Effective Approaches to Nature Conservation · 2003-07-01 · MTEST Ministry of Tourism, Environment, Science and Technology ... 4.5 Keynote Lecture by Mr. Mitsuo Usuki ... Effective

Japan InternationalCooperation Agency

(JICA)

Sabah State Government Universiti Malaysia Sabah(UMS)

Effective Approachesto Nature Conservation

Proceedings of the BBEC International Conference 2003

25th - 27th, February 2003 at Shangri-La’s Rasa Ria Resort, Tuaran, Sabah, Malaysia

Edited byMaryati MohamedTakahisa Kusano

BBEC International Conference 2003 - Effective Approaches to Nature Conservation

BBEC Publication No. 11

ISBN 983-41084-1-9

‘Effective Approaches to Nature Conservation’Proceedings of the BBEC Internatinal Conference 2003,25th - 27th February 2003 at Shangri-La’s Rasa Ria Resort, Tuaran, Sabah

Copyright © 2003 BBEC Secretariat

Editors:Maryati MohamedTakahisa Kusano

Published by:BBEC Secretariatc/o Institute for Tropical Biology and Conservation (IBTP)Universiti Malaysia SabahLocked Bag 207388999, Kota Kinabalu,Sabah, MalaysiaTel: +6-088-320104Fax: +6-088-320291

Photographs courtesy of Universiti Malaysia Sabah

Printed By:Mewamas Sdn. Bhd.No. 1003-1004, 10th Floor, Gaya Centre, P.O. Box 14205,88848 Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia.

ornean Biodiversity and Ecosystems Conservation (BBEC) Programme is a smart partnership amongJapan International Cooperation Agencies (JICA), Universiti Malaysia Sabah and Sabah State Government. Theinter-link in terms of impact and approaches among four components of the Programme viz Research andEducation Component (REC), Park Management Component (PMC), Habitat Management Component (HMC) andPublic Awareness Component (PAC), is planned in such a way to ensure the main goal of BBEC can be achievedin five years time.

The simplest concept of BBEC is conservation. Conservation requires knowledge of particular ecosystems. Forthis knowledge, exposure and promotion of conservation concept should then reach the various level ofcommunities, especially Sabahan. In BBEC, the approaches planned and implemented for the process ofgaining knowledge are actually from researches, leading to establishment of reliable database and information.This in turn will be useful two ways: enforcement of legislation (especially on protected and/or conservation areas)and public awareness. This is where the four components are integrated.

Since its launching, one year ago (25th March 2002), BBEC has started its function. Throughout the year, threeprogress reports have been produced. BBEC is organising this International Conference as part of theproject’s planning strategy to globalise the function and existence of the Programme in Sabah specifically, and inMalaysia generally. We are hoping for the involvement of wider range of government and non-governmentagencies, and the private sector and non-profit making institutions (local or foreign) to have a hear and see ofwhat BBEC is doing. Thus, the aim of this conference is to gain better knowledge (for BBEC members ornon-members) on approaches to conserving the terrestrial and freshwater biodiversity and ecosystems inBorneo Island. The four main objectives of the Conference were:

a. To share knowledge on nature conservation among the managers, practitioners and researchers.b. To highlight approaches and achievements by BBEC Programme for participants.c. To gain better understanding on effective approaches and practices on biodiversity and ecosystems

conservation for Sabah.d. To initiate network among managers, practitioners and researchers on nature conservation in Borneo.

This two days conference consisted of three main activities: progress report, paper presentation and workshops. Thefirst and second activities were more likely a hear and see-oriented scenario. The third part is more of two-waysinteraction among participants. The participants of conference have vast experience in various experties (planning,implementing, managing, promoting and communicating) of conservation. Therefore, active participation will ensuresharing of experience and learning of lesson to effective approaches in conservation.

We were honoured to have the Chief Minister of Sabah, Y.A.B. Datuk Chong Kah Kiat to officiate the conference.

It is hope that through this conference, the participants (BBEC members and non-members) have gained moreknowledge on effective approaches to nature conservation. The Organising Committee would like to acknowledgethe full support of each individual in Institute for Tropical Biology & Conservation (UMS), Science & TechnologyUnit, Sabah Parks and Sabah Wildlife Department and those indirectly helped towards the success of BBECInternational Conference 2003.

Thank you.

Prof. Datin Dr. Maryati MohamedMr. Takahisa KusanoJoint-Chairpersons for BBEC International Conference 2003Kota Kinabalu, Sabah.

Preface

B

i

Preface


Patron: Y.B. Datuk K.Y. MustafaSabah State Secretary

Advisor: Tan Sri Prof. Datuk Seri Panglima Dr. Abu Hassan OthmanVice Chancellor, UMS

Joint-Chairperson: Prof. Datin Dr. Maryati MohamedDirector of ITBC, UMS

Mr. Takahisa KusanoChief Advisor for BBEC Programme

Committee: Sabah ParksDatuk Lamri Ali, DirectorDr. Jamili Nais , Deputy DirectorMr. Ludi Apin

Sabah Wildlife DepartmentMr. Mahedi Andau, DirectorMr. Laurentius Ambu, Deputy DirectorMr. Soffian Abu BakarMr. Augustine Tuuga

Science and Technology UnitMr. Moktar Yassin Ajam, DirectorPn. Fatimah JaafarPn. Lina Mohd. LinMs. Ken Kartina Khamis

JICA ExpertsDr. Yoshiaki Hashimoto, JICA Expert for Research and Education ComponentDr. Takuji Tachi, JICA Expert for Research and Education ComponentDr. Mohd. Nazri Iguchi Abdullah, JICA Expert for Public Awareness ComponentDr. Masaaki Yoneda, JICA Expert for Park Management ComponentMr. Shigeo Sakai, JICA Expert for Park Management ComponentDr. Toshinori Tsubouchi, JICA Expert for Habitat Management Component

Bursar: Ms. Ryoko Takeda (JICA-BBEC Programme Coordinator)

Logistics: Carlota’s Borneo Sdn. Bhd.Ms. Mayumi Chin

Conference’s Secretariat: Ms. Kertijah Abd. Kadir (ITBC,UMS)Ms. Halimah Hassan (BBEC-JICA)Mr. Aziz Parman (BBEC-JICA)Mr. Arman Hadi Mohmad (ITBC-UMS)Mr. Ahmad Sudin (ITBC, UMS)Mr. Azimah Jaafar (ITBC, UMS)

Organizing CommitteeBBEC International Conference 2003

ii

Abbreviations

iii

BBEC Bornean Biodiversity & Ecosystems Conservation Programme in Sabah, MalaysiaBAKAS Water Supply and Cleanliness of Surrounding EnvironmentBOD Biological Oxygen DemandCMC Catchment Management CommitteeCRP Crocker Range ParkDatuk SirDCMC District Catchment Management CommitteeDID Department of Irrigation and DrainageDO District OfficerDOE Department of EnvironmentDTT District Technical TaskforceDWRM District Water Resources ManagerEAC Environmental Action CommitteeEIA Environmental Impact AssessmentEncik Mr.GFS Gravity Fed SystemGIS Geographical Information SystemICP Integrated Catchment PlanICMP Integrated Catchment Management PlanJICA Japan International Cooperation AgencyJKR Public Works DepartmentJPPS Federal Development Department SabahLA Land ApplicationLUC Land Use CommitteeMTEST Ministry of Tourism, Environment, Science and TechnologyNGO Non-government OrganizationNT Native TitleRESP Rural Environmental & Sanitation ProgramSWRE Water Resources Enactment 1998TOL Temporary Occupation PermitUMS Universiti Malaysia SabahWQI Water Quality IndicesWRC Water Resource CouncilWWF World Wildlife Fund

Abbreviations


Preface iOrganizing Committee iiAbbreviations iiiTable of Contents iv

Part 1: Opening Session1.1 Opening Remark

by Prof. Datin Dr. Maryati MohamedJoint-Chairperson of BBEC International Conference 2003......................................................................1

1.2 Welcoming Remarkby Datuk K.Y. MustafaBBEC Chairman........................................................................................................................................3

Part 2: Presentation of Progress Report2.1 Research & Education Component............................................................................................................42.2 Park Management Component...............................................................................................................122.3 Habitat Management Component...........................................................................................................222.4 Public Awareness Component.................................................................................................................282.5 Keynote Paper by Datuk K.Y. Mustafa, BBEC Chairman

Balance between Socio-economic Development and Biodiversity Conservation....................................33

Part 3: Guest Papers3.1 Paper 1 - The Awareness and Conservation Activities of Wetland Ecosystems

and Their Wildlife by Local Communityby Mr. Hisashi Shinsho, Kushiro International Wetlands Centre (KIWC)..............................................38

3.2 Paper 2 - Community-Based Conservation Project in Kinabatangan, Sabahby Dr. Isabelle Lackman-Ancrenaz, HUTAN............................................................................................42

3.3 Paper 3 - Public Awareness on Conservationby Mr. Gary Lim, Malaysian Nature Society (MNS).................................................................................45

3.4 Paper 4 - Canopy Biodiversity Studies in Lambir Hills National Parkby Dr. Tohru Nakashizuka, Research Institute for Human and Nature (RIHN), Japan............................49

3.5 Questions and Answers (Papers 1-4)......................................................................................................56

3.6 Paper 5 - Management of Tropical Rainforest in Kalimantan:How Can Local Community be a Key to Success?by Prof. Ir. Dr. Mustofa Agung Sardjono, Mulawarman University, Kalimantan.......................................58

3.7 Paper 6 - Conservation Initiatives in Gunung Halimun National Park, West Java, Indonesiaby Dr. Jito Sugardjito, Research Centre for Biology of the Indonesia Institute for Sciences (LIPI).........74

3.8 Paper 7 - Research & Education on Biodiversity in ASEANby Dir. Gregorio I. Texon, Asean Regional Centre for Biodiversity Conservation (ARCBC)............................80

3.9 Paper 8 - Wildlife Management in Japanby Dr. Hiroshi Ikeda, Hyogo Prefectural Homeland (HPH) for the Oriental White Stork..........................87

3.10 Questions and Answers (Papers 5-8)..............................................................................................................91

3.11 Paper 9 - Park Management: Brunei’s Experienceby Mr. Awang Samhan Nyawa, Brunei Museum Department.........................................................................93

Table of Contents

iv

v

Contents of BBEC International Conference 2003

3.12 Paper 10 - Park Management: Indonesia’s Experienceby Dr. Dwi Setyono, Gunung Halimun’s National Parks................................................................................101

3.13 Questions and Answers (Papers 9-10).........................................................................................................107

Part 4: Opening Ceremony4.1 Welcoming Speech

by Tan Sri Prof. Datuk Seri Panglima Dr. Abu Hassan Othman, Vice Chancellor, UMS................................1084.2 Speech by Mr. Takahisa Kusano, Chief Advisor for BBEC Programme.........................................................1104.3 Speech by Datuk K.Y. Mustafa, BBEC Chairman..........................................................................................1114.4 Opening Speech and Official Launching

by Y.A.B. Datuk Chong Kah Kiat, Sabah Chief Minister.................................................................................1134.5 Keynote Lecture by Mr. Mitsuo Usuki (United Nation University)...................................................................115

Part 5 : Component Workshops5.1 Research and Education Component Workshop...................................................................................1255.2 Park Management Component Workshop...................................................................................................1295.3 Habitat Management Component Workshop...........................................................................................1365.4 Public Awareness Component Workshop....................................................................................................1415.5 Presentation of Discussion from Component Workshops.....................................................................1535.6 Colloquium............................................................................................................................................1605.7 Closing Remarks

by Datuk K.Y. Mustafa, BBEC Chairman...............................................................................................165

Part 6: Photo Gallery........................................................................................................................................................166

Part 7: Press CuttingBBEC International Conference 2003...................................................................................................................180


1

1.1 Opening Remarksby Prof. Datin Dr. Maryati Mohamed, Joint-Chairperson of BBEC International Conference 2003

Assalamuwalaikum, good morning, selamat pagi, ohiogozaimas!

My name is Maryati Mohamad, and together with Mr. Kusano, we are organizing this conference for the Secretariat of theBBEC Programme. BBEC stands for Borneon Biodiversity & Ecosystem Conservation. It is a trilateral programme,between JICA, who is providing the technical assistance with the Federal Government, which in this case, is the UniversitiMalaysia Sabah, and also the State Government.

This programme is headed by Y.A.B. Datuk K.Y. Mustafa, who is State Secretary of Sabah. He will see that everyone willabide to what we want to do, to see that friendly conservation is practiced in Sabah.

Ladies and gentlemen, my job here today is to brief you on what is going to happen. As you can see BBEC has been inplace for about a year now. The launching was February last year, by the Most Honourable, the Chief Minister of Sabahhimself, who will also officiate the conference tomorrow.

After one year, we have done some bits and pieces. This conference is being held to actually look back at what has beendone for the past 12 months.

We want to gain experience and information from all others who have been practicing conservation in their regions orcountries. That is the reason why we have at least ten papers delivered by all kinds of people who are concerned withpublic awareness, e.g. the Malaysian Nature Society, people on the administrative level and researchers.

These people will give us their experience and tell us what are their strengths and weaknesses in their programmes forus to learn. This is the first in a series of five international conferences that we will be having under the BBEC programme.This year, we listen and learn. Next year, we will have another conference and we will let you know what we have donefor the past two years.

Ladies and gentlemen, we will be hearing the four components’ reports on their progress. The four components of thisprogramme are:

1) Research & Education Component, headed by the Institute for Tropical Biology & Conservation (ITBC)2) Parks Management Component, headed by Sabah Parks3) Habitat Management Component, headed by Sabah Wildlife Department4) Public Awareness Component, headed by Science & Technology Unit of the Chief Minister’s Office

Our BBEC Chairman Datuk K.Y. Mustafa will give a Keynote Paper after the Progress Reports from the fourcomponents.

We also have twelve invited papers from speakers from the Philippines, Indonesia, Japan and of course Malaysia, whowill talk on various subjects, from which we hope to learn more on the ecosystem and conservation.

On the following day, we open up with a Recitation of Prayer from Encik Hairul Hafiz Mahsol.

Following that is a Welcome Speech by Tan Sri Prof. Datuk Seri Panglima Dr. Abu Hassan Othman, UMS ViceChancellor, and then a speech from Datuk K.Y. Mustafa, followed by Mr. Kusano, our BBEC Technical Advisor.

We will have the Official Opening by our Most Hon. Chief Minister Datuk Chong Kah Kiat followed by a press conferenceand exhibition, where you can see all the different types of conservation and nature we have in Sabah.

PART 1 Opening Session

Welcoming Remarks by Prof. Datin Dr. Maryati Mohamed

This is followed by a Keynote Lecture by Mr. Mitsuo Usuki of the United Nations University who will talk on theconservation methods in Japan.

After his lecture, we will have the Component Workshop sessions for Park Management, Habitat Management, PublicAwareness Component and Research and Education Component, where we will each discuss issues and topics and tryto find solutions.

This will be followed by the Presentation of Discussion from Component Workshops, where each component will presentthe results of their group's discussions.

After that we will have the Colloquium, which will be chaired by our BBEC Chairman, Datuk K.Y. Mustafa. After that, thechairman will then officiate the closing ceremony, and that will be the end of the second day of the conference.

Ladies and gentlemen, I hope I have prepared your minds about what to expect for the next two days.

Thank you.

2


Assalammualaikum warrahmahtullahi wabarakatuh, good morning, welcome to Sabah, and welcome to Pantai Dalit,Tuaran.

Mr. Mitsuo Usuki, representing the Ministry of Environment of Japan, Mr. Kusano, the Chief Technical Advisor of theBBEC programme, JICA, Prof. Datin Maryati Mohamad, the Chairperson of the Organising Committee for the BBECProgramme 2003, guest speakers, Heads of Components as mentioned by the Professor, heads of departments,conference participants from Malaysia and also guests from overseas, members of the press, ladies and gentlemen.

We are indeed very glad that this conference can be held this year as part of the plans we have always had. There hasbeen a lot of publication and publicity about BBEC over the past year, and I believe most of us by now, are quite familiaras to the key areas we are talking about. Moreover, our officers and also representatives from the Press have been giventhe opportunity to visit Japan and study what the development and biodiversity the Japanese Government and Japanesepeople share with us, and I myself was given such an opportunity in August 2001.

Of course, we have a lot of Japanese friends, as you can see around this room. They have been all around Sabah, notonly in our major towns and city, but very much in the forest or in the jungle, studying the animals and the forest, and theinsects in the forest. Why do we have this sort of arrangement or co-operation? This will be answered when thespeakers share their thoughts with us today, and as Professor mentioned earlier, this year, we want to listen and learn,and probably by next year, we will be ready enough to share what we have learnt, to share with others what we have inSabah, and how we can go about protecting and propagating biodiversity.

The current scenario is not as beautiful as you would expect. There have been lots of discussions and publicity aboutthis, and our Chief Minister has made very strong remarks. However, all is not lost and because of this, the effort amongJICA, the Malaysian Government and the State Government, have the sole intention of protecting whatever we have leftand hopefully recreate a future, not only for us, but for our future generations.

With that, ladies and gentlemen, welcome to Sabah. Have a good conference. This is a small conference, but becauseit is small, we will have the opportunity to discuss a lot of details. It will provide a very good opportunity for each one ofus to know each other, or in current IT terms, network, so even human beings are being networked now, as against hugeconferences whereby we are not that personal. So we are hoping that through this conference, we will have manyfriends, both within and outside Malaysia.

Thank you.

1.2 Welcoming Remarksby Datuk K.Y. Mustafa, BBEC Chairman

3

4

Presentations of Progress Report PART 2

2.1.1 AbstractResearch and Education (R&E) Component of the Bornean Biodiversity and Ecosystems Conservation (BBEC) programmehas its goal “Research and education capacity for conservation of biodiversity and ecosystems of Bornean forest inSabah is enhanced”.

In BBEC Programme, R&E programme hope to achieve five outputs. They are:a. Linkages of implementing and related organisations are enhanced and developed.b. Research and training facilities at UMS and other implementing organisations are developed.c. Trained researcher for taxonomy and conservation biology are increased.d. Biodiversity and ecosystems in the target areas are studied and better understood.e. Inventories and reseach findings are consodilated and compiled at the UMS and the relevant agencies and to be

made accessible to interested researchers, stakeholders and the public.

In this report, each of the output will be considered. Although, Research and Education Component faces two majorchallenges: lack of research funding and good pool of researchers (postgraduate students especially), the Institute forTropical Biology and Conservation (ITBC), the lead agency is making effort to acquire funding from all sources availableat the local, national and international level.

Cooperation and Integration between R&E Component and the other three working groups is satisfactory. However, ascan be seen from the proposed research catalogues, R&E Component believed that participation of more researchersfrom other stakeholders is vital in balancing the priority areas of research.

2.1.2 Slides Presentation

2.1 Progress Report 1:Research & Education Componentby Prof. Datin Dr. Maryati MohamedDirector, Institute for Tropical Biology and Conservation, Universiti Malaysia Sabahcum Head of Research & Education Component

Slide 1 Slide 2


Slide 3 Slide 4

Slide 5 Slide 6

Slide 7 Slide 8

5Slide 9 Slide 10

Slide 11 Slide 12

Slide 13 Slide 14

Slide 15 Slide 16

Slide 17 Slide 186


Slide 19 Slide 20

Slide 25 Slide 26

Slide 21 Slide 22

Slide 23 Slide 24

7

Progress Report 1: Research and Education Component

8

Slide 27 Slide 28

Slide 29 Slide 30

Slide 31 Slide 32

Slide 33 Slide 34


Slide 35 Slide 36

Slide 37 Slide 38

Slide 39 Slide 40

Slide 41 Slide 429

10

Slide 43 Slide 44

Slide 45 Slide 46

Slide 47 Slide 48

2.1.3 Question & Answer SessionChairman: Mr. Takahisa Kusano, BBEC Chief Advisor

Q: Prof. NakashizukaI am not clear. What kind of long term research are you thinking of starting?

A: Prof. Datin MaryatiThe long term research that we identified at Kinabatangan includes things like monitoring the water quality of the CrockerRange. We also look at the impact of tourism, as we know the Crocker Range is a watershed for Sabah.

Another study is to look at Canopy biology and we have started this in Danum Valley, but I think studying the canopy atother research sites under BBEC will be very good. Canopy is one of those places where it is very clearly affected, when


11

you log forests. So naturally, we have to do canopy biology.

The greatest challenge is to get funding from any organizations and good students to do the research. Thank you.

Q: Hj. Amat RamsaI am interested in your conservation activities, especially in Gaya Tamu at the public venues. It is so interesting and Iwould like to know how you do it and what the response is from the public.

A: Prof. Datin Dr. MaryatiYou can actually ask Dr. Monica, who was in charge of the project. We have all the ups and downs. There are times whenwe don’t have the booth because we cannot get our people to go there in time. Either they have to do their field work orthey have lots of teaching to do. etc. Then we go under the basis of using students, under the Science Shop Programme,but again these students have exams, field work or reports to write, so we sort of failed for a while. Two weeks ago, wedeveloped another scheme. We are paying a very small fee to someone who is very dedicated to public awareness andwe hope this time it will stay.

We show examples to people about what we are doing, for e.g. the recycling programme. We do demonstrations for thepublic. We face a lot of challenges but we try hard to get this through because we believe people have to be educated ona face to face interactions.

A: Mr. Kusano (comments)Thank you. More outreach programmes will be introduced by the Public Awareness Component later.

12

2.2.1 AbstractThe Crocker Range Park (CRP), at 139,919 ha, was gazetted in 1984. It is the youngest and largest park in Sabah, andthus far, the least developed and researched on. In the quest to understand and better manage the CRP, it was chosento be the site for the Park Management Component (PMC) of the Bornean Biodiversity and Ecosystem ConservationProgramme.

There were five main objectives of the PMC, and various activities were conducted to achieve those objectives. The firstobjective is that the relationship between the local communities in and around the CRP and the park management isstudied and understood.

Several social surveys have been conducted in and around the CRP to identify and ascertain the extent of theoverlapping claims along the boundaries. Among them are the re-creation of the salt-trail and the preliminaryassessment of the possibilities of a homestay programme at the CRP, concentrating on villages between Penampangand Tambunan, particularly Kg. Terian in Penampang. An Ecotourism Workshop was held on 16-17 January, 2003among the representatives from local communities residing along the ‘salt trail’ between Penampang and Tambunan.

The second objective is that the management plan for CRP is prepared. Draft Table of contents of the management planhas been deliberated on and agreed upon. Several works have been conducted to provide background information to beused for the management plan. Among them are the research on mammalian fauna of CRP by Dr Yasuma; developmentof a Geographical Information System (GIS) for Sabah Parks through the help of a JICA GIS expert, Dr. Kitaura from 14th

September to 14th November 2003; a Scientific Expedition co-organized with UMS in August 2002; and the workshop onthe Water Resource Management in and around the Crocker Range Park, was conducted on 22-23 November 2002, atShangri-La Rasa Ria Resort, Tuaran, attended by 68 participants.

The third objective is that the capacity of the implementing organizing in managing CRP is increased. A Sabah ParksRangers and Research Assistant Training Course was conducted in July 2002, involving 30 personnel. The participantswas exposed to various information and skills required for protected area management. The Inobong Visitor andResearch Station was built and was officially opened by the Member of Parliament for Penampang on 16 January 2003.The Station will serve as a visitor centre, as a field research centre, and as well as a ranger post for boundary controlpurposes. A watch tower to monitor the behavior of flying squirrels was also built at CRP Headquarters in Keningau. Thistower could also be used for other ecological study such as for plant phenological observation. Construction of theMahua Visitor Centre in Tambunan and the CRP Nature Centre at the CRP Headquarters in Keningau is currently inpreparation.

In November 5th to December 15th 2002, Mr. Michael Emban, the Keningau District Officer joined the Country-FocussedTraining Course in Japan to represent the Park Management Component. He was selected to represent this componentto this training course because the Keningau district plays a big role in the management and protection of the CRP.

Several reports and publications have been or in the process of being published:a. Proceeding of the Water Resources Management Workshop,b. GIS maps of CRP and all project site of the BBEC,c. Mammals of the CRP, andd. Identification Key on Mammals (Insectivora, Chiroptera, Scandentia).

Activities and progress reports for the fourth (that the CRP is better managed) and the fifth (that lessons learned from theimplementation of the CRP Management Plan) objectives can only be done at the later stage of this five year programme.

2.2 Progress Report 2:First Year of the Park Management Componentby Dr. Jamili Nais, Deputy Director, Sabah Parkscum Representing Head of Park Management Component

Progress Report 2: First Year of the Park Management Component


Slide 1 Slide 2

Thus far, the PMC under the BBEC has had a successful one year. No doubt there has been some minor difficulties asto be expected from such a big and ambitious endeavour, but the component had progressed well. It had been atremendous year in term of integration as the PMC involved the eight districts and several other implementingorganizations, plus the involvement from the other three components especially the Research and EducationComponent (REC) and Public Awareness Component (PAC). We thank JICA and the Sabah State Government for thisopportunity to focus on the CRP.


Slide 3 Slide 4

Slide 5 Slide 6

13

14

Slide 7 Slide 8

Slide 9 Slide 10

Slide 11 Slide 12

Slide 13 Slide 14


Slide 19 Slide 20

Slide 15 Slide 16

Slide 17 Slide 18

15Slide 21 Slide 22

16

Slide 23 Slide 24

Slide 25 Slide 26

Slide 27 Slide 28

Slide 29 Slide 30


17

Slide 31 Slide 32

Slide 33 Slide 34

Slide 35 Slide 36

Slide 37 Slide 38

18

Slide 43 Slide 44

Slide 39 Slide 40

Slide 41 Slide 42

Slide 45 Slide 46


19

Slide 47 Slide 48

Slide 49 Slide 50

Slide 51 Slide 52

Slide 53 Slide 54

20

Slide 55 Slide 56

Slide 57

2.2.3 Questions and Answers SessionChairman: Mr. Takahisa Kusano, BBEC Chief Advisor

Q: Dr. Chey Vun KhenWe have been told that the proposed Kudat Marine Park has been approved by the State Government since thoseislands are part of Pulau Banggi and Balambangan and it is quite big. Would it be good if the BBEC programme conductresearch to compare the biodiversity in those islands with the biodiversity in mainland Sabah and these islands couldalso serve as a link between Borneo and Palawan? Thank you.

A: Dr. Jamili NaisYes, it is in the pipeline and in fact, there are many things that should be in the BBEC programme. I agree with you, butamong other things that need to be done under this programme should include the Forestry Research Centre and theSabah Biodiversity Centre. The main focus is the terrestial ecosystem.

The proposed Marine Park at the northern tip of Sabah currently involves the marine water, and does not involve theislands. Probably not in this particular programme.

Q: Mr. Abdul-Hamid AhmadDo you have any idea about the size of the population who are actually living within the Crocker Range Park?

A: Dr. Jamili NaisWe have very detailed map and information database on the villagers and people living inside the park. The differenceis that Kinabalu Park was gazetted in 1964 before the population boom, land was plentiful and people were not thatmany, so we did not have many problems in the Kinabalu Park.

However, when the Crocker Range Park was gazetted in 1984, the population boom in settlement had set in. That’swhere the problem started. When we started surveying, some communities, villagers and shifting cultivators were insidethe park. This is what we are trying to resolve now.


21

From the preparation of the Management Master Plan, we have detailed maps and database of all the people involved.We try to solve the problem by creation of bufferzones. If a community falls inside the park, then we will probably excisethem, designate the area a bufferzone and restrict activities. We are going to resolve this once and for all within the nextfive years.

In the third week of next month, we are going to have the Park Zoning Workshop, and are inviting all relevant people tolook bit by bit, whether each section selected is to be excised, retained or bufferzoned. That’s what we will be discussingnext month.

A: Hj. Amat Ramsa (comments)I totally agree with Dr. Jamili that participation of the stakeholders are important, and to view sustainability of the park. In2000 I visited the Forest Training in Nepal around Lantong National Park. We had a two months course there. What theydid was to set up an institutional arrangement with park authorities and the local community, where they set up thecommunity based ecotourism activities.

The activities actually reduced one conflict between the park and the community. Now it is going to be implemented inThailand. Maybe we can learn from them and I think there are a lot of cases where local communities participate in parkmanagement. They can actually reduce conflict, like the case study in Pakistan, where they reduced conflict of illegalhunting by developing an Association of Hunters comprised of local hunters inside the park. Therefore, through theassociation, they are controlling the hunting activities and conserving the wildlife species at the same time. Thank you.

A: Dr. Jamili NaisThank you for your comments. In fact, I was in Nepal in 1996 and studying the Napuma National Park and the RoyalNational Park. We were looking at their public participation and bufferzone management. Last month, I was in Vietnam,discussing the ten model sites in Asia for Protected Area Management. Kinabalu was chosen as one and the RoyalNational Park also, mostly regarding public participation and decision making. Thank you for the information anyway.

22

Progress Report 3: Habitat Management Component

2.3.1 Presentation TextThe project purpose of Habitat Management Component is defined as “an approach to habitat management forimportant species is established”.

The main objectives of the component are:a. To provide high quality analysis of the resource in wildlife protection areas.b. To provide recommendations for improved management and protection of wildlife and their habitat.

To realize the objectives above, a total of six main outputs were laid out, supported by 25 action plans and activities. Thisproject component will serve as a model, which can be applied, to the other protected areas after the completion of theproject.

(1) Objective of the Project ComponentAs mentioned earlier, the overall goal of the BBEC project is “Conserving the endangered and precious biodiversity andecosystems of Sabah”. This can be achieved by embarking on the four main project components viz Research andEducation, Parks Management, Habitat Management and Public Awareness.

As for the Habitat Management Component, the Sabah Wildlife Department is entrusted the task of being the leadingagency to implement the component together with eight other stakeholders. The project purpose of the HabitatManagement Component is defined as: “an approach to habitat management for important species is established”.

This program actually fits well with the planning of SWD in line with the federal and state government’s commitment inconserving biodiversity. The SWD has developed strategies for implementing this commitment. The strategy is todevelop a protected areas network in the state. At the moment, approximately about 11% of the State’s land area iswithin the protected areas network. This includes different categories of land such as Sanctuaries, Conservation Areas,State Parks, Protection Forest, Wildlife Reserves and VJRs. And these areas virtually cover all different habitat typesfrom marine and mangrove to mountain forest.

This HMC is looking at how we can develop corridors between protected areas to allow for free movement or ratherenlarging ranging areas of wildlife and maintaining genetic diversity. Perhaps this is important in the sense that most ofthe protected areas are either fragmented or not contiguous with one another. For this particular project component, theproject area is Tabin Wildlife Reserve and Surroundings.

(2) Project Component OutputsA total of six (6) major outputs have been planned as follows :

a. Key species are selected.b. Methods for monitoring the key species are developed.c. Monitoring personnel are trained for using the methods.d. A habitat range of the selected key species is identified in and around Tabin Wildlife Reserve.e. Management plan(s) for the selected key species is (are) completed.f. New protected areas around Tabin Wildlife Reserve and Proposed.

(3) Project Component Main Activitiesa. OUTPUT 1: Key species selected.

Activities to be implemented:1-1 Review existing data of the whole range of species, especially the protected species in Sabah.1-2 Decide criteria for selecting key species.1-3 Selected species matching the criteria.

2.3 Progress Report 3:Habitat Management Componentby Mr. Laurentius N. Ambu, Deputy Director, Sabah Wildlife DepartmentRepresenting Head of Habitat Management Component


23

This output 1 is to select key species to be targeted by management plan(s) prepared by the component. All the aboveactivities must be implemented before the following outputs.

b. OUTPUT 2: Methods for monitoring the key species are developed.Activities to be implemented:

2-1 Refer to the relevant information collected by the Research and Education Component.2-2 Refer to existing topographic and land-uses maps in and around Tabin Wildlife Reserve.2-3 Draft methods for monitoring the key species.2-4 Conduct preliminary field monitoring on the key species.2-5 Decide the monitoring methods.2-6 Prepare manuals of the monitoring methods.

c. OUTPUT 3: Monitoring personnel are trained for using the methods.Activities to be implemented:

3-1 Identify officers, rangers, tourist guides, wildlife warden, etc. involved in the monitoring.3-2 Identify what kind of training is necessary for them to conduct monitoring, in relation to the ongoing

capacity building project.3-3 Formulate training module to suit the requirement.3-4 Conduct the training of the methods of monitoring the selected key species.

d. OUTPUT 4: A habitat range of the selected key species is identified in and around Tabin Wildlife Reserve.Activities to be implemented:

4-1 Set up an institution for implementation of the monitoring.4-2 Monitor the key species.4-3 Plot monitoring results of the key species on a map.

e. OUTPUT 5: Management plan(s) for the selected key species is (are) completed.Activities to be implemented:

5-1 Refer to relevant information collected by the Research and Education Component.5-2 Prepare a vegetation map in and around Tabin Wildlife Reserve, based on data from Forestry

Department, UMS, Land and Survey Department, etc.5-3 Verify the vegetation map by field Survey.5-4 Comprehensive analysis of habitat requirement around Tabin Wildlife Reserve.5-5 Survey human activities and requirement around Tabin Wildlife Reserve.5-6 Identify threats to the key species.5-7 Draft the management plan(s) for the selected.

f. OUTPUT 6: New protected areas around Tabin Wildlife Reserve are proposed.Activities to be implemented:

6-1 Identify needs to rehabilitate degraded areas around Tabin Wildlife Reserve, especially riverine habitat.6-2 Identify and propose the conservation of important habitat surrounding Tabin Wildlife Reserve.

(4) Progress Report on the Project ComponentAs planned in the project document operation of plan schedule for Habitat Management Component, from April -December 2002, this component has managed to accomplish the output 1, to select the key Species. The process ofselection of the key species involved the selection of criteria. In order to get inputs from other implementing agencies, aworkshop that jointly organized with Research and Education Component was held in August 15. Two kinds ofapproaches, Species approach and Ecosystem approach were suggested and discussed in the workshop. Speciesapproachs seem to be more popular and as many as 11 criteria were suggested in order to select the key species. Therewere also suggestions to select the Sumatran rhino and the combination of taxon: bird, insect and amphibian as the keyspecies to be monitored in this program. Problems and constrains also identified during the workshop were as below:

a. Need more research to determine the function of species concerned in the ecosystem.b. Unclear of long-term objective of the reserve in 20-40 years to come.c. Capacity of Sabah Wildlife Department (SWD) as a leading agency very limited in term of manpower, time and

budget, expertise must be considered.d. Management issue (e.g: Human - Elephant Conflict).

24

Progress Report 2: First Year of the Park Management Component

Preparation for the implementation of output 4: A habitat range of the selected species is identified in and around TabinWildlife Reserve, began by gathering all the relevant digital information from the other implementing agencies such asForestry Department and Land and Survey Department. This is to enable SWD to produce the digital maps using GISsoftware (Arc View), to easily visualize the distribution, movement and habitat preference or identifying potential habitatfor the selected key species and also as a tool for a proper management of the Tabin reserve. At this moment, all thebasic digitized information for Tabin WR and it surrounding is available and compatible with the GIS Arc view softwareused by the SWD. However a lot of works on updating and modifying data are still going on.

Sometimes it is quite hard to really follow what have been planned or agreed earlier. This is what had happened to theoutput 6: New protected areas around Tabin Wildlife Reserve are proposed. This output should be achieved at the endof the project, however flexibility in the implementation of the operation plan to achieve this output was evaluated on itsopportunity, complicity and sensitivity verses the time and situation. Therefore, a consultant was appointed by JICA forHabitat management Component to assist SWD in drafting a proposal to gazette the lower Segama area as WildlifeConservation Area. As part of the process, the consultant together with SWD staff and JICA officers have conducted afield survey in December 26-30, 2002, to have general understanding of the proposed area. A final report was submittedto the SWD and a draft paper for gazettement of the proposed area is in the process.

(5) Linkages of the Project Component With the Other Project ComponentsAs seen from the project document, this project is designed in such a way that it portrays the contemporary best practiceof biodiversity conservation. All the four components form the basic ingredients of a protected area management. Apartfrom that the project provides opportunities for interaction among the four components, for example, training (GIS,research method, etc), expedition, working group meetings and so forth.


Slide 1 Slide 2

Slide 3 Slide 4


25

Slide 7 Slide 8

Slide 5 Slide 6

Slide 9 Slide 10

Slide 11 Slide 12

26

Slide 13 Slide 14

Slide 15 Slide 16

Slide 17 Slide 18

Slide 19 Slide 20


27

Slide 21 Slide 22


Q: (Name unknown)How is the situation of the paper proposing the gazzettement of lower Segama as conservation area?

