Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
SUI Technical Series Vol. 1
ENHANCING
SUSTAINABIL ITYRESOURCES FOR
OUR FUTURE
Proceedings of a workshop held at the WorldConservation Congress organised by the
Sustainable Use Initiative,17-20 October 1996, Montreal, Canada
HENDRIK A. VAN DER LINDE ANDMELISSA H. DANSKIN, EDITORS
The designations of geographical entities in this book, and the presentation of the material, do not imply theexpression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of IUCN concerning the legal status of any country, territory,or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.
The views expressed in tnis publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of IUCN.
Published by: IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.
IUCNThe World Conservation Union
Copyright: © 1998 International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources.
Reproduction of this publication for educational or other non-commercial purposes isauthorised without prior written permission from the copyright holder provided the source isfully acknowledged.
Reproduction of this publication for resale or other commercial purposes is prohibited withoutprior written permission of the copyright holder.
Citation: van der Linde, H. A. and Danskin, M. H. (Eds) 1998. Enhancing Sustainability—Resourcesfor Our Future. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.vii and 178 pp.
ISBN: 2-8317-0427-8
Cover Art by: Ann LaGesseProductionsupported by: Dan Cao and Terisa E. DavisDesign andLayout by: Savannah SettingProduced by: IUCN Sustainable Use Initiative, 1400 16th Street NW, Washington DC 20036, USAPrinted by: Page Bros (Norwich) Ltd., UK
Available from: IUCN Publications Service Unit,219c Huntingdon Road, Cambridge CB3 0DL United Kingdomtel: ++44 1223 277 894fax:++ 44 1223 277 175
e-mail: [email protected], www: http//www.iucn.org
A catalogue of IUCN publications is also available.
The text of this book is printed on Fineblade Cartridge 90 gsm paper made from low-chlorine pulp.
Table of Contents
ForewordAcknowledgements
vivi
Section One:Key-note Speakers
Evolving Understanding of Sustainable UseJohn G. RobinsonSummaries
Strategic Roots and Implementational Evolution:Considerations for the Future in theSustainable Use InitiativeMarshall W. Murphree
3
6
Summaries
What Price for Sustainability?Curtis H. FreeseSummaries
Investment in People - A Key to EnhanceSustainability: Lessons from Northern PakistanJaved Ahmed and Shoaib Sultan KhanSummaries
Sustainable Use and Global IssuesLeif E. ChristoffersenSummaries
11
13
19
21
28
29
31
Section Two:Sustainability in Artisanal Fisheries
Le Rôle du Savoir Traditionnel dans la Gestiondes Pecheries du Delta Intérieur du Niger au Mali 35Dr. Kassibo BréhimaSummaries 44
Les Organisations Professionnelles et la Pêche Durableen Afrique de l'Ouest 45Dr. Kobla AmegavieSummaries 47
iii
7
Pêche Artisanale et Conservation du littoralen Afrique de l'OuestPierre CampredonSummaries
La Gestion Durable des Pecheries dans l'Archipel desBijagos et dans le Rio Grande de BubaDomingos de BarrosSummaries
49
55
57
73
Section Three:Community-based Management of Forests
Community Forestry in South AmericaEduardo MansurSummaries
Sustainable Management of Mangrove Forests in AsiaZakir HussainSummaries
Sustainable Use of Mangroves in Central AmericaAlejandro Imbach and Néstor Windevoxhel-LoraSummaries
Rôles et Place des CommunautésVillageoises dans la Conservationet l'Utilisation Durable des Ressources
El Hadj Saley GamboSummaries
Sustainable Timber Harvesting in Belize:The Columbia Controlled Felling ProgrammeN.M. Bird and Virginia VasquezSummaries
La Experiencia del Plan Piloto Forestade Quintana Roo, México, en Relatión alUso Sostenible de RecursosAlberto VargasSummaries
77
78
79
83
85
102
103
111
113
116
117
122
iv
Section Four:Managing Wildlife For Sustainable Use
A Case Study in the Sustained Use of Wildlife:The Management of Beaver in theNortheastern United StatesJohn F. Organ, Robert Gotie, Thomas A. Deckerand Gordon R. BatchellerSummaries
The Management and SustainableUse of Duck and Geese in North AmericaJ. Gregory Thompson and James H. PattersonSummaries
La Chasse Commerciale et la Gestion Durable de laFaune en Afrique CentraleDjoh à NdiangSummaries
Uso Sostenible de la Vida Silvestre en América Central:Un Instrumento para laConservación de la BiodiversidadManuel Benítez and Vivienne Solis RiveraSummaries
Seven Case Studies on Wildlife ManagementCarried Out by the North AmericanSustainable Use Specialists GroupRichard M. ParsonsSummaries
A Case Study of the Management of Barren-GroundCaribou from the Beverly and QamanirjuaqHerds in Northern CanadaKevin A. Lloyd and Roland P. GrafSummaries
125
138
141
155
157
160
161
166
169
172
173
178
v
ForewordIUCN's Sustainable Use Initiative (SUI) began in January 1995. Our principal goal was, and remains, toenhance understanding of sustainable use. In pursuit of this goal 15 regional Sustainable Use SpecialistGroups have been formed to date. Many of the Specialist Groups have undertaken studies of different useregimes within their regions to identify factors which influence sustainability in their cultural contexts.
This volume is our initial offering in IUCN's new SUI Technical Series—which will be published annu-ally. Our intent is to use the Series to enhance communications. As a matter of policy, papers presentedin the SUI Technical Series will be subject to minimal external review. Editing will be limited to provid-ing a standard layout and consistency in referenced citations. As we have done in this volume, we willcontinue to exercise editorial discretion over the figures that are reproduced — using those figureswhich enhance the text. Readers need to be aware that the content of the individual papers is theresponsibility of the individual authors.
The papers published in this inaugural volume were presented at a Workshop organised by the IUCNSustainable Use Initiative during the 1st World Conservation Congress held 17-20 October 1996 inMontreal, Canada.
The four-day Workshop was planned and organised by four Regional Specialist Groups (West Africa,Central America, North America and Southern Africa). The first session included a series of papers onbroad issues pertaining to sustainable use. This session was followed by three half-day thematic ses-sions on artisanal fisheries, community-based management of forests and managing wildlife for sustain-able use. The Southern Africa Sustainable Use Specialist Group organised a theatncal production, Guard-ians of Eden, which used traditional story-telling techniques to dramatise rural communities' associa-tions with wildlife. Its four presentations played to packed audiences.
We are also using this volume to launch our SUI Home Page on the Internet. The abstracts of each ofthe papers, which appear in English, French and Spanish, will be filed on our home page to promotebroader communications on the subject. To enhance communication we will provide complementarycopies to colleagues in developing countries — as long as the supply lasts. The cost of providing thisservice is inducted in the price of the book. If you bought this book you are indirectly helping col-leagues in developing countries, and we thank you.
AcknowledgementsA volume like this is possible because of the contributions and support of numerous people. I thankthe organisers of the Workshop sessions in Montreal whose extraordinary efforts set the standard forfuture Workshops:
• Ambouta Karimou and Thomas Price, for organising the session on Sustainability in ArtisanalFisheries
• Juan Carlos Godoy and Néstor Windevoxhel-Lora for organising the session on Community-basedManagement of Forests, and
• Jim Teer, Don MacLauchlan and Rick Parsons for the session on Managing Wildlife for Sustainable Use.
Special recognition is given to the authors of the papers which comprise this volume. It is their ideas,experiences and knowledge that make this volume unique. It is especially gratifying to me becauseseveral papers were written and presented at the Workshop by specialists who had never attended aninternational meeting prior to the Congress.
Other key people who merit special recognition for their involvement in putting this publication to-gether are: Féhcité Adjoua, Dan Cao, Rocio Cordoba, Teri Davis. Eduardo Fernandez and Ann LaGesse.Translation of the abstracts was facilitated through the IUCN offices in Costa Rica and Niger.
vi
We are grateful for the financial support provided by the Ford Foundation, Canadian Wildlife Service,the European Commission Directorate-General XI and Norwegian Agency for Development which madeit possible to organise the Workshop and publish this volume.
Last, I want to provide special recognition to the SUI Advisory Group — John Robinson, MarshallMurphree, David Brackett and George Rabb. Without their vision and leadership, the SUI, the Special-ist Groups, the Workshop and this publication would not have been possible. Thank you.
Stephen R. Edwards, HeadIUCN Sustainable Use Initiative1 December 1997
vii
Section One
Evolving Understanding of Sustainable UseJohn G. RobinsonSummaries
Strategic Roots and Implementational Evolution:Considerations for the Future in theSustainable Use InitiativeMarshall W. MurphreeSummaries
What Price for Sustainability?Curtis H. FreeseSummaries
Investment in People - A Key to EnhanceSustainability: Lessons from Northern PakistanJaved Ahmed and Shoaib Sultan KhanSummaries
Sustainable Use and Global IssuesLeif E. ChristoffersenSummaries
3
6
7
11
13
19
21
28
29
31
Key-note Speakers
Evolving Understanding of Sustainable UseJohn G. Robinson1
The term "sustainable use" is loaded. Some people equate it with commercial use, some with consumptive use.Some require an economic return. Some advocates see it as an alternative to protected areas. Some restrict itto harvesting elephants, rhinos, whales and seals. Other people synonymise sustainable use with community-based management. But sustainable use is not any of these. People use natural resources, and the term"sustainable use" only codifies the notion that we are obliged to enhance the sustainability of that use.Sustainable use CAN involve commercial use, it can involve local communities, but it does not have to. Othermechanisms might be better at enhancing sustainability under certain circumstances.
Some argue that the best strategy to conserve nature is to leave it alone and not use it at all. However, thisview is refuted by reality, and there is a general consensus among conservationists that nature is dynamic,that natural systems include people, that people use natural resources and that nature has to be managed.
There is less consensus on the goal of that management. Do we want to manage wild lands for economicgrowth and national development?; for social and economic development of disenfranchised populations?;for wild species and natural communities? IUCN has throughout its history been a forum for these debates.Moving beyond the purely political policy debate, IUCN recently launched the Sustainable Use Initiative, whosemandate is to relate these broad policy goals to the realities of the possible.
Specifically, the Initiative aims to identify the biological, social, cultural and economic conditions underwhich specified uses (or non-uses) are sustainable. What is immediately clear is that sustainable use is notdeterminate — there are a multitude of configurations of biological, social and economic factors, andsustainability lies not in the factors themselves but in the interactions among them.
The term "sustainable use" symbolises a series of long stand-ing debates within the conservation community.
• Are natural resources for human beings or does nature haveinherent rights to exist independent of human beings?
• How do we reconcile the reality that people exploit natu-ral systems, with our desire to conserve those systems?
• What is the balance between the needs of people, espe-cially socially and economically disenfranchised people,and the needs of future generations?
• Should our conservation efforts be defined by what wewould like to conserve, or by what we think we can con-serve?
Advocates on all sides of these debates have defined theterm "sustainable use" in ways that support their various po-
sitions. It is therefore appropriate, as we begin this workshopon sustainable use at this World Conservation Congress, todefine how the IUCN's Sustainable Use Initiative has not de-fined sustainable use.
• Sustainable use is not commercial use.• Sustainable use is not consumptive use.• Sustainable use is not an alternative to protected areas,
reserves and national parks.• Sustainable use is not about the harvesting of charismatic
megafauna—elephants, rhinos, whales, seals.• Sustainable use does not require that nature be managed
by local communities. It does not require that indigenouspeople have the rights to exploit natural systems. It doesnot require that local communities have more authorityover resources than national governments.
1Chair, Sustainable Use Initiative Advisory Group, IUCN Species Survival Commission, andVice President and Directorof International Conservation, Wildlife Conservation Society, 185th Street and Southern Boulevard, Bronx NY 10460-1099, USA;email: [email protected]
3
JOHN G. ROBINSON
• Sustainable use does not require that we calculate aneconomic value for all species, all habitats, all ecosystems— and then using this criterion of value decide which ofthese can "pay their own way", and give up on conserv-ing the rest of them.
• Sustainable use does not require that the only speciesand habitats that we can conserve are those that we use."Use it or lose it" might make good political theatre butit does not define sustainable use.
But sustainable use can involve any of these. Sustainableuse can involve consumptive, commercial use. It can be analternative to protected areas, it can involve indigenous peo-ple and local communities, it can depend on valuing resourceseconomically, and it can even promote the use of resources.But it does not require that involvement.
Now there are those who would argue that to conservenature we must progressively disengage from our reliance andexploitation of nature — and any conservation programmethat does not actively discourage resource use is an oxymoron.
This perspective derives inexorably from a certain viewof nature:
• that nature is ordered and stable;• that humans are not a part of nature; and• that nature need not be managed.
1. Nature is ordered and stable. This early view assumedthat nature was highly structured and deterministic — witheach species occupying a defined ecological role, with com-munities developing into unique "climax states," with therebeing a definable "balance of nature."
2. Human beings are not part of this nature. Drawingon Christian theology, in which Adam and Eve were expelledfrom the Garden of Eden, and western philosophy with itsCartesian duality between humans and nature, early conser-vationists considered that humans disrupt natural systems,and the ecological health of natural systems is inversely re-lated to the extent of human activities. Undisturbed systemsfrequently termed wilderness, are in the words of BishopHeber's missionary hymn "From Greenland's Icy Mountains":where"... every prospect pleases/And only man is vile."
3. And this nature need not be managed. If natural sys-tems are ordered and will revert to a natural "climax" state ifdisturbed, then the conservation of natural systems does notrequire active management. Instead, the most effective op-tion is to establish parks and other protected areas, and thenbuffer these areas as much as possible from human activities.Left to their own devices, natural systems will revert to or re-main as wilderness.
But the nature of nature is different.
1. Nature is dynamic. Biological communities sometime
seem no more than species assembled through historicalchance and environmental stochasticity.
2. People live in nature. People have lived, for instance,throughout the tropical forests of this world for at least thelast 40,000 years. The structure of natural communities is de-termined in no small part by the actions of those people. Andthose people traditionally use and continue to depend onnatural resources.
3. And nature has to be managed. Because nature isdynamic, and because people are always present, nature hasto be managed. What happens when it is not is the strongestjustification for its management.
The challenge of course is "For what shall we managenatural systems?"
• Do we want to use resources sustainably to promote eco-nomic growth and national development?
• Do we want to use resources to foster the social and eco-nomic development of rural peoples or disenfranchisedpopulations?
• Do we want to use resources to conserve species forwhich we have a special affinity? Species which might besentient?
• Do we want to use resources so as to conserve entireecosystems with their full complement of biodiversity?
These goals are not absolutely compatible with one an-other. What is in the interest of the community may provecontrary to the interest of a specific individual. What is ben-eficial to one species may prove detrimental to another. Whatpromotes ecosystem integrity may have negative impacts ongiven species within that system.
IUCN throughout its history has sought to accommodateall of these concerns and goals. It is perhaps an impossibletask, but it is more likely to be accomplished by looking at thebig picture. The World Conservation Strategy (IUCN/UNEP/WWF, 1980) and Caring for the Earth (IUCN/UNEP/WWF,1991) do not argue that natural resources should be man-aged for the benefit of specific individuals or groups, nor forthe development of certain nations, nor for the benefit of cer-tain favored species, but for the entire system, which embracesall of these lower levels. Only at the systemic level can con-flicts between interests at lower levels be resolved.
But it is clear from the preceding discussion, that themanagement of nature depends on two elements:
• First, a scientific process by which we can understandthe nature of nature, and most importantly the impactsof human policy decisions on that nature. This is the ana-lytical element.
• Second, a political process which bounds the conflict be-tween different goals for nature, and generates policies
4
EVOLVING UNDERSTANDING OF SUSTAINABE USE
for natural resource management This is the political dement• It is the interactions between these two elements, two
elements termed the compass and the gyroscope by KaiLee (1993), that are the navigational aids in our quest forsustainability. It is useful to think of natural resourcepolicy as experiments, which should be analyzed andmonitored. The results of that analysis allow decisionmakers to adjust their policies.
IUCN's Sustainable Use Initiative is purposely focused onthe analytical element. At its outset, we recognized that allpeople in the world, regardless of whether they live in urbanor rural environments, depend on wild plants and animals—and more often than not, in our present world, that use isnot sustainable. The business of the Sustainable Use Initia-tive is to analyze which factors enhance the sustainability ofresource use, and which factors detract from it. The first prod-uct of the initiative, submitted to this congress under the title"Factors Influencing Sustainability", was circulated to all IUCNmembers by the Director General.
The political element is the business of this World Con-servation Congress—a debate involving citizen groups, NGOs,governments, businesses and individuals. On one extreme,
• There are those who argue for a divorce between hu-mans and nature, who argue that we need not dependon wild plants and animals. We already know that even ifhumans can create self-contained agricultural and indus-trial systems, this path will at best lead to the isolation ofsmall reserves for nature.
On the other extreme,
• There are also those who embrace use completely, theabsolutists "use it or lose it" school, assuming that all usecan be sustainable or that sustainability can be easilyachieved, and thus equating use with conservation. Wealready know that this path will inevitably lead to a ho-mogeneous, biologically depleted and socially and eco-nomically impoverished world.
IUCN has recognised the importance of the issue of sus-tainable use since its inception. The World Conservation Strat-egy (IUCN/UNEP/WWF, 1980) identified the "sustainable uti-lization of natural resources" as a core goal, and the list ofresolutions emanating from IUCN General Assemblies testi-fies to the overriding importance of this issue. Yet sustainabilityof resource use remains elusive, in part we believe becauseanalysis has been shallow and poorly defined.
IUCN's Sustainable Use Initiative has, over the last trien-nium, sought to institute a process to understand what hu-man and ecological factors affect the sustainability of resourceuse. That process has been characterised by:
• an examination and synthesis of what we know. Case stud-ies, reviews, workshops and symposia facilitate the col-lection and analysis of data;
• an analysis carried out by a network of specialists in thesocial, economic and biological sciences; and
• regionally based networks which recognise the impor-tance of the social and economic contexts in natural re-source use.
The results have been humbling. At the IUCN GeneralAssembly in Perth in 1990, you urged the IUCN to developgeneral guidelines for sustainability. No such guidelines areforthcoming. Sustainable use is not an exercise in colouringby numbers. Instead, what you have is an identification of thesocial, economic and biological factors that always need to beconsidered, and which sometimes enhance, or not, thesustainability of resource use. Sustainable use is not de-terminate — in other words, there are a multitude ofconfigurations of biological, social and economic con-ditions. And the sustainability lies not in the factors them-selves but in the interactions among factors.
For instance, resource uses can be made sustainable:
• by changing harvest rates;• by giving people the rights to harvest resources and thus
the responsibility to conserve them;• by regulating and controlling people's aooess to rescurces; and• by commercialising the harvest process.
But these factors can equally promote unsustainability indifferent biological, social and economic contexts.
Over the course of the next four days, you will hear theresults of many of the network's analyses of sustainable use.These analyses seek to identify the factors that enhance thesustainability of resource use. They consider the biological, socialand economic factors that contribute to each case, and they con-sider the specific goals of each case. The results will, I think, con-vince you that our understanding of sustainability is improvingbut also convince you that the analysis is far from over.
ReferencesIUCN/UNEP/WWF. 1980. The World Conservation Strategy: liv-ing Resource Conservation for Sustainable Developrnent. Gland,Switzerland.
IUCN/UNEP/WWF. 1991. Caring for the Earth: A Strategy for Sus-tainable living. Gland, Switzerland.
Lee, K.1993. Compass and Gyroscope: Integrating Science andPolitics in the Environment. Island Press, Washington DC, USA
5
La expresión "uso sostenible" es muy compleja. Algunas personas lo hacen equivalente a uso comercial;otras, a uso consuntivo. Algunos de sus defensores lo ven como una alternativa para zonas protegidas. Otroslo limitan a "cosechar" elefantes, rinocerontes, ballenas y focas. Otras personas hacen el uso sostenibleequivalente a manejo con base en la comunidad. Sin embargo, uso sostenible no es ninguna de esas cosas. Lagente usa recursos naturales, y la expresión "uso sostenible" refleja solamente la noción de que estamosobligados a incrementar la sostenibilidad de ese uso. El uso sostenible PUEDE implicar uso comercial, puedeimplicar comunidades locales, pero no necesariamente. Otros mecanismos pudieran ser mejores paraincrementar la sostenibilidad en ciertas circunstancias.
Algunos argumentan que la mejor estrategia para conservar la naturaleza es dejarla sola y no usarla enabsoluto. No obstante, este criterio queda refutado por la propia realidad, y existe consenso entre losconservacionistas en cuanto a que la naturaleza es dinámica, que los sistemas naturales incluyen a lagente, que la gente usa los recursos naturales y que la naturaleza tiene que ser sometida a manejo.Existe un consenso menos fuerte en cuanto a los objetivos de ese manejo. ¿Queremos manejar las tierrassilvestres para el crecimiento económico y el desarrollo nacional? ¿Para el desarrollo social y económico delos desposeídos? ¿Para las especies silvestres y las comunidades naturales? La UICN ha sido, a través de suhistoria, unforo para estos debates. Transcendiendo el debate puramente político, la UICN lanzó recientementela Iniciativa del Uso Sostenible, cuya esencia es referir estos amplios objetivos de su política a las realidadesde lo posible.
Específicamente, la Iniciativa pretende identificar las condiciones biológicas, sociales, culturales yeconómicas, bajo las cuales los usos (o los no usos) especificados son sostenibles. Lo que resulta sumamenteclaro es que el uso sostenible no es algo determinado: hay una gran cantidad de configuraciones de factoresbiológicos, sociales y económicos, y la sostenibilidad estriba no en los factores mismos, sino en las interaccionesque se dan entre ellos.
6
En fait, aucune de ces définitions ne rend compte de la signification véritable de l'expression "utilisation durab. "A travers cette expression, l'objectif recherché est de formaliser et de donner un caractère contraignant à
l'idée de l'amélioration soutenue des ressources naturelles.Une opinion assez répandue, c'est que la meilleure stratégie de la conservation de la nature consiste à la
laisser tranquille et a ne jamais l'utiliser. Cependant ce point de vue est réfuté par la réalité, et il existe unconsensus général chezlesspécialistesde la conservation selon laquelle "la Nature est dynamique", "les Hommesfont partie des systèmes naturels et exploitent les ressources naturelle"; "la Nature devrait être gérée".
Quant au but recherché par cette gestion, il est loin de faire l'unanimité. Veut-on gérer les aires naturellespour la croissance économique et le développement national? pour le développement social et économiquedes populations les moins nanties? pour les espèces sauvages et les communautés biologiques naturelles?L'UICN a toujours servi de forum pour ce genre de débat. Au delà d'une discussion essentiellement politique,l'UICN a récemment créé "l'Initiative pour l'Utilisation Durable", qui a pour mandat d'établir la relationentre les objectifs d'une éventuelle politique générale et les possibilités concrètes sur le terrain.
V "Initiative" a pour mission d'identifier les conditions biologiques, sociales, culturelles et économiquesafin que les formes spécifiques d'utilisation (et de non utilisation) soient durables. Dans ce sens Il est clair quel'accent doit êre mis sur l'incontournable interrelation entre les différentes conditions et facteurs quiinfluencent la durabilité
- l'utilisation à des fins de consommation- l'utilisation à des fins commerciales, s'accompagnant de
bénéfices économiques- une alternative pour les aires protégées- l'exploitation des éléphants, des rhinocéros, des baleines
et des phoques- la gestion communautaire
JOHN G. ROBINSON
SummariesLe terme "utilisation durable" revêt plusieurs significations. Selon les points de vue, il s'agit de:
This paper identifies five strategic stances which have characterised the Sustainable Use Initiative during thetriennium 1994-1996. The first two are scientific. These are firstly a systematic approach to sustainability,broadening the scope of analysis to include relevant social, economic and political variables. Secondly, thisscientific approach is experimental, emphasising an on-going cycle of analysis and adaptation arising fromexperience and interaction between policy and practice. The third focus is implementational, recognisingthat the regulation of use is an essential component for sustainability in use. The Initiative seeks to identifyincentive packages which provide regulatory systems that work efficiently, efficaciously and sustainably.
The last two strategic stances are organisational. The Initiative has decentralised its activities to regionallevels to situate its analyses in operative contexts which vary significantly. Secondly it has moved to devolvethe responsibility for its activities to regional levels to stimulate the use of analytic talent at these levels andtighten links between analysis, policy and action.
The paper ends with a discussion of future evolution in the structures of the Initiative, suggesting that furtherintra-regional decentralisation may be necessary, that further devolution will depend on the development ofregional organisational capacities, and that these developments should be contained within the larger cohesionthat the Union provides.
IntroductionIn this introductory plenary the Robinson/Murphree duet hasthe role of introducing debate on where we are and wherewe are going in the Sustainable Use Initiative. The task hasbeen made much easier for us by the circulation to all IUCNmembers of the SUI's report to the WCC, "Factors Influenc-ing Sustainability," under cover of the Director General's let-ter of 1st August 1996.
These documents outline developments during the lat-est triennial phase in the evolution of IUCN's approach to theissue of sustainable use. Attention to this issue is not new toIUCN, or indeed, to the people who form its constituency.What our triennial history shows is an extension of the con-cerns of the past in a new configuration of emphasis and pro-gramme, the Sustainable Use Initiative.
Components of this new configuration include the following:
• an enlarged agenda of variables for consideration;• the recruitment of a broader range of disciplinary
specialisms in analysis;• dialogue between scientists, policy makers, managers and users;• an iterative process of cumulative understanding involv-
ing all these actors;• more analytic emphasis on operative contexts;• less emphasis on generalised proscriptions, more empha-
sis on prescriptive inducements;• the integration of the SSC's Sustainable Use Specialist
Group and the Secretariat's Sustainable Use of WildlifeProgramme, with a shift from project involvement to tech-nical support; and
• the contextualisation of activities in regional structures.
Strategic RootsThis list of elements in the Initiative, read out seriatim, maywhat disjointed agenda to keep us all busy and induce do-
1 Chair of the IUCN/SSC Sustainable Use Specialist Group and Professor Emeritus of Applied Social Sciences, University of Zimba-bwe, c/o IUCN Southern Africa Sustainable Use Specialist Group PO Box MP4, Mount Pleasant, Harare, Zimbabwe; e-mail:sasusg@moost. icon. co.zw
7
Strategic Roots and ImplementationalEvolution: Considerations for the Future inthe Sustainable Use InitiativeMarshall W. Murphree1
MARSHALL W. MURPHREE
nors to provide the resources for us to do so. There is, how-ever, an underlying cohesion to the list, an implicit strategy whichis tuned to current reality, responsive to need and workable inimplementation. If we are to plan for the future, we need to bringthis strategy into sharp relief. In particular the strategy has fivecharacteristics or "strategic roots" which we should note.
A Systemic Approach
First of all, the strategy takes a systemic approach to the issueof sustainable use. This is a necessary and long-overdue cor-rective to the fragmented, bio-centric and often species-spe-cific foci which have, to a large extent, characterised perspec-tives in the past. Such approaches have value and can recordsuccess within a discrete context. However sustainable useissues are rarely confined to closed, biologically defined sys-tems. Thus, the conservation record is one of a few small suc-cess and big failures. Sustainability in the use of any species isusually embedded in larger ecosystem sustainability, and thisin turn is embedded in larger social system structures withcultural, economic and political dimensions. Issues ofsustainability cannot be adequately addressed independentlyof these macrostructural components. As Kai Lee comments,"sustainability as an institutional value succeeds or fails at thesystemic level" (Lee, 1993).
