Organized & Facilitated by the South Rift Association of Land Owners (Rebuilding the Pride) and Lion Guardians Hosted by the School for Field Studies Funded by the Liz Claiborne Art Ortenberg Foundation and African Conservation Centre

Meeting Report 24th-25th January, 2014

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2

BACKGROUND ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3

GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 4

MEETING SUMMARY ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4

DETAILED NOTES – PRESENTATIONS---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7

DETAILED NOTES – WORKING GROUP DISCUSSIONS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11

DETAILED NOTES – BORDERLAND CONSERVATION INITIATIVE -------------------------------------------------------------- 17

DETAILED NOTES – ACTION PLAN -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20

MEETING PARTICIPANTS ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 24

3

BACKGROUND

In February 2012, a workshop organized by African Conservation Centre and Wildlife Conservation Society was held in Arusha titled “Conserving Elephants in the Tanzania-Kenya Borderlands: Forging a Collaborative Approach” which recognized that three levels of collaboration were required to conserve a meta-population of elephants, stem poaching and ensure local communities benefited from wildlife. The three-levels involved government-to-government coordination; Mobilizing local communities to engage in conservation; and establishing a common database and monitoring program to track and monitor elephant movements, poaching, conflict and other activities in the region. Following this, several community meetings were held where the communities requested that NGOs and governments tackle conflict with lions and other large carnivores together with human-elephant conflict. This would allow us to tackle the bigger challenges that both species present, under a single initiative. Over the last three decades, lion (Panthera leo) populations inside and outside protected areas have collapsed from an estimated 75,800 to less than 32,000 today. Three main factors continue to threaten the future of Africa’s lions: range fragmentation, conflict with people and loss of prey. Rapid fragmentation in previously connected ecosystems make lions more susceptible to conflict, poaching, loss of prey, drought and other factors. Other large carnivores including wild dog, cheetah and hyenas are also in decline for much the same reasons.

East Africa now has over half of the remaining lions in the world. Kenya has approximately 2,000 lions, with 75% residing in southern pastoral lands. Tanzania is estimated to have between 16,000 and 18,000 lions. Amongst these, the Maasailand ecosystem subpopulation is considered a transborder population which includes two Lion Conservation Units. Latest results show that collectively the borderland area accounts for approximately 20% of the remaining lion populations of Kenya and Tanzania. Allowing the decline of lions to continue will impact whole ecosystems, disrupting food webs and leading to the decline and possibly even extinctions of multiple species.

In order for lion populations to survive, the aforementioned factors which threaten the future of Africa’s lions have to be addressed. There are many individual programs and projects that are working on lion conservation throughout the borderland area. However, it is of utmost importance to enlist the support of communities and for the specific projects and programs to work collaboratively to achieve greater goals, and ultimately to successfully conserve lions. This meeting of lion research and conservation organization is focused on bringing together all these groups for a better future for communities and lions.

4

GOALS and OBJECTIVES

The rapid decline of lions and their habitat calls for an urgent integration of

conservation agendas and conflict mitigation tools. To promote collaboration, Lion Guardians, the South Rift Association of Land Owners (Rebuilding the Pride) and African Conservation Centre developed and organized a Borderland Lion Initiative meeting that draws from the Borderland Elephant Conservation Initiative. This initiative aims to conserve a large, genetically viable, free-ranging metapopulation of lions along the Kenya-Tanzania borderlands through the coordination of conservation efforts and cooperation between key interest groups. Collaboration of conservation and research groups within the borderland region will be key in achieving the following goals:

1) Sharing of data and information to improve the knowledge and understanding of movements and threats to the lion populations across the borderland area and identification of key areas for broader connectivity.

2) Maintenance of a viable borderland lion metapopulation: complementing efforts to

protect a network of individual lion populations and ecosystems.

3) Improved conservation effectiveness: sharing and creating tools to mitigate conflict as well as to identify, and ultimately protect, the critical areas needed to maintain connectivity through the use of culturally-appropriate strategies and incentive schemes ensuring community support.

4) Joint advocacy for lion conservation: improving continuity in conservation agendas

and policymaking across the borderland region.

