Mount Kenya National Park/Natural Forest

Country
Kenya
Inscribed in
1997
Criteria
(vii)
(ix)
The conservation outlook for this site has been assessed as "significant concern" in the latest assessment cycle. Explore the Conservation Outlook Assessment for the site below. You have the option to access the summary, or the detailed assessment.

At 5,199 m, Mount Kenya is the second highest peak in Africa. It is an ancient extinct volcano, which during its period of activity (3.1-2.6 million years ago) is thought to have risen to 6,500 m. There are 12 remnant glaciers on the mountain, all receding rapidly, and four secondary peaks that sit at the head of the U-shaped glacial valleys. With its rugged glacier-clad summits and forested middle slopes, Mount Kenya is one of the most impressive landscapes in East Africa. The evolution and ecology of its afro-alpine flora provide an outstanding example of ecological and biological processes. Through the Lewa Wildlife Conservancy and Ngare Ndare Forest Reserve, the property also incorporates lower lying scenic foothills and arid habitats of high biodiversity, situated in the ecological transition zone between the mountain ecosystem and the semi-arid savanna grasslands. The area also lies within the traditional migrating route of the African elephant population. © UNESCO

© IUCN/Roger Porter
See all information

Summary

2025 Conservation Outlook

Finalised on
11 Oct 2025
Significant concern
Mt Kenya National Park/Natural Forest largely retains its outstanding World Heritage values, however, several threats, including climate change, wildfires, and unsustainable practices, pose challenges to its integrity. Climate change, in particular, impacts the site's iconic glaciers and high-altitude habitats. Glacial retreat could make habitats less suitable for Afro-alpine species characteristic of the area’s glacial valleys and moorlands. Wildfires, often human-induced, have become increasingly frequent during dry periods, damaging forests and moorlands. Other threats include illegal activities like logging, grazing, and poaching, as well as the proliferation of invasive alien species. Water management issues, such as unregulated abstraction and proposed large dam constructions, also jeopardise the Mount Kenya site's ecological balance. While tourism on Mount Kenya is growing, its impact remains manageable, though littering, waste management, and vegetation trampling need attention. Efforts to mitigate these threats include ecological restoration initiatives and community involvement. The construction of 300km of a planned 450km long comprehensive electric fence along the Mount Kenya forest boundary has reduced human-wildlife conflicts and encroachments from adjacent communities. Local Community Forest Associations are increasingly engaged in conservation efforts. However, challenges persist, also driven by national development, as demonstrated by the lifting of the ban on harvesting plantation forests and subsequent reversal of the decision by the High Court. Challenges include insufficient funding, and unclear management roles among responsible agencies. The 2010-2020 Mount Kenya Ecosystem Management Plan by the Kenya Wildlife Service and Kenya Forest Service addresses some of these issues, but coordination between agencies and the plan's implementation needs improvement. More generally, the plan needs updating. Overall, while the Mount Kenya site benefits from natural protection due to its altitude and inaccessibility and improved management, further management improvement is crucial to address the growing threats and ensure the national park's long-term preservation. The LWC-NNFR extension is a smaller area to manage and is well-resourced and has a black rhino population of national value to protect. There are public roads passing through LWC-NNFR which is not ideal for security. The human population in surrounding areas and nearby Isiolo town is increasing pressures on this site. LWC has had the benefit of financial support through high quality tourism but this is not secure long-term. LWC also benefits from international philanthropy which helps sustain LWC's armed and general security which NNFR also benefits from. Continuing national and county government commitment and support for the LWC-NNFR portion of the site is vital.

Current state and trend of VALUES

High Concern
World Heritage values of Mount Kenya National Park/Natural Forest have largely been maintained, however the effects of climate change could potentially alter the scenic values of the site, epitomized by the occurrence of glaciers and glacial forms in Equatorial geographical latitudes. The glaciers are being compromised as the ice melts, but the scenic mountainous landscape with abundant water remains. The diversity of habitats for which the site was inscribed on the World Heritage List is still present. With climate change, it is likely that the conditions of the high-elevation habitats may become less suitable for the iconic Afro-alpine species that now characterize the high glacial valleys and moorlands. Some of the current threats, such as wildfires, unsustainable water abstraction and invasive alien species all have the potential to deteriorate the values of this site if not properly managed. Pressures from human population growth and uncontrolled urban expansion and agricultural expansion in surrounding areas are placing ever-increasing pressure on the World Heritage site. The site's extension to LWC-NNFR leads into a lower altitude and drier but zone with public roads passing through. LWC-NNFR's values and diverse attributes are vulnerable to burgeoning human population surrounding the site, and in the expanding nearby Isiolo town, which has an international airport.

Overall THREATS

High Threat
Uncontrolled and frequent wildfires on Mount Kenya, most often of anthropogenic origin, have become an increasing threat during drier periods, destroying extensive areas of moorlands and forests on Mount Kenya. Other threats to the World Heritage property as a whole include poaching, illegal logging, illegal grazing, and wood collection, alongside the negative influence of spread of invasive alien species. Tourism numbers on Mount Kenya fluctuate and are generally increasing and there are some associated problems on Mount Kenya with litter, waste management and trampling of vegetation, but currently, the impact is not severe. The Mount Kenya National Park management authority has been implementing measures to restore ecological connectivity and enable movement of relevant species. The potential construction of several large dams both in and outside Mount Kenya National Park/Natural Forest is a major concern. The construction of water storage dams to regulate river flows was indicated in the Management Plan of Mount Kenya Ecosystem (2010-2020). Another threat to the property is unregulated and excessive water abstraction from rivers in particular, both from areas outside and within the property boundaries. The reintroduction of harvesting of commercial plantation forests and reintroduction of the PELIS (shamba) system in 2022, are concerns as the past history of management has not been satisfactory. The LWC-NNHR extension of the site has different pressures due to surrounding human population and their associated needs. Armed livestock rustling incidents have been a feature in areas bordering NNFR to the west, which requires further assessment. The current community livestock and wood gathering activities in NNFR are an ongoing management challenge. Furthermore, elephant break outs from NNFR towards community farm areas to the west persist. However, the comprehensive Mt. Kenya Electric fence is currently being built in that area by Rhino Ark and expected to be completed by the end of 2026. The economic situation in the country as a whole and encroachment threats into protected forests are exacerbating these numerous threats.

Overall PROTECTION and MANAGEMENT

Some Concern
The site is threatened by several threats including climate change, excessive and poorly regulated water abstraction, wildfires, illegal forest resources extraction, poaching, and potential large-scale infrastructure development, that are not sufficiently addressed overall. Kenya Wildlife Service and Kenya Forest Service are authors of a 2010-2020 Management Plan for Mount Kenya Ecosystem, however, it seems there is a lack of understanding and clarity on the roles and responsibilities of these agencies, and the management plan needs to be updated. While insufficient finances have impacted certain management actions, there has been an increased involvement of local communities in protection and management, for example through Community Forest Associations. Furthermore, country-wide recruitment of 2,700 Kenya Forest Services rangers and foresters in 2023, as well as 1,400 Kenya Wildlife Service rangers and assistant wardens in 2024 helped address the inadequate staff capacities previously affecting the the Mount Kenya National Park and National/Forest Reserve. The well-advanced construction of a 450 km long comprehensive electric fence along the lower Mount Kenya forest boundary aims to minimise conflict between the protected area and adjacent communities and aims to effectively reduce threats stemming from areas outside of the World Heritage property. The site extension to LWC-NNFR through a corridor is fenced and LWC is well-managed with well-resourced armed and general security teams whose surveillance extends into NNFR as well. However, it is to be noted that challenges remain of elephants breaking out and damaging farm crops, notably to the west of NNFR, and indications of armed livestock rustling in recent months affecting communities near NNFR is a concern.

Full assessment

Click the + and - signs to expand or collapse full accounts of information under each topic. You can also view the entire list of information by clicking Expand all on the top left.

Description of values

Spectacular mountain scenery

Criterion
(vii)
The Mount Kenya National Park protects some of Africa’s most spectacular mountain scenery, including Africa’s second highest peak (Batian, 5,199m), 12 remnant glaciers, and an abundance of lakes, waterfalls and moorland. Mount Kenya is an ancient extinct volcano, which probably reached a height of 6,500m during its formation 3.1-2.6 million years ago (World Heritage Committee, 2013). There are a number of volcanic cones and craters such as Ithanguni and Rutundu cones (Gichuhi, 2015). Today, the jagged snow-capped peaks, glaciers, exuberant afro-alpine vegetation and diverse forest habitats and rich wildlife create one of the most impressive landscapes in Africa. The extension of the site to the Lewa Wildlife Conservancy (LWC) and Ngare Ndare Forest Reserve (NNFR) on the mountain's northern footslopes is connected via a corridor through a zone of small and large landholders engaged in crop production
This mountain landscape has deep cultural meaning and resonance to the tribes who live in the surrounding areas. The views of - and from - Mount Kenya from and to the surrounding landscape are deeply meaningful to the surrounding tribes. The mountain is associated with many belief systems and it has informed intangible cultural heritage traditions for untold generations.