It is true of course that the systemic approach pushesthe study of sustainable use toward more complex and lessdeterminate conclusions. In science there is usually an inverserelationship between exactitude and the number of relevantvariables. This is used by critics of the Initiative to raise thecanard that it is unscientific. To the contrary, while good sci-ence regards exactitude as desirable, it regards validity as nec-essary. Validity requires that analysis address all the relevantvariables of the topic under consideration. In other words,eliminate or at least reduce the number of "black boxes." Giventhe nature of sustainable use, its study can only be consid-ered scientific if it is systemic.
An Experimental Methodology
Secondly, the strategy is experimental in its methodologicalapproach to understanding, with its emphasis on testablehypotheses, grounded data, dialectic between managementexperience and policy and continuous adaptation. This ex-perimental methodology, with its assumption of uncertaintyand its stochastic approach to learning, is the only scientificstyle which provides real debate and incremental understand-ing. This contrasts to other intellectual styles characterised,in Galtung's words, by "vehement monologues of differenttypes" proceeding from entrenched a priori stances (Stolte-
Heiskanen, 1987). In the past too much of the debate on sustain-able use has been conducted through such "vehement mono-logues" and the Initiative's experimental methodology is a strat-egy to raise the scientific calibre of the Union's approach to the issue.
The third characteristic of the strategy is that it has as acentral objective the establishment of effective and efficientregulatory mechanisms to control use. Another canard raisedby critics of the Initiative is that it is antiregulatory. Nothingcould be further from the truth. The Initiative recognises that,generally and globally, current trends in land and natural re-source use place the future of biodiversity and the survival ofspecific ecosystems and species in jeopardy. It also recognisesthat regulation of use is an essential component forsustainability in use.
It has, however, also taken a hard look at currently pre-vailing regulatory structures, largely of a proscriptive and leg-islative nature imposed by the centre on the periphery, andasked why they have failed to stop negative trends. It has comeup with a variety of answers which can be succinctly summa-rised by the conclusion that the profile of the incentive pack-age for regulatory compliance is too often wrong.
Incentive is the fulcrum of regulation. Regulation usuallyrequires an element of negative incentive, proscriptionsbacked by powers to enforce them. But any regulatory sys-tem which relies primarily on negative incentives is, in thelong term, in trouble. Enforcement costs are high and thelegitimacy of the system in the eyes of the enforced is calledinto question. History shows that such systems are unstableand that sustainable systems of regulation are those that relyprimarily on positive incentives — economic, cultural and in-stitutional — and which are affordable. Hardin's comment isrelevant here: "We must recognise that all control operationsincur costs; excessive controls generate their own kind of pov-erty" (Hardin, 1985). The issue is thus not one of negativeversus positive inducements per se but of finding the rightmix of these ingredients in specific systemic contexts. This isa primary goal of the Initiative — to promote regulatory sys-tems that work, efficaciously, efficiently and sustainably.Fourthly, the strategy is one of decentralising structures forthe implementation of the Initiative. This is an organisationalresponse to centralised bureaucratic hypertrophy. IUCN is aworld union, but the operative contexts in which its mem-bers work are primarily regional and national. The impera-tives of organisational efficiency demand decentralisation tothese levels, where coordination must be tight and responsesrapid. Increasingly it is also these contexts which must pro-vide the funding for member activities, and our membershipmust be organisationally placed to aggressively address thisfact. As Jeff McNeely comments, this means that "IUCN mustagain return to its members" (McNeely, 1995). This strategyhas already been adopted by the Secretariat; the SUI's recordover the past two years shows that it can be done.
8
STRATEGIC ROOTS AND IMPLEMENTATIONAL EVOLUTION: CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE FUTURE IN THE SUSTAINABLE USE INITIATIVE
Devolution in Authority and Responsibility
The final characteristic of the strategy which I mention is thatit is devolutionist. I have just quoted McNeely: "IUCN mustreturn to its members." I go further: "IUCN must be returnedto its members." The first is decentralisation, the second isthe devolution of authority and responsibility. There are tworeasons why this is necessary. Firstly it is important that thecentre of gravity in our analytic discourse shifts to more accu-rately profile the spectrum of the Union's membership. Thiswill not be an easy or rapid process. There is no question thatcurrently this centre of gravity resides primarily in economi-cally highly developed countries. Radakrishna's study 16 yearsago indicated that twenty-five countries accounted for 90% ofthe world's scientists, while another sixty countries accountedfor only 1% (Radakrishna, 1980). Developing countries areno longer tolerant of this satellite intellectual status and thepower differentials in international orientation which it pro-duces. While a number of prescriptions are required to re-dress this imbalance, devolution is in itself a powerful stimu-lus to release and channel the analytic talent which our mem-bership in the developing world possesses.
Secondly, devolution addresses the current dissonancebetween the abstract conclusions of international discourseand implementation. International discourse of the kind inwhich we are presently engaged is generally marked by lowaccountability content. Recommendations are made but notfollowed because those who make them are not accountablein the implementational contexts which count. For most ofour membership these contexts are national or regional. Devo-lution to this level provides a much tighter accountability chainbetween agenda setting, analysis, policy and action, which thenreflects back to more realistic and accountable internationaldebates and decisions.
Implementational Evolutionfor the Future
These are the strategic roots of the Initiative. They are scien-tific, pragmatic, participatory and inherently robust. Ouragenda for the future must build on this inherent strength,but also address current gaps in the strategy and real or po-tential weaknesses in structure and implementation. Both ouranalytic and organisational agendas have been set out in ourReport to the WCC, and in conclusion I confine myself to certainstructural issues which I consider to be of particular importance.
Decentralisation
Up to the present this process has concentrated on the initia-
tion of regional SUSG networks and our WCC Report posits afurther proliferation of these during the forthcoming trien-nium. This is important since the Initiative still has significantgaps in its global coverage. But is decentralisation to regionallevels sufficient to meet the need for administrative efficiencyand properly contextualised programming? I think not, andwe should anticipate a push for further administrative andprogrammatic intra-regional decentralisation. This should bea matter primarily for the attention of the regional networksand the form it takes is likely to vary.
Devolution
To what degree has our progress in decentralisation beenmatched by progress in devolution? Devolution has occurredin significant dimensions. The networks determine their ownmembership, elect their own leadership, set their own agen-das within the overall SUI strategy and structure their ownactivities. An SUSG Steering Committee comprised of regionalchairs has been formed and met on three occasions, produc-ing inter alia our WCC Report. That is pretty good progressin devolution. At the same time we must recognise that ex-ecutive direction of the Initiative still lies within the AdvisoryGroup, which derives its mandate at present from the Direc-tor General and the Chair of the Species Survival Commis-sion. Is this a sign of arrested devolution?
There are, in my mind, certain considerations whichshould be factored into the answer. Firstly, we must recog-nise that the regional networks are themselves at differentstages of development. They themselves have the fundamen-tal responsibility to ensure that their membership covers thespread of perspective and competence that the regions pro-file. At the moment, I suspect that they would score differ-ently on this indicator. Secondly, devolution in control mustbe matched by ability to assume the responsibilities involved.These include greater self-reliance in the funding requirementsof regional network activities and they must carefully considertheir progress in creating the kind of structures of fiscal ad-ministration which provide confidence for donor, public andprivate sector support. Thirdly, it should be clearly recognisedthat however far the Initiative wishes to take devolution, itneeds a global Secretariat Support Centre. There can be nodoubt that much of our success to date can be attributed tothe fact that we have had a dedicated and efficient such Cen-tre to provide global coordination, facilitate inter-regional com-munication, assist in fund-raising, initiate expansion to regionsnot yet organised and service the Advisory Group and theSteering Committee. Finally, it should be recognised that atthe global coordination level we require a tightly-knit execu-tive unit, currently provided by the Advisory Group. The Steer-ing Committee is too large to provide this, and it is likely tobecome larger.
9
MARSHALL W. MURPHREE
All of these points must be considered as we contem-plate further devolution. The principle should be that devo-lution should proceed as far as is necessary to realise the dy-namics of its potential but that its pace should be determinedin light of the considerations I have just raised. In my per-sonal view two further steps could be taken immediately, bothof which relate to constituency mandate. The Chair of theSUSG and Steering Committee should be elected by the Steer-ing Committee rather than appointed by the Director Gen-eral and the Chair of the SSC. Secondly, the executive direc-tion of the Initiative needs further examination. Should it con-tinue under the Advisory Group and if so should the AdvisoryGroup include appointments made by the Steering Commit-tee? Or should its membership be determined solely by theSteering Committee, becoming in effect the Steering Com-mittee Executive?
Scope
One aspect of the Initiative's evolution which is importantbut not amenable to precise prescriptions is its location withinother topically defined activities of the Union and its relation-ship with them. Intrinsically, sustainable use is an issue ofpervasive salience for most of what IUCN considers and does.This leads to fuzzy boundaries and potential replication. Whatshould be the limits of the Initiative's agenda within the totalconfiguration of the Union's various parts? One approach toanswering this question would be a topical boundary-settingexercise, a vertical intra-Union compartmentalisation of fo-cus and activity replicated at regional and national levels. Myown view is that this approach leads to competitive agendas,waste of resources and dissonance between need and demandat these levels. Here the division of labour should be tailoredto configurations of systemic demand rather than to topicaldefinition. While there are good reasons for topical foci at theSecretariat level these should be non-intrusive and service-driven in their relationship to national and regional program-ming. This suggests that the profile of the Initiative's "fit" withother IUCN activities will vary from region to region, andshould be determined within them.
Cohesion
I return in conclusion to another quote from Kai Lee.Sustainability, he says, "cannot be reduced to a recipe becausewe have neither a list of ingredients or a kitchen" (Lee, 1993).The Initiative's response has been to produce an analyticagenda to search more effectively for the ingredients, to sug-gest that diversity may need several recipes, and that efficacyrequires a number of kitchens. Continuing the metaphor, ifthere is a core ingredient in the cuisine it lies in effective,
systemically situated packages of incentive for sustainable use.But this emphasis on contextualisation should not lead us intoan era of fragmented and autarkic Initiative activities. We arepart of a global union, we participate in the search for a globalvision of our planet, and our systemic approach requires thatwe maintain cohesion at the international level. This cohe-sion can be assisted by the way we structure our activities,but this is not the fundamental solution. That solution liesrather in taking our core ingredient — effective, situated in-centive packages for sustainable use — and searching for in-centive compatibility (Bromley, 1994) at international levelson matters that are genuinely global in their significance.
In other words, cohesion requires judgement and toler-ance. Good judgement about what matters for all of us andwhat matters for some of us, good judgement about whatworks and what doesn't, and tolerance in allowing others todo what works for them.
References
Bromley, D. 1994. Economic Dimensions of Community-basedConservation. In: Western, D. and Wright, R.M. (Eds.), Natu-ral Connections. Perspectives in Community-based Conser-vation. Island Press, Washington DC, USA.
Galtung, J. 1981. Structure, Culture, and Intellectual Style: AnEssay Comparing Saxonic, Teutonic, Gallic and Nipponic Ap-proaches. Social Science Information 20(6):817-856.
Hardin, G. 1985. Filters Against Folly. Penguin Books, NewYork, USA.
Lee, K. 1993. Compass and Gyroscope: Integrating Scienceand Politics for the Environment. Island Press, WashingtonDC, USA.
McNeely, J. 1995. IUCN in the 21st Century. A Discussion Pa-per. IUCN Secretariat, Gland, Switzerland.
Radakrishna, S. (Ed.) 1980. Science, Technology and GlobalProblems: Views from the Developing World. Pergamom,Oxford, UK.
Stolte-Heiskanen, V. 1987. The Role of Centre-Periphery Re-lations in the Utilisation of the Social Sciences. InternationalSociology 2(2):189-203.
Sustainable Use Initiative, IUCN. 1996. Factors InfluencingSustainability: A Report of the activities of the IUCN Sustain-able Use Initiative to IUCN members in compliance with Rec-ommendation 19.54. IUCN Secretariat, Gland, Switzerland.
10
STRATEGIC ROOTS AND IMPLEMENTATIONAL EVOLUTION: CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE FUTURE IN THE SUSTAINABLE USE INITIATIVE
SummariesLa présente étude identifie cinq positions stratégiques ayant caractérisées l'Initiative sur l'Utilisation Durableau cours de la période triennale 1994-1996. Les deux premières sont scientifiques. Il s'agit d'abord d'uneapproche systématique de la durabilité, qui élargit le champ d'analyse pour y inclure les variables sociales,économiques et politiques appropriées. Quant à la deuxième, cette approche scientifique est expérimentale,parce qu'elle met l'accent sur un cycle continue d'analyse et d'adaptation résultant de l'expérience et del'interaction entre les politiques et les pratiques. Le troisième aspect est focalisé sur la mise en oeuvre, tout enreconnaissant que la réglementation de l'utilisation constitue un aspect essentiel de l'utilisation durable.L'Initiative cherche à identifier un ensemble de mesures incitatives qui permet la mise en place de systèmes derégulation qui fonctionnent de manière efficace, efficiente et durable.
Les deux dernières orientations stratégiques concernent l'organisation. L'Initiative a décentralisé ses activitésau niveau régional afin de situer ses analyses dans des contextes opérationnels qui varient considérablement.Ensuite, elle a agit pour transférer la responsabilité de ses activités au niveau régional pour stimuler lerecours aux compétences dans le domaine de l'analyse existant à ce niveau et pour renforcer les liens entrel'analyse, la politique et l'action.
L'étude se termine par une discussion sur l'évolution future des structures de l'Initiative, suggérant qu'uneplus grande décentralisation intra-régionale sera probablement nécessaire, qu'une plus grande dévolutionde responsabilités dépendra du développement des capacités organisationnelles au niveau régional et que cedéveloppement devrait se faire dans le cadre de la cohésion globalisante favorisée par son appartenancecontinue à l'Union.
Este trabajo identifica cinco posturas estratégicas que han caracterizado la Iniciativa de Uso Sostenible en eltrienio 1994-1996. Las dos primeras son científicas. Son, en primer lugar, un enfoque sistemático de lasostenibilidad, ampliando el ámbito de análisis para incluir variables sociales, económicas y políticaspertinentes. En segundo lugar, este enfoque científico es experimental, enfatizando un ciclo constante deanálisis y de adaptación que nace de la experiencia e interacción entre políticas y práctica. El tercer ejetiene que ver con la implementadón, al reconocer que la regulación del uso es un componente esencial parala sostenibilidad en dicho uso. La Iniciativa trata de identificar conjuntos de incentivos que ofrezcan sistemasreguladores que funcionen eficiente, eficaz y sosteniblemente.
Las dos últimas posturas estratégicas tienen que ver con la organización. La Iniciativa ha descentralizadosus actividades hasta niveles regionales para ubicar sus análisis en contextos operativos que varíansignificativamente. En segundo lugar, ha procedido a transferir la responsabilidad por sus actividades aniveles regionales a fin de estimular el uso del talento analítico que hay en esos niveles y de estrechar losvínculos entre análisis, políticas y acción.
El trabajo concluye con un análisis de la evaluación futura en las estructuras de la Iniciativa, sugiriendoque quizá se requiera una mayor descentralización intrarregional, que una mayor transferencia dependerádel desarrollo de las capacidades regionales en organización, y que estos desarrollos deberían mantenersedentro de la cohesión más amplia que brinda la Unión.
11
What Price for Sustainability?
The commercial, consumptive use of wild species (CCU) presents the proverbial double-edged sword forconservationists. If well managed, it can be a powerful tool that provides socioeconomic incentives for theconservation of wildlands and biodiversity. If poorly managed, it can lead to over exploitation and bioticimpoverishment.
The ecological and socioeconomic crises that result from overe xploitation often appear to be a preconditionto reforming and improving management. Progress toward more sustainable management, however, carriestwo prices, one economic, the other ecological. Where CCU is central to offsetting the opportunity costs ofalternative land and water uses, the wild species product must fetch a high price. But high prices and overreliance on CCU bring two distinctive risks for biodiversity if the right incentive structure and controls arelacking: 1) Overexploitation of high-value species motivated by the prospect of a quick profit or by the need tokeep the management system socioeconomically afloat; 2) overspecialisation in production of the high-valuespecies at the expense of native biodiversity. Thus, there is often an ecological price to pay wherever CCU is theprimary source of revenues.
Too often, CCU is expected to shoulder the full burden for justifying the conservation ofwildlands. Such overreliance on CCU as a conservation tool is dangerous because: 1) It alone may be uncompetitive with alternativeland and water uses; 2) dependence on a few wild species commodities poses considerable risks because bothvalues/markets and ecosystems/populations change unpredictably; and 3) the slippery slope of economicspecialization can readily lead to ecosystem simplification. CCU values, however, often account for only afraction of the totalfunctional and nonuse values of ecosystems. Long-term biodiversity conservation requiresfundamental changes in the way we account for, pay for and manage for these other values.
Commercial, consumptive use occupies a central role in de-termining the future of much of the world's remaining wild-lands that are not securely in protected area status. With but4% of the terrestrial realm in protected area status (WorldResources Institute, 1990) and at best holding steady, andperhaps 40% devoted to domesticated production and stillexpanding (derived from Durning and Brough, 1992; Turnera al., 1994; Williams, 1990; World Resources Institute, 1990),most terrestrial diversity is subject to how the remaining wild-lands will be managed. The same certainly holds for marineecosystems, where less than 0.3% is in protected area status(M.T. Agardy, pers. comm.) and much less than that in inten-sive domesticated production. Whether terrestrial or marine,the sustainability of wild species use will play a central role inthe future of biodiversity conservation.
The effects of commercial, consumptive use on wild eco-systems depend on the sustainability of such use, andsustainability comes with two prices attached, one economic,the other ecological. The most fundamental economic priceis the level of profit needed from wildland products and serv-ices to offset the opportunity costs of alternative land uses. Ifprofits from wildlands are not competitive, wildlands oftenget converted to agriculture. If our only concern is to out-compete alternative land uses, then the answer to our ques-tion, What price for sustainability? would seem to be that thehigher the price received for a wild species product, the bet-ter. Greater sustainability might simply be a function of higherprices.
But as marine conservationists in particular will be quickto point out with respect to open-marine fisheries,
18891 Bridger Canyon Road, Bozeman MT 59715, USA; e-mail: [email protected]
13
Curtis H. Freese1
CURTIS H. FREESE
sustainability generally decreases with increasing prices. Apartfrom open-access problems, the open marine realm is pre-sumably not competing so directly with alternative uses ofthe ecosystem, and thus higher profits confer no conserva-tion benefit. Such conventional perceptions, however, arechallenged by the use of the oceans as a toxic sink (Norse,1993).
In many cases, of course, the relationship between price/profit and sustainability is more complicated. For example,under some conditions sustainability might be greatest at someintermediate level of price/profit, and decrease if profits be-come either very low or unusually high. This is because whenprofits from wildlands are low either the wildland gets con-verted to monocrop agriculture or revenues are simply insuf-ficient to cover the management of the resource and thus it isreadily overexploited. When profits become too high, incur-sions by free riders (e.g., poachers) seeking a quick profitbecome uncontrollable, corruption overwhelms natural re-source bureaucracies that are supposed to help set and en-force rules for sustainability, and discount rates become toohigh. High discount rates are especially likely if profits areviewed as unusually high and thus temporary. The perverseeffects that high discount rates have on sustainability is wellknown. If the discount rate is higher than the growth rate ofthe harvested population, it is in the resource owner's eco-nomic interest to mine the entire population and reinvest theprofits elsewhere (Clark, 1973). The preceding array of eco-nomic factors led Swanson (1994) to conclude that "it is onlythe high-value/high-growth resources that will ultimately sur-vive." If that is the case, eucalyptus forests and shrimp pondsexemplify our wildlands of the future.
The problem is that high value wild species do not growlike we want them to. They often grow slowly, erratically, atlow densities and not at all where we would like them. Andthey often move around too much.
Which brings us to our second question: What is the eco-logical price for sustainability? The economic competitivenessof a wildland often comes with some ecological costs as weattempt to overcome the biological constraints presented byhigh-value wild species. It then becomes a balance betweenavoiding both over exploitation and overspecialisation. Thesame incentives that lead one to avoid over exploitation maylead one to specialise, to focus on the production of wild spe-cies with high commodity values at the expense of other spe-cies in the ecosystem.
Economic specialisation in wild species commodities thusrepresents a slippery slope to ecosystem simplification, an al-ternate route to an alternative use of the land. For many eco-systems and uses, the distinction between the so-calledwildlands or wild ecosystems we are managing and the alter-native land uses we wish to avoid becomes blurred.
What management interventions lead to ecosystem sim-plification and alteration? The most common is to increase
the density of the economically important species by, for ex-ample, stocking more of the desirable species and eliminat-ing competitors. This is common in silviculture, with planta-tion forestry the prime example (Dudley et al., 1995; Ledig,1992). The same effect can be achieved by altering, and gen-erally simplifying, the physical habitat to favor the economi-cally important species, a common practice in wetland man-agement, whether for ducks, fish, or shrimp (Callaghan et al.,in press; Southgate, 1992). We also increase production byeliminating species that compete with us for the same preyitem, a common practice in game management for hunting,such as wolf control in Alaska and Canada to increase huntablemoose populations (Gasaway et al. 1983; van Ballenbergheand Ballard, 1994).
Commercial markets prefer steady, predictable suppliesof commodities, a point of inevitable conflict between mar-kets and ecosystems. So management intervenes with theobjective of not only smoothing out annoying population fluc-tuations, but preferably doing so at or near the highest popu-lation level ever recorded. However, poorly conceived at-tempts to increase and maintain production levels can leadto long-term declines in productivity of the harvested spe-cies. Failed attempts to manage the periodic outbreaks ofspruce budworm (Cboristoneura fumiferana) and its effectson forest dynamics in southeastern Canada, near the venuefor this congress, provide a close-at-hand example (Baskerville,1995).
Besides quantity, commercial markets also put a premiumon quality, whether it is straighter boles on trees or biggerhorns on trophy sheep. However, poorly managed harvest-ing regimes can have incidental, dysgenic effects by selectingagainst the desired traits in the population. Such incidentaleffects are appearing in fisheries where, for example, the NorthSea cod (Gadus morhua) appears to be reaching maturity atlower ages and smaller sizes because large fish are preferen-tially caught in the fishery (Brown and Parman, 1993; Rowell,1993).
As suggested by a recent article in BioScience entitled"Building a Better Oyster" (Baker 1996), biotechnology offersnew and faster mechanisms for molding wild species to fitcommercial demands. This is fine when applied to domesti-cated production, but will likely conflict with biodiversity con-servation goals when such "improved" species are reintro-duced into their native ecosystems. Finally, if you do not likewhat is there, or if what you like is missing, a universal man-agement solution is to introduce an exotic species with oftendire consequences for native species. Freshwater fisheries arewell known for this management technique (Marnell, 1986;Moyle et al., 1986). Perhaps the best known and most de-structive example has been the introduction of the Nile perch(Lates niloticus) in Lake Victoria, with indications that up tohalf of 300 endemic species of cichlids in the lake may faceextinction as a result (Barel et al., 1991; Miller, 1989).
14
WHAT PRICE FOR SUSTAINABILITY?
The above issues can be further illustrated with a fewadditional examples. The striped bass (Morone saxatalis) onthe Atlantic coast of the United States is pursued both forsport and for the food market. It breeds in estuaries and riv-ers up and down the Atlantic coast, and migrates across juris-dictional (state) boundaries. In an all-too-familiar pattern forcommercial fisheries, as fish markets boomed in the 1970sand early 1980s, fishing increased and striped bass populationsdeclined. Overfishing was exacerbated by the fact that as basspopulations declined, prices for striped bass rose even faster,making it profitable for fishers to go after fewer and fewerfish. It was only when bass populations fell to crisis levels thatthe states, with the threat of federal sanctions, agreed to co-operate in bass management. Populations rapidly reboundedto fishable levels. Striped bass also exemplify the problem oferratic growth, as they display 10-fold year to year differencesin recruitment levels (Upton, in press).
Salmon populations display another level of complexityand headaches for commercial trade, though the commercialimportance of salmon is clearly an incentive for restoring manyNorth American river systems (e.g., Lee, 1993). Westernsockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka), for example, exhibittwo superimposed population trends over time, one predict-able and periodic on a 5-year cycle corresponding to differentstocks, and the other longer term, unpredictable and causedby large-scale shifts in marine ecosystem productivity. A com-mon management solution to such boom-and-bust cycles insalmon fisheries is to stock streams with hatchery-reared fish,though this may often have negative effects on the nativepopulation due to competition from the hatchery fish. Fur-ther, salmon represent a major nutrient pump from the oceanto freshwater ecosystems where they spawn, and thus declinesin native salmon runs because of competition from hatcheryfish or offtake by humans may create significant ecologicalchanges in their natal streams (Francis, in press).
The introduction of exotic grasses into native grasslandsis widespread, and allows us to more efficiently employ cowsand other livestock as warm-blooded food processors to con-vert grass into a form more palatable to humans. In northernAustralia, for example, the poor nutritional quality of nativegrasslands is overcome by oversewing them with exotic spe-cies which permit a doubling of stocking rates (Solbrig, 1993).In the steppe grasslands of North America native plant spe-cies have been extensively displaced by the introduction ofEurasian wheatgrasses and ryegrasses (West, 1996). Further,while grazing on our behalf, cows are rather unselective andthey can quickly over-exploit sensitive plant species (West,1996): a form of incidental take.
The incidental harvest of nontarget species is a problemin a broad array of consumptive uses. Callaghan et al. (in press)show that incidental shooting in waterfowl hunting has beena serious source of mortality for several endangered and fullyprotected species of waterfowl, such as the freckled duck
(Stictonetta naevosa) in Australia, the barnacle goose (Brantaleucopsis) in Europe and three species of swan (Cygnus spp.)in Europe and North America. Despite these and otherbiodiversity effects of waterfowl management, revenues fromwaterfowl hunting, such as those generated by duck stamps,have protected an estimated 40 million hectares of wetlandsin North America alone (Heitmeyer et al., 1993).
Bycatch is also a major concern in marine fisheries. Theglobal average is more than five kilograms of nontarget spe-cies caught for every kilogram of shrimp landed (Alverson etal., 1994). Add to that the effects of shrimp farming on coastalmangrove ecosystems, and the harvest and management ofshrimp must be among our most unsustainable, ecosystem-altering forms of consumptive use.
Under the right conditions, big game markets may re-quire lower ecological costs to achieve economic sustainabilitythan many forms of commercial, consumptive use. On theRooipoort ranch in the Northern Cape Province of South Af-rica revenues from safari hunting, the venison market andoccasional live animal sales to other game ranches collectivelyout-compete cattle ranching in terms of profitability (Croweet al., in press). Though no large predators are allowed onRooipoort, and McNab (1991) suggests other components ofbiodiversity may be compromised by managing for ungulatesin southern Africa, the profitability of wildlife use in many re-gions of southern Africa is a powerful economic force for con-servation. For example, land available for wildlife in Zimba-bwe increased more than fourfold from 1930 to 1990, largelybecause of the profitability of commercial, consumptive usesof wildlife compared to agriculture (Cumming, 1991). One isleft wondering if southern Africa occupies a relatively uniqueposition in the world in the form of a highly profitable type ofconsumptive use combined with relatively low biodiversityimpacts.
