Kajiado Governor Joseph Ole Lenku has criticized the ongoing fencing of Tsavo and Chyulu Hills National Parks, warning that the move risks trapping dangerous wildlife within community lands, thus escalating human-wildlife conflict.
Speaking at the Ole Lenku Township Primary School, the Governor urged the Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS) and relevant stakeholders to halt the exercise and return to the negotiating table to find a viable solution.
He noted that despite constitutional recommendations that national parks be fenced, which only works in an ideal situation, where there is no wildlife within human settlements, the current exercise undermines the creation of roaming spaces for the animals.
“When Maasais were given Amboseli National Park, they set aside millions of acres to create wildlife corridors to connect Amboseli to Chyulu, Amboseli to Tsavo, and Amboseli to Kilimanjaro Heartland in Tanzania to create a roaming space for our wildlife,” Mr. Lenku said.
Governor Lenku confirmed that communities bordering Chyulu and Tsavo are hosting a large number of wildlife in their private ranches.
He warned that if the parks are fenced, the animals will be locked into the villages, further undermining conservation efforts.
The county boss advised the relevant stakeholders to go back to the drawing board and offer sound advice concerning the fencing of national parks.
He further urged local communities not to take the law into their own hands but to remain patient as the issue is being handled by the relevant authorities to find a lasting solution.
The Governor applauded the national government’s efforts to conserve wildlife, confirming that the handover of Amboseli National Park management to the Kajiado County Administration is set to take effect in July this year.
The planned transfer had stalled following a legal dispute in January this year.
According to a petition filed in court on January 27, 2026, by a resident, Joseph Kasau Masaa, against the Cabinet Secretary for Tourism and Wildlife and the Kajiado County Government, the petitioner claimed that the move violated the Constitution.
The petitioner had argued that the management transfer was rushed, unlawful, and threatened a key protected national asset.
By Joylynn Arodi