Diversity of evolving habitats

Criterion
(ix)
There is a great diversity of habitats on account of the range of altitude (2,400-5,200 m), equatorial location and variable rainfall. Mount Kenya National Park/Natural Forest is particularly noted for its rich alpine and subalpine flora, which provides an outstanding example of ecological processes in an environment that is characterized by an extreme climate with ‘summer every day and winter every night’. The forested drier lower slopes (below 2,500 m) are abundant with Juniperus procera, Olea africana and Podocarpus species, while dominant species on the wetter slopes include Ocotea usambarensis, Prunus Africana, among others. The vegetation zones of higher elevations (2,500-3,000 m) are dominated by bamboo Podocarpus latifolius and Hagenia abyssinica Above 3,000 m there are erica forest and bush patches (giant heather), grassy glades, moorlands, tussock grasslands and sedges, while there is no continuous vegetation at about 4,500 m. Isolated vascular plants can be found at over 5,000 m. This altitudinal zonation and diversity are the product of ongoing ecological interactions and the continuing state of change responds to the erosive force of water and ice, and climate change (World Heritage Committee, 2013). Through the Lewa Wildlife Conservancy and Ngare Ndare Forest Reserve, the property comprises forest, plains, hills, rocky outcrop, riverine and swamp habitats.nd swamp habitats.
Rich montane flora, with many endemic species
The Mount Kenya National Park has a rich montane flora, including many endemic species. The giant heather and afro-alpine vegetation zones that extend from around 3,500 m to the snow line at around 4,400 m represent the rarest vegetation types on the African continent. Prominent constituents of this extraordinary vegetation are several endemic and near-endemic giant groundsels such as Senecio keniodendron and Senecio johnstonii battiscombei, and giant Lobelias Lobelia deckenii keniensis and Lobelia telekii (Birdlife International, 2024). The forested lower slopes support a number of rare shrubs and the climber, Rubus keniensis.
Rare, threatened and endemic fauna
Mount Kenya is an Important Bird Area (IBA) and a home to 53 of Kenya’s 67 African highland biome species, including endangered and little known Abbott’s Starling (Arizelopsar femoralis). It provides a habitat for six of the eight bird species that are endemic to the Kenyan Mountains Endemic Bird Area (Kenya Wildlife Service/Kenya Forest Service, 2010). Mammals of global concern include African savannah elephant (Loxodonta africana) (endangered), black rhino (Diceros bicornis) (critically endangered), bongo (Tragelaphus eurycerus isaaci) (critically endangered), and a local race of the black-fronted duiker (Cephalophus nigrifrons hooki) (least concern), as well as four globally- threatened small mammals (Birdlife International, 2024). Two reptiles, Ashe's bush viper (Atheris desaixi) and Mount Kenya dwarf chameleon (Trioceros schubotzi), are endemic species, while Kenya montane viper (Vipera hindii) is found only on Mount Kenya and the Aberdare mountains.
Enhanced landscape connectivity
The property includes the site's extension to the Lewa Wildlife Conservancy and Ngare Ndare Forest Reserve (LWC-NNFR) to the north. The two component parts of the property are connected via a wildlife corridor which is part of the buffer zone for the property, and which provides vital connectivity for elephants moving between Mount Kenya and the larger conservation complex of the Laikipia/Samburu landscape. The LWC-NNFR extension is within the Ewaso Ngiro North Basin and incorporates the forested foothills and steep valleys of the lower slopes of Mount Kenya and extends northwards onto the relatively flat, arid, volcanic soils supporting grassland and open woodland communities on the Laikipia plain.