The commercial use of wild species from the Amazonprovides additional examples of the interplay of economic andecological factors affecting sustainability. The Tamshiyacu-Tahuayo Communal Reserve in Amazonian Peru was estab-lished in 1991 by local communities that wanted to secureexclusive use rights to the resources of the surrounding for-est. As Bodmer et al. (in press) report, the open access sys-tems that had prevailed earlier led to over harvesting of manyspecies. Populations of wildlife with high reproductive rates,such as peccary (Tayassu tajacu and Tayassu pecari), havewithstood rather high harvest rates, while those with low re-productive rates, such as the tapir (Tapirus terrestris) andwoolly monkey (Lagothrix lagotricha) show significant de-clines. Revenues from forest resources exceed those fromagriculture, and thus the communities have a strong interestin maintaining the forest and restoring depleted populations.However, Bodmer et al. (in press) calculate that a discountrate above 12%, which is to be expected in this poverty-strickenregion, makes their switch to a more sustainable system of
15
CURTIS H. FREESE
wildlife management disadvantageous compared to contin-ued over exploitation of populations. Without an economicbridge for the communities during the period required forover harvested populations to recover, the road tosustainability remains uncertain.
Nontimber forest products, such as Brazil nuts(Bertholletia excelsa), have become a favorite of those pro-moting sustainable use of natural forests. Brazil nuts, wide-spread throughout much of Amazonia and harvested only fromnatural stands, have a global market. Use regimes range fromopen access to well-established ownership. As Clay (in press)shows, the distribution of revenues along the market chainexemplifies the problem facing many products where there isintense competition among producers and thus little if anyrent from the resource captured locally. In Brazil nuts for ex-ample, local harvesters receive but 1% of the retail price inNew York. The ratio is similar for many other wild speciesuses, such as trade in rhino horn (Milliken et al., 1993) andlive birds (Swanson, 1992), where local ownership of the re-source is poorly defined and difficult to control against freeriders (e.g., poachers).
The Matang Mangrove Reserve, in Perak, Malaysia, toutedas one of the world's best managed mangrove forests, raisesan array of issues. The 40,000ha of Matang have been undermanagement by the state forest department for 90 years. Pro-duction has focused on construction timber and wood for amajor charcoal industry. Apart from timber commodities,Matang's mudflats support an important blood clam industryand the nearshore waters support major fisheries. Becausethe forest department oversees the reserve, management hasfocused on the economically most productive species of man-grove tree, Rhizophora apiculata. Though the commerciallogging industry in Matang may have helped deter the inva-sion of shrimp farming into the area, it came with an ecologi-cal price: "There are virtually no areas of old primary forestleft. The effect of growing trees of the same age and heighthas destroyed the multicanopied structure of the primary for-est." (Gopinath and Gabriel, in press). The value of variousproducts and services of Matang, particularly the nearshorefisheries, ecotourism and protection against coastal erosion,suggests that the production value of the forest is but onesmall component of a much larger array of values that shouldbe incorporated into management (Gopinath and Gabriel, inpress).
Forest management in Mexico's Yucatan Peninsula pro-vides another example of some of the tradeoffs between so-cioeconomic and ecological sustainability (Kiernan and Freese,in press). The Plan Piloto Forestal is a programme of forestmanagement conducted on communal lands, called ejidos.From the mid-1950s to 1983 the government exercised itsownership of forest resources on ejido lands by granting con-cessions to a major logging company. In 1983, a major policychange gave the ejidos full use rights to the forest, and forest
management has improved considerably since. Some areasare certified under the Forest Stewardship Council. About 20species of so-called lesser known tree species, out of morethan 100 species in the forest, provide low-value timber, suchas for railroad ties. Thus a vast majority of species in the for-est have low, or no, market value. Chicle (Manilkara zapota),used to make chewing gum, is the only important nontimberforest plant product, but the only major buyers are from Ja-pan. Most chewing gum is now synthetic. The economic en-gine of the forest is mahogany (Surietenia macrvphylla). Itfetches a much higher price, and provides the main source ofcash to families and to the funding of community projects.Under concession management, however, mahogany stockswere depleted in many areas. With 75 to perhaps even 120years required for mahogany to reach harvestable size (Snook,1993), recovery of stocks is slow. Further, mahogany requiresdisturbance and plenty of light for regeneration, but only 6%of the forest is disturbed during logging. Though quotas formahogany harvest have been steadily readjusted downwardin recent years, mahogany is probably still not beingsustainably logged. However, Kiernan and Freese (in press)conclude that it may be unwise to further curtail the rate ofextraction since any additional declines in forest revenuescould erode support from both the communities and frompoliticians for maintaining the forests. Meanwhile, valuabletime has been bought for the forest, perhaps as much as 50-75 years until the current growing stock of mahogany is de-pleted.
The history of forest management in Switzerland typifiesforestry in many industrialised, temperate regions. McShaneand McShane-Caluzi (in press) note in their review of forestmanagement in Switzerland that "the emphasis on wood pro-duction in this century led management to focus on a limitednumber of economically valuable species. The result was asimplified forest structure of even-aged trees with few spe-cies. Broadleaved trees, formerly the dominant vegetation typeon the Swiss Plateau, have been reduced to less than 40% oftheir natural potential due to extensive planting of conifers."Government subsidies for the wood production industry wereon the rise over recent decades and served to exacerbate thisforest management trend. However, changing forest use andthe recognition of other forest values, such as recreation andecosystem services, have begun to reshape forest manage-ment policy in Switzerland to give more attention tobiodiversity. Timber production, in fact, represents at best 5%of the total value of the forest based on a recent economicvaluation of Swiss forests (Rauch-Schwegler, 1994; cited inMcShane and McShane-Caluzi, in press).
The lesson from the economic valuation of Swiss forestsand other recent attempts at ecosystem valuation is thatthough consumptive use values may represent only a smallfraction of the total economic value of an ecosystem, they aregenerally the only wildland values that make it into the re-
16
WHAT PRICE FOR SUSTAINABILITY?
source owners' pockets as revenues. Market mechanisms thatenable beneficiaries to pay for nonconsumptive use valuesare inadequate or missing (Pearce and Moran, 1994), and thusmost ecosystems are managed almost exclusively for commod-ity values. This creates not only a narrow financial base forjustifying the conservation of such wildlands, but it drives re-source owners to specialise economically and to homogeniseecosystems.
Five ecological, socioeconomic and cultural factors mayconvince the resource owner to maintain biodiversity ratherthan to over exploit or specialise in production: 1) In manyecosystems a loss of biodiversity or natural processes can, overthe long run, erode productivity (Holling et al, 1995); 2)biodiversity tends to provide resilience to perturbations andadaptability to long-term change (Holling et al., 1995); 3)biodiversity maintains options, a hedge against changing hu-man values and the possibility that yesterday's weed is tomor-row's miracle plant (Burton et al., 1992); 4) in addition toconsumptive use values, there exist or may emerge markets,such as the Global Environmental Fund and debt-for-natureswaps, that enable payment for the array of non-use valuesbased on biodiversity (Pearce and Moran, 1994); and 5) theowner intrinsically values, for whatever reasons, natural eco-systems and biodiversity. Where these incentives fail to pro-tect society's interests in biodiversity, the second line ofdefense is government control and sanctions, though this maybe costly and often ineffective.
In summary, commercial, consumptive use of wild spe-cies can be a tool for biodiversity conservation, but the pricefor sustainability is twofold: 1) Greater financial investmentsby consumers and society at large are required to ensure thatconsumptive uses are well managed and to pay for non-usevalues of biodiversity; and 2) despite getting the economicsright, sustainable use often implies some potentially signifi-cant ecological sacrifices and compromises.
The success of any of these strategies ultimately dependson how we deal with the larger issues of global populationgrowth and per capita consumption. If we fail to effectivelydeal with these, any victories of sustainability will be, at best, localand temporary, and biodiversity will continue its slide down theslope of both over exploitation and economic specialisation.
Acknowledgements
This paper is based on a study of the commercial, consump-tive use of wild species supported by the World Wide Fundfor Nature-International and World Wildlife Fund-US. My sin-cere thanks are owed to the following members of the WWFtask force assembled for the study: Cleber Alho, Jason Clay,Barry Coates, Steve Cornelius, Anton Fernhout Jan Habrovsky,Ginette Hemley, Barbara Hoskinson, Kevin Lyonette, TomMcShane, Fulai Sheng, Gordon Shepherd, Michael Sutton and
Magnus Sylven. A special thanks also goes to Maria Boulosand Kimberly Doyle for their attentive and meticulous admin-istrative support throughout the study. Invaluable support forbibliographic research was provided by the Department ofBiology, Montana State University.
References
Alverson, D.L, Murawski, SA and Pope, J.G. 1994. A GlobalAssessment of Fisheries Bycatch and Discards. FAO FisheriesTechnical Paper 339. FAO, Rome, Italy.
Baker, B. 1996. Building a Better Oyster. BioScience 46:240-244.
van Ballenberghe, V. and Ballard, W.B. 1994. Limitation andRegulation of Moose Populations: The Role of Predatioa Ca-nadian Journal of Zoology 72:2071-2077.
Barel, C.D.N., Iigtvoet, W., Goldschmidt, T., Witte, F. andGoudswaard, P. C. 1991. The Haplochromine Cichlids in LakeVictoria: An Assessment of Biological and Fisheries Interests.In: Keenleysid, M.HA (Eds), Cichlid Fishes: Behaviour, Ecol-ogy and Evolution. Chapman and Hall, London, UK
Baskerville, G.L. 1995. The Forestry Problem: Adaptive Lurchesin Renewal. In: Gunderson, L.H., Holling, C.S. and light, S.L(Eds), Barriers and Bridges to the Renewal of Ecosystems andInstitutions. Columbia University Press, New York, USA.
Bodmer, R.E., Penn, J.W., Puertas, P., Moya I., L and Fang, T.G.(in press). Linking Conservation and Local People Through sus-tainable use of Natural Resources: Community-Based Manage-ment in the Peruvian Amazon. In: Freese, CH. (Ed),HarvestingWild Species: Implications for Biodiversity Conservation. TheJohns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Brown, J.S. and Parman, A.O. 1993. Consequences of Size-Selective Harvesting as an Evolutionary Game. In: Stokes, T.K.,McGlade, J.M. and Law, R. (Eds), The Exploitation of Evolv-ing Resources. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany.
Burton, P.J., Balisky, AC, Coward, L.P., Cumming, S.G. andKneeshaw, D.D. 1992. The Value of Managing for Biodiversity.The Forestry Chronicle 68:225-237.
Callaghan, D .A, Kirby, J.S. and Hughes, B. (in press). The Ef-fects of Recreational Waterfowl Hunting on Biodiversity: Im-plications for Sustainability. In: Freese, C.H. (Ed), HarvestingWild Species: Implications for Biodiversity Conservation. TheJohns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD, USA
Clark,C.W.1973.The Economics of Overexploitation. Science 181:630-634.
17
CURTIS H. FREESE
Clay, J. (in press). Brazil Nuts: The Use of a Keystone Speciesfor Conservation and Development. In: Freese, C.H. (Ed),Harvesting Wild Species: Implications for Biodiversity Conser-vation. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Crowe, T.M., Smith, B.S., Little, R.M. and High, H. (in press).Conservation Implications and Financial Potential for Sustain-able Utilization of Game at Rooipoort Estate, Northern CapeProvince, South Africa. In: Freese, C.H. (Ed), Harvesting WildSpecies: Implications for Biodiversity Conservation. TheJohns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Cumming, D. 1991. Wildlife Products and the Market Place: AView from Southern Africa. In: Renecher, LA and Hudson,R.J. (Eds), Wildlife Production Systems: Conservation andSustainable Devebpment. AFES misc. publ. 91-6. Universityof Alaska, Fairbanks, AK, USA.
Dudley, N. Jeanrenaud, J.P. and Sullivan, F. 1995. Bad Har-vest: The Timber Trade and the Degradation of Global For-ests. Earthscan, London.
Durning, A.T. and Brough, H.B. 1992. Reforming the LivestockEconomy. In Brown, L.R. (Ed), State of the World 1992. W.W.Norton and Company, New York, USA.
Francis, R.C. (in press). Sustainable Use of Salmon: Its Effectson Biodiversity and Ecosystem Function. In: Freese, CH. (Ed),Harvesting Wild Species: Implications for Biodiversity Con-servation. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD, USA
Gasaway, W.C., Stephenson, R.O., Davis, J.L., Shepherd, P.E.K.and Burris, O.E. 1983. Interrelationships of Wolves, Prey andMan in Interior Alaska. Wildlife Monographs No. 84.
Gopinath, N. and Gabriel, P. (in press). Management of LivingResources in the Matang Mangrove Reserve, Perak, Malaysia.In: Freese, C.H. (Ed), Harvesting Wild Species: Implicationsfor Biodiversity Conservation. The Johns Hopkins UniversityPress, Baltimore, MD, USA
Heitmeyer, M.E., Nelson, J.W., Batt, B.D.J. and Caldwell, P.J.1993. Waterfowl Conservation and Biodiversity. Midwest Fish& Wildlife Conference 1993, Columbia, Missouri, USA.
Holling, C.S., Schindler, D.W., Walker, B.W. and Roughgarden,J. 1995. Biodiversity in the Functioning of Ecosystems: An Eco-logical Synthesis. In: Perrings, C, Mäler, K.-G., Folke, C.,Holling, CS. and Jansson, B.O., Biodiversity Loss: Economic andEcological Issues. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Kiernan, M. and Freese, C.H. (in press). Mexico's Plan PilotoForestal: The Search for Balance Between Socio-Economic and
Ecological Sustainability. In: Freese, CH. (Ed), HarvestingWild Species: Implications for Biodiversity Conservation. TheJohns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Ledig, F.T. 1992. Human Impacts on Genetic Diversity in For-est Ecosystems. Oikos 63:87-108.
Lee, K. 1993. Compass and Gyroscope: Integrating Scienceand Politics in the Environment. Island Press, Washington DC, USA
Marnell, L.F. 1986. Impacts of Hatchery Stocks on Wild FishPopulations. In: Stroud, R.H. (Ed), Fish Culture in FisheriesManagement. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, MD, USA
McNab, J. 1991. Does Game Cropping Serve Conservation? AReexamination of the African Data. Canadian Journal of Zo-ology 69:2283-2290.
McShane, T.O. and McShane-Caluzi, E. (in press). Swiss For-est Use and Biodiversity Conservation. In: Freese, CH. (Ed),Harvesting Wild Species: Implications for Biodiversity Conser-vation. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD, USA
Milliken, T., Nowell, K. and Thomsen, J. B. 1993. The Declineof the Black Rhino in Zimbabwe. TRAFFIC International, Cam-bridge, U.K
Miller, DJ. 1989. Introductions and Extinctions of Fish in theA fricanGreat Lakes. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 4(2):56-59.
Moyle, P.B., Li, H.W. and Barton, B.A 1986. The FrankensteinEffect: Impact of Introduced Fishes on Native Fishes in NorthAmerica. In: Stroud, R.H. (Ed), Fish Culture in Fisheries Man-agement. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Norse, E. A. (Ed). 1993. Global Marine Biological Diversity.Island Press, Washington DC, USA.
Pearce, C. and Moran, D. 1994. The Economic Value ofBiodiversity. Earthscan, London.
Rauch-Schwegler, T. 1994. La Foret, Capital et Interets:Combien Vaut la Foret Suisse? Decouvrir la Forêt, Yverdon-les-Bains.Rowell, C.A. 1993. The Effects of Fishing on the Timing ofMaturity in North Sea Cod (Gadus morhua L). In: Stokes,T.K., McGlade, J.M. and Law, R. (Eds), The Exploitation ofEvolving Resources. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany.
Snook, L.K. 1993. Stand Dynamics of Mahogany (Swieteniamacrophylla King) and Associated Species After Fire and Hur-ricane in the Tropical Forests of the Yucatan Peninsula, Mexico.Doctoral dissertation, Yale School of Forestry and Environ-mental Studies, New Haven. University Microfilms Intema-
18
tional, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA #9317535.
Solbrig, O.T. 1993. Ecological Constraints to Savanna Land Use.In: Young, M.D. and Solbrig, O.T. (Eds), The World'sSavannas: Economic Driving Forces, Ecological Constraintsand Policy Options for Sustainable Land Use. UNESCO, Paris;Parthenon, Carnforth, UK.
Southgate, D. 1992. Shrimp Mariculture Development in Ec-uador: Some Resource Policy Issues. Dept. of Agricultural Eco-nomics, Ohio State Univ. No. 5.
Swanson, T. 1992. Economics and Animal Welfare: The Caseof the Live Bird Trade. In: Thomsen, J.B., Edwards, S.R. andMulliken, T.A. (Eds), Perceptions, Conservation and Man-agement of Wild Birds in Trade. TRAFFIC International, Cam-bridge, UK.
Swanson, T.M. 1994. The Economics of Extinctions Revisitedand Revised: A Generalised Framework for the Analysis of theProblems of Endangered Species and Biodiversity Loss. Ox-ford Economic Papers 46:800-821.
Turner, R.K., Folke, C., Gren, I.M. and Bateman, I. 1994.Wetland Valuation: Three Case Studies. In: Perrings, C, Mäler.
WHAT PRICE FOR SUSTAINABILITY?
K.G., Folke, C, Holling, C.S. and Jansson, B.O. BiodiversityLoss: Ecological and Economic Issues. Cambridge UniversityPress, Cambridge, UK.
Upton, H.F. (in press). Striped Bass Management and Con-servation Along the Atlantic Coast of the United States. In:Freese, CH. (Ed), Harvesting Wild Species: Implications forBiodiversity Conservation. The Johns Hopkins UniversityPress, Baltimore, MD, USA.
West, N.E. 1996. Strategies for Maintenance and Repair of Bi-otic Community Diversity on Rangelands. In: Szaro, R.C. andJohnson, D.W. (Eds), Biodiversity in Managed Landscapes:Theory and Practice. Oxford University Press, New York, USA.
Williams, M. 1990. Forests. In: Turner II, B.L., Clark, W.C.,Kates, R.W., Richards, J.F., Mathews, J.T. and Meyer, W.B. (Eds),TheEarth as Transformed by Human Action. Cambridge Uni-versity Press, Cambridge, UK
World Resources Institute. 1990. World Resources 1990-91.Oxford University Press, New York, USA.
SummariesL'utilisation des espèces sauvages à des fins de consommation, commercialisées constitue, pour les écologistes,un couteau à double tranchant. Lorsque celle-ci est bien gérée, elle peut constituer un puissant outil quifavorise, au plan socio-économique, la conservation des aires encore naturelles et de la biodiversité. Malgérée, elle peut conduire à une surexploitation et à un appauvrissement biotique.
Les crises écologiques et socio-économiques qui découlent d'une surexploitation semblent souvent constituerun préalable à la réforme et à l'amélioration de la gestion. Toutefois, le progrès vers une gestion plus durableimplique des coûts: l'un économique et l'autre écologique. Lorsque l'utilisation des espèces à des finscommerciales joue un rôle central dans le calcul des coûts d'opportunité issus des différentes formesd'utilisation des terres/eaux, la valeur des produits des espèces sauvages doit être élevée. Mais les prix élevés etla trop grande dépendance de l'utilisation des espèces sauvages à des fins commerciales exposent là biodiversitéà deux risques majeurs, si les structures incitatives appropriées et les systèmes de contrôle sont inexistants: 1)la surexploitation des espèces de grande valeur motivée par la perspective de gain rapide ou la nécessitéd'assurer la viabilité socio-économique du système de gestion; 2) une spécialisation excessive dans laproduction d'espèces de grande valeur au détriment de la biodiversité locale, autochtone. Ainsi, il y a souventun prix écologique à payer dans tous les endroits où l'utilisation des espèces sauvages, à des fins commerciales,constitue la principale source de revenus.
Trop souvent, on s'attend à ce que l'utilisation des espèces sauvages à des fins commerciales serve, à elleseule, de justification à la conservation des aires naturelles. Une telle dépendance excessive de l'utilisationdes espèces sauvages à des fins commerciales comme outil de conservation est dangereuse pour les raisonssuivantes : 1) seule, elle peut ne pas être compétitiveface à d'autres formes d'utilisations des terres/eaux; 2) ladépendance sur quelques produits des espèces sauvages comporte des risques considérables parce quel'évolution des valeurs/marchés et les écosystèmes/populations est imprévisible; 3) la spécialisation économiquepeut directement conduire à la simplification de l'écosystème, sans s'en rendre compte. D'ailleurs, la valeurdirecte de l'utilisation commerciale de certaines espèces ne constitue qu 'une partie infime de la valeur globaledes écosystèmes sur le plan fonctionnel et «non-utilisatrices». La conservation à long terme de la biodiversiténécessite des changements fondamentaux dans la manière dont nous justifions, payons et gérons ces autresniveaux de valeurs.
19
CURTIS H. FREESE
El uso comercial y para consumo (UCC) de las especies silvestres presenta a los conservacionistas la proverbialespada de dos filos. Si se maneja bien, puede resultar un poderoso instrumento que proporciona incentivossocioeconómicos para la conservación de las zonas silvestres y de la biodiversidad. Si se maneja mal, puedeconducir a una sobreexplotacióny al empobrecimiento biótico.
Las crisis ecológicas y socioeconómicas que nacen del exceso de explotación a menudo parecen ser unacondición previa para reformar y mejorar el manejo. El avance hacia un manejo más sostenible, sin embargo,tiene dos costos, uno económico y otro ecológico. En los casos en que el UCC es decisivo para compensar loscostos de oportunidad de los usos alternativos de la tierra y el agua, los productos de especies silvestres debenalcanzar un precio elevado. Pero los precios elevados y la dependencia excesiva del UCC generan dos riesgospeculiares para la biodiversidad si se carece de una estructura adecuada de incentivos y de controles: 1)sobreexplotación de especies de mucho valor, dada la posibilidad de conseguir ganancias rápidas y dada lanecesidad de mantener a flote socioeconómicamente el sistema de manejo; y 2) exceso de especialización enla producción de especies de valor elevado a costa de la biodiversidad nativa. Así pues, suele tenerse quepagar un precio ecológico siempre que el UCC es la fuente primaria de ingresos.
Con excesiva frecuencia se espera que el UCC sea el factor exclusivo que justifique la conservación de lasáreas silvestres. Este exceso de dependencia del UCC como instrumento de conservación es peligroso porque:1) por sí solo puede resultar no competitivo frente a usos alternativos de la tierra y el agua; 2) la dependenciade unas pocas especies silvestres como mercancía crea riesgos considerables porque tanto los mercados/valores como los ecosistemas/poblaciones cambian en forma impredecible; 3) la pendiente resbalizadiza dela especialización económica puede fácilmente conducir a la simplificación del ecosistema. Los valores delUCC, sin embargo, explican a menudo sólo una fracción de los valores funcionales y del no uso de losecosistemas. La conservación de la biodiversidad a largo plazo demanda cambios en la forma en queexplicamos esos otros valores, pagamos por ellos y los manejamos.
20
Investment in People - A Key to EnhanceSustainability: Lessons from NorthernPakistan
The conventional models of conservation and developmentthat emphasised transfer of capital and technology for progressand relegated the human factor to a peripheral position provedto be, in most cases, neither sustainable nor environmentallyfriendly. It is interesting to note that the concept ofsustainability emerged because of the concern of the envi-ronmentalists about the adverse impacts of development onthe environment and natural resources. In spite of huge capi-tal investments, the ecosystems continue to degrade and spe-cies continue to be lost for ever. A bottom-up planning pro-cess and peoples' participation are now considered essentialto ensure sustainability. Similarly it is now widely believed thatthe environmental degradation can be prevented only ifpeople are able to protect and defend their local environmentfrom their own actions and those of the outsiders. Therefore,the alternative view places the human agency at the centrestage and stresses the role that social capital plays in sustain-
able development.In spite of the realisation that the human agency needed
to be at centre stage, the notions of sustainable develop-ment and human development continued to be pursuedas a two-prong approach to progress. In fact, the road toprogress requires integration of the two into a concept ofSustainable Human Development (Banuri et al., 1994) thatcan only be achieved through: a) the formation of social capi-tal; and b) establishment of participating institutions atboth local and national levels. The social capital recognisesthat the enlargement of people's choices and capabilitiesmakes sense only in the context of voluntary action for thecollective interest of the community. An example is providedby the Aga Khan Rural Support Programme (AKRSP) in thenorthern Pakistan where investment in people has contrib-uted to the formation of social capital which is now a solidbase for community-based conservation initiatives.
1Head ofNatural Resources Group, IUCN Pakistan, 26 Street 87, G-6/3, Islamabad Pakistan; e-mail: [email protected]. org2Senior Advisor of Rural Development, UNDP (can be reached through Javed Ahmed at above address)
21
Javed Ahmed1 and Shoaib Sultan Khan2
Environmental degradation can be prevented only if people are able to protect and defend their localenvironment. This, however, requires empowerment of people and their skill enhancement to manage theirown natural resources on sustainable use basis. In northern Pakistan, the Aga Khan Rural Support Programme(AKRSP) established a network of over 2000 Village Organisations (VOs), institutions since 1982, with a view toorganise people for collective action. The program has helped Vos enhance their skills and generate their owncapital for improvement of their economic well being. The investment in people is now paying dividends andthe VOs have become basic building blocks of supra help programmes in the field of primary health, education,conservation of natural resources, marketing etc. The sustainable use of natural resources through communityparticipation warrants investment in people on the pattern of AKRSP. The paper presents and reviews thelessons from northern Pakistan.
The ContextDevelopment and Conservation
JAVED AHMED AND SHOAIB SULTAN KHAN
Conservation and People?For a variety of reasons, the traditional concept of conserva-tion through the establishment of protected areas has notproved successful in many countries of the south, and eco-system continue to degrade and species continue to be lostfor ever. Furthermore, the biologists have now come to realisethat small parcels of Protected Areas (PAs) tend to lose theirbiological richness over time. The PA strategy has proved tobe too expensive and the management of the PAs suffers froma lack of adequate financial and trained human resources.There are often multiple demands on the natural resourcesand it is becoming increasingly difficult to set aside areas purelyfor conservation. In fact, in Nepal the public pressure to openup the PAs for use by the local communities is so much that itbecomes a political issue at the time of general elections. There-fore, any further additions to the list of the existing PAs are bothimprobable and infeasible. Thus the only viable option appearsto be to conserve nature "with" people and not "without" people.
The last two decades have seen a major shift in conserva-tion approaches and the people who were considered part ofthe problem are now being increasingly made part of the so-lution. The community-based conservation (CBC) initiatives,such as collaborative management and joint management havebecome conservation buzzwords and are being widely usedand promoted as bottom-up conservation approaches. Simi-larly, the gulf created between man and his environment bytechnology and the Green Revolution is now being bridgedthrough programmes like "Man and Biosphere", "Forests,Trees and People Programme", "Plants and People" and "Peo-ple and Planet."
