THE UNIVERSITY OF LEIPZIG

During pre-colonial times, issues of environmental conservation or biodiversity conservation
for that matter were not taken as critical as we see them today. However, societies lived side
by side with the environments and as such the environment played a leading role in the lives
of the people by providing products for the basics of life like food, clothing and shelter. In a
way, intentionally or not, societies practiced biodiversity conservation especially in a bid to
protect those species that were thought to be rare through ensuring that they were not overharvested.
515
The need to balance between natural wants and nature sowed the foundation for colonial
policies and legal regimes aimed at biological conservation. This is clearly discernible in both
forestry and wildlife colonial legal frameworks. The escalating recreational and hunting safari
games introduced by the European settlers only acted as a major incentive to this endeavour.
On top of that, there was a notable increase in the number of visitors coming to the new
settlers’ colony. 516 It is also important to note that the completion of the railway improved
trade between the interior and the coast. This trade increased demand for wildlife products
such as ivory and rhinoceros horns, hence affecting the national fauna since Kenya was the
greatest supplier of these trade commodities. 517
Furthermore, the settlers’ agricultural interests were beginning to take root and as a result
Kenya witnessed further destruction of biological diversity. Wild animals also posed a danger
to the settlers’ crops and were hence killed in great numbers. On the other hand group hunting
was also taking strong roots among the African tribal communities. 518 Hunting was not only a
game but also seen as a way to attain animal protein to those communities who could not have
domesticated animals due to the rampant spread of sleeping sickness in humans. Sadly, many
of the domesticated were wiped out by rinderpest and therefore hunting was one way of
providing this source of protein. 519
It is imperative to note that since there were no laws relating to biological diversity at the
time, many conservationists were at pain with the continued destruction of biodiversity in the
“newfound lands”. The British government was equally appalled by this state of affair.
However when dealing with pre-independence legalities relating to biodiversity, it is
important to note that they did not take place in a vacuum and were also not motivated by
merely a desire to conserve, but rather by long-term colonial interests. 520 This is manifested in
the 1900 Convention on Biodiversity Conservation which made a distinction between harmful
and non harmful species. This convention formed the background and foundation for the pre-
independence biological diversity conservation legal regimes particularly in Kenya. 521
515
Lord, H. 1957. An African Survey. London: Oxford University Press.
516
Konnange,M. 1955. The People of Kenya speak for themseleves. Detroit: Kenya Publication Fund.
517
Leys,C. 1975. .Politics in Kenya: Development of Peasant society in the British Journal of Political Science
3 (1):307-337.
518
Crafter, S.A.; J. Awimbo and A.J. Broekhoven, eds. 1997. Non-timber Forest Products: Value, Use and
Management Issues in Africa, including examples from Latin America. Nairobi: IUCN.
519
Ibid .
520
Schillings, C.G. 1907. With a flash light and a rifle in wildest Africa. Edited by T,Spear and R.Waller.
521
The 1900 Convention on Biodiversity Conservation.
107