Assessment information

High Threat
Uncontrolled and frequent wildfires, most often of anthropogenic origin but also being influenced by climate change, have become an increasing threat during drier periods, destroying extensive areas of moorlands and forests. Fires have started to occur on an annual basis. Other threats to the World Heritage property include poaching, illegal logging and illegal grazing, alongside the negative influence of the spread of invasive alien species. Tourism has been increasing and there are some associated problems with litter, waste management and trampling of vegetation, but currently, the impact is not severe. The park management authority has been implementing measures to restore ecological connectivity and enable movement of relevant species. Climate change related impacts due reduced cloudiness, changing rainfall and temperature patterns are also a high threat to the site. The glaciers on Mount Kenya lost more than half of their 2016 extent by 2021/2022 demonstrating the rapid disappearance. The opening up of harvesting of commercial plantation forests and reintroduction of the PELIS (shamba) system in 2022, although halted and conditions changed, demonstrates the fragile legal system and changes may exacerbate poaching, illegal grazing, amongst other concerns. Little is reported for the southern part of the Mount Kenya site. The ongoing economic situation in Kenya is a concern and is impacting government financial capacity.
Invasive Non-Native/ Alien Species, Problematic Native Species
(Invasive alien species)
Invasive/problematic species
Lantana camara
Ricinus communis
Other invasive species names
Caesalpinia decapelata, Datura dothistroma, Solanum incanum, Fraxinus pennysilvania
High Threat
Inside site
, Extent of threat not known
Outside site
The spread of invasive alien plant species and expansive / problematic native plant species are one of the greatest problems for the integrity of natural communities (Kenya Wildlife Service/Kenya Forest Service, 2010). Management efforts thus far have been unable to significantly improve the situation (Report on the Mount Kenya National Park and Natural Forest Stakeholders Meeting, 2013). The main invasive plant species include Mauritius Thorn (Caesalpinia decapelata), Jimson Weed (Datura dothistroma), Sodom’s Apple (Solanum incanum), Curse of India (Lantana camara), and castor oil plant (Kenya Wildlife Service/Kenya Forest Service, 2010). Mexican Green Ash (Fraxinus pennysilvania) is an opportunistic plant that has spread beyond firebreak lines. Some successes have been achieved in removing the invasive Curse of India (Lantana camara) in the Lower Imenti Forest Reserve to pave way for the replanting of indigenous trees. However, this species, alongside other invasive species, are largely found on the lower slopes outside the property and will likely continue to spread due to continuous climate change conditions (Waititu et al., 2022).
Fire & Fire Management
(Wildfires)
High Threat
Inside site
, Scattered(5-15%)
Outside site
Wildfires are a major annual problem affecting the property (Ndalila et a., 2024). Over the past decade, large fires have become more common, with the following burned area totals on Mount Kenya: 3000 ha of moorland (Ericaceous zone) in 2005, 2500 ha of moorland in 2009, 3500 ha of moorland in 2009, and 3600 ha of upper montane forest in 2011. Kenyan newspaper reports indicate that over 8000 ha burned on Mount Kenya by 17 March, 2012 following late arrival of “long rains”. In 2019, wildfires burnt over 20,000 hectares of the moorlands inside the site (Henry et al. 2019). Moorlands’ fires most often affect the upper ericaceous forest belt, and in some cases, the upper Hagenia forest belt. The ericaceous forest is tolerant to some fire activity but requires longer recovery time than grasslands. When fires are too frequent, grasses may invade resulting in conversion from forests to grasslands (Henry, 2019). One of the latest devastating wildfires occurred in 2022 (UNESCO, 2022). Most fires are triggered by human activities, in combination with warming drying climate that provides suitable conditions for the spread of fires (Ndalila et al., 2024). Some of the key human activities causing fire include honey collecting, poaching, illegal charcoal burning, arson, livestock grazing, poorly disposed cigarette stubs (Ndalila et al., 2024, Nyongesa, 2018; Kenya Wildlife Service/Kenya Forest Service, 2010). In other cases, fires are set in the higher altitude bamboo belt to clear the land for the cultivation of illegal but lucrative gardens of marijuana (Cannabis sativa) (Martin, 2019). Fire management is generally improving as private conservation trusts have joined hands with the Kenya Wildlife Service and Kenya Forest Service in recent years. They have trained and equipped joint fire-fighting teams, brought aerial support capabilities and established firebreaks in the moorlands that are most vulnerable to fires (Ndalila et al., 2024). The LWC-NNFR extension is closely managed and has fire-response teams.
Recreation & Tourism Areas
(Impacts of tourism)
Low Threat
Inside site
, Scattered(5-15%)
Outside site
With some 25-30,000 visitors annually, visitor numbers to Mount Kenya remain low (Kenya Wildlife Service/Kenya Forest Service, 2010), although their impact can be significant in ecologically sensitive areas of the site. During Covid, visitor levels dropped to 13,500 (Kenya Bureau of Statistics, 2022). Most recent results on tourism sector performance of National Parks in Kenya showed the site was not in the top 10 visited parks (Tourism Research Institute, 2023). Some negative consequences of tourism include inappropriate waste disposal. The Management Plan of Mount Kenya ecosystem (2010-2020) notes there is a need to introduce the ‘Pack it in, Pack it out’ waste management philosophy where visitors will need to record their belongings while entering (Kenya Wildlife Service/Kenya Forest Service, 2010), however progress and effects of this are unknown.
Changes in traditional ways of life and knowledge systems that result in negative impact
(Ecological fragmentation due to land use changes, including degradation of the ‘Buffer Zone’)
High Threat
Inside site
, Widespread(15-50%)
Outside site
The Mt Kenya site portion is ‘buffered’ from adjacent settlements by a 5-10 km wide belt of protected natural forest and plantations, but the land beyond this (below about 2,000 m) has become more intensively settled and cultivated, disrupting historical landscape connectivity with nearby natural habitats, especially to the west (Aberdares), north-west (Laikipia plateau), north (Ngare-Ndare Forest Reserve, Lewa Conservancy) and north-east (Imenti Forest Reserve, Meru National Park) (UNESCO/IUCN, 2008). The buffer zone is impacted by the reintroduction of plantation forest harvesting and the controversial PELIS "shamba system" in 2022 whereby cultivation is allowed in plantation forest compartments (The Conversation, 2023). Wildlife habitat declines due to past conversion of natural forest to plantation forests and the loss of historical migration routes of keystone species, such as African savannah elephant (Loxodonta africana), have resulted in increasing human-wildife conflicts. In a step to address wildlife isolation, a wildlife corridor was established between Mount Kenya Forest/National Reserve and Ngare Ndare Forest Reserve in 2010. This corridor led to the extension of the Mount Kenya National Park/Natural Forest World Heritage site to include Ngare Ndare Forest Reserve and Lewa Wildlife Conservancy. Not only elephants but many other species have frequently been recorded including bushbuck, duiker, jackal, leopard, zebras, porcupine, reedbuck, serval cat, spotted hyena, warthog, wild dog (Mount Kenya Trust, 2020). In addition, two one-way automatic elephant gates were built along the Imenti Forest Comprehensive Electric Fence to allow elephants to move from the north into the Mount Kenya forest ecosystem (Rhino Ark, 2021). Furthermore, work has for some time been under discussion with land owners to re-establish a wildlife corridor between Mount Kenya and the Aberdare ecosystem, through Thego Forest, Sangare Conservancy and Nyeri Forest (Daily Nation, 2020). The latest discussions with landowners were chaired by Rhino Ark in May 2025.
Logging, Harvesting & Controlling Trees
(Illegal logging of indigenous trees)
Other targeted species names
Juniperus procera, Olea europaea, Hagenia abyssinica, Ocotea usambarensis, Olea capensis sp., Vitex keniensis
High Threat
Inside site
, Scattered(5-15%)
Outside site
Indigenous forests have been exploited in great extent ever since the 1970s until the government introduced a nation-wide ban on the use of forest resources in 1999 (Kenya Wildlife Service/Kenya Forest Service, 2010). According to the aerial survey undertaken in 1999, 6,700 Camphor (Ocotea usambaresis) trees were logged in Mount Kenya during a one-year period (Kenya Wildlife Service, 1999). The aerial survey findings triggered changes in the management of Mt. Kenya ecosystem in 2020. Only a few years later, in 2002, a follow up survey revealed a decline in logging (illegal at that time) by as much as 93 percent (Vanleeuwe et al., 2002; Kenya Wildlife Service/Kenya Forest Service, 2010). Apart from the ban on logging, this result was also due to increased surveillance of the area by forest patrols (Kenya Wildlife Service, 1999). Sporadic illegal logging still occurs, especially in the south-eastern parts of the forests (Vanleeuwe, 2016; Vanleeuwe, 2020). A nation-wide ban on plantation forest harvesting, introduced in 2018, was lifted in 2022 (Fuchs, 2023) which increased pressure on the bordering indigenous forest. However, since then the High Court seems to have reversed this decision, reinstating the logging ban (africanews, 2023; Aluoch, 2023). Currently, there is a lack of clarity to what extent the forests in the property are legally protected with recommendations that the PELIS - Plantation Establishment and Livelihoods Improvement Scheme (shamba system) resumes (IUCN Consultation, 2025). The Mount Kenya Trust recently reported the discovery of an illegal logging site within the Mount Kenya forest by rangers (Mount Kenya Trust, 2024). Some of the main species targeted are Cedar (Juniperus procera), Wild Olive (Olea europaea), East Africana Rosewood (Hagenia abyssinica), Camphor (Ocotea usambarensis), Black Ironwood (Olea capensis sp.), and Vitex keniensis (Kenya Wildlife Service/Kenya Forest Service, 2010). Although legal, the management of ongoing community livestock grazing and wood collection from within the Ngare Ndare Forest Reserve is a concern as that forest's cover is reported on a declining trend (Rural Focus, 2024).
Hunting, Collecting & Controlling Terrestrial Animals
(Wildlife poaching)
Low Threat
Inside site
, Scattered(5-15%)
Outside site
Poaching mainly occurs in the forested lower slopes, and to a lesser extent at higher elevations where its impact is limited due to the extremely rugged terrain and difficulty of capturing prey species (UNESCO/IUCN, 2008). Bushmeat hunting targeting various species, in particular antelope remain a main concern. Poaching of key conservation species, such as the black rhino (Diceros bicornis), mountain bongo (Tragelaphus eurycerus isaaci) and African elephant (Loxodonta Africana) remain a threat (Kenya Wildlife Service/Kenya Forest Service, 2010; IUCN Consultation, 2025). The site is currently facing an upsurge in illegal snaring of wildlife activities. It appears to be primarily for subsistence but could grow into a commercial activity (IUCN Consultation, 2025). The separate extension of the site comprising LWC-NNFR is very carefully secured due to its black rhino population in particular.
Terrestrial Animal Farming, Ranching & Herding
(Illegal grazing)
High Threat
Inside site
, Extent of threat not known
Outside site
Illegal grazing is one of the threats to forest conservation as livestock browse on young trees, inhibiting natural regeneration. It can also lead to overgrazing and subsequent degradation of pastures (Kenya Wildlife Service/Kenya Forest Service, 2010). Illegal grazing occurs particularly during prolonged dry seasons. The most significant impact is from cattle and goats being grazed in Indigenous forest areas. There is a general lack of grazing planning enforcement in forests exacerbated by economic conditions in the country (IUCN Consultation, 2025).
Changes in Temperature Regimes, Changes in Precipitation & Hydrological Regime
(Increased glacial melting, moorland vulnerability and forest fire risk)
High Threat
Inside site
, Widespread(15-50%)
Outside site
Increasing temperatures, reduced rainfall and reduced cloudiness (Prinz, 2016) as a result of climate change are contributing to the melting of the park’s glaciers, which are expected to disappear altogether with the next few decades. The glaciers on Mount Kenya lost more than half of their 2016 extent by 2021/2022 (Hinzmann et al. 2024). While this negatively impacts the views of the peaks, the loss of glaciers does not have significant impacts on the hydrological regimes, streamflows and aquifer levels on and surrounding Mount Kenya. This is due to the fact that the glaciers cover a very small area (compared with the forests and the moorlands) and are located at high altitude with low rainfall. Increasing temperatures, reduced rainfall and reduced cloudiness are also increasing the vulnerability of the moorlands and the forest belt to fire. In contrast to common belief, climate change may not necessarily cause an upward shift of plants and animals. As observed on Kilimanjaro which has much similarities with Mt. Kenya, increased fire frequency has led to a downward shift of the upper forest line by several hundred metres (Hemp, 2009). There may also be an increased incidence of landslides and flooding due to increasing extreme rainfall events. While data is deficient to assess these potential developments, the Mount Kenya World Heritage Site Climate Change Adaptation Programme was developed in June 2013, which recommends a number of activities to help reduce the potential impacts of climate change. Additionally, various forest restoration projects have been implemented/are being implemented to enhance climate resilience (e.g. BirdLife International, 2023; IKI, 2022).
Other Human Disturbances
(Light pollution)
Data Deficient
Inside site
, Widespread(15-50%)
Outside site
Mount Kenya is ringed by densely populated towns and intensely farmed agricultural land. Population growth - and urban sprawl - is forecast to increase exponentially, with associated urban development. Security lighting on high mast in small urban centres negatively impacts the wilderness experience of Mount Kenya. Future explosive urban growth will only amplify this problem. Intensive industrial agriculture - including large greenhouses for horticulture (e.g. flowers and vegetables for export) further exacerbate the negative impact of urban light pollution on the night sky, and also on nocturnal flora and fauna whose life cycles are disrupted by light pollution. A comprehensive assessment of the extent of this threat on the site's key attributes is needed.
High Threat
The potential construction of several large dams both in and outside Mount Kenya National Park/Natural Forest is a major concern, especially as the status of the most recent dam proposal is unclear. The construction of water storage dams to regulate river flows has been indicated in the Management Plan of Mount Kenya Ecosystem (2010-2020). This plan needs to be updated. Another threat to the property is poorly regulated and excessive water abstraction, both from areas outside and within the property boundaries.
Dams & Water Management/Use
(Unregulated water abstraction)
High Threat
Inside site
, Scattered(5-15%)
Outside site
Unregulated water abstraction from the many rivers comprising the Mount Kenya catchment is a significant challenge (Kenya Wildlife Service/Kenya Forest Service, 2010). Certain levels of water abstraction are permitted, however, permitted and illegal abstraction has become excessive. For example, 75 water intakes were found on the Sagana River inside the Mt Kenya Forest Reserve during an official inspection conducted in August 2018 by the Cabinet Secretary for Environment together with the Chairman of the Kenya Forest Service (Kamau, 2018). On the northern slopes, surveys in 2021/22 reported water abstractions over allocated by 303% on the Ngare Nything and Ngare Ndare rivers (Rural Focus, 2024). Weak control and inadequate enforcement of water regulations have further enabled this situation (Kenya Wildlife Service/Kenya Forest Service, 2010; Rural Focus, 2024). In cases, water intakes are established in the moorlands inside the National Park. If this trend continues, it could harm the wildlife, ecosystem health and the communities. Moreover, a water shortage lower in the catchment could result in people moving higher into the catchment which then may result in clashes over water resources (Report on the Mount Kenya National Park and Natural Forest Stakeholders Meeting, 2013).
Dams & Water Management/Use
(Construction of large dams)
High Threat
Inside site
, Localised(<5%)
Outside site
Currently, there are no dams in Mount Kenya National Park/Natural Forest, but the government proposed the construction of eight large dams within and outside the World Heritage property (Kenya Wildlife Service/Kenya Forest Service, 2010). Within the site boundaries are the proposed Naro Moru Dam on the Naro Moru River with a reservoir of 38.76 hectares, and Kamburaini Dam on the Nanyuki River with a reservoir of 17.29 hectares. The one outside the World Heritage boundaries is Tinga I Dam on the Nanyuki River with a reservoir of 18.50 hectares. The area is affected by water shortages and the dams would tackle this issue by enabling downstream users to have water during wet and dry seasons (presently available only during wet season) (Kenya Wildlife Service/Kenya Forest Service, 2010). However, construction of the dams could adversely impact the site and Environmental Impact Assessment is needed (National Irrigation Board, 2013). Most recently Kahurura Dam Water Supply Project (Nyanyuki Bulk Water Supply Project) was proposed, situated in Laikipia east and funded by USAID/GOK. It involves the review of the feasibility studies of the dam and water supply system and undertake the feasibility study taking into consideration the WH site. The project was reported to be at procurement of consultant stage with consultations with Laikipia county government on carrying out feasibility study (CRVWWDA, 2025). However, a report from the auditor general states the dam is in the planning and design phase (OAG, 2023). In 2020 the Kenya Forest Service (KFS) objected to the construction while the Water Ministry, the National Environment Management Authority and Kenya Wildlife Service supported it. The current status of the project is therefore unclear (Munyeki, 2020).
Involvement of stakeholders and rightsholders, including indigenous peoples and local communities, in decision-making processes
Mostly Effective
Community relations are generally good in respect to the World Heritage site, with the economic benefits of tourism accruing to local people who provide porter and guiding services on the mountain, and security, fence maintenance and other services in the LWC-NNFR extension. The World Heritage site borders protected forest lands and is at least 5 km from the nearest area of settlement. However, there are significant issues of human-wildlife conflict adjacent to the lower forest boundary where elephant crop damage and livestock depredations occur. A 450 km comprehensive electric fence is currently being built by Rhino Ark and various partners of which 300 km was completed by late-2024 (Rhino Ark, 2025). This helps addressing the problem of human-wildlife conflicts (Upper Tana Natural Resources Management Project, 2019). The long-term future of the property is dependent on the ability of the management approach to ensure the site is known and recognised by the local communities in perpetuity and that it continues to generate benefits for neighbouring local communities. While so far this has been partially successful, continued and increasing efforts are needed given the growing pressures. The partnership between local communities and Kenya Forest Service through Participatory Forest Management has been strengthening forest management and ensuring active involvement of local communities in the management of forests (IUCN Consultation, 2024; Kenya Wildlife Service/Kenya Forest Service, 2010).
Legal framework
Some Concern
The most relevant legislation is provided by the Wildlife Act (2013), the Environment Management and Coordination Act (1999), the Water Act (2002), and the Forest Act (2016) (World Heritage Committee, 2013). Originally protected as a Forest Reserve in 1932, the uppermost section of the mountain (715 km2, mostly above the 3,200 m contour) became a National Park in 1949 (with extensions in 1968). The entire Forest Reserve was designated as a National Reserve (2124 km2) in 2000 following a landmark aerial survey which exposed the extent of encroachment and degradation of the ecosystem (Kenya Wildlife Service, 1999). This conferred co-management status in the lower part of the Mount Kenya World Heritage site (2,400-3,200 m) as well as the forested flanks of the mountain below it (2,000-2,400 m). No cultivation or settlement is permitted within the Forest Reserve/National Reserve, except with a special permit (which may be granted as a way of clearing land in preparation for the establishment of commercial plantation forests under the controversial ‘shamba’ system). However, there were discussions around lifting the ban on the harvesting of plantation forests and reintroducing the PELIS (Plantation Establishment and Livelihoods Improvement Scheme) system by the national government in 2022, which received mixed reception by the public and conservationists due to reported past abuse of the system (Kirui, 2023; Fuchs, 2023). In 2023, the High Court (Environment and Land) suspended the decision to allow logging to resume in state forests (africanews, 2023; Aluoch, 2023). Currently, the ban on logging indigenous trees/forests remains in place, although PELIS has been recommended to continue. These developments indicate the important discussions around the improvement of livelihoods while balancing nature conservation and climate mitigation needs (Maringa, 2023). Currently, there is uncertainty with differing reports on the status of the logging ban, which raises some concerns over the current legal framework and its ability to protect the key attributes underlying the OUV of the property.
Governance arrangements
Some Concern
Governance of Mount Kenya National Park/Natural Forest World Heritage site is divided between state, community, and private institutions. Mount Kenya National Park and Nature Reserve are managed by the Kenya Wildlife Service, Mount Kenya Forest Reserve (overlapping with the Nature Reserve in the lower parts of the site) are managed by the Kenya Forest Service, while private Lewa Wildlife Conservancy is responsible for the Lewa part of the site, and the Ngare Ndare forest portion is under Kenya Forest Service jurisdiction assisted by the community Ngare Ndare Forest Trust, but assisted by LWC security teams. It seems that an agreement on responsibilities and roles, in particular between Kenya Wildlife Service and Kenya Forest Service, is still missing and coordination remains poor (IUCN Consultation, 2025). The Wildlife Conservation and Management Act is currently being re-written to bring it into line with the Kenya Constitution, to recognise the role of the county governments, and amongst others to address the wildlife economy and encouraging profitable uses of wildlife resources aligned with conservation (Draft Wildlife Conservation and Management Act, 2025).
Integration into local, regional and national planning systems (including sea/landscape connectivity)
Mostly Effective
The site is managed together with other protected areas within the Kenya Wildlife Service and Kenya Forest Service regional management structures. However, the site falls under two separate regional structures of Kenya Forest Service (Central Highlands and Eastern Conservancies) making unified management more difficult.
Boundaries
Some Concern
The World Heritage property comprises Mount Kenya National Park, parts of Mount Kenya Forest Reserve/Nature Reserve, Lewa Wildlife Conservancy and Ngare Ndare Forest Reserve (World Heritage Committee, 2013). The National Park and Nature Reserve (the latter overlaps with previously designated Forest Reserve) protect the watershed above 2,000 – 2,500 m elevations, as well as the main natural values of the property. Lewa and Ngare Ndare contribute with lower drier ecosystems and species, and they are linked to the main property with a 9.8 km long ecological corridor, which is part of the World Heritage buffer zone (World Heritage Committee, 2013). Some areas of the Forest Reserve/National Reserve that are not yet fenced are not clearly demarcated, causing encroachment (Kenya Wildlife Service/Kenya Forest Service, 2010). According to the latest periodic report the government, in collaboration with various stakeholders is erecting a comprehensive electric fence to mitigate threats from outside the site (State Party of Kenya, 2021). The electric fence is proving effective in addressing human-wildlife conflicts and ascertaining the boundaries of the Forest Reserve / National Reserve.
Overlapping international designations
Highly Effective
Mount Kenya-Lewa Biosphere Reserve was established in 1978. It incorporates more than 500,000 hectares. The overlap with the Biosphere Reserve seems to have a positive effect on the World Heritage site by bringing together different stakeholders and encouraging conservation action, most recently on climate change. For example, on 4 November 2024, there was an event to celebrate International Day for Biosphere Reserves, which brought together community members, youth, children, conservationists and government officials to celebrate the achievements and explore the opportunities of the Mt. Kenya-Lewa Biosphere Reserve in promoting sustainable development and preserving Kenya’s natural heritage. Especially in regard to promoting youth engagement and gender inclusion the overlap with the Biosphere Reserve is beneficial, as the event included the award ceremony for the winners of the UNESCO Youth Competition on Documenting Tangible and Intangible Cultural Assets within UNESCO-designated Biosphere Reserves and World Heritage sites in Kenya (UNESCO, 2024).
Implementation of World Heritage Committee decisions and recommendations
Data Deficient
There have been no WH Committee decisions for Mount Kenya National Park since 2013 when the proposal to extend the WH Site was approved by the WH Committee (World Heritage Committee, 2013).
Climate action
Data Deficient
Increasing temperatures, reduced rainfall and reduced cloudiness (Prinz, 2016), because of climate change, are contributing to the melting of the park’s glaciers. Glaciers are expected to disappear entirely within the next few decades. These three factors are also increasing the vulnerability of the moorlands and the forest belt to fire. In contrast to common belief, climate change may not necessarily cause an upward shift of plants and animals. As observed on Kilimanjaro, that has many similarities with Mount Kenya, increased fire frequency has led to a downward shift of the upper forest line by several hundred metres (Hemp, 2009). But it is worth noting that fire is likely a consequence of human activity pressures rather than climate action. There may also be an increased incidence of landslides and flooding due to increasing extreme rainfall events in plantation forest areas that have been cleared for re-planting. Data is generally deficient to assess these trends, however, the Mount Kenya World Heritage Site Climate Change Adaptation Programme, developed in 2013, recommended a number of activities to help reduce the potential impacts of climate change and enhance the resilience of the OUV to climate change. The programme can be considered an elaboration of Action 4.7 in the 2010-2020 Mt Kenya Ecosystem Management Plan’s Ecological Management Programme, namely: “Support climate change monitoring” (KWS et al. 2013). This Programme developed in 2013 is over a decade old and needs to be reviewed. furthermore, the Management Plan expired in 2024 and a current version of has not been seen to assess the integration of climate action.
Management plan and overall management system
Some Concern
As a serial World Heritage site of 202,334 hectares, it contains several components. Mount Kenya National Park is managed by Kenya Wildlife Service, while Mount Kenya Forest Reserve (partly within the property and partly a buffer zone) is managed by Kenya Forest Service. In 2000, Mount Kenya Forest Reserve was gazetted as Mount Kenya Natural Reserve that is managed by Kenya Wildlife Service. Thus, this area holds dual gazettement and cooperation between the two agencies is essential for ensuring integrated management actions (Kenya Wildlife Service/Kenya Forest Service, 2010). Currently, there is no clear definition of roles and mandates of each institution, which would be highly important to avoid duplication of efforts and improve coordination. In 2013, the World Heritage property was extended to include Lewa Wildlife Conservancy (LWC) and Ngare Ndare Forest Reserve (NNFR). Lewa Wildlife Conservancy is a private non-profit trust managed by a Board of Trustees (UNEP WCMC, 2012). A signing of a Memorandum of Understanding was planned between Kenya Wildlife Service, Kenya Forest Service and Lewa Wildlife Conservancy, but there is no information on the progress to date (Kenya Wildlife Service/Kenya Forest Service, 2010). The management plan (2010-2020) for the Mount Kenya Ecosystem (comprising all these protected areas) had been developed jointly by Kenya Wildlife Service and Kenya Forest Service. The management of the whole ecosystems is structured around seven programmes, including ecological management, forest resources, water resources, security, protected area operations, tourism, and community partnerships (Kenya Wildlife Service/Kenya Forest Service, 2010). The management plan expired in 2020 and stakeholders are currently in discussion about the revision of the plan (IUCN Consultation, 2025).
Law enforcement
Some Concern
Mount Kenya is a vast area and increasing the number of rangers was one of the needs for effective patrolling of the site (Gichuhi, 2015). In recent years, there have been some important management decisions that led to concrete positive results in terms of law enforcement. For example, Community Forest Associations that had been established to manage some forest blocks enable improved community involvement in natural resource management and lessen illegal activities. Further, there has been a considerable decrease in illegal cultivation of marijuana due to effective law enforcement (Kenya Wildlife Service/Kenya Forest Service, 2010). The Horse Patrol Team, established in 2022 by a project led by Mount Kenya Trust, is a community rangers' team that fights poaching and other illegal activities (Mount Kenya Trust, 2022). However, there remains concern over largely non-regulated entry to the Forest Reserve/National Reserve, occasionally leading to illegal activities (Kenya Wildlife Service/Kenya Forest Service, 2010) and some deficiencies in law enforcement remain (State Party of Kenya, 2021). Joint aerial surveillance flights led by Rhino Ark between 2018 and 2023 revealed very low level of illegal logging in the protected areas (IUCN Consultation, 2025).