But an important question is "Why should communitiesconserve?" Experience has shown that communities cannotbe engaged in conservation unless they get direct tangible orintangible benefits. External incentives to abstain from the useof wild species are not sustainable in the long term. Sustain-able use of the wild resources is an economically viable op-tion. But the world conservation community is divided on useand no use—especially on the issue of culling wildlife in theProtectedAreas and harvesting of wild species, including sporthunting. There are animal rights groups, there are trusts toprotect species, and there are global conventions and trea-ties that either prescribe no use or regulate it such that thepoor people cannot cross the bureaucratic hurdles for wiseuse of their own resources. The good news is that the conser-vation community has already begun to realise the benefits ofwise-use, and therefore the time is ripe to look for ways andmeans to engage in conservation.
The CBC efforts are of relatively recent origin and little isknown about what will work and what will not work. There-fore, there is a continuous quest to learn both from successesand failures, and to refine and fine-tune the principles of CBCapproaches. In our view, investments in people and forma-
tion of social capital are keys to enhance sustainability of con-servation programmes. In support, we will like to describethe example of AKRSP to show how investment in people leadsto the formation of social capital and how it contributes notonly to the social and economic well being of the people butalso to the conservation of nature and natural resources.
The ParadigmPoverty is commonly believed to be one of the causes of deg-radation of the environment and increasing population is erod-ing the natural resource base on which the survival of thesepeople depends. Therefore, it is now widely believed thatconservation and poverty alleviation should be addressed asa single challenge. In order to address this issue, one mustfirst understand the problems of the poor. The common prob-lems of the poor are: a) small land holdings; b) tow produc-tion; c) tow income; and d) little savings and debt. An objec-tive analysis of the rural poor would indicate that they are nota homogeneous group but have certain commonalities: a)landlessness or small subsistence holding; b) isolation frommainstream economy; c) unorganised and leaderless; d) lackof capital and access to credit; and e) above all they have nomarketable skills. These elements essentially translate into alack of capacity of the rural poor to change their own lot.
A number of anti-poverty programmes have demon-strated that it is possible to improve the lot of the rural poorthrough a new concept of self-help. The new definition re-jects the traditional concept of self-help synonymous with thepoor providing free labour and redefines it as willingness ofthe poor to organise, to generate their own capital throughsavings, to upgrade their skills and to take full responsibilityfor management of local affairs. These are the principles ofRaifeissen used with success in the institutionally-based de-velopment of German agriculture and later pursued by theJapanese. In the period after World War n, these principles ofvillage organisation have been developed with encouragingresults in Taiwan, China and Republic of Korea. We will de-scribe a theoretical framework or the Conceptual Package:a) social organisation; b) human resource development; andc) capital formation. The paradigm (conceptual package) de-scribed here is based on actual experience in different geo-graphical locations of the world, namely Comilla in Bangla-desh, Daudzai in North West Frontier of Pakistan, Mahawelisystem in Sri Lanka and the Aga Khan Rural Support Pro-gramme (AKRSP) in northern Pakistan (Gilgit, Baltistan andChitral). The basic elements of the package are now described
Social Organisation
The key to creating and nurturing the capacity of the rural
22
INVESTMENT IN PEOPLE - A KEY TO ENHANCE SUSTAINABILITY: LESSONS FROM NORTHERN PAKISTAN
poor is to bring them into the fold of an organisation. Theorganisation must be broad based and multipurpose at leastin the initial stages. It should not lump different interest groupsinto one organisation. For example, the land owners and land-less may have to be organised as separate interest groups forthe purpose of identifying their needs and to meet their re-quirements. The organisation should meet as a general bodyon regular basis and not leave the affairs of the organisationto be controlled by a few members. The general body may,however, constitute special purpose committees that reportto it directly.
Human Resource Development
Upgrading of cooperative, managerial and productive skills isessential to enable the rural poor to make the best use of theavailable resources. The basic need is the provision of simpleservices to the individual villagers that can be achieved effi-ciently and economically through a cadre of workers ratherthan the functionaries of the state agencies. The organisationnominates persons for training by the support structure andagrees to make the best use of their services and, where fea-sible, to remunerate the trained members for the services ren-dered. Thus the development cadre of the village organisationsbecomes the extension arm of the support structure neededto foster a framework of grassroots community-basedorganisations (CBOs).
Capital Formation
Capital is power, and without it the poor can neither hope tobe self-reliant nor have self respect. Therefore, generation ofcapital by the poor through the discipline of savings is essen-tial. The support structure nurtures a savings habit amongthe members of the CBOs. The members are required to save,no matter how small the amount, at each meeting of theorganisation. This amount is entered into their individual led-gers and deposited in any scheduled bank in the name of theorganisation. The account is jointly operated by the office bear-ers of the organisation. These savings can then be used as acollateral for credit.
In the absence of formal credit sources or its inaccessi-bility to the rural poor, people fell into the "debt trap" of moneylenders, where interest rates are invariably exorbitant and ex-ploitative. Therefore a social innovation is needed that makesbanking operations possible at the door steps of the farmers.Group lending to the CBOs for onward disbursement to mem-bers, has proved to be very successful, especially where creditand savings have been integrated. Group cohesion has alsobeen strengthened, as essentially collective savings has be-come a new common property that provides equitable ben-
efits to members.Whereas the principles for the formation of social capital
described above are widely applicable, the design or the pro-gramme model will vary from area to area. For example, north-em Pakistan lacked infrastructures, therefore developmentof Productive Physical Infrastructure provided an entry pointfor social organization. On the other hand, in some other partsof the country, the infrastructure is well developed but ruralpoor lacked access to credit, and hence here an easy accessto credit turned out to be the entry point.
AKRSP Programme ModelAga Khan Rural Support Programme (AKRSP) was started innorthern Pakistan in December 1982 with two main objec-tives:
a) to improve economic condition of people in the area;and
b) to develop a model of rural development that is replicable.
The Programme is based on the conceptual frameworkdescribed above that has been used successfully to organisethe rural poor around their interests, and to service these ru-ral organisations in a permanent and profitable manner. AKRSPis working in six districts of the Northern Pakistan (see map),extending over 74,200 sq. km. There are roughly 103,000households with a population of one million. The region isrugged and mountainous, located among four of the world'shighest mountain ranges—the Himalayas, Karakorum, Pamirand Hindukush. Much of the region is above 1200m abovemean sea level (MSL). Agricultural production is based essen-tially on irrigation with water diverted from streams and riv-ers that are fed by snow. The region is located in the rainshadow area. Therefore, the annual precipitation is only 100-500mm, received mainly in the form of snow.
An estimated 90% of the region's population makes itsliving from subsistence farming. The average household hasmore than eight members, farms 1.1 ha of land (of which only60% is suitable for annual crops and 40% is used for pastureor trees), owns a small number of livestock and a few fruittrees near the homestead. The average literacy rate is esti-mated to be less than 15% (for women it is 3%).
The Process
The process of organisation starts with a visit to a village whoseresidents have agreed to meet with AKRSP staff. The GeneralManager initiates the first dialogue by explaining the objec-tives and methods of AKRSP to the villagers. The villagers areencouraged to form an organisation that has a geographical
23
JAVED AHMED AND SHOAIB SULTAN KHAN
Figu
re 1
: Th
e Aga
Kha
n Ru
ral S
uppo
rt Pr
ogra
mm
e—Pr
ojec
t Are
a
24
INVESTMENT IN PEOPLE - A KEY TO ENHANCE SUSTAINABILITY: LESSONS FROM NORTHERN PAKISTAN
identity and includes at least 75% of the households in thearea. The General Manager invites the villagers to identify acommon need, provision of which would result in benefitssuch as equity, productivity and sustainability, and which canbe undertaken by the villagers themselves. Almost invariably,they are able to agree on a project of overriding importanceto all the villagers. Thus, the result of the first dialogue is thestart of a process for the formation of an organisation andidentification of a productive project by the villagers.
The first dialogue is followed by a process that involvespreparation of a technical feasibility study of the project, jointlywritten by the informed village representatives and AKRSP en-gineering staff. The AKRSP management then takes the final-ised project proposal to the villagers and discusses it with themin a general assembly. The deliberations explore the terms ofpartnership that would characterise the relationship betweenthe two entities. The AKRSP expands on the benefits of or-ganisation while the villagers spell out the manner in whichthey would organise, implement, manage and maintain theproject. They also agree to benefit from the skill developmentprogramme and the creation of equity capital over time. Thisfinal, or third, dialogue concludes with the signing of the termsof partnership and marks the formation of an organisation ofall the beneficiaries called the Village Organisation (VO).
The above three stages of the diagnostic survey requireseveral visits by the staff to the village, and by the same token,by the villagers to the AKRSP management. These series ofdialogues help to create bonds between the VO members andthe management. Because of the cultural considerations, theVOs mainly consist of men, however, at the request of thewomen themselves, AKRSP started to foster Women's Organi-sations (WO) as well.
The Progress
The achievements of the programme until the end of 1995 interms of the organisations formed, village specialists trained
and equity capital created are as follows:
Village Specialists Trained:W/Vo Managers 2,800Agriculture 700Livestock 1,200Poultry 1,500Forestry 750
Linkages for Development
The AKRSP programme has laid a foundation for the public-private partnership for development. The increasing empha-sis on community participation has led Government, donorsand NGOs to be interested in working with Village andWomen's Organisations. The Government of Pakistan has ini-tiated a Social Action Programme (SAP) to reach areas previ-ously lacking social sector services. In the Northern Areas(NAs), the two components of the programme, i.e., primaryeducation and the rural water supply and sanitation, are be-ing implemented through VOs with AKRSP assistance. Thecommunities are required to accept responsibility for theproject as well as donate locally available resources for it. Thisnot only makes the SAP cost effective, but also develops asense of ownership by the communities.
Under the SAP, a total of 250 community schools have sofar been opened throughout the Northern Areas. These com-munity-managed schools are a sustainable alternative for pri-mary education which the government sees as a viable modelof primary schooling in the Northern Areas. The buildings forthe schools were provided by the villagers. Teachers for theschools are selected from the village and they are paid throughthe VOs by the Directorate of Education from special endow-ments set up for these schools.
IFAD and FAO have funded an area development pro-gramme in Chitral which is working with VOs. There are plansto fund a similar agriculture and infrastructure development
Numbers
Village Organisations
Women Organisations
Total
InitiatedPPIs3 1,624
1,955854
2,809
Members
79,45329.031
108,484
CostCompleted
1,314
Deposits
209
48
257
(Rs. Million)330
(Rs. Million)
Beneficiaries92,300
1PPI = Productive Physical Infrastructure
25
JAVED AHMED AND SHOAIB SULTAN KHAN
project in Baltistan. The World Bank plans to fund two majorhealth and education projects which will also involve the VOsin the Northern Areas.
The forum of VOs in the NAs also provided a launchingpad to IUCN for a UNDP/GEF-funded project for maintainingbiodiversity in Pakistan through community development. Theproject aims to assess the effectiveness of rural village man-agement of wild species and/or habitats at conservingbiodiversity. In the pilot phase, the project will be workingwith 12 village/Valley communities.
Institutional Development
The VOs, initially formed around a single Productive PhysicalInfrastructure (PPI), have proven to be truly broad-basedmultipurpose organisations. While all VOs still have a strongrole in "traditional activities", e.g., maintaining the PPIs, build-ing equity capital, accessing and managing credit and improv-ing productivity, many have adopted non-traditional roles andfunctions as well. The fact that VOs have started addressingissues that are not covered under AKRSP's original mandatereflects first the VOs' level of awareness, and second their in-stitutional capacity in terms of practical management.
As the roles and functions of the VOs began to "diver-sify," new management strategies started to emerge. In addi-tion to an increase in VOs' capacity to manage complex andnon-traditional activities, the governance mechanisms in theinstitutions have also improved in increments. The evolutionof VOs is a self perpetuating process; it feeds on its own suc-cesses and plows forward. VOs evolve because they gear upto deal with issues that surround them. Some examples ofthe institutional development of the VOs are reflected in thefollowing examples of good governance.
Many inter-village land disputes have been settled out ofcourt by the VOs:
• Many VOs have their own mechanisms to settle minordisputes without going to the police or court;
• Some VOs have voluntary code of ethics to limit lavishspending on social functions;
• Some VOs have imposed a ban on open smoking in thevillage; and
• Many VOs have rules to regulate open-access grazing onvillage lands and to promote tree planting.
Aware of the needs to conserve, many VOs have bannedcutting of green, naturally growing trees and imposed restric-tions on hunting and shooting.
It is the shifts in socioeconomic and political environ-ments that provide impetus to the VOs to change and modifyaccordingly. The emerging functions of VOs essentially reflectthe changing demands of economy and society. The main fac-
tor that determines the dynamism in the VO is awareness andconsciousness of their own status as well as the status of theirenvironment and this can happen only through investmentin the people. Thus, the process of VOs evolution is directlydependent upon VOs level of awareness and a mechanismthat can deal with the consequences of that awareness.
Sustainability of the VOs
Institution building is a long-term process and an externalsupport structure that nurtures the VOs, and is essential untillocal level apex organisations evolve. The collective approachthrough the VO forum has given rise to many spinoff institu-tions, which work in specific sectors. Groups of VOs from thesame valley are coming together to form cluster levelorganisations to arrange inputs and market the outputs. Thereis an outstanding example from Nagar Valley where 22 VOshave come together to form a local NGO that is managingprimary health and education. This NGO has recently secureda grant of US$200,000 from the World Bank for its programme.A further interesting development is that the nearby Bar Val-ley, which sponsored three ibex trophy hunts at $3000 each,have requested this NGO to help them establish a self-sus-taining maternity and child care centre with the income fromhunting permits.
So far as the sustainability of a VO is concerned, it is de-termined by its basic capacity to: a) identify an issue and en-sure that the issue is important to their present and futurelivelihoods; and b) act to deal with that issue. The process ofsustainability is ongoing — sustainability is not a stage, it is astate. It is the ever-increasing capacity of the VOs to deal withemerging issues within their environments,
Therefore, the basic aims of development programmes,for those wishing to work in the area of sustainable develop-ment, must focus on investing in the people whosesustainability is in question. The sustainability of an ecosys-tem will then follow automatically.
Social Organisation and Sustainable Use ofNatural Resources
Health and condition of an ecosystem are indicators ofsociety's awareness and efforts toward sustainable use of natu-ral resources. As we all know, ecosystems across different geo-graphical regions are being degraded and importantbiodiversity is being lost to the ultimate determent of humans.Scientists and professionals across the globe have concludedthat the process cannot be halted without the active involve-ment of the people and their institutions. Degradation of natu-ral resources outside the PAs has until recently not receivedmuch needed attention. Conservation of these vast areas of
26
INVESTMENT IN PEOPLE - A KEY TO ENHANCE SUSTAINABILITY: LESSONS FROM NORTHERN PAKISTAN
natural heritage is only possible through sustainable humanresource development and indigenous institutional supportand management mechanisms.
In most cases, people are aware of the positive and nega-tive effects that their activities have on the ecosystem andhealth of natural resources. But they are neither organisednor have they the means to take appropriate measures. It hasnow been well established that social and cultural solutions,i.e., those which target the human practices first and techni-cal solutions later, are more successful and cost effective. Thishas been amply demonstrated through the experience ofAKRSP in northern Pakistan.
The VO forum has given the local communities a collectiveconscience to act to find solutions to their mutual problems. ManyVOs have voluntarily, and through their own self evolved initia-tives, imposed simple rules and regulations on their members. Avoluntary ban on free grazing, cutting of green trees as a measureto arrest the negative trend in environmental degradation andrestrictions on hunting are some examples.
These measures however, remained simple and mostlyconfined to restricted usufruct right areas of the VOs. Theself actualisation process that started as a result of spinoff ef-fects of the community mobilisation expanded further, andsoon communities felt a need for empowerment to addressissues where they did not have ownership rights. These is-sues, many of which are conservation and sustainable use re-lated, however, were recognised by the communities as oftheir immediate concern. Some of the institutions grewstronger in their capacities and vision, and there was an up-surge of local initiatives. The most prominent examples inthis regard are the cases of VOs of Khunjerab Buffer Zone,Chaprote and Chult valleys in the Gilgit district and a numberof other valleys scattered all over the northern Areas of Paki-stan that are participating in the UNDP/GEF project entitled"Maintaining Biodiversity in Pakistan with Rural CommunityDevelopment".
The VOs of Khunjerab Buffer Zone showed an interest inmanaging the population of the ibex in their area. For thispurpose they took the first step by putting a ban on ibex hunt-ing. They approached the Northern Administration for em-powerment to manage the ibex population and initiate a sus-tainable harvest programme. They also prepared a proposaland obtained funding from UNDP under the GEF Small GrantsProgramme. This group has issued a couple of hunting per-mits. The income generated from sport hunting fees is beingspent for resources conservation programmes. This exampleillustrates that through local organisations, with institutionaland technical support from conservation organisations, com-munities can manage their natural resources on sustainablebasis. The kind of institutional and technical support couldvary from place to place, but in this case it consists of:a)fostering grassroots organisations; b)linking with donors andsport hunting groups/individuals; c)preparing resources con-
servation plans; and d) assistance with outside monitoring.In the other example, people of Chaprote and Chult val-
leys through their cluster VO forums persuaded the North-ern Areas Forestry Department to hand over the legal man-agement of the local forest into their hands. Since 1972, whenthe local forest came under the NAs Forestry Department,the commercial logging of trees by the forest department con-tractors had reduced the forest size to alarming limits. Therewere cases of plundering and indiscriminate cuttings. The VOsof Chaprote and Chaprote areas recognised that very soonthe entire forest would vanish and therefore decided to ap-proach the Forestry Department. The VOs formed a ForestProtection Committee and following two years of hard worksucceeded in persuading the government to give the localForest Protection Committee legal rights to regulate loggingin the forest. As a consequence the Committee has put a checkpost on the only road leading into and out of the forest. TheCommittee has constituted its own rules and regulations whichare followed for the extraction of wood from the forest.
In addition, more than ten VO and WOs are involved inthe UNDP/GEF-funded Biodiversity Project in the NorthernAreas. The project is being implemented by IUCN. The projectaims to institutionalise sustainable practices of natural re-source management among the local communities. The V/WO communities provide the required social infrastructurewhich is important for the execution of the project. IUCN'swillingness to work these local institutions indicates the VOsstrength and viability.
The above examples amply illustrate that investment inpeople through building local level, broad-based institutionscan lead local initiatives to sustainable utilisation of naturalresources. The process, which eventually leads to this sus-tainable use, requires proper support by an external catalyst,such as AKRSP. These support structures influence changesin laws and policies through an advocacy role that is muchneeded to create a favorable environment for the conserva-tion and sustainable use of natural resources by the commu-nities. The main lesson here is that broad-based village insti-tutions and support organisations can create an enabling en-vironment for evolving simple and complex strategies for theconservation and sustainable use of their natural resources.
References
Banuri, T., Hyden, G.Juma, C. and Rivera, M. 1994. Sustain-able Human Development— From Concept to Operation: AGuide for the Practitioner. United Nations Development Pro-gramme, New York, NY, USA.
Additional References
Khan, S. K. 1995. Institutional Development at the Grassroots
27
JAVED AHMED AND SHOAIB SULTAN KHAN
for Poverty Alleviation. International Development ResearchForum 2, March 1995.
LCAOF. 1993. The View from Airlie: Community-Based Con-servation in Perspective. Liz Claiborne and Art OrtenbergFoundation, 650 Achievements of the Programme, New York,NY, USA
SummariesLa dégradation de l'environnement peut être évitée uniquement si les populations sont capables de protégeret de défendre leur environnement. Toutefois, cela nécessite la responsabilisation des populations etl'amélioration de leur capacité à gérer leurs propres ressources naturelles de manière durable. Dans le norddu Pakistan, le programme Agha Khan pour l'appui aux zones rurales (the Aga Khan Rural Support Programme— AKRSP) a mis en place un réseau de plus de 2000 Organisations Villageoises (OV) depuis 1982, en vued'amener les populations à s'organiser pour une action collective. Le programme a aidé les OV à augmenterleurs compétences et à générer leur propre capital en vue de l'amélioration de leur bien-être économique.L'investissement humain porte maintenant ses fruits et les OV sont devenues des composantes fondamentalespour les programmes d'assistance dans les domaines de la santé, de l'éducation, de la conservation desressources naturelles, du marketing, etc... L'utilisation durable des ressources naturelles à travers laparticipation des communautés justifie l'investissement humain basé sur le modèle de l'AKRSP. L'étude présenteet examine les leçons tirées de l'expérience menée dans le nord du Pakistan.
28
El deterioro ambiental se puede prevenir sólo si las personas están en condiciones de proteger y defender suambiente local. Esto, sin embargo, requiere el empoderamiento de las personas y la mejora de sus habilidadespara manejar sus propios recursos naturales sobre una base de uso sostenible. En Pakistán septentrional, elPrograma de Apoyo Rural Aga Khande (AKRSP) ha creado desde 1982 una red de más de 2000 organizacionescomunitarias con el fin de organizar a las personas para que actúen en forma colectiva. El programa haayudado a que las organizaciones comunitarias mejoren sus capacidades y su propio capital con el fin demejorar a su vez su bienestar económico. La inversión en las personas está ya pagando dividendos y lasorganizaciones comunitarias se han convertido en los componentes básicos a partir de los cuales se realizanprogramas de ayuda en el campo de atención primaria en salud, educación, conservación de recursosnaturales, mercadeo, etc. El uso sostenible de los recursos naturales por medio de la participación comunitariamerece que se invierta en las personas según el modelo del Programa de Apoyo Rural Aga Kande (AKRSP).Este trabajo describe y analiza las lecciones de Pakistán Septentrional.
Sustainable Use and Global IssuesLeif E. Christoffersen1
IUCN has taken a long time to formulate technical guidance on sustainable use of wildlife and other naturalresources. Such a delay is quite surprising since this major issue was so much a part of the ideas and theconcepts which were embraced under the World Conservation Strategy pioneered by IUCN in 1980. At thattime IUCN provided innovative leadership at the global level on the need to move away from natureconservation as mainly a defensive protection mechanism — to nature conservation as a more dynamicmanagement concept which takes into account the economic and social needs and aspirations of local peopleand which works in concert with them.
IUCN should be in a unique position among global institutions to help explain how sustainable use ofwildlife and other natural resources can be pursued in practical terms. There is need for sound scientific andtechnical guidance on how to implement this concept in relation to economic and social developmentobjectives. IUCN is well positioned to make constructive contributions with its large scientific and technicalnetworks and with its diverse membership and field experiences. While there will always be a need for generalenvironmental awareness-raising there is today an even more urgent priority—namely to demonstrate howthe concept of sustainable use can be applied to the different "real life" situations facing local communitiesthroughout the world.
Five years after UNCED, strong views have been expressed by people in both developed and developingcountries that there is an urgent need for methods and tools that incorporate sound scientific and technicaladvice on sustainable use of wildlife and natural resources. Countries need such advice for their participationin global environmental conventions. They need it to participate effectively in projects funded under theGlobal Environment Facility. Furthermore, they need it for the implementation of their own nationalenvironmental action plans and biodiversity strategies.
As the last speaker on this panel I shall focus my remarks on a fewobservations related to some global issues and expectations re-garding sustainable use of wildlife and other natural resources.
In the course of the recent external evaluation of IUCN,during many of our meetings in developing countries the ex-ternal evaluation team noted a very favourable response toIUCN's Sustainable Use Initiative (SUI). Indeed many of thosewe interviewed considered it a very important IUCN contri-bution. This is a programme, they said, which tries to listen tolocal views and perspectives. It makes use of local knowledgeand expertise. It builds on local experiences. Based on thisbroad support, and the many compliments on the bottom-upfocus of this programme, the external evaluation team ex-
pressed considerable surprise that the Sustainable Use Initia-tive was not more directly integrated into the IUCNBiodiversity Programme.
Furthermore, many IUCN members and staff voiced theopinion that the SUI addressed issues that were central toIUCN's polices. There seemed to be a strong opinion amongmany people we met in developing countries that it shouldbecome more strongly rooted in the main core of IUCN's Pro-gramme.
The SUI would seem to have considerable potential forproducing results that could constitute a major IUCN contri-bution to the Biodiversity Convention. But its importance ismuch broader.
12312 Kimbro Street, Alexandria VA 22307, USA
29
LEIF E. CHRISTOFFERSEN
In fact, it is surprising that it has taken IUCN so long toformulate technical guidance on this issue — since it was somuch a part of the ideas and concepts which were embracedunder the World Conservation Strategy which IUCN pioneered16 years ago. At that time IUCN provided innovative leader-ship at the global level on the need to move away from natureconservation as mainly a defensive protection mechanism —to nature conservation as a more dynamic management con-cept which takes into account the economic and social needsand aspirations of local people and which works in concertwith them.
Since then we have had the Brundtland Commission andUNCED and many other political endorsements for the con-cept of sustainable development. But 16 years after the WorldConservation Strategy, we still don't have any technical guid-ance from IUCN on sustainable use of wildlife and other natu-ral resources. Why is this so? Is IUCN not able to provide glo-bal leadership on this key topic? Is it good at planning andpoor on implementation advice? Is it adept at awareness-rais-ing and not effective in giving practical advice?
It is my sense from travelling around the world that manythoughtful people are making extensive efforts to clarify andunderstand the lofty concept of sustainable development inpractical terms so that it can be implemented. Within thisbroad concept of sustainable development one of the mostkey issues relates to sustainable use. Clearly IUCN should bein a unique position among global institutions to help explainhow sustainable use of wildlife and other natural resourcescan be pursued in practical terms. There is need for soundscientific and technical guidance on how to implement thisconcept in relation to economic and social development ob-jectives. IUCN is well positioned to make constructive contri-butions with its large scientific and technical networks andwith its diverse membership and field experiences.
IUCN is clearly at a crossroads if it wants to be taken seri-ously within the global community groping for ways in whichto make practical sense of the concepts of sustainable useand sustainable development. It certainly does have the capa-bility to provide valuable guidance on this topic to the worldcommunity. Does it have the will? If not, then it runs the riskof loosing some of its international relevance.
While there will always be a need for general environ-mental awareness-raising, there is today an even more urgentpriority — namely to demonstrate how the concept of sus-tainable use can be applied to real life situations. People needto understand what it means, before they can be expected toaccept it — and support it. Political support will then followmore easily.
As has been often mentioned, use of wildlife has beenpart of human history since our beginnings. More than a cen-tury ago, in my own country, Norway, many poor people inrural areas who were struggling to survive and to improvetheir critical living conditions, found wildlife use quite a
lifesaver. During a wilderness trip a few years ago, I came acrossdocumentation in an old log cabin in Western Norway whichshowed that a very poor farm family of five persons couldsurvive for almost a year on the products from a bear killednearby its small farmstead. Today millions of people aroundthe world, many living in poverty, make use of wildlife re-sources on a daily basis. They do so to improve their eco-nomic and social conditions. Some practices may confirm withsustainable use concepts. Many would not. How can betterguidance be given by the international scientific and techni-cal community? Who can give it?
The Sustainable Use Initiative provides a very useful op-erational approach to this question. It has very powerful po-tential. It focuses on better information. It focuses on a betterunderstanding of what is happening at local levels around theworld. It focuses on adaptive management.
Sometimes good information is available very early on.What does one do when it is not? There will be situationswhen the magnitude and risks are so high that economic de-cisions have to be postponed. But for a large number of cases,when there is no apparent high risk involved, it will not al-ways be possible to ask for postponement until the informa-tion base has been adequately developed. Here the adaptivemanagement approach seems sensible.