MEETING SUMMARY

In January of 2014, twenty representatives from Kenya and Tanzania-based lion research and conservation groups met to form a collaborative approach to lion conservation in the borderlands. The meeting was organized by the South Rift Association of Land Owners (SORALO), Lion Guardians, and was hosted by the School for Field Studies Kenya. It was funded by the Liz Claiborne Art Ortenberg Foundation, African Conservation Centre and SORALO.

Dr. Moses Okello, Director of the School for Field Studies, opened the meeting by welcoming everyone and reinforcing the need for all present to embody the scholarly qualities of humility and responsibility.

This was followed by John Kamanga, the Director of SORALO, who represented the voice of communities in the borderland region. He expressed their desire for a forum where conflicts arising from human-elephant and human-lion interactions would be addressed, as they believed that lions are as much of a “conflict” species as elephants.

5

Building on this, Dr. Stephanie Dolrenry (Director of Science, Lion Guardians) talked about the theories and concepts behind metapopulations: a network of populations that are connected through dispersal and influenced by factors such as proximity and area. She presented the findings from a recent study on the metapopulations of lions across Kenya and Tanzania. Dr. Dolrenry concluded by stressing the importance of Maasailand for lion conservation given that it currently has a network of well-connected, moderate sized lion populations (e.g., known lion populations exist within 300kms of each other). The lasting message from the presentation was that as lion conservationists, we need to work to reduce the probability of lion extinction by maintaining connectivity between existing populations and not only focusing on our individual sites.

Once the stage was set, each participating organization briefed the group on their efforts in their specific areas. Copies of the presentations can be found at:

https://app.sugarsync.com/wf/D1487157_71101232_961790

Figure 1. Each participating organization shared information on the areas they focused on. The participants were then split into three working groups to discuss the following:

Group 1: Community engagement and conflict mitigation Group 2: Lion survey protocols and lion identification protocols Group 3: Gap identification (geographic and scientific knowledge)

Group 1 identified the central issue with regard to community engagement and conflict mitigation as “space”, specifically outside of protected areas and that the approach taken to

6

engage communities in conservation is critical to success. Different techniques are required in different circumstances and different areas. Group 2 discussed the various lion survey protocols and identification methods, listing the pros and cons of each while trying to devise a way forward on collaborative survey efforts. Group 3 identified the various geographical and knowledge gaps in the borderlands area as well as a potential way forward on how to bridge those gaps.

Peadar Brehony (SORALO) then gave a presentation on the Borderland Elephant Conservation Initiative in order to provide a basis from which the lion partners could forge its way forward. This included specifics such as agreements on what collaborators are willing to share, what issues the Elephant Initiative has faced and what the lion partners could learn from that.

At the end of the meeting, all participants agreed on a specific action plan (see Page 21) and a timeline for this collaborative effort. Four members (two from Kenya, two from Tanzania) were nominated as representatives on a steering committee (see Page 20) who would be responsible for ensuring all parties are involved and that the Action Plan is being implemented.

Figure 2. The meeting participants; missing members include John Kamanga, Moses Okello, Koikai, Lana Muller and Dirk Van der Goes.

7

DETAILED NOTES – PRESENTATIONS

Communities Call for Collaboration John Kamanga - South Rift Association of Land Owners

John Kamanga’s presentation revealed the reason behind the communities’ desire for scientists to partner and work together.

The process started in 2012 with the Borderland Elephant Conservation Initiative. There was interest in working on both sides of the border, focusing on elephants specifically to understand pathways and gaps in knowledge so as to offer better protection. It was felt that the communities needed to be involved to understand why corridors should not be blocked. Scientists and communities would have to work together in order to conserve elephants; the scientists would need to share information and data whilst communities would need to work towards a harmonious relationship with wildlife given the different policies on the two sides of the border. Furthermore, it was understood that communities also cross the borders and it is necessary for them to work together and keep corridors open both for the wildlife and themselves (pastoralist communities).

A couple of months later during follow up community meetings in Longido and Namanga, communities wondered why the initiative singled out elephants. They felt that this had to be an ecosystem approach, and to them lions are as much of a “conflict” species as elephants, therefore lions should also be brought into the borderland initiative. The communities wanted a forum that included both elephants and lions.

