ORIGINAL ARTICLE Livestock–wildlife joint land use in dry lands of Kenya: A case study of the Lolldaiga Hills ranch Fumi MIZUTANI, 1 Mutsuyo KADOHIRA 2 and Bernard PHIRI 3 1 The Lolldaiga Institute, Nanyuki, Kenya; 2 Department of Animal Science, Obihiro University of Agriculture and Veterinary Medicine, Obihiro, Japan; and 3 Zambia Institute of Animal Health, Mazabuka, Zambia ABSTRACT This study aimed to examine livestock–wildlife interactions at the micro level and to quantify how resources are shared in joint land use by comparing the monitoring records collected on the Lolldaiga Hills ranch in Laikipia, Kenya from 1990s onwards. Livestock and wildlife distributions together with existing water points were geo-referenced; by air and road census total animal biomass densities were estimated. Through 38-h observation at a water point, livestock–wildlife interaction was recorded. During this period, water decline has been identified as an acute factor for farming and ranching. It was found that distributions of livestock and wildlife were related to water and pasture availability during the severe drought in 2009. Although there is seasonality in densities of both livestock and wildlife populations, results of air census indicated that the stable resident populations of wildlife have resided on the ranch. In this paper, we describe how livestock and wildlife interact at a water point and on pastures on the ranch in terms of biomass density. Such resources shared at different times need to be investigated further as a key factor to improve productivity of livestock–wildlife joint land use. Key words: conservation, dry land, land use, livestock, wildlife. INTRODUCTION Over the last few decades in Kenya, wildlife popula- tions have dramatically decreased (Ottichilo et al. 2000; Ogutu et al. 2009). Illicit harvest of wildlife (Ogutu et al. 2009) and livestock are often blamed as the main cause of the decline (FAO 2006). However, many researchers have identified other factors. The first is restricted access of wildlife populations to natural resources such as land due to incompatible land use (i.e. large-scale cultivation and land subdivisions for small-scale agri- cultures (Serneels & Lambin 2001; Serneels et al. 2001; Western et al. 2009) and water due to exclusion of permanent water points in dry lands (De Leeuw et al. 2001). Second, land use change from cattle ranching to pro-wildlife (Georgiadis et al. 2007) increased the populations of the largest predators, such as lions. This altered the population balance of carnivores and led to increased predation of some species, which led to a decline in species such as Greater Kudu (Tragelaphus strepsiceros), Coke’s hartebeest (Alcelaphus buselaphus cokii) and mountain reedbuck (Redunca fulvorufula). Third, when parks and protected areas were created in the middle of the last century in African savanna, people and livestock were excluded from those areas (Homewood & Brockington 1999; Adams 2004). Some evidence has been gathered (Taylor et al. 2005; Lane 2010) that as human activities were largely suppressed, subsequent vegetation changes in part have brought changes in diversity in the indigenous herbivore species. When diversity of plants had decreased, the diversity of animal species also declined. However, livestock remains a major financial and social asset for the poor. In addition, there has been increasing evidence of synergies between livestock and wildlife in dry lands. By examining transitions of veg- etation on a Zimbabwean working cattle ranch, Taylor and Walker (1978) have concluded that good forage utilization was achieved when both wild and domestic herbivores were mixed. Kreuter and Workman (1994), looking at an economic aspect of mixed live- stock and wildlife land use in Zimbabwe, found it was profitable when both livestock and wildlife were kept together. We refer to these as livestock–wildlife joint land use. If an appropriate method of joint land use for managing livestock and wildlife can be found, it might Correspondence: Mutsuyo Kadohira, Department of Animal Science, Obihiro University of Agriculture and Veterinary Medicine, Obihiro, Hokkaido 080-8555, Japan. (Email: kadohira@obihiro.ac.jp) Received 10 May 2011; accepted for publication 25 July 2011. Animal Science Journal (2012) 83, 510–516 doi: 10.1111/j.1740-0929.2011.00985.x © 2011 The Authors Animal Science Journal © 2011 Japanese Society of Animal Science