A: Mr. LaurentiusActually, we have the procedure for establishing an area where we do a lot of justification, supported by field work, datajustification, socio-economic. We have done this with a consultant and have written a good report which we havesubmitted to the Ministry. We have been asked to look into consultation with other agencies before we write anything. Ithas since been completed, and we are waiting for the Ministry to table it at the cabinet. We hope to be able to secure thatarea as the area is now being applied for and virtually nobody has the right to plant in the wetlands, because a lot ofmoney will be needed.

Q: Mr. Y.C. KanIn order to maintain genetic diversities, you need to link all those isolated protected areas. I have the impression that thedepartment has very few manpower to implement such ideas, for example in the lower Kinabatangan areas. Many forestthere are fragmented, because of the plantations, and they cut off pockets of Orang Utan’s habitat, so, even key specieslike the Orang Utans will eventually face extinction, because of genetic threats. I wonder what kind of power you have toimplement that idea? Or, are you looking for more power to bring up all the particular isolated areas in Sabah?

A: Mr. LaurentiusWhen we talk about pure science, there are lots of concepts with regards to maintaining the genetic diversity. It’s all withthe concept of SLOs. I have prepared maps that depict a scenario where there is no logging, and then we will followthese areas for the next 30 to 40 years, and you can see that even then, most areas will be fragmented.

We would like to study those species in terms of habit, fertilization, habitat requirements, and so forth. This project isdesigned in such a way, that we can use it as a model for sustaining or protecting the species who reign within the Tabinor around the Tabin, and to a large extent, outside the Tabin. If it is successful, we can use this for other areas, and thisis what the project is for, and it will be a good indicator for project completion, and we can then use it anywhere else in theState.

A: Mr. KusanoIn any country, protecting agencies or agencies working for conservation to gain more power need support from thepublic and also understanding. Therefore the Public Awareness Component is very crucial and helpful for us. Thank you.

28

2.4.1 AbstractThe project purpose of the Public Awareness Component is that people of Sabah have better understanding andappreciation to the conservation of biodiversity. To achieve this purpose, a working group has been formed, whichconsist of nine agencies as component members and lead by the Science and Technology Unit Sabah.

In the first year of this five years long programme, the component has accomplished some activities. Firstly, to identifycurrent issues, problems and constrains of public awareness, the working group conducted a case study on current andpast public awareness campaigns for biodiversity conservation in Sabah and baseline survey of people’s awareness onbiodiversity conservation.

Secondly, to plan and implement effective awareness campaigns, the working group identified several target groups ofthe campaign, such as students, teachers, politicians, etc, and also started some pilot campaigns, such as publishingBBEC newsletters, launching website, an exhibitions at Crocker Range Park, Radio campaign, BBEC logotypecompetition etc.

Thirdly, to enhance the capacity of the component members, the officers in charge of the component went for trainingand study tour both locally and in Japan.

All these activities are conducted by the good teamwork among the component members and strong support from JICAadvisors. All components members have been fully involved in the implementation of all the activities. This fullparticipation of all component members is remarkable characteristic of the Public Awareness Component.

As a result of the above activities and interactions conducted in this first year, the component members are gaining moreknowledge and expertise to achieve the purpose of the component.


2.4 Progress Report 4:Public Awareness Componentby Moktar Yassin Ajam, Director, Science and Technology Unit, Chief Minister Departmentcum Head of Public Awareness Component

Progress Report 4: Public Awareness Component

Slide 1 Slide 2


29

Slide 3 Slide 4

Slide 5 Slide 6

Slide 7 Slide 8

Slide 9 Slide 10

30

Slide 11 Slide 12

Slide 13 Slide 14

Slide 15 Slide 16

Slide 17 Slide 18


31

Slide 19 Slide 20

Slide 21 Slide 22

Slide 23 Slide 24

Slide 25 Slide 26

32

Slide 27


Q: Hj. Amat RamsaWhat are the indicators you have, to measure the effectiveness of campaigns, and what the peak performance meteryou use to measure such success?

A: Mr. Moktar Yassin AjamPublic awareness is an ongoing activity where we try to create an understanding of the level of awareness in people. Wetry to connect with the local people, to try to make them understand and even if have success with one person, we callthat effective.

A: Mr. Azman Mohamad (comments)It is a baseline study.

Q: Ms. Zahra YaacobHow effective is the public awareness campaign? There are so many campaigns. We have to bring understanding to thelowest level of people. How can we reach the illiterate? We have campaigns in cartoon forms, something the children ofthe kampungs can associate with. As the public awareness campaign consist mainly of government people, how manyactually go to ground level?

A: Mr. Moktar Yassin AjamThat is a very good point to bring up. We have to discuss more on this, perhaps have partnership programmes withNGOs and the government.

Progress Report 4: Public Awareness Component


33

2.5.1 Keynote PaperGood morning ladies and gentlemen! We talk about biodiversity and conservation in our conversation almost everyday,whether in the academic field, government, as well as the public themselves. Generally, we get nowhere, but create a lotof disagreements, and these disagreements create a lot of awareness. If everyone agreed, nothing would happen andthe government would be complacent, and the people will not have access to critical information, and perhaps the presswould have nothing to write about. It was said earlier that people are the force behind all these factors.

Some of the disasters may not be physical disasters, but social disasters, etc., which have resulted from overzealousness or over emphasis towards one end. For example, the strong push, and/or the strong pull; whichever way welook at it, by the business sector, we do not talk about conservation, but only on creating wealth, and more wealth.Conservation issues only become important after we have seen some huge disasters. Even then, people tend to forgeteasily. Do you recall the disaster Greg we had in 1992, and in 1999, we had a big flood in the Penampang area?

Weapons are used against developing countries by developed countries, resulting in no more forests. Perhaps they arestill learning, but at the same time, they are also trying to impose their values on us. We should be able to manage ourown resources and our own destiny, but with the partnership of both developed countries and less developed countries.

The challenge in Sabah is to be Unity in Diversity and in Sabah alone, we have 4 diversities:a. cultural diversity - we have more than 30 indigenous ethnic groups and languages.b. political diversity - we are the most politically active. In Malaysia we have 12 active parties.c. religious diversity - Sabah people have a very high level of tolerance, and for many good reasons, understand

others better because we understand other peoples’ religions, and it is not an easy subject to digest becauseeveryone is protective of his religion, and there are no particular grouping of majority.

d. biological diversity - the subject of this conference.

We have to think about great diversity; our current, previous and future state is all in the context of diversity.

The Sabah economic composition is mainly dependent on agriculture and services. The manufacturing sector is laggingbehind, although it was, and still is, a vision of the State. This has resulted partly in our conference today, in our giving somuch priority to BBEC, and the question of conservation and our heavy reliance on forestry.

Thirty years ago, Sabah used to enjoy a prestigious economy, although it was very much dependent on forestryproducts, i.e. timber, and Sabah used to be compared to the rest of Malaysia as one of the top developing states inMalaysia. However, the scenario has now changed drastically. In most cases, Sabah has fallen far behind, and on thedevelopment index, Sabah is now almost at the bottom. This gives us a very clear backdrop as to why Sabah is in sucha state now. No doubt we have to talk about development.

Apparently, there is no balance. We emphasise very much on sustainable development in every area. Therefore, withoutbalance, there can never be conservation. Practically in most of the issues, examples related earlier were because ofover-emphasis on either development of business, etc., and the results we see many years later are very disheartening.These are the situations we are trying to recover from. Instead of just development, we are talking about sustainabledevelopment, and there is also the need to be philosophical in conservation, and the principle of conservation ofbalance. Balance needed not only in the physical aspect of forestry conservation, but in relation to human kind also.

These are the implications, the loss of biodiversity. We have a wide variety of wildlife in Sabah that are facing extinction.We also have a lot of pressure from international communities. Many years ago in one of the Prime Minister’s speeches,he agreed with the western people about imposing these values in Malaysia. The Prime Minister defended our need tocut our forests, in order that Malaysians can compete in development and move up, but of course, it has to be in balance.

2.5 Keynote Paper:Balance Between Socio-Economic Development andBiodiversity Conservationby Datuk K.Y. Mustafa, Sabah State Secretary cum BBEC Chairman

Keynote Paper by Datuk K.Y. Mustafa, BBEC Chairman

34

We have international communities like ITTO that have the power. We always ask why now, and not 200 years ago?When the United States was developing, when there were still colonies, while many western countries were not yetwestern in their development, why were these issues not discussed openly then? Why now, is a question we have tohandle. There are not many third world countries that have large forests. There always has to be a balance betweensocio-economic development and biodiversity conservation. As to the question on the final progress report on PublicAwareness, the public are not really fully aware. How do we measure public awareness? Even if we can measure it, whatdoes it really mean? Public awareness is still at a very low level.

Prioritizing economic activities that bring money without destroying the environment. Two or three years ago, everybodywas talking about gold or monkey. I will not pass any remarks or judgement on this. Our Chief Minister, in his dialogue atour Executive Development Programme in Keningau, said he wanted both gold and monkey!

Getting the support of the people, including the decision makers for efforts on conservation, is crucial. However, gettingwhere we are today is not an easy proposition, and this has to be a continuing effort. Touching on our youngergeneration, are they aware they are going to live in a world that will be hostile to them, and what does this hostileenvironment present to them? We need to shift paradigm, not use monetary values as the only yardstick, but again, weare talking about balance conservation. Then, we talk about alternative measures. The State, higher institutions ofeducation and the IDS, have been involved in the promotion of non-timber products, nature based tourism, etc. Theseare the issues right now!

We need to realign everyone on the values of our natural resources. I have to chair the special committee on illegallogging. This has been one of the problems we have been trying to address for the last 30 or 40 years. When we had somuch timber in the past, illegal logging was insignificant, but then we started controlling our timber industry, as a resultof illegal felling. Illegal activities also created a lot of damages to our forests and environment. These illegal loggers haveno care or love for the forests or the state and / or the country. They would log in places which are most vulnerable to us;our water catchment areas, river areas, etc., as these are the easiest areas for them to handle. The saddest fact is someof these loggers are legal loggers, with legal licences. Therefore, we need to realign everyone on the values of naturalresources, other than just timber, that we need to protect.

We have to educate people on the importance of biodiversity and the ecosystem, using solid evidence, showing loss ofbiodiversity and how the ecosystem is affecting human life. That is a message we have to drive home at all levels.

When we started with BBEC, one of my earliest observations was Public Awareness. It is one of the most difficult to dealwith, not only in biodiversity but especially biodiversity in other areas. It is an on-going problem.

We need integration, co-ordination, even among government agencies, and when we see the BBEC programme, thereare four components involving many agencies, both in the State and the Federal, and even in higher institutions. One ofthe problems which I find very testing, is getting the government to work as one government. We had to embark on ourreinventing government initiative in 1999, basically trying to organize the government to work as one. There is a lot ofrivalry, organization rivalry, to strongly demonstrate the misco-ordination of formal requirements among agencies, evenjust to borrow equipment, someone would demand a written memo, etc.

Therefore, we are looking at this and trying to make everyone understand, especially in Malaysia, where we have aFederal Government system. It is a very difficult relationship. We have to live as one Malaysia, and under that oneMalaysia, there are many states. All of them have their own government system, their own agencies, their localgovernments, district offices, etc.

The more agencies we have, the more difficulty we have in co-ordinating in making all these agencies work as one.Because of our reinventing government agencies, we are willing to discuss this very openly. In most cases, people donot like to touch on these subjects. Similarly, people also avoid talking about biodiversity. Though we have manycommittees and task forces, are we still a colonial government? Or are we making a point where everyone is willing toshare? These are major issues to be discussed. People suggest these systems, but are there will to share?

Conservation is an equal balance which will determine the future of mankind.

Thank you.


35

Slide 3 Slide 4

Slide 5 Slide 6

Slide 1 Slide 2

Slide 7 Slide 8


36

Slide 9 Slide 10

Slide 11 Slide 12

Slide 13 Slide 14

Slide 15 Slide 16


37

Slide 17 Slide 18

Slide 19 Slide 20

38

Guest Papers PART 3

3.1 Paper 1:The Awareness and Conservation Activitiesof Wetland Ecosystems and Their Wildlife by Local Communityby Mr. Hisashi Shinsho, Kushiro International Wetland Center

This case study is a local community based subject, which involves conservation and public awareness in easternHokkaido, Japan. There are 3 RAMSAR sites there. Kushiro is the first crucial wetland RAMSAR site in Japan. Thesecond is in Kitabu, and Akashi wetland site is the third one.

These wetlands are famous for the Red Crested Crane, one of the key species for local based conservation activities.The Red Crested Crane, or Japanese Crane is important to Japanese because it brings happiness and success. Whena happy event is celebrated, for e.g. a wedding, the symbol of the Red Crested crane is used.

About 50 years ago, most of these cranes were almost extinct. But in eastern Hokkaido, a small number still existed, andthey thrive in the central wetlands. In every autumn, they migrate to the 3 sites mentioned above. These cranes habitatis in nearby farm areas. At one time, some school children started to feed them during winter. Now, these Red CrestedCranes, though still an endangered species to the rest of the world, the locals believe otherwise. These cranes arefamiliar with local families, especially in these 3 areas.

A lot of scientific data was needed, and local researchers carried out the research on these cranes. Besides the cranes,they also researched insects, plants and wildbirds. They set up a project consisting of only local researches andpublished some scientific data after all their results were collected. They then discussed how to conserve and managecrucial wetlands. In 1971, when the RAMSAR Convention was launched, they obtained their information from there.

The proposed wetlands were designated a RAMSAR site, and they then obtained a development agreement with localdevelopers, administrators, the local government, naturalists and the local people, and discussed how to conserve anduse wetland sustainably. How do the locals get economic benefits from these areas?

For the Japanese who live in the cities, e.g. Tokyo, Kyoto, etc., they have to be taught about conservation of theecosystem. However, local people are part of the wetland system. Because they live in the countryside, they appreciateconservation more.

Wetlands are important, but one has to get economic benefit from the ecosystem. It was discussed, and it resulted in itbeing designated as a National Park under the Japanese environmental law. The idea was to get tourists to enjoy thebeautiful scenery in the wetlands, and also establish facilities for visitors.

Park Management involves a variety of local governments, supported by the national and the prefectual governments.This is one of Japan’s systems. Some financial aid was obtained. However, the local community have to maintain thepark themselves. Tourists from other parts of Japan now really appreciate the Park’s beautiful scenery and its wonderfulnature.

Why are wetlands so valuable? The local government and community decided how to promote public awareness valueto the local community and its people. An opportunity was provided to the locals to get international ideas and knowledgefrom foreign people. It was decided to hold and host the 5th RAMSAR Conference, and this is a very important keypoint.It gave the locals a chance to obtain knowledge and experience from the foreign people, and more than 4000participated in the conference in volunteer activities.

In this kind of international conference, only delegated parties participate. Usually, the locals had no chance to take part.But in Kushiro, after much discussion on how to get the local community involved with other international delegates,some school children decided to support by hanging up the national flags of all participating countries in the conference,i.e. the contracted parties. 125 countries took part in the international conference, so all these countries’ flags wererepresented by these school children, giving them the opportunity to interact and communicate with the delegates.


39

Housewives participated by serving coffee and tea, so it was another form of communication with the delegates. Localresearchers provided major hikes as side event. Schools and university students became nature tour guides to thedelegates. These offered the local people a good chance to be exposed to and learn international knowledge.

After this happened, some NGOs from KIWC (Kushiro International Wetland Center), who works in co-operation with thelocal government, provided financial aid and the locals provided volunteers. There are environmental educationprogrammes, like nature hikes, which are also in the school curriculum for children now. After the RAMSAR Conference,we introduced canoeing, and also small unique horses called Dosanko, which are like ponies, and in order to protectthese species from going extinct, they are used for horseback riding.

Because of the ecological changes caused by human activities, the swamp forest has been expanded. The cranes havedisappeared. The locals planned to restore their habitual cranes by cutting down trees. For several years, they continueddoing this. Five years later, the Red Crested cranes have been restored to their natural habitat. The swamp forest hasnow become the reed forest, and the cranes are back.

These birds migrate between Hokkaido and Australia every autumn, so, these two places have linkage. There aretraining courses supported by JICA on how to manage ecotourism and environmental education to create publicawareness. It was a wonderful chance for the locals to communicate with international parties.

Slides Presentation

Slide 1 Slide 2

Slide 3 Slide 4

Slide 6Slide 5

Slide 9

Slide 8Slide 7

Slide 10

Slide 11 Slide 1240


Slide 13 Slide 14

Slide 15

41

42

3.2 Paper 2:Community-Based Conservation Projectin Kinabatangan, Sabahby Dr. Isabelle Lackman-Ancrenaz, HUTAN

Paper 2: Community-Based Conservation Project in Kinabatangan, Sabah

1. IntroductionThe establishment of protected areas is at the forefront of efforts to conserve biodiversity. But many existing protectedareas are in crisis, partly because of the hardship they impose on the members of local communities.

Communities next to protected area boundaries frequently bear substantial costs – as a result of lost access andsometimes of wildlife conflicts – while receiving little in return. Local residents, who tend to be poor, often perceiveprotected areas as restricting their ability to earn a living. It is not surprising that the pressures of growing humanactivities outside – and sometimes inside – their boundaries frequently lead to illegal and destructive encroachment.

In the face of relentless human pressures, enforcement alone will not preserve these areas. Conservation thus requiresa perspective that stretches well beyond park boundaries and demands consideration to local people, whose lives areaffected by the creation of protected areas.

It has been estimated that orang-utan numbers have declined by 50% over the last 10 years, due to increasing humanactivities within the species range. Recent surveys showed that much of the remaining wild orang-utan populationsoccur in forests that are still prone to exploitation. Rather than accept that orang-utans living in multiple-use areas areultimately doomed, the Kinabatangan Orang-Utan Conservation Project decided to focus on finding realistic solutions toenhance their prospects of long-term survival, and specifically sought to involve local communities in the many aspectsof orang-utan conservation.

2. The Lower Kinabatangan Wildlife SanctuaryThe Kinabatangan River floodplain is one of the few remaining rainforest wetlands in Southeast Asia. It is home to 10primate species, including one of the largest orang-utan populations in Malaysia, the Asian elephant, the estuarinecrocodile, and a vast array of bird life.

Starting in the mid-50s, the whole Kinabatangan region was subjected to extensive commercial timber extraction. Morerecently, much of the remaining forests were converted to large-scale oil palm monoculture. Today, only a corridor ofsecondary forests remains along the river.

Surprisingly, remarkable concentrations and diversity of wildlife can still be found in this 27,000ha corridor. But when itwas first proposed to create the Lower Kinabatangan Wildlife Sanctuary to save this threatened natural heritage, theidea was met with much incomprehension and resistance by local communities.

3. The Kinabatangan communities: Why give land to orang-utans, and not to people?The local people, the Orang Sungai, have lived for hundred of years in a dozen of once flourishing villages scatteredalong the Kinabatangan River. They traditionally relied on the region’s abundant natural resources for subsistence;fishing in the river and collecting wild vegetable, medicinal plants and house construction materials in the forest. Sincethe people of the Lower Kinabatangan are of Muslim faith, deer is the only game hunted and eaten, and this partlyexplains the presence, until now, of abundant wildlife populations in the region.

But today, local people are faced with the consequences of the loss of their traditional resources. Forest reduction anddegradation have resulted in a shortage of basic supplies, and in the emergence of wildlife conflicts, like crop raiding.With the critical degradation of their means of subsistence, the gazetting of the Kinabatangan Wildlife Sanctuary istherefore seen by the local community as a threat to lock up the last available resources. With much resentment,inhabitants of the Kinabatangan are asking “why give land to the animals, and not to people?”


The orang-utan symbolizes this conflict of interest: while the conservation of the endangered red ape is evoking greatconcerns throughout the world, local people in the Kinabatangan regard the orang-utan primarily as a pest to their cropsand a cause of their plight.

4. The Kinabatangan Orang-Utan Conservation ProjectThe Kinabatangan Orang-Utan Conservation Project (KOCP) was established in 1998 by the NGO Hutan, and uses amulti-disciplinary approach to ensure the conservation of orang-utan populations living in multiple-use forests.

A first objective of the KOCP is to conduct biological research applied to orang-utan population management.Concurrently, a main project component is to develop, in collaboration with the Sabah Wildlife Department, innovativesolutions to restore more harmonious relationships between local communities and the orang-utans. This includes:

a. local employment, training and empowermentb. orang-utan conflict mitigationc. conservation educationd. development of alternative ways for communities to derive tangible and durable benefits from the preservation of

local natural resources.

5. Capacity buildingThe KOCP, based in a village on the Kinabatangan, now comprises a total of 30 research assistants, all hailing from thelocal community. For the past five years, they have been following continuous and intensive training in various researchand conservation techniques.

This includes orang-utan eco-ethological research, wildlife population monitoring, interview surveys, English language,attendance at international conferences and professional training courses, project management, fund raising, etc.Currently, they are responsible for many aspects of fieldwork, as well as project planning, management and monitoring.

Through this process, they have become aware of global conservation issues and are acting as ambassadors for habitatand wildlife preservation in other Kinabatangan villages. Most importantly, they are now eager to participate inaconservation-oriented management of the region’s natural resources, notably through an official Wildlife Wardenprogramme under the Wildlife Department.

The KOCP also conducts training programs for Sabahan conservation professionals, such as staff of the Sabah Wildlifeand Forestry Departments and students of the Universiti Malaysia Sabah.

6. Awareness Campaign among Kinabatangan CommunitiesRaising awareness of wildlife and habitat preservation needs is certainly the first necessary step to encourage localcommunities to take part in a conservation-oriented management of their natural resources. With this aim, the KOCP, incollaboration with the Sabah Wildlife Department, is holding a series of participatory workshops in the villages of theKinabatangan floodplain. The specific objectives of these workshops are:

a. To raise awareness on the uniqueness of the orang-utan, and on its urgent preservation needsb. To present the role of the Wildlife Sanctuaryc. To address the issue of orang-utan conflicts with local communitiesd. To gather information on the needs and aspirations of communitiese. To develop incentives for community-based initiatives to derive durable benefits from the conservation of the

orang-utan

The workshops are organized by the KOCP research assistants. They belong to the local community themselves, usethe local dialect, and this greatly enhances receptiveness and facilitates dialogue. In some villages, these workshopshave resulted in joint KOCP / community projects, such as orang-utan conflict mitigation programs, the development ofeco-tourism initiatives, or the setting-up of a new orang-utan study site (with villagers hired and trained as new researchassistants).

7. Nature Education Programme for Kinabatangan SchoolsAlthough living close to the orang-utans, the children of the Kinabatangan usually know very little about them. The KOCPlocal research assistants developed, in collaboration with the Sabah Education Department and Wildlife Department, anature education programme for schools of the Kinabatangan District. This program includes classroom activities and a

43

Paper 1: The Awareness and Conservation Activities of Wetland Ecosystems and Their Wildlife by Local Community

44

one-day visit at the KOCP project site. Children and teachers can meet habituated wild orang-utans, see how to collectco-ethological data and thus better understand the gentle red ape. Emphasis is also given to educational activitieshighlighting the unique value of the Kinabatangan wetlands, and the importance of their conservation.

8. Mitigation of Orang-Utan Conflicts with CommunitiesThe recent land-use changes in the Kinabatangan region have driven displaced wildlife – especially elephants andorang-utans - to increasingly rely on human food sources. A region-wide interview survey by the KOCP showed thateverywhere orang-utans raid the villagers’ crops and devastate their annual fruit production. Oil palm plantations arealso widely affected by orang-utan damage. Orang-utans are therefore generally regarded as pests, and sometimesthreatened by drastic crop protection measures from crop owners.

Consequently, local communities increasingly resent the creation of the Kinabatangan Wildlife Sanctuary which not onlydenies them access to traditional forest resources but also acts as a reservoir for crop raiding wildlife.

The KOCP staff is evaluating various ways of controlling orang-utan damage, including traditional deterring methods(noise scare, smoke) as well as more innovative ones such as placing zinc sheets on isolated fruit tree trunks to preventorang-utans from climbing.

A Wildlife Control Unit was created with 5 full time KOCP staff assisting villagers to peacefully mitigate conflicts withcrop-raiding orang-utans and elephants.

9. Conclusion: Towards Local Community Participation in the Management of Kinabatangan Wildlife SanctuaryIt is our firm conviction that community development and nature conservation are so inextricably linked that failure at one– conservation or development – will result in failure of both. In other words, conservation can only be achieved with thesupport of local communities, and communities will only support conservation if it can directly and durably contribute tolocal social and economic development.

The KOCP is therefore working with local communities, the Sabah Wildlife Department and other agencies to investigatethe potential contribution of the Kinabatangan Wildlife Sanctuary to sustainable community development. As an example,the KOCP is now assisting a community-based initiative to develop orang-utan viewing and cultural tourism in the villageof Sukau. But local people should not be seen as passive beneficiaries only, but should become active participants in theprocess of change and development of their region. Certainly, building adequate capabilities is a time-consuming anddifficult process. With the intensive training of its thirty local research assistants, the KOCP experience remains at a verymodest scale. But during the 5 years of project existence, these thirty persons have been acting as ambassadors fornature conservation among their community and, through appropriate awareness and education campaigns, we haveseen a clearly multiplied impact over the whole region.

It is now clear that the competent and motivated team of KOCP research assistants will play a crucial role in the futurewise management of the Lower Kinabatangan Wildlife Sanctuary by reconciling the needs and aspirations of theircommunity with the conservation of one of the largest orang-utan populations in Malaysia.


45

3.3 Paper 3:Promoting Education, Public Awareness and Trainingfor Conservationby Mr. Gary Lim, Malaysian Nature Society (MNS)

1. BackgroundCommunicating the important message of the environment in relation to its social, economic and cultural dimension is acritical challenge facing us today. Environmental Education (EE) and communications is widely regarded by manyplanners, administrators, scientists, teachers and learners as fundamental in spreading this message. EE is problematicyet a practical process. While it can be conducted as an extra curricular activity, to make EE inclusive it has to build intothe formal curriculum. However, there is currently no coherent framework and limitations across the nation within whichto share experience or develop forward progress in EE.

The MNS having traditionally worked with children has realised that it is necessary to develop innovative outreachactivities with communities at all levels in order to have a more sustainable impact.

Given the diversity and complexity of our audience and the range of environmental issues that we have to deal with in theprocess of EE, the MNS had to carve a niche. This is done by establishing field study centres like the Nature EducationCentre (NEC) in FRIM, school programmes through the Kelab Pencinta Alam (KPA) and community based outreachactivities like the PAKAS (Pusat Aktiviti Kesedaran Alam Sekitar) in Kampung Endah, Banting Selangor. Essentiallythese are only models and approaches. Experiences drawn from these initiatives are analysed from the perspective ofa) who participates, b) in what do they participate, c) how do they participate. Several lessons emerge from the analysisof these experiences as we aim to form stronger relationships between learners and their environment. The challengesfacing the future direction of EE particularly in MNS and generally in Malaysia are also discussed.

On the forefront, the Ministry of Education (MOE), Malaysia has tried to introduce EE into the formal curriculum throughthe “man and the environment module”. However this effort has been discontinued and as a matter of principle EE isinfused across subjects. However infusing EE across the curriculum is more dependent on individual initiatives and inmany instances challenged by the lack of proper training, resources and institutional support.

In view of the situation, various agencies and NGOs have taken on the task of raising environmental awareness andpromoting EE.

The MNS was established in 1940 by a group of like-minded people, keen to record and document the rich biodiversityin the country. As a result the inaugural issue of the Malayan Nature Journal (MNJ) was first published in August 1940towards the same cause. This is reiterated in the MNS mission statement as “To promote study, appreciation,conservation and protection of our natural heritage”. In our foundations for EE, the aim is to help learners becomeenvironmentally knowledgeable, skilled and dedicated citizens who are willing to work individually or collectively towardsachieving a balance between the quality of life and the quality of the environment. Ultimately the aim is to changebehavior.

As the oldest NGO in the country dedicated to the study and conservation of nature, MNS recently celebrated its 60th

anniversary in the year 2000. It has currently an adult membership of about 5,000 and a growing school and affiliatemembership.

Essentially a naturalist, apolitical and social organisation, the MNS recognises the importance of extending the realm ofscientific knowledge and information to the public. For example the EE initiatives of MNS evolved from simple yetmeaningful biological field trips led by dedicated members. These field trips were well received and gradually took theshape of the more formalised field courses offered by the MNS today. The MNS went on to establish it flagship project inthe Kuala Selangor Nature Park (KSNP) in Kuala Selangor in 1986, BOH-MNS Field Study Centre followed by the FRIM-MNS SHELL Nature Education Centre (NEC) in 1992. At the same time the young school going generation provided ahealthy ground for MNS to carry out its schools outreach programme though the Nature Club for Schools Project in 1991(Please refer to Table 1).

Paper 3: Promoting Education, Public Awareness and Training for Conservation

46

2. Environmental Education Initiatives.The EE activities initiated by MNS have largely focused on the non-formal sector apart from some collaboration with theDepartment of Environment and the Ministry of Education. Existing activities focused on students and communitiesconducted at various settings such as forest parks, recreational areas, schools as well as plantations using theenvironment as our classroom. (Please refer to Table 2) Two basic approaches have been outlined:

a. In-situ approach - through the establishment of field study centres which offer various nature study experiences.b. Ex-situ approach- through outreach programmes such as nature clubs, slide shows, symposia, scientific and

biological expeditions, exhibitions, conferences and public events.

3. Environmental Education for the Local Community:Pusat Aktiviti Kesedaran Alam Sekitar (PAKAS) in Kampung Endah, Banting Selangor.

The MNS was invited to be part of the Selangor Government initiated sub committee for the environment known asBERKESAN in 1998. Under the auspices of the BERKESAN Committee, MNS have led the establishment of acommunity based ‘model environment site” in the village of Kg Endah in Kuala Langat District. After initial surveys,research and recommendations by local contacts in 1997, the model site was officially launched in 1998.

The main aim of the project is to motivate the local community to participate in the development of their localenvironment, instead of just becoming beneficiaries. We are glad that after facilitating the project for 4 years thecommunity leaders are now playing a more active role in spearheading the progress of PAKAS.

The concept of PAKAS is to develop a model EE site with community based environmental activities that can beemulated by other villagers in Selangor.

4. Environmental Education programme for schoolsMore commonly known as the Kelab Pencinta Alam (KPA), the programme was established as a pilot project with 12pioneer clubs in the Klang Valley. Today the KPA programme has grown to more than 180 clubs throughout the country.Various nature club guidelines and activity booklets have been published and distributed. Orientation courses areoffered regularly to the teacher or advisors in their respective zones. The KPA project have received recognition from theMalaysian International Chamber of Commerce and Industry (MICC) in 1993 and more recently the Rotary InternationalDistrict 3300 “Environmental Achievement Award 2000”. Annually a number competitions are organised for KPAmembers for instance, at the Millennium International Conference (MICC) held in United Kingdom in May 2000, two KPAmembers were selected to attend the event based on their environmental projects.

Table 1

In-situ approach -the establishment of education and field study centres by MNSa. Kuala Selangor Nature Park (KSNP) situated in the coastal mangroves - established in 1986b. Boh-MNS Field Study Centre in Cameron Highlands - established in 1989c. FRIM-MNS-SHELL- NEC - situated in the grounds of the Forest Research Institute Malaysia (FRIM) -

established in 1992d. Rimba Ilmu Environmental Education centre based at the botanical gardens of the University of Malaysia -

developed together with University Malaya in 1998e. Endau Rompin Nature Education and Research Centre (NERC) established in 2000 at the Endau Rompin

National Park

Table 2

The philosophy of using the environment as our classroom encourages learners to focus, explore, reflect andapply their experiences through various activities. This includes environmental games, role-play, environmentalauditing and field study. The aim is to influence values and behavior, then sensitize people to the issues andpromote good decision making and motivate people into positive action.


47

In 1997, with the assistance of the MOE, 12 MNS Education Coordinators were appointed to act as local coordinators atState level. The coordinators are now initiating their own orientation courses and competitions and contributing to theMNS Branches in the field of EE.

As a forum of exchange KPA members contribute articles and receive the “Tapir” newsletter currently on a print run of7,500 copies.

5. Environmental Education through publicationsPublications have been one of the mainstays of the MNS. A wide range of publications ranging from simple booklets toresearch publications and scientific papers has been made available by the MNS since its inception. Some of the EErelated publications are:

a. Tapir- a quarterly newsletter for members of the KPA.b. Keruing - an occasional publication by the NEC targeted to members of the Tri-Partite Agreement as well as

alumni members.c. Pak Cipan - currently has 6 topics under the nature series and is popular with beginners in nature education.d. Pendidikan Alam ESSO-MNS resource book distributed to all KPA.e. Malaysian Naturalist and Malayan Nature Journal.f. Modules and booklets on the rainforests - these publications are varied and are published as references or

worksheets for participants of MNS courses.

6. Strength in a diverse membershipAs a membership society, MNS members play a pivotal role in environmental awareness activities such as organisingfield trips, slide shows, symposia and scientific expeditions. In addition, members have also established various activeinterest groups like the flora, cave, marine and astronomy groups to cater to the diverse interest of the membership.Members at the local level contribute articles to newsletters, conduct research and give views in addition to coordinatingour education activities and nature clubs. In biological expeditions, MNS members have played a crucial role in helpingto set up, participate and extending the message of conservation and bio-diversity to visitors and students who visit thebase camps during the expedition period. As part of our decentralising programme, MNS Education Coordinators havealso been appointed at the state level to assist in servicing schools.

7. Challenges to Environmental Education in MalaysiaIn a recent workshop on EE organised by the Curriculum Development Centre (CDC), Ministry of Education Malaysiaand DANCED, it was suggested that the effort put in to introduce EE as a cross cutting subject in the curriculum may notincrease the competency of students to deal with environmental problems. This has been compounded by the fact thatthe cross curricular approach to teaching EE has not been fully understood by many teachers who presume that EE canbest be taught through a limited number of subjects like science and geography.

The broad nature of EE (IUCN definition) has to a certain extent contributed to the lack of understanding on the conceptof EE, among practitioners and the public. EE, like the concept of sustainable development, has become more a catchphrase than a point of departure for action.

In any case as with the experiences of other countries, environmental awareness becomes an issue when “problems”occur. Practitioners need to develop a more pro-active approach including training, capacity building of humanresources and resources on EE. Our reactive approach has delegated EE into more an after thought rather than ameaningful process, which should be, incorporated right from the beginning. Evaluation in EE poses another challengedue to the lack of proper baseline studies and coherent framework for EE in Malaysia. A national policy can be in placeonly after a baseline study involving as many stakeholders as possible is commissioned.

8. Possible DirectionsDue to the diversity of teaching methods, audience and practitioners of EE, it would be beneficial to allow for theestablishment of an umbrella body to function as a Council for EE. The Council can then recommend and work towardsan EE policy for the use of all Malaysians.

The council could also streamline activities and act as a clearing-house for expertise, materials, training and fundinginitiatives.

48

Paper 2: Community-Based Conservation Project in Kinabatangan, Sabah

The following are some recommendations based on the MNS experience:a. There is a need to add value to our EE courses and a clearer career path for students of EE. The MNS is working

towards developing accreditation for our EE courses.b. Develop competencies through cross-training, exchange programmes and study visits (As capacity building for

human resources and institutions).c. Encourage action research in EE in collaboration with NGOs and other institutions.d. Creating an EE journal to spur research in EE.e. Curriculum reform - there is a need to depart from the current “cascade model” of implementing EE and allow for

a more open and practical process. This will provide for EE to be more learner-centered and than outcomebased.

9. ConclusionIt is imperative that we continue to create opportunities for people to come together to debate and discuss about issuesconcerning EE. This is crucial in view of Malaysia’s “young development” in the field of EE. Whether we like it or not, theprocess and results form the implementation of EE, the engagement of citizens in dialogue, participation andopportunities to work towards a more open way of “doing and thinking” will be the way of the future. EE properlyunderstood, should constitute a comprehensive lifelong education and one that is responsive to changes in a rapidlychanging world.

References

Larsen E.& Azizi bin Muda, Strengthening of EE in primary and secondary schools in Malaysia: 2000

EE Asia and Beyond Proceedings: 1999

Lim M.H. A study of environmental attitudes and knowledge of M’sian secondary school students, UM: 1998/1999 Ismail,Meriam: Case study of Adult Learning Program, IAB: 1997

Environmental Self-Governance, The 6th Pacific Environmental Conference: 1997

Report: regional workshop on promotion of environmental awareness, Bangkok, ESCAP: 1997

William J. Peters JR: Local participation in the conservation of the Ranomafana National Park, Madagascar: 1997 ABAcademic Publishers: Journal of World Resource Management, Vol 8, pp-109-135 0261-4286


49

1. AbstractCanopy study in Lambir Hills National Park (LHNP) was initiated in 1991, when we established a canopy walkway ofabout 350 m long and two tree towers funded in collaboration between Forest Department Sarawak and severalJapanese universities. In March 2000, another canopy access facility, a canopy crane, with 80 m in height and arm of 75m long was established by the funding support by Japan Science and Technology Corporation.

