Over the recent weeks, there has been a debate revolving around proposed changes to the national law governing forest resources in Kenya.
Specifically, there is a proposal to amend Section 34 of the Forest Conservation and Management Act by Parliament so that any citizen will have an opportunity to petition the August House to alter the existing boundaries around the forests.
The leeway, if approved, will make it the prerogative of the National Assembly to revoke registration of state forests or portions of the same.
At first sight, the implications of that law are negligible, but on deep thought, it calls for precaution.
The generations born in the 1990s and earlier may recall the hardships that Nobel Laureate Wangari Maathai and other environmentalists endured in their struggle to protect our forests and other green spaces.
A random search on the internet will reveal horrific images of environmental activists who have faced the wrath of selfish land grabbers eyeing rare natural resources, such as forests.
The struggles of Prof Maathai and the rest are mirrored by the murder in June last year of renowned environmental activist Joannah Stutchbury, who was shot in her home after numerous threats on her life. It hasn’t been any different globally.
Well, we have bestowed powers upon legislators that we send to Parliament every election cycle to represent our interests, and we would expect them to speak for us. There should be limits, however.
Let’s allow professionals in the line of environmental conservation to adjudicate on these matters.
Has been shrinking
Our forest cover has been shrinking in the past two or so decades from an impressive 10 per cent of total landmass to a life-threatening under three per cent. Other Kenyans have put aside the “cut one, plant two” clarion call and left it to the politicians eyeing elective seats in and around forests.
Population sizes are ballooning and, all factors held constant, there will be more millions of people relying on the never-expanding forest resources in the near future.
The appetite humans have for rare natural resources, coupled with the effects of climate change, could leave everyone badly exposed.
Forests are Nature’s lungs, without which no life would exist. Then why would we be discussing laws permitting revocation of state forests in a country where a few citizens have historically benefited from illegal public land allocations?
Future generations could sit on wood logs to watch digital presentations of ideal forests just like we throng museums to see graphical depictions of hadropithecus.
Uhuru Park is in the current state because people sacrificed and stood their ground. Karura Forest, City Park and other lucrative parcels of land would be a concrete jungle, were it not for environmentalists’ engagement and existence of appropriate legal provisions. We must not forget the journey we have walked—unless we don’t want to finish it in style. BY DAILY NATION