Lastly, John talked about how SORALO sees lions dispersing from the South Rift, but that they have no knowledge of where those lions go and whether they emerge elsewhere e.g. Amboseli, Mara or Tanzania. This, to him, emphasized the need to work together as scientists and also help communities address the issues of human-lion conflict.

Figure 3. John Kamanga begins the meeting with a perspective from communities.

8

East African Metapopulation of Lions Stephanie Dolrenry – Lion Guardians

The focus of Dr. Stephanie Dolrenry’s presentation was how human activities are fragmenting populations and how this in turn affects dispersal, colonization and results ultimately with extinction.

Stephanie began by sharing the theories and concepts behind metapopulations, how they are connected and what affects them. She built on the point made earlier by John Kamanga, that like SORALO, Lion Guardians does not know whether Amboseli lions survive once they leave their study area. This knowledge is critical because a dispersing lion has the potential to rescue an existing population that may be close to extinction or extinct, or to recolonize an unoccupied habitat patch that is suitable for lions. The area between existing populations that lions must disperse through is called the matrix, an area generally unsuitable for long-term survival of lions. Based on her recent model-based analysis of lion metapopulations, Dr. Dolrenry found that one of the largest threats to metapopulations is survival in the matrix (Dolrenry et al. 2014).

There are many ways to analyze metapopulations, but Dorenry et a.l kept it as simple as possible by using an incidence function model. The study focused on Kenya and Tanzania and identified lion populations based on the most authoritative studies. They also sent questionnaires out to experts/ researchers in the area and asked them whether there is currently a lion population or not (1 vs. 0).

Using the presence/absence data as a base, Dolrenry et al. then analyzed using dispersal distances found from the existing literature and Lion Guardians data. They broke the analysis down to treat males and females as separate species, and used a best-case (maximum dispersal distances) as well as the average dispersal distances for both males and females to predict the occurrence of lion populations in Kenya and Tanzania. The data showed that if males are allowed to disperse from patches and survive the matrix, the metapopulation as a whole will be more viable with each population having a lower probability extinction. Their findings have possible implications for hunting areas, which may have fewer male dispersals thus reducing the metapopulation viability. The study also underlined that despite being less effective dispersers, females are crucial for recolonization, and thus also need to be able to survive the matrix. They found that under the worst case scenario, even large populations like Ruaha could go extinct due to isolation, as females would not be able to get there to recolonize.

However, under all scenarios (given maximum and average dispersal distances of

both males and females separately) the borderland populations in the Maasailand area were occupied. This is promising as it suggests that even though populations are becoming smaller and more restricted, there is an opportunity for lion conservationists in Maasailand to be ahead of the game. If the area’s populations can remain connected and intact, they can remain healthy and viable as a central network of medium-sized patches (populations), which is more likely to survive than few small patches or large isolated patches.

9

Furthermore, Stephanie suggested that broad scale collaboration is essential for lions

to survive in non-protected areas. It is only through collaboration that we can elevate human tolerance in these areas to create corridors that will enable connectivity of the borderland metapopulation and allow them to prosper.

Figure 4. Stephanie Dolrenry presents recent findings from the Dolrenry et al. 2014 paper. Questions and Answers on Presentation

The question and answer session focused primarily on the potential weaknesses of the model and how it could be made more robust. The study has only looked at breeding lion populations; it would be possible to overlay minimum viable population size as another scenario. It could also be made stronger by getting more robust information on lion populations (e.g. specifics on the specific extent - area - of breeding populations). It is also possible to model the effect of changes in the matrix on the metapopulation by using different snapshots of occupancy over time, but this would entail follow-up surveys over multiple years. Today, there are more complicated models that take into effect matrix changes e.g., least to most harsh. The ability to disperse is also dependent on seasonality, human intervention (fences) and presence of prey. It is thus also useful to understand how prey movements and anthropogenic influences influence lion metapopulation connectivity.