The studies in LHNP aimed to elucidate the biodiversity and its maintaining mechanisms together with the ecologicalprocesses. In particular, we concentrated to clarify the mechanisms of general flowering and canopy-atmosphereinteraction in the tropical rain forest, including baseline researches on tree phenology, seed / litter traps with rearing theseed-eating insects, periodical trapping of insects (Light and Malaise traps), dynamics of stored substances (starch andsugars) in tree body, and measurements on forest meteorology, and gas flux. The site is also used as the site for thevalidation site for remote sensing.

Using these data, both proximate and ultimate factors of the general flowering have been tested. Carbon and waterbudget of the tropical rain forest is to be estimated in three ways, by flux measurement, tree enumeration, andintegration of eco-physiological processes. Three dimensional canopy structure and reflection factor of the canopy havebeen investigated both from satellite and canopy crane. The longer continuation of these observations and baselinestudies are necessary to reply the questions on general flowering and spatio-temporal variation of gas exchange.

The data obtained are fundamental knowledge for the biodiversity conservation, and provide us the informationindicating the function of tropical rainforests. Recently these activities are to be expanded into the surroundingecosystems including other land uses. The biodiversity assessments and functional studies for the various forestutilization types win provide the implications for the conservation practice and sustainable uses of tropical forests.

2. Text PresentationThe subject relates to the Research and Education Component of the BBEC project and research about Canopy Biologyin the Lambir Hills National Park, Sarawak. Dr. Nakashizuka hoped to be able to connect this topic to a question on howresearch can contribute to the ecosystem and conservation.

Why are we focusing on forest canopy? There are three reasons. The first is the forest canopy which comprises ofbiology tropical production. It is a primary production by leaves and foliage and also some secondary production oninsect herbivors and animals. The canopy is one of the places of the forest ecosystem which have the highest biodiversityas well as soils. It is a place with atmospheric and ecospheric interaction. It is related to a very important ecosystemfunction of the tropical forest.

Recently we have had several kinds of facilities to reach canopies. In the Lambir Hills National Park, we establishedthree kinds of facilities to reach the canopies. One is the Ladang Teras System, which can be reached over the top oftrees, and we have two towers at the Lambir Hills and a 300 meter long canopy walkway. Unfortunately, eco tours cannotutilize this facility because it is only for the use of researchers. The canopy at the moment does not have a safety net.This canopy was established in 1990. Quite recently in March 2000, we added a new facility, i.e. the canopy crane. It is80m tall and has an arm length of 75m, and we can access trees within a 75m radius.

Therefore, we now have many facilities covering an area of 100 acres in the Lambir Hills. There are quarters in the parkand a laboratory to prepare samples for analyzing, and also hostels on an 8-acre plot. Inside this, we have two towersconnected to the canopy walkway of 300m. There are another four acres of land, and at the centre of that, we have thecanopy crane. In order to contribute to ecosystem conservation, we plan to do long term research here.

3.4 Paper 4:Canopy Biodiversity Studiesin Lambir Hills National Parkby Dr. Tohru Nakashizuka, Research Institute for Human & Nature, Japan

50

Paper 4: Canopy Biodiversity studies in Lambir Hills National Park

Locals have been requested to bring in all kinds of insect specimens. Listed here are the main research items:a. inventory of insects.b. use of light traps. This was done monthly when the moon was full but has since been reduced to a quarterly basis.c. plant biology.

We asked the locals to check whether trees have flowers or fruits every 2 weeks, which they have been doing for thepast 10 years. We also set some seed traps to catch fruits and flowers and make periodical synthesis on mammalpopulation.

Please note the long term results of the phenological observation from 1992, which shows the flowering percentage ofover 400 trees. The blue line shows the percentage of fruiting trees and the red line shows the flowering trees. After thegeneral flowering in 1992, we did not have any large flowering until 1996, so it was very quiet in the forest during thattime. Following that in 1997 and 1998 and in 2001 we had another flowering. Such a recurrence is very valuableinformation, and we can learn how trees regenerate and how the forests are maintained. The question is why such kindof general flowering occurred, and what is the metrological trigger in these areas. Extreme low temperatures used to berecorded here, and this was the case as recorded in 1992, 1993, 1996 and 1997. However, it was not so in 1998 and2001. Recently we changed our way of analysis to focus on some strategies of rainfall average, and when we saw theratio of flowering trees, the results were most interesting and sharply coincided with the draught and flowering times.Therefore, we have to test this hypothesis.

Nature has a kind of network which promotes pollination efficiency. For instance, if these trees which have commonpollinators flower at the same time, we see results with bigger flowering, leading to high efficiency in fruiting.

Another aspect of general flowering importance is the typical pollinator, the giant honey bee. From 1992 to 1998, weobserved the giant honey bee by using light traps to catch them, and it coincided with the general flowering time. Whatdid the giant honey bee bring to the trees in this area? To think about this, we used micro-satellites and DNA markers tostudy how long it takes the giant honey bee to bring the pollen from one flower to another. The targetted tree was thedipterocarp. The bees make several subpollination here and swiftly target the trees and the fruits, and the pollen to thesetrees were brought from six or seven meters away. This is the case of some typical areas, but in some areas when thegeneral flowering is not so gregarious, these species were pollinated by moths. Therefore, in general, during theflowering time, pollination was by the giant honey bee and also by moths.

What is the difference here? One example in 1996 shows a gregarious flowering time and in 1998, flowers were not thatbig. The large inflow between the subpollination was observed and at the largest general flowering time, they avoidedinbreeding. The flowering time when pollination was done by giant honey bees caused genetic diversity. I concentratedon the regeneration phase of the tree bees, as it is important for forest regeneration and forest maintenance.

Another aspect is seed eating insects, which are predators, and were used for testing, and the question is why the treesmake fruits in such type of general fruiting. To test this, we had to make an inventory of seed eating insects, and wetested more than 20 species and detected more than 40 species of these insects which eat dipterocarp seeds. However,among the species described, are many other new species that feast on these seed. Not only insects, but rodents alsoeat these seeds. Some of these live in the canopy, some in tree trunks and some live on the ground. We have madeperiodical studies and when the general flowering and fruiting occurs, the population in logarithmic scale is reduced, andthen it goes up during general fruiting time. It seems to cause saturation of the seed.

Another aspect we are concerned about relates to an important forest function: carbon and water budget in the tropicalrain forest. We are taking several kinds of measurements, and one is the ecophysiological process in the canopy. Tointegrate this, a forest dynamic and carbon budget and direct measurement of gas were used, incorporating the Covariance. Every tree had a different response to light intensity and there was also some difference between shade treesand shade leaves and sun leaves. The difference between these leaves and the different species need to be integratedinto the forest as a whole. To do this, we made some measurements of the canopy, the three dimensional canopystructure using the canopy crane to come to this figure. We can find out the forest distribution and micro environmentwhich is associated with forest structures, and we can make a simulation to cover the budget.

Another method is traditional method which is summing up the trees in the forest as a whole. Here we developed somesmall GIS system which covers some four acres and eight acres, and every dot shows a position of trunks of trees in afour acre radius. You can also observe some imagery of leaves which is very useful to new researchers. Therefore, we


51

can combine this data to estimate the carbon budget. The tropical rain forest is absorbing the carbon by ad-covariance,4.4 tons per acre per year per estimation from tree gross 3.8 tons per acre per year, but the estimation for the integratinggas exchange from the leaves to the canopy is coming soon.

The Lambir Hills National Park has some 800 acres in area, and there are several kinds of vegetation. What we want todo on such kinds of landscape effects biodiversity or some carbon budget, and I will show an example of the stinging beepopulation. It is an important pollinator from the primary forest. Five to ten years after logging we used some batch trapsto catch the stinging bee but the population of these bees depended on the flower density of the large sized trees. Suchkind of information can be accumulated to derive the human impact the pollinator has through forest regeneration orforest maintenance. This is just an idea on the acceleration of biodiversity loss when we over use the forest, then thedecrease in biodiversity causes a loss of partnership between pollinators and flowers, seed disperse and its naturalenemies, and these cause regeneration failure and the delay in resource recovery or acceleration over use. It reducesbiodiversity and we should stop this cycle in any way, and think about how we can manage the forest in a sustainableway.

The contribution of canopy research in the ecosystem and conservation is one fundamental inventory of biodiversity.The key mechanism such as pollination or seed dispersal to maintain a sound ecosystem should be applied throughresearches and detect the human impact it has on the ecosystem, which we are going to do, and also provideinformation for education. I am also testing ecotourism in the Lambir Hills and my colleagues in the Western Pacificregion and Asia are conducting the same field of biology, and these are mostly graduates. Children are invited to the sitefor four weeks in order to educate them on biological studies.

Slides Presentation

Slide 2Slide 1

Slide 4Slide 3

52

Slide 6Slide 5

Slide 7 Slide 8

Slide 9 Slide 10

Slide 11 Slide 12


53

Slide 13 Slide 14

Slide 15 Slide 16

Slide 17 Slide 18

Slide 19 Slide 20

54

Slide 21 Slide 22

Slide 25 Slide 26

Slide 23 Slide 24

Slide 27 Slide 28


55

Slide 31 Slide 32

Slide 29 Slide 30

Slide 33

56

Q: Dr. Jito SugardjitoFor Orang Utan in secondary forest, how do they behave in comparison with those living in primary forest?

A: Dr. IsabelleOrang Utan do well in secondary forest, they are able to shift diet. The adult male seems able to adjust socially. Howeverit is still an early stage that our observations are not enough to give any conclusion.

Q: Dr. SugardjitoThe Orang Utans are attracted to fruit trees. How do you repel these Orang Utans?

A: Dr. IsabelleYou can scare them away with light and noise. Even though it is very effective but you need to be there 24 hours of theday because they also come during the night. We also have some more effective methods, such as moats as OrangUtans cannot swim.

Q: Prof. Mustafa Agung SardjonoThe idea from shifting timber to non-timber business products. Based on your experience, how dangerous is this idea forthe regeneration of the tropical forest? For instance, people collect seeds of the dipterocarp. It will destroy the vegetationof the dipterocarp.

A: Dr. NakashizukaI find that the collection of seeds by locals nowadays is largely reduced. The local people are more interested in catchingwild boars, which they do by waiting by a certain type of tree. When the boars come, they shoot them.

Q: Mr. Ludi ApinRegarding satellite images and crane towers. Can we use the crane tower method to create vegetation maps in relationto the canopy? Crane tower methods would be more accurate.

A: Dr. NakashizukaWe are now using satellites for bi-directional break analysis. We use a special technique by collecting the reflection.When we get a satellite image, it depends on two angles, one is the sun angle, and one is the observing angle. What wecan do with the canopy crane tower, is that we can observe the canopy with different sun angles at the same point, whichis quite useful to calibrate the satellite images to with different angle imageries. In the future maybe we should calibrateto use sensing satellite images.

Q: Mr. Ludi ApinHave you ever thought about using the balloon? That is easier than the crane, no heavy construction needed. Have youever thought of doing so?

A: Dr. NakashizukaThe problem with using balloons is that it takes skill to manoeuvre them.

Q: Haji Amat RamsaIs there any arrangement for the local people to participate? Any empowerment for the local people to manage?

A: Mr. Hisashi ShinshoWe have implementations of different kind of workshops for public awareness.

3.5 Questions & Answers (Papers 1-4)Chairperson: Prof. Datin Dr. Maryati Mohamed

Questions & Answers (Papers 1-4)


57

A: Dr. IsabelleWe involved the local in the research. We also developed programmes with Sabah Wildlife Department, which attracttourists and thus created income for the local community.

Q: Mr. Boyd Sun FattEENC - How effective is it? Tour guides are the frontline people and they seem to know not much more than the generalpublic. They don’t know how to explain what is conservation and biodiversity.

A: Mr. Gary LimIn relation to your dilemma in explaining scientific concepts, I think that’s faced by almost everyone I know, but I thinkthat’s where environmental education comes in. When we ask our students what is eco-systems, we explain it bybreaking up the word, and by using environmental games to explain. There are many methods and communications.There’s too little attention to the quality of our work. Sometimes people use “nature education”, some people use“environmental education”, but they can be defined differently even though they sound similar. Year 2010 has beenproposed as the decade for environmental education for sustainable development. I think there has to be more inputfrom the practitioners and policy makers.

58

1. AbstractIt is a real ironic story that Indonesia as the owner of the third largest tropical rain forest in the twenty first century facescomplex ecological and socio-political problems in forest management. Although the official figures from ForestryDepartment (2001) showed only approximately 24.0-43.0 million hectares of critical or unproductive forest areas, theWorld Resource Institute reported in 1998 that 72% of approximately 120-145 million hectares of Indonesian forestshave been destroyed. With the same annual deforestation rate (+1.6 million hectares/year) the remaining tropical rainforest in Kalimantan, as the largest and richest resources, will vanish in the next ten years.

This situation just coincides with the unfavourable economic condition of the country; prolonged monetary crisis needsoptimum support from the forestry revenues and global market is entering claims on resource sustainability.Experiences with mismanagement of the forest during three decades of the previous New-Order government continueto happen along with the implementation of regional autonomy and decentralization of forest management since thetwenty first century. Authority conflicts and local popular forest policies have been considered as the main factors thatcause worse deforestation, including in some conservation areas. Destruction of this world’s biodiversity center will givenegative impacts not only on the host country, but also on the global environment.

On the other hand, the life of local communities as an integrated component of the tropical rain forest ecosystem ofKalimantan has been threatened parallel with the on-going deforestation. Actually, these social groups, who have neverbeen taken into account in forest policies and forest management, have great capacity to conserve the valuable naturalresources. They are potentially being involved in the forest and forestry management schemes. Therefore, it isconsiderably important to underline that ‘bottom-up’ efforts, especially concerning problem solving and communityempowering at the grass-root levels, will be a key alternative for striving for resource sustainability.

2. Introduction: Hearth of Indonesian ForestryKalimantan is the hearth of Indonesian forestry, not because of its location in the middle of the Indonesian archipelago.As a matter of fact, at least 32% (formerly even reached to 41%) of statistically +120-145 millions hectares of Indonesia’sforests are distributed in the four provinces, namely West-, Central-, South-, and East-Kalimantan. Although Papua (orformerly called Irian Jaya) is almost as rich as Kalimantan (31%; see Table 1.), the presence of most valuableDipterocarps species especially Dipterocarp and Shorea trees, is not as abundance as that in Kalimantan. In addition tothat, with regards to topography, transportation facilities (especially river stream system) as well as distance from thedecision makers (including planners and investors) in Jakarta, the accessibility of the forests in Kalimantan could behigher than that of Papua.

It has been widely acknowledged that with only +200–250 tree species per hectare mixed dipterocarps forests of Kalimantanor largely called Borneo (including Sarawak and Sabah/Malaysia, and Brunei) reflect the most richest forest inSoutheast Asia. Furthermore, various non-timber forest plants (e.g. 4,000 orchids, 25,000-30,000 of other floweringplants) as well as diverse fauna promote the island as the world’s biodiversity center. Therefore, this competitiveadvantage has offered not only prospective economic revenues to the host country, but also has created globalexpectations that conservation measures are deemed as one of the important aspects of resource utilization.

However, it is becoming a common topic that tropical rain forests of the world are recently ‘under attacks’. In SoutheastAsia, the annual deforestation rate has reached to 2.9 million hectares/year, of which one third has been contributed byIndonesia (Dauvergner, 2001). The deforestation or other more specific issues, such as biodiversity losses and climatechange have predominated different events, from national scientific seminars to the recent world summit.

3.6 Paper 5:Management of Tropical Rainforest in Kalimantan:How Can Local Community be a Key to Success?by Prof. Ir. Dr. Mustofa Agung Sardjono, Mulawarman University, Kalimantan

Paper 5: Management of Tropical Rainforest in Kalimantan


59

Island Land Area Forest LandForest Land as a

Percentage of Area of

Table 1: Area and Distribution of Forest Land in Indonesia (1976)

Million Hectares Island Total

Sumatra 47.361 28.4 60.0 14.8

Java & Madura 13.219 2.9 21.9 1.5

Kalimantan 53.946 41.5 76.9 21.6

Sulawesi 18.922 9.9 52.3 5.2

Bali & Nusa Tenggara 8.849 2.0 22.6 1.0

Maluku 7.451 6.0 80.9 3.1

Irian Jaya (or Papua) 42.198 31.5 74.6 16.4

Total 191.944 122.2 - 63,6

Source: Directorate General of Forestry; in Ross (1984)Note: The total forest cover of the country varied considerably based on the data sources, but ranging from 120 to

148 million hectares.

The present paper, as it was requested, tries to touch some aspects of Kalimantan’s tropical forest managementexperiences, including success and failures of the efforts carried out. Some problems related to local communitiessurrounding the forest will be discussed with the support of related studies. At the end, some recommendations forsuccessful the community-based tropical rain forest management, which is possible through collaboration amongparticipants of the conference, will be offered.

3. Learning from a three-decade success and failureThe significant change of forestry in Kalimantan or outer islands of Java as a whole began in the early 70’s, whenextensive mechanical exploitation under the forest concessionaires management system (or in Indonesian called HakPengusahaan Hutan/HPH System) had been implemented. The mission of the forest utilization was to support thecountry’s economic revenue for succeeding the national development programs. As a result, starting in mid 1980’s theforestry activities extended from natural forest logging in the initial period, to establishment of industrial timber estates(or Hutan Tanaman Industri / HTI) in order to support raw materials supply for hundreds of wood industries (e.g.sawmills, veneer or plywood industries, pulp and paper, etc.) of the years of 1980s.

All activities were capital intensive and characterized by conventional forestry business, such as timber oriented, targetoriented, macro planning, low social sensitivity (controlling local community activity), and under tight control of thecentral government c.q. Forestry Department (centralized management).

After two decades of the forest policies implementation, some important changes (instead of success) have beendetermined, such as:

a. The timber production increased significantly from only 1.4 million m3 (in 1960) to 31.4 million m

3 (in 1989), of

which 96% depended on natural forests of outer islands of Java, especially Kalimantan;b. Indonesia has shifted its role from log producer and timber exporter to timber industrial supplier, where 50% of

plywood and 17% of sawn timber world-markets came from; andc. The forestry sector contributed approximately 1.2% of the national working place.

Another important economic impact is that the annual export value of natural forest was only US$ 200 millions in the1980’s, and increased ten times higher (+US $ 2.0 billions) in one decade. Before the 1997 monetary crisis, the forestrycontribution reached US$ 20 billions or 10% of the Indonesia’s total gross domestic product (ITTO, 2001).

However, all of the above achievements have to be compensated with greater ecological and socio-culturaldestructions, such as:

a. According to the national inventory there were 41 million hectares of degraded forest land in the mid 1990’s, of

60

which 20.5 million hectares is in Kalimantan (see Table 2.). However, the World Resource Institute recorded that72% (+86-106 million hectares) of the Indonesian forest was destroyed in 1998 (see WALHI, 2001). The problemwas not in the silvicultural systems used or other technical aspects. Most relevant factors identified were, amongother (a) Ineffective as well as inconsistent forestry policies and regulations; (b) Low law enforcement, becauseof high corruption and collusion; (c) Unbalance between the area of forest (as well as some management units)and availability of human resource and controlling facilities. The destruction of these most valuable naturalresources has definitely led not only to disturbances of forest function, but also the loss of biodiversity. Forestdestruction under fire or conversion to other land uses has not been included in the above factors.

b. There were limited positive impacts of HPH, HTI, and Timber Industries to the well being of forest localcommunities. This is partly because most profits have gone to the central government, and created minimumtrickle down effects to the local rural development program. According to some observations, the presence ofthose activities have even destroyed local economy as well as socio-culture of the communities (e.g. Mubyarto,et al., 1991; Widjono, 1998; Gunawan, et al., 1998). Decreasing living-space of the local community andincreasing competition in working-opportunity between local communities and migrants from other provinces orother islands were the most important reasons. Furthermore, the contravention and opposition among the localcommunities to the surrounding big-scale forest concessionaires and forest products industries grow upunavoidably from year to year.


Table 2: Natural Forest, Degraded Forests, and Bare Forest Land in Kalimantan in the mid of the 90’s.

West Kalimantan 8,448,175 2,644,665 545,685

Central Kalimantan 10,735.935 599,666 266,169

South Kalimantan 1,573,856 8,447,911 2,089,952

East Kalimantan 14,584,672 8,845,655 1,368,415

Total Kalimantan 35,342,638 20,537,897 4,270,221

Total Indonesia 113,975,279 41,445,044 8,899,976

Source: FWI/GFW (2001; modified)

Province Permanent Forest(Ha)

Degraded Forest(Ha)

Bare Forest-Land(Ha)

With regards to the relation between concession holders and surrounding local communities, it should be noted the ruraldevelopment program (or in Indonesian Bina Desa Hutan or Pembinaan Masyarakat Desa Hutan / PMDH), which hasbeen obligated to every concession holder since the beginning of the 1990’s, also achieved insufficient, if not at all,success. After a half decade of its implementation, most of the implementers felt that such activity was actually beyondtheir capacity and costly (not profitable).

Some important notes can be generated from the three decade development of forestry in Kalimantan, namely:a. In reality only timber extraction has been implemented in Kalimantan, instead of forest resource management.

The obsession to gain maximum yields has made forestry planners and policy makers wasted the opportunity tolearn complex characters of the tropical rain forest. Consequently, they did not realize how difficult it was to createsustainable management of that fragile ecosystem. Issuing hundreds of forest concession licenses for tenthousands or even hundred thousands of hectares of forest area, and then for decades carrying out remotecontrol from Jakarta without supports of adequate apparatus as well as infrastructures in the field level haveclearly reflected a big naive.

b. A bigger mistake came from the fact that under shortages of human resource and facilities, the local communityhas not been actively involved to support the forest management. A long period of forestry development inKalimantan has not given any lessons that the existing forests are not just a sum of trees, but local community(and for sure their culture) also become an integrated component of the tropical rain forest ecosystem.


Principles, Criteria Verification Score According to Determined Indicators

Big-Scale HPH Medium-Scale HPH Small-Scale HPH

(> 100.000 Ha.) (50.000-100.000) (< 50.000 Ha.)

(1) (2) (1) (2) (1) (2)

Administration

Planning 24,00 24,00 15,99 21,99 18,00 19,99

Actuating 50,00 50,00 44,44 23,33 44,44 33,33

Monitoring 20,00 20,00 20,00 20,00 20,00 20,00

Sub-Total I 94,00 94,00 80,43 65,32 82,44 73,32

Implementation

Local Participation 41,67 37,50 37,50 25,00 37,50 41,60

Inter-sectoral

Coordination 16,67 38,85 44,44 22,22 33,33 33,33

Sub-Total II 58,43 76,39 81,94 47,22 70,83 75,00

Achievements

Welfare 30,95 32,46 30,95 32,35 38,09 28,20

Self-Reliance 9,99 16,67 23,33 15,00 21,82 14,54

Environmental

Awareness 13,33 16,19 8,00 12,22 12,22 11,67

Sub-Total III 54,27 65,32 62,28 59,57 72,13 54,41

Total I + II + III 206,61 235,71 224,65 172,11 225,40 202,99

Score 68,87 78,57 74,88 57,37 75,13 67,66

Category Fair Good Good Fair Good Fair

Classification C B B C B C

Source: Sardjono, et al. (1999)Notes: (Score 90-100= Success/Class A; 70-<90= Good/B; 50-<70= Fair/C; 30-<50= Bad/D; 0-<30= Fail/E; About

Verification Method see Sardjono, 1999)

61

Table 3: Monitoring Results of the Implementation of Rural Development Program (PMDH) of Forest ConcessionHolders (HPH) Based on Research in Kutai District of East Kalimantan 1996-1998

c. From decades of its development, it should have been learned that tropical rain forests of Kalimantan need notonly technical and biological knowledge as it has been formulated almost perfectly in the famous silviculturalsystem of Indonesian selective cutting and planting (Tebang Pilih Tanam Indonesia). The ecosystem demandssociological approaches, which previously just became ‘an appendix’ of the forestry policies. For example, poorachievements of PMDH implementation were caused by designing the program as supplementary rather thancomplimentary aspect of the forest management.

4. Is decentralization in forest management worthwhile for forest conservation?Theoretically, with a shift from centralized to decentralized forestry politics after regional autonomy in the beginning of2001, planners and policy makers would be getting closer to the managed resources. The spirit of handing over a part ofthe administrative, politic, as well as fiscal authorities from the central to the local (province or district/city) governmentbrings expectation that the problems and needs of tropical rain forests, including the aspiration of the local community,

62


can be accurately identified in order to determine a better management. However, from the initial stage ofdecentralization, the situation of forest resources has not improved and it is even getting worse.

Of many factors which might influence the above situation, authority conflicts among governments at the national/locallevels and the popular local forestry policies have been considered to be the most important. These can be described inmore details, as follows:

First, from the beginning, central forestry bureaucrats had a perception that decentralization was not a part of proactiveefforts for economic recovery following the 1997 monetary crisis. Forest management decentralization has beenencouraged only by some natural resource rich regions (including Kalimantan governments), which have been exploitedas ‘national wallets’ by the central government.

That might remain debatable, but it is already an obvious phenomenon that strained situation in forestry emerges inrelations not only between central and local governments, but also between province and districts/city levels. As it isstated by Beukeboom (2000), a different perception / interpretation on forestry regulations and policies at different levelscontributes to the power struggle and confusion. For example, the decision to establish forestry technicalimplementation units by the provincial level in many districts of East Kalimantan has been opposed by the existingforestry districts services. Under such unconducive situation, improvement of forest management to combatdeforestation has no more room and time to do.

Second, Beukeboom (2000) also states that ‘forest for people’ euphoria (following the reformation movement in 1998),which was indicated by increasing land (use) and forest products (especially timber) utilization claims, has beenrecklessly exploited by various parties and vested interests. The difficulty (unwillingness or low capacity?) to recognizeclaims on traditional land and land use by local community at the district level has initiated the issue of small scale (100hectares) and short-term (only one year) timber utilization permits e.g. IHPHH (Ijin Hak Pemungutan Hasil Hutan). Fromthe view point of district governments, such forest utilization permits can be considered as the fastest approach toincrease the local community’s welfare. Is it true?

In reality the issue of such a popular forest policy has even caused destruction of the remaining but potential long termforest resources. The inadequate number of staff and, indeed facilities at the forestry district offices (at least when it iscompared to hundreds of permits issued), the scattered distribution of IHPHH locations, its uncontrollable activities(since the utilization permits have generally been handed over to external investors), and unreliable approaches toreplanting the log-over areas were some weaknesses of the policy as well as its implementation. Moreover, the illegallogging has extended and even encroached some conservation areas (e.g. National Parks) and protection forests, thelast reserve of the tropical rain forest. To get a real, recent picture of the local community life during the implementationof decentralization, it is necessary to present the results of a long term observation in one sub-district of East Kalimantan.

For sure, the above information can not be confirmed to represent the situation of all districts/regions in Kalimantan, orto generate conclusions that decentralization will never bring sustainability of the tropical rain forest. However, it must beagreed that how the government, especially local governments, implements the decentralization will determine whetherthat political shift is meaningful or not for both forest resource conservation and well being of the local communities.

Relating to the above statement, decentralization should have therefore two future perspectives: optimistic andpessimistic scenarios.

a. Optimistic scenario:Local governments (both provinces and districts/cities) work together in very cooperative and coordinated ways,and start to prepare strategic policies and needed instruments (technical guidance) involving all forest/naturalresources related key stakeholders including local ‘grass root’ organizations. The existing core problems in forestrywill be immediately solved, such as:i. Unavailability of ‘bottom-up’ processed spatial planning,ii. CCN (corruptions, collusions, and nepotisms),iii. Illegal loggings (linked to ‘powerful’ parties) and other forest encroachments, andiv. Tenurial problems (leading to vertical and horizontal social conflicts)

Solutions of those problems become valuable support for better forest resource management plans to achievesustainability and people’s welfare.


63

Table 4: The Dynamics of Land Use Changes and Production Activities by the Local Community of KaranganDalam, Sangkulirang Sub-District (East Kalimantan).

Reasons / CausesChangesLand Use /

Production ActivitiesLanduse

1. Shifting Cultivation Decreased a. Limited primary forest surrounding settlements;

b. Uncertain yields because of problems with pests

and diseases;

c. Decreasing interest in grouping systems;

d. More attractive cash-money sources (bird nest and

‘belambangan’);

e. Limited manpower.

2. Wetland Paddy Cultivation Decreased a. Limited investment (seeds, fertilizers, pesticides,

other costs);

b. Problems with pests and diseases;

c. Trauma from the previous year’s harvesting

failures;

d. Limited knowledge and skills for better cultivation

systems;

e. More attractive cash-money sources (bird nest and

‘belambangan’);

3. Tree-Crops Farming Increased a. Availability of seeds and guidance programs from

surrounding enterprises;

b. Abundant arable lands (ex shifting cultivation

areas);

c. Learning from success during long-drought 1997/

98 (better prices, compared to other agricultural

crops);

4. Community based Constant a. No supply of seeds and seedlings;

Timber Estate b. Arable lands converted into tree-crops farming;

c. Insecurity of the market (possible?)

Production-Activities

5. Bird-nest Collection Decreased a. Many caves are unproductive and destroyed due to

over-exploitation;

b. Decreased bird population;

c. More cases of robbery, stealing, and/or illegal

collectors (locally called ‘ngeremes’);

d. High risks of e.g. crimes and diseases.

6. Rattan Collection Decreased a. No buyers and investors because of recent low

-Stopped prices;

b. Its locations are farther away and more difficult to

reach;

c. Small quantity and only for daily uses.

64


Production-Activities

7. ‘Iron-Wood’ Roof Decreased a. Buyers are decreasing;

Production b. Availability of substitute roof materials (corrugated iron,

Nypa fructicans leafs);

c. Raw material is limited and available in a far-away

location.

8. Bee-Honey Collection Decreased a. Trees are located far away and more difficult to reach;

b. Bee-honey tree population is decreasing because of

timber estate and forest fire;

c. Population of plants or trees of bee’s food sources is

also decreasing;

d. High risk of honey harvesting.

9. ‘Belambangan’ Increased a. Economic considerations (buyers, cash money

(illegal logging) sources, inactive or unpromising traditional activities);

b. Political considerations (utilization of residual stands in

logged over areas, opportunity for self-utilization before

invasion by outsiders-both individual farmers and

big-scale firms/enterprises, and last chance to

anticipate unpredictable policy changes).

10. Fishery Constant a. Availability of buyers surrounding the villages or

Increased settlements;

b. Alternatives for cash income sources;

c. Rivers and swampy areas are found abundantly near

the villages or settlements.

11. Hunting of Wild Constant a. Availability of buyers surrounding the villages or

Animals Decreased settlements;

b. Although its product is unpredictable, hunting is

easy and cheap;

c. As an alternative for cash income;

d. Increasing interest in hunting has resulted in decreased

population of the animals.

Source: Sardjono, et al. (2000;2001)

b. Pessimistic scenario:Provinces and districts (especially natural resource rich regions) will compete in getting greater authorities andrights (rather than responsibilities and obligations) of management. Decentralization will not be followed bydevolution until the grass-root levels. The natural resources (especially forests) will be more intensively exploitedin order to collect locally generated incomes (called Pendapatan Asli Daerah/PAD). The possible worst situationswould be e.g.:i. New ‘small empires’ in the regions (or like ‘countries in the country’) and even more powerful ‘clicks’ in the

provincial and especially in the district/city levels, which mostly have economic as well as political interests,ii. Vertical and especially horizontal conflicts among the stakeholders become sharper, because of unavailability

of definitive spatial plans, unsolved tenurial problems, and more limited (or scare) natural resources,iii. Illegal resource utilizations will be larger following those above problems,iv. Local natural resources will be assured for foreign debts (bilateral or multilateral) that may lead to worse

environment degradations.


65

Table 5: Average Contribution (%) of Forest-Based Production Activities to the Income of Local Community

Shifting Cultivation 36.5 6.0

Timber Industries Labour 23.5 -

Rubber Plantation 19.0 21.0

Non-Timber Forest Products 10.0 58.0

Fire Woods 7.0 1.0

Fruit Gardens 5.0 9.0

Ecotourism Services - 5.0

Total 100.0 100.0

Source: Akhdiyat, et al. (1998; modified); Fahruk, et al. (2002)

Activities Case of South Kalimantan:

Villages Surrounding Production

Forest 1994 / 1995

Case of West Kalimantan:

Villages Surrounding Recreation

Forest 1999 / 2000

Another clear conclusion about the local community’s dependency on the local forest is that they have to be involved inthe management of forest resources (see also Colfer, et. al., 1999). It is understandable that IHPHH experience (seeprevious chapter) in a glance indicated failure to give opportunity to utilize forest resources sustainably. The problems donot come at the community’s level but definitely from the policy or government side. IHPHH has been designed andregulated by the government based on limited data/information of the resource objects as well as target groups(community). Last but not least, controlling capacity of the forestry district services has never been evaluated. The localforestry planners have not optimized the utilization of local traditional experiences and knowledge on resourcemanagement and biodiversity maintenance, which are plenty among local communities in Kalimantan, such as (adoptedfrom Sardjono and Samsoedin, 2001):

a. The naming of stages of forest regrowth in the agroforestry systems of the Kenyah Dayak communities at LongSegar, Muara Wahau, and Long Ampung, East Kalimantan (Colfer, 1983);

b. The terms munaant, simpukng, and lembo, which are indicative of similar management practices in home andforest gardens among the Tunjung and Benuaq Dayak groups in Barongtongkok, East Kalimantan (Sardjono,1990);

c. The use and cultivation of land based on vegetation types among the Simpang Dayak community at Ketapang,West Kalimantan (Djuweng, 1992); and

5. Local Community as a Key Component of the Forest ConservationCommunities in and around the tropical rain forest of Kalimantan (or Borneo as a whole island) have been widelyobserved and written in many scientific as well as popular publications. Their existence in the forest ecosystem haslasted from generation to generation and even longer than the independence day of Indonesia (1945). As it has beenmentioned in the previous chapter, local communities depend on many land use and production activities, such asshifting cultivation, collecting or hunting non-timber forest products, and even actively practised fishery. It has to benoted that the activities have been oriented not only for socio-cultural or subsistence economic orientations, but also forcash income. The last situation emerges when many regions have higher accessibility and some of the daily needsshould be fulfilled from outside markets (instead of local natural resources).

The most interesting view concerning communities’ forest based income sources is that the production activities of thelocal community strive to adapt the forest functions declared by government such as production and conservationforests, although some people might be there earlier.

66


d. The land management system of the Benuaka Dayak community in Kapuas Hulu, West Kalimantan (Frans,1992).

In order to get a better view about the traditional capacity of the community in utilization, and at the same time,conservation of local resources, the results of a study on Benuaq Dayak in East Kalimantan will be presented, inTable 6.

Activity Traditional Knowledge and Practices

Dry-field cultivation/upland rice farming a. Giving priority to old secondary forest, to maximize harvest

without disturbing succession process

b. Avoiding wildfire by using firebreaks, accounting for wind

direction and slopes, keeping an eye on the fire

c. Working together with manual tools (without mechanization)

and use of fertilizer and/or other chemicals

d. Using different local rice varieties of pare and pulut

(Oryza spp)

e. Following fallow period and rotation principles to let the soil

recover and maintain fertility

Rattan harvest / collection a. Growing rattan with other useful plants (sown or naturally

regenerated)

b. Cutting rattan selectively to ensure sustainability

Fruit tree gardening and fruit collection a. Conserving forest fruit trees (in situ conservation) for food

(simpukng) security

b. Gardening fruit trees (ex situ conservation) in different

places - such as close to farmlands, settlements, and

rivers - to result in ecological and socio-economic benefits

and balance

Collecting vegetables and condiments a. Collecting young leaves (for example rattan), ferns, and

condiments from the forest (usually on the way to or from

farmland) for daily consumption

Hunting and fishing a. Periodic hunting and fishing individually or in small groups

(not more than five people)

b. Using traditional or simple tools (blowpipe, traditional

spear, “local production” gun) that have a low impact on the

environment

c. Targeting hunted species, particularly those that are also

farm pest (deer[Cervus unicolour], wild pig [Sus barbatus])

Table 6: Some Traditional Knowledge and Practices Concerning Daily Activities of the Benuaq Community thatreflect a Conservation Ethic


67

Activity Traditional Knowledge and Practices

d. Hunting game mainly for daily consumption and sharing

with neighbours before selling excess (if any)

e. Prohibiting the use of tuaq (Derris elliptica), a small plant

used for fish poison

Collecting Honeybees a. Prohibitting the cutting of different species of tanyut

(honeybee trees) –banggeris/puti (Koompasia sp.), kenari /

jelmu (Canarium decumanum), and durian/ kalang (Durio

sp.) –and different species of dipterocarps

b. Collecting in groups, with a system of sharing

Collecting wood for construction and a. Collecting construction wood for self-consumption only (not

fuel commercial), usually in traditional forests and fallow areas

b. Prioritizing fallen wood, dead wood, and unproductive trees

for timber, usually saving them during clearing for dry-field

cultivation

c. Using fallow areas and bushes as firewood sources

d. Choosing only a few selected plant species as firewood

(based on burning and fire quality, ash residue, and toxicity)

Damar resins, saps/malau, barks / a. Making seasonal collection part of daily activities

gembor, aloewood/gaharu, other b. Collecting mostly from fallen resins (from damar; from many

raw materials collection species of dipterocarps), selected trees (that is, they do not

cut or tap every tree in a stand; for gaharu, from Aquilaria

sp., and for malau, from Palaquium calophyllum), and dried

trees (for bark of gembor / Alsiodaphne sp.)