Ecosystem management and species protection will mostoften require more information than is available at any givenpoint in time. The adaptive management approach recognisesthat one can seldom expect to have a perfect starting pointwith all relevant information gathered and examined. It em-phasises two parallel and interconnected issues. First, a seri-ous commitment to undertake a continuous information sys-tem related to the resources in question during implementa-tion. Second, a firm agreement to be willing to adjust the im-plementation of the activities as increasing insights are beingmade available from data and knowledge gained as a result ofthis continuing system of information gathering and associ-ated analysis.
Most of the major decisions related to sustainable devel-opment are being made by people with background in finance,engineering, economics or other social sciences. In the realmof international economic relations, the application of eco-nomic sanctions against a country is sometimes endorsed —but only very rarely. Economic boycotts are very difficult toimplement. They involve immense political complexities. Theyare also very blunt and primitive policy instruments. Oftenthey have many unintended, major side-effects. For these andother reasons economists are generally reluctant to recom-mend economic sanctions.
A similar situation seems to exist for international appli-cation of principles related to sustainable use. Sound ecosys-tem management may sometimes require stop measures. Butthese are crude and primitive interventions. Like economicsanctions, they often have serious unintended side-effects.
30
When these appear, they tend to undermine popular supportand political will to carry on with them. Examples are many—the devastating effects on people in Greenland of the ban onseal skins and seal products. Also, as forcefully underscoredby the Canadian Deputy Prime Minister at the Opening Ses-sion of this Congress, the tragic consequences for indigenouspeople in Canada from the international sanctions on fur trade.
We can do much better than just applying environmen-tal "stop-go" sanctions. We need more dynamic policy inter-ventions in order to be taken seriously in a world where eco-nomic decisions regarding the use of wildlife and natural re-source are being taken continuously without waiting for ouradvice. If we want to be credible to these decision makers, weneed to demonstrate how sound scientific and technical ad-vise on this topic can be brought into play in a credible wayfor economic decision-makers.
At this point I will not enter into the substantive discus-sion on what should go into this scientific and technical ad-vice. Over the next few days many experts will address thisworkshop and you will have an opportunity to listen to theirviews and to discuss this topic. My main point is to say that,from my own international experience, I am convinced thatIUCN is in unique position to provide practical decision-mak-ing tools, beyond the blunt and primitive instruments of "donothing" sanctions, to those responsible for policies and de-
SUSTAINABLE USE AND GLOBAL ISSUES
cisions relating to sustainable development. If IUCN can getits own internal act together on this crucial issue, I believe itsscientific and technical guidance, and its policy advice, will beseriously considered in the economic world and among theinternational development agencies.
Five years after UNCED strong views are being expressedby people in both developed and developing countries aboutthe urgent need for decision-making tools that incorporatesound scientific and technical advice on sustainable use ofwildlife and natural resources. Countries need such advicefor their participation in global environmental conventions.They need it in order to participate effectively in projectsfunded under the Global Environment Facility. Furthermore,they need it for the implementation of their own nationalenvironmental action plans and conservation strategies.
IUCN should be strongly encouraged to move more force-fully into this topic. At this point in time IUCN has a majoropportunity to give guidance on a topic of high interest andrelevance to economic and social decision-making. There isnowawindow of opportunity. Use this wisely. I am convincedthat IUCN can make a major contribution to the internationalcommunity on this topic. It is indeed uniquely positioned to makea real difference on a broad topic of worldwide significance.
SummariesL'UICN a mis du temps à formuler des conseils techniques en ce qui concerne l'utilisation durable des espècessauvages et des autres ressources naturelles. Un tel retard est assez surprenant d'autant plus que cette questiond'importance faisait partie des idées et concepts qu 'englobe la Stratégie Mondiale de Conservation lancée parl'UICN en 1980. A cette époque, l'UICN a joué un rôle novateur de premier plan au niveau mondial, relativementà la nécessité de se départir d'une conservation de la nature consistant essentiellement en un mécanisme deprotection défensive —pour s'orienter vers une conservation de la nature basée sur un concept de gestionplus dynamique qui tient compte des besoins économiques et sociaux, et des aspirations des populationslocales et qui travaille en collaboration avec ces dernières.
Parmi les institutions mondiales, l'UICN devrait être en très bonne position pour aider à expliquer commentl'utilisation globale des espèces sauvages et des autres ressources naturelles peut se faire dans la pratique. Desconseils scientifiques et techniques solides sur la manière de mettre en oeuvre ce concept par rapport auxobjectifs de développement économique et social, sont nécessaires. L'UICN est bien placée pour apporter descontributions constructives grâce à ses importants réseaux scientifiques et techniques, à ses membres d'horizondivers et à ses expériences sur le terrain. Bien qu'il soit toujours nécessaire de poursuivre les activités desensibilisation générale sur l'environnement, il existe aujourd'hui une priorité encore plus grande - à savoir,montrer comment le concept d'utilisation durable peut s'appliquer aux différentes situations"concrètes"auxquelles doivent faire face les communautés locales à travers le monde.
Cinq ans après le CNUED, des personnes originaires aussi bien de pays développés que des pays endéveloppement ont clairement exprimé leur point de vue quant à l'urgente nécessité de disposer d'outils et deméthodes comportant de solides conseils scientifiques et techniques sur l'utilisation durable des espèces sauvageset des ressources naturelles. Les pays ont besoin de tels conseils pour leur participation aux conventionsmondiales sur l'environnement. Ils en ont besoin pour participer effectivement aux projets financés dans lecadre du Fonds pour l'Environnement Mondial — FEM (Global Environnement Facility — GEF). Ils en ontégalement besoin pour la mise en oeuvre de leurs plans d'action environnementale et de leurs stratégies enmatière de conservation de la diversité biologique, au niveau national.
31
LEIF E. CHRISTOFFERSEN
Le ha tomado bastante tiempo a la UICN elaborar directrices técnicas acerca del uso sostenible de la vidasilvestre y de otros recursos naturales. Esta demora resulta más bien sorprendente dado que este temafundamental era parte esencial de las ideas y conceptos que se aceptaron bajo la Estrategia Mundial para laConservación de la que la UICN fue pionera en 1980. En esa época la UICN brindó liderazgo innovador aescala mundial acerca de la necesidad de dejar de lado la conservación de la naturaleza como un simplemecanismo defensivo de protección para pasar a un concepto de manejo más dinámico, que toma en cuentalas necesidades económicas y sociales y las aspiraciones de las personas y que actúa de acuerdo con ellas.
La UICN debería encontrarse en una posición única, entre las instituciones mundiales, para ayudar aexplicar cómo se puede buscar en forma práctica el uso sostenible de la vida silvestre y de otros recursosnaturales. Hace falta una dirección científica y técnica sólida acerca de cómo hacer realidad este conceptoen relación con los objetivos de desarrollo social y económico. La UICN está bien ubicada para contribuir enforma constructiva, ya que dispone de amplias redes científicas y técnicas y de una membresía muydiversificada y de gran experiencia en el terreno. Aunque siempre se necesitará despertar la concienciaambienta lista general, en la actualidad existe una necesidad todavía más apremiante, a saber, demostrarcómo el concepto de uso sostenible se puede aplicar a las diferentes situaciones de la vida real con las que seenfrentan las comunidades de todo el mundo.
Cinco años después de la CNUMAD, hay personas de los países tanto desarrollados como en vías de desarrolloque han expresado sus puntos de vista muy vigorosos en el sentido de que se necesitan urgentemente métodose instrumentos que incorporen principios científicos y técnicos sólidos acerca del uso sostenible de la vidasilvestre y de los recursos naturales. Los países necesitan esta asesoría en el marco de su participación enconvenciones ambientales mundiales, la necesitan para participar en forma eficaz en proyectos financiadosbajo elFondo para el Medio Ambiente Mundial (GEF). Además, la necesitanpara la implementación de suspropios planes nacionales ambientales de acción y de sus estrategias de biodiversidad.
32
Section TwoSustainability in Artisanal Fisheries
Le Rôle du Savoir Traditionnel dans la Gestiondes Pêcheries du Delta Intérieur du Niger au MaliDr. Kassibo BréhimaSummaries
Les Organisations Professionnelles et la Pêche Durableen Afrique de l'OuestDr. Kobla AmegavieSummaries
Pêche Artisanale et Conservation du Littoralen Afrique de l'OuestPierre CampredonSummaries
La Gestion Durable des Pêcheries dans l'Archipel desBijagos et dans le Rio Grande de BubaDomingos de BarrosSummaries
35
44
45
47
49
55
57
73
Le Rôle du Savoir Traditionnel dans laGestion des Pêcheries du Delta Intérieurdu Niger au Mali
Introduction2
Le delta intérieur du Niger est une vaste plaine dépressionnairesituée dans la région de Mopti, au centre du Mali. Cette cu-vette alimentée par le fleuve Niger et ses affluents est tributairede l'hydrographie et de la pluviométrie du bassin versant —situé en Guinée—qui conditionnent le phénomène de la crue.En période d'étale sa superficie peut atteindre jusqu'à30,000km2, en année faste. Le Delta est le siège de trois desprincipales activités du pays qui sont: l'agriculture, l'élevageet la pêche. C'est la principale zone de pêche du Mali, avecune production très fluctuante qui peut avoisiner les 100,000tonnes de frais en période favorable. La pratique de l'élevageet de la riziculture, initiée depuis des siècles par des groupesethniques spécialisés à l'instar des pêcheurs Bozo et Somono,lui a conféré une importance économique certaine sur le plannational. La pêche fait vivre directement, environ 200,000
personnes dans le delta, au nombre desquelles on retrouveplus de 60,000 pêcheurs actifs, répartis au sein de 30,000ménages (Morand et al, 1994). La population totale de larégion était estimée à 760,000 habitants, selon le recensementnational de 1987, la capitale régionale, Mopti renfermant àpeu près le dixième.
Les activités de pêche se déroulent dans des milieux forthétérogènes: fleuve; lac; plaines inondées; mares et chenaux;qui sont soumis à d'importants changements saisonniers; etliés au cycle hydrologique annuel. Ces activités sont pratiquéespar des groupes spécialisés: les Somonos et les Bozos qui endétiennent presque le monopole. On distingue aussi desagriculteurs qui pratiquent occasionnellement les pêchesd'étiage comme activités secondaires saisonnières. Les Bozoset les Somonos sont les principaux gestionnaires traditionnels
1Institut d'Economie Rurale, BP 258, Bamako, Mali
2Pour la rédaction de cet article l'auteur s'est servi de travaux précédants tels que l'article portant sur «expériences et perspec-tives de l'aménagement traditionnel et moderne despêcheries du Mali, le cas des pêcheurs Bozo et Somono du delta central(5ème région); publié par la FAO in Rapport sur les pêches n°445 FPI/R 445, Rome, FAO,pp. 111-119., ainsi que l'ouvrage collectifdu "Programme DCN" publié sous la direction de Jacques Quensière en 1994 et qui renferme 4 de ses articles consacrés à la pêche.
35
Dr.Kassibo Bréhima1
Les pêcheurs du delta intérieur du Niger ont élaboré au fil des siècles, un système de gestion traditionnel despêcheries, caractérisé par une organisation remarquable des activités halieutiques. Ce système a pu garantirla reproduction harmonieuse de la ressources et des groupes socio-professionnels, ainsi que l'articulation desaires de pêche. Reposant sur la maîtrise de l'espace aquatique, il se caractérisait par un droit exclusifd'exploitation de la ressource, concédé au premier arrivant, par la divinité tutélaire des lieux, en vertu d'unpacte sans cesse renouvelé par la vertu du sacrifice. La transmission agnatique de ce droit à l'intérieur deslignages récipiendaires leur en a conféré le monopole, qui a été sanctionné par la coutume. Ce système a subides transformations notoires sous la coupe des différents pouvoirs hégémoniques qui ont subjugué la région,sans pour autant être altéré dans ses fondements. L'organisation de la pêche en devenant l'affaire des Etats,augure d'une confrontation permanente entre ordres ancien et nouveaux, dans une perspectived'appropriation et de gestion de la ressource et des hommes.
Il sera donc question dans cet exposé de la dynamique interactionnelle entre différentes modalitésd'intervention, opérant sur des registres contradictoires en la forme et dans le fond. La situation présente enest le reflet le plus évident, et en constitue la meilleure grille de lecture.
DR. KASSIBO BRÉHIMA
pêcheries du delta intérieur du Niger, depuis des siècles ilsont élaboré un système de gestion et d'aménagement des airesde pêche, basée sur une connaissance empirique remarqua-ble de la ressource et du milieu physique, et acquis un hautdegré de perfectionnement dans la technique de fabricationdes engins de pêche.
Les Bases de l'AmenagementTraditionnel des PecheriesLa Maîtrise de l'Eau
Les fondements de l'aménagement traditionnel des pêche-ries reposent sur la maîtrise de l'eau qui confère des droit degestion et d'exploitation aux maîtres d'eau. Il y a deux catégo-ries de maîtrise qui sont: le ji tigiya et le ba tigiya3, exercéespar des groupes différents, sur des milieux différents et surdes registres différents.
Le ji tigiya ou maîtrise d'eau, se caractérise par un droitexclusif d'exploitation d'une ou plusieurs pêcheries par unlignage. Ce droit est concédé par le génie tutélaire des lieuxinvoqué par le postulant—en l'occurrence l'ancêtre éponymedu lignage, avec lequel il conclut un pacte qui lui garantit l'usu-fruit et non la possession de la ressource. Ce droit est trans-mis à l'intérieur du lignage aux descendants mâles de l'ancê-tre, selon le principe gérontocratique de séniorité. Il s'exercedans les mains de l'aîné social appelé ka, qui renouvelle pé-riodiquement son allégeance au génie loti par la grâce dusacrifice sanglant (sonni). Une fois le pacte scellé il confère àl'usufruitier les droits d'exploitation de la ressource, en vertude la primauté d'installation. Le ji tigiya a donc un fonde-ment religieux, il est d'essence mystico-lignagère (Kassibo,1988), ce qui lui confère un caractère transcendant, avalisépar la coutume. Le ji tigi (maître d'eau) exerce donc une fonctionsacerdotale, son pouvoir revêt un caractère religieux et familial
Caractéristiques du Ji Tigiya
Le ji tigiya se définit par les caractéristiques suivantes:
• c'est un droit exclusif d'exploitation de pêcherie(s);• il appartient à un lignage;• il se dévolue en ligne agnatique selon le principe de séniorité;• il est fractionnable (mare, lac, plaine inondée, chenal,
marigot, bras de fleuve etc.);• il est transférable;• par le canal de l'alliance matrimoniale (leg aux filles du lignage);• comme prix du sang, pour l'indemnisation d'un meurtre
commis par un membre du lignage; et• en compensation des services rendus aux ji tigi;• il peut être concédé gratuitement lors des pêches collec-
tives sans aliéner pour autant les privilèges des lignagesdétenteurs; et
• il peut être concédé temporairement à des tiers étran-gers au lignage moyennant paiement d'une redevancesymbolique appelée manga ji (part du maître), équiva-lent au tiers des captures effectuées.
Les Fonctions du Ji Tigi
Le maître d'eau est un véritable gestionnaire de l'espace aqua-
tique et de son lignage:
• il fixe le calendrier de pêche;• exerce la fonction sacerdotale (sacrifice au génie.). Cette
fonction vise à assurer la protection des pêcheurs, la re-production de la ressource et la réparation des infrac-tions;
• impose les interdits incompatibles avec les pratiques ha-lieutiques;
• inflige des amendes aux contrevenants et accomplit lestransactions;
• assure la mise en défens des plans d'eau en vue d'assu-rer la reproduction et la conservation du stock biologi-que;
• arbitre les conflits;• jouit de prérogatives (meilleur emplacement de pêche,
capture du premier poisson etc.);• a le pouvoir d'organiser des pêches extraordinaires; et• réglemente l'accès à la ressource et concède des droits
d'exploitation temporaires en percevant des redevancessymboliques.
Bref, sa fonction consiste à réglementer avec l'ensemblede ses pairs les pratiques de pêche dans sa sphère d'activité.Le pouvoir symbolique qu'il détient joue le rôle d'impératifcatégorique — au sens kantien du terme-auprès des contre-venants; le châtiment étant d'ordre transcendant (noyade,accident, maladie, etc.) et inévitable en cas de non réparationde l'infraction.
Le Ba Tigiya (maîtrise du fleuve)
Il a un double fondement: religieux et temporel et est princi-
palement détenu; et pour des raisons historiques et politi-
3 En bambara dans le texte, ils signifient respectivement: maîtrise d'eau et maîtrise du fleuve.
36
LE RÔLE DU SAVOIR TRADITIONNEL DANS LA GESTION DES PÊCHERIES DU DELTA INTÉRIEUR DU NIGER AU MALI
ques par les Somonos. Ces derniers, installés par les soinsdes souverains politiques sur les rivages fluviaux, en ont reçula concession.(Gallais, 1967; Roberts, 1981; Jeay, 1980). Leculte de Faro, divinité de l'eau, sert de fondement mythiqueau ba tigiya. (Dieterlen, 1955; Takézawa, 1988). Le ba tigiyase fonde d'une part sur le pacte conclu entre Faro et l'ancê-tre du lignage somono usufruitier, et d'autre part, sur l'auto-rité politique des souverains médiévaux.
Les Caractéristiques du Ba Tigiya
Contrairement au jitigiya, le ba tigiya s'exerce principale-ment sur les portions ou bras de fleuve. Pour des raisons his-toriques (cf. supra), les Somonos sont les exploitants des coursd'eau permanents, notamment le Niger et le Bani. En plus dela pêche ils se livraient à des activités de transports fluviaux etde batellerie au compte de leurs suzerains(Mage, 1868; Ro-berts, op. cité) ainsi qu'à l'agriculture et à l'artisanat. C'estdonc un droit exclusif d'exploitation fluviale (portions defleuve) dévolu à un lignage et qui se transmet suivant lesmêmes modalités que le ji tigiya. Cependant il est soumis àune grande précarité à cause de son caractère temporel etson respect est plutôt garanti par le pouvoir politique.
Les fonctions du ba tigi sont presque similaires à celledu maître d'eau à quelques exceptions près, liées à la spécifi-cité du milieu fluvial. Il offre les sacrifices à Faro, organise etautorise la navigation sur son domaine, assure les opérationsde secours et de sauvetage sur ses eaux et représente le li-gnage à l'extérieur
Evolution du Droit Traditionnel de Pêche
Ainsi durant des siècles l'expérience acquise par les pêcheursdu delta intérieur du Niger a permis la reproduction harmo-nieuse de la ressource et des hommes. Cependant cet espacede production halieutique n'est pas demeuré à l'écart despuissances hégémoniques qui ont successivement étendu leurdomination sur la région. Il s'agit en outre des empires duGhana, du Mali et du Songhay, des royaumes bambara, peulet toucouleur; sans oublier la colonisation française, la der-nière en date avant le recouvrement de la souveraineté natio-nale en 1960. L'intégration des espaces de production halieu-tique dans des sphères de pouvoirs hiérarchiques des socié-tés englobantes, entrainera de profonds changements dansl'organisation juridique de la pêche devenue affaire d'Etats.Nous examinerons les altérations des droits de pêche tradi-
tionnels en fonction des différentes politiques initiées par lesEtats en matière de gestion et d'aménagement des pêche-ries. Mais nous ne nous attarderons que sur celles qui ontiont joué un rôle significatif dans l'évolution des droits tradi-tionnels de pêche. Sous la poussée des allochtones et par lacoercition, les gestionnaires traditionnels des pêcheries vontaliéner une partie de leurs prérogatives, mais continueront àexercer leur quasi-monopole sur les activités de pêche jus-qu'à la fin de la période coloniale.
La Domination Marka
Daget (1956) en décrivant la remarquable organisation socialedes pêcheurs Bozo du delta intérieur, la qualifiait de commu-nauté taisible; jouissant d'une forte autonomie politique.Cette communauté est placée sous l'autorité des aînés (sys-tème gérontocratique). Le ka ou patriarche est l'aîné de lagénération des père du patrilignage, il est ton maa etnyoniyé4; à ce titre, il détient plusieurs prérogatives, tels quele pouvoir de décision, l'organisation du procès de produc-tion, ainsi que l'autorité religieuse et morale. Il gère le patri-moine lignager (foroba) et organise les activités de produc-tion en compagnie de ses pairs. Cependant, sous cette pseudo-autonomie politique, Daget reconnaît l'autorité des souve-rains marka sur la région. La province du Diagana dépendaitdu chef de Dia, appelé Dia manga. Ce dernier va usurper letitre de ton maa dévolu aux ka des patrilignages pour sonusage personnel, ainsi que les droits y afférent: perception detribut en nature (poisson), réservation du produit de certai-nes pêche sous forme de redevances imposées aux pêcheurs,etc. Il leur enlève une partie de leur pouvoir juridique en seréservant l'arbitrage des conflits graves en matière de pêche.
Les Pouvoirs Impériaux
Les grands empires médiévaux du Soudan occidental: Ghana;Mali; Songhay; ont e xercé leur souveraineté nominale sur lesterritoires conquis par l'intermédiaire de souverains vassauxou de leurs représentants résidents. Ils ont instauré un ordremarchand axé sur le commerce fluvial en ce qui concerne leMali et le Songhay. La ville de Djenné vassale de ces empiresjoua un rôle de premier plan dans l'épanouissement du com-merce fluvial dont Tombouctou était l'aboutissement auxportes du désert. Plusieurs auteurs (cf. supra), postulent quel'émergence des Somono en tant que catégorie socioprofes-sionnelle se justifiait par le besoin éprouvé par ces Etats d'as-
4Le ton ou association est un regroupement de personnes suivant des critères d'âge, de sexe, de fonction et de statut. Le nyonié estle représentant de l'ancêtre éponyme du lignage, à ce titre il accomplit le sacrifice au génie qui annonce l'ouverture de la pêchedans son domaine.
37
DR. KASSIBO BRÉHIMA
surer la navigation fluviale, le ravitaillement, le transport destroupes, la traversée des cours d'eau et les activités de pêcheà travers l'existence d'un corps social spécialisé. Roberts (op.cité) à propos des rapports qui liaient les Somonos de Ségouaux souverains bambara parle d'un véritable pacte social basésur des échanges et prestations de services. Gallais (op.cité)explique ainsi la régularité des villages somono situés le longdu Niger et du Bani sur le parcours Djénné-Tombouctou parles exigences de la batellerie: la distance séparant deux villa-ges somono devant correspondre à une journée de voyageen pirogue. Dieterlen (1955) explique à partir du mythecosmogonique de Faro (divinité d'eau), comment les espa-ces halieutiques du delta intérieur ont été intégrés dans lasphère de domination mandingue. De Kaba à Akka, 22 lieuxde cultes dédiés à Faro (les faro tyn) marquent les pointsd'ancrage de la domination impériale mandé sur les eaux. Cequi s'est traduit par le contrôle et la réorganisation des droitsde pêche entre les collectivités riveraines. Ainsi, le paiementde redevances en nature (poisson) aux maîtres mandé ou àleurs représentants (manga) devient une obligation pour lesvassaux Somonos et Bozos.
L'Ordre Théocratique (la Dina)
Le royaume théocratique du Maasina fondé par Cheiku Amaduà la fin du 19 siècle entreprit un véritable travail d'identifica-tion et de délimitation des espaces de production. Les pêche-ries aussi bien que les pâturages et les finages agricoles furentrépertoriés sur l'ensemble du territoire et les droits d'usu-fruit reconnus aux différents usagers. A un quadrillage politi-que, économique et administratif, nouveau, se superposa unnouveau code juridique de légitimation des droits de con-quête qui réglementa l'accès aux aires de production en réaf-firmant la souveraineté temporelle de l'Etat sur l'espace res-source. Malgré les processus de désappropriation/redistribu-tion de certaines pêcheries aux profit d'alliés et de dépen-dants, le principe de gestion lignagère des eaux subsista et lafonction sacerdotale des maîtres d'eau fut épargnée par laDina. Le grand mérite de l'ordre théocratique c'est d'avoirfixé par le biais de la transcription graphique, le droit coutu-mier qui se transforma ainsi en droit positif.
La Colonisation Française (Elle fut la dernière endate avant le recouvrement de la souveraineté nationale)
La principale préoccupation des administrateurs Français dansles années quarante consistait à vouloir améliorer les condi-tions d'hygiène liées à la transformation des produits de pê-che. La création de pêcheries militaires destinées au ravitaille-ment des fonctionnaires africains marquait le début d'un ac-croissement de la production halieutique. La monétarisation
de l'économie favorisée par l'introduction du numéraire (pa-pier monnaie) dans les colonies accéléra l'insertion de la pê-che dans des rapports économiques de type marchand. Dansles années cinquante, la conjonction d'un ensemble de fac-teurs: économique (accroissement de la demande); techno-logique (introduction de nouveaux matériaux de pêche); cli-matique (retour de conditions hydrologiques favorables);politique (instauration de la paix sociale et de la sécurité, etc.) ;aboutira au boom halieutique dans le delta intérieur (cf.Kassibo, 1988 et 1994; Fay, 1994). Sur les plans législatif etréglementaire, l'administration coloniale s'efforcera de recou-rir au droit coutumier en matière de règlement des litiges etde gestion des pêcheries. Elle procédera à la création d'uncorps de moniteurs, chargés d'encadrer les pêcheurs, auquelallait se substituer finalement celui des forestiers. Elle s'inté-ressera de plus en plus à une identification scientifique de lafaune halieutique et à une rationalisation des techniques degestion.
