter.
But if the 2007 Bill was a negotiated one, why did the ministry come up with a new one?
.



