Uproar in Samburu over State's controversial acquisition of land

There is an uproar over the government’s plan to acquire 4,000 hectares of community land in Samburu County for a security installation.

The controversy arose after the government issued two conflicting gazette notices indicating different acreages of land for the intended acquisition.

A notice dated March 25, 2024, stated the state intended to acquire 2,183.91 acres from parcel Samburu/East/Waso/1, while another dated November 25, 2024, indicated 4,675.84 hectares from the same parcel.

The land belongs to the Losesia Conservancy, whose members have raised concerns about the conflicting land sizes the government intends to acquire.

.

Keep Reading business

•  KPC's Sh7b windfall boosts cash-strapped Treasury
•  Tala to expand lending to unbanked groups
•  Kwale miner ordered to pay KRA Sh23.3m withholding tax
•  Kenyan Fintech joins UN global compact
•  Counties on the spot over lack of urban plans, poor development

“The acquisition of the additional land will highly inconvenience the operations of Samburu National Reserve,” he said.

He said huge chunk of the land being earmarked for the security installation was meant for pasture for the community livestock, and if hived off, would force their cattle and goats to stray into the national reserve.

“It will be a big challenge to us as pastoralists especially during drought if the over 4,000 hectares are acquired for the security installation. We will not allow that to happen,” he said.

Leshagayo said the government should stick to the initial over 2,000 acres of land it had requested.

“If the government forces us to surrender the 4,000 hectares, then we will have no choice but venture into the national park to graze our animals and water them,” he warned.

Leshagayo revealed that the community gained more by leasing the land to the National  Reserve than by having the security installation.

“The money we get from leasing the land to the National Park has enabled us to educate our children,” he said.

Leaders silent

Felix Loseseiya, a ranch member, said the community was only aware of the acquisition of the 2,000 acres of land.

“We do not understand where the additional hectares came from. Someone needs to bring our parents together to deliberate on the extra land that the government now needs. The land belongs to us and we have a right to be told what the extra hectares will be used for,” Loseseiya said.

Tibian Lenyakopiro, a community leader, questioned why local leaders remained silent on the issue.

“We’re astonished by their silence and failure to explain the sudden increase in land acreage,” he said.

Youth leader Kelvin Lelemoyog pledged to mobilize young people to oppose the push for more land without public participation.

“As young people in this country, we will not sit back and watch as our heritage is taken away. We must stand up and ask questions, and we deserve answers,” Lelemoyog said.

He accused elected leaders of keeping quiet when the community resources were being taken away.

“Our leaders are the problem here. We elected them to represent us yet they cannot even ask questions when our resources as being taken away,” he said.

Carbon credits

Lelemoyog argued the community would benefit more from projects like carbon credits than a security installation.

Fellow leader Lentala Lenene emphasized that Losesia Conservancy, the community’s main income source, should not be handed to the national government.

Samburu Governor Lati Lelelit, who in January 2024 led local leaders in opposing the acquisition of 2,000 acres of land, could not be reached for comment.

However, he had previously expressed concerns and warned against alleged intimidation tactics aimed at forcing the community to surrender the land to the national government.

During a meeting on January 4, 2024, at Archers’ Post, he claimed the National Land Commission (NLC) had not engaged the county government in the acquisition process.

Yesterday, the National Land Commission was yet to respond to our queries on the intended purchase.