Medicinal plant use a. Not allowing forest activities to disturb medicinal plants

b. Cultivating some medicinal plants close to settlements and

frequently using them for traditional cures (beliatn)

Source: Sardjono and Samsoedin (2001)

Nowadays, in some regions the traditional potentials mentioned above are not completely conserved by localcommunity, since rapid socio-economic development has changed local demands and therefore also resourcemanagement orientation (from subsistence to commercial). For example, the introduction of financially more attractive(but actually in the same time ecologically more exploitative) forest management e.g. HPHH has threatened theexistence of traditional knowledge and practices in forest management. However, apart from the external factors, thereare also internal problems among the communities. For example, some groups have difficulties in passing over thetraditional potentials from older to younger generation, because of urbanization of capable young generation or adifferent perception between both generation on local norms and values (see e.g. Sardjono and Ismayadi, 2001). Undersuch situation the local capacity has been distorted, and might disappear in time they are needed.

6. Closing Remarks: Challenges for the Optimistic FutureFrom the beginning of the discussion, it is understood that the great deforestation in Kalimantan was caused bymismanagement that has been carried out for decades. Again, the problem faced was mainly not relating to theinappropriate silvicultural system, but more in socio-political aspects especially lack of political will of the government

68


c.q. Forestry Department to involve local community in the forest management system. For Kalimantan, undoubtedly thelife of most communities, who live in remote or rural areas, depends on forest resources. At least from their populationnumber, they could be participated in the ‘warning system’ against e.g. over exploitation or illegal logging.

In addition to that capacity, local communities have developed various practices and norms on sustainable resourceutilization, which are more potential to be implemented for increasing community’s well-being compared with differentrural development schemes of timber concessionaires (e.g. PMDH). Unfortunately, these potentials of the localcommunities were seen as ‘a primitive’ system and therefore have never been well documented, or even acknowledgedor implemented appropriately.

After the 1998 reformation movement in Indonesia, there is an opportunity to save the remaining tropical rain forests inKalimantan and to carry out rehabilitation programs, since the political paradigm has shifted from ‘state-’ to‘community-based’ and from ‘timber-‘ to ‘ecosystem-oriented’ forest management. A better future perspective of theinvolvement of local communities has been created especially with the implementation of the regional autonomy anddecentralization era since the beginning of 2001. The handing over of some political and administrative authorities to thedistrict/city governments has to be underlined as an important point, because it enables optimum efforts for answeringchallenges at the grass-root level. The challenges refer to four main aspects namely tenure, human-resource,institution, and economic.

a. Tenurial aspect is considered as an important entry point in order to solve disharmony in relations among forestusers. There are some activities under tenurial aspect, such as:i. To carry out and accommodate the participatory village boundary and natural resources mapping in the frame

of District Spatial Planning Program;ii. To determine and acknowledge traditional land on the participatory village map based on agreement among

related parties (district government and traditional institution);iii. To ensure local community’s access to state forests, which are used for living and income sources based on

forest functions as well as agreement among forest users (especially areas, which have been managed byforest concessionaires).

b. Human-resources aspect is necessary as the basic for creating civil society at the grass-root level in order tosupport democratisation on natural resource management. This aspect includes:i. To give wider opportunities to local young generation to take formal education in forestry science by providing

scholarships generated from local forest resource utilization;ii. To offer more opportunities to local community for participating in trainings or different networks/discussion

forums related to forest resource management;iii. To conduct intensive field extension/training programs, especially for women and children about

environmental sustainability and forest resource management.c. Institutional aspect plays an important role in sustaining efforts on forest conservation and rural development. It

will not reach an optimum impact, if there is no restructuring and revitalisation of local forestry institutions. In theframe of regional autonomy and decentralization legal drafting advocacy for local legislatives becomes anecessity to produce regulations or policies, which have social sensitivity. This aspect consists of somepromising approaches such as:i. To strengthen or improve the existing local formal and informal institutions (structure and function), especiallyconcerning planning, organizing, actuating, and controlling in forest management;

ii. To encourage networks among villages (inter-village institutions) in order to avoid horizontal conflicts concerninglocal natural resources;

iii. To encourage local/traditional institutions to participate actively in environmental protection and forest utilization;iv. To facilitate local self-reliance groups in developing proposals related to forest management to be submitted to

funding agencies.d. Economic aspect concerns local economic improvement. It should be considered as a core of vision to reach

community’s welfare, especially those who depend on forest resources. Some important actions are:i. To give prioritized allocation of budget, which comes from local resources, to fulfill local physical and

non-physical demands, especially dealing with first-floor basic needs;ii. To encourage participatory economic development processes in order to fit with resource potentials and local

needs;iii. To identify and develop the existing potential forest based production activities, including post-harvesting

processes, marketing, and if necessary property rights of specific local traditional technologies / products;iv. To analyse the possibility to extend working opportunities for local community and partnership patterns (vertical,

horizontal, and advocacy) between local communities and big-scale forest industries;


69

v. To develop or strengthen local economic institutions including village cooperation based on local socio-culturesand demands.

In order to answer those challenges it needs cooperation among forest users or multi-stakeholders. Non-governmentalorganizations or universities, especially those which are familiar with local condition, and entrusted by the localcommunities, and have knowledge about external interests as well as external processes, that would play importantroles in the actions.

References:

Akhdiyat, A., M. A. Sardjono, I. Kuncoro. 1998. Analisis Kontribusi Hutan Terhadap Pendapatan Masyarakat DesaSekitarnya. Suatu Studi Kasus di Kecamatan Kelumpang Hulu Kabupaten Kotabaru Kalimantan Selatan (Analysis ofForest Contribution to the Local Community’s Income. Case Study of Kelumpang Hulu, Kotabaru District of SouthKalimantan). Pascasarjana Journal Vol. 1./No.1./1998/44-68.

Beukeboom, H. 2000. Re-Thinking the Role of Forest Concession (HPHs) in Settling Land Conflicts. Pola Kemitrraan vsLand Claims. Samarinda: SFMP/GTZ.

Colfer, C. J. P. 1983. Change and Indigenous Agroforestry in East Kalimantan. Borneo Research Bulletin 15: 3-20,70-86.

Colfer, C. J. P., R. Prabhu, M. Guenter, C. McDougall, N. M. Porro, R. Porro. 1999. Who Count Most? Assessing HumanWell-Being in Sustainable Forest Management. Bogor: CIFOR.

Dauvergner, P. 2001. Loggers and Degradation in the Asia-Pacific. Cooperation and Enviromental Management.Cambridge: Cambridge Uiversity Press.

Djuweng, S. 1992. Kampung Loboh Laman Banua: Konsep dan Praktek Teritorial pada Suku Dayak Simpang (TheBanua Community of Loboh Laman: Teritorial Land Use Concepts and Practices among the Simpang Dayaks). PaperPresented at the Second Bienal Conference. Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia: Borneo Research Council.

Fahruk, E., M. A. Sardjono, I. Kuncoro. 2002. Analisis Potensi dan Manfaat Kawasan Hutan Wisata Gunung KelamDitinjau dari Kontribusinya terhadap Pendapatan Masyarakat Desa Sekitarnya (Analysis of the Potential and Utilizationof Gunung Kelam Recreation Forest with Regards to Its Contribution to the Surrounding Villager’s Income). EquatorVol.1 / No.1 / April 2002 / 1-34.

Frans, S. 1992. Pola Pengusahaan Tanah dan Permasalahan pada Masyarakat “Dayak Banuaka” di Kabupaten KapuasHulu, Kalimantan Barat (Pattern of Land Use and Problems of Banuaka’ Communities in Kapuas Hulu District, WestKalimantan). Paper Presented at the Second Biennial Conference. Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia: Borneo ResearchCouncil.

FWI / GFW. 2001. Potret Keadaan Hutan Indonesia (The Portrait of Indonesia’s forest situation). Bogor, Indonesia:Forest Watch Indonesia dan Washington D.C.: Global Forest Watch.

Gunawan, R; J. Thamrin; E. Suhendar. 1999. Industrialisasi Kehutanan dan Dampaknya Terhadap Masyarakat Adat.Kasus Kalimantan Timur (Forestry Industry and Its Impacts on Traditional Community. Case of East Kalimantan). Bandung:AKATIGA.

Mubyarto, L. Soetrisno, P. Sudira, S. A. Awang, Sulistyo, A. S. Dewanta, N. S. Rejeki, E. Pratiwi. 1991. Kajian SosialEkonomi Desa-Desa Perbatasan di Kalimantan Timur. (Socio-Economic Analysis of Villages in the Border Region ofEast Kalimantan). Yogyakarta: Penerbit Aditya Media.

Ross, H. S. 1984. Forestry in Land Use Policy in Indonesia. Oxford, England: University of Oxford.

Sardjono, M. A. 1990. Die Lembo-Kultur in Ostkalimantan. Ein Modell fuer die Entwicklung agroforstlicher Landnutzungin den Feuchttroppen (The Lembo-Culture in East Kalimantan. A Model for the Development of Agroforestry Land Use inthe Tropical Region). Hamburg, Germany: Universitaet Hamburg.

70


Sardjono, M. A., G. Riyadi, I. Lambrie, A. Kalimantoro, E. Erawan, Setiawati, M. Amblani, S. B. Darmi, Udin, Kamaruddin.1999. Pemantauan Perkembangan Sosial-Ekonomi-Budaya Desa-Desa Binaan Pemegang Hak Pengusahaan Hutan diKabupaten Kutai, Kalimantan Timur (Monitoring of Social, Economic, and Cultural Aspects of Guided Villages of TimberConcessioneaires in Kutai District, East Kalimantan). Samarinda: PPLH Unmul.

Sardjono, M. A. 1999. Panduan Penilaian Kegiatan Pembinaan Masyarakat Desa Hutan. (A Guidance Book forEvaluation of Forest Villages Development Program). Samarinda: Fahutan Unmul/PPLH Unmul/CSF Unmul/FMP-GTZ.

Sardjono, M.A; Y. Yasuhiro; A. Wijaya; Kamaruddin; T. Handoko; A. Purbono. 2000. Study on the dynamics of localcommunity’s livelihood and forestland uses in Sangkulirang Sub-district of East-Kalimantan, Indonesia. Samarinda/Morioka/Jakarta: Unmul-Tohoku Research Center-Bioma Foundation-PT SLJ.

Sardjono, M. A. and I. Samsoedin. 2001. Traditional Knowledge and Practice of Biodiversity Conservation. The BenuaqDayak Community of East, Kalimantan, Indonesia. In Colfer, C. J. P. and Y. Byron (Eds.). 2001. People ManagingForest. The Links between Human Well-Being and Sustainability. Bogor, Indonesia: CIFOR, Washington D. C, USA:RFF.

Sardjono, M. A; Y. Yasuhiro; A. Wijaya; Kamaruddin; Ibrahim. 2001. Social structure and production activities of thecommunity surrounding forest concessionaires in Sangkulirang of East-Kutai District (Indonesia). Samarinda/Morioka:Unmul-Tohoku Research Center-Bioma Foundation.

ITTO. 2001. Mewujudkan Pengeloaan Hutan Lestari di Indonesia. Laporan Misi Teknis ITTO untuk Indonesia. (RealizingSustainable Forest Management in Indonesia. Report of Technical Mission for Indonesia). Jakarta.

WALHI. 2001. FLEG: Antara Setitik Harapan dan Segudang Keraguan (FLEG: Between Hopes and Doubts). Jakarta:Wahana Lingkungan Hidup Indonesia.

Widjono, AMZ. R. H. 1998a. Masyarakat Dayak Menatap Hari Esok (Dayaks Community Looking at their Future). Jakarta:Grasindo.

Slides Presentation

Slide 1 Slide 2


71

Slide 3 Slide 4

Slide 5 Slide 6

Slide 7 Slide 8

Slide 9 Slide 10

72

Slide 11 Slide 12

Slide 13 Slide 14

Slide 15 Slide 16

Slide 17 Slide 18


73

Slide 19 Slide 20

Slide 21 Slide 22

Slide 23

74

1. AbstractThere are three main threats to biodiversity on the Gunung Halimun National Park (GHNP) i.e., natural resources usedto fulfill basic needs; unclear boundary, and land encroachment / forest clearance. The Biodiversity Conservation Project(BCP) Initiative in GHNP area has been conducted to mitigate these threats through conservation practices whichfocused on strengthening Park management, development of research and long-term monitoring program ofendangered wildlife, and the establishment of database and information system. Although, the initiative has beenconducted for nearly eight years, the activities almost exclusively concentrated on the Park area only. In order to mitigatepressure to biodiversity in the Park and to sustain natural resources use in the area, it is suggested to developcommunity development activities around the Park. At the same time it should include natural forest surroundings asone ecosystem-based conservation management unit.

2. IntroductionCovering almost 40,000 ha of wet forest, the Gunung Halimun area supports biodiversity of national, regional, andinternational importance and is considered to be the most significant remnant of Javan montane and submontanetropical forest. The area has a vital hydrological function, as it is the main source of clean water for most of West Javaand Jakarta urban areas. The wide variety of natural habitats support a number of endemic species among the faunasuch as Javan hawk-eagle (Spizaetus bartelsi), and Javan gibbon (Hylobates moloch) and a distinctive flora includingDipterocarpus haseltii. Previous authors noted that 25 of Java’s 30 endemic bird species are recorded in GHNP. Sixspecies of endemic mammals are found in GHNP as a component of Halimun’s ecosystem and it is also important forleopard (Panthera pardus) the top remaining predator in Java.

3. Main direct threats to biodiversityWidespread poverty puts pressure on natural resourcesThe forests are rich source of timber and non-timber forest products, used locally for a variety of purposes such as food,medicines, construction materials, charcoal and ranching. Plant collection is often accompanied by opportunistichunting.

Villagers hunt various species of birds for personal consumption and local trade. Food species include jungle fowls,quails, pigeons and doves. Trade species include song birds (e.g. thrush and bulbuls), and birds of prey.

Unclear boundaryIn general, boundary of the protected areas is unclear, causing a lot of confusion and unnecessary conflict between therangers and the local community. In addition, the absence of clearly delineated boundary has led to disputes betweenthe forestry concession (perum Perhutani) and the protected area authority and, in certain places, a production activitycan now be found inside the protected area. This demonstrates the difficulty of managing and enforcing a protected areawhere boundaries are disputes.

Land encroachment/Forest clearanceEncroachment/forest clearance is a serious problem in Halimun area. The encroachment are often found nearboundaries of enclaves and even the settlement can be found very close to the protected area. This is because most ofthe settlements were established before the management unit of the protected area exists. Also, unsustainable farmingpractices and insufficient farmland drive the local people to enlarge their land for cultivation by clearing the forest.

4. Constraints on biodiversity conservationThe following factors place constraints on conservation and sustainable use of natural resources:a. Links between central and local conservation policy are not clear.

Despite the fact that conservation policy is under Central government directives, the management of natural

3.7 Paper 6:Conservation Initiatives in Gunung Halimun National Park,West Java, Indonesiaby Dr. Jito Sugardjito, Research Centre for Biology of the Indonesia Institute for Sciences (LIPI)

Paper 6: Conservation Initatives in Gunung Halimun National Park, West Java, Indonesia


75

resources has been shifted to district level. Therefore, a linkage of conservation policy to the district level is required.Most policy makers and stakeholders particularly in the district level are still emphasizing short-term economicbenefit in order to generate revenue for their districts.

b. Unclear legal regulation on land useMost of the forests in Halimun are located in protected areas. Surrounding these sites, are large remaining farmingareas and production forests managed by the private sector. However, boundaries and utilization rights are notclearly defined.

c. Limited capacity and resourcesThere are currently no institutions with the capacity to effectively manage boundary between protected areas andprotection forest, to conserve biodiversity situated in these areas. The District government is mandated with thisresponsibility, but it does not have the skills, knowledge and resources to implement conservation activitieseffectively.

d. Limited communication and no community participationThe majority of local inhabitants have failed to benefit from the growth of timber production, but rather have sufferedfrom having their traditional wild harvesting grounds enclosed. This has led them to exploit resources in lessaccessible areas, including core protection and other biological critical zones. Many activities related to forestresource management have not considered local communities.

e. Poor socio-economic conditions of local peoplePeople who live surrounding protected areas have no alternative income other than from forest resources. A numberof economic activities within the buffer zone are threatening the adjacent core areas. This include firewood collectionfor charcoal production and capturing of wildlife, which often involved endangered or keystone species. This isparticularly practiced by people who live in the National Park enclave where the family planning programme hasfailed and resulted in a rapid rate of population growth which leads to forest clearance for agriculture and wildlifehunting.

f. Insufficient biological data and ecological knowledge on rare and keystone speciesMany important areas, in terms of biodiversity and ecological function, such as wildlife routes between foresthabitats, are located outside protected areas where their current status is a long-term production forest. Until now,field studies have focused mainly on inventory of biodiversity. There is little detailed ecological knowledge onendangered or rare species.

g. Low level of awarenessAwareness among policy makers, specifically at local government (district level) as well as local communities, somecommercial concerns, and outsiders, on long-term value of biodiversity is considered relatively low. There are anincreased number of wealthy people from surrounding cities are moving into the Halimun area and conductingcommercial activities such as cattle ranching and poultry farming. Apart from traditional communities in the southernpart of the Park, few other communities practice sustainable use of natural resources or have any sense ofcustodianship over the land. This is partly due to their low level of awareness of what the benefits of a long-termconservation approach to their environment would bring. Furthermore, a negative side-effects of the new policy ofdecentralization is, a need to increase local revenue which has resulted in increasing illegal trade for timber andother forest products.

5. Conservation activitiesAlthough the Park has been designated since 1992, it lacks representative management office to operate its mandate inconserving biodiversity in the Park. As a consequence, the first step of activities was building up capacity of bothphysical construction and human resources. This was the first phase of activity that has been conducted for three yearsfrom 1995 until 1998. Working in collaboration with two government organizations partner, JICA has completed theinfrastructure facilities including training for personnel in the first phase. Two government organizations are involved.The Indonesian Forest Protection and Nature Conservation (PHKA), is the management authority. The IndonesianInstitute for Sciences (LIPI), is the scientific authority for biodiversity issues. During this period, a management unitbuilding, visitor centre, provision of equipments for park protection and research centre, have been constructed, whilecollection of base-line data on fauna and flora for establishment of park management has also been conducted.Conservation activities such as conservation education and public awareness, ecotourism, and species protection wereestablished in phase two from 1998 until 2003 while at the same time research were emphasized on studying fauna andflora that can directly support management of the park. On collaboration with community and NGOs in implementingconservation program, activities were established during this period. In accordance with the objectives of BCP which areto strengthen park management through incorporating scientific findings into management decision-making processand to disseminate research results, the conservation activities conducted by JICA-LIPI-PHKA consist of:a. Conduct baseline ecological studies and develop a long-term monitoring programme.

76


b. Develop a database for the entire GHNP.c. Produce conservation plans for endangered species.d. Strengthen links between the GHNP management and research station activities.e. Coordinate research activities in the GHNP and identify research priorities.f. Implementation of awareness and extension programmes among stakeholders to increase their appreciation of the

long-term value of biodiversity and understanding impact they exert on the Park.g. Conduct a campaign at regional and national level to promote the attractions and values of GHNP.h. Train and equip school teachers and religious leaders to engage in environmental education within their

communities.i. Train forest and community rangers on skills necessary to operate in GHNP.j. Provide training for nature guides and interpretation staff.

In addition, some NGOs have initiated activities to assist community in developing alternative income by generatingseveral schemes, including propagation of commercial orchids, breeding of commercial beetle, and establishment ofsilk-worm farming.

Field guide-books have been produced to support conservation education and awareness, particularly for urban peoplewho benefited from the protection of biodiversity in the Park. These include topics on:a. Medicinal plantsb. Plants around Cikaniki and loop trailc. Bird of GHNP.d. Orchids of GHNP.e. Mammals of GHNP.f. Fresh water fish of GHNPg. Fungi of GHNP

In the meantime, some scientific results which can be used to support park management and have been publishedinternationally, include:a. Distribution and density of primates in GHNP, West Java (Sugardjito, J and M.Yoneda)b. Altitudinal distribution of birds in GHNP (Adhikerana, A and S. Komeda)c. Primate responses to observer related to habitat disturbances in GHNP (Sugardjito, J. and M.H.Sinaga)d. Ecological research on Leopard in Cikaniki, GHNP (Sakaguchi, N. et al)e. Diversity and distribution of raptors at GHNP. (Prawiladilaga, D.M.)

In order to extend and develop conservation programme at landscape level, Fauna & Flora International in collaborationwith LIPI and PHKA is proposing to integrate GHNP and the neighbouring Protection Forests into one unitecosystem-based management which is being considered by multilateral donor agency for funding. The immediateobjective of this ecosystem-based conservation programme is to establish a basis and framework for the long-termconservation of the habitats, species, and functions of the Halimun-Salak Ecosystem.

6. ConclusionThe BCP initiative has contributed significantly towards strengthening the management of Gunung Halimun NationalPark. Development of facilities during the BCP Initiative has helped the park in managing and protecting biodiversity.Development included construction of management office unit, interpretation centre, research centre and database andinformation centre. Dissemination of information particularly on species diversity and natural uniqueness of the Park isuseful to promote the Park in order to foster environmental sound nature tourism. The protection of biodiversity in thePark cannot be sustained unless the pressures on natural resources to satisfy the basic need of surroundingscommunities are tackled. Therefore, it is recommended to include the existence of natural forest surroundings into anecosystem-based conservation management unit.

Reference

ANZDEC 1995 Nature Conservation Plan for Indonesia Vol. 4A Jawa Barat Province; A Review and update of the 1982National Conservation Plan for Indonesia. IBRD/WB Number 3243-IND.

Fauna&Flora International-IP 2002 MSP Brief: Developing an Ecosystem-based Conservation in Halimun-SalakRegion, West Java. UNDP-LIPI-FFI-IP. Bogor.


77

Slide 6Slide 5

Slide 4Slide 3

Slide 2Slide 1

Slides Presentation

Kahono, S; and T. Okayama 2001 The Sub project A Research and Survey. Proceedings of The Annual Meeting of theProject. LIPI-JICA-PHKA. Bogor.

Mori, K. 2002 Biodiversity Conservation Project Activities in 2002 for Research and Study Component. Seminar AktivitasPenelitian Program Konservasi Keanekaragaman Hayati. LIPI-JICA-PHKA. Bogor.

Takahashi, S 1997 Review and Prospects of the Biodiversity Conservation Project. Research and Conservation ofBiodiversity in Indonesia Vol. 1: General Review of the Project. LIPI-JICA-PHKA. Bogor.

Uehara, H. 2001 Profile of the Biodiversity Conservation Project (Phase II). Proceedings of the Annual meeting of theProject. LIPI-JICA-PHKA. Bogor.

78

Slide 8Slide 7

Slide 9 Slide 10

Slide 12Slide 11

Slide 13 Slide 14


79

Slide 17 Slide 18

Slide 20Slide 19

Slide 21

Slide 16Slide 15

80

ASEAN is composed of ten independent nations in South East Asia, including Brunei Darussalam, Indonesia, Singapore,Malaysia, Thailand, Vietnam, Cambodia and the Philippines, excluding Myanmar. South East Asia is one of the mostimportant regions in the world, in terms of biodiversity. It is rich in species ingenutive and ecosystem diversity. There isalso a high level of Indonesium. The world’s most megadiverse countries are located in this region, namely Indonesia,Malaysia and the Philippines. The forest covers 48% of its land area but the average loss of forest is 15,000sq km in1970 to 1990, and from 1990-2000 it is 23,000sq km. However, the protected areas of these regions have more than1000 sites covering 18,000sq km and 94 sites for marine, covering 97,000sq km. These sites are distributed among theten Asean Countries. These countries are also signatories to international conventions, such as Conventions ofBiological Diversity (CBD) and World Heritage Parks. Only two countries have not joined the CBD. There are alsointernational initiatives that are working in the region. One is the CITES, i.e. involving the control and trade of wildlifespecies. The IUCN has a programme on red listing of species and WWF has eco-regions and Birdlife International hasimportant endemic bird areas and Conservation International has conservation areas in priority areas in these parks.The overall goal of the project is to intensify the Biodiversity Conservation in order to improve co-operation in acomprehensive regional contact by trying to set up a network of international links among ASEAN countries. ARCBC hasfour components, one of which deals with Networking and Institution Building, and conducting regular meetings amongmembers, as well as organizing workshops that are important to the regions. The second component is Training andExtensions, which will be detailed later. The third component is Research and Development, and the fourth isManagement and Electronic Data Information Sharing. In this fourth component, we try to harmonise data that is beinggenerated by various institutions through the National Biodiversity Units, in order that they can report the biodiversityconditions at the ASEAN meetings. The research programme is a grant that has been provided by European Unions,which has provided funds to conduct research in the region. In the grant programme, their objectives are to providesolutions to issue on biodiversity conservation throughout ASEAN of the regional context, improve standards of researchterms, and methodology and skills, and to promote collaboration among ASEAN institutions. ASEAN and EU providebenefits for gender and development as well as prepares and packages research results beneficial to scientists.

Initially, ten subjects were identified to cover the research areas. These are:a. Valuable usage and valuesb. Ecological reconstructionc. Sustainable production and use biodiversity protected areasd. System designe. Taxonomic and systematic designf. Monitoring biodiversity protected areasg. Management studiesh. Linkagesi. Economical systemsj. Conservation and Biosafety and Biosecurity

However, considering the limited budget, the project has, through the committee, recommended only three importantareas, which they consider valuable, i.e. Valuable Usage and Values, Ecological Reconstruction and Taxonomic andSystematic Design.

Today, there are 51 projects operating all over the South East Asian region, and the funding is indicated in the table. Theresults of the research is yet to be received. Some of them have barely started, therefore, results of these research willcome in over the next year.

There is only one project that has results at present, and this was a project done in the Philippines, on the survey of coralin the north of Mindanao. They discovered four new species of coral that have never been described before in the

3.8 Paper 7:Research and Trainingon Biodiversity in ASEANby Dir. Gregorio I. Texon, ASEAN Regional Centre for Biodiversity Conservation (ARCBC)

Paper 7: Research and Training on Biodiversity in ASEAN


81

country. This has contributed to some new discovery for the country as far as corals are concerned.

On training, we are trying to work out a traditional system, which consists of designing, implementation and evaluation.The initial training was done in Bangkok, Thailand in 2001. It was discovered there are four important types of trainingthat emerged. The first is Taxonomy, the second is Assessment and Management of Biodiversity, the third is AwarenessBuilding and the fourth is Data Access and Exchange. However, as the training have been designed by many countriesand institutions, a new system has to be designed, to meet the collective requirements. In this way, we looked back tosee how we can address this. Strategically we have to design an occupational standard for staff working in the protectedareas. Last year, we had Phase One, which was regional survey and assessment. Phase Two was the development ofstandards. In the survey, we looked into the training of these three aspects on the operational capacity of theseProtected Management Areas. We found there were many organizations working for these protected areas in onecountry alone, producing overlaps. As far as Protected Area Management is concerned, there is no status given byauthorities to staff working in protected areas, and there are inadequate resources for capacity building, and there is aneed to improve transboundary co-operation over protected areas.

On the approach to Protected Management Areas, there is a lack of strategic approach to Human ResourceManagement, lack of ownership training because most of the training is actually initiated by foreign institutions. Thesejobs are not clearly defined and not systematically evaluated.

On the availability of training development opportunity, there is limited education for protected management. There is adominance of forestry training, and most of the people we have interviewed working in the protected areas, seldom havedegrees in other conservation courses. There is no particular person qualified for this subject. Some training centers arenot suitable and have improper formats for training schedules, with no appropriate identification of needs. They havetheir problems, but they also have activities that are co-ordinated to the practices of the region. For example in Brunei,all those who are trained in forestry are required to go for intensive training.

In Cambodia and Indonesia, all field researchers and staff are required to go for training, to improve professionalism andmanagement. In Laos, PDR Nationally Development Management is available to all staff. In Malaysia establishment ofhuman resources plan training centre for its staff is available. In other parts only nationally funded certified long termcourses are done in conjunction with Lincoln University of New Zealand and in the Philippines manuals are availableabout Management Integrated Protection Areas. In Singapore there is a clear mechanism for staff to share withcolleagues its skills and knowledge to experience training for its volunteers. In Thailand, training is strategicallyco-ordinated for its staff and training programmes offered for its volunteers. In Vietnam, training is organized andco-ordinated for its staff to include biodiversity conservation and natural resources management at ForestryUniversities.

In Phase 2, we were able to identify more than 200 jobs in the protected area and in Kota Kinabalu , we were able to findvarious activities and skill knowledge to effectively manage our protective areas.

In Phase 3, there will be a signing of Work Programme for Protected Management and Flora and Fauna Internationaland also IUCN will look at what we have done and check the professional standard for protected areas.

It is recommended that world collaboration, research institution supported by government in international conservationprogramme and Human Resource Management be practiced. However, habitat destruction still continues. ARCBCrecommends transforming research resources conservation policies to include practical procedures and activities withtangible resources with technical peoples and transform research resources of awareness materials to reach theordinary man in the street and the farmers in order to reap benefits.

On the training side those responsible for Management should be working on a co-ordinated agenda, be proficient inprotected area management and be given a higher status. Their work should be more attractive and more accessible asa career, in order to become more performance focused. National ownership programme should be increased andsupported. Regional co-operation and collaboration should be encouraged, and establish national training andeducation institution to be supported and designed to conservation. Focus on particular areas should be shifted to longterm and to continue good practices on human resource development.

82

Slide 1 Slide 2

Slides Presentation

Slide 5 Slide 6

Slide 3 Slide 4

Slide 7 Slide 8


83

Slide 9 Slide 10

Slide 11 Slide 12

Slide 13 Slide 14

Slide 15 Slide 16

84


Slide 17 Slide 18

Slide 19 Slide 20

Slide 21 Slide 22

Slide 23 Slide 24


85

Slide 25 Slide 26

Slide 27 Slide 28

Slide 29 Slide 30

Slide 31 Slide 32

86

Slide 33 Slide 34


87

1. AbstractThe New Biodiversity Strategy of Japan summarizes "three cries" in the current biodiversity conditions. Those are threatof extinction of many species caused by human activities, desolation of rural area caused by changes in lifestyles incountryside, and negative impact of alien species introduced by human being.

In these status of nature in Japan, the project for reintroduction the oriental white stork is on going in the Toyooka-city,Hyogo prefecture. The breeding population of Oriental white stork in this area became extinct in 1971 due to habitatdeterioration, food shortage and physiological damage by chemical substances for agriculture, etc. Captive breedinghas succeeded since 1989 when it was 24 years after the breeding project started. In 1999, Hyogo prefectural homelandfor the Oriental white stork was established at Toyooka-city as a reintroduction center for this species with conservationand propagation activities.

To establish viable and free-ranging population in this area, we promote the propagation of captive storks with geneticand veterinary management, habitat restoration based on the ecosystem research, and education on creatingenvironments where humans and wildlife coexist.

Integrated approach based on scientific and local knowledge, cooperation and jointworks with several social sectorssuch as universities, zoos, NGO'S, governmental agencies, and local bodies are the basic perspectives forimplementing of above measures. And preventative and adaptive manner is fundamental concept to promote thisre-introduction project.

2. Text PresentationThis paper covers the introduction of the Oriental White Stork, its extinction and the success of its reintroduction andrehabilitation.

The total land area of Japan is 380,000sq km and from north to south end, it is about 3000km, consisting of unique floraand fauna. However, Japan is consistently developing and wildlife population is affected. Recently, the Japanesegovernment compiled a biodiversity study and summarized three crises. The first crisis is the shrinking or extinction ofmain species caused by reckless human activities such as habitat destruction and plantation. Second crisis isdegradation of satoyama, which mean countryside nature, i.e. padi fields and secondary forest. This is caused by thechange of lifestyles of the country people. There is a negative impact of alien species introduced by human beings whichcan disturb the natural ecosystem. The third crisis is human activities, and we can recognize two types of humanactivities such as over exploitation of habitat destruction and the change of lifestyle.

The Oriental White Stork is a huge bird with a wing span of over two meters and they breed around Russia. Theymigrates to Central China, but the breeding population still live in Toyoka, in Japan. Only about 2500 species are still inexistence over the last thirty years and they survived on fish, insects and other small animals. These birds occupied thetop of the ecological pyramid and Toyoka is the last place where these birds were recorded seen. In 1940’s these birdswere increasingly becoming extinct and in 1971 they were lost in the wild. The cause for its extinction was due to huntingand habitat destruction. These birds make their nests in pine trees but during World War 2, these trees were cut down fortheir gum. Another cause for their extinction is pollution caused by toxic chemicals and also dramatic changes of padifields resulting in food shortage for these birds.

The White Stork is believed to bring happiness and luck to the Japanese. In 1950, several conservation efforts such asfood supply, building of artificial nests etc by the local people and government were conducted. In 1965 captive breedingwas started but no chicks hatched. In 1985, six young storks donated by Harbour of Territories resulted in the first chickbeing hatched in 1989. After this we have had successful breeding every year. We have 100 individuals chicks in ourstations. Therefore, Hyogo Prefecture founded the Homeland for Oriental White Stork in 1999. Our missions are firstly,

3.9 Paper 8:Wildlife Management in Japanby Dr. Hiroshi Ikeda, Hyogo Prefectural Homeland for the Oriental White Stork

88

breeding and genetic management of the Oriental White Stork, and secondly, scientific research for reintroduction andpublic education. Therefore, our first success in artificial breeding was in 1985 and we established registration of theOriental White Stork.

The introduction schedules are divided into three stages. The first is captive breeding which has already beensuccessful. The next one is to create the release stage. In captivity breeding, we managed genetic management,habitation for release in the wild and environment assessment, and restoring techniques. Social economic activities and,public education to the relevant social sectors are targetted. We use the GIS methods to run the assessment of habitatfor the white stork. We make a database for habitat conditions and also habitat use for the white stork, covering habitatconditions. In comparison, we derived some theories and techniques for habitat restoration. For example, as we nolonger have pine trees, we use artificial nesting towers. Also, we do not have access from the padi fields to existingrivers, therefore we have to make our own water network.

Collaboration with the social sectors is also very important, therefore, we work hand in hand with the locals to keep thegenetic diversity and also we have joint projects to conserve the white stork population in Harbour of Territorities. Thegovernment and other administrative sectors are also important in giving financial support and organizing activities. Lastyear, we started committees to have joint activities with the local public bodies and central government and severalsections for agriculture and construction bodies. The forestry and agriculture departments also played their parts inestablishing a pine forest. Local companies and funding bodies are also important. The electric company is alsoimportant because the white storks will strike electric cables, and it is necessary for the electric company to bury theircables underground. The most important sector is its citizens, the local people, e.g. NGOs, volunteers, farmer groups,who started their own activities. Farmers organize markets to sell their products which do not contain chemicalsubstances. These markets are open to visitors. Students also play their part in conserving these white storks in joiningour projects and learning the important activities on how to conserve these birds.

30 or 40 years ago, the ecological pyramid was complete. However, fragmentations of the destruction of several types ofactivities resulted in the incomplete portrayment of the pyramid. The Oriental White Stork was the top predator, but notany more. We have to re-establish some ecological network and modify the pyramid. We have to go back to the past toretrace our steps, it is a baseline, in order to find out what we did wrong.