Ngare Ndare Forest Reserve is under increasing community livestock and wood gathering pressures with the forest cover recently reported as declining (Rural Focus, 2024). The lifting of the ban on harvesting commercial plantation forest and subsequent reversal of the decision demonstrates the fragility of human activities in the bordering forest reserves which are already challenging to manage. Furthermore, there are reports that illegal snaring incidences are increasing in the site as a whole, which is concerning (IUCN Consultation, 2025).
Sustainable finance
Some Concern
The funds provided to the site are provided by the national government through budgetary allocations to the lead site management agencies i.e. Kenya Wildlife Service and Kenya Forest Service. Under previous arrangements, both management agencies (Kenya Wildlife Service and Kenya Forest Service) were self-financing semi-autonomous agencies, so revenue generated from tourism and forestry activities were retained and could be re-invested in site management. Whether this remains the case is uncertain with all revenue now passed through the national government's centralised e-citizen digital platform. There remain some management needs and concerns over sustainable financing (State Party of Kenya, 2021). Although the site has a high degree of natural protection against human influence on account of its remote and inhospitable location at the very top of the mountain, increased financing could further improve its management. According to media reports, the Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS) is facing Ksh 19.8 billion deficit to implement the Ksh 98.3 billion 2024-2028 Strategic Plan (Obura, 2024). Private conservation partners, such as the Mount Kenya Trust and the Rhino Ark are investing yearly towards the protection and restoration on the Mt. Kenya ecosystem by supporting community patrols, fencing, tree planting, firefighting, among others.
Staff capacity, training and development
Mostly Effective
The country-wide recruitment of 2,700 Kenya Forest Services rangers and foresters in 2023, as well as 1,400 Kenya Wildlife Service rangers and assistant wardens in 2024 helped address the inadequate staff previously affecting the the Mount Kenya National Park and National / Forest Reserve (IUCN Consultation, 2025). Law enforcements is also helped by Mount Kenya Trust in patrolling the site on the northern and eastern slopes through the deployment of foot and horse-back patrol teams and on the south-western slopes through the deployment of foot patrol teams supported by Rhino Ark and the Wilder Institute/Calgary Zoo. The Mount Kenya Ecosystem Management Plan noted the required training to be undertaken in the future (Kenya Wildlife Service/Kenya Forest Service, 2010), but this plan is outdated. According to the latest periodic report a site-based capacity building plan or programme has been developed but it is not implemented and skills are not being transferred (State Party of Kenya, 2021). The LWC-NNFR component seems to have adequate well-resourced staff capacity (IUCN Consultation, 2025). More updated information is needed to adequately assess staff capacity of the property as a whole.
Education and interpretation programmes
Mostly Effective
The Community Partnership and Education Programme aims to ensure the support of local communities for conservation, while improving livelihoods through the sustainable use of natural resources (Kenya Wildlife Service/Kenya Forest Service, 2010). There is no recent information on the extent of implementation of the programme’s objectives outlined in the Mount Kenya Ecosystem Management Plan, which is also out of date. Conservation awareness activities are supported by several NGOs, including the Mount Kenya Trust, Rhino Ark Kenya Charitable Trust, William Holden Education Centre, Nature Kenya, and the Wildlife Clubs of Kenya (Kenya Wildlife Service/Kenya Forest Service, 2010; IUCN Consultation, 2025). The Rhino Ark Kenya Charitable Trust has in recent years become very active in fencing around Mount Kenya and associated community engagement on the south-western slopes of the Mountain, Rhino Ark, together with the Wilder Institute / Calgary Zoo where Nature Conservation Club have been established in 23 schools (IUCN Consultation, 2025).
Tourism and visitation management
Data Deficient
The Tourism Development and Management Programme elaborated in the Mount Kenya Ecosystem Management Plan noted that the park management had strong collaboration with private ecotourism companies that lead recreational tours in the site (Kenya Wildlife Service/Kenya Forest Service, 2010). This report is outdated, but tourism, with less than 30,000 visitors annually, is currently not posing significant pressure on Mount Kenya’s ecosystems, but it is faced with certain challenges, such as littering, inadequate infrastructure and lack of equitable benefit sharing.
Sustainable use
Some Concern
The protected natural forest and lands of the mid-slopes (buffer zone of the Mount Kenya World Heritage site portion) are extensively used by local communities for a variety of permitted, but also illegal extraction of timber and non-timber forest products, as well as for poorly controlled livestock grazing. Furthermore there are reports that illegal snaring is increasing for subsistence purposes (IUCN Consultation, 2025). The original World Heritage property, located some 5-10 km from the nearest areas of settlements, is under much less pressure, but some tree species (in particular Camphor (Ocotea usambarensis) and Cedar (Juniperus procera)), bamboo and other products are occasionally harvested. In line with the 2016 Forest Conservation and Management Act, Community Forest Associations (CFAs) have been established in each of the 16 forest stations of the Mount Kenya ecosystem (Kenya Wildlife Service/Kenya Forest Service, 2010). The key value of CFAs is promoting and enabling sustainable use of forest products within designated multiple-use zones. This arrangement greatly reduced illegal logging and poaching (World Heritage Committee, 2013). However, in 2022 the ban on harvesting of commercial plantation forests in forest reserves was lifted and the "shamba system" restored along with concerns of the abuse experienced in the past leading to a total ban by the previous regime. Nevertheless, since then the decision to allow harvesting seems to have been halted by the High Court (Aluoch, 2023). The World Heritage site's extension that comprises a corridor from Mount Kenya to the Lewa Wildlife Conservancy and Ngare Ndare Forest does not have forest reserve buffer zones on all sides. The wildlife corridor passes through well-managed private and community farmland. The Lewa Wildlife Conservancy is well-resourced thanks to international philanthropy and tourism and is also well-managed and its borders with Ngare Ndare Forest Reserve and Borana Conservancy are open. Apart from the border with Il Ngwesi Conservancy, the electric-fenced boundaries border farm and range land. Whilst Lewa Wildlife Conservancy is also wholly responsible for rhino surveillance within the Ngare Ndare Forest Reserve, the permitted community livestock and wood gathering activities are governed by KFS and Ngare Ndare Forest Trust rangers. The community pressures in Ngare Ndare are of concern for sustainability as a recent study shows the forest area in decline (Rural Focus, 2024). Both Lewa Wildlife Conservancy and Ngare Ndare Forest Reserve have public roads passing through which adds to their vulnerability.
Monitoring
Mostly Effective
Ecological monitoring has been carried out on an ad-hoc basis for a long time, and mainly responding to particular threats (Kenya Wildlife Service/Kenya Forest Service, 2010). An example of monitoring activities is a comprehensive elephant survey that has been ongoing since 2016 every three years (UNEP-WCMC, 2012). It includes also a forest health survey. This is a joint initiative by Wildlife Conservation Society, Kenya Wildlife Service, Kenya Forest Service, Rhino Ark, Mount Kenya Trust, and the Bongo Surveillance Project. Some of the key goals for future monitoring activities include the development of monitoring protocols and the establishment of an ecological monitoring database at the King’ong’o Research Station. The database would include existing data on environment, fauna, and economy-driven aspects. According to the last periodic report, the greatest challenge is to monitor visitor activities in the high altitude area (State Party of Kenya, 2021).
Lewa Wildlife Conservancy (LWC) Research and Monitoring Team collects continuous data to evaluate the health of the ecosystem (LWC website, 2025). This work extends into the Ngare Ndare Forest Reserve as does LWC's Armed and General Security (IUCN Consultation, 2025).
Research
Some Concern
Inventories of natural resources have been implemented in the Mount Kenya portion of the site at various times, and basic information on climate and relevant flora, fauna, geology, soils, and water is available. Nevertheless, this data is not comprehensive. Based on the plant inventory done on Kilimanjaro over 30 years of continuous research, it can be derived that about 50% of the plant species on Mt. Kenya have not yet been inventoried. Thus one of the key priorities for the research agenda was to fill the gaps on status of various taxa of fauna and flora by carrying out new inventories (Kenya Wildlife Service/Kenya Forest Service, 2010). Overall, thirteen priority research topics had been identified in Mount Kenya Ecosystem Management Plan to aid decision-making in the site’s management (Kenya Wildlife Service/Kenya Forest Service, 2010), however, although there is considerable research ongoing, this is not being utilised to improve understanding of the OUV or towards enhancing management needs (State Party of Kenya, 2021). Apart from the inventories, this includes, among other topics, carrying out research on ecosystem carrying capacity, reforestation of degraded areas and propagation of indigenous trees, elephant ranging patterns, and fire ecology. Research in Mount Kenya National Park/Natural Forest faces multiple challenges, such as inadequately determined research protocols and data collection methods, as well as lack of existent ecological database and capacities to conduct research.