Impacts des Groupes Hégémoniques
Les différentes interventions des Etats dans le domaine de lapêche ont abouti à une restructuration des aires de pêche.L'intégration de ces aires dans des espaces englobants leur aconféré une envergure supra lignage, voire nationale (terri-toires de pêche). Ainsi les règles coutumières de gestion depêcheries lignages ont été étendues à des collectivités plusvastes. Le résultat le plus remarquable accompli par le pou-voir temporel a été la transcription du droit oral en législationécrite, ainsi que l'articulation des aires de pêche qui a aboutià une harmonisation des pratiques coutumières de gestiondes pêcheries: élaboration des calendriers de pêche, tauxuniforme de redevance fixé au tiers des captures, libre circu-lation du poisson à travers les pêcheries, libre accès à la res-source d'autres groupes ethniques en des occasions détermi-nées (pêches collectives d'étiage), mesures de conservationcollectives de la ressource (mises en défens temporaire despêcheries), etc. Malgré ces transformations notoires, les ges-tionnaires coutumiers de l'eau continuèrent à régenter lespratiques de pêche dans le delta intérieur grâce à leur savoirfaire empirique, gage de leur autorité morale et symboliquesur la nature et les hommes. En 1963, trois ans après l'indé-pendance du pays, le régime socialiste de Modibo Kéïta ins-taura officiellement la souveraineté éminente de l'Etat sur laterre et les eaux. Dès lors les fondements de la gestion tradi-tionnelle furent profondément ébranlés par la substitutiond'un droit qui la niait jusque dans son existence. L'applica-tion du droit positif entraîna la multiplication des oppositionset des conflits, de la part des gestionnaires traditionnels, quine voulaient pas renoncer à leurs prérogatives reconnues detous au fil des siècles. Face à ce défi et au constat de l'ineffica-cité de la réglementation officielle, l'état se décida à nationa-
38
LE RÔLE DU SAVOIR TRADITIONNEL DANS LA GESTION DES PÊCHERIES DU DELTA INTÉRIEUR DU NIGER AU MALI
liser la gestion des pêcheries dans le sens du rétablissementd'une plus grande justice sociale et de la modernisation dessystèmes de gestion.
la Legislation Moderne en Matiered'Amenagement des PecheriesEn s'arrogeant l'exclusivité du droit à l'exercice de la pêche5,conditionné à l'octroi du permis de pêche aux usagers, l'Étatmalien mettait ainsi un terme à l'exercice du droit de maî-trise traditionnelle multiséculaire de l'eau. La dépossessiondes détenteurs traditionnels de leur droit séculier, leur enle-vait du même coup toute légitimité en affaiblissant leur auto-rité morale. Le libre accès à l'eau impliquait un nouveau typede gestion des pêcheries. En mettant un terme à l'hégémo-nie ethnico-professionnelle, des Bozos et Somonos, il annon-çait par la même occasion le processus de banalisation et dedésacralisation de l'eau, qui se manifesta par l'intéressementcroissant des collectivités paysannes à la pêche (Marka,Rimaïbé, Bellah et Bambara). Les pêcheurs professionnelsconsidérèrent ces mesures comme une atteinte à leur souve-raineté, le permis devrait plutôt d'après eux, être exigé desagro-pêcheurs au risque de remettre en cause la division so-ciale traditionnelle du travail
L'Application du Droit Positif Moderne
Les pêcheurs professionnels s'opposèrent à l'application dela loi en contestant la domanialité de l'eau, il en résulta denombreux heurts avec l'administration des pêches qui pré-conisa la répression systématique, comme moyen de résolu-tion des conflits. Grosso modo, les conflits peuvent se résu-mer à un conflit de droits (locaux coutumiers et nationaux)car dans la pratique le droit positif n'est jamais parvenu à sup-planter la coutume.6 Au lieu d'une substitution il y a eu unchevauchement de deux droits contradictoires dans leursprincipes et dans leur application, chacun s'exprimant sur sonregistre propre. De plus la loi de 1963 instaure la confusiondans l'esprit de ceux-là même qui sont chargés de son appli-cation: en l'occurrence les agents forestiers, à cause des con-tradictions majeures qu'elle renferme. A titre d'exemple elle
reconnaît un droit d'usage aux populations riveraines dans lagestion de leur terroir, et autorise en même temps les mi-grants à pêcher dans ces mêmes eaux à l'aide de permis depêche, mais ces derniers sont priés de se plier aux coutumeslocales. D'où des conflits interminables entre autochtones etallochtones pour l'accès à la ressource, ainsi qu'à l'intérieurde ces groupes pour le contrôle de la présence migrante,source de perception de la rente par les aînés de lignage. Achaque fois le protagonistes jouent sur des registres différents.Les allochtones vont se référer au principe de la conservationde la ressource pour interdire dans "leurs eaux" l'utilisationd'engins performants tels que la senne et les birijo utilisés parles migrants allochtones. Ces derniers à leur tour invoque-ront le principe de la domanialité qui leur confère le droitd'exploitation des pêcheries, propriété exclusive de l'Etat. Trèssouvent le consensus est établi sur le paiement par lesallochtones d'une taxe informelle qui leur garantit temporai-rement l'accès à la ressource. Les représentants de l'Etat sontintégrés dans ces rapports tributaires (Fay, 1989; Kassibo,1994). En fait la nationalisation de l'eau s'est traduite dans ledelta par une étatisation de la gestion de l'espace qui a eutendance à minorer la gestion traditionnelle, à l'occulter pourmieux la confiner dans les limites de l'informel sinon de l'illé-galité. Les lois et décrets réglementant l'exercice de la pêcheau Mali conservent un caractère franchement répressif.7 Plu-sieurs engins décrétés nocifs tels que l'épervier, les nassesdurankoro, les birijo (petites sennes coulissantes), sont frap-pés d'interdiction, la senne de plage considérée comme en-gin non sélectif donc prédateur, est frappée d'interdiction tem-poraire. Ces décisions émanant des gestionnaires officiels dela pêche ne reposent en fait que sur des considérations parti-sanes. Ces représentants du nouveau pouvoir que les pêcheursont assimilés à leurs prédécesseurs, deviennent un enjeu im-portant dans les nouvelles stratégies de compétition pour lecontrôle de l'accès aux pêcheries. La plupart des décisionsprises ne sont que le résultat de manipulations idéologiquesdes pêcheurs qui n'hésitent point à se servir de la réglemen-tation officielle pour arriver à leur fin. En fait, la gestion étati-que de l'eau repose principalement sur le principe de gestionrationnelle de la ressource, issu de l'idéologiedéveloppementiste des années 60. Il n'existe de ressourcevéritable que biologie, son exploitation doit tendre vers unéquilibre durable. Une bonne gestion doit tendre vers la réali-
5Loi n° 63/7AN-RN du 11 janvier 1963, (art/3).6Takézawa, 1988:148-49, rapporte que le conflit entre les pêcheurs de Diafarabé conduits par leurs ji tigi contre les autoritésadministratives maliennes, en 1963, s'est soldé par l'emprisonnement des premiers au cours duquel plusieurs d'entre eux onttrouvé la mort. Cet événement aurait signé la défaite des maîtres d'eau dans la région et consacré l'émergence de la réglementationofficielle dans la région7A titre d'exemple, les articles 41, 51 58 à 67 de la loi n° 86-44IAN-EM portant code de pêche au Mali traduisent un aspect plusrépressif qu'éducatif, qu'il faudrait tempérer.
39
D R . KASSIBO BRÉHIMA
sation de l'optimum qui est le rendement maximal équilibréou MSY. Dans un tel contexte les pêcheurs sont considéréscomme des prédateurs qui déciment la ressource en lasurexploitant, ou des attardés rivés à des modes de gestionarchaïques qu'il faut rationaliser pour éviter legaspillage(Quensière et al., 1994). L'encadrement apparaîtdans cette logique comme la solution idéale de transfert deconnaissances techniques aux différents usagers. Le pêcheurdevient la cible préférée des "développeurs" attelés à la réali-sation d'objectifs qui le dépassent complètement. Il est vic-time d'une logique qu'il ne comprend pas. Seules comptentl'augmentation du rendement et la maximisation du profit.Tout un dispositif technico-juridico-institutionnel est mis enplace pour "l'encadrer" afin de le mener un jour sur la terrepromise du développement: l'autopromotion. Cependantmalgré sa volonté de se doter d'outils réglementaire et admi-nistratif nécessaires à sa politique de gestion rationnelle etson souci d'établir l'équité dans l'exploitation des ressources,l'Etat ne disposait pas de moyens suffisants pour la satisfac-tion de ses ambitions8. Suite à l'échec de cette politique vo-lontariste et technocratique, il se rend compte de son impuis-sance à maîtriser les différents paramètres liés à la gestiondes pêcheries, il fait enfin appel aux scientifiques pour com-prendre le fonctionnement du système pêche et éclairer lesdécideurs institutionnels. Il décide d'associer les pêcheurs àla gestion de leurs pêcheries en les faisant participer au pro-cessus de prise de décision.
La Gestion Participative des Pêcheries
L'Etat s'est donc orienté vers le dépassement progressif del'approche centralisée et coercitive, pour l'adoption de stra-tégies de concertation active entre les différents partenairesimpliquant la participation effective des co-usagers des pê-cheries à l'optimisation des plan d'eau où ils opèrent. Ceciest une tendance généralement observée dans les pêcheriescontinentales du sahel (Bonzon, 1990).
Elle s'est traduite dans le delta intérieur, par la créationdes instances de gestion participatives appelées comité desurveillance et de gestion de la pêche, comité et conseil depêche. Ces organes sont calqués sur les subdivisions adminis-
tratives à structure verticale qui sont constituées par: le vil-lage, l'arrondissement, le cercle et la région. Au niveau dechaque village riverain, existe un comité de surveillance et degestion de l'eau, composé de quatre membres élus en assem-blée générale. Ses attributions sont laissées à l'initiative ducomité de pêche9, elles consistent en des actions de police etd'organisation pratique des activités de pêche. Le comité depêche fonctionne au niveau de l'arrondissement, tandis quele conseil de pêche correspond à l'échelon supérieur qui estle cercle.
En vue d'assurer une gestion participative des pêcheries,la loi fixant les conditions de gestion de la pêche et de la pis-ciculture reconnaît—en matière des droits d'usage—que lesconditions de leur exercice, seront déterminées par voie ré-glementaire et conventionnelle au niveau régional et local.(Loi n° 86-44/AN-RM du 24 mars 1995). Les organes de ges-tion que nous venons d'évoquer sont l'oeuvre de la conven-tion régionale de Mopti de 1988 qui a vu le jour suite à latenue de conventions locales dans tous les arrondissements.
Les organes dits participatifs n'ont pas répondu à l'at-tente placée en eux10. En effet, huit ans après leur mise enoeuvre la situation n'a pas fondamentalement changé dans ledelta intérieur car le dysfonctionnement du système persisteencore. Il se caractérise par les nombreux conflits,l'inapplicabilité de la réglementation officielle, et la dégrada-tion des conditions de vie des pêcheurs. La gestion des pê-cheries est restée l'affaire des techniciens, et les recomman-dations des scientifiques n'ont pas été prises en compte pourprocéder à une remise en cause des choix établis devant abou-tir à des changements salutaires.
Les Expériences de Gestion Décentraliséedes Pêcheries
Les décennies 70 et 80 ont été particulièrement éprouvantespour les pêcheurs du delta intérieur à cause de la dégrada-tion des conditions climatiques (sécheresse) qui a occasionnéune réduction des aires de pêches traduisant par une baissedes captures, et une concentration des usagers sur les mi-lieux permanents. Le résultat en a été un accroissement im-portant de l'effort de pêche(surexploitation) et une déplétion
8En ce qui concerne l'encadrement, en 1990 il y avait un agent forestier pour 18,553 individus avec un taux de couverture de77,803km par agent dans la région de Mopti. De plus ces agents qui n'avaient pas reçu de formation en halieutique, étaientdépourvus de tout moyen logistique leur permettant d'accomplir les tâches qui leur incombaient, et jusqu'à présent, la situationn'a toujours pas évolué.9Cf. Art/9 de la convention régionale de pêche de janvier 1990, par ailleurs cette convention en ses articles 4, 5 et 6 fixe lacomposition et les attributions de ces différents organes.10Les pêcheurs n'ont pas pu jouer leur véritable rôle à cause de la pesanteur administrative résultant de la concentration despouvoirs de décision aux mains de l'administration (chefs de circonscriptions administratives, techniciens de développement,organismes d'encadrement etc.)
40
LE RÔLE DU SAVOIR TRADITIONNEL DANS LA GESTION DES PÊCHERIES DU DELTA INTÉRIEUR DU NIGER AU MALI
du stock biologique, d'après le constat effectué par les ges-tionnaires institutionnels de la pêche. Au nom de la préserva-tion de la ressource le caractère répressif de la réglementa-tion a été renforcé afin de contraindre les pêcheurs à sauve-garder l'écosystème. L'expertise scientifique a été sollicitéeen 1986 pour l'évaluation du stock et l'étude des facteurs dedysfonctionnement du système. Les résultats de cette étuderéalisée par le "Programme de recherche halieutique dans leDelta central du Niger" (Programme DCN) ont montré queface à la crise, les pêcheurs autant que les poissons ont sudévelopper des stratégies adaptatives efficaces qui leur ontpermis de survivre en surmontant les obstacles. Aux hypo-thèses de surexploitation et de déplétion de la ressource, lesconclusions de l'étude montrent qu'il n'en est rien, autrementon serait déjà dans une phase d'effondrement de la ressource,car le stock d'étiage ne pourrait plus assurer le renouvelle-ment des effectifs. "Au contraire, on observe actuellement,que les captures restent étroitement corrélés au volume desdéversements. Le stock répond donc normalement aux pos-sibilités de renouvellement que le milieu fluvial lui offre. Il estdans sa globalité, déterminé par la crue et non par la pêche."(Quensière et al., 1994). Ces conclusions se sont avérées éton-namment justes, car avec le retour de la crue exceptionnellede 1994, la production halieutique du delta a dépassé en uneannée, le volume des années 50, avec plus de 120,000 tonnesde frais.
La lame de fond qui a emporté le régime du généralMoussa Traoré en mars 1991, a provoqué l'éveil de consciencedu monde rural. Ceci s'est traduit par une contestation vio-lente de l'encadrement officiel notamment, le service des eauxet forêts, les services économiques et financiers.11 A la confé-rence nationale les représentants du monde rural lors d'unesession spéciale qui leur avait été réservée, ont dénoncé avecbeaucoup de véhémence les abus dont ils avaient été victi-mes pendant des décennies, de la part des représentants del'Etat ils ont réclamé une participation active dans la gestionde leurs terroirs. Le nouveau régime qui a succédé à la transi-tion la deuxième République, s'est présenté comme étant enrupture avec les précédents. Il a mis en place un programmede décentralisation devant conduire à une gestion démocra-tique des affaires. Dès lors les conditions étaient réunis pourun changement de la politique institutionnelle de gestion desressources. L'unes des premières recommandations du pro-gramme DCN a été la création d'un programme de suivi desactivités de pêche dans le delta intérieur et d'un système d'in-formation géographique (SIG), afin de prévenir les dysfonc-tionnements éventuel du système pêche. D'autre part, à tra-vers le volet pêche du Programme Pamos/DDR MLI: 91/005PNUD-FAO de développement de la pêche au Mali, initié par
la FAO et la direction nationale des ressources forestières,fauniques et halieutiques (DNRFFH), un programme test degestion décentralisée de pêcheries du delta central a vu lejour. Il s'agissait de transférer aux usagers de l'eau des préro-gatives en matière de gestion et d'exploitation de leur terroir.Ce qui impliquait la non intervention directe de l'administra-tion dans ces zones expérimentales. Un protocole d'accordfut établi entre les services d'encadrement de la pêche(DNRFFH, Opération Pêche Mopti) et la structure régionalede recherche (Programme Ressources Halieutique), relevantdu Centre régional de Recherche Agronomique de la 5èmerégion (CRRA de Mopti). Il définissait les modalités de coopé-ration et d'exécution du programme test de décentralisationdes pêcheries. Les études socio-économiques réalisées par lePRH, ont identifié les caractéristiques essentielles de deuxpêcheries choisies d'après un certain nombre de critères (so-cial, économique, culturel, juridique, historique démographi-que et géographique). Il s'agit du lac Korientzé situé en aval,à une centaine de km à l'est de Mopti; et de la zone du Diakaaval sis au nord de la ville de Mopti, en aval, sur le bras Diaka,particulièrement dynamiques à cause de leur grande produc-tivité, et de la grande concentration saisonnière de pêcheursmigrants et autochtones, sources de nombreux conflits. Unscénario a été mis au point pour définir les modalités d'appli-cation des principes de gestion décentralisée. Ces principesportaient sur les conditions de mobilisation du flux moné-taire généré par les deux zones et concentré dans les mainsdes gestionnaires traditionnels des pêcheries sous forme derente. Ceci pourrait servir à un développement endogènesdes pêcheries si les fonds était mis au service de la collectivitédes exploitants. D'autre part, malgré la profession de foi del'Etat en ce qui concerne la domanialité de l'eau, les droits demaîtrise sont fortement implantés dans les deux zones, il fal-lait réussir à desserrer l'étau des maîtres d'eau pour mettreen place une gestion démocratique des pêcheries. Contraire-ment à l'Etat qui a voulu exclure les gestionnaires tradition-nels de toute responsabilité, le scénario prévoyait leur inté-gration dans un système d'où ils n'étaient jamais sortis, parvoie consensuelle. Les deux scénarios furent présentés lorsde deux forums qui ont regroupés tous les co-utilisateurs del'eau dans les deux zones concernées, notamment les pê-cheurs. Après deux jours d'âpres discussions dans chacunedes zones, ces derniers approuvèrent les scénarios proposésavec de nombreux amendements. Quelques semaines plustard, ils procédèrent à la mise en place des principales instan-ces de gestion que sont les sous-comités et comités de ges-tion décentralisés. Les membres de bureau furent démocrati-quement élus par les délégués provenant de toutes les agglo-mérations de pêche.
11Les incidents de Yanfolila ont provoqué la mort d'un douanier lynché par la foule en colère, dans d'autres endroits du pays desdouaniers des policiers et des agents du service économique ont été agressés. Par les populations rurales.
41
D R . KASSIBO BRÉHIMA
Un an après leur mise en place nous avons pu faire lesconstatations suivantes. L'administration a été exclue de lagestion directe, grâce à la transformation des comités et con-seil de pêche en sous-comités et comités de gestion décen-tralisée, où ne siègent que les pêcheurs. Les zones ayant ac-quis un caractère expérimental, les agents forestiers devaients'abstenir d'y intervenir sauf pour des actions d'arbitrage oude police à l'invitation des responsables des organes de ges-tion. Des comités de suivi regroupant tous les intervenantsinstitutionnels de la pêche furent officiellement créés au ni-veau régional et local (cercle).Leur fonction consistant à four-nir un appui technique aux membres des comités de gestiondécentralisée (formation, alphabétisation, conseils, assistanceetc.), afin de les rendre aptes à accomplir correctement lestâches qui leur ont été dévolues.
Ainsi, ce sont les représentants des pêcheurs eux mê-mes qui viennent chercher les permis de pêche auprès del'administration pour les placer apurés de leurs pairs. Ils s'oc-cupent de l'organisation des activités de pêche (fixation decalendrier, mise en défens des eaux, accès à la ressource, per-ception de taxes, etc.) et font respecter la réglementation.Malgré l'élection démocratique des membres des comités degestion les maître d'eau se sont retrouvés à leur tête, à causede l'influence qu'ils exercent sur les autres pêcheurs. Les mi-grants considérés comme des étrangers ont pu enfin accéderà ces instances. Ils ne sont plus les seuls soumis au paiementdes taxes qui sont prélevés sur tous, même les autochtones,et versés à la caisse pour la réalisation des actions initiativesde développement endogène des pêcheries.
Vers une Utilisation Durable desRessources Halieutiques
Les Facteurs Institutionnels
La mise en application du programme test de décentralisa-tion des pêcheries du delta intérieur a suscité bien de remousen 5ème région, surtout de la part des gestionnaires institu-tionnels qui ont vu se rétrécir leur domaine d'intervention.Le principal argument invoqué par certains hauts responsa-bles était la non possibilité d'application des scénarios, dansle cadre de la législation existante qui ne reconnaît pas auxcollectivité la propriété de la ressource, ni le droit de perce-voir de taxes. C'était oublier que les scénarios prenait encompte le processus de décentralisation en cours, ainsi quele plan à long terme du ministère du développement rural etde l'environnement (MDRE) qui préconise une restructura-tion complète des services d'intervention du monde rural avecune redéfinissions des tâches assignées aux différents dépar-tements. La note de présentation des projets de lois relativesà la gestion des ressources forestières, de la faune sauvage etde son habitat, de la pêche et de la pisciculture émanant du
cabinet du MDRE, justifie l'élaboration d'une nouvelle régle-mentation par "la mainmise totale de l'Etat sur la gestion detoutes les ressources forestières, fauniques et piscicoles illus-trée par les textes qui stipulent que l'Etat est le meilleur jugede la façon d'utiliser toutes les ressources." Il s'est donc ar-rogé des pouvoirs exorbitants de police pour exercer son con-trôle par le canal du service forestier qui est essentiellementrépressif. Cet état de fait n'a pu assurer la protection et lagestion rationnelle des ressources naturelles et a amené lespopulations rurales à l'exploitation frauduleuse des ressour-ces naturelles , constate toujours la note. D'autre part la toin'est comprise ni par les populations analphabètes, ni par lesagents forestiers et le manque de moyens matériel et humainne permet pas une application correcte, telle que conçueactuellement. D'où l'échec de l'orientation répressive don-née à la législation et qui implique la relecture des textes fo-restiers.
La nouvelles loi vise un certain nombre d'objectifs telsque: la responsabilisation des populations sur la gestion dé-centralisée de toutes les ressources naturelles renouvelables,l'élargissement des droits d'usage, l'assouplissement du ré-gime de police, l'adaptation des lois au nouveau contextesocio-politique de l'après-mars 91 et la revalorisation del'image du forestier.
D'où l'application d'un certain nombre de principes debase proposés par la nouvelle législation qui concernent:
• la garantie e la propriété privée, collective, communau-taire ou étatique sur les ressources selon les cas;
• la simplification des procédures administratives;• la promotion d'organisations socioprofessionnelles for-
tes pour défendre leurs intérêts;• la gestion concertée de la ressource au détriment de la
répression; et• la reconnaissance des conventions locales et régionales
sur l'exploitation des ressources naturelles.
Telles sont résumés en gros les principales orientationsde l'Etat malien en matière d'utilisation durable des ressour-ces naturelles renouvelables.
La loi n° 95-032 du 20 mars 1995, fixant les conditions degestion de la pêche et de la pisciculture fixe en son article1er, les conditions générales de conservation, de protection,de mise en valeur et d'exploitation des ressources halieuti-ques et piscicoles du domaine piscicole qui est réparti actuel-lement entre l'Etat, les collectivités territoriales décentraliséeet les particuliers qui sont tenus de prendre des mesures deprotection des ressources halieutiques et piscicoles. Les col-lectivités territoriales décentralisées peuvent concéder à l'ins-tar de l'Etat l'exercice du droit de pêche dans des conditionsqui seront déterminées par décret pris en conseil de minis-tres (chap.2, art.20)
L'application effective de cette loi rend possible les scé-
42
LE RÔLE DU SAVOIR TRADITIONNEL DANS LA GESTION DES PÊCHERIES DU DELTA INTÉRIEUR DU NIGER AU MALI
narios de gestion décentralisée des pêcheries du delta inté-rieur. Ce mode de gestion devrait s'intégrer bientôt dans lagestion communale des ressources naturelles. Dans le Diakaaval, 3 pêcheries ont fusionné pour donner naissance à uneunité de gestion d'eau, mais elles sont situés sur trois com-munes différentes. D'où l'interrogation suivante au sujet dudécoupage territorial qui devra délimiter le patrimoine com-munal et les modalités d'accès à la ressource. Les collectivitésde pêcheurs ne devraient pas en faire les frais et leur expé-rience devrait être mise à profit pour une utilisation durabledes ressources:
• Sur le plan économique les ressources financières quiseront générées pourrait être réparties à différents ni-veaux' pour servir à réaliser des aménagements durables;
• Sur le plan de la recherche, le système de suivi a été éten-due aux deux zones tests, il fournira des informationsaux différents utilisateurs sur, l'état de la ressource, l'ef-fort de pêche l'occupation humaine, les conflits de pê-che etc. En retour il pourrait recevoir des pêcheurs desinformation sur l'état général des pêcheries et les niveauxd'exploitation de la ressource et, ensemble, des mesuresde protection pourraient être prises (contingentementdes pêcheurs, sélection des engins, constitution de ré-serves permanentes etc.) pour le renouvellement correctdu stock.
La Gestion Environnementale des TerroirsAquatiques
L'utilisation durable des ressources naturelles renouvelablesest conditionnée par une gestion environnementale intégréedes terroirs aquatiques. L'écosystème aquatique est forméd'un ensemble d'éléments interdépendants que sont l'envi-ronnement physique, et humain, le climat, la végétation. Parexemple une mauvaise pluviométrie dans le bassin versantdu Niger occasionnera une mauvaise crue dans le delta, quisera synonyme de baisse de capture donc de détériorationdes conditions de vie des pêcheurs. Par conséquent la défo-restation du bassin versant intéresse autant les pêcheurs ma-liens que les autorités guinéennes. De plus dans le delta inté-rieur la production s'est effectuée autour de la trilogie: eau;herbe terre qui a donné naissance aux trois activités primai-res la pêche; l'élevage et la riziculture. Il faut donc assurer unpartage équitable de l'eau entre les différents usagers. Seulun développement intégré sera à même de favoriser ladurabilité des systèmes de production en jouant sur leur com-plémentarité et la multifonctionnalité des espaces ressources.L'histoire de la gestion institutionnelle des pêcheries du deltaintérieur a été une suite de malentendu entre les co-usagersde la pêche. Sous la pression des masses rurales l'Etat a dû serésoudre à opérer des révisions déchirantes qui n'ont pas
encore été acceptées de tous, d'où la nécessité de promou-voir dans le cadre de la décentralisation, la gestion écologi-que pour une utilisation durable des ressources naturellesrenouvelables.
References
Bonzon, A. 1990. Eléments pour l'Analyse des InstrumentsInstitutionnels et Juridiques de l'Aménagement des Pêche-ries Sahéliennes. Séminaire sur les systèmes d'aménagementtraditionnels et modernes des pêches dans la zone sahélienne.Document de travail, inédit.
Daget, J. 1956. La Pêche à Diafarabé. Etudes Monographiques.Bull.IFAN, série B, XVIII(12). P.97.
Dieterlen, G. 1955. Mythe et Organisation Sociale au SomudanFrançais. Journal de la Société des Africanistes, XII: 149-155.
Fay, C. 1989. Sacrifice, Prix du Sang ,"Eau du Maître", Fonda-tion des Territoires de Pêche dans le Delta Central du Niger(Mali), 1920-1980. Cab.Sc.Hum., 25(1-2),159-176.
Gallais, J. 1967. Le Delta Intérieur du Niger, Etudes de Géo-graphie Régionale. Mém.IFAN 78.Dakar-Paris. Larose, 2vol,P.621.
Jeay, A.M. 1986. Maîtrise du Fleuve, in Actes du IIIème Con-grès des Sociétés Savantes, Poitiers; Paris. C.T.H.S.,303-313.
Kassibo, B. 1988. La Dynamique de la Pêche dans le DeltaIntérieur du Fleuve Niger (Mali). In: Kawada,J. (Ed), Boucle du Niger,approches multidisciplinaires. Tokyo, ILCAA; voLl, 167-187.
Mage, E. 1868. Voyage au Soudan Occidental (1863-1866).Paris, Hachette. P.693. Réédition abrégée 1980, Paris, Karthala.P.308.
Morand et al. 1994 La pêche dans le Delta Central Niger: Ap-proche pluridisciplinaire d'un systeme de production halieu-tique, Jacques Quensière, éditeur scientifique. Paris (1994):Editions de l'ORSTOM, editions Karthala et IR- Institut d'Eco-nomie Rurale, 2 Volumes.
Quensière, J, et al. 1994 Représentations des Pêches et Mo-dèles de Gestion. In: Quensière, J. (Ed), La pêche dans leDelta Central du Niger. Paris, Karthala-Orstom, vol.1. P.495.
Roberts, R. 1981. Fishing for the State,the Somono and thePolitical Economy of the Middle Valley of Niger. In: Grumney,D., et Stewart. (Eds), Mode of Production in Africa: The Pre-colonial Area. Londres, Sage.
43
D R . KASSIBO BRÉHIMA
Takezawa, S. 1988. Le Maître des Eaux et l'Islam: ChangementsSociaux et Changements Religieux chez les Tié du Niger. In:Kawada. (Ed.), Boucle du Niger, ApprochesMultidisciplinaires. ILCAA, vol.l, 113-166.