“We have to work together to conserve lions. It is not enough for us to concentrate just on our own sites. We need to be open and sharing, if there is a tool that can help all, we should share it for the greater success for everyone.” Leela Hazzah –Lion Guardians

10

The findings help to inform priorities – for instance we should not put resources into areas where lions are heading out into lands where there is no other population, we should instead focus on where we can establish or work to maintain a corridor of tolerance. The model could be tightened up further if we are able, through systematic survey, to fill in information/data where none was available. Group Presentations Each group represented at the meeting was asked to give a short presentation to outline the kind of work being carried out in each of their respective areas. Specifically, groups were asked to give information on the following:

Geographical area and communities they work with Ways in which they engage local communities What research or conservation efforts they are doing in each area Lion numbers or densities (or estimates) Lion movements (known or suspected) Lion mortality rates (illegal) and killing methods Survey tools used Conflict mitigation tools used Challenges the programs face

All the presentations can be found at the link below:

https://app.sugarsync.com/wf/D1487157_71101232_961790

Figure 5. Guy Western sharing his presentation on SORALO’s Rebuilding the Pride work.

11

DETAILED NOTES – WORKING GROUP DISCUSSIONS

Group 1: Community Engagement and Conflict Mitigation The central issue discussed in this working group was “space” – specifically areas outside of protected areas. In Tanzania, there is a structure for land use planning but it is a complicated process and unfortunately the approach is “incorrect”, communities are left out of the process when they are the most affected. To successfully engage communities, the approach taken by conservationists is paramount to success. Integrating traditional knowledge, cultural values and will of the people that make up the community will help conservationists engage with communities so that everyone wins in the end.

Figure 6. Group 1 discussions. The group discussed two specific examples of where community engagement has worked effectively:

1. Longido district: a number of villages (10 wards) have one common vision, one common development plan. They created a wildlife management area (WMA) for livestock, and through effective management have an entire area that secures grazing and water for livestock – as well as for wildlife. Because they are such a strong collective unit, they also have government support for the WMA.

2. Olkirimatian Group Ranch: The Olkirimatian community have gone back to cultural practices. They use their traditional knowledge, along with scientific findings, to practice effective land use planning and management. They have agreed to respect these plans and use them to the benefit of both livestock and wildlife.

12

In summary, if you get the approach right then everything else falls into place because everyone comes from the same place. The group felt that the following should be kept in mind when trying to engage with communities:

1. Start with the community and what their issues are. It may be different for different places.

2. How do you get positive support from local communities? Understand the communities’ desires and what they would want to achieve. Look at alternatives that would address both their needs and the needs for conservation.

3. Look at cultural values and economic incentives for solutions to problems. 4. Allow communities to own the process and understand that they own their

resources. In this way it is driven from the grass roots. 5. Education – ensure that it is a two way process.

Time is conditional on the approach – you have to work at the pace that is needed to ensure the “approach”. Patience and endurance are key as one is more likely to have the desired outcome if the community and conservationists move at the same pace.

Group 2: Lion survey and identification protocols This working group spent the majority of time discussing various protocols and their pros and cons:

Using call-ins and the pros/cons, and biases of the method. Use of call-ins used to make individual IDs for mark-recapture study (Lion

Guardians), or trying to habituate lions to cars in Ngorongoro Conservation Area. Spoor transects, mark-recapture, call-ins good for doing lion surveys Occupancy: good to use two methods and not just one. Spoor transects as well as

call-ins. How do you conduct surveys for large areas?

o Most useful to first obtain local knowledge – are there lions in the area or not? Perception is exaggerated but helps to narrow down areas where lions are actually present.

Lion identification – currently have very localized knowledge on lions, want to develop a platform to share lion identities and facilitate identification of lions that have dispersed into a study area by:

o Sharing data o Engaging tourists to boost up observations: Maurus Msuha gave an example

of cheetah and wild dogs in Tanzania – TAWIRI promotes tourist reports and

Communities want RECOGNITION! PARTICIPATION! INVOLVEMENT! Koikai – Amboseli Ecosystem Trust

13

works with a network of tour operators. If TAWIRI is able to identify individuals they let the tourists know, and thank them for their submission. This has helped increase the profile of the species.