The Lewa Wildlife Conservancy (LWC) Research and Monitoring Team collects continuous data to evaluate the health of the ecosystem. This work encompasses the areas of both Lewa Wildlife Conservancy and Ngare Ndare Forest Reserve. Lewa Wildlife Conservancy has also built long-running collaborations with several universities and research institutions around the world (IUCN Consultation, 2025).
Effectiveness of management system and governance in addressing threats outside the site
Some Concern
The development of a new joint Kenya Wildlife Service-Kenya Forest Service comprehensive management plan for the period 2020-2030 that considers the World Heritage site in a wider ecosystem context will facilitate further required action to address key threats, including climate change, fires, illegal forest resources extraction, and adverse large-scale infrastructure development. According to reports, this plan is currently being discussed by stakeholders. Protection and restoration of forest on the mid-slopes of the mountain should continue and be improved. The on-going construction of a comprehensive electric fence on the lower forest boundary aims to minimise conflict between the protected area and adjacent communities and effectively reduce threats from outside the site. The Mount Kenya fence was initiated in 2012 and by end of 2024 completion comprised 300 out of 450 kilometres planned (Rhino Ark website, 2025). The wildlife corridor from Mount Kenya to the site's extension at Lewa Wildlife Conservancy and Ngare Ndare Forest Reserve are already fenced along farming and community boundaries but there are ongoing challenges with elephants regularly breaking out into nearby farming areas.
Effectiveness of management system and governance in addressing threats inside the site
Some Concern
Management was historically significantly constrained by budgetary and staffing levels (State Party of Kenya, 2011). Staffing has improved substantially over the past two years with the country-wide recruitment of 2,700 Kenya Forest Services rangers and foresters in 2023, as well as 1,400 Kenya Wildlife Service rangers and assistant wardens in 2024. Although the World Heritage site is characteristically resilient and requires relatively low levels of management input to retain its values and ecological integrity, management constraints impact the ability of Kenya Wildlife Service and Kenya Forest Service in tackling effectively illegal extractive activities within the lower part of the site and its extension into the Ngare Ndare Forest Reserve. The use of the Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool (METT) to improve the management was recommended some years ago (Gichuhi, 2015).

