Which colonial interest is clear from taking good Maasai grazing land for white settlement?

Correct answer: Prioritising settlement and state interests over local pastoralism

The direct answer is A: colonial authorities prioritised settlement and state interests over local pastoralism. Good grazing land was economically and strategically valuable. By taking Maasai grazing areas for white settlement, colonial policy transferred control of productive land away from local pastoral communities and towards settlers and the colonial state. This shows that the government valued territorial control, settler expansion and administrative power more than existing customary use rights. Option A is correct because it directly identifies the colonial priority. Option B is wrong because the policy did not give the Maasai unlimited pastures; it reduced their access. Option C is wrong because the question concerns land appropriation, not cattle taxation. Option D is wrong because old grazing rights were weakened rather than strengthened. The reasoning is: productive land was taken, settlers received it, and local pastoral livelihood was pushed aside. This is an example of power expressed through land control. Memory cue: taking pasture for settlers means colonial settlement came before local rights.