The key message was that it was important to use protocols which had comparable accuracy so that cross comparisons could be made between the different studies and different areas.

Figure 7. Group 2 discussing protocols.

Group 3: Identifying Gaps The third group focused on current geographic and scientific knowledge gaps, and how to proceed forward. For each they concentrated on the following issues:

1) Geographic Gaps: a. No knowledge at all of an area (unknown unknowns) b. Very little knowledge, not enough to use in analyses or management plans, or

knowledge of a gap in knowledge (known unknowns)

2) Scientific Gaps: a. Genetic Information b. Dispersal and sub-adult male collaring c. Camera Trap technology and lion identification

14

Geographic Gaps The group reviewed a map of the borderland area with an overlay of where all groups were working. Based on this, they identified the following gaps: Table 1. Information on Geographic gaps

AREA Groups/Researchers

Tsavo

Survey by Phillip Henschel, Laurence Frank and KWS (Panthera and Living with Lions) that found much fewer lions than expected,

Mervin King (suggested by Allan Earnshaw), also Tsavo Trust pass on GPS locations or

lions seen in anti-poaching flights.

Tsavo West-South

Very little known, suggested person to contact: Donald Mombo, working with

Wildlife Works and Taita Taveta – also for Tsavo as whole

Mkomazi

Tony Fitzjohn – Stephanie Dolrenry to find out more

West Kilimanjaro

AWF working in area, but not specifically on lions, Maasai Wilderness Conservation Trust have two scouts in area, but very little data

Amboseli

Big Life, Lion Guardians, MWCT (Kuku Group Ranch area)

Lake Natron

Hunting block issues… Some tour operators and hunting camps.

Longido

TAWIRI and Honeyguide Foundation

South Rift

SORALO (Rebuilding the Pride).

South Rift - Namanga

Major gap that is being addressed by SORALO (Rebuilding the Pride)

Loitas

SORALO: Mixed results so far, but did show lions decreasing and possibly an important

matrix between Mara and South Rift

15

AREA Groups/Researchers

Maasai Mara

Mara Predator Hub – Nic Elliot

Serengeti and Ngorongoro Conservation Area

TAWIRI and Serengeti Lion Project

Tarangire

Tarangire Lion Project, Tanzania People and Wildlife Fund

Maasai Steppe Tanzania People and Wildlife Fund East of Loliondo/Gol Mountains Little known – Tour operators?

Lake Eyasi Little known – Tour operators? South of Maswa Little known – Tour operators?

N.B. The group also thought that tour operators could be useful partners to get presence/absence data, basic numbers, and ID photos.

Figure 8. Group 3 discussing scientific and geographical gaps Scientific Gaps The group identified three scientific gaps:

1. Genetic Information: Genetics can be used to answer some key questions about connectivity, but also basic population information. It would allow for a much better understanding of the borderland lion metapopulation. A genetic analysis would look at identifying where current corridors

16

exist, and where there are barriers to movement. Questions that can be asked include how related the populations are (existing gene flow and relatedness), and whether certain types of matrix are better for dispersal than others.

o Many researchers already have samples just waiting to be analyzed, but analysis is hampered by difficult processes to send samples out of country to labs

o Both Tanzania and Kenya want genetic analysis to be done in country to develop labs and facilities, and promote training of Kenyans and Tanzanians, but a big issue is the lack of trusted facilities and training in East Africa. Need an assessment of genetic facilities in TZ and Kenya – what can and cannot be done?

TZ has some equipment at The Nelson Mandela African Institution of Science and Technology in Arusha.

Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS) have many stored genetic samples and have recently constructed a Wildlife Forensics Lab.

Need to talk to Dr. Kissiki at KWS (Moses Okello, Noah Sitati, Allan Earnshaw to talk to people)

o A big goal is to promote the education and training of Tanzanians and Kenyans (capacity building), and bringing in equipment can also act as a large funding draw.

o Dr. Sam Cushman (University of Arizona) looking to come out to Kenya to teach courses on landscape genetics (just applied for a Fulbright grant to do so). Will be working closely with Dr. Nic Elliot of the Mara Lion Project.