In 2022, the situation changed with the lifting of the ban of harvesting in plantation forests and the restoration of the controversial "shamba system" whereby communities are permitted to cultivate in amongst saplings in the Mt Kenya forest reserves. However, since then this decision seems to have been halted by the High Court. The collection of wood from forest reserves throughout remains a challenge to manage and long term ecological damage is a concern as reflected in the declining forest cover trend recently reported for the Ngare Ndare Forest Reserve (Rural Focus, 2024).
The site is threatened by several threats including climate change, excessive and poorly regulated water abstraction, wildfires, illegal forest resources extraction, poaching, and potential large-scale infrastructure development, that are not sufficiently addressed overall. Kenya Wildlife Service and Kenya Forest Service are authors of a 2010-2020 Management Plan for Mount Kenya Ecosystem, however, it seems there is a lack of understanding and clarity on the roles and responsibilities of these agencies, and the management plan needs to be updated. While insufficient finances have impacted certain management actions, there has been an increased involvement of local communities in protection and management, for example through Community Forest Associations. Furthermore, country-wide recruitment of 2,700 Kenya Forest Services rangers and foresters in 2023, as well as 1,400 Kenya Wildlife Service rangers and assistant wardens in 2024 helped address the inadequate staff capacities previously affecting the the Mount Kenya National Park and National/Forest Reserve. The well-advanced construction of a 450 km long comprehensive electric fence along the lower Mount Kenya forest boundary aims to minimise conflict between the protected area and adjacent communities and aims to effectively reduce threats stemming from areas outside of the World Heritage property. The site extension to LWC-NNFR through a corridor is fenced and LWC is well-managed with well-resourced armed and general security teams whose surveillance extends into NNFR as well. However, it is to be noted that challenges remain of elephants breaking out and damaging farm crops, notably to the west of NNFR, and indications of armed livestock rustling in recent months affecting communities near NNFR is a concern.

Spectacular mountain scenery

Low Concern
Trend
Deteriorating
Mountain scenery of Mount Kenya National Park/Natural Forest remains outstanding despite some obvious modifications. Primarily, the changes are reflected in retreat of glaciers and land use changes / human landscape modification, which is affecting the overall scenic value of the mountain. Stresses from explosive population growth, urban sprawl and agricultural expansion in adjacent areas are expected to rise exponentially and place new stresses on the World Heritage site. Nevertheless, the mountain landscapes themselves remain largely intact at the present, together with snow-capped peaks, numerous lakes and waterfalls, moorlands and other vegetation communities, and glacial features. Ecological impacts such as changes to forest cover, changes to vegetation communities, changes to plant and animal diversity, alien and problematic native plant invasions, and general landscape changes are not immediately apparent to visitors to the site.

Diversity of evolving habitats

High Concern
Trend
Deteriorating
Ongoing ecological processes have led to outstanding diversity of habitats and altitudinal zonation of vegetation. With the changing climate, the situation will change over time, shifting the altitudinal boundaries of certain species. Wildfires also have critical impact in that sense. Although long-term studies of the vegetation change are not available, monitoring of similar ecosystems on Kilimanjaro (Tanzania) show that increased fire frequency leads to a downward shift of the upper forest line by several hundred metres (Hemp, 2009). Wildfires have started to occur on an annual basis in the Mount Kenya ecosystem. The extension of the World Heritage property to include Lewa Wildlife Conservancy and Ngare Ndare Forest Reserve in 2013 contributed to the outstanding value of the site through extension into a drier climatic zone (State Party of Kenya, 2013; World Heritage Committee, 2013). However the lifting of the ban on the harvesting of commercial forest plantations and the associated shamba system in 2022, although subsequently reversed, may bring new threats in the adjacent natural forest areas, such as logging, charcoal making and bushmeat hunting. The recent forest cover decline trend recently reported for Ngare Ndare Forest Reserve (Rural Focus, 2024) is indicative of increasing human pressures that are a concern.
Assessment of the current state and trend of World Heritage values
High Concern
Deteriorating
World Heritage values of Mount Kenya National Park/Natural Forest have largely been maintained, however the effects of climate change could potentially alter the scenic values of the site, epitomized by the occurrence of glaciers and glacial forms in Equatorial geographical latitudes. The glaciers are being compromised as the ice melts, but the scenic mountainous landscape with abundant water remains. The diversity of habitats for which the site was inscribed on the World Heritage List is still present. With climate change, it is likely that the conditions of the high-elevation habitats may become less suitable for the iconic Afro-alpine species that now characterize the high glacial valleys and moorlands. Some of the current threats, such as wildfires, unsustainable water abstraction and invasive alien species all have the potential to deteriorate the values of this site if not properly managed. Pressures from human population growth and uncontrolled urban expansion and agricultural expansion in surrounding areas are placing ever-increasing pressure on the World Heritage site. The site's extension to LWC-NNFR leads into a lower altitude and drier but zone with public roads passing through. LWC-NNFR's values and diverse attributes are vulnerable to burgeoning human population surrounding the site, and in the expanding nearby Isiolo town, which has an international airport.
Assessment of the current state and trend of other important biodiversity values
High Concern
Deteriorating
Other biodiversity values of Mount Kenya National Park/Natural Forest comprise many endemic floral and faunal species, including abundant montane flora and threatened wildlife. LWC has helped restore the national population of once almost-decimated black rhino. Three concurrent initiatives are on-going towards rebuilding the population of the mountain bongo on Mt Kenya. They are: (1) the Meru Bongo and Rhino Conservation Trust which have established a sanctuary in Marania Forest and translocated 14 bongo from Florida, USA, to the sanctuary in May 2025; (2) the Mount Kenya Wildlife Conservancy which has established the Mawingu Sanctuary in Ontululi and Nanyuki Forests which currently hosts 23 bongos; and (3) the Ragati Chehe Mountain Bongo Conservation Trust which is currently establishing a release site in Ragati and Chehe Forests. The state of these values may respond to modified climate conditions and human population increase in surrounding areas. Management improvements are essential in the protection of habitat in the forested ‘buffer zone’. Water catchment values have likely improved as a result of the restoration of forest cover on the mid-slopes of the mountain during the past decade. Threats such as poaching and illegal logging of indigenous trees were of low concern and had largely been put under control by management authorities, in strong cooperation with local communities. Human pressure in buffer areas has since increased and have for some time been reflected in the over abstraction and illegal abstraction of water from rivers and springs throughout the site and its extension.