SummariesThe Niger River Delta fishermen in Mali have, over the centuries, developed a form of traditional fisheriesmanagement characterized by an impressive organization of their activities. Thissystem was able to guaranteethe harmonious regeneration of resources, continuity in the organization of socio-professional groups, andthemaintenanceofinter-linkagesbetwemfishingareas.Basedonmasteryofthewaters,themaincharacteristicof the system was the exclusive right of exploitation of the resource granted on a "first come, first serve" basisto the first fisherman (and his descendants) by the protective divinity of the area, through a pact renewedcontinually through sacrifice. The paternal transmission of this right within each lineage bestowed a monopolyover use, ratified by custom. The system went through important changes under the control of various externalforces that conquered the region, without profound transformations in the basic foundations. Since fisheriesorganization became the business of the overarching State, there have been constant confrontations betweenthe old and new orders in order to control and manage the communities and the resources.
The paper therefore examines the dynamic interactions among the various modes of intervention on thefisheries, operating on contradictory assumptions both inform and content. An analysis of the current situationoffers an opportunity to identify key, representative issues.
Los pescadores del Delta del río Níger en Malí han desarrollado, a lo largo de los siglos, una forma de manejode la pesca tradicional caracterizado por una impresionante organización de sus actividades. Este sistemafue capaz de garantizar una armoniosa regeneración de recursos, continuidad en la organización de grupossocio-profesionales y el mantenimiento de vinculaciones entre las zonas de pesca. Con base en el dominio delas aguas, la principal característica del sistema fue el exclusivo derecho de explotación del recurso concedido,con arreglo al principio «primero en llegar, primero en servir», al primer pescador (y a sus descendientes)por la divinidad protectora de la zona, mediante un pacto renovado continuamente a través del sacrificio.La transmisión paterna de este derecho dentro de cada linaje otorgó un monopolio sobre el uso, ratificadopor la costumbre. El sistema sufrió importantes cambios bajo el control de diversas fuerzas extemas queconquistaron la región, sin que se dieran transformaciones profundas en lo fundamental. Como laorganización pesquera llegó a ser el negocio del Estado, ha habido constantes confrontaciones entre losviejos y los nuevos mandatos para controlar y manejar las comunidades y los recursos.
El trabajo, por consiguiente, contempla las dinámicas interacciones entre las diversas modalidades deintervención sobre la pesca, que funcionan sobre supuestos contradictorios tanto en la forma como en elcontenido. El análisis de la situación actual ofrece la oportunidad de identificar los problemas representativosmás importantes.
44
Les Organisations Professionnelles et SaPêche Durable en Afrique de l'Ouest
IntroductionLa stratégie de développement des pêches adoptée par lesEtats en Afrique de l'Ouest dans les années 60 et 70, basée surla philosophie selon laquelle l'industrialisation de la pêcheest le meilleur moyen d'accélérer le développement s'est avé-rée comme l'un des facteurs ayant entraîné la surexploitationet la gestion anarchique des ressources halieutiques.
Cette politique a marginalisé des millions de femmes etd'hommes qui vivent de la pêche artisanale. Cette populationmarginalisée contribue à la production domestique, assuredes revenus et des emplois aux familles.
Il est révolu le temps où l'on disait que les ressourcesétaient abondantes en Afrique de l'Ouest. Le constat est ameraujourd'hui car bon nombre d'entreprises se sont retirées dela zone où se sont relocalisées dans les pays où les ressourcesrestent relativement abondantes.
Face à la baisse des rendements, à l'exportation des pro-duits sur des marchés plus rémunérateurs et à l'augmenta-tion de la demande résultant d'une démographie galopante,de nouveaux concepts sont apparus. Il s'agit d'exploitationrationnelle et plus récemment de la gestion durable des res-
1Initiatives Développement Pêche, BP 12528, Lome, Togo
45
Dr. Kobla Amegavie1
Il est révolu le temps où l'on disait que les ressources halieutiques étaient illimitées. Leur exploitation effrénéea perturbé l'état des stocks et a contribué à leur déséquilibre. Certains stocks sont pleinement exploités ousurexploités ou ont disparu. On en a pris conscience et cet état de choses a induit un changement decomportement.
De nouveaux concepts sont apparus: gestion rationnelle des ressources, mesures de protection et plusrécemment gestion durable des ressources. Ces nouveaux concepts prouvent que, la stratégie de développementqui avait été adoptée par les Etats de l'Afrique de l'Ouest dans les années 60 et 70, basée sur la philosophieselon laquelle l'industrialisation était le passage obligé en vue d'accélérer le développement des pêches, alargement contribué à la réduction des stocks. Elle a occasionné une vive compétition entre pêche industrielleet pêche artisanale. Aujourd'hui certaines industries ont fait faillite ou se sont délocalisées toujours à larecherche du profit immédiat.
La pêche artisanale pourtant marginalisée, est toujours présente face à ses obligations. Elle contribue àl'approvisionnement en poissons des populations, fournit des emplois et assure des revenus pour les pêcheurset leur famille. La production est en général du ressort des hommes. Les femmes jouent un rôle importantdans l'avant-capture et beaucoup plus dans l'après-capture car elles assurent la transformation et lacommercialisation.
Face à la triple contrainte de la réduction des stocks, de la dégradation de l'environnement marin et de lapression démographique, comment réagissent les communautés de pêche?
Elles ont pris conscience et s'organisent en conséquence pour préserver les ressources pour demain. Cetteprise de conscience est certes limitée dans l'espace.
La présente communication évoque quelques unes des initiatives prises dans quelques Etats en vue d'unegestion durable des ressources.
DR. KOBIA AMEGAVIE
ources, ce qui a supposé une prise de conscience et un chan-gement de comportement.Certains Etats ont crée des départements pour s'occuper desproblèmes de la "Révolution Bleue" car ils ont pris consciencedes bénéfices qu'ils pouvaient en tirer.
Dans un souci de protection des ressources, ils ont pris desmesures sans une connaissance suffisante de l'état des stocks.
Les organisations professionnelles ont longtemps assistéimpuissantes à la dégradation de leurs conditions de vie dueà la féroce compétition entre pêche industrielle et pêche arti-sanale. L'acuité du problème, amène certaines à une réelleprise de conscience et l'on en voit naître qui veulent partici-per en tant qu'acteurs à la gestion durable des ressources.Elles ne sont pas certes nombreuses a avoir pris consciencemais les quelques initiatives qu'elles ont prises méritent d'ali-menter le débat sur la durabilité des ressources pour demain.
Contexte GénéralL'Afrique de l'Ouest compte 16 Etats dont 13 Etats côtiers et3 Etats sans littoral. C'est un vaste ensemble dont la popula-tion est estimée à plus de 200 millions d'habitants.
Les Etats côtiers disposent d'environ 10 000km de côteet ont une zone économique exclusive de l'ordre 2,3 millionsde km2.
Les captures réalisées en 1994 sont de l'ordre de 1,18millions de tonnes dont 70% proviennent de la pêche artisa-nale. La majorité des captures est composée de petits pélagi-ques 58%. Il s'agit essentiellement des sardines, de sardinelles,d'ethmaloses et d'anchois. Les poissons demérsaux représen-tent 20%; les céphalopodes 8%, les crustacés 2%.
Les moyens de production dans la région sont assez sem-blables d'un pays à un autre. Ce sont des filets maillants, dessennes tournantes et de rivage. Les pirogues sont monoxylesou en planches motorisées ou non. Le taux de motorisationvarie selon les pays mais on constate qu'il est en progressioncar les pêcheurs partent de plus en plus loin à la recherchedu poisson.
La consommation des produits de la mer est estimée à9,3kg pour l'ensemble de la région, cependant avec des dis-parités selon les pays. Au Sénégal, on consomme 27,5kg/hab/an ; au Ghana 23,3; au Libéria 3,6; au Togo 10,5.
Conditions Exigées pour uneGestion Durable des Ressources
La gestion durable des ressources halieutiques implique unpartenariat entre toutes les parties qui y accèdent ou qui l'ex-ploitent. Dans le secteur pêche les partenaires identifiés sont:l'Etat, la Recherche Scientifique et les Utilisateurs.
En Afrique de l'Ouest, les eaux font partie du patrimoine
national et l'Etat a juridiction sur elles jusqu'à la limite des200 milles de la Zone d'Exploitation Exclusive (ZEE) L'Etatgère, protège et surveille les eaux. L'accès aux ressources estdonc réglementé par l'octroi de licences de pêche ou d'auto-risation. Mais il faut reconnaître que le contrôle des eaux etdes ressources est difficile car les moyens de surveillance dis-ponibles sont faibles ou inexistants à l'exception de quelquesEtats où les ressources sont abondantes (Sénégal, Mauritaniepar exemple). Tous les Etats sont dotés de textesréglementants l'accès aux ressources. Ils ont, dans leur es-sence, un souci de protection et portent sur:
• la délimitation d'une zone pour la pêche artisanale (engénéral la frange côtière comprise entre 2 et 7 milles);
• le maillage; et• l'effort de pêche.
On observe que la plupart des Etats disposent d'un Cen-tre de Recherches. On peut citer:
• le Centre National de Recherches Océanographiques etde la Pêche CNROP de Mauritanie;
• le Centre de Recherches Océanographiques de Dakar-Thiaroye (CRODT) du Sénégal;
• Le Nigerian Institute of Oceanography and MarineResearch (NIOMR) du Nigéria;
• Le Fisheries Research Unit (FRU) du Ghana; et• Le Centre de Recherches Océanographiques (CRO) de
Côte d'Ivoire, etc.
Ces différents centres ont bénéficié de l'assistance exté-rieure (FAO, NORAD, ORSTOM etc) pour exécuter des pro-grammes de recherche. Ils disposent des connaissances surcertains stocks qui ont un intérêt économique. Ils continuentde jouer leur rôle mais avec des moyens limités en hommes,en matériel et en finances. Ils travaillent pour la plupart enautarcie, mais se retrouvent dans le cadre de concertation créepar la FAO pour la région. Le Comité des Pêches pour l'Atlan-tique Centre Est (COPACE) est le cadre où se retrouvent leschercheurs. Il dispose de deux (2) groupes de travail l'un surles statistiques de pêche, et l'autre sur l'évaluation des stocks.
La Commission sous Régionale des pêches qui regroupele Cap-Vert, la Gambie, la Guinée-Bissau, la Mauritanie et leSénégal, constitue une base de coopération dans le domainede la gestion et du développement pour ces pays caractériséspar une interdépendance géographique et biologique des stocks.
Dans leur ensemble, les connaissances sur les ressour-ces ne sont pas suffisantes pour aider à une gestion ration-nelle donc durable.
Les utilisateurs qu'ils soient de la pêche industrielle ouartisanale, n'ont qu'un seul souci, prélever autant se faire quese peut le maximum de la ressource. On observe des migra-tions de deux nationalités qui ont un savoir-faire et une maî-
46
LES ORGANISATIONS PROFESSIONNELLES ET LA PÊCHE DURABLE EN AFRIQUE DE L'OUEST
trise des techniques de la mer. Il s'agit des Sénégalais au Nordet des Ghanéens au Sud. Ils ont des connaissances empiri-ques sur les stocks et n'hésitent pas à traverser les frontièrespour s'installer dans les pays voisins.
Pour gérer les ressources, il devrait exister un cadre deconcertation qui devrait regrouper les utilisateurs, les cher-cheurs et l'Etat. Malheureusement ce cadre tripartite n'existepas. Les utilisateurs sont exclus des concertations entre l'Etatet la Recherche Scientifique. La gestion durable des ressour-ces est problématique.
Les OrganisationsProfessionnelles et la PêcheDurable
Dans le secteur pêche, le concept genre est très développé eton observe une division nette du travail. Les activités de cap-ture sont du ressort des hommes tandis que les femmes s'oc-cupent de la transformation et de la commercialisation.
La pêche peut être individuelle ou collective. Elle peutêtre de subsistance ou à caractère économique générateurde revenus.
Les acteurs s'organisent à leur manière pour exploiterles ressources et valoriser les produits de pêche.
En Afrique de l'Ouest, il existe divers groupements, as-sociations ou coopératives. On peut citer le Collectif Nationaldes Pêcheurs du Sénégal (CNPS). Mais le mouvement coopé-ratif et le monde de pêche ont leurs limites.
En effet, le monde pêcheur est dans sa grande majoritéillettré et conservateur. Il possède des connaissances empiri-ques sur les ressources et dénient le droit aux chercheurs deposséder toute la vérité sur l'état des stocks. Ce monde a uneattitude peu responsable devant l'état des ressources. Le soucimajeur est de tirer davantage de la ressource ce qui l'amène àutiliser des engins peu sélectifs et à ignorer la réglementationsur les maillages. Cependant, il existe une constante que cemonde perçoit: la baisse des rendements, des captures d'unefaçon générale. Certains en ont pris conscience. Les cas duCollectif National des Pêcheurs du Sénégal (CNPS) des pê-cheurs de la lagune Aby sont édifiants.
Les pêcheurs de Kayar (Sénégal) ont observé la chuterégulière des prix du pageot (Pagellus spp.) au débarquement.
SummariesThe days of viewing the fisheries resources as unlimited are over. Uncontrolled exploitation bas disturbed thestate of stocks and contributed to important imbalances. Some stocks are ftdly exploited, overexploited oreven completely depleted. Growing awareness of this state of affairs bas led to changes in behaviour.
New concepts bave appeared such as: improved resource management; emphasising innovativeforms ofuse and protection; and most recently, sustainable management measures. The adoption of these new concepts
Cette baisse ne rémunère en rien tous leurs efforts. Ils ontdécidé de ne pêcher que deux (2) caisses de 13 kgs de pa-geots par jour et par sortie. Les pêcheurs de la petite côte auSénégal, ont également décidé de réduire le nombre de sor-tie des sennes tournantes et 2 à 1 sortie par jour afin de régu-ler le marché. Les prix aux producteurs sont effectivementremontés.
Les pêcheurs à la grande senne de rivage de la LaguneAby en Côte d'Ivoire ont décidé, face à la chute des rende-ments, d'interdire l'utilisation de ladite senne pendant 2 anset ont demandé au CRO d'Abidjan de les aider à aménager lesressources sur la Lagune Aby.
Quelles que soient les motivations qui ont animé les pê-cheurs du Sénégal ou de la Lagune Aby, il y a là un réel soucide gestion durable des ressources.
Dans l'après-capture, l'introduction de fours performantséconomes en énergie tel que le four chorkor, procède de lamême idée. Accroître la disponibilité des produits de pêchedans l'espace et le temps en disposant de produits de qualitéqui se conservent mieux et plus longtemps permet de baisserla pression sur les stocks.
Dans le secteur lagunaire, la technique de "l'acadja" (enRépublique du Bénin) est une méthode d'élevage qui à termeest une gestion rationnelle des ressources.
"L'acadja" est un parc planté de branchages qui constitueun refuge pour les poissons qui y croissent en toutetranquillité. Toute pêche est interdite pendant 6 mois. Lapopulation peut croître à son rythme, émigrer avant la pêchequi ne capture que les sujets matures.
Conclusion
La gestion durable des ressources suppose un partenariatentre les acteurs mais également des hommes responsablesmoins avides du résultat immédiat sans un souci de préserva-tion pour la génération de demain. En Afrique de l'Ouest, leconcept de durabilité des ressources halieutiques ou d'autressecteurs, fait son chemin. Mais le concept n'est pas encorebien perçue. Il faudra s'armer de patience afin que tous lecomprenne.
47
DR. KOBLA AMEGAVIE
have proven that the development strategy which had been adopted by West African States in the 1960s and1970s, based on the approach that industrialisation was the only way to accelerate fisheries development,contributed significantly to the depletion of stocks. This led to keen competition among large-scale, industrialand small-scale, artisanal fishing. Some companies have gone bankrupt and others are moving activitieselsewhere in search of immediate profit.
Although marginalised, small-scale fishing activities remain important to the region. The artisanal sectorcontributes to fish supply for the general population, provides employment and ensures the incomes of thefishermen and their families. Generally, production is carried out by men. However, women play a majorrole in the preparations for fishing and, most important, in handling the processing and marketing of thecatch.
The question is: how do the fishing communities react in the face of the triple impact of stock depletion,overall degradation of the marine environment and increasing human population pressures?
They are aware of the situation and are therefore organising in order to preserve thefisheriesfor the future.However, the level of consciousness certainly has a limited distribution.
The paper presents some initiatives taken in a few countries towards sustainable management of theseresources.
48
Han pasado ya los días en que los recursos de pesca se consideraban ilimitados. La explotación incontroladaha distorsionado la situación de las reservas marinas y ha contribuido a importantes desequilibrios. Algunasde estas reservas están totalmente explotadas, sobre explotadas o incluso completamente agotadas. Elconocimiento creciente de esta situación ha conducido a cambios de conducta.
Han aparecido nuevos conceptos, tales como el manejo mejorado de los recursos, énfasis en formasrenovadas de uso y protección y - más recientemente - medidas de manejo sostenible. Mediante la adopciónde estos nuevos conceptos se ha probado que la estrategia de desarrollo adoptada por los estados de Africaoccidental en las décadas de 1960 y 1970 con base en el principio de que la industrialización era el únicocamino para acelerar el desarrollo de la pesca, contribuyó significativamente al agotamiento de las reservasmarinas. Esto condujo a una aguda competencia entre la pesca industrial, de gran escala, y la artesanal, depequeña escala. Algunas compañías han caído en la bancarrota y otras están actuando en otros lugares enbusca de beneficios inmediatos.
Aunque marginadas, las actividades pesqueras de pequeña escala siguen siendo importantes para la región.El sector artesanal contribuye a surtir de pescado a la población en general, suministra empleos y garantizalos ingresos de los pescadores y de sus familias. Por lo general, la producción la llevan a cabo los hombres.Sin embargo, las mujeres desempeñan un papel fundamental en los preparativos de la pesca y, lo que es másimportante aún, en el manejo del procesamiento y mercadeo de la pesca.
El asunto es el siguiente: ¿cómo reaccionan las comunidades pesqueras ante el triple impacto delagotamiento de las reservas, de la degradación completa del medio ambiente marino y de las crecientespresiones de la población humana?
Ellos son conscientes de la situación y, por tanto, se están organizando para preservar la pesca con mirasal futuro. No obstante, el nivel de concienciación del problema es, ciertamente, limitado.
Este trabajo presenta algunas iniciativas que se han tomado en unos cuantos países relativas al manejosostenible de estos recursos.
Pêche Artisanale et Conservation duLittoral en Afrique de l'Ouest
Introduction
En Afrique comme ailleurs les pêcheurs artisanaux représen-tent une des principales catégories d'utilisateurs de l'espacelittoral. Bien que certaines ethnics de la côte ouest-africainepossèdent des traditions anciennes en matière de techniquesde pêche, d'embarcations ou de migrations la pêche artisa-nale était jusqu'à une époque récense essentiellement uneactivité saisonnière, de subsistence et de proximité géogra-phique. Depuis une vingtaine d'annees des transformationsprofondes vent intervenues notamment en relation avec lagénéralisation des moteurs hors-bord ainsi qu'une utilisationplus large du froid qui ont entraîné une plus grande maîtrisede l'espace et du temps. Il est done interessant aujourd'huide chercher à mieux comprendre les relations entre la pêcheartisanale et les ressources de la zone côtière entre la Mauri-tanie et la Guinée-Bissau et d'analyser l'impact de quelquesunes des initiatives en cours visant à enc ourager une utilisation durable de ces res sources.
Description du Littoral
Les eaux côtières vent influencées par l'existence du courantfroid des Canaries et la presénce d'un upwelling permanent,notamment en Mauritanie, à l'origine d'une importante pro-duction planctonique, ainsi que par les eaux guinéennes pluschaudes qui accompagnent le front intertropical de conver-gence jusqu'au niveau du Cap Blanc. La presénce successivede ces masses d'eau explique la rencontre au niveau de laMauritanie d'espèces appartenant à des aires bio geo graphi-ques distinctes aussi bien au niveau de la végétation que chezles poissons, les cétacés ou les oiseaux.
Le Nord du littoral océanique mauritanien est constituéde côtes à falaises où vit encore la plus importante colonie dePhoques moines connue. Au large du Cap Blanc et jusqu'auCap Timiris s'étend le Banc d'Arguin ou la houle vient briseret à l'intérieur duquel on remarque une vaste zone de hautsfonds abrités tapissés d'herbiers aquatiques à Zostera etCymodocea. La presénce d'une quinzaine d'îes permet à des
1Secretaire Executif, Fondation Internationale du Banc d'Arguin, s/c Station Biologique de la Tour du Valet, Le Sambuc, 13200Arles, France; e-mail: [email protected]
49
Pierre Campredon1
L'influence exercée par la pêche artisanale sur l'évolution de la zone côtière et de ses ressources s'estconsidérablement accrue depuis une vingtaine d'années, l'utilisation du moteur et du froid permettant demieux maîtriser l'espace et le temps. A une époque où l'on comprend mieux le rôle stratégique des zonescôtières vis à vis de la conservation et du développement dans des pays tels que la Mauritanie, le Sénégal, laGambie et la Guinée Bissau il paraît nécessaire d'évaluer la nature et l'intensité de l'impact exercé par lapêche artisanale. On remarque que les efforts de développement consentis par les communautés, le secteurprivé, les gouvernements et les agences de coopération ont souvent abouti à des situations de pénurie, deconflits ou de dégradation des zones de reproduction et de nourricerie. Aux problèmes propres au secteur dela pêche artisanale viennent s'ajouter ceux qui sout provoqués par les interférences de la pêche industrielle etparla dégradation progressive de l'environnement côtier. La présente communication évoque quelques unesdes initiatives les plus marquantes pour tenter de mieux adapter l'impact de la pêche artisanale par rapportà l'ensemble des fonctions du littoral dans le cadre d'une approcheplanitiée—et si possible régionale—de lazone côtière.
PIERRE CAMPREDON
colonies d'oiseaux (Pélicans, Flamants, Spatules, Hérons,Cormorans, Sternes, etc.) représentant environ 40,000 cou-ples de se reproduire. Les centaines de km2 de vasièresintertidales accueillent par ailleurs plus de 2 millions de limi-coles paléarctiques en période d'hivernage. La presénce deces oiseaux et des mammifères marine traduit l'abondancedes ressources halieutiques, le Gblfe d'Arguin constituent dansla région la principale zone de reproduction et de nurseriepour de nombreuses espèces de poissons d'intérêt commer-cial. Ces caractéristiques vent à l'origine de la création—voici20 ens exactement du Parc National du Banc d'Arguin, site duPatrimoine Mondial qui, avec 12,000km2, constitue le plusvaste Parc côder d'Afrique. La communauté Imraguen pré-sente à l'intérieur des limites du Parc, so it environ 800 per-sonnel, a été maintenue au s ein de 7 villages répartis sur lelittoral.
Au sud du Cap Timiris les eaux vent plus profondes etmoins abritées et le littoral, bordé de plages sableuses, dedunes et de sebkhas, s'étend à peu près rectiligne jusque versle delta du Sénégal. A 60km au nord du dlelta se trouve unezone lagunaire, l'Aftout es Sahel, connectée de manière épi-sodique avec l'océan et avec le fleuve, et qui représente unezone importante pour les oiseaux d'eau. L'écologie du teasdelta dépendait autrefois directement de la pluviométrie surle massif du Fouta Djalon, en Guinée, considéré comme lechâteau d'eau de la région. En période de déficit des pluiesles eaux marines pouvaient remonter jusqu'à 300km de l'em-bouchure tandis que de fortes précipitations provoquaientdes crues inondant tout le teas delta. La construction du bar-rage anti-sel de Diama, achevée en 1985, a profondément al-téré la dynamique estuarienne. Les effets cumulés des ouvra-ges hydrauliques, des activités humaines et de la sécheresseont exercé un impact considérable sur les sols, la végétationet la faune. La réduction des échanges d'eau douce et marinea entraîné une diminution drastique des ressources halieuti-ques en termes d'abondance et de diversité. Des aires proté-gées, l'une en Mauritanie et deux au Sénégal ont été implan-tés dans le teas delta. Le Parc National du Diawling, d'unesuperficie de 35,600ha situés sur la rive droite couvre desmilieux principalement halophiles. Le Parc National desOiseaux du Djouj d'une superficie de l6,000ha accueille d'im-portants peuplements Ornithologiques en période de repro-duction (Pélicans, Ardeidés, Anatidés) ou d'hivernage (Fla-mants, Anatidés). Plus au sud, dans la partie la plus marine dudelta, les 2000ha du Parc National de la Langue de Barbarieaccueillent une avifeune composée essentiellement de Laridés.
Au sud du delta du Sénégal le littoral est constitué d'uneplage battue jusqu'a la presqu'île du Cap Vert à Dakar, puis ànouveau sur un mode plus abrité et jouant un rôle de nurseriejusqu'au delta du Saloum. Ce dernier marque le début du lit-toral des "Rivières du Sud" comme ltont dénommé les Portu-gais au XV°, qui s'étend jusqu'au Sierra Leone et composéessentiellement de rias bordées de mangroves à Avicennia et
Rhyzophora. Le régime hydrologique du Saloum comme dela Casamance dépend des précipitations au niveau local con-trairement à la Gambie qui prend sa source dans la zone trèsarrosée du Fouta Djalon. Le déficit ploviométrique actuel liéaux aménagements hydro-agricoles a entraîné une forte élé-vation des salinités, le Saloum et la Casamance fonctionnantdésormais comme des estuaires inverses avec une salinité quicroît de l'aval vers l'amont. L'imp act sur les mangroves et surles res sources halieuti ques, Tortu es marine s et Lamantinsinclus, s'avère particulièrement négatif. Une partie du deltadu Saloum, principalement du côté Sénégalais a été érigée enParc National (76,000ha) au sein d'une Réserve de la Bios-phère (180,000ha) tandis que du côté Gambien 4940ha dudelta étaient classés auxquels viennent s'ajouter les 11,000hadu Parc de Kiang west plus en amont.
Le littoral de Guinée-Bissau est profondément découpépar une succession de rias bordées de grandes superficies demangroves qui couvrent près de 7% du territoire national.L'étendue considérable du plateau continental et lamorphologic du littoral vent à l'origine de marées et de cou-rants relativement forts, tandis que les apports de sédimentset de matières organiques expliquent la turbidité des eaux.Au large on note la presénce de l'Archipel des Bijagos déclaréRéserve de la Biosphère en 1996. On y trouve le plus grandsite de ponte de Tortues marines de l'Afrique de l'ouest ainsique des populations relativement abondantes de Dauphins àbosse, Lamantins, Hippopotames et Crocodiles.
La Pêche Artisanale
Jusqu'à une époque récense la pêche artisanale sur le littoralmauritanien était pratiquée uniquement par les ethnics vivantau bord du fleuve et par les Imraguen du Banc d'Arguin. Cesderniers pratiquaient la pêche à pied avec des filets en fibrevégétale pour capturer les banes de mulets jaunes en migra-tion qu'ils faisaient sécher ensuite pour les conserver. Cettepêche, qui se déroule parfois en collaboration avec les dau-phins, est toujours pratiquée. Vers la fin du XIX° des pêcheursd'origine canarienne vent venus pêcher avec des bateaux àvoile sur les hauts fonds du Golfe d'Arguin. Si l'on mesuredifficilement quel fut leur impact sur les ressources halieuti-ques on sait néanmoins qu'ils débarquaient fréquemment dansîles iles pour prélever des oeufs et des poussins des oiseauxcoloniaux. Quand les Canariens ont quitté la Mauritanie dansles années 1930-50 ils ont revendu les bateaux aux Imraguenqui ont ainsi étendu considerablement leur zone de pêche.
