cts and trade-offs There are a number of problems, which arose among the stakeholders as the consequence of the actions. In 1977 about 30% of herders stated having conflicts with the wildlife. The main problems were competition between livestock and buffalo, elephant and other range species for water and grazing, and predation by lion and leopard. As for the farmers, their lands had good access to wildlife and 61% cited such problems with them, as were crop damage and fear of wildlife, the most significant being buffalo, antelope, elephant, and monkey. (Campbell, 2000) In 1996 among basically same issues, were others as access to water and grazing, and the spread of disease. Concerning he conflict about the water, it was claimed to be destroyed by herds looking for water, as well as using up water by farmers and overall nature conservation. (Campbell, 1999) Other issues concern livestock disease and conflicts between wildlife, livestock, and humans, and this issue assumedly wasn’t addressed by any action. As for conflicts of migrants, with the rapid population growth caused by immigration from other parts of Kenya, these rich areas have become populated, and today agriculture is spreading down the wetter edges of grazing land, along rivers and around wetlands. This has reduced the area available for livestock grazing and facilitated access to water for both livestock and wildlife. Changed resource use is the basis for land use conflicts. By 1996, the situation was more complicated. There were more non-Masai farmers, and many former Maasai herders were engaged in farming. The circumcised area expanded beyond the slopes of Mount Kilimanjaro. These land-use changes have modified the choice of shepherds for water and livestock grazing and led to conflicts between immigrant farmers and shepherds, former farmers, Masai (Campbell, 2000). While ranchers have a reasonable expectation that they will acquire part of the land under the unit, the result is unclear to non-members. Many immigrants have been farming on group ranches as part of informal agreements for more than a decade. Separation and division of land among ranchers can result in them losing access to land. This raises the tense political question of whether these farmers should have claims to land (Campbell, 2005). In 1996, however, many of the immigrant farmers sought redress from civil authorities. For example, farmers in conflict with herders reported resort to chiefs (20%), the courts (15%) and the police (9%) – and to violence (19%) (Campbell, 2000).>