Additional information

History and tradition,
Wilderness and iconic features,
Sacred natural sites or landscapes,
Sacred or symbolic plants or animals,
Cultural identity and sense of belonging
The mountain is symbolic to the culture and religious beliefs of the people. Communities living in close proximity to Mt. Kenya believe that the mountain is sacred and should be conserved for that purpose (Akker, 2016).
Factors negatively affecting provision of this benefit
Climate change
Impact level - High
Trend - Continuing
Pollution
Impact level - Moderate
Trend - Continuing
Overexploitation
Impact level - Moderate
Trend - Increasing
Invasive species
Impact level - Moderate
Trend - Continuing
Habitat change
Impact level - High
Trend - Increasing
Reduction of the above negative factors will improve the cultural and spiritual values. The local communities will embrace and share the sacred belief from generation to generation
Access to drinking water
Mount Kenya serves an invaluable role as a water tower regulating both ground and surface water flows into the Ewaso Ngiro North and Tana Basins, thereby maintaining biodiversity and life-support systems downstream, providing water to millions of households in the rural areas, key urban centres, as well as to economically important hydro-electric facilities and irrigation schemes.
Factors negatively affecting provision of this benefit
Climate change
Impact level - High
Trend - Continuing
Pollution
Impact level - Moderate
Trend - Continuing
Overexploitation
Impact level - High
Trend - Increasing
Invasive species
Impact level - Moderate
Trend - Continuing
Habitat change
Impact level - High
Trend - Increasing
The above factors combined may impact tremendously on water availability in the lowlands, in particular in the dry seasons.
Carbon sequestration,
Soil stabilisation,
Flood prevention,
Water provision (importance for water quantity and quality),
Pollination
These benefits are all part of the ecosystem services provided by the Mount Kenya World Heritage site. Mt.Kenya forest is estimated to provide ecosystem services valued at US$220 million annually (Matiku et al. 2016).
Factors negatively affecting provision of this benefit
Climate change
Impact level - High
Trend - Increasing
Pollution
Impact level - Moderate
Trend - Continuing
Overexploitation
Impact level - Moderate
Trend - Continuing
Invasive species
Impact level - Moderate
Trend - Continuing
Habitat change
Impact level - High
Trend - Increasing
The reduction of the above negative factors will improve on the environmental services
Outdoor recreation and tourism,
Natural beauty and scenery
This contributes to the well being and aesthetic values to the community, including culturally meaningful ethnobotanical practices and traditional ecological knowledge.
Factors negatively affecting provision of this benefit
Climate change
Impact level - High
Trend - Increasing
Pollution
Impact level - Moderate
Trend - Continuing
Overexploitation
Impact level - Moderate
Trend - Continuing
Invasive species
Impact level - Moderate
Trend - Continuing
Habitat change
Impact level - High
Trend - Continuing
Reduction of the impacts will improve on the resources being used for the aesthetic,medicinal and research purposes
Provision of jobs,
Tourism-related income
Mount Kenya is a significant source of jobs and tourism-related income.
Factors negatively affecting provision of this benefit
Climate change
Impact level - Very High
Trend - Increasing
Pollution
Impact level - Moderate
Trend - Increasing
Overexploitation
Impact level - Moderate
Trend - Increasing
Invasive species
Impact level - High
Trend - Increasing
Habitat change
Impact level - High
Trend - Continuing
Degradation of the integrity of the World Heritage Site has the potential to negatively impact future contributions to the local economy.
The mountain is symbolic to the culture and religious beliefs of the people. Communities living in close proximity to Mt. Kenya believe that the mountain is sacred and should be conserved for that purpose. Mount Kenya forest is estimated to provide ecosystem services valued at US$220 million annually. For example, Mount Kenya serves an invaluable role as a water tower regulating both ground and surface water flows into the Ewaso Ngiro North and Tana Basins, thereby maintaining biodiversity and life-support systems downstream, providing water to millions of households in the rural areas, key urban centres, as well as to economically important hydro-electric facilities and irrigation schemes.
№ Organization Brief description of Active Projects Website
1 27 Community Forest Associations (CFAs), together with Nature Kenya and the Kenya Forest Service (KFS), with support from Trillion Trees Efforts by 27 Community Forest Associations (CFAs), together with Nature Kenya and the Kenya Forest Service (KFS), with support from Trillion Trees, a venture by BirdLife International, Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) and World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) have resulted in the restoration of more than 500 hectares of degraded forest areas, with over 500,000 indigenous trees planted in the past five years. Based on the progress of the planted trees, community groups in Mount Kenya can attest to the success of the restoration initiative. For instance, the Chehe CFA, with 768 members, majority women, manages the Chehe forest block on the border between Kirinyaga and Nyeri counties. Community members engaged in planting and maintaining the restored sites have also earned wages that have helped them improve their livelihoods.
https://www.birdlife.org/news/2023/03/17/collaboration-for-mount-kenya-forest-restoration/; https://naturekenya.org/2023/02/28/collaboration-for-mount-kenya-forest-restoration/
2 IKI Small Grants project, Help Self Help Centre Inhabitants living around Mount Kenya are often poor, since climate change is hitting the agricultural sector particularly hard. Attempts to restore the once dense forest by planting exotic trees failed due to the illegal logging. The IKI Small Grants project therefore plants 150,000 indigenous trees to restore the habitat for wildlife. Further, forests act as a natural carbon sink that benefits the climate. The planted trees produce essential oils, tea-like leaves or dyes for the paint industry and therefore serve as an additional source of income for the local population. The community-owned tree maintenance program ensures the sustainability of the project and shares the methods and learnings of the project with other resforestation initiatives in Kenya.
https://www.hshc-kenya.or.ke/; https://iki-small-grants.de/k1project/community-driven-regeneration-of-native-forests-at-mount-kenya/
3 Mount Kenya Trust Various projects by the Mount Kenya Trust focussing on: - Agroforestry and tree planting - Strengthening ranger teams - Wildfire mitigation - Community health - Environmental education - Water conservation
https://www.mountkenyatrust.org/
4 Rhino Ark Kenya Charitable Trust Launched by Hon. Njeru Githae, Ministry for Finance, on 7th September 2012, the Mount Kenya Electric Fence will encircle over 2,700 sq. km and will be approximately 450 km in length. As of end of 2024, 300 km of the fence had been built. Following one of the key principles in all Rhino Ark fence projects – the Mount Kenya Electric Fence is being built by members of forest adjacent communities under the supervision of a technical team from Kenya Wildlife Service. The involvement of the local communities creates job opportunities and ensures ownership of the fence project by the neighbouring communities.
https://www.rhinoark.org/mt-kenya-ecosystem/#:~:text=As%20of%20March%202023%2C%20over,team%20from%20Kenya%20Wildlife%20Service.
5 Rural Focus Ltd, Nanyuki, Kenya, commissioned by Lewa Wildlife Conservancy, Isiolo, Kenya Water Resource Synthesis Report
https://www.lewa.org/impact/wildlife/research/
6 Rhino Ark/Wilder Institute Calgary Zoo Establishment of a mountain bongo release site in Ragati / Chehe forests; establishment of 23 Nature Conservation Clubs in 23 schools on the south western slopes; community patrol teams securing the integrity of the Ragati / Chehe Forests.
7 Mount Kenya Wildlife Conservancy Establishment of a mountain bongo sanctuary in Nanyuki/Ontulili Forests which currently hosts 23 bongos.
8 Meru Bongo and Rhino Conservation Trust This is a new trust comprising of the Meru County Government, Marania and Muchene CFAs and LWC which has established a sanctuary in Marania Forest. 14 bongo were recently translocated from the Rare Species Conservatory Foundation, Florida, USA, to the sanctuary.