In conclusion, the scientific approach and collaboration of all the social sectors and adaptive management are veryimportant in conserving these endangered species. A photograph taken in 1960 shows a white stork with students, andthis sends us the message that it is never too late to reintroduce the white storks again.

Slides Presentation

Slide 1 Slide 2

Paper 8: Wildlife Management in Japan


89

Slide 3 Slide 4

Slide 5 Slide 6

Slide 7 Slide 8

Slide 9 Slide 10

90

Slide 11 Slide 12

Paper 8: Wildlife Management in Japan

Slide 13


91

Q: Dr. Stephen SuttonI’d like to know the difference between a crane and a stork. They are two different kinds of birds?

A: Dr. IkedaThe cranes lay their eggs on the ground but the storks lay their eggs on trees.

Q: Mr. Kan Yaw ChongToxins is one of the factors responsible for the extinction of the white stork. I wonder what chemicals there are, and howthey contribute to the extinction of the white stork, for e.g. the toxic chemicals used in paddy fields.

A: Dr. IkedaMercury and PCP chloride. This chemical concentrates in fishes and prawns, and white storks feeding fish and prawnsare affected. PCP affects the breeding condition of the white stork.

Q: Mr. M.H. PhuaWe have heard two fairy tales about conservation. One is from Japan, Kushiro to be precise, and the other is theintroduction of the white stork. This leads me to conclude that culturally meaningful key species to the local people orsociety is the key to successful conservation. This is created from a driving force to protect these species and leads toa successful conservation. The Orang Utans are culturally meaningful to the Malaysians, and perhaps they alsorepresent happiness to the people. Do you think this situation applies to Malaysia?

A: Dr. IkedaOf course, the white stork invites happiness to the local people, that is what they believe. We always try to have jointinteractive projects on scientific levels, and work together with administrative sectors on the importance of successfulconservation. We also try to have several joint education programmes involving the locals and also have meetings at thevillages.

Q: Mr. Azman MohamadI have two questions to Dr. Sugardjito on the Public Awareness Campaign that has been done in Kalimantan Park. First,who is the group you are targeting for the campaign? And how did you come to choose this group? Secondly, what is theresult from that campaign, i.e. what are the indicators used to measure the effectiveness of the conservation campaign?

A: Dr. SugardjitoThe target group identified at the beginning of the second phase of the PCP initiative is the people in the city, becausethe purpose of the management is also to promote the Park. Before this initiative, there were very few visitors to thePark, perhaps less than l00. Since then, there has been a significant increase in visitors after year 2000. This would bethe indicator of the campaign’s success. We have also been successful in training and educating the locals for thesurrounding park areas, including the community and religious leaders. We have a designated time to carry out all thesecampaigns. As you know, most of the Indonesians are Muslims, so every Friday we have our prayers in the mosque. Assuch, we supply our material to the Kiyai (prayer leader), who will inculcate or promote our campaign aboutconservation. So, these are the main target groups.

A: Dr. Jamili NaisThese are just some comments, some passing thoughts. You may not want to respond. Hearing the contrast uponconservation approach in developed countries, it crossed my mind that it is just like kids growing up. When you are a kid,you long to be a grown-up, and when you have grown-up, you want to be a kid again. Thus, developing countries rush tobe developed, and once we are developed, you long to be somehow underdeveloped again. That is the nature of thegame.

3.10 Questions & Answers (Papers 5-8)Chairperson: Dr. Stephen Sutton

92

Seems to me that in a developing country, the main aim is habitat conservation, and once that is strictly under control,only then will focus on individual species. However, once we are developed, only then will we focus on speciesconservation, for e.g. the white stork and other species, which we cannot afford to do at the moment. The storkconservation is very costly, and in Sabah, we definitely cannot afford it.

Q: Hj. Amat RamsaI would like to ask Prof. Agung Sardjono a question. You have recommended two approaches in solving the problem inKalimantan. One is the bottom-up effort, and the second is the committee empowering at grassroot level. You say thesewould be the key factors to success in solving problems in the field. Can you elaborate further your approach?

A: Prof. Agung SardjonoActually, the Government has many programmes for the areas under threat, but most of the programmes are decided attop level. According to management decisions, there are many NGOs who can be collaborators, or at least be includedin the programmes, mostly institutions, including government institutions.

Q: Dr. Stephen SuttonI would like to ask Dir. Texon on the future of the ARCBC. It has been very busy and active in the past few years, so howdo you see their future now?

A: Dir. Gregario TexonThe ARCBC have indicated they are interested in extending the project for another year. They have sent theirapplication, and also a team to evaluate whatever shortcomings we face, and they are interested in correcting all these,and continue on with their project. The team has just completed a mission (we had a meeting in Jakarta), and theindication is that we will continue with the training programme with respect to Database, and one of the importantelements is the setting up of a Policy Conservation Section, so that we can resolve our work, and hopefully transform itinto our policy programme.

Questions & Answers (Papers 5-8)


93

1. IntroductionThe biodiversity and tropical rainforest ecosystems of Brunei Darussalam have been, at this moment, spared by thecontinuous production of oil and gas from offshore territorial water since 1929. The country's population of just over300,000 people were drawn to settle major towns along the northern coastal areas that offered lucrative jobs for a muchbetter standard of living. This has left the hinterland rainforests in the southern region remained largely isolated andundisturbed.

It is estimated that Brunei Darussalam still maintained about 80 percents of its land under rainforest covering a total areaof 469046 hectares. Roughly 50 percents of the forest is pristine, and out of this about 20 percents have been allocatedas conservation areas such as protected national parks, heritage parks, wildlife sanctuaries and nature reserves.Represented by an estimated 5000 species of flora, Brunei rainforest contains some of the richest biologicalassemblages in the world.

These conservation areas were managed by two stake holders; the Brunei Forestry Department mainly looking after theflora, and the Brunei Museums Department is responsible for the fauna affairs. The Forestry Department and BruneiMuseums have 93333 hectares and 9011 hectares conservation areas, respectively. This accounts about 18 percents ofits 576500 hectares total land area (Table 1).

This paper presents my direct experiences as the manager at Kuala Belalong Field Studies Centre and MerimbunHeritage Park since 1990.

2. Conservation AreasSome 20 areas have been kept aside sporadically throughout the country as national parks, heritage parks, wildlifesanctuaries and nature reserves. These conservation areas account for more than 20 percents of the country's totalforest cover.

Brunei rainforest is represented by at least nine different forest types commonly known to botanists in this region.Amongst of these forest types are:

a. Beach Forest, develops along the coastal area.b. Mangal Forest or Mangrove thriving by the coastal margin and river estuaries that are associated with muddy

soils.c. Peatswamp Forest existing in the poorly drained freshwater, just behind the coastal forest formations.d. Riparian Forest forms as a transition habitat between the brackish to freshwater tidal reaches along the riverbanks.e. Heath Forest of nutrient-poor and acidic soils occurring in patches near the coast and inland.f. Mixed Dipterocarp Forest dominantly presents with more than 170 species of valued giant Dipterocarpaceae.g. Alluvial Forest develops on flat land beside the river meanders.h. Lower Montane Forest existing on steep ridges above 1000 meters above sea level.i. Secondary Forest or also known as Belukar consisting of mainly short-live or transitional pioneer species.

All conservation areas in Brunei are managed by two stake-holders; the Brunei Forestry Department of the Ministryof Industry and Primary Resources, and the Brunei Museums Department of the Ministry of Culture, Youth andSports.

The Brunei Forestry Department is responsible in managing at least 16 different sites allocated sporadicallythroughout the country (Figure 1). The following are some keys and isolated areas:

a. Ulu Temburong National Park, a self-contained rainforest ecosystem which has an area of 46,210 hectaresharboring Mixed-Dipterocarp Forest and Lower Montane Forest.

b. Benutan Catchment, made up of 2,932 hectares of Mixed-Dipterocarp Forest.

3.11 Paper 9:Park Management - Brunei’s Experienceby Mr. Awang Samhan Nyawa, Brunei Museums Department

Total area % total % total

Brunei Museum (hectare) land area forest area

1. Merimbun Heritage Park 7800 1.3530 1.6629

2. Pulau Siarau 488 0.0846 0.1040

3. Pulau Pilong-Pilongan 2 0.0003 0.0004

4. Mangrove Forest of Berambang 721 0.1251 0.1537

Total 9011 1.5631 1.9211

Forestry Department

1. Ulu Temburong National Park 46210 8.0156 9.8519

2. Bukit Teraja 6825 1.1839 1.4551

3. Bukit Batu Patam 921 0.1598 0.1964

4. Bukit Ulu Tutong 251 0.0435 0.0535

5. Benutan Catchment 2932 0.5086 0.6251

6. Bukit Bedawan 7633 1.3240 1.6273

7. Anduki 917 0.1591 0.1955

8. Andulau 260 0.0451 0.0554

9. Badas 76 0.0132 0.0162

10. Bukit Sawat 486 0.0843 0.1036

11. Sungai Ingei 18491 3.2075 3.9423

12. Ulu Mendaram 6170 1.0703 1.3154

13. Belait Peat Swamp 1492 0.2588 0.3181

14. Berakas 149 0.0258 0.0318

15. Keluyoh 77 0.0134 0.0164

16. Ulu Badas 443 0.0768 0.0944

Total 93333 16.1896 19,8985

Total forest area 469046 ha

Total land area 576500 ha

94

Table 1: Brunei Tropical Rain Forest Conservation Areas

Paper 9: Park Management: Brunei’s Experience

c. Bukit Bedawan, with an area of 7,633 hectares, consisting of hill Mixed-Dipterocarp Forest.d. Sungai Ingei has an area of 18,491 hectares harboring both Mixed-Dipterocarp Forest and Heath Forest.e. Bukit Teraja has an area of 6,825 hectares is dominantly of hill Mixed-Dipterocarp Forest.f. Ulu Mendaram which is allocated for Peatswamp Forest has an area of 6,170 hectares.

The other stake holder is the Brunei Museums Department has managed four areas mainly associated with theprotection of wildlife and their natural habitats. This department is entrusted by the Government of His Majesty TheSultan and Yang Dipertuan of Negara Brunei Darussalam as the authority on Wildlife Protection Enactment and theUnited Nation's Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of wild fauna and flora (CITES).

Its authority has consented the Brunei Museums Department to the acquiring of nature reserves required for the legalprotection of wildlife habitats. The following are nature reserves and wildlife sanctuaries managed by the Department ofBrunei Museums.


95

a. Tasek Merimbun Heritage Park (7,800 ha) is made up of Mixed-Dipterocarp Forest, Freshwater Swamp Forestand Secondary Forest.

b. Pulau Berambang (721 ha) consisting of mangrove forest as the main habitats for Nasalis larvatus and Vampyruspteropus.

c. Pulau Siarau (488 ha) providing a secluded mangrove forest habitats for Nasalis larvatus and Vampyruspteropus.

d. Pulau Pelong-Pelongan (2 ha) is an important islet used as a breeding ground for several migratory species ofTerns.

3. Management ParksTaking into account various isolated and remote locations of most Brunei Darussalam conservation areas, its rainforestis believed to keep many secrets for scientists to discover. The Government of Brunei Darussalam itself is promoting thesignificant roles of the rainforest in maintaining a healthy environment for everybody to appreciate and not just as aparadise for biologists. In this regard two national parks have been established since the early 1980s, whereas the restof major remote conservation areas remained isolated and undeveloped as an indication of safe heaven for biodiversityconservation.

3.1 Ulu Temburong National ParkThis is the largest national park in the country, which has a total area of 46,210 hectares. Most of the terrain ischaracterized by steep ridges and valleys with the highest point attaining a height up to 1850 meters above sea level.Formed by rugged, uplifted and faulted sedimentation layers over millions of years, this is the only national park inthe country that is dominantly consisted of ridge or highland Mixed-Dipterocarp Forest and Lower Montane Forest. Itrepresents about 10 percents of the country's total land area.

This park is a total wilderness with no indigenous settlement within. A large area in the southern region of the parkis landscaped with rugged and hostile terrain that is only accessible by helicopter.

The Brunei Forestry Department, an authority of this park, has consigned a buffering 5000 hectares study arealocated at the north end. It represents just about 10 percents of the park's total area and this means that the park isstill largely inaccessible to public. This study area has maintained its natural status quo where the proposals for theconstruction of dam and road to link this wilderness have been shelved. It is only accessible by a longboat ride overnumerous rocky rapids of Sungai Temburong.

3.2 Kuala Belalong Field Study CentreThe major opening of this park was the establishment of Kuala Belalong Field Studies Centre (KBFSC) immediatelycame into force after the one year scientific expedition jointly organized by the Universiti Brunei Darussalam (UBD)and the Royal Geographical Society (RGS) of London from 1990 to 1991. KBFSC is managed by UBD whichorganizing regular field trips and education programmes for primary and secondary schools, university students,government officials and others from institutes of higher learning locally and internationally. These programmes arepart of boosting public awareness and education towards better understanding on the rainforest ecology.

KBFSC was built inside the park on the bank of Sungai Belalong, just about 300 meters up the confluence of SungaiTemburong. The center has several dormitories, a laboratory, a multi-purposes hall and a dining. This center isdesigned to cater for about 30 people at a time.

The field programmes are associated with nature trails that educate visitors on the ecological roles of the rainforestfauna and flora communities. Next to the center, projecting up over 100 meters above the ground is the vertical andhorizontal aluminium structure that explores the spatial environment of the Mixed-Dipterocarp Forest. This structurewhich stands over the canopy providing visitors with a mesmerizing imagination over an exciting close-up anddistance aerial view of the pristine and luxuriant tropical rainforest.

Just outside the park, on the bank of Sungai Temburong, were the Ulu Temburong National Park Information Centre(UTNPIC) and the Outward Bound Brunei Darussalam (OBBD). UTNPIC is responsible for monitoring visitors andeco-tourism activities on the north end of the park. OBBD, which is managed by the Ministry of Culture, Youth andSports, is on the other hand, provides basic physical, mental and spiritual endurance training in the rainforestenvironment for all walk-of-life.

96

3.3 Merimbun Heritage ParkThis unique wildlife rich, tranquil and mesmerizing area has been the subject of interests to the Brunei Museums asits managing authority since 1967. It covers an area of 7,800 hectares that dominantly harbors lowlandMixed-Dipterocarp species, freshwater swamp forest plant communities in association with 220 hectares of blackwater twin lakes ecosystems.

Preliminary surveys and continuous research on the fauna, flora, ethnography and archeology of the area wasconducted by the Brunei Museums Department, Universiti Brunei Darussalam, National University of Singapore,Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, USA, University of Natural Science, USA, Kagoshima University of Japan,James Cook University and University of New South Wales, Australia, and University of Kent, Uk, since 1983 (Table2). The study by the Brunei Museums in particular, had revealed a few surprising discoveries.

The area around the twin black water lakes itself is believed to have been settled by the native Dusun community sinceabout 500 years ago. Archeological studies have shown that Merimbun Heritage Park (MHP) has a rich remains of the15th century of the Ming Dynasty ceramic artifacts. In the natural history field, the first discovery of the White-collaredFruitbats (Megaerops wetmorei) was the one and only known living specimen in the world occurred here in the park.Several other rare mammal species were also recorded, such as Vordermann's Flying Squirrel (Petynomys vordermanni),Malay Weasel (Mustela nudepis), Otter Civet (Cynogale bennettii), Banded Palm Civet (Hemigalus derbyanus), BandedLinsang (Prionodon linsang) and Turted Ground Squirrel (Rheithrosciurus macrotis).

The above outstanding discoveries, alongside with its unique habitats of the black water lakes, has prompted andhonored the area being declared as one of the ASEAN National Heritage Parks in 1984.

On the contrary to Ulu Temburong National Park, Merimbun Heritage Park is linked with all seasons sealed roads. Thisis a typical infrastructural development provided by the Government of Brunei Darussalam to link all inland villages withmajor coastal towns, and in this case is Kampong Merimbun located at the north end of the park. Archeologicalevidences suggest that Kampong Merimbun is the remains of the once big settlement around the, lake, but nowbecomes a small village consisting of about 10 houses with a total of about 80 local inhabitants.

Local inhabitants and roads that link Merimbun Heritage Park posed a different park management strategy. The beautyand tranquility of the twin lakes, and as well as the friendly inhabitants attract many visitors. Basic public facilities havebeen built by the local authority to cater weekend picnickers. This has forced the Brunei Museums Department to adoptthe local management zones in handling various needs to suit the sustainable development of the park to a minimalimpact on its natural environment.

The park was then divided into three management zones that provide specific roles as to ease the imminent impactposes by visitors and further infrastructural development.

a. Intensive Use AreaThis is located at the end of the road around Kampong Merimbun and is designed as a "honey-pot” in absorbingvarious public activities. It represents about 10 percents of the entire park area of 7, 800 hectares.

b. Less Intensive Use AreaIs a buffer zone behind the Intensive Use Area where public activities are strictly monitored. Education andeco-tourism programmes should be always supervised with the assistance of the park management staff. Thiszone covers about 45 percents of the park total area, and

c. WildernessThe rest of the park is restricted for research and management staff only. No public activities are allowed in thiswilderness.

4. Public Awareness and EducationTwelve years after Tasek Merimbun had been declared as one of the ASEAN National Heritage Parks, the museumscomplex was constructed in 1997 in response to mitigate and minimizing a direct impact to the natural environment. Themuseums complex, which was located in the Intensive Use Area, consisted of a dormitory, a laboratory, an exhibitionhall, a multi-purposes hall and the traditional Dusun house.

As part of the public awareness and education programmes, this complex welcomes the general public and schoolgroups to view its exhibition on the local natural history, archeology and ethnography. And as mentioned earlier in thispaper continuous researches had been conducted by various local and international universities and other institutes of



97

higher learning since 1983. The data and information derived from the on-going researches help to enhance indisseminating knowledge and mutual understanding of the park's rainforest ecology through public education. This effortfurther convinced the public to appreciate, respect and protect the natural and healthy environment for the welfare of all.

5. Obstacles in the Parks ManagementAll national parks around the world have their own specific problems. In a densely populated country encroachment intothe parks is a common practice. In Brunei Darassalam such a problem does not exist because of its small population. Onthe other hand however, illegal logging and poaching activities are two major threats that attract exploitation on valuedtimbers and other forest products in our national parks. This include the felling of the "Agar wood" or "Gaharu" (Aquilariamalaccensis) as one of the most expensive aromatic chips to be found in Asian black markets.

The other problem is the lacking of professional and specially trained local management staff whose biological andecological knowledge is rather limited. It is quite obvious that academically dedicated and specially trained graduatesand postgraduates in those fields mentioned above are not available for the management of the parks. This has resultedto poor methods of presentation of natural resources and biodiversity for everybody to appreciate and understandtowards sustainable management of the rainforest ecosystem.

Other minor problems that are still persisting are littering, wandering beyond the designated access that lead tostampede on sensitive plants and niches, and illegal collections of fauna and flora by casual visitors.

6. Enforcement DeploymentIn Brunei Darussalam illegal loggers and poachers are dealt with the deployment of National Security Task Force thatactivates regular patrolling exercises along the international borders. Offenders are jailed or made paid on heavypenalty.

On local and national levels, the campaign on appreciating our national parks has recently been introduced to a zerokick-start, that is promoting this issue at the primary schools. This is followed by young scientist field projects to becarried out annually at the actual national parks for secondary schools. Their gradual end products as Riture scientistsshould be a better solution for park management in the country that is lacking of skilled professionals.

The other options are to limit public facilities and not to overdevelop the national parks, avoiding mass-tourism, andprovide excellent information centres at the beginning of every visiting sites and other selected attractions suchwaterfalls, special habitats, cultural sites, etc. with special well-informed interpretation trails system.

On top of all that problems mentioned above national parks enforcement personnel should always be present to monitorand attend the visitors at all time.

7. ConclusionThe present legislation structures and well-established conservation areas, mostly located in isolation, remote andinaccessible hinterland, had positioned Brunei Darussalam biodiversity well protected and preserved in- situ. This alsoindicates that there are opportunities to conduct more research in the Riture in these largely unstudied areas in revealingmore secrets of one of the oldest rainforest ecosystems in the world.

8. AcknowledgementThanks to the sponsor and organizer of the conference, especially Prof. Datin Maryati Mohamed, Director for TropicalBiology and Conservation, UMS, that has enable me to participate in this invaluable conference in Sabah. I am gratefulto Kertijah Abdul Kadir for her most kind assistance prior and throughout the conference. And also a big thank you to theConference Secretariate and the people of Sabah, Malaysia, who had supported me during my stay throughout theconference.

References

Brunei Forestry Department, 1998. PRYNSA: Princess Rashidah Young Nature Scientist Award. Forestry Department,Ministry of Industry and Primary Resources, Brunei Darussalam.

Coode, M.J.E., Dransfield, J., Forman, L.L., Wirkup, D.W. and Said, I.M., 1996. A Checklist of the Flowering Plants andGymnosperm. Ministry of Industry and Primary Resources, Brunei Darussalam.

98


Cranbrook, Earl of, and Edwards D.S., 1994. Belalong: A Tropical Rainforest. Sun Tree Publishing, 205 HendersonRoad, Singapore.

Dransfield, J., 1997. The Rattans of Brunei Darussalam. Ministry of Industry and Primary Resources, Brunei Darussalam.

Meng, W.K., 1990. In Brunei Forests. Government Printing Department, Ministry of Law, Brunei Darussalam.

Meng, W.K. and Abu Salim, K., 1999. Forests and Trees of Brunei Darussalam. Universiti Brunei Darussalam inassociation with Forestry Department, Ministry of Industry and Primary Resources, Brunei Shell Petroleum CompanySendirian Berhad.

Museums Department, 2000. Merimbun Heritage Park: ASEAN National Heritage Park. Museums Department, Ministryof Culture, Youth and Sports.

Payne, J., Francis, C.M. and Phillips K., 1985. A Field Guide to the: Mammals of Borneo. The Sabah Society, Malaysia.

Whitmore, T.C., 1975. Tropical Rain Forests of the Far East. Butler and Tanner Ltd, Frome, Somerset, England.

Whitmore T.C., 1990. An Introduction to Tropical Rain Forests. Oxford University Press inc., New York.

Slides Presentation

Slide 1 Slide 2

Slide 3 Slide 4


99

Slide 5 Slide 6

Slide 7 Slide 8

Slide 10Slide 9

Slide 11 Slide 12

100

Slide 13 Slide 14

Slide 15



101

1. AbstractAccording to the Act No. 5 of 1990 Concerning Conservation of Living Resources and Their Ecosystems, a national parkis defined as a natural conservation area which possesses native ecosystems, and which is managed through a zoningsystem utilized which facilities research, science, education breeding, enhancement, recreation and tourism purposes.As a conservation area, national park plays an important role for human life because it has functions, as follow: (1)Protecting the life support system; (2) Preservation of the biodiversity and its ecosystem; and (3) Sustainable utilizationof the natural resources and its ecosystem. It is necessary to endure the national park because it provides many benefitswhich are vital importance for human life, e.g., in regulating hydrological system (prevention of flood/drought),prevention of landslide hazard, source of genetic resources, and etc.

Gunung Halimun National Park is one of the national park in Indonesia that has the largest tropical rainforest remainedin West Java. To attain the optimum function of the national park (protection, preservation and utilization) with regard tothe potentials and problems encountered, basic strategies for park management and development are directed in threeaspects, which are: (1) Strengthening ecological function, on how park management and development can maintain thesustainability of life support system and preserve the biodiversity and their ecosystems; (2) Enhancing utilizationfunction on how park management and development can serve nature tourism/ecotourism activities, research andconservation education, as well as breeding enhancement, with regard to the sustainability of the park forestecosystems; and (3) Improving local community involvement, on how park management and development can increaselocal participation and the welfare of people around the park. In addition, some management actions to the park area areconducted, such as: strengthening the area enforcement; natural resources management; protection and security;improvement of the quality and quantity of the human resources; ecotourism development; promotion and information;buffer zone management; development of infrastructure and facilities; environmental education program; andcoordination strengthening.

3.12 Paper 10:Park Management - Indonesia’s Experienceby Dr. Dwi Setyono, Gunung Halimun National Parks

Slides Presentation on Gunung Halimun

Slide 1 Slide 2

102

Slide 3 Slide 4

Slide 5 Slide 6

Slide 7 Slide 8

Slide 9 Slide 10


103

Slide 11 Slide 12

Slide 13 Slide 14

Slide 15 Slide 16

104

Slides Presentation on Gunung Halimun National Park Management

Slide 1 Slide 2

Slide 3 Slide 4

Slide 5 Slide 6

Slide 7 Slide 8


105

Slide 9 Slide 10

Slide 11 Slide 12

Slide 13 Slide 14

Slide 15 Slide 16

106

Slide 17 Slide 18

Slide 21 Slide 22

Slide 19 Slide 20

Slide 23 Slide 24


107

Q: Dr. Masaaki YonedaFor Brunei’s protected area at national boundary area, do you have some agreement on trans-boundary protected areasystem?

A: Mr. Awang SamhanThere’s one conservation area called sungai ingai area where we have a common border with Mulu national park. We dohave some sort of understanding on that particular region. As for Ulu Tonbolong national park at the border side ofSarawak’s conservation area, we do not have a collective agreement with the Sarawak side at all.

Q: Tn. Hj. Amat Ramsaa. Since he has managed to co-ordinate so many stakeholders which is a difficult task. What is his strategic formulation

to ensure that all the parks consistently providing the highest quality of eco-tourism product, highest delivery ofservices & the highest experience for the visitors?

b. As the management of the rainforest, how would you give those visitor who has not been able to visit the rainforestthe feel of it in the museum?

A: Mr. Mitsuo UsukiThe co-ordination is the main task of environmental ministry. The environmental conservation does not have muchresources. It would take a lot of effort & time. The result would not be visible in a short term. Nevertheless, we shouldcontinue to endeavour.

A: Mr. Awang SamhanThe Brunei Museum is located in the center of the city, which consists of eight buildings. For the rainforest, we provideexhibition and we have a “natural history” corner which will provide sufficient information on Brunei’s environment.

3.13 Questions & Answers (Papers 9-10)Chairperson: Dr. Mohd. Nazri Iguchi Abdullah

108

Launching Ceremony PART 4

4.1 Welcoming Speechby Tan Sri Prof. Datuk Seri Panglima Dr. Abu Hassan OthmanVice Chancellor, UMS(Vice Chairman of the BBEC Programme Steering Committee)

Assalamualaikum and a warm welcome to all our guests especially those from oversea. It is my pleasure to be with youand indeed we are most grateful that the Chief Minister, Yang Amat Berhormat Datuk Chong Kah Kiat can be with ustoday. He has always been supporting us and more so for conservation activities.

When the Institute for Tropical Biology and Conservation requested for a JICA technical assistance in 2001, UMSsupported the request. This is because, after being in Sabah, on the island of Borneo, for several years we realised justhow rich the biodiversity of this area is. Having more than 10,000 species of plants from a world total of 259,000, webelieve strongly that these plants will have some uses for mankind. Our scientists are slowly and steadily discovering theuses. In addition to the rich biodiversity, the other important aspect is the vast traditional knowledge of the many ethnicgroups in Sabah on the uses of the plants. The same species of plant or animal is used differently by different ethnicgroups. Our scientists are also documenting the traditional knowledge quickly before it is totally gone, together with theelderlies of the ethnic groups.

In 2002 when ITBC secured the technical cooperation and decided jointly with JICA to expand the scope of the programmeto include several state agencies, UMS is agreeable. This is because we believe that conservation of biodiversity andecosystems is the responsibility of all. The various sectors of the community – government, NGO’s, private sector,scientists as well as the common people have to participate. The more agencies are involved, the better, as long as allinvolved agreed and appreciate the ultimate goal “to conserve the precious biodiversity and ecosystems in Sabah”.

I am amazed to note the development of this programme. Despite having more than 10 agencies involved the programmehas gone forward as planned. I must congratulate the State Secretary for his ability to coordinate all working groups andtheir activities. To all Head of working groups and leading agencies, well done. But of course the support given by theState government has been one of the most important factors in seeing that the programme was implemented withsuccess. To UMS the spirit of working together between us and the many state agencies and NGO has provided us withtremendous experience and satisfaction.

We believe working together is one major factor that will lead to successful and sustainable implementation ofconservation for Sabah.

UMS has been provided by the Malaysian government with funds to equip our laboratories and to train our researchers.Through BBEC programme JICA had adequately provided more equipment to complement what we have. Indeed, thishas encouraged our scientists to work faster and harder. Without those support, ITBC in particular may have to waitlonger to move forward. The presence of Japanese experts at UMS has also affect the status of our scientist. In our effortto globalize our activities, their presence has provided guidance and training needed. For that on behalf of UMS and thefederal government we thank JICA and the Japanese government. Arigatogozaimas.

In building up centers of excellence, such as the Institute for Tropical Biology and Conservation, many differentcomponents have to work side-by-side and at times synergize. We see that the research carried out by ITBC, being theleading agency for Research and Education Component, has also to take into account the need of the programme. Inthis case I hope ITBC will consider this aspect. Secondly, the facilities can be shared. I believe that ITBC can work it outwith all the other stakeholders of the facilities that can be commonly used. It would be the University’s honour to be ofservice to the State government. In fact that is our basis being in Sabah.

I do not wish to elaborate further of the importance of working together, between a federal institution such as UMS, withstate agencies and NGO. I am confident BBEC programme will be a successful model of this working together in theregion. I am happy that this working together have a common goal to safeguard our precious biodiversity andecosystem. Socio-economic development cannot be sustained without natural resources. Thus, the goal of BBEC


109

programme is the essence to ensuring a sustainable socio-economic development for Malaysia in general and Sabah inparticular.

With those remarks, once again I wish a warm “Selamat Datang” to all our participants and congratulation to theSecretariat for successfully doing this International Conference. On behalf of UMS I thank the Chief Minister for all hissupport and his presence here today.

Thank you.

110

Good morning. It is my great pleasure to welcome you today to this conference.

I recall that our BBEC Programme was officially launched by His Excellency Datuk Chong Kah Kiat, the Chief Minister ofSabah about 11 months ago on March 25th, 2002. Since then, within this short time, we have accomplished a lot as thefour component heads presented yesterday.

However, to be able to conserve the endangered and precious biodiversity and ecosystems of Sabah, we need tocontinue to exert more efforts through joint works of participating organizations.

Many scientists in the world fear that the existing mega-biodiversity in Borneo is disappearing even before we know whatand how many living creatures dwell there.

We are concerned about the future of local communities, which depend on biological resources for their basic needs.Clean water and clean air, plants and animals that can be bred and cultivated for food consumption, medicine andhandicrafts, functions to hold rain and stop flooding, functions to ease climate changes and natural disasters, moreover,the refreshing and peaceful feeling, places for recreation and tourism. These are what we loose with the loss of biodiversityand damage of ecosystems.

Some economists claim that everything has a monetary value. If so, how much Ringgit should we pay for the servicesoffered by nature? How much do we gain by clearing the forests and scraping the soil? And how much will our futuregeneration ought to pay for this trade? It is clear that those who profit so much RM now and who ought to pay in the futureare not the same.

It is obvious our efforts have not been enough and the message has not reached the majority of society. The concept ofconservation is not well appreciated compared to "development to thrive" or "'poverty alleviation" even though they areall interlinked.

Many people say Sabah still has a lot of jungle. But its forest area is now less than 50%. It is not plenty compared to 68%of Japan. We see land that has been cleared and later forgotten and uncultivated. Despite wasting the value of itsoriginal biodiversity and ecosystems, we continue to face desires of people who want to clear more forests and wetlandswhich has a richer biodiversity and which contain the resources our children will need.

We cannot keep the word "'biodiversity" as a scientists' jargon, or a password to a club of sophisticated thinking.Research, administration and media have to work together to find a way to make conservation everybody's concern.

It is a difficult task to maximize the efficiency or productivity of land use while minimizing exploitation, especially if you areworking alone. Unity is power. Our strategy of integrating the efforts of various state agencies, the university and NGOsis correct. We could achieve much more in a shorter time more if we work together. Continually working towards thesame goal will bring us closer to "establishing a comprehensive and sustainable approach for conservation," that is themain purpose of the BBEC Programme.

I always feel honored and lucky to be able to serve this meaningful endeavour of BBEC. I would like to express mysincere appreciation to all the involved personnel in BBEC for their dedicated hard work. My congratulations also go tothe organizing committee and secretariats who prepared this conference so successfully.

Last but not least, I would like to thank His Excellency Datuk Chong Kah Kiat for his continued and valuable support tothe BBEC Programme.

Thank you very much.

Mr. Takahisa Kusano, Chief Advisor for BBEC Programme

4.2 Welcoming Speechby Mr. Takahisa KusanoChief Advisor for BBEC Programme, JICA


111

Yang Amat Berhormat Datuk Chong Kah Kiat, the Chief Minister of Sabah, Yang Berbahagia Tan Sri Prof. Datuk SeriPanglima Dr. Abu Hassan Othman, Vice Chancellor of Universiti Malaysia Sabah (UMS), Mr. Takahisha Kusano, JICAChief Advisor for Bornean Biodiversity and Ecosystems Conservation (BBEC) Programme, all invited speakers, allparticipants, distinguished guests, Datuk-Datuk, ladies and gentlemen. A very Good Morning.

Firstly, let me welcome everyone to this first International BBEC Conference especially to Yang Amat Berhormat DatukChong Kah Kiat, the Chief Minister of Sabah who has kindly agreed to officiate this conference this morning. Hispresence here with us signifies his strong support and commitment towards conservation of our biodiversity. I also liketo welcome our foreign speakers and participants to Sabah, the Land Below the Wind.

This 3-day BBEC International Conference is the main highlight of BBEC programme in its first year calendar. I amdelighted by the overwhelming response especially participation by foreign speakers and participants in thisconference. I was made to understand that this conference has attracted a total of 106 local participants, 12 speakersof whom 11 are foreign speakers. The conference has also attracted a total of 33 foreign participants from Japan,Indonesia, Brunei Darussalam and few European countries.

The Bornean Biodiversity and Ecosystem Conservation (BBEC) programme is a technical cooperation among variousState Agencies, Universiti Malaysia Sabah and Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA). This 5-year programmewas launched on 25 March 2002 by Yang Amat Berhormat Datuk Chong Kah Kiat, the Chief Minister of Sabah, with thenoble goal of conserving the endangered and precious biodiversity and ecosystems in Sabah. To implement thisfive-year programme, a steering committee was established to steer its implementation. In addition, four componentsor working groups were formed to coordinate BBEC's many programmes and activities. These are the Research andEducation Component, the Park Management Component, the Habitat Expansion Management and the PublicAwareness Component.

As chairman of BBEC programme steering committee I would like to thank JICA and all agencies involved for theirefforts and hard work in implementing all activities under the programme. I am happy to note that after one year of itsimplementation, BBEC has achieved a very significant progress and I consider the first calendar year as a greatsuccess. Please allow me to highlight several of BBEC achievements thus far:

Research & Education ComponentThis component has successfully carried out two scientific expeditions to study biodiversity, ecosystems andsocio-economy related to conservation. The first expedition was carried out at Kinabatangan Wildlife Sanctuary whilethe second expedition was carried at Crocker Range Park. A research protocol was later established. Results fromboth expeditions are useful in conserving biodiversity & ecosystem in situ or ex situ. Besides, these expeditions couldbe used as guide to identification of long-term research. The findings will also be very useful information in PublicAwareness campaigns.

Park Management ComponentThe Park Management Component, which is being led by the Sabah Parks, is in the process of formulating theCrocker Range Park (CRP) Management plan. Regarding infrastructure, the lnobong Visitor's Centre has beencompleted recently. Another facility, the Mahua Visitor's Centre is now under construction. The Crocker Range ParkHead Quarters, Keningau Nature Centre will also be constructed in the near future.

Habitat Management ComponentThis component, which is led by the Sabah Wildlife Department, has identified an area to be recommended as a newconservation area. We hope that the State Government will favourably consider this recommendation. The componenthas also identified key species to be conserved.

4.3 Welcoming Speechby Datuk K.Y. Mustafa, The State Secretary of Sabah(Chairman of the BBEC Programme Steering Committee)

112

Public Awareness ComponentThe Public Awareness Component is coordinated by Science and Technology Unit (UST), Sabah. Several activitieswere carried out by this component. These include a study on Environmental Education in Sabah. In addition, apre-test study on the level of public understanding on biodiversity was done. The BBEC website was established foreasier access by members of the public.

An exhibition was put up during a scientific expedition to the Crocker Range Park. The first BBEC Newsletter was alsopublished to assist awareness campaigns. In addition, BBEC was also introduced to the local and Japanese media.These include "BBEC On Air" through RTM, both in BM and English Channels. To make BBEC better known to thepublic, the new BBEC logo was officially launched in January 2003. This new logo was chosed through a competitionwhich attracted 101 designs from 64 participants.