In theory, managing bodies of various regions – especially groups like SORALO – should be able to provide an interface with which to handle things like sampling permission (vs. needing to talk to millions of separate landowners). Working through regional managing bodies to facilitate the process, collaboration and a big push from many parties is thus likely the best route forward.

2. Dispersal and sub-adult male collaring: Would be very informative about dispersal and population connectivity. It would provide real-time information on movements.

o Nic Elliot’s PhD work on sub adult male dispersal will be very informative o But some people raised concerns: sub-adults are still growing, don't want

collars too tight and drop-offs are unreliable, more likely to have to re-collar, high level of effort needed

3. Camera Trap Technology and Lion Identification:

As remote camera technology and image analysis software develops, it may also become possible to evaluate movement and/or dispersal of lions based on individual IDs from trap photos. Group affiliated with Princeton is currently using a modeling approach looking at bone structure, ear notches, and scars to see if this is feasible.

17

DETAILED NOTES – BORDERLAND CONSERVATION INITIATIVE

Borderland Elephant Conservation Initiative South Rift Association of Land Owners, Peadar Brehony

Peadar Brehony shared the details and experiences of the Borderland Elephant Conservation Initiative that was convened to:

1. Conserve a meta-population in the borderland area 2. Stem poaching 3. Ensure communities are benefitting from wildlife

The lion partners can gain from the experiences of the Borderland Elephant Initiative.

This initiative has already figured out platforms for collaboration and we can learn from the mistakes they have made.

The first collaborative step that the Borderland Elephant Initiative took was to create

a basemap. Researchers defined the probable extent of the borderland elephant metapopulation, and used that to define the area of interest and then compiled data layers e.g., natural features, roads, designations, collar data etc. on top of this. A GIS workgroup keeps this data current. This basemap can thus be used by to identify the gaps, look for funding for those gaps and get assessments done on the ground.

This was exactly how the group was able to assess the situation on the ground in the Loita Hills. After reviewing the basemap, the Loita hills turned out to be a geographical gap that needed to be surveyed. As a first step, the Borderland Elephant Conservation Initiative began by working through community-based organizations to talk with community leaders. Subsequently, they used local enumerators to conduct 260 interviews across different sites. The survey found that elephants and lions were the two main species that communities believed had declined over the last 5 years. The Initiative further broke this down by area and found that in 80% of the areas, the populations of elephants were decreasing. Following this, Elephant Voices conducted a survey that confirmed this decrease in those areas, and also confirmed an increase in elephants in the Loita area adjoining Mosiro. This was further confirmed by Kenya Wildlife Service aerial surveys. Community game scouts are now being trained to be deployed in these critical areas. Collaboration has allowed the Borderland Elephant Initiative to confirm the questionnaire data and fill in a gap. The same methodology can be used for lion assessments. Peadar went on to outline the successes, as well as the pitfalls and challenges the Borderland Elephant Conservation Initiative has seen, and what the Borderland Lion Conservation Initiative can learn from this:

1. Start with agreements: a. What datasets should we share? Datasets that members are comfortable

sharing b. Data security should have high priority

18

c. Access to the data – webpage and ArcGIS online (user restrictions can be applied). Store data in a location where all participants can have easy access.

2. Ensure that many groups are contributing, e.g. sharing collar data and other information has enabled the discovery link between Mara and the South Rift in the Loitas. Everyone needs to commit to a minimum set of data to launch of collaborative database.

3. Share standardized data collection protocols: a. MIKE and PIKE for elephants – these protocols are used for reporting

carcasses b. SMART and Eventbook system for enforcement c. Common protocols for future surveys to do cross comparisons d. Suitability mapping – using data such as waterhole locations, and overlaying

with data for elephants – shows the areas which are good for elephants

4. Communicate information: a. Webpage – also as a way to collaborate (www.borderlandconservation.org)

i. Vital to share the message with global audience ii. Can define levels of access: internal vs. external access

iii. ArcGIS online – embedded map and data sharing platform, serves as a database to run analyses and create maps from