La diminution progressive des populations de mulets aprobablement été provoquée par l'intensification des captu-res durant la migration de ponte vers le sud pour l'exploita-tion des oeuls de mulet exportés en Europe. II est probableaussi que le delta du Sénégal constitue un lieu de ponte prin-cipal des mulets que le barrage de Diama rend aujourd'hui
50
PÊCHE ARTISANALE ET CONSERVATION DU LITTORAL EN AFRIQUE DE L'OUEST
Figure : Plan de la region51
PIERRE CAMPREDON
inaccessible. L'exploitation a pris des dimensions catastrophi-ques avec l'utilisation des filets tournants à l'extérieur du ParcNational qui a entraîné la capture en 1995-96 de plus de 5000tonnes de mulets dont seuls les oeufs étaient conservés pourêtre commercialisés par une société italienne. Ce mode depêche, interdit depuis par arrêté ministérial suite à l'échouagede grandes quantités de dauphins, a donné un coup d'arrêtpresque définitif à la pêche traditionnelle des Imraguen. Cesderniers se vent progressivement tournés vers la captured'autres espèces, encouragés en cela par l'établissement d'in-frastructures frigorifiques à Nouakchott et le passage régulierde commerçants rendu possible par la généralisation des vé-hicules tout terrain. Simultanément le développement dumarché des ailerons de rates et de requins, dont le prix devente atteint 100 US$/kg à Hong Kong ou Singapour, a en-couragé les Imraguen à cibler leurs activités sur ces espècesau point de les menacer gravement, leur stratégic démogra-phique ne se prêtant guère à une pêche intensive. De plusl'utilisation de filets à grandes mailles a augmenté sensible-ment les captures de tortues et de dauphins à l'intérieur mêmedu Parc National.
En dehors des limites du Parc la pêche artisanale s'estconsidérablement développée depuis une vingtaine d'années.II s'agit essentiellement de pêcheurs venus du Sénégal avecdes pirogues motorisées dont le nombre dépasse aujourd'hui2000 embarcations. L'épuisement des ressources en poissonsdémersaux, provoqué en grande partie par les chalutiersindustrials, a conduit les pirogues à s'orienter vers la capturede céphalopodes a l'aide de filières de pots cylindriques enmatière plastique, à l'origine de nombreux conflits avec lapêche industrielle et d'une pollution durable des rivages. Lapêche à la Langouste verse pratiquée par les pirogues en bor-dure immédiate des falaises du Cap Blanc représente de soncôté une menace à l'égard des Phoques moines soit directe-ment par compétition alimentaire soit indirectement par lapresénce de nombreux filets dans leur espace vital. L'augmen-tation rapide du nombre de pirogues simultanément à l'épui-sement des tessources démersales est à l'origine des pres-sions de plus en plus fortes exercées sur le territoire du ParcNational du Banc d'Arguin qui, en tent que zone de repro-duction et de nurserie représente pourtant la dernière garan-tie de vitalité du secteur de la pêche.
Au Sénégal et en Gambie la pêche artisanale est prati-quée depuis des temps reculés et constitue une véritable tra-dition pour des ethnics telles que les Lébous de la presqu'îledu Cap vert ou les Nhominkas du Saloum. Un recensementréalisé en 1989 fait apparaître la presénce de près de 5000pirogues motorisees sur cette portion du littoral. La pêchepratiquée dans le teas delta du Sénégal connaît une récessionimportante simultanément à la mise en service du barrage deDiama, le potentiel de ressources halieutiques exploitablesayant diminué d'environ 75% par rapport aux années 1970.Cette baisse des captures s'est vérifiée, mais dans une moin-
dre mesure, dans les estuaires situés plus au sud et en géné-ral tout le long du littoral pour des raisons de surexploitationet de dégradation des conditions environnementales. Elle estassociée à une perte de la valeur commerciale des prises pardes tailles, notamment des crevettes, et par un appauvrisse-ment du nombre d'espèces. Cette situation, loin de limiter laprogression du pare piroguier, pousse à des comportementsextrêmes tels la pêche à la dynamite pratiquée au large deDakar, et conduit la pêche artisanale à étendre sa zone d'in-tervention vers le large et vers les pays limitrophes. Au Séné-gal elle contribue ainsi pour 90% des débarquements des es-pèces pélagiques (surtout Sardinelle ronde et S. plate) tradi-tionnellement exploitées par la pêche industrielle. Inverse-ment les chalutiers pénètrent régulièrement dans la zone des6 milles réservée à la pêche artisanale commettant des dégâtsconsidérables à l'écologie des fonds, entraînant la destruc-tion d'engins de pêche et de nombreux conflits avec les piro-gues. Des conflits ont également apparu avec d'autres sec-teurs d'activité, la conservation des derniers massifs forestiersconvoités pour la fabrication des pirogues, ou encore le tou-risme balnéaire difficilement compatible avec le traitementdu poisson qui intervient sur les plages. Conflits enfin entredifférentes ethnies surtout en Casamance où les Diolas, pê-cheurs de subsistence occasionnels, voient désormais despêcheurs originaires du nord venir prélever avec une eff cacitésupérieure des ressources déjà surexploitées, provoquant desaffrontements qui font parfois des victimes.
La Guinée-Bissau présente une situation différente dansla mesure où les populations de la zone côtière n'ont qu'unefaible tradition de pêche. II s'agit le plus souvent de pêchepratiquée en dehors des saisons agricoles soit à pied avec deséperviers, des harpons ou des nasses soit à bord de piroguesmonoxyles qui ne s'éloignent guère du rivage. Dans les zonesde mangrove et dans l'archipel des Bijagos la contributiondes mollusques pêchés par les femmes (surtout les huitressauvages, qui s'effectue parfois en coupant les racines aérien-nes des Ryzophoras, les arches et les murex) dépasse large-ment celle de toutes les autres sources de protéines dans lerégime alimentaire. II existe en outre une tradition anciennede migration saisonnière de la part de pêcheurs Nhominkasqui installent des campements tempo raires sur le littoral pen-dant la saison sèche, ret ournant vers le Saloum pendant lespluies pour la culture du riz. Ainsi traditionnellement la pê-che intervenait peu à la saison des pluies qui correspond aussi à lasaison de reproduction d'un grand nombre d'espèces de poissons.
Depuis une dizaine d'années les campements ont ten-dance à se développer et à devenir permanents et les pêcheursse consacrent de plus en plus à la capture des rates et desrequins uniquement pour leurs ailerons. L'usage des filets àrequins entraîne aussi la capture d'un nombre conséquentde Tortues marines et de Lamantins. L'abondance relative desressources de cette portion du littoral a encouragé d'autrepart la venue et l'installation de pêcheurs originaires de Gui-
52
PÊCHE ARTISANALE ET CONSERVATION DU LITTORAL EN AFRIQUE DE L'OUEST
née-Conakry dans le sud du pays qui pratiquent également lapêche aux Sélaciens. Les témoignages et les recherches con-cordant pour constater la disparition presque totale de cer-taines espèces comme le Poisson scie et le Requin marteau.Ces mêmes pêcheurs exploitent les dernières forêts denses àla recherche de grands arbres pour la construction de piro-gues ainsi que les mangroves pour le fumage des ethmalosesou l'approvisionnement en bois des villages de Guinée-Co-nakry.
La Recherche de Solutions
L'un des problèmes qui se posent en Mauritanie vient de ladifférence de pression exercée sur les ressources à l'extérieuret à l'intérieur du Parc du Banc d'Arguin: le nombre impor-tant de pirogues prélevant à l'extérieur du Parc des ressour-ces déjà épuisées est irrésistiblement attiré par les quelques6000km2 de territoire maritime du Parc où seuls les Imraguenavec une centaine de bateaux vent autorisés à pêcher. La dé-marcation entre ces deux ensembles se fait précisément auniveau des embarcations, celles des Imraguen ne fonction-nant qu'a la voile et les pirogues au moteur. Le vieillissementdes voiliers hérités des Canariens depuis plus de 50 ens a faillise traduire pour les Imraguen par l'acquisition de piroguesmotorisées faute d'alternatives. Or non seulement les moteursvent interdits sur le Parc mais il deviendrait alors impossiblede faire la distinction entre les Imraguen et les autres pêcheurs.Depuis 1988 le Parc du Banc d'Arguin, avec l'appui de la Fon-dation Internationale du Banc d'Arguin (FIBA), de l'UICN etde l'aide bilatérale hollandaise a mis enoeuvre un programmede restauration de la flottille et de construction de bateauxneuves. Le programme et ses différents volets, création d'unchantier naval et d'une coopérative des pêcheurs, formationdes femmes à la voilerie et de charpentiers navels est coupléà d'autres activités telles l'élaboration du nouveau plan direc-teur du Parc et la révision de la législation réalisées, avec l'ap-pui du WWF International, avec la participation directe desImraguen pour fixer le nombre maximum de bateaux etles modalités de la pêche. Cette participation leur a permisde mieux defendre leurs droits d'exclusivite de peche dans leParc et de défendre ipsofacto la plus importante zone denurserie du pays. En d'autres termes le Parc a été amené àdévelopper la force et l'identité de la communauté Imraguen,symbolisée par les bateaux à voile, pour qu'elle puisse mieuxfaire valoir ses droits traditionnels vis à vis des ressources duBanc d'Arguin. Ce faisant il stest constitué des alliés directsqui, en protégeant leur zone de pêche protégent en consé-quence le Parc. Tous les problémes ne vent pas résolus pourautant, loin s'en faut, car la pêche industrielle continue à ve-nir pirater les eaux du Parc et parce que les Imraguen eux-mêmes exercent une pression excessive sur les Sélaciens etles tortues marines. La restauration des bateaux permettra pro-
bablement de diversifier leurs activités à travers le dévelop-pement de l'écotourisme et ainsi d'alléger la pression sur lesressources.
Une autre initiative intéressante est conduite par leMinistére du Développement rural en collaboration avecl'UICN et avec l'appui des aides bilatérales hollandaise et fran-çaise, qui vise à restaurer en partie le fonctionnement del'écosysteme du teas delta du Sénégal dans le cadre du ParcNational du Diawling. Les activités vent orientées vers la re-constitution artificielle des mécanismes de crues du fleuve àtravers des ouvrages hydrauliques. En dépit des difficultés demaîtrise de lteau liées aux impératifs de gestion du barragede Diama et, plus en amont au Mali, du barrage de Manantalides améliorations vent déjà observées: les surfaces occupéespar les mangroves se vent étendues, des peuplements depoissons estuariens (mulets, ethmaloses) et de crustacés(Penaeidés, Carcinidés) ont pu regagner d'anciens lieux defrayère et de ponte entraînant une augmentation sensible descaptures opérées par les pêcheurs ainsi que le retour de plu-sieurs espèces d'oiseaux (Pélicans, Ardeidés,Phalacrocoracidés). La crue artificielle montre ainsi qu'il estpossible de restaurer au moins partiellement les fonctions del'estuaire tent au bénéfice de la pêche artisanale que de laconservation.
En Guinee-Bissau, dans le cadre du programme de Plani-fication Côtière réalisé par divers partenaires nationaux avecl'aide de l'UICN et l'appui financier de la Suisse, le Rio Grandede Buba a été choisi comme site pilote pour identifier unmodèle de gestion des ressources halieutiques. Le site pré-sente en effet un ensemble de caractéristiques qui englobentla plupart des problèmes auxquels la pêche artisanale est con-frontée: ctest un important lieu de reproduction, notammentpour les Barracudas, que des pêcheurs étrangers viennentexploiter alors que les pêcheurs résidents disposant de peude moyens se limitent à leurs besoins de subsistence. C'est àla demande de ces derniers que le projet stest basé sur le Riode Buba.
Un programme de recherches et d'enquêtes, couplé àun processus de formation continue, a été mis au point avecle Centre de Recherches du Ministère des Peches (CIPA) pourcomprendre le fonctionnement de la zone sous l'angle desressources halieutiques afin de définir des mesures de ges-tion permettant une exploitation durable. Un comité regrou-pant les pêcheurs résidents a été constitué et a formulé despropositions à l'intention du Ministère des Peches fixant lespériodes et les modes de pêche ainsi qu'un quota de piro-gues stipulant que les pêcheurs non-résidents n'ont accès àce quota que si les pêcheurs résidents ne l'ont pas épuisé.Ces différentes propositions ont pour la plupart été accep-tées et ont fait l'objet d'un arrêté ministérial. Wiles confèrentdone aux pêcheurs résidents un droit d'accès prioritaire auxressources. Comme chez les Imraguen "l'appropriation" del'usutruit des ressources (à la nuance qu'elle est ici prioritaire
53
PIERRE CAMPREDON
et non exclusive) est censée créer un sentiment de responsa-bilité vis à vis de leur devenir à long terme, et introduire leprincipe de la gestion. Parallèlement des actions de dévelop-pement vent entreprises qui vi sent d'une part à améliorerprogressivement la capacité de capture des pêcheurs résidentstout en les associant aux enquêtes de débarquement et à lasurveillance de la zone et d'autre part à renforcer la capacitédes femmes dans le traitement et la commercialisation dupoisson à travers un systéme de crédit villageois. Grâce à l'es-prit de collaboration qui règne entre les pêcheurs et les diffé-rentes institutions impliquées, notamment le Ministère desPêches, cette initiative connaît déjà quelques succès: on as-siste depuis trots années à une augmentation des peuple-ments de Barracudas, de leurs captures et des revenue géné-rés par la pêche. L'expérience montre ici, comme sur le Bancd'Arguin et le Diawling, qutil peut y avoir conjonction d'inté-rêts entre la pêche artisanale et la conservation.
Conclusions
Un ensemble de facteurs d'ordre social, économique etenvironnemental a conduit la pêche artisanale à la situationqu'elle occupe aujourdthui. La surexploitation des ressour-ces sur certaines portions du littoral a entraîné certains pê-cheurs à étendre considérablement leurs zones d'interven-tion en partie grâce à l'utilisation généralisée des moteurs. Lanécessité de rembourser des crédits et l'implantation rapidede l'économie de marché ont poussé les pêcheurs à rentabi-liser leur activité à court terme à partir de ressourcesrenouvelables communes: l'exploitation des requins unique-ment pour leurs ailerons, des mulets pour leurs oeufs ou desbarracudas pendant la période de reproduction vent révéla-teurs de cette situation. Toutefois, en dehors des espèces lesplus sensibles (sélaciens, tortues, lamantins ou phoques) lapiche artisanale provoque relativement peu de dégâts en com-paraison avec les chalutiers industrials qui pénètrent dans leszones réservées à la piche artisanale et détruisent les fonds.
L'expérience acquise dans quelques pays d'Afrique del'ouest, notamment par I UICN, permet de firer un certainnombre d'enseignements dont les plus pertinents dans lecadre de cet atelier pourraient être les suivants:
• Les pêcheurs migrateurs ont une stratégic offensive, deconquête de nouvelles zones de pêche et de maîtrisedes circuits de distribution. Ils vent beaucoup plusefficaces et parfois destructeurs que les pêcheursrésidents qui stinscrivent dans une logique d'exploitationcommunautaire des terroirs. Cette stratégic de conquêteentraîne des conséquences graves quand elle s'exerceaux dépens des zones de reproduction et de nurserie.L'experience montre que dans cette situation il estefficace d'accorder des droits d'accés particuliers aux
pêcheurs résidents qui, en défendant "leurs" ressourcesdéfendent en même temps les fonctions écologiques deces zones. II est nécessaire simultanément de les ap puyerdans le développement de leurs cap acités afin qu'ilssoient en mesure d'occuper leur zone, tout espace laissévide ayant pour effet d'attirer les pêcheurs étrangers.
• II faut travailler en concertation étroite avec les adminis-trations et les agences de coopération pour les sensibili-ser aux contraintes écologiques et biologiques incontour-nables, aux spécificités propres aux ressourcesrenouvelables, à la nécessité d'avoir une gestion spécifi-que des zones de nurserie—ce que même la plupart descentres de recherche océanographiques de la région sem-blent ignorer — et pour les amener à mesurer les consé-quences des choix politiques, emplacement et caracté-ristiques des infrastructures, puissance des moteurs, in-citations fiscales etc. Le Japon, très présent dans ce sec-teur, devrait jouer un rôle plus exemplaire en la matière.
• La pêche artisanale s'inscrit dans un ensemble d'activitésqui s'exercent sur la zone côtière: pêche industrielle, tou-risme, agriculture, transports, urbanisme, conservation etil est essentiel pour une cohabitation plus harmonieusede ces activités d'adopter une approche intégrée à tra-vers des exercices de planification côtière. Cela est encours dans plusieurs pays de la région et il est nécessairenon seulement d'encourager leurs travaux mais de leurpermettre de travailler à une échelle régionale comptetenu de la nature des problémes et de la mobilité tentdes ressources que des pêcheurs.
• Par leur presénce permanente dans la zone côtière et leurconnaissance intime du milieu les pêcheurs artisanauxvent des acteurs essentials du littoral. II convient de lesconsidérer comme les gestionnaires les plus directs desécosystèmes littoraux et de leurs ressources, et ce n'estquten travaillant avec eux et en contribuant à répondre àleurs préoccupations que l'on pourra mieux gérer le littoraldans l'intérêt commun des pêcheurs et de la conservation.
54
PECHE ARTISANALE ET CONSERVATION DU LITTORAL EN AFRIQUE DE L'OUEST
SummariesThe influence of small-scale fisheries on the evolution of coastal areas and their resources has increasedconsiderably over the last twenty years. The use of engine-driven boats and cold storage has led to an increasein, and more control over, the length and distance of expeditions. At a time when there is better understandingof the strategic role of coastal areas vis-a-vis conservation and development in countries such asMauritania,Senegal, the Gambia and Guinea Bissau, it seems necessary to evaluate the nature and intensity of artisanalfisheries impact. The study notes that the community, private sector, government and co-operation agencydevelopment efforts have often led to shortages in catch, and to conflicts in or degradation of the breedingand feeding areas. In addition to problems concerning the small-scale fishery sector, other problems arecaused by the influences of the industrial fisheries and the progressive, gradual degradation of the coastalenvironment. The paper highlights a few of the most striking initiatives aimed at better adapting artisanalfisheries to the characteristics of the overall marine ecosystem, within the framework of a planned (andpossibly regional) approach to the coastal areas.
La influencia de la pesca de pequeña escala sobre la evolución de las zonas costeras y sus recursos se haincrementado considerablemente a lo largo de los últimos veinte años. El uso de lanchas de motor y decámaras de refrigeración ha llevado a un aumento y un mayor control sobre duración y distancia de lasexpediciones. Precisamente cuando existe una mejor comprensión del papel estratégico de las zonas costerasen relación con la conservación y desarrollo de países tales como Mauritania, Senegal, Gambiay GuineaBissau, parece necesario evaluar la naturaleza e intensidad del impacto de la pesca artesanal. El estudioseñala que los esfuerzos de desarrollo de la comunidad, del sector privado, del gobierno y de las agencias decooperación han terminado frecuentemente en una disminución de la pesca, así como en conflictos odegradación en las zonas de crianza y alimentación. Además de los problemas que se refieren al sector depesca en pequeña escala, surgen otros problemas producidos por la influencia de la pesca industrial y por ladegradación progresiva y gradual del medio ambiente costero. El trabajo destaca unas cuantas de las másnotables iniciativas propuestas en la pesca artesanal que mejor se adapta a las características del ecosistemamarítimo global, dentro del marco del proyecto (posiblemente regional) para las zonas costeras.
55
La Gestion Durable des Pêcheries dansl'Archipel des Bijagos et dans le RioGrande de Buba
La Guinée-Bissau (voir cartes) avec ses 36,125km2 se situe dans l'une des zones les plus riches de l'Afrique del'Ouest. Son complexe écosystémique côtier est particulier non seulement au niveau régional, mais présenteaussi des spécificités à l'échelle mondiale notemment au niveau de l'Archpel des Bijagos. Toute sa zone côtièreest assimilable à une nurserie sous-régionale ou zone de ponte aussi bien pour les poissons pélagiques oudémersaux que pour les crustacés, maisaussipourcertainesespècesmigrantesprotégéesounon (dont certainesen voie de disparition) telles les tortues marines, barracudas,... etc. C'est ce qui lui vaut sa qualification dereservoir de l'Afrique de l'Ouest.
L'Archipel des Bijagos (sens restreint) a une superficie totale de plus de 10,000km2 dont 1600 pour la seulezone intertidale (bancs de sable et vasières). La surface des terres émergées (l'île de Bolama non comprise)représente 900km2 desquels il convient de soustraire les 350km2 de la couverture de mangrove. Il est constituéde 88 îles dont la moitié constituée d'ilots. Seulement une vingtaine d'îles sont habitées en permanence et lereste occupé temporairement (culture saisonnière ou cérémonies d'initiation traditionnelles). La populationde l'Archipel approche les 19,000 habitants.
La richesse, la fragilité et la sensibilité des espèces vont en augmentant lorsque l'on s'approache du littoral.Au large, les espèces pélagiques vivent en pleine eau dans un milieu relativement simple. Plus prés des côtesles espèces démersales côtières présentent des exigences biotopiques pour leur reproduction et dépendentd'un habitat sensible à la destruction par certains modes de pêche tel le chalutage. Enfin, dans les estuaires,qui sont des zones de nurseries pour près des 2/3 des espèces, les conditions écologiques sont complexes auxniveaux physico-chimiques et biologiques, et sensibles aux risques de pollution et de détérioration en raisondu développement des activités humaines.
Le Rio Grande de Buba, digitation marine vers l'intérieur du continent (Rio) se caractérise par son biotopeparticulier; large bordure de mangrove, zone préférentielle de ponte des barracudas, zone de refuge/protectionde plusieurs espèces pélagiques ou démersale. Son embouchure s'ouvre sur l'archipel des Bijagos, créantainsi un lien permanent avec ce dernier. LeRio Grande de Buba est une des zones préférentielles de migrationde reproduction des barracudas (Sphyraendae) de l'Afrique de l'Ouest.
Le Secteur des Pêches couvre plus de 43% de l'économie nationale de la Guinée-Bissau. Les garants de laperennité des ressources halieutiques, aussi bien pour la pêche artisanale que pour la pêche industrielle, sontl'équilibre dynamique et la gestion durable et soutenue de la zone côtière riche et sensible sus-décrite dontfont partie l'Archipel des Bijagos et le Rio Grande de Buba qui représentent 36% de l'effectif des pêcheurs, 27%du parc piroguier, 30% des embarcations motorisées et 28% des débarquements totaux.
Cette priorité de gestion durable et soutenue de ces deux régions ont conduit à l'exécution de programmesd'études biologique, économiques et sociaux ayant aboutit très récemment, pour le cas de l'Archipel desBijagos à l'identification hiérarchique de zones sensibles et à la création officielle de la réserve de la Biosphèrede l'Archipel des Bijagos. Pour ce qui est du Rio Grande de Buba, des mesures conservatrices de gestion ontconduit à la publication officielle d'un decret définissant et précisant la période de fermeture de la pêche auxbarracudas en reproduction. La particippation communautaire occupe une large part dans le processusintégré de gestion durable des deux régions géographiques aussi bien au niveau de l'élaboration des mesuresde gestion que du suivi (surveillance) de leurs applications.
1Directeur General de la Pêche Artisanale, BP 102, Guinea Bissau
57
Domingos de Barros1
DOMINGOS DE BARROS
PréambuleCe document représente une contribution pour l'Atelier surle Développement Durable des Pêches Artisanales (Artisanalworkshop) devant se tenir à Montréal (Canada) du 16 au 22Octobre 1996, dans le cadre du Congrès Mondial sur la Con-servation (World Conservation Congress).
La communication se propose de traiter des expériencesdans l'Archipel des Bijagos d'une part, et au niveau du RioGrande de Buba d'autre part. Les deux examples mettrontsurtout en exergue l'approche intégrée (systèmique) adop-tée au niveau de la gestion de ces deux pêcheries ainsi que lapart importante de la participation communautaire dans lesdécisions courageuses de gestion durable du patrimoine ha-lieutique de la Guinée-Bissau.
Enfin nous présenterons les grandes lignes de la nou-velle (à vrai dire la première) réglementation de la Pêche Arti-sanale de la République de Guinée-Bissau. En effet, c'est du-rant la préparation de la présente contribution qu'a pris fin leSéminaire Technique organisé pour l'analyse critique et lafinalisation du premier document (Projet de Décret) de ré-glementation de la Pêche Artisanale en Guinée-Bissau.
Thèmes• l'interface entre la réglementation nationale et législative
et la durabilité des pêcheries locales;• capacité de charges et concepts ou connaisson les lo-
caux concernant la récolte durable.
IntroductionLes notions de développement durable et d'utilisationdurable des ressources en pêche artisanale ont pu être mi-ses en pratique en Guinée-Bissau avec la signature d'un Pro-tocole d'Accord, entre l'UICN et le Ministère des Pêches dece pays en 1992. Deux axes principaux furent identifiés: lepremier au niveau de l'Archipel des Bijagos, le second au ni-veau du Rio Grande Buba. La Direction Générale de la PêcheArtisanale (DGPA) ainsi que le Centre de Recherches Appli-quées sur les Pêches (CIPA) ont été, pour la composante pê-che du Projet, les deux institutions nationales qui ont con-duit avec l'UICN, les actions du Projet.
Ces Projets se proposaient de définir une approche deCo-Gestion des ressources aquatiques des zones côtières, as-sociant les pêcheurs et autres professionnels et l'Administra-tion, optant ainsi pour la participation communautaire dansl'aménagement des ressources, telle que le préconise Brêthes(1991) dans l'interdisciplinarité et l'approche de GestionSystèmique. D est clair que de très nombreuses actions derecherches biologiques, socio-économiques et environ-
nementales ont été conduites. L'année 1989 marque la génèsedu processus de réflexions, discussions et analyses critiques autourdu thème de l'utilisation durable des ressources côtières.
Cette approche méthodologique a produit des résultatsextrêmement positifs et innovateurs en terme de conserva-tion, aménagement et Co-Gestion mais plus particulièrementen terme d'Auto-Développement, ayant conduit entreautres, d'une part à la définition et la publication officielled'un décret relatif à la période de fermeture de la pêcheriependant la migration de reproduction des barracudas(Sphyraenidae) pour les engins non sélectifs dans le RioGrande de Buba, et d'autre part à la récente création officielle,sous l'égide de l'UNESCO, d'une Réserve de la Biosphère dansl'Archipel des Bijagos.
Une bonne compréhension des raisons de cette appro-che méthodologique interdisciplinaire priorisant la participa-tion communautaire passe par une brève présentationécosystèmique de la zone côtière de la Guinée-Bissau.
Présentation Ecosystémique de laZone Côtière de la Guinée-BissauLa République de Guinée-Bissau et un pays côtier d'AfriqueOccidentale caractérisée par sa jeunesse d'abord, ses fortespotentialités ensuite. Située sur la