References

№References
1
Aluoch, C. (2023). Reviving forests: When Kenya lifted logging ban. The Star. Published online 28 November 2023. Available at: https://www.the-star.co.ke/opinion/columnists/2024-01-02-re…
2
BirdLife International (2023). Collaboration for Mount Kenya Forest Restoration. By Martin Kiama and John Mwacharo. Published online 17 March 2023. Available at: https://www.birdlife.org/news/2023/03/17/collaboration-for-…
3
BirdLife International. (2024). Important Bird Areas factsheet: Mount Kenya. [online] Available at: https://datazone.birdlife.org/site/factsheet/mount-kenya-ib… [Accessed 16 December 2024].
4
CRVWWDA (2025). Laikipia. Central Rift Valley Water Works Development Agency. Available at: https://www.crvwwda.go.ke/index.php/water-supply/item/16-la…
5
Daily Nation (2020). Agencies agree on plan to build elephants corridor linking parks. Daily National Newspaper. Updated 29 June 2020. Available at: https://nation.africa/kenya/counties/agencies-agree-on-plan…
6
Fuchs, L.E. (2023). Kenya’s logging ban has been lifted – it’s a political decision and a likely setback for conservation. The Conversation. Published online 22 July 2023. Available at: https://theconversation.com/kenyas-logging-ban-has-been-lif…
7
Gichuhi, M.W. (2015) Assessing the Role of Wildlife Management and Governance in Conservation Areas in Kenya. PhD Thesis. Nairobi, Kenya: IEET, JKUAT
8
Hemp, A. (2009). Climate change and its impact on the forests of Kilimanjaro. African Journal of Ecology, 47, 3-10.
9
Henry, M. C., Maingi, J. K., & McCarty, J. (2019). Fire on the water towers: Mapping burn scars on Mount Kenya using satellite data to reconstruct recent fire history. Remote Sensing, 11(2), 104.
10
Henry, M. C., Maingi, J. K., & McCarty, J. (2019). Fire on the Water Towers: Mapping Burn Scars on Mount Kenya Using Satellite Data to Reconstruct Recent Fire History. Remote Sensing, 11(2), 104.
11
Hinzmann, A., Mölg, T., Braun, M., Cullen, N. J., Hardy, D. R., Kaser, G., & Prinz, R. (2024). Tropical glacier loss in East Africa: recent areal extents on Kilimanjaro, Mount Kenya, and in the Rwenzori Range from high-resolution remote sensing data. Environmental Research: Climate, 3(1), 011003.
12
IKI (2022). Community-driven regeneration of native forests at Mount Kenya. International Climate Initiative. Available at: https://iki-small-grants.de/k1project/community-driven-rege…
13
IUCN Consultation. (2024). IUCN World Heritage Confidential Consultation. Mount Kenya National Park/Natural Forest, Kenya.
14
KWS, KFS, NP (2013). Mount Kenya Climate Adaptation Programme. Kenya Wildlife Service, Kenya Forest Service, Mount Kenya National Park representatives. Available at: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&…
15
Kamau, W. (2018). Tobiko Raises Alarm Over Exploitation of Mt. Kenya Water Towers. Talk Africa. Published online 20 August 2018. Available at: https://www.talkafrica.co.ke/tobiko-raises-alarm-over-explo…
16
Kenya Bureau of Statistics (2022). Economic Survey of Kenya Tourism Sector. Kenya Bureau of Statistics. https://www.knbs.or.ke/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/2023-Econ…
17
Kenya Wildlife Service. (1999) Aerial Survey of the Destruction of Mt Kenya, Imenti and Ngare Ndare Forest Reserves. [online] UN Environment. Available at: https://www.unenvironment.org/resources/report/aerial-surve… [Accessed 24 November 2020].
18
Kenya Wildlife Service. (2019). National Recovery and Action Plan for the Mountain Bongo in Kenya (2019-2023). Kenya Wildlife Service and Republic of Kenya Ministry of Tourism and Wildlife, 62 pp. Available at: https://www.kws.go.ke/sites/default/files/2019-11/Mountain%…
19
Kenya Wildlife Service/Kenya Forest Service. (2010). Mount Kenya Ecosystem Management Plan, 2010-2020. Kenya Wildlife Service and Kenya Forest Service. Available at: https://www.kws.go.ke/sites/default/files/2019-11/Mt.%20Ken…
20
Kirui, D. (2023). Kenya’s agroforestry in the spotlight. Dialogue Earth. Published online 10 May 2023. Available at: https://dialogue.earth/en/forests/kenya-shamba-agroforestry…
21
Maringa, F. (2023). Outcry as Kenya lifts six-year ban on logging. Deutsche Welle. Published online 25 July 2023. Available at: https://www.dw.com/en/outcry-as-kenya-lifts-six-year-ban-on…
22
Martin, N. (2019). Mount Kenya: Wildfires rage around Africa's second highest peak. [online] 2 March, DW. Available at: https://www.dw.com/en/mount-kenya-wildfires-rage-around-afr… [Accessed 12 September 2019].
23
Matiku, P., Gacheru P., Waswa G. (2016). Management and Conservation of Mt. Kenya Forest-Business case for Sustainable Restoration. Nature Kenya, Nairobi. Available at: https://naturekenya.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Mt.-Keny…
24
Mount Kenya Trust (2024). Our dedicated rangers uncover an illegal logging site deep within the Mt. Kenya forest. Facebook page Mount Kenya Wildlife Trust. Posted online 15 April 2024. Available at: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=854993353333341&id=…
25
Mount Kenya Trust. (2020). Elephant Corridor. Mount Kenya Trust [online]. Available at: https://mountkenyatrust.org/wildlife/ [Accessed on 26 August 2020].
26
Mount Kenya Trust. (2022). International Elephant Foundation Interim Report. International Elephant Foundation. Available at: https://elephantconservation.org/ief/annual-reports/
27
Munyeki, J. (2020). Forester digs in against dam plan. The Standard. First published online 16 December 2019. Available at: https://www.standardmedia.co.ke/rift-valley/article/2001353…
28
National Irrigation Board. (2013). Feasibility Study to Identify Irrigation Investments in Kieni East and West, March 2013. Kenyan National Irrigation Board.
29
Ndalila, M. N., Lala, F., & Makindi, S. M. (2024). Community perceptions on wildfires in Mount Kenya forest: implications for fire preparedness and community wildfire management. Fire Ecology, 20(1), 92.
30
Nyongesa, K., & Vacik, H. (2018). Fire Management in Mount Kenya: A Case Study of Gathiuru Forest Station. Forests, 9(8), 481.
31
OAG (2023). Report of the Auditor-General on Central Rift Valley Water Works Development Agency. For the year ended 30 June 2021. Office of the Auditor-General. Available at: http://www.parliament.go.ke/sites/default/files/2023-04/Rep…
32
Obura, F. (2024). Kenya Wildlife Service Budgets KShs. 3.8Bn to Tackle Human -Wildlife Conflict in 2024-28 Plan. The Kenyan Wall Street. Published online 30 September 2024. Available at: https://kenyanwallstreet.com/kenya-wildlife-service-budgets…
33
Prinz, R., Nicholson, L., Mölg, T., Gurgiser, W., and Kaser, G. (2016). Climatic controls and climate proxy potential of Lewis Glacier, Mt. Kenya, The Cryosphere, 10(1), 133–148.
34
Report on the Mount Kenya National Park and Natural Forest Stakeholders Meeting, September 2013
35
Rural Focus (2024). Surface Water Status and Trends Report for Mountain, Agricultural, Conservation and Pastoral Landscape (Laikipia, Meru and Isiolo Counties), prepared for Lewa Wildlife Conservancy.
36
State Party of Kenya. (2011). Report of the State Party to the World Heritage Committee on the state of conservation of Mount Kenya National Park/Natural Forest (Kenya). [online] Available at: https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/800/documents/ [Accessed 24 November 2020].
37
State Party of Kenya. (2021). Periodic Reporting Cycle 3, Section II: Mount Kenya National Park/Natural Forest (Kenya). [online] Available at: https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/800/documents/
38
Tourism Research Institute (2023). Annual Tourism Sector Performance Report 2023. Tourism Research Institute for the Ministry of Tourism and Wildlife, Kenya. Available at: https://tri.go.ke/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/TOURISM-SECTOR…
39
UNEP-WCMC. (2012). Mount Kenya National Park/Natural Forest (Kenya). UNEP-WCMC World Heritage Information Sheets. Cambridge, UK: UNEP-WCMC.
40
UNESCO (2024). Celebrating harmony between people and nature at Mount Kenya-Lewa UNESCO Designated Biosphere Reserve. UNESCO. Published online 11 November 2024. Available at: https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/celebrating-harmony-betw…
41
UNESCO. (2022). Suppressing the spread of uncontrolled fire in Mount Kenya National Park. UNESCO [online]. Published 3 June 2022. Available at: https://whc.unesco.org/en/news/2446#:~:text=From%20mid%2DMa…. [Accessed 16 December 2024].
42
UNESCO/IUCN. (2008). Reactive Monitoring Mission report Mount Kenya World Heritage Site (Kenya). Gland, Switzerland and Paris, France: IUCN and UNESCO World Heritage Centre. 
43
Vanleeuwe, H. (2016) Elephant Census, Mt. Kenya, 2016, Wildlife Conservation Society, June 2016.
44
Vanleeuwe, H., Kiambi, S. (2020), Mount Kenya Elephant Survey, Wildlife Conservation Society, March 2020.
45
Vanleeuwe, H., Woodley, B., Lambrechts, C., Gachanja, M. (2002). Changes in the state of conservation of Mount Kenya forests - An Interim Report. Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology, Kenya Wildlife Service, United Nations Environment Programme, Kenya Forests Working Group. December 2002.
 
46
Waititu, J.M., Mundia, C.N., Sichangi, A.W. (2022). Assessing distribution changes of selected native and alien invasive plant species under changing climatic conditions in Nyeri County, Kenya. PLoS ONE 17(10): e0275360.
47
World Heritage Committee. (2013). Decision 37 COM 8B.9 Extensions of properties already inscribed on the World Heritage List: Mount Kenya National Park/Natural Forest (Kenya). In: Decisions Adopted by the World Heritage Committee at its 37th Session (Phnom Penh, 2013). [online] Paris, France: UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Available at: https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/5125 [Accessed 24 November 2020].
48
africanews (2023). Kenyan environmental court halts lifting of logging ban. Rédaction Africanews with AF. Update online 13 August 2023. Available at: https://www.africanews.com/2023/10/12/kenyan-environmental-…

Indigenous Heritage values

At 5,199 m, Mount Kenya is the second highest peak in Africa. It is an ancient extinct volcano, which during its period of activity (3.1-2.6 million years ago) is thought to have risen to 6,500 m. There are 12 remnant glaciers on the mountain, all receding rapidly, and four secondary peaks that sit at the head of the U-shaped glacial valleys. With its rugged glacier-clad summits and forested middle slopes, Mount Kenya is one of the most impressive landscapes in East Africa. The evolution and ecology of its afro-alpine flora provide an outstanding example of ecological and biological processes. Through the Lewa Wildlife Conservancy and Ngare Ndare Forest Reserve, the property also incorporates lower lying scenic foothills and arid habitats of high biodiversity, situated in the ecological transition zone between the mountain ecosystem and the semi-arid savanna grasslands. The area also lies within the traditional migrating route of the African elephant population. © UNESCO

Would you like to share feedback to support the accuracy of information for this site? If so, send your comments below.

This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.