5. Challenges:

a. Need people “driving” things otherwise, despite good intentions, actions don’t get implemented

b. Lack of steering committee i. Gaps in the map

ii. How we dealt with this iii. Unrealistic timelines

c. Different protocols/survey techniques and projections confound comparisons

d. Sharing platforms are useful for collaboration before the website is operational

i. External database like Sugarsync and Dropbox

In terms of genetics and a borderland lion genetic study, the borderland elephant genetic analysis (Ahlering et al. 2012) showed that female elephants tend to be philopatric (remain near birth site ) and males tend to disperse. This was noticed when a genetic study was done the borderland area. This study showed that there is a strong elephant metapopulation with separated populations on the eastern and western sides of the Rift Valley. The western population was identified as the source population responsible for a recolonization of the South Rift.

19

Looking forward, NASA/ESA interested in using the borderland area as a unit for analysis. They are want to look at change in hydrology and NDVI in the borderland area over the last 30 years. This can then use used as a tool in land use planning and help in our understanding of water availability.

Figure 9. Koikai (AET) addresses the group in an open discussion.

20

DETAILED NOTES – ACTION PLAN

The second day of the meeting focused on a way forward. All participants talked about what they were willing to collaborate on and developed a specific action plan for the next year (see below: page 21). To ensure the action plan is implemented and that members adhere to the core values and principles behind the Borderland Conservation Initiative, the group nominated a steering committee with representation from Kenya and Tanzania: Table 2. Steering committee.

Kenya Tanzania

Moses Okello – School for Field Studies Maurus Msuha – TAWIRI Peadar Brehony – SORALO Laly Lichtenfeld – TPWF

Finally, the group – as seen in the Action Plan – agreed to sign an MOU between all partners to insure that this process acknowledged both the importance of continuing the collaboration, whilst respecting the data rights of each partner.

21

Action Person Responsible Timeline Resources Sharing: Metapopulation Paper and other relevant Scientific Papers

Stephanie Dolrenry (Lion Guardians) 10th February

Sharing: East African Community Transboundary Ecosystem Management Act 2012

Noah Sitati (AWF) 10th February

Sharing: Lion survey (call back) of Enduimet and Amboseli NP

Noah Sitati (AWF) 10th February

Sharing: Preliminary/published Tsavo Survey results

Stephanie Dolrenry (Lion Guardians) Leela Hazzah (Lion Guardians)

When it is available

GIS: Allow others to join GIS Workgroup and provide shape files

Peadar Brehony (SORALO) Bernard Kissui (Tarangire Lion Program) Charles Trout (TPW) Maurus Msuha (TAWIRI)

10th February

Governance Structure: Develop guidelines, statement of commitment List of Data Requirements to be circulated for confirmation and then agreement from all

Leela Hazzah (Lion Guardians) Peadar Brehony (SORALO)

15th February

Lion ID: Write Concept Note on survey protocols and lion I.D. database

Lead: Stephanie Dolrenry (Lion Guardians) Bernard Kissui (Tarangire Lion Project) Working Group – see below

28th February

Survey Protocols: Request templates from specialist groups and upload to discussion platform

Stephanie Dolrenry -> P. Henschel Lana Muller -> H. Bauer Guy Western -> C. Sillero-Zubiri

7th March KWT – if under $3000

Lion ID: Contact Google to see if they would have any interest in the lion I.D. database

Allan Earnshaw (KWT) Lana Muller (MWCT)

31st March

Joint Advocacy Group: What are the avenues and legal implications?

John Kamanga (SORALO) Peadar Brehony (SORALO) Allan Earnshaw (KWT) Feedback from the Elephant Borderland Initiative

31st March

22

Lion ID: Description of the job Budget for the lion id database

Guy Western (SORALO) Nic Elliot and Kasaine Sankan (Mara Lion Project)

28th April

Survey Protocols: Each of the following individuals are to review the protocols and feed back to the group through online platform

Call backs – Bernard Kissui/Stephanie Dolrenry

Spoor Counts –Stephanie Dolrenry/Laly Lichtenfeld

Camera Traps – Laly Lichtenfeld/Maurus Msuha

Mark and recapture –Maurus Msuha/Stephanie Dolrenry/Bernard Kissui

Questionnaires (presence/absence) – Guy Western

31st May

Lion ID: Finding the Developer

Salisha Chandra (Lion Guardians) Samantha Spooner (Mara Lion Project)

30th June

Budget:Transport, Visas Projects will cover food/stay

Lion ID: Develop Common Template

Stephanie Dolrenry (Lion Guardians) Ingela Jansson (Serengeti Lion Program) Working Group – see below

30th June – Draft 29th Sept – Final

Borderland Lion Genetics Study: Feasibility, Process and Way Forward

Stefanie Streble (SORALO) Ernest Ebalat (TAWIRI) Bernard Kissui (TLP) Nic Elliot (Mara Lion Project)

30th June

Priorities and Gaps: Working Group Meeting to continue the discussion on common lion I.D. protocols and survey techniques Geographical Gaps: Initial Assessment – people to follow up on: Mkomazi Tsavo South Rift/Loitas Loliondo (follow up with FZS) Natron, Eyasi

Peadar Brehony (SORALO) Working Group Stephanie Dolrenry (Lion Guardians) Salisha Chandra (Lion Guardians) Guy Western (SORALO) Peadar Brehony (SORALO) Charles Trout (TPWF)

End of June End of June – presented at the meeting

AWF Namanga facilities

23

Rangeland Conservation: Develop a Toolbox: ‘Protecting Rangelands’ Approaches to Habitat loss and fragmentation through community engagement

Charles Trout, Laly Lichtenfeld (TPW) Guy Western, Peadar Brehony (SORALO) Noah Sitati (AWF) Bernard Kissui (SFS TZ)

Community Engagement: Meetings with communities and community conservation groups to investigate: what data is required to effectively combat habitat loss and fragmentation?

Noah Sitati (AWF) Allan Earnshaw (KWT) John Kamanga (SORALO) Maurus Msuha (TAWIRI)

Sharing the message: Presentation to Kenya Carnivore Conference and TAWIRI

Representatives from Tanzania and Kenya

Next year’s meeting: Take stock of previous year’s events and plan next steps

January 2015 Tanzania

Working Group: Lion I.D. and surveys – Laly Lichtenfeld, Guy Western, Ingela Jansson, Stephanie Dolrenry, Philip Briggs, Bernard Kissui, Nic Elliot, Kasaine Sankan,

Lana Muller, Dennis Ikanda, Monica Chege

24

MEETING PARTICIPANTS

Name Project E-mail

Francis Irungu Kenya Wildlife Service Sylvia Kutata Kenya Wildlife Service Maurus Msuha TAWIRI Maurus.Msuha@gmail.com Leela Hazzah Lion Guardians Leela@lionguardians.org Stephanie Dolrenry Lion Guardians Stephanie@lionguardians.org Salisha Chandra Lion Guardians Salisha@lionguardians.org John Kamanga SORALO j.olekamanga@gmail.com Peadar Brehony SORALO peadar_b@hotmail.com Stefanie Strebel SORALO strebelstefanie@gmail.com Guy Western SORALO guy.western.ke@gmail.com Laly Lichtenfeld Tanzania People & Wildlife Lichtenfeld@afrpw.org Charles Trout Tanzania People & Wildlife Trout@afpw.org Ingela Jansson Serengeti Lion Project - Ngorongoro ngorongoro.lions@gmail.com Noah Sitati AWF - Kilimanjaro nsitati@awf.org Bernard Kissui Tarangire Lion Project/SFS bkissui@fieldstudies.org, Koikai Oloitiptip Amboseli Ecosystem Trust oloikoikai@ovi.com Moses Okello SFS - Kenya mokello@fieldstudies.org John Kiringe SFS - Kenya jkiringe@fieldstudies.org James Nkobu Amboseli Ecosystem Trust Kuperejames@yahoo.com Lana Muller Maasai Wilderness Conservation Trust conservation@maasaitrust.org Dirk Van Der Goes Maasai Wilderness Conservation Trust data@maasaitrust.org Allan Earnshaw Kenya Wildlife Trust for

Mara Lion Project allan@earnshawsafaris.com, nic_elliot@yahoo.co.uk