A unique characteristic of this programme is the integration and collaboration of efforts by ten State agencies and theInstitute of Tropical Biology and Conservation (ITBC) of UMS in collaboration with Japan International CooperationAgency (JICA). A total of about 40 officials and researchers from Sabah State agencies and UMS have been involvedsince the planning up to the implementation stage of the BBEC programme. At the same time, JICA dispatched andassigned a total of 13 Japanese experts in various related fields to BBEC programme.

Equipment wise, JICA has supplied equipments such as an electron microscope, geographic information system(GIS) hardware and software, a specimen storing system, field survey equipments, computers and 4 wheel drivevehicles, valued at about RM3.4 million.

On training, JICA has sponsored 9 senior officials and researchers from both state agencies and the UMS to Japan forhighly rated training courses on the conservation and management of terrestrial natural environment. Another 5officials are expected to attend the same training in Japan from late March this year. Various training programmeswere also held in Sabah by respective components such as GIS training course, DNA analysis, etc.

The achievements that I have just mentioned were achieved through good cooperation and close collaboration amongcomponents or working groups members and JICA. I would like to thank and congratulate all those who have beeninvolved in this programme. I would also wish to put on record my appreciation to all heads of components for theirleadership role in ensuring all activities were carried out as planned.

I also like to congratulate the organising committee of this conference for being able to successfully organise this wellmanaged seminar and exhibition.

Finally, once again I like to thank Yang Amat Berhormat Datuk Chong Kah Kiat, the Chief Minister of Sabah for hisstrong commitment and continuous support towards biodiversity conservation, especially the BBEC programme.

Thank you.

Datuk K.Y. Mustafa, BBEC Patron


113

It is indeed a great pleasure to be here with you at this morning at this launch of the first Borneon Biodiversity andEcosytem International Conference 2003. I understand that this conference will be an annual programme for BBEC until2007 as a part of the project's planning strategy to globalize the function and existence in Malaysia generally and inSabah specifically. I am pleased to note that we have participants from our sister states from Peninsula Malaysia,Brunei, Indonesia, Philippines, Singapore and Japan attending this seminar to network and to share their experiencewith us. On behalf of the state government, I wish to take this opportunity to extend a warm welcome to all of youespecially to our distinguished guests from outside Sabah.

The State and Federal Governments continue to accord high priority on the conservation of the physical and naturalenvironment, and more specifically our forests. As you are aware, Sabah is blessed with a remarkable biodiversity withinits rainforests which rank amongst the great biodiversity centres of the world. These natural assets are our heritagewhich I consider as our "green gold mine". The various ecosystems, both terrestrial and marine based, in Sabah and inthe other parts of Borneo serve as storehouses of fundamental resources which not only support life but also provide forvarious economic activities for our local communities, as well as for society at large in Sabah and more generally formankind as a whole. Our tropical rainforests, apart from being a traditional provider of timber, contain many non-timberresources which potential has yet to be tapped. These and a number of other Sabah's nature-based assets whichinclude her rich biodiversity have also provided the base and principal resources on which we have developed ourtourism industry. In fact, many of these natural assets are recognized as world class tourism products which attract bothscientists and tourists from at home and abroad to Sabah with the view to carry out studies to seek and enhancescientific knowledge and information, or to uncover some new aspect of Sabah's natural heritage or simply to enjoy theirremarkable beauty and diversity.

I note with interest the theme for this conference: "Effective Approaches to Nature Conservation". I expect there will bediscussion on the management of access of our biodiversity resources and the challenges they present. In this respectI would like to reiterate some of the issues I have mentioned in March last year during the launch of the BorneonBiodiversity and Ecosystem Conservation Programme. The state government will always welcome scientific research inorder to learn more and better understand our forest ecosystems and our biodiversity, but they must be done withintegrity and respect to local protocol and requirements. In this connection I would like to emphasize that any researchand use of such environmental resources for whatever objectives carry certain fundamental responsibilities. The underlyingrationale is to protect these resources so that benefits derived are long-term and accrue to the host community, the stateand the country as a whole. Such responsibilities concern us all, irrespective whether we are in government, operatingas an NGO, are a member of the public, whether we are Malaysian citizens in Sabah, or are foreign nationals. Carryingout research means gathering of information, creation of a data bank, sharing and providing access. This is in line withresource management responsibility and ethic and calls for adherence to existing laws and protocol governing researchand use of our environmental resources. We need to ensure these laws are appropriately complied with and enforced.The results of research and study should be properly recorded and documented and the intellectual property and otherrights and their consequent benefits must be properly acknowledged and accorded.

In Sabah, a number of legislations have been formulated and enhanced to provide greater protection and provision forthe management of our biodiversity and the natural environment. Among these are the Conservation of Environment1996, the Wildlife Conservation Enactment 1997 and the Sabah Biodiversity Enactment 2000. The Sabah BiodiversityCouncil will manage the access to the State's biodiversity and integrate scientific research and as well as their conservation.I believe the Borneon Biodiversity and Ecosystem Conservation Programme or BBEC will help pave the way for a moreeffective management and use of Sabah biodiversity and her varied ecosystems.

In this connection, I am glad to note that BBEC programme will continue to organize this important annual conferenceduring the project implementation period as I consider it an excellent forum for exchange of information and ideas in ourefforts to enhance the conservation of tropical ecosystems of the island of Borneo. I also understand that many interesting

4.4 Opening Speech and Official Launchingof BBEC International Conference 2003by Y.A.B. Datuk Chong Kah Kiat, Sabah Chief Minister

114

working papers on various aspects of conservation and management of the terrestrial biodiversity will be presented bythe participants from the BBEC Programme and experts from our neighbouring countries during this 3-day conference.I wish you all a fruitful discussion and deliberation in the next two days. I look forward to receiving a copy of the conferenceproceedings which I understand will provide a most useful resource reference to the BBEC programme for the sustainablemanagement and development of our terrestrial biodiversity and ecosystems.

To all our distinguished guests from overseas I wish you a pleasant and enjoyable stay in Sabah. I also hope that you willtake time off after the conference to visit some of our unique and interesting places.

It is with great pleasure that I now declare the Borneon Biodiversity and Ecosystem Conservation Programme InternationalConference 2003 officially open.

Thank you.

Y.A.B. Datuk Chong Kah Kiat, Sabah Chief Minister


115

Thank you very much for the long long introduction. The keynote lecture is about various Stakeholders Co-ordination inthe National Park in Japan. Mr. Kikuchi, Professor of the Hosei University, who was actually planning to come to thisworkshop today to give this keynote lecture was unable to come due to examinations. It is a busy season for theProfessor at this time of year. Therefore he requested me to take his place.

The Japan Ministry has 5 to 6 pinch hitters, and I, myself, have two titles. I am the with the Ministers’ Secretariat in chargeof conservation matters, and I am also working with Prof. Zakri in the United Nations University, in the Institute ofAdvanced Studies. Therefore, both these titles are used by the Government. My main job is with the United NationsUniversity.

The United Nations University is not actually a university, as they have no students. There are various levels ofresearchers sent by neighbouring countries, mainly from Asian countries, to have joint research activities. They arereceiving education from Japan and sometimes the United Nations system allocates fellowship to conduct the researchwork. The first mission of the United Nations University is co-ordinating or managing research activities. It is a verydifficult and complicated task for me, under the leadership of Prof. Zakri, a Malaysian, who will be with the University foranother some years. Anyone can apply for a fellowship to study or do research work in the Tokyo area in co-operationwith the United Nations task, so please apply. The Malaysians may have a good chance of getting this fellowship.

Yesterday, Mr. Lim of Nature Conservation Malaysia mentioned a little bit on the world summit of SustainableDevelopment in Johannesburg and also the Decade of Education for sustainable Development. Ten years back, therewas the ceremony of the United Nation’s conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro. Everyoneknows of this important conference, in which they came to some important conclusions in CBD and climate change. Nowten years have gone by, and there have been no new conventions to the Johannesburg conference. The main output ofthe conference was Action of Implementation, about 100 pages of Implementation of Action, which include, as Mr. Limmentioned, Capacity Building and Education Matters, are much more focused on the papers, compared to ten yearsback. Nowadays the main theme of the 21st century is Capacity Building and sometimes education programme for allsectors of the world. The Decade of Education, as I should say, is at a very happy stage.

As a Japanese NGO group initially proposed, the Decade idea in the final preparatory committee be held in Bali in Junelast year. That concept is a very good one, therefore the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Japanese Government, hadtaken it over as a government proposal. The Foreign Affairs Ministry has requested the joint support of teams, especiallyfrom the Asian countries, and also some from European countries, to propose the Decade of Education to be discussedat the World Summit on Sustainable Development and which concept was included in the paper of Implementation ofActions. After that, the United Nation General Assembly on September 20, 2002 formally accepted the proposal of theDecade in consensus with the Decade beginning from year 2005 to 2015.

Another aspect in the 21st century the keyword Ecosystem Approach should be taken into consideration for policymaking. This concept was repeatedly proposed by the United Nations University, which Prof. Zakri is one of the consulars.If we implement some project on conservation, we should incorporate the economic development and also socialstability of the community or social equity. In other words three; environmental, social and economic conservation. Threekeylinks should be taken into consideration every time. In that sense if we combine the new ideas/concepts of the 21st

century, education and ecosystem approach should be combined into one, and combined into nature conservationfields, and focus much attention on environmental education and ecotourism. Therefore, we target ecotourism.Coordination and integration of the 3 keylinks, that is conservation, social and economic affairs.

In this aspect, I did my personal survey on the students of the university. I have researched status from the visitinglecturers of the University of Toyo and the questions of the survey was made by myself in regard to environmentaleducation. 120 students are learning at my university, in the faculty of Regional Development. In regard to ecotourism

4.5 Keynote Paper:Variuos Stakeholders Coordination in National Parks of Japanby Mr. Mitsuo Usuki, United Nations University

116

survey international students studying international tourism, there were 180 students at the Toyo University. My survey isnot the normal one, I requested to write a report on what their preference on environment education is. It was hard workfor the visiting lecturers, and for me too, because I had to read through 180 reports and 120 reports. It took me one week,but I realized my objective. Compared to the 5 minute interview, the reports were very informative to us. If I had the time,I would like to do a similar survey to the Malaysian university students, if possible.

Today, I share with you the result of the survey. Based on these results, the first preference of ecotourism site in Japanwas Oz Marshland. I should like to introduce this area to you. The second preference is Mt. Fuji, a kind of ecotourism sitefor its people. Lastly I should like to introduce Mt. Fuji’s problems, or headaches, or stomach ache of Fuji, as thismountain cannot be nominated as a world heritage at the World Heritage Convention.

My questions to the students are as follows:

Mr. Mitsuo Usuki, United Nations University

Table 1: What was your most impressive experience on environmental education activity?

“Result of this questionnaire survey”

Category of Activities Experienced / Taken Number of Respondents

1. Collecting Trashes and Waste Recycling 57 53%

2. Nature Contacting-style Education 20 19%

3. Global Environmental Issues 9 8%

--------Climate Change-------- (7) (7%)

4. Pollution Caused Diseases 5 5%

5. Air and / or Water Pollution 3 3%

5. Farm-work like Rice-Planting and / or

Rice-Harvesting Experiences 3 3%

7. Participating in Volunteer Tours 2 2%

7. Making the Most of Resources 2 2%

9. Dioxins Issue 1 1%

9. Kenaf Cultivation 1 1%

9. Environmental Actions by Consumers 1 1%

9. Dilemma of Environment & Facilities 1 1%

9. Destruction of Nature 1 1%

14. Endangered Wildlife Species 1 1%

Total 107 100%

Notes: Among the above responses, impressive expressions are;a) Environmental Education should give a sign of future projection by reflecting the past experience,b) Pupils could grow through cooperative activities for environmental conservation,c) Learning from the nature is high-level in quality than compulsory education,d) It's better to seldom visit nature rather than usually stay at nature.


117

Table 2: Which group is in need of environmental education activity?

“Result of this questionnaire survey”

Category of Targeted Group Number of Respondents

1. Preschool Children 5 4%

2. Elementary and Secondary School

Children 53 46%

3. High School Students 3 3%

4. University Students 7 6%

5. Teachers and Professors 4 4%

6. Re-education for General Public 32 28%

7. Entrepreneur 4 4%

8. Administrative Officials 3 3%

9. Politicians 3 3%

Total 114 100%

118

Table 3: Which category of tour is most worthy of ecotourism? Which category of tour will be popularised by

Japanese in the 21st Century?

"Result of this questionnaire survey"

Category of Tour Number of Respondents to Table 2 Fluctuation Number of Respondents to Table 3

(Question 2) (Question 3)

1. Green Tourism

in Farming,

Mountain and

Fishing Villages 29 16% 37 20%

2. (World) Heritage

Tour 12 7% 20 11%

3. Nature-rich

Tour With

Naturalist 88 48% 32 18%

4. Overseas

Adventure Tour 1 1% 30 16%

5. Volunteer Tour 11 6% 13 17%

6. Discovery of

Neighboring

Local Nature 34 18% 24 13%

7. Mountain Hiking 7 4% 3 2%

8. Aesthetic

Walking

& Bicycle Tour 1 1% 24 13%

Total 183 100% 183 100%



119

Ecotourism Place Experienced Number of Respondents

1. None, and Virtual Experience 34 18%

2. Overseas Experience 31 17%

a. Canada (7)

b. Australia (6)

c. USA (Hawaii 2, Saipan 1, Yellow S. 1) (4)

d. New Zealand, Fjord (3)

e. Malaysia (3)

f. China, Mongolia, Singapore, Bali Island, Fiji, Mexico, UK

and Netherlands: 1 each (8)

3. Oze Marshland 21 11%

4. Okinawa Islands 20 11%

5. Camping (School) 19 10%

6. Mountain Hiking (Mt. Fuji 6, Mt. Zaoh 2) 15 8%

7. Discovery of Neighboring Local Nature 8 4%

8. Cultural Heritage and Pilgrimage

(Kyoto-Nara 3) 7 4%

9. Community Beautification Activity 5 3%

10. Yakushima Island 4 2%

11. Hokkaido 3 2%

12. Sadogasima Island 2 1%

13. Kamikouchi High Land 2 1%

14. Lake Kawaguchi 2 1%

15. Ogasawara Islands 2 1%

16. Oirase, Kinugawa, Irumagawa(fossil),

Tateyama-Kurobe, Lake Biwa,

Takashima, Ohnohara Town, Hiwasa

Shore(Sea Turtle), Amami Island: 1 each 9 5%

Total 184 100%

Note 1: Among the above responses, impressive expressions are;a) A glance is much helpful to understand than hundreds of hearing.b) We can meet ourselves grown intellectually and mentally through ecotourism.c) Activities as leaders of school of kids-boss and survival courses are useful.

Note 2: A large number of virtual experience is direct communication with Johmon Cedar, old growth JapaneseCedar in Yakushima Island.

Note 3: Not a small number of respondents whose parents take interests in mountain hiking.

Table 4: What was your most impressive experience on ecotour? If none, please describe your virtual experience.

"Result of this questionnaire survey"

120

Primary Secondary Tertiary (service

Industry Industry Industry Tertiary I.) Total

Hinoemata 15 52 424 (326) 491

Village 3% 11% 86% (66%) 100%

Fukushima 117,560 392,816 575,236 (241,419) 1,085,612

Prefecture 11% 36% 53% (22%) 100%

Katashina 688 830 1,824 (1,143) 3,342

Village 21% 25% 54% (34%) 100%

Gunma 83,222 401,218 564,569 (232,687) 1,049,009

Prefecture 8% 38% 54% (22%) 100%

Note: Summed up the data based upon the National Census, 1995


Section 2

Classified Special Class I Class II Class III Ordinary

Zones Protection Special Z. Special Z. Special Z. Zone Total

Area 99 87 440 123 651 1,400km2

covered 7% 6% 31% 9% 47% 100%

Source: Nature Conservation Bureau, the Ministry of the Environment

Among these 6 classified zones, four of them are classified as "Special Zones" on land areas, the other 2 are MarinePark zone and Ordinary zone. Special Zones are classified into 4, i.e. Special Protection Zone, Class I Special Zone,Class II Special Zone and Class III Special Zone. Special Protection Zones are the areas in which the most stringentregulations are to be enforced such as erection of structures, change of topography, fell, damage or plant trees areprohibited unless otherwise a permission from the Minister of Health and Welfare till the establishment of theEnvironment Agency in 1971, and then from the Director General of the Environment Agency till the establishment of theMinistry of the Environment in 2001, and at present from the Environment Minister. Special Protection Zone of Oze areacovers 87 km2 which contributes 88% of total area of Special Protection Zone in Nikko National Park.

Table 2: Labour Composition of Gateway Villages to Oze

Table 1: Classified Zones of Nikko National Park


121

TABLE 4 - GATEWAY CONCENTRATION IN OZE & VISITORS NUMBER

Notes: 1. Data based upon the Oze Conservation Foundation: Oze Data Book, February 2002 2. % show the rate for the total annual visitors' number

Year 1997 Year 2001

Month, Date Visitors' Number Month, Date Visitors’ Number

1. June 14, Saturday 20,049 1. June 9, Saturday 12,415

2. July 20, Sunday 16,891 2. July 20, Friday 11,702

3. June 7, Saturday 15,839 3. July 21, Saturday 11,098

4. October 10, Friday 14,169 4. October 7, Sunday 10,024

5. June 8, Sunday 12,753 5. July 14, Saturday 9,598

6. October 11, Saturday 12,331 6. October 6,Saturday 9,113

7. July 19, Saturday 10,671 7. June 3, Sunday 8,657

8. June 15, Sunday 10,411 8. June 2, Saturday 8,465

9. June 1, Sunday 10,235 9. June 10, Sunday 7,529

10. July 21, Monday 9,568 10. July 22, Sunday 7,234

132,917 (21.6%) 95,835 (1.4%)

Year Hatomachi-Pass Sanpei-Pass Numayama-Pass Others Total

1989 207,861 63,253 169,725 27,151 467,990

44% 14% 36% 6%

1993 262,126 64,693 179,507 33,938 540,264

49% 12% 33% 6%

1996 348,686 49,799 193,106 55,932 647,523

54% 8% 30% 8%

1997 306,670 50,171 196,433 61,043 614,317

50% 8% 32% 10%

2001 223,058 34,366 118,596 72,021 448,041

50% 8% 26% 16%

Notes: 1. Data based upon the Oze Conservation Foundation: Oze Data Book, February 20022. Others include Miike, Shibutsu, Ayame-daira, Fujimi-pass gateways and estimated visitors' number

during the off-season taking sensors away.

Table 3: Most crowded top 10 days in Oze & Visitors Number

Table 4: Gateway Concentration in Oze and Visitors' Number

122


Table 5: Causes, Consequences and Three Categories of Measures Taken

Causes Consequences a) Regulative b) Facility, c) Manner

Methods, Provisional Educative

Laws Measures Measures

Non-sustainable 1. Trampling Restriction of Wooden board- Brochures,

use on marsh- entrance & walks provision guidebooks include

land trail for vegetation information

recovery

2. Waste water Water Freeze lodge Water-treatment Voluntary

discharge pollution, and capacity, system, pipeline donation to

enlarged compulsory preparation public toilets, no

Mizubashou by reservation soap no shampoo,

over nourishment policy and No-bath-days

Attached earth 3. Alien species Volunteer guide

to tourists shoes invasion to remove soil &

& garbage cans seeds,

4. Exhaust gas Air pollution Restriction of Parking provided Cooperation

entering by at gateways required to use

private cars buses

5. Wastes and Deteriorate De-establishment Trash-carry-home

litters cleanliness of or abolition of movement; the

environment public trash cans "Oze Initiative"

in entire Oze

Days, season & 6. Over-uses Freeze lodge Guidance

gateway capacity, meetings for

concentration, compulsory promotion of

popularization reservation weekdays trips

policy

Notes: a) Regulative methods bind tourists' behavior by law, sometimes accompanied by penal provisions.b) Facility provisional measures don't affect the ordinary behavior of the tourists, but limit the impact of

such behavior to the environment by preparation of facilities and / or equipments.c) Educative measures aim at converting the tourists manner into more environment-benign one by

making them more conscious of their impacts on the natural environment.


123

Source: Nature Conservation Bureau, Ministry of the Environment

Table 6: Land-ownership of Oze Marsh land area (km2)

Forestry Ministry of Ministry of TEPCO TotalAgency Finance Environment (private)

Gunma area 0 km2 1 km2 0 km2 61 km2 62 km2

(71%)

Fukushima 20.4 km2 0.8 km2 0.1 km2 0 km2 21.3 km2

area (25%)

Niigata area 3.7 km2 0 km2 0 km2 0 km2 3.7 km2

(4%)

Total 24.1 km2 1.8 km2 0.1 km2 61 km2 87 km2

(28%) (2%) (0. I%) (70%) (100%)

Table 7: Composition of the Organization of Oze Conservation Foundation

a. Board of Directors, Oze Conservation Foundation (22 Directors)

Chairperson (1) Governor of Gunma Prefecture

Vice-Chairpersons (3) Governor of Fukushima Prefecture

Governor of Niigata Prefecture

President of TEPCO

Managing Director (1) Director, Environment Dpt. Gunma Pref.

Directors (15) Chairpersons of Environment Councils of 3

Prefectures (3)

Chiefs of local villages of 3 Pref. (3)

Presidents of local bank associations (3)

Essayist, Mountaineer, Professor, and the

Representatives of 3 NGOs (6)

Auditors (2) Chief Cashier of Fukushima Prefecture

Chief Cashier of Niigata Prefecture

Totally 22 members of the Board of Directors

b. Council of Oze Conservation Foundation (29 Council Members)

Members representing Gunma (8) Superintendent of Pref. Education (1)

Deputy mayor of local village (1)

Committee member of Oze Conservation (1)

Academic research team member of Oze (1)

Secretary, natural environment surveys (1)

President, tourism association (1)

President, league of alpine clubs (1)

Director of local newspaper (1)

Members representing Fukushima (8) Composition is almost same as Gunma

Members representing Niigata (8) Composition is almost same as Gunma

Others (5) Academic research team member of Oze who

based on Tokyo (1)

Representative, lodge owners association (1)

President, Oze Forest Management Co. (1)

President, railroad company (1)

Representative of NGO based on Tokyo (1)

Totally 29 members of the Council

Source: Oze Conservation Foundation: Outline of the Foundation, 2000

124



5.1 Research and Education Component WorkshopTopic: Priority Setting for Research Education Component

Prof. Datin Maryati opened the session with a word of welcome and thanks to all participants present for attending theResearch and Education Component session. She expressed her hope that there would be full participation from every-one present, in order to obtain solutions and feedback to the topics that would be raised.

She went on to explain the method of the session, which would be a semi-PCM (Project Cycle-Management), wherebyeverybody will paste their ideas and suggestions on the board. These ideas and suggestions would then be grouped andcategorized in their order of importance and priority.

There were six topics to be discussed in the one and a half hour session:1. What are the parameters that can be chosen in prioritizing research? (e.g. importance, short/mid/long term,

management values, etc.)

125

Chairperson:

Prof. Datin Dr. Maryati Mohamed, Institute For Tropical Biology & Conservation, UMS

Participants:

1. Mr. Mustafa bin Saleh Universiti Malaysia Sabah2. Ms. Sabrina Salimi Environmental Conservation Department3. Ms. Nurhuda Mansor Universiti Malaysia Sabah4. Mr. Daniel Pamin Universiti Malaysia Sabah5. Prof. Tohru Nakashizuka RIHN6. Mr. Mahadimenakbar M. Dawood Universiti Malaysia Sabah7. Mr. Kelvin BH Kueh Universiti Malaysia Sabah8. Mrs. Jumrafiah Abd. Sukor Sabah Wildlife Department9. Mrs. Maznah Mahali Universiti Malaysia Sabah10. Ms. Kumiko Handa Hyogo Museum11. Dr. Menno Schilthuizen Universiti Malaysia Sabah12. Dr. Isabelle Luckman Ancreanaz HUTAN13. Mr. Berhaman Ahmad Universiti Malaysia Sabah14. Mr. Maklarin Lakim Sabah Parks15. Mr. Takashi Fueda Fujitsu16. Prof. Shukery Mohamed Universiti Malaysia Sabah17. Dr. Arthur Chuag FRC, Forestry Department18. Dr. Chey Vun Khen FRC, Forestry Department19. Mr. Anuar Mohd. FRC, Forestry Department20. Mr. Bakhtiar E. Yahya IBTC, Universiti Malaysia Sabah21. Mr. Hairul Hafiz Mahson Universiti Malaysia Sabah22. Ms. Wendy Wan State Economic Planning Unit23. Mr. Zukifli Mohamad Universiti Malaysia Sabah24. Mr. Takamitsu Toda Tokyo Electric Power Company25. Mr. Yusuo Yutoka Kyushu Electric Power Company26. Ms. Nell Baker Global Canopy Programme27. Ms. Lee Shan Khee WWF Malaysia28. Dr. Homathevi Rahman Universiti Malaysia Sabah29. Ms. Petherine Jimbau Universiti Malaysia Sabah30. Mrs. Meriam Mohd. Yusof Universiti Malaysia Sabah31. Mr. Ko Sasaki Urban Development Corp, Tokyo32. Dr. Kartini Saibeh Universiti Malaysia Sabah33. Mrs. Yvonne Basusie Universiti Malaysia Sabah34. Dr. Hashimoto, Yoshiaki JICA Expert - Universiti Malaysia Sabah35. Dr. Takuji, Tachi JICA Expert - Universiti Malaysia Sabah36. Mr. Noel bin Tamatao Universiti Malaysia Sabah

PART 5 Component Workshop

126

2. What kinds of research are important for conservation of (a) Biodiversity and (b) Ecosystem in Borneo (Sabah)?3. What are the prior information/permission needed?4. Who can do the research? (institutions, staff, students)5. Statistics needed6. Funding Sources & Limitations

1. What are the parameters that can be chosen in priortising research?a. Availabilty

Specialists / ExpertsRelevance of Project (field)FundingSubject of Research / TopicManagement & Financial TeamManagement of FinanceTechnical SupportTime / Money / PeopleAvailability of Funds & ExpertiseImportance / Sustainable UsageInventory / based studies should be done first (ie higher priority)

b. Long-termImportanceSustainable / PracticalLong-term fluctuations

c. Integration(ie Team, Project, etc)Integrity of Research SiteNetworkingManagement / Collaboration

d. Research Needed by International RequirementsResearch in line with international requirements and should comply with national (Malaysia & Sabah) rules,etc.

e. Commercial ValueImportance – economicalNew Innovations (in popularization of biodiversity)Product-oriented may not yield money

f. Less Studied AreasCanopy Biology

g. Management ValuesThreatened SPPImportant for conservation of protected species in SabahImportance & RelevanceContributing to conservation values & socio-economic developmentRisks to society from environmental degradationSocio-economic developmentEducation Component OutcomeImportance of Educating

2. What kind of research are needed for conservation of (a) Biodiversity, (b) Ecosystem in Borneo, Sabah?a. Biodiversity

i. Ethnic / Traditional Uses of BiodiversityNatural ResourcesLocal understanding of what is Biodiversity and why it is importantEconomic ValuesManipulation of the usage of the biodiversityBioprospecting

ii. Systematic & Taxonomy as Basic StudiesInventoriesSurveys

Component Workshop Sessions


EcologyBiodiversity–organism-based tourism, e.g. entotourism/anurans tourism

iii. Impact AssessmentKey SpeciesEndemic SpeciesEndangered SpeciesEcological Study on Large & Threatened animals

iv. Relationship of Biodiversity & Ecosystem FunctionResearch on groups that are easily sampled & monitored, ie invertebratesEnvironmental studiesEcological Research – value & benefits to local community

b. Ecosystem of Borneo, Sabahi. Effects of Habitat Alteration / Disturbance

Assessment of ThreatsQuality Evaluation – water, air, etc.Linkages / Connectivity of EcosystemBiodiversity & Human Factors

b. Roles of Canopies in Ecosystem FunctionEcosystem – Kenangas, wetland & Island ForestsEnvironmental Education / Non-formal EducationValue of Ecosystem / BiodiversityEcosystem – Researches on Conservation Prioritization, Nature Tourism

c. CollaborationLocal CollaboratorsLocal CounterpartsLocal ProtocolReview of existing literature & collection (some date may already be available)Systematic KnowledgeInternational Information (e.g. Plants – Kew Gardens?)Existing Management PlanLand Use PatternInformation – TopographyLiterature – previous, related, relevantCondition of the area, e.g. disturbed, loggedInformation on Land Use, e.g. agriculture, forest reserve, industrial

d. Commercial Agreement

3. What information / Research is needed?a. Permission from Sabah State Governmentb. Priorities of International Agreement, e.g. CBD

Research Permits & Acknowledgement of International Rules & Lawsc. Research Proposal

Thru EPUResearch PermitMalaysian GovernmentRespect of Local CommunityPermission from Maliau Basin Management CommitteePermission from Agency of study site

d. State EducationEPRD – Educational Planning & Research Division – KPM

MOUResearch AgreementRules & RegulationsFacilities Availability

127

4. Who can do the Research (Institutions, Staff, Students)?a. Collaborators

Hyogo MuseumKyushu UniversityCollaboration between UMS & Local Government DepartmentsFirst class international collaborators

b. Local CommunitiesTrained local / public

c. Volunteers (Local & International)NGOs – WWF, HUTAN, etc.Volunteers from NGOs can assist in earthwatch

d. ApprovalsAnyone with approval

e. Anyone Interested with Fundsf. Who Can be Involved?

Faculty members, teachersSchool children (guided)StudentsAcademic / Research Institutions / StaffInternational Research BodiesRegistered & Recognised Education/Research InstitutionsResearchersPost Doc ResearchersBona Fide Researchers

Question 5 regarding What Statistics are needed:a. Research Designb. How to obtain statisticsc. Production of Local Goods

Question 6 regarding Funding Sources & Other Limitations:On Funding Sources:a. Local Sourcesb. International Sourcesc. Private Sourcesd. NGOs

On Limitations:a. Fundingb. Research Proposalc. Field Centred. Limitations by rules and regulations


128


5.2 Park Management Component WorkshopTopic: The possibility of Creating Buffer Zones for the Crocker Range Park

Chairman

Dr. Jamili Nais Deputy Director / Sabah Parks

Participants

1. Dr. Dwi Setyono Forestry Department Indonesia2. Dr. Geoffry Davison WWF Malaysia (Sabah)3. Mr. Azmi Salimi Ranau District Office4. Mr. Justinus Guntabid Sabah Parks5. Mr. Kenneth Sion Sabah Parks6. Dr. Maasaki Yoneda Sabah Parks7. Mr. Pilis Malim Sabah Forestry Department8. Mdm. Rimi Repin Sabah Parks9. Mr. Shigeo Sakai Sabah Parks10. Mr. Mitsuo Usuki Kushiro International Wetland Centre11. Mr. Eric Wong Sabah Park12. Mr. Ludi Apin Sabah parks13. Ms. Agnes Agama WWF Malaysia (Sabah)14. Mr. Amano Tomoyuki Chubu Electric Power Co15. Prof. Agung Sardjono Universiti Mularwarman16. Encik Iman Ali Kinbatangan Distric Office17. Che Fatimah Simin Sabah Park18. Mr. Boni Antiu Asian Tourism Institute19. Mr. Boyd Sun Fatt Asian Tourism Institute20. Tomoshi Ichikawa JICA / Junior Course Advisor

Dr. Jamili introduced himself to all participants and invited everyone to introduce themselves. He informed the subject ofdiscussion of the workshop is “The Possibilty of Creating a Buffer Zone for the Crocker Range Park”, and severalquestions will be explored. He hoped everyone will contribute their thoughts and ideas in this workshop. At the end of thismeeting everything will be summarized and the input from this will be used for a bigger workshop on the 25th and 26th

March 2003 called Zonation of CRP, that is dividing the CR into several smaller zone probably including Buffer Zonedepending on the feelings of the workshop.

The following questions are as follows:a. What is the criteria for a Buffer Zone?b. To learn the model round this region where there are working models of Buffer Zone.

Dr. Jamili: For these two questions, I like to invite Dr. Yoneda to address what is Buffer Zone and to show several modelsof Buffer Zone in some of the protected areas and after that we will throw questions around i.e do we really need theBuffer Zone for CRP and what are the sort of Buffer Zone we can create for CRP and the existing legislation for estab-lishing Buffer Zone?

Dr. Yoneda: Thank you. First of all I like to show the situation of the CRP potential Buffer Zone areas and the issues andchallenges to establish Buffer Zones around the CRP. And I was invited to address these two questions let us take a lookat the map here. (Please see Power Point presentation and notes attached).

Dr Jamili Nais: Thank you Dr Yoneda, Can we go back to the map shown earlier by Dr Yoneda. I believe everyone hasa copy of the GIS map of the Crocker Range Park. Let me start the discussion of today by saying a few things. CrockerRange as it is now has several boundary disputes with the local community and even without the Buffer Zone we alreadyhave enough problems just maintaining and supervising our own boundary. Even safeguarding the present boundary is

129

already a problem but if we maintain only the present one which was summary by Dr. Yoneda earlier to avoid directcontact and direct conclusion. There are some area here which probably needed some Buffer Zone and this will be theissue we will be discussing in this meeting. We have many experts here in this conference and also people from thedistrict like Tenom here today and we need their advice and also to voice out their opinions. Lets us take a look at themap like the disputed area such as the shifting cultivation.There are three options here eg. what are we going to do with the disputed overlapping claim?

a. Do we keep quite about the whole thing? Just retain them as park area?b. Or do we just excise them from the park / cut out from the area and solve the problem?c. Or to designate those area as Buffer Zone.

These are some of the questions I like to hear from the floor. Is there anybody from the floor would like to say somethingabout this issue? We would like to invite Mr. Usuki to share his view with us in this workshop.

Mr Usuki: Thank you very much. First of all on regards to the Buffer Zone, this can be a very complicated issue. Japanhas five classified zones from special protection to ordinary zone. In an ordinary zone in Japan National Park system,the legislative system measures is not effective. Anybody can do anything, just designation was made and bigproject will be reported to the Government. Whereby in the ordinary zone in National Park in Japan name is givento the community for attracting the people for tourism potential and that is the system in Japan and no regulativemeasures. Many of the ordinary zone of National Park in Japan is consider as different but sometimes reformingand re-changing the boundary of the park, many of the ordinary zone are from the park areas to the free zone. In caseslike Africa, Tanzania and Kenya 3.5 year rated by the U.K National Park Establishment and the Buffer Zone has amuch regulative measures. In case of Sabah, the suggestion made by Dr. Yoneda earlier, a committee must be createdto consists of various communities groups, such as the Government bodies, researchers and NGO’s groups. I think it willbe a very good idea to find out the best way of Buffer Zone of Sabah. It is the originality of Sabah.If it is suitable for Sabah, there must be a new elaboration sometime including regulative measures, educative measurealso. In case of the involvement of National Park Buffer Zone area some professional safety measuremust be provided by the international community and also from the National Park authorities. In Japan theBuffer Zone is not transferable to the neighbouring countries. Thank you.

Dr. Dwi Setyono: I would like to make some comments and suggestion here. To make a Buffer Zone, we must cooper-ate with the local people because we do not know the attitude of the local people which I think is very important and thisis happenings in Indonesia. We need to make a proposal together with them in order to meet the smooth running of theimplementation of the Buffer Zone.

For Buffer Zone it is not the construction of the road side. The most important thing is that it is almost the same as theecosystem of the protected area. Because if the clear Buffer Zone have an impact from the protected area e.g if this isa protected area, the Buffer Zone is a very different ecosystem it will make impact for the protected area for the ecosys-tem. Take for example a road side of the Buffer Zone, there are a lot of human activities going on and they could be thecause of fire incident and also the cause of damages to the park area. In my opinion it would be better if we can make anatural Buffer Zone. Thank you.

Dr. Jamili: Thank you. Dr Dwi, we think that Buffer Zone can also be a form of one category of zone within theManagement area. If the Crocker Range is going to be divided into several management zone, some are restrictedsome are for eco-tourism development and this is the topic which we will be talking about today. The road side is notrelated because it is the same ecosystem probably restricted activities inside the Buffer Zone. Take a look at the Keningauand Kimanis road, this part of the road is going to be seal. The tender has been awarded and this area is going to be veryvaluable and yet this place is already overlapping, people from Keningau, Papar and elsewhere is applying for land andthat is not designated for whatever category and sad to say in no time there will be uncontrolled development and otheractivities and etc. We are here today to discuss this and I thank everyone here for the input.

Mr Azmi Salimi: Thank you, Mr Chairman, I have gone through the Kimanis and Keningau road many times and I mustsay there is not much development. The Sabah Park can do a proper application to the proper authority to make the areapart of Sabah Park and to go through all the relevant department, like the land and survey , the Hasil Bumi and others.I am also in agreeable to the proposal of this Buffer Zone and I think the local people must be inform and be involved inthis discussion through their respective head like their JKK or Head Village so that they are aware ofwhat’s going on and the benefits for them in the long run. What we are trying to say here is that the mountain and the hillsare like their water tanks, and the rivers along the villages are their livelihood so I think they must be involved in thediscussion. I also strongly suggested that the relevant government department must also be involved when


130


discussing promoting this Buffer Zone and the same goes to the State Level.

Dr. Jamili: Mr Eric Wong, would you like to say something on this?

Mr Eric Wong: Thank you, Mr Chairman, I would like to ask a few question here, In the briefing just now we understandthat there is a proposed Buffer Zone around the CRP since 1992. I would like to know what happen to this proposedbuffer zone before we discussed another new proposed Buffer Zone? Maybe from that experience we can learn some-thing from that Buffer Zone 10 years ago and what has been done so that the next proposal will be materialized. That’sthe question I like to raise here.

Dr. Jamili: Maybe Dr Davison can brief us on this issue.

Dr. Davison: I am not very sure whether it was in the year 1992. I am not familiar with that document but the one that Iknow is the report produced by the Sabah Biodiversity Council which was the project running from 1996 –1998, the mapshowing this two Buffer Zone was being shown to the Ministry of Tourism and Environmental Development inDecember that year. So I don’t think it is exactly ten years but maybe five years. That report went to the Ministry togetherfamiliar with the procedure that Encik Azmi mentioned but that was not our responsibility to carry on as an NGO and wehave no authority to apply for area like that through the land office on behalf of the government and that waswhy the report was given to the Ministry.

Dr. Jamili: Let me clarify a little bit on this. It was the Ministry project and WWF was contracted to do the job. Like I sayearlier, it was the responsibility of Sabah Park but during the early years we were new to this area and things werenot being followed up in those days. But we are here now today and that is why we are trying to follow up andmaybe based on this recommendation and the present situation, we might be able to do it. It would be a useful referencefor us to learn from the past years.

Encik Azmi: Meaning to say there is no follow up?

Dr. Jamili: Yes, there is no follow up, not yet follow up because Buffer Zone is a new concept in Sabah. In Sabah Park,our jurisdiction is only within the Boundary of the gazette park once outside, we have no jurisdiction and our law is veryclear on that and we are based on the other protected area in the world. There is such category as Buffer Zone andwe are now contemplating putting up Buffer Zone as recommended, so we can’t exactly say that there is no followup because Buffer Zone do not exist in our law and we are now contemplating in setting up one.

Mr. Boni Antiu: The Buffer Zone that we are now discussing, are we going to implement the area outside or insidethe park?

Dr. Jamili: That is exactly what we are going to discuss. Like I explain, it can be outside the park maybe the naturalresources office un-informally require that no logging within 1 km from the park boundary but that is informal andthat could be one of the possibility. The other possibility is those inside the park and we like to hear from your opinion.

Mr. Sakai: Yes, I was thinking about the Buffer Zone and for the Sabah Park, the purpose is to protect the park. Peopleshould realize why we need the Buffer Zone. Maybe we should combine the Sabah Park with the Water maybethat would be a powerful tools that is why two months ago we had the workshop called the Water Shed ProtectionManagement Workshop. The Department Irrigation Drainage are also planning some protective area around the water-shed that is exactly around the CRP. We had some plan and project too. I wonder whether we can work together with theother agencies to make some other type of protective areas that is for the Sabah Park and a Buffer Zone. I think that willbe a really realistic way for us to go.

Ms. Agnes Agama: I can see two very important issue here in establishing a Buffer Zone. One is the land used patternand the other is the legal status of the land. It is hard to say which one comes first and which one should be analyzed firstbecause as I understand different type of land status around the CRP which will be a target area where we will look intoestablish Buffer Zone and some kind of land status means negotiation with different groups of peoples. The other relatedissue is the land used pattern. When this report was finished in 1997, WWF has actually earmarked Gunung Membakutarea as the critical area for conservation because of the low land and then it was burned and is not there anymore andnow we have oil palm instead in that area. This means land used pattern are changing overtime. In establishing a BufferZone we would have to take into consideration on how to address the legal status of land or converting legal status of

131

land that would enable management and enactment by Sabah Park or any relevantagencies. To take into account the existing potentially future land used pattern in that area, what is being proposed sofar?

Dr. Jamili: Sabah Park are totally open, we are trying to feel our way and we are happy without having a Buffer Zone butjust the Park Boundary. We are trying to feel our way on where to go and which direction to go and that’s why weare seeking your opinion.

Mr. Ludi Apin: We are actually going to have a meeting on this issue soon. One of the things we are going to discuss inour meeting is actually about the roadside and we have to proposed it to the Development Committee for theirconscientious. I believe that this is the most urgent part of the CR that need to be tackle. We need to take measure stepsto an agreement on what kind of Buffer Zone we need to implement. We have to include the local peoplein this issue. So, what I think here is that even though we need the Buffer Zone as soon as possible, the timeframe of construction of the enactment plan is very short and in order to materialized this plan we need a longerperiod e.g. 3–5 years. As for the management plan we can still propose something that can benefits the future.

Azmi Salimi: I also like to suggest to the committee which involved Keningau and Papar. Whenever there is an issuethey will have a Land Utilization Committee meeting. If some land applications are too near to the park we have the rightto bring this up to the LUC meeting, whereby you can expressed your opinions, suggestions, and objection. I hope youcan include the opinions of the two areas but also the LUC. Please check with these two district officerswhen their LUC meetings are and get a list of the land application.

Dr. Jamili: Anybody from the Forestry Department, what about Mr Pilis Malim?

Mr. Pilis Malim: Mr Chairman, I would still like to go back to the question on the need for a Buffer Zone. I think we stillhave to know what is the problem. What I can see here is the problem from the illegal encroachment to the park area andwhat are the root causes to the encroachment to the park area. By establishing a Buffer Zone is that the answer to thisproblem? Probably the encroachment is due to the boundary of the park not properly established and maintain.The other thing is that patrolling the boundary to check any encroachment from time to time and so on.

Dr. Jamili: Any body wants to response to this question?

Mr. Eric Wong: Mr Chairman, I think I can say something to this response. I think the idea of establishing the BufferZone and the park is only to put additional effort in protecting the park. Even now the CRP boundary has also beenmarked and patrolling are also very frequent. As a head of the enforcement section for the last two years there is nomajor encroachment into the park. The park area is very big and it double the size of Singapore and the root cause orproblem we faced are from cultivation and hunting from the local community and extraction of jungle products.It is very difficult to check because all this activities is very mobile. That is why the idea of a Buffer Zone is mainlyto put an additional protection to the park.

Prof. Agung: I like to give my opinion here. If you decide to establish the Buffer Zone, you cannot only think of protectingthe area but also to manage the outside threat. It means you have to have a good management of the Buffer Zone notonly by the present threat but also for the future. Buffer Zone should be an integrated park. You cannot establish aBuffer Zone just because of threat because the threat is dynamite. Do you think it will solve the problem byestablishing a Buffer Zone just to protect the park? You have to think of how to manage the threat and thenhow to protect the area inside and outside, that’s the point I like to raise here.

Dr. Jamili: That’s a very valid point that leads us to the last section of our discussion. If we are to established a BufferZone what sort of legislation to apply, the land enactment or the land ordinance or others? We must summarize onthe issue of what we have discussed today.

Mr. Ludi Apin: At the district level if we create a Buffer Zone do you think there will be some sort of control andmonitoring or management of guide using the local authority power?

Mr. Iman Ali: Mr. Chairman, in fact the Buffer Zone in Kinabatangan are one under the Agriculture Department and one isour own. In fact our committee is looking after this Buffer Zone. We create our own buffer zone near to the forestreserve and also near to the Wildlife Sanctuary. Just for e.g last month we call on one Company and this company has


132


been approved to 28,000 acres of land to developed the area and then the committee suggest that they can onlyallow to plant up to 1000acres only and the rest is just limit under buffer zone like Mr Ludi says. This zone is loose.There is no Department or Committee like the Ministry to look after the zone. We create our own because it is easier for usto monitor. The enforcement we will suggest to the committee like the DID or the Forest Department. For example inKinabatangan there has been a suggestion for the Bird Sanctuary back in 1990 but the Chief Minister and Ministry broughtthis to the legislative meeting last year in October 2002. The area has been approved under Wildlife Sanctuary of 26,000acres. With that announcement we refer back to the committee and ask the land office from the headquarters and alsofrom the districts to give us the pictures to all the committee where the Wildlife Sanctuary is and from that we create a 5 acreWildlife Sanctuary in and around the Forest Reserve. However, the committee still lose regarding Buffer Zone. We canrefer to the Kinabatangan districts office about this committee and then from that our committee will take the steps thatevery land approval must refer to this committee whatever they want to do or develop their land that has been approved tothem. I think this is one way of educating them on how to manage the Buffer Zone.

Dr. Jamili: May I enquire what is the legal status of the committee?

Mr. Iman Ali: As I say just now it is still loose, but we call up the relevant department to attend the meeting as well as allthose estate that wanted to open up line in Kinabantangan. All this while in Kinabatangan, the Forest Reserve andthe Wildlife Sanctuary has been reported to have open up all the reserve already, so from this year we take a stepon that one and the latest status is still loose, whatever report we get from the estate we must refer back to the relevantdepartment and also to call them up for meeting. We have actually call up 25 relevant departments for this meeting andso far there are three departments turning up for the meeting.

Dr. Jamili: Thank you for the contribution. It may be a good way to start but eventually when it grows up it need to beinstitutionalize and not ad-hoc. You need the secretariat and funding and maybe channelled someway and also somelegal instrument to enforce that in contrast to ad-hoc committee maybe in future. I throw it to the floor again.

Encik Azmi: I think since the proposed area of the Buffer Zone is a big area and the Sabah Park should sent theproposal to the Hasil Bumi and then Hasil Bumi can call up for a meeting to consider the proposal. This will involved theLand Office Director, the Forestry Department the JKS and other relevant department and also Jabatan Pertanian andothers. A good start will be to put up the proposal and get the approval and the parameters of how manyacres / hectars more or less parameter of the approval from the higher level. For the possible threats from theproposed Buffer Zone as mentioned by Prof. Agung, the local community and heads must be inform and meeting mustbe held with them to brief them and to make them understand. We can also learn from them and get them involved. Takefor Example the Gunung Halimun , the locals are being trained as ordinary guides. I believe Sabah Parks also have theirown activities like jungle tracking and they can train the local people to be guides tohelp with Tourism. So here we must emphasis that local people must be involved to minimize the outside threatsnot only now but also the future.

Dr. Jamili: Thank you. Points taken.

Ms. Agnes Agama: I think in every of the disputed areas, there are three possibility. The strategy for resolving thisdisputed area maybe different for each area and that could depend on the followings:

a. On the size of the land that is being disputedb. The size of the population who may claim to that landc. And the decision whether this land would be given to the local people as native title or whether the land can

be converted to new land category as a kind of buffer zone

For either case there would have to be some kind of management plan where the local people will be involved inthe management of the buffer zone. What I am concern here are, areas where shifting cultivation are going on and ifthere is a dispute with CRP and if Sabah Parks gives it to the local community and we will have some form ofco-management. It doesn’t necessary protect CRP from encroachment because there will still be a chancethat community will still plant padi all the way right to the boundary of the CRP. There will still be potential for people tohunt as soon as animals step out of the park boundary. So it isn’t necessary address the threat of a fridgeeffect of CRP and therefore I think it will be very problematic to deal case by case especially when each disputewith local community considering that there are so many districts officers involved.

133

Dr. Jamili: Actually that is exactly what they are currently doing at the boundary of the park and they have a database ofall the pockets of area and the dispute. Those areas are inside the gazetted areas of Sabah Park and are dully marketedon the ground. This has been there quite sometime and because of humanitarian feeling towards them that is why weare feeling our way on how to solve these problems. And so the option here is weather we should just give it to them andsolve the whole solutions. Correct me if I am wrong, but most of the encroachment are not fromthe local community but from people outside. If Buffer Zone is established and the local community are there thenthey can act as a front line guard against outside encroachment, illegal loggings and other things, so basically that’s thewhole idea.

Mr. Boni Antiu: Adding to that, the local people are also involved in jungle products, hunting and shifting cultivation.Before we come out with any proposal, I strongly believe that we must get these local resident and their head village tobe involved in the discussion and planning so that they can deliver their opinion to the management of the park.

Dr. Jamili: For every section, after everything has been identified, we are going on the ground to discuss with thesepeople. We are going to have a workshop on the 3rd week of March and will be calling each district representatives tolook into their own district and try to address each and everyone of those pockets.

Mr. Boyd Sun Fatt: I am not very sure about Buffer Zone but what I can understand here, Buffer Zone is important toprotect the area. Is there any tropical country that have succeed in the establishment of the Buffer Zone and maybe wecan learn from their examples and apply it to our CRP.

Dr. Jamili: Yes, there are so many examples but Buffer Zone is a very loose term. Once you have established the BufferZone it will be your responsibility to set out the rules and the activities that are allow and not allowed in the BufferZone. Take for example in Nepal,the Royal Citwa National Park has established a Buffer Zone among the pocket ofcommunity. They are very successful because Tourism is the main income in Nepal. It is also mandatory by law that 50%of the park revenue will be given to the community that is why it is very successful. As in the Philippines, there is the Mt.Kitangklat National Park, a protected area in Mindanao where the Buffer Zone is a protected area. They have a boardconsisting of the Local Government, the Park Board, the Natural Resources Office and also the representatives of thelocal community bodies. All decision on regards to the Buffer Zone and the protected area must be refer backto the community that is the successful ones. However, there are plenty of cases once established nothing is done andit is almost free for all. Of course there are some successful cases but there are more neglected cases.

Mr. Sakai: Let me share my opinion about the local people. In some places, we have the management orconservation side of the commonwealth to the local community. In the other part we are completely different. I would liketo share my presentation story of a place in Sungai Apin Apin. Illegal logging activities were going on in that area and thelocal people were very much against it because of the water quality. When the logging is finished, the local peoplewanted that area. In that sense, the BIB or Sabah Park committee group also agreed with the local people,but the Department Irrigation Drainage wants to gazette that area to establish the watershed management area.However, the local community does not allow that area to be gazette for they wanted that area for their future generationto develop. In that sense, we are still in the same ground and it is a very difficult issue and these are some of the caseshappening in the CRP.

Mr. Ludi Apin: Mr. Chairman, I have one question here about the establishment of a Buffer Zone. Let’s go down toindividual feeling, eg. I have a 10 acres of land and some are on the slope and some on the flat land. Let’s say the BufferZone only allows you to plant your crops on the hilly park and the wet padi on the level park as one of the regulation andguideline. So, in that 10 acres I can only plant 3 crops i.e rubber, durian and another crop on the hilly park and wet padiand other crops will be allowed on the flat park and do you think that is possible? In a bigger Zone like the Buffer Zonewe apply that kind of concept which means all the slopes will be on the 3 crops and the flatland will be for wet padi and everyone will join in and work together on the flat area and all the hilly area will be dividedevenly in order for everyone to gain benefits from this. Is that possible?

Mr. Azmi: I like to give my general opinion here eg. If the local people apply for the land in Sabah Park and the slope ismore than 27degrees, of course it is not suitable for agriculture and if you happen to bring this up to the Land OrganisationCommittee, the Agriculture Department will not approved it and you will be rejected and there is no way they can applythe land for any agriculture purpose because of the slope. However, the higher the slope is and ifthey put up the land, erosion will happen and the environment will be destroyed. Sabah Park is still consider a good placefor obtaining land because of the physical nature of the hills.

134



Dr. Jamili: Thank You. Any other questions?

Ms. Agnes Agama: I don’t think it is possible. It is not sustainable for the long term because it is base on the image ofthe local community being stagnant (unchanging) and because local community change so quickly overtime. We do notknow what is going to happen but we can project it. Let us imagine what would happen to the local community 20 yearsfrom now.

Do you think whey still want to plant rubber, cocoa, wet padi and other kind of crops? I think it would be a grave injusticeif the Buffer Zone of Crocker Range were conceptualized only with the image of local community and agriculturalistsbecause there is every potential for them to change their mode of production in a different way.

Dr. Jamili: Thank you Agnes, Thank you everyone. Even though, we did not come to any conclusion in this workshop,but all the contribution from everyone here today are very helpful and we will bring this to the next workshop in March.Number One, we will concentrate on the pockets of these disputed areas and Number Two on the 2 roads depending onhow was the status. We will also try to look into the proposed Water Catchments Area (Water Resources Enactment)and probably at the corridor of the CRP, to Kinabalu with the possibility of a Buffer Zone.

135

Chairman: Mr. Laurentius is unable to be here but he has given this topic for discussion, i.e. Challenges andOpportunities of a Protected Area having Multiple Status. To give you the background of this topic, for example, TabinWildlife Reserve, we are there to manage the wildlife (without legal authority to manage the habitat). At the moment, weare thinking of gazetting Tabin Wildlife Reserve (TWR) as a wildlife center under Wildlife Enactment. We feltthat there are challenges in the area of multiple status. There are times when we have to gazette state lands as conser-vation areas e.g. between Kulamba and Tabin area. Under section 21 of the Wildlife ConservationEnactment, we can gazette the area between 2 wildlife areas for certain reasons e.g. migration route of the animals.Even if it is a private land, you can still gazette it for certain activities.

5.3 Habitat Management Component WorkshopTopic: Challenges & Opportunities of a Protected Area Having Multiple Status

Chairman

Mr. Augustine Tuuga representing Mr. Laurentius Ambu

Lists of participants

1. Mr. Ahmad Shamsuri Lahad Datu District Office2. Datuk Daniel Khiong Sabah Forestry Department3. Mr. Danny Chew Borneo Tourism Institute4. Mdm. Elizabeth Malangking Department of Agriculture5. Datuk Eric Juin Environmental Conservation Department6. Mr. Faizal Ahmad Environmental Conservation Department7. Dr. Junaidi Payne WWF Malaysia8. Ms. Lee Shan Khee WWF Malaysia9. Dr. Marc Ancrenaz HUTAN10. Mr. Melvin T Gumal Wildlife Conservation Society - Malaysia Programme11. Dr. Stephen Sutton Borneo Books12. Mr. Vincent Fung Sabah Forestry Department13. Dr. Waidi Sinun Innoprise Sdn. Bhd.14. Mr. Watanabe Takeshi JIPRC15. Ms. Wendy Wan State Economic Planning Unit16. Datuk Wilfred Lingham Pabin Wildlife Department17. Mr. William Wong Agriculture Department18. Mr. Laurentius Ambu Sabah Wildlife Department19. Mr. Augustine Tuuga Sabah Wildlife Department20. Mr. Soffian Abu Bakar Sabah Wildlife Department21. Mr. Roland O Nium Sabah Wildlife Department22. Mr. Abd Karim Hj Dakog Sabah Wildlife Department23. Mr. Sailun Aris Sabah Wildlife Department24. Dr. Toshinori Tsubouchi JICA Expert - Sabah Wildlife Department25. Mr. Joseph Lim Land and Survey Department26. Mr. Mahadimenakbar Dawood Universiti Malaysia Sabah27. Mr. Kenji Fukushima Institute Consulting Division Water Environment28. Mr. Rikako Kimura Urban Development Corporation, Tokyo Branch29. Mr. Drew Boshell Raleigh International30. Mr. Roger Cox DANIDA-SWD31. Dr. Tsuzuki Kazuko Natural Environment Education Advisor32. Mr. Awang Samhan Nyawa Brunei Museums Department33. Dr. Sugradjito LIPI34. Mr. Jaffit Majuakim Sabah Museum35. Dr. Hamid Ahmad Universiti Malaysia Sabah36. Dr. Hiroshi Ikeda Hyogo Prefectural Homeland for Oriental White Stork, Japan37. Peter Malim Sabah Wildlife Department38. Tn. Haji Amat Ramsa Rainforest Academy, UPM

136



Peter Malim: Can you enlighten us on how this topic can fit in the theme – Habitat Management Component?

Chairman: Mr. Laurentius is unable to be here but he has given this topic for discussion, i.e. Challenges andOpportunities of a Protected Area having Multiple Status. To give you the background of this topic, for example, TabinWildlife Reserve, we are there to manage the wildlife (without legal authority to manage the habitat). At the moment, weare thinking of gazetting Tabin Wildlife Reserve (TWR) as a wildlife center under Wildlife Enactment. We feltthat there are challenges in the area of multiple status. There are times when we have to gazette state lands as conser-vation areas e.g. between Kulamba and Tabin area. Under section 21 of the Wildlife ConservationEnactment, we can gazette the area between 2 wildlife areas for certain reasons e.g. migration route of the animals.Even if it is a private land, you can still gazette it for certain activities.

Peter Malim: Can you enlighten us on how this topic can fit in the theme – Habitat Management Component?Chairman: Initially the idea of having the Habitat management component was to connect Tabin and Kulambawildlife reserve but we don’t know the status of this area now.

Mr. Peter Malim: Are we focusing on Tabin?

Chairman: This is an example. We may have other areas that are important as wildlife corridor and migration routes.

Dr. Hamid Ahmad: What do we understand by multiple status?

Chairman: It means legal protection status. In actual fact only the forestry department can manage the areawhereas the wildlife enactment has no power under the present status. In order to enforce the law, the area has tobe gazetted under the wildlife enactment act.

Dr. Hamid Ahmad: Are we talking about the present protected area?

Chairman: This is applicable to many areas but we are using Tabin as an example.

Peter Malim: I am confused with the scope of this project. How many of us are familiar with the law of the protectedarea?

Dr. Toshinori Tsubouchi: There are many lands between the protected areas that are owned by the private and thegovernment. How can a protected area have multiple status?

In Japan, after the World War II, we have traditional protected areas that have many sacred lands / trees / species. Theywere communally run. After the War, we dismissed the law of protected areas. This meant the whole area has multiplestatus, namely private, public, government and sacred areas. We have 3 status under the National ParkLaw , national park, semi-national park and local government designated parks. Only the national parks are underthe national government while the semi-national parks are under the local government and national government.We had multiple status on the particular land so it was difficult for the habitat management.

Mr. Melvin T Gumal:Which has more protection for the habitat; is it under the Wildlife Conservation Enactment or the Forestry Enactment?

Chairman: Both.

Mr. Melvin T Gumal: If tomorrow the forestry department decides to log , can they do it?

Chairman: Yes, but under certain policies.

Mr. Vincent Fung: For Tabin, it is classified under Class 6 which means it is a protected forest. It is not subject to timberexploitation and solely for scientific research. Thus, it is very restricted. To me, I think the Forest Enactment holdsstrongly for the area. There is absolutely no compromise for any timber extraction.

Mr. Melvin T Gumal: Under the Sarawak Forestry Law, for areas under Class 4 and above, the terrain is too steep anddifficult for logging which means they are protected areas but there are still logging done by helicopters. Thus, this type

137

of protection is not strong enough as opposed to the Wildlife Enactment. I’m not sure about Sabah. Now the ForestryDepartment of Sarawak has been corporatised and naturally the main objective is to make money. So thefirst to go is the multiple status of these areas. Which law gives Tabin more protection in the long run?

Mr. Vincent Fung: The Forestry Enactment gives the fullest protection for this area. There is absolutely no logging inthis area.

Dr. Junaidi Payne: There has been presidence where the Sabah Government and not the Forestry Departmentthat has reclassified the forest reserves easily.

Chairman: Tabin Wildlife Reserve was gazetted in 1984. Logging was carried out until 1989.

Dr. Marc Ancrenaz: If there is a problem in Tabin, who is in charge of enforcing the law?

Chairman: At the moment, it is the Forestry Department.

Mr. Drew Boshell: On the topic of tourism, I strongly agree that Tabin is well conserved and there are nice pockets ofbiodiversity. However, there are problems with the genetic bottlenecks which restrict of movement of the animals. InTabin, there are still 7-9 rhinoceros left.

Chairman: What are the opportunities and the challenges of the protected areas?

Dr. Hamid Ahmad: I would like to suggest that we discuss the pros and cons of the multiple status.Mr. Drew Boshell: The challenges would be the conflicts with the landowners and the opportunities will be to openup the genetic bottlenecks for migration. Who has the veto power to control the status of the land? If someonedecides to change the status of the land, do they need mutual agreement?

Chairman: They are both government agencies so there will be no problem.

Dr. Hamid Ahmad: How can we change the status of the land?

Dr. Junaidi Payne: We need to go to the State Assembly.

Chairman: The best thing to do is to leave the management to an agency entrusted to look after that place e.g. ForestryDepartment has the full power to manage the forest while the Wildlife Department will protect the wildlife.

Mr. Drew Boshell: It is a good idea if there is co-operation between the agencies. This is the problem we facedunder the multiple status.

Dr. Hamid Ahmad: With this current management i.e. with a management committee as in the TWR, do we have anyproblems?

Chairman: With the present situation, if there is illegal logging, the rangers will report immediately to the ForestryDepartment. There were instances where they have to make reports to the Forestry Department and thus the timelag has provided an opportunity for the loggers to flee.

Mr. Melvin T Gumal: This is also the problem within the national parks in the Wildlife Department. The enforcement hasbeen removed from the wildlife rangers because there is ownership of the land.

Dr. Marc Ancrenaz: Is there a way to change this?

Chairman: As in the case of Kinabatangan Wildlife Sanctuary, it was gazetted under the Land Enactment a few yearsago. They do not have the power to take action. If it is under the Wildlife Enactment, we have the full power.

Dr. Hamid Ahmad: Can you take action on people who possessed wildlife outside the Wildlife Park?

Chairman: Yes, anywhere except in the Park.

138



Dr. Toshinori Tsubouchi: If this area is a private land and the wildlife are moving freely, what will happen?

Chairman: If the wildlife corridor is in the plantation area, we can gazette it as a conservation/wildlife area.

Dr. Junaidi Payne: This is only a theory, it is not tested in Sabah yet.

Chairman: Maybe it is a good idea to test it in Tabin & Kulamba.

Dr. Toshinori Tsubouchi: Is it true that only wildlife sanctuary will be compensated and not conservation areas?

Chairman: Yes, conservation areas are still owned by the landowners.

Tn. Haji Amat Ramsa: There are some challenges - different enforcements due to different agencies and conflictsbetween users.

Chairman: There are no conflicts at the moment. The Forestry Department will not allow logging. The problem isthe enforcement.

Dr. Hamid Ahmad: Let’s agree that we want a corridor between Tabin and Kulamba. We can discuss how to repossessthe land.

Chairman: These options have different obstacles. It is not easy to repossess the land unless the government has a lotof money to pay compensation.

Mr. Drew Boshell: One of the challenges - if there are more than 1 agencies responsible, sometimes the areas ofresponsibilities are not clear.

Chairman: If for example, Tabin is to be regazetted under the Wildlife Enactment, we felt that the Forestry is morepowerful then we may ask the Forestry Department to take action rather that the Wildlife Department.

Mr. Drew Boshell: One of the opportunities maybe to set up a task force so that they can work together and thus morefunds to manage the area.

Mr. Vincent Fung: We can have a committee to manage the Forest Reserve including the private sector. The firsttask is to ensure that there are no intruders in the forest. If the wildlife thinks that they have no power, they can referto the Forestry Department to take action against the illegal loggers. As far as I can see, this is not a crucial issuebetween the Forestry and Wildlife Department. Furthermore, the enforcement is in good shape.

Dr. Hamid Ahmad: If there are no officers/rangers from the forestry department when there is illegal logging, your reportwould be inter-department whereas if there are officers from the forestry department, the report would be from within theunit, so it should be faster.

Mr. Vincent Fung: If the area is changed to wildlife reserve and being under Class 6, what is the guarantee thatthis status will not change in the event of a change in government?

Mr. Ahmad Shamsuri: What is Class 6?

Mr. Vincent Fung: No logging strictly for scientific research.

Dr. Hamid Ahmad: There is a management committee for Danum Valley as well as the Maliau Basin. Having theforest in Class 6, that is the best protection. The problem would be to ensure that it will not be regazetted if there is achange in government. The only way is to make it more difficult to change the status of the land e.g. maybe througheducation.

Mr. Vincent Fung: We also mentioned linking Kulamba and Tabin and we should focus on that.

Mr. Peter Malim: With regards to the corridor, it is a big challenge especially in determining the boundaries.

139

Mr. Ahmad Shamsuri: The corridor involves a lot of private lands. If we could guarantee the landowners a job e.g.ecotourism, we can solve a lot of problems.

Chairman: Ecotourism is a positive solution.

Mr. Drew Boshell: Another opportunity is that if 2 or more agencies are involved, each agency could make it moredifficult to change the status of the land. Furthermore, they can act as a watchdog for each other to ensure that respon-sibilities are carried out.

Tn. Haji Amat Ramsa: Another opportunity could be less bureaucracy and more transparency.

140



5.4 Public Awareness Component WorkshopTopic: Smart Partnership Between NGOs and Governmental Agencies for the Public Awareness

141

Participants:

1. Ms. Ainon Salam Environmental Conservation Dept.

2. Mr. Azman Mohamed Universiti Malaysia Sabah

3. Mr. Azri Sawang KOCP

4. Mr. Datu Ahbam Abulani KOCP

5. Mdm. Fatimah Jaafar Science & Technology Unit

6. Mr. Gary Lim Malaysian Nature Society

7. Dr. Hiroshi Ikeda Hyogo Prefectural

8. Ms. Josephine Michael VVWF Malaysia

9. Ms. Ken Kartina Khamis Science & Technology Unit

10. Mrs. Lina Mohd. Lin Science & Technology Unit

11. Ms. Masniah Othman Sabah Forestry Department

12. Dr. Mohd. Nazri lguchi Science & Technology Unit

13. Mr. Moktar Yassin Ajam Science & Technology Unit

14. Dr. Monica Suleiman Universiti Malaysia Sabah

15. Mr. Hisashi Shinsho KIWC

16. Ms. Susan Pudin Environmental Conservation Dept.

17. Mr. Takeshi Watanabe JIPRC

18. Ms. Sumie Yamamoto JOCV-SWD

19. Mr. Yasuo Yutoku Kyushu Electric Power Co.

20. Mrs. Bernadette Joeman Sabah Forestry Department

21. Ms. Janet Likunjang Sabah Forestry Department

22. Mr. Jimmy Omar Sabah Nature Club

23. Ms. Doris Lasimbang PACOS

24. Mr. Sumbin Gadas Sabah Wildlife Dept.

25. Mrs. Anna Wong Sabah Wildlife Dept.

29. Mr. Albert Aseh My-Gap Sdn Bhd

30. Dr. Ambi Kavathi Universiti Malaysia Sabah

31. Mr. Ag. Rahim Ag. Ali lnnoprise

32. Ms. Alice Wong Asian Tourism Institute

33. Mr. Yukio Hasegawa Longstay Travel & Tours

34. Mr. Mohd. Fauzi Yaacub Universiti Malaysia Sabah

35. Mrs. Zahra Yaacob Sabah Society

36. Tn. Hj. Amat Ramsa Universiti Putra Malaysia

Slide 1


142

Participants:

37. Ms. Keiko Ando Japan Wildlife Reseach Centre

38. Ms. Kazuko Ikeda Japan Wildlife Reseach Centre

39. Mr. Minoru Tanaka Japan Environment Corporation

40. Mr. Yasuhiro Ichikawa 2nd year, Faculty of Policy Management, Keio University

41. Ms. Michi Goto Coordinator / Translator, Japan for Sustainability Volunteer Team

42. Ms. Yuko Kishikami Volunteer Staff, Association for Ecosystem Conservation - Kochi Prefecture

43. Mr. Mikio Matsuda Staff, Burkina Faso Office, Action for Greening Sahel

44. Ms. Akiko Noda Faculty of Engineering, Tokushima University

45. Ms. Akiko Tajima 4th year, Nohon University, College of Bioresource Sciences

46. Mr. Yasunori Yamazaki Staff, Ecology Club Hiroshima

Presentation Slides by Ms. Keiko Ando, Japan Wildlife Research Centre

Slide 2

Slide 4

Slide 3

Slide 6

Slide 5


143

Slide 15

Slide 14

Slide 13

Slide 12

Slide 11

Slide 10

Slide 9

Slide 7

Slide 8

Slide 9

Slide 8

Slide 7

Slide 6

Slide 5

Slide 4

Slide 3

Slide 1

Slide 2

Slide 10

144

Presentation Slides by Ms. Ainon Salam, EAC Executive Secretary


Slide 18

Slide 17

Slide 16

Slide 15

Slide 14

Slide 13

Slide 11

Slide 12

145


146

Slide 9

Slide 8

Slide 7

Slide 6

Slide 5

Slide 4

Slide 3

Slide 1

Slide 2

Slide 10

Presentation Slides by Ms. Michi Goto, Japan for Sustainability Volunteer Team


147

Slide 17

Slide 16

Slide 15

Slide 14

Slide 13

Slide 11

Slide 12

148

Slide 9

Slide 8

Slide 7

Slide 6

Slide 5

Slide 4

Slide 3

Slide 1

Slide 2

Slide 10

Presentation Slides by Mr. Jimmy Omar, Sabah Nature Club


149

Slide 18

Slide 17

Slide 16

Slide 15

Slide 14

Slide 13

Slide 11

Slide 12

Slide 20

Slide 19

Slide 24

Slide 23

Slide 21

Slide 22

Slide 4

Slide 3

Slide 2

Slide 1

Presentation Slides by Mr. Mikio Matsuda, Action for Greening Sahel

150


151

Slide 12

Slide 11

Slide 10

Slide 9

Slide 8

Slide 7

Slide 5

Slide 6

Malay Lady: How do you evaluate your performance?

Ms. Ainon Hj. Salam: For evaluation for eg, our financier Shell Malaysia has requested us to evaluate our programmein Danum Valley before and after the participants attend the activity. Our government also want to know whether theactivity was a successful one.

Mdm. Masniah Othman: Do you have any body to monitor the activities?

Ms. Ainon Hj. Salam: We will monitor partially. If they request funding from us, we would require them to submittheir proposal. We are requesting them to monitor the activities. We actually empowered them to monitor the activities.

152

Mr. Matsuda Mikio: The vital goal of the project is to make the village people independent. The government and localvillagers evaluate their own activities. They can improve on their activities then it would be quite sustainable.



5.5.1 Research and Education Componentpresented by Prof. Datin Dr. Maryati Mohamed, Universiti Malaysia Sabah

The objective of the workshop was how to prioritize research, and concentrate on six topics.

The problem is that in the Research & Education Component (REC), there is a large catalogue of research requestedby people, to do over a five programme, but because there are limitations of funding and resources, etc. REC needsto prioritize.

Six topics were touched on at the Session Workshop:1 .What are the parameters chosen2. What kind of research are important for conservation of (a) Biodiversity (b) Ecosystem in Borneo3. What prior information/research is needed4. Who ran do the research5. Statistics needed6. Funding Sources & Limitations

Question 1 regarding Parametersa. Availability (of specialists/experts)b. Long-term researchc. Integrationd. Research needed by International Requirementse. Commercial Valuef. Less Studied Areasg. Management Values

Question 2 regarding Research Necessary for Biodiversity and Ecosystem in SabahBiodiversity:a. Ethnic/Traditional Uses of Biodiversityb. Systematic & Taxonomy as Basic Studiesc. Impact Assissmentd. Relationship of Biodiversity & Ecosystem Function

Ecosystem of Borneo (Sabah):a. Effects of Habitat Alteration I Disturbanceb. Roles of Canopies in Ecosystem Functionc. Collaborationd. Commercial Agreement

Question 3 regarding What lnformation/research is Neededa. Permission from Sabah State Governmentb. Priorities of International Agreement, e.c. CBDc. Research Proposald. State Education

MOU:a. Research Agreementb. Rules & Regulations

5.5 Presentation of Discussion from Component WorkshopChairman: Mr. Takahisa Kusano

153

c. Facilities Availability

Question 4 regarding Who Can do the Researcha. Collaboratorsb. Local Communitiesc. Volunteers (local & international)d. Approvalse. Any interested with fundsf. Who can be involved

Question 5 regarding What Statistics are neededa. Research Designb. How to obtain statisticsc. Production of Local Goods

Question 6 regarding Funding Sources Other Limitations

On Funding Sources:a. Local Sourcesb. International Sourcesc. Private Sourcesd. NGOs

On Limitationsa. Fundingb. Research Proposalc. Necessitiyd. Field Centree. Limitations

Questions and Answers After PresentationQ: Prof. NakashizukaI am not clear. What kind of long-term research are you thinking of starting?

A: Prof. Datin MaryatiThe long-term research that we identified at Kinabatangan includes things like monitoring the water quality of the CrockerRange. We look at the impact of tourism, as we know the Crocker Range is a watershed for Sabah.

There are many researches we have identified. We also look at Canopy biology and we are starting this in Danum Valley,but I think studying the canopy at other research sites under BBEC will be very good. Canopy biology is one of thoseplaces where it is very clearly affected, when you log forests. So naturally, we have to do canopy biology.

The greatest challenge is to get funding from any organizations and good students to do the research. Thank you.

Q: Hj. Amat RamsaI am interested in your conservation activities, especially in Pasar Minggu at the public venues. It is so interesting and Iwould like to know how you do it and what the response is from the public.

A: Prof. Datin Dr. MaryatiYou can actually ask Dr. Monica, who was in charge of the project. We have all the ups and downs. There are times whenwe don't have the boost because we cannot get our people to go there at that particular time. Either theyhave to do their fieldwork or they have lots of teaching to do. Then we go under the basis of using students, underthe Science Short Programme, but again these students have exams, fieldwork or reports to write, so we sort offailed for a while.

154

Presentation of Discussion from Component Workshop


2 weeks ago, we developed another scheme. We are paying a very small fee to someone who is very dedicatedto public awareness and we hope this time it will stay. We show examples to people about what we are doing, fore.g. the recycling programme. We do demonstrations for the public. We face a lot of challenges but we try hard toget this through because we believe people have to be educated on face-to-face interactions.

A: Mr. Kusano (comments)Thank you. More outbridge programmes being introduced by the Public Awareness Component later.

5.5.2 Park Management Componentpresented by Mr. Shigeo Sakai, Sabah Parks

The session discussed the possibility of creating buffer zones for the Crocker Range Park (CRP). The session wasdivided into two parts, with the first part comprising of a presentation by Dr. Yoneda, and the second part was thediscussion.

In Dr. Yoneda’s presentation, he touched on topics concerning environmental threats in Sabah, especially to the CRPand the forest reserve. The key problems concern forest fires and shifting cultivation, including illegal logging in theCRP, degradation of the adjacent areas of the eco-system, by oil palm plantations, illegal logging and illegal hunting.Some examples of these are in the Ulu Membakut area where it used to be a secondary forest, but now there is an oilpalm plantation just by the boundary. Another example of degradation is traditional shifting cultivation in some areas ofthe park, and also the illegal logging activities in the CRP.

The second part of the discussion summarized what had been discussed, where four issues were brought up regardingbuffer zones, namely what is the buffer zone, what is the criteria of a buffer zone, what are the models of buffer zonesand the registration of buffer zones.

It was felt that the Park Management should consult and discuss with the local community on its past, present and futureland use, and these should be studied in depth in order to formulate an Integrated Management Plan for long termperspective. It would also be necessary to examine problems and protocol necessary for these plans. Some felt it wasnecessary to take immediate action and to speed up any proposals and apply implementation in order to gain progress,rather than lose all that has been done up to date.

There were also opinions that long term plans should be made immediately and these plans should be integrated now,like other countries, for e.g. Japan, where they have five categories of protected areas. These may not be applicable toSabah, but Sabah should have its own system. There have also been successful cases from Nepal and the Philippines,where the local community took active parts. The Ministry, in collaboration with the WWF had studied the potentialprotective areas as early as the 90s, and six areas were proposed, but todate, not much has been realized, unfortu-nately. At that time, Membakut, which now has an oil palm plantation as was mentioned earlier, was still a secondaryforest. There has been no significant push since 1998.

In the present, the Kinabatangan case was presented, and potential areas were established for buffer zones and water-shed protection areas. The watershed protections are planned by the Department of Irrigation & Drainage, and it wassuggested that this watershed protection area be used as a buffer zone.

In summary, there have been no solid conclusions. It was quite a heavy brain-storming session, but it is a very complexissue with many stakeholders and a lot of different interests. Local communities are the key for sustainability for themanagement, but this is also a complex issue. The Keningau and Kimanis road is going to be sealed soon, so the landalong this road is also an urgent issue. Some participants suggested that Sabah Park should apply for the land there sothat it can be included as Parkland or at least, a protected area.

Hopefully, a final conclusion can be drawn from the March workshop. Sabah Parks is planning to have a bigger work-shop then, so this subject can be continuously discussed.

155

Questions and Answers After PresentationQ: Dr. Chey Vun KhenWe have been told that the proposed Kudat Marine Park has been approved by the State Government Since thoseislands are part of Pulau Bangi and Balambangan and it is quite big, would it be good if the BBEC programme conductresearch to compare the biodiversity in those islands with the biodiversity in mainland Sabah and these islands couldalso serve as a link between Borneo and Pahlawan. Thank you.

A: Dr. Jamili NaisYes, it is in the pipeline and in fact, there are many things that should be in the BBEC programme. I agree with you, butamong other things that need to be done under this programme should include the Forestry Research Centre and theSabah Biodiversity Centre. The main focus is the terrestial ecosystem.

The proposed Marine Park at the northern tip of Sabah currently involves the marine water, and does not involve theislands. Probably not in this particular programme.

A: Mr. Kusano (comments)Are we talking about Banggi Island, yes? Unfortunately this area, Japanese are prohibited to go. This side of Kudat isblacklisted for Japanese.

Q: Mr. Abdul-Hamid AhmadDo you have any idea about the size of the population who are actually living within the Crocker Range Park?

A: Dr. Jamili NaisWe have a very detailed map and information database on the villagers and people living inside the park. The differenceis that Kinabalu Park was gazetted in 1964 before the population boom, land was plentiful and people not that many, sowe did not have many problems in the Kinabalu Park.

However, when the Crocker Range Park was gazetted in 1984, the population boom in settlement had set in. That'swhere the problem started. When we started surveying, some communities, villagers and shifting cultivators were insidethe park. This is what we are trying to resolve now.

From the preparation of the Management Master Plan, we have detailed maps and database of all the people involved.We try to squash the surface, the creation of a buffer zone. If a community falls inside the park, then we will probablyexcise them, designate the area a buffer zone and restrict activities. We are going to resolve this once and for all withinthe next 5 years.

In the third week of next month, we are going to have the Park Zoning Workshop, and are inviting all relevant people tolook bit by bit, whether each section selected is to be excised, retained or bufferzoned. That's what we will be discussingnext month.

A: Hj. Amat Ramsa (comments)I totally agree with Dr. Jamili that participation of the stakeholders are important, and to view sustainability of the park. In2000 1 visited the Forest Training in Nepal around Lantong National Park. We had a 2 month course there. What theydid was set up an institutional arrangement with park authorities and the local community, where they set up the commu-nity based ecotourism activities.

The activities actually reduced one conflict between the park and the community. Now it is going to be implemented inThailand. Maybe we can learn from them and I think there are a lot of cases where local communities participate in parkmanagement. They can actually reduce conflict like the case study in Pakistan, where they reduced conflict of illegalhunting by developing an Association of Hunters comprised of local hunters inside the park. Therefore, through theassociation, they are controlling the hunting activities and conserving the wildlife species at the same time. Thank you.

A: Dr. Jamili NaisThank you for your comments. In fact, I was in Nepal in 1996 and studying the Napuma National Park and the RoyalNational Park. We were looking at their public participation and bufferzone management. Last month, I was in Vietnam,discussing the 10 model sitv in Asia for Protected Area Management. Kinabalu was chosen as one and the

156



Royal National Park also, mostly regarding public participation and decision making. Thank you for the informationanyway.

5.5.3 Habitat Management ComponentPresented by Mr. Laurentius Ambu, Sabah Wildlife Department

We discussed about the challenges and opportunities on protected areas having a multiple status.

The participants have a view that this is a challenging topic and an issue we have yet to face with such scenario. Unlikeother countries such as Japan, Europe and others, an area of multiple status to us meant either a protected area withdifferent organisations or a bioregion having different protected areas with different organisations in both of thatbioregions.

We have discussed about the area of Kinabatangan. Even though it would not be a good case study for this topic, we willhowever present some of the opportunities and challenges of having a bioregion area and protected area with differentorganisation and different status. Just like in Europe, they have the landscape concept. In Japan they have differentorganisation managing one area and in Africa, Kenya with protected area managed by government agency and run bylocal council. These are the scenario we are aiming for Sabah. We anticipate a lot of habitats and eco system andbioregion would be affected in ten to twenty years from now. So we would prepare for this scenario today.

An area with different stakeholders and organisation with different jurisdictions, the challenges we foresee would be thefunding needed in terms of payment and compensation to land owners. For example, for a protected area that need asupport from a big land owner adjacent to the protected area, we would need to work with the land owners to plant treesalong the corridor. We may need a lot of incentives in form of funding to the land owners and everybody agree it wouldbe a constrain in terms of funding.

The other challenge is the conflict of jurisdiction between agencies. For example the bioregion of Kinabatangan’s riverbasin and protected areas around that bioregion, and the buffer zone and wildlife sanctuary. We anticipate the conflict ofjurisdiction in these areas.

We cannot deny the fact that what you do in one area affects the other.

The other challenge we face would be conflict between agencies since each has different priorities, different mandate.Therefore, we could foresee conflict of interest in terms of land use.

Another challenge would be also different agencies would have different problems incorporated into their managementplan.

However, we are positive, as we see few challenges but more of opportunities.

The opportunities we first discuss is synthesizing the coordination of managing the area by an appointed institution.Again, the transparency of management would be needed with less double standard. Our vision would be zoning, to bemore effective with multiple input and coorperation between agencies. There would be zoning procedure to be followedaccording to the constitution of different institutions on the area.

A shared funding between agencies would be implemented by means of one agency getting the fund while the othersharing the fund in terms of capacity building.

We also want to have active participation from stakeholder as the key element to sustainability of an area by mean ofinvolving local community with local authority.

Lastly, we suggest increase of protection on the value and use of the area with enforcement to enhance our protection.As people see the coordination of multiple agencies, the value of area would become apparent and attracting tourists.

157

Questions and Answers After PresentationQ: (Name unknown)How is the situation of the paper proposed?

A: Mr. LaurentiusActually, we have the procedure for establishing an area where we do a lot of justification, supported by fieldwork, data justification, socio-economic. We have done this with a consultant and have written a good report whichwe have submitted to the Ministry. We have been asked to look into consultation with other agencies before wewrite anything. It has since been completed, and we are waiting for the Ministry to table it at the cabinet. We hopeto be able to secure that area as the area is now being applied for and virtually nobody has the right to plant in thewetlands, because a lot of money will be needed.

Q: Mr. Y.C. KanIn order to maintain genetic diversities, you need to link all those isolated proected areas. I have the impressionthat the department has varied the power to implement such ideas, for example in the lower Kinabatangan areas. Manyproblems there are fragmented, because of the plantations, and they cut off pockets of Orang utans, so eventually, evenkey species like the Orang Utans will eventually face extinction, because of genetic threats. I wonder what kind of poweryou have to implement that idea, or are you looking for more power to bring up all the particular isolated areas in Sabah.

A: Mr. LaurentiusWhen we talk about pure science, there are lots of concepts with regards maintaining the genetic diversity. It’s allwith the concept of SLOs. I have prepared maps that depict a scenario where there is no logging, and then we will followthese areas for the next 30 to 40 years, and you can see that even then, most areas will be fragmented.

We would like to study those species in terms of habit fertilization, habitat requirements, and so forth. This projectis designed in such a way, that we can use it as a model for sustaining or protecting the species who reign within theTabin or around the Tabin, and to a large extent, outside the Tabin. If it is successful, we can use this for otherareas, and this is what the project is for, and it will be a good indicator for project completion, and we can then use itanywhere else in the State.

A: Mr. KusanoI think in any country, protecting agencies or agencies working for conservation to gain power needs support from thepublic and also understanding. Therefore the Public Awareness Component is very important to us, and it will help a fewmillion people who understand environmental issues. It is very crucial and helpful for us. Thank you.

5.5.4 Public Awareness ComponentPresented by Moktar Yassin Ajam, Director of Science & Technology Unit

We have 5 presentations with 3 speakers from Japan and 2 from Sabah. Our focus was to discuss about Smartpartnership between NGOs for environmental public awareness.

We have about 38 participants including 10 persons from the Citizen’s college for global environment, overseas trainingcourse from Japan. Another 5 speakers present on their experience on partnership between government& NGOs.

The first speaker Ms. Ando, she speaks about the Japan fund for global environment to different countries includingMalaysia. The second speaker was Ms. Ainon from Environmental Action Committee of Sabah. She speaks aboutthe activities of partnership between the government and NGOs. The same goes for Jimmy Omar from SabahNature Club. The fourth speaker Mr. Michi Goto speaks about the Japan experience on conservation for birds. She hasgiven three-focus area in this experience by providing material for environmental education with support fromcompanies like Olympus. She speaks about providing training in teaching volunteers & providing a guide toimplement successful education. The last speaker Mr. Matsuda speaks about his experience from ‘Bukit Basung’ in titleaction greening science. Again he mentioned about the partnership between government and support from Japan aswell as the participation of local community. At the end of the component meeting we talk about how to evaluate &monitor our activities. The indicators we should look into for evaluation.

158



In fact, evaluation can be from government or NGOs or the community. In conclusion, we look into two aspects. Firstly,we emphasize more on partnership between government & NGOs, as we believe that government provides the servicesand the NGOs & the community give care to it. Secondly would be the community participation in environment educationas the community is the end beneficiary of any activities. We like the idea that the community will become independentlater on as we do something about the environment. Our goal in environmental education is we want our children to learn& think about environmental education with a sustainable society.

Questions and Answers After PresentationQ: Tuan Hj. Amat RamsaWhat are the indicators you have, to measure the effectiveness of campaigns, and what the peak performance meteryou use to measure such success?

A: Mr. Moktar Yassin AjamPublic awareness is an ongoing activity where we try to create an understanding of the level of awareness in people. Wetry to connect with the local people to try to make them understand and even if have success with one person, we callthat effective.

A: Mr. Azman Mohamad (comments)It is a baseline study.

Q: Ms. Zahra YaacobHow effective is the public awareness campaign. There are so many campaigns. We have to bring understanding to thelowest level of people. How m we reach the illiterate. We have campaigns in cartoon forms, something the children of thekarnpungs can associate with. As the public awareness campaign consist mainly of government people, how manyactually go to ground level?

A: Mr. Moktar Yassin AjamThat is a very good point to bring up. We have to discuss more on this, perhaps have partnership programmes withNGOs and the government.

159

160

Chairman Datuk K.Y. Mustafa/BBEC Chairman

Panelists Mr. Takahisa Kusano/Chief Advisor-BBECProf. Datin Dr. Maryati Mohamad/Director, ITBC-UMSDr. Jamili Nais/Deputy Director-Sabah ParksMr. Moktar Yassin Ajam/Director-Unit Science & TechnologyMr. Laurentius Ambu/Deputy Director-Sabah Wildlife Department

In his brief introduction, Datuk K.Y. Mustafa recorded his appreciation for the four workshop presentations, which weremost informative. He mentioned that on the third day of the BBEC Conference, there would be a ProjectCycle Management (PCM) Workshop, which would be the last workshop of the three-days conference.

At the colloquium, he wanted to take the opportunity to see and assess how things have progressed. Over the last twodays, many reports and opinions had been presented and given, especially by the four components: Research & Educa-tion, Park Management, Habitat Management and last but not least, the Public Awareness Component. There were alsoten paper presentations by various speakers, both local and overseas, from as far as Japan and Indonesia.

The colloquium was an open session, and Datuk wanted to get feedback from all the participants, in order to get aperspective on how to improve BBEC’s approach to effectively handle biodiversity and eco-system conservation,especially in Sabah.

The main approach is the integration of action of all four components in five sites within five years, to conserveendangered and precious biodiversity and eco-system in Sabah. That is what the BBEC Programme is all about.

With that brief address, he opened the colloquium to the floor.

Question and Answer Session

Q: Mr. Ludi Apin (Sabah Parks)I would like to go directly about what is on my mind. If we talk about forestry, logging, etc., even after logging we haveregenerations. Once an area is logged and nothing is done after that, there will definitely be regenerations in five to tenyears to come. I have no idea on the Department of Agriculture’s stand from the socio-economic point versus theconservation of biodiversity. I think it will be a problem in future if we don’t look into agro forestry as a sustainabledevelopment tool for developing countries. For example if I am a farmer and I have ten acres of land. I am told not tocut any land above 25 degrees. This would not be practical for me and if there are thousands of people who have beentold the same thing, then it would not be fair to them because they all need their subsistence. Perhaps there is someway where we can integrate agricultural activities as one of the consideration on biodiversity conservation. Thank you.

A: Datuk K.Y. Mustafa (Sabah State Government)I will try to make some clarification. We have commissioned a study on land use in Sabah, under the Land Use Policyin Sabah. We have some funds from the State Government and these funds would be used to study the terms ofreference, the scope and everything else. The secretariat of this study will be the Secretary of Natural Resources,Jabatan Hasil Bumi. Basically, it tries to answer the issues you raised on an individual basis and also State basis.

5.6 Colloquium

Colloquium


In Sabah, we are not utilizing our land as we should, including agriculture land. Secondly, we know some land allocatedfor other uses would be better used for agricultural purpose for food products for instance. Another area to look into is thecleared forest area and forest reserve areas. Agreements have been signed under the Forest Management Unit buteven after several years, not much progress has been made. Therefore, we would like to explore alternative uses. Ofcourse, as much as possible, we would like to retain our forest.

A: Mr. Laurentius Ambu (Sabah Wildlife Department)I would like to add some comments. Actually in the late 70s, the State Government embarked on an LEC study, i.e. LandEquitability Classification study. Basically everything is there, and I think what Datuk said just now refers to that.

All categories of land use has been laid out, including conservation, soil, etc. The agricultural sites have also been laidout as such, according to the LEC. On the conservation side, we are trying to follow international requirements and weare one of the agencies that comply with international conventions. I think this year they will be holding another worldconference i.e. the CNPPA (Commission of National Parks and Protected Areas).

In some countries, the minimum protected/reserve area is 10% of the land representative of the eco-system habitat. InSabah, we are trying to negotiate on the minimum requirement of protection.

When we talk about logging classifications, we know that most of the fertile land is in the lowlands, and most of biodiversityis in the lowlands. This has been discussed again and again, and we have to compromise. When we are talking aboutagricultural land, we talk about clear cutting, and when we talk logging, we have selective logging in Malaysia, and nowwe are gearing towards certification through the FSC, the Forest Stewardship Council. Thank you.

A: Dr. Chey Vun Khen (Forest Research Centre)I think our State Government has to facilitate research at all levels. However, when it comes to commercialexploitations of our biodiversity, I think we have to look closer. For example, in Sarawak, anyone who wants to docommercial exploitation of biodiversity, whether local or from overseas, separate samples, commercial tissue culture oforchids or other plants, they have to enter into a commercial agreement with the Sarawak State Government. Thisensures the government gets their fair share of the benefits. Thank you.

A: Prof. Datin Dr. Maryati (Universiti Malaysia Sabah)I think during the press conference just now, and also during his speech, the Chief Minister mentioned about theprotection of biodiversity of Sabah. We all fully agree that there must be some guidelines on how people use biodiversityin Sabah, because at the end of the day, profits benefitted from using genetic resources must be shared. Having saidthat, I would like to clarify that in BBEC’s programme we, Malaysians are to do the research. JICA experts are here onlong term and short term programmes, are just to help train and guide us in our research.

Therefore in no way, they are taking out resources for their own use. I am sure Mr. Kusano would like to reinforce this.I think there is no real worry about us abusing the faith or goodwill of the State Government in the BBEC programme. Asyou can see in our research protocol, which is now outlined in our book, it is clearly stated that when the SabahBiodiversity Enactment comes into full force, whatever agreement we had earlier will be automatically null and void.

A: Datuk K.Y. Mustafa (Sabah State Government)I am sure everyone is aware our Enactment has been approved and the Biodiversity Council has also been approved.The Chief Minister also mentioned earlier on during the press conference that he will hold the first meeting as soon aspossible, and in fact, the Chief Minister has acknowledged that Sarawak is ahead of us in this.

Q: Ms. Bernadette Joeman (Forest Research Centre)I was in the Public Awareness Component group just now during the discussion. I noticed that any programme on publicawareness or environmental education in Sabah is sadly lacking evaluation. I would like to suggest to the BBECprogramme that this be given emphasis because so far what we have done is to look at or observe indicators forsuccess, and I personally don’t think this is enough to know how far we have progressed. A lot of people have beendoing their part on environment education and public awareness in Sabah.

As far as I can recall, in 1996 when I first started going into environmental education, lots of people, NGOs as well asgovernment departments, have been doing their part, but up till now, no one can say for sure what kind of evaluation

161

method they have carried out, to show how far we have progressed. I do hope BBEC will put a lot of emphasis on thismatter.A: Mr. Moktar Yassin Ajam (Science & Technology Centre)Thank you. If JICA supports this, we will certainly look deeper in this matter.I am not the practitioner here for public awareness, I am only a general administrator, but I believe that any kind ofactivity that can lead to evaluation and monitoring, in other words, indicators will be very much welcome. I would like todifferentiate between output and outcome. Normally, when we conduct a certain number of activities per year, we saythat is the output However, we seldom look at the outcome, or how effective the implementation is.

On the participation of school children, I think many of the activities have target them already. I believe we should alsolook into the co-curriculum designed, which should include the participation of the teachers.

A: Mr. Drew Boshell (Raleigh International)It’s quite ironic because that was exactly the statement that I was going to make, going back on my research days ofdeveloping performance evaluation indicators for public awareness and also the government. I might be a little bit hazy,but I am not sure what BBEC is doing in this scope. It is important if you can align the evaluation indicators together withgoals for management, not only in research and education, but also park management. You may have great manage-ment plans and unless you have indicators to determine how well you have progressed, you don’t really how well you aredoing.

A: Mr. Azmi Salim (Ranau District Office)I’d like to suggest that the target group you give priority to should not only be the Kota Kinabalu area, but also areasaffected by the Crocker Range Park. I’d also like to suggest that the Federal Government together with the EducationDepartment be involved in this campaign, so that students of primary and secondary schools can assist in this publicawareness programme. Thank you.

A: Mr. T. Kusano (JICA)I am sure all of you have read the guide book for the BBEC programme. It is the compilation of our planning and our firstseminar last year. In the book, we listed the project design matrix for four components and programme design for all.There are columns for indicators where we mark the success, achievements of the outcome and activities we want to do.

The design of BBEC was made by about 300 people attending 16 workshops, which did preliminary studies beforeembarking on. This design itself indicates what we have thought. After one year, we will look at this plan and we willnotice what activities and/or outcome are not successful or correct.

Before beginning the BBEC programme, everybody agreed on the achieved results of a particular design, and we put upthe indicators. Public Awareness would make Sabahans understand the meaning of biodiversity, etc. After a year, wewill check to see how much we have progressed. We will see whether we have achieved the goals, and if not, we willmodify this design and put in more practical indicators.

A: Prof. Datin Dr. Maryati (Universiti Malaysia Sabah)This is very interesting. I remember during the planning of this BBEC programme, this was one of the suggestionsmentioned, that some form of education method be established for the Public Awareness Component, because unlesswe have one method of assessing, it is not fair to say whether we have succeeded or failed. However, this is somethingwe have to learn from Japan; I am unsure whether they have such a thing or not. So if anyone in this room knows aboutany evaluation method, please let us have your ideas, and perhaps we can put it to good use.

A: Mr. Kan Yaw Chong (Daily Express)My comments are about the fundamental objectives of BBEC. I am a little puzzled by the definition of the BBEC. It seemsto separate the eco-system from biodiversity. I have just come back from a six week course in Japan, and what I learnedthere is that eco-system and biodiversity are one and the same thing.

Biodiversity is defined on three main levels – genetic, species eco-system and biodiversity. That is what diversity is allabout. Actually it is not a Japanese definition, but it was taken from the Earth Summit in 1992. Therefore, I think themost important thing that this conference must do is try to adopt a definition, because I have talked to so many peoplein my job, and one important thing I learnt was that when we have a problem we must first define very clearly and

162

Colloquium


precisely what the problem is, before it can be resolved. Hence, we should define biodiversity.

A: Prof. Datin Dr. Maryati (Universiti Malaysia Sabah)You are definitely right. I agree there are three levels of biodiversity, however, our stakeholders are Sabahans. Thereare people who do not know what biodiversity is in the first place. Firstly, we want to know what we have at the specieslevel. It is not possible to go to the genetic level within five years; we know our constraint. We didn’t ask to look at theconservation of genes, because nobody can do that within five years on a limited budget. Therefore, we go for specieslevel, which is common in the world of biodiversity. We feel we can manage this level, and complete it within the five yearlimit satisfactorily. This includes how many species of ants we have, how many species of plants we have, etc. Sec-ondly, we’d also like to look into functional aspects, and this is where the ecosystem comes in. The Crocker Range is inthe ecosystem, and this is why we have to balance between the scientific conservation of biodiversity and ecosystem tomake it understandable.

A: Mr. T. Kusano (JICA)About biodiversity and ecosystem. However, the word “biodiversity” is not yet popular among the public, and we areafraid it mislead to mean only species level. This is why, we put the word “ecosystems” in our programme title. Thescientific definition of biodiversity includes ecosystem level. I sincerely hope one day everybody will understand the wordbiodiversity, its three different levels, and that equals nature.

Q: Mr. Jimmy Omar (Sabah Nature Club)One of the obvious constraints faced by people dealing with public awareness and/or environmental education practitio-ners, is funding. Would it be possible to get a commitment from the government or from agencies dealing with environ-ment or biodiversity, to at least provide funding for this? As indicated yesterday in a keynote address by Datuk K.Y.Mustafa, it is very important to educate people so they can understand the importance of conservation.

A: Datuk K.Y. Mustafa (Sabah State Government)Generally, I think Malaysia does not provide enough funding for research and development. This is a common discus-sion, and has been raised on many levels. Basically, it is because the State itself is facing a severe constraint. There isthe intention and capability, and these are the two issues which are not working together at this point.

A: Mr. Azman Muhammad (Universiti Malaysia Sabah)In the Keynote Address this morning by Mr. Mitsuo Usuki, he mentioned the problem/issue of conservation is alsorelated to economy, society and environment. These are all inter-related. The approach to the conservation effort mustbe a multi-holistic approach rather than one approach only. That is why we have a problem measuring the success orfailure of an awareness campaign. It is because we are looking at the campaign on its own, and not as a whole. One ofthe issues of consideration in Sabah is people living within the park boundaries. Probably by giving them land titles toother places will solve the whole problem of conservation. My idea or suggestion is that we must look at the issue ofPublic Awareness inter-related with other things.

A: Mr. Augustine Tuuga (Sabah Wildlife Department)Most of the environmental problems we are now facing is partly because of poor decision making by administrators, orgovernment department officers. However, we cannot totally blame them as they may have been ignorant of the natureconservation concept. I would like to suggest future leaders, officers, etc. the university should make nature conserva-tion a compulsory subject. Thank you.

A: Datuk K.Y. Mustafa (Sabah State Government)This has been discussed by the University Board the other day, and there are several subjects that the public must learnabout. This has become critical in nation building.

A: Prof. Datin Dr. Maryati (Universiti Malaysia Sabah)We realize this fact very much, and in fact, efforts have already begun at lower levels, even at primary schools, kinder-gartens, etc. Some years ago, we had already discussed and wondered why our children are not aware of the environ-ment. It is because the Minister of Education has not made environmental education a core subject. The mentality ofpeople or even parents is that since you don’t have to pass the exam on that subject, you don’t have to study it.

Learning is one method of really getting things into children. Mr. Gary Lim mentioned earlier our problem lies at oureducation level. For your information, ITBC-UMS offers 6 courses, ranging from topics such as Environment and

163

Conservation, Evolution Distribution and Conservation, Animal and Plants, etc., to non-science students. We believethat these non-science students, who may be bankers, managers, district officers, etc. in the future, need to know aboutthe environment. In this way, we hope this will become a more active subject and that we will see many changes infuture. Thank you.

A: Mr. Shigeo Sakai (JICA Expert - Sabah Parks)I wish to make two comments. The first comment is that everybody attending this workshop are working towards thesame goal. I would like to express my thanks to Datuk K.Y. Mustafa for his support.

My second comment is that I used to work in the central American countries, in Costa Rica, the Honduras. When I wentto the coastal areas, I could see banana plantations then, but now there are no more banana plantation expansions. Inthe early 90s, the forest areas were converted to banana plantations.

When I first saw the oil palm plantations (in Sabah), it was similar to the situation in the South American countries. It’skind of sad, frankly speaking. This happens not only in Sabah, Costa Rica, Honduras, but in Japan too. We say 68% ofthe land is forest, but in reality, we have cedar and cypress tree plantations, and there are many programmes these dayswith appalling averages. These trees are called “sugiwashinoshi”, and they are in every plantation.

Now I work for the Sabah Parks, and I sincerely hope the work will be a kind of foundation towards conservation, but ouroverall goal for this project is ecosystem and biodiversity, and I wonder if we can achieve these goals. Of course we willtry hard, and if everyone attending this conference thinks the same way, it would be good, but I wonder how much we canactually achieve.

A: Datuk K.Y. Mustafa (Sabah State Government)Probably at the bottom of our hearts, we always have that worry. Talking about it and exchanging ideas is definitely oneway of creating awareness rather than not doing anything at all, and we have to be patient. Efforts like this shouldcontinue, even with the minimal results.

With those comments, Datuk K.Y. Mustafa declared the Colloquium Session closed, and thanked everyone for theirquestions, comments and contributions.

Colloquium

164


5.7 Closing Remarksby Datuk K.Y. Mustafa, BBEC Chairman

Assalamualaikum warrahmahtullahi wabarakatu, good afternoon Ybhg. Prof Mohd. Noh Dalimin, DeputyVice-Chancellor of Student Affairs, Prof Datin Dr. Maryati, Mr. Kusano, JICA Advisor, speakers, both from neighbouringcountries and Malaysia, participants, heads of components.

This morning, we had the Rt. Hon. The Chief Minister, who expressed very strong support for our programme, anddespite his leaving the State leadership, he still makes time and ensures a commitment still visible. For that, I ampersonally very grateful to him, but the very reason I believe he made his presence here today is because he saw the realimportance of what we are doing. Of course, towards the end of the day, we ourselves will express whether we arecontributing meaningfully, or whether we are just doing a lot of things, and deriving little results. However, as the ChiefMinister comments, doing nothing is not an option we have nowadays. We have to do something, eventhough we do notderive great results. As there are so many people who choose to do nothing, this option will create a lot of problems lateron, and certainly create a lot of regrets.

What we are trying to do at this conference through the wider efforts of BBEC, again at State and National level, it is ourco-operation among countries to make this world a better place, to try to save whatever we have left, so we can perpetu-ate. And of course, I think by protecting our environment, we are protecting ourselves. We are also one of the partici-pants of the whole ecosystem. Therefore, it is very important we have one intention in mind, that we have to continue withthese efforts and we are today comprised of many different fields and of course, the few, like me, who are definitely reallyout (I'm quite an alien). I remember when I had to present a paper several years ago in the presence of Prof Maryati,which I had to speak to scientists, that’s the sort of feeling I had. I had been involved with Science and Technology Unitfor several years. STU is now headed by Mr. Moktar. Being in BBEC Programme for more than a year, now I'm morecomfortable and I do understand a little bit more, that it's not only the responsibility of people who do research, peoplewho have direct intentions, but it's the responsibility of everybody.

We talk not only about the policy makers, we talk about the stakeholders, the ordinary man in the street. The discussioncentres a lot on public awareness. I remember when we started discussing about the BBEC programme, I also thoughpublic awareness is not only most difficult, but most important, because this is where we have to get the support of thepublic, the support of the masses. If I were to compare to some of the jobs we have done, for e.g. preventing illegallogging, of course we have managed to obtain public confidence that we are caring and protecting the forestry a littlebetter. In the past, people did not even speak or report (illegal logging), until perhaps it was highlighted in the paper, andby then it was already too late.

So we are hoping, we will get to, at least that stage where people are very aware and people are very conscious of whatbefore was very wrong. I quoted two examples in my welcome speech yesterday. Hopefully, we do not get such a nastynotice before we start acting, or reacting.

So ladies and gentlemen, we have had a long day, and everybody had contributed so much. I’d like to repeat what ourChief Minister has said. Please stay longer in Sabah, because despite the problems that we have, Sabah is still verymuch a beautiful place. We are grateful to our friends from Brunei Darussalaam. We share borders and it’s good thatBrunei is not just an oil country, but also has biodiversity. Of course the environment is so similar, but so is with otherstates, Kalimantan for instance. So we will want to conduct this dialogue very openly and being in Sabah, you can beassured you are very much welcome. We'd like to pride ourselves that Sabah has a population who are very tolerant,where people have unity and blodiversity, and that will be good if that too represents other countries in the world.

Sekian, Assalamualaikum warrahmahtullahi wabarakatu. Thank you.

165

Mr. Laurentius Ambu (Sabah Wildlife Department), presenting the progress of Habitat Management Component

On the first day at the Registration Counter

Photo Gallery PART 6

166


Dr. Jamili Nais (Sabah Parks) presenting the progress of Park Management Component

Dr. Moktar Yassin Ajam (Science and Technology Unit)presenting the progress of Public Awareness Component

167

Keynote Speech by the BBEC Programme Chairman, Y.B. Datuk K.Y. Mustafa

Prof. Datin Dr. Maryati Mohamed (ITBC) presenting the progress of Research & Education Component

168

Photo Gallery


UMS Vice Chancelor, Tan Sri Prof. Datuk Seri Panglima Dr. Abu Hassanwelcoming the arrival of Y.A.B. Datuk Chong Kah Kiat

The conference officially launched by Sabah Chief Minister, Y.A.B. Datuk Chong Kah Kiat

169

After officiating, Y.A.B. Datuk Chong received a momento of the conference, which consisted of four recentpublications of BBEC from the Chairman of BBEC Programme.

The Guest of Honours for the launching of BBEC International Conference 2003.

170

Photo Gallery


Y.A.B. Datuk Chong greeted by three guest speakers from Philippines and Indonesia(Dir. Texon of ARCBC, Dr. Sugardjito of LIPI and Dr. Dwi Setyono of Gunung Halimun National Park).

Some participants of BBEC International Conference 2003 (Photo 1 of 4)

171



172

Photo Gallery



Prof. Ir. Agung Sardjono from Mulawarman University, presentinghis paper on Tropical Forest Management: Kalimantan’s Experience

173

Mr. Mitsuo Usuki, a Senior Research Fellow of United Nation University,presenting his keynote paper

Dr. Mohd. Nazri Iguchi Abdullah (centre) chairing the presentation of Mr. Awang Samhan (Brunei MuseumDepartment) and Dr. Dwi Setyono (Gunung Halimun National Park, Indonesia)

174

Photo Gallery


Guest Speakers (from right to left), Mr. Gary Lim of MNS, Mr. Hiroshi Shinsho of KIWC,Dr. Tohru Nakasizuka of Research Centre for Humanity and Nature and Dr. Isabelle of HUTAN.

Their presentation was chaired by Prof. Datin Maryati.

Mr. Drew Boshell of Raleigh International, participating in the Q & A Session.

175

Mr. Jimmy Omar of Yayasan Sabah, participating in Q & A Session.

176

Photo Gallery

Component Workshop Session: Habitat Management Component (Photo 1 of 4)


Component Workshop Session: Public Awareness Component (Photo 2 of 4)

Component Workshop Session: Park Management Component (Photo 3 of 4)

177

178

Photo Gallery

Tn. Hj. Amat Ramsa from Rainforest Academy of UPM asking one of the guest speakers.

Component Workshop Session: Research and Education Component (Photo 4 of 4)


Pn. Zahra Yaacob from Sabah Society, delivering her question to Y.B. Datuk K.Y. Mustafa.

The commitee of BBEC Programme from left to right: Mr. Kusano (Chief Advisor of BBEC),Prof. Datin Maryati (Head of REC), Datuk K.Y. Mustafa (Chairman of BBEC), Dr. Jamili Nais (representing

Head of PMC)Mr. Moktar Yassin (Head of PAC) and Mr. Laurentius Ambu (representing Head of HMC)

179

180

Part 7

Press Cuttings

BBEC International Conference 2003


183

184


185

186


187

188

Documents

Effective Approaches to Nature Conservation · 2003-07-01 · MTEST Ministry of Tourism, Environment, Science and Technology ... 4.5 Keynote Lecture by Mr. Mitsuo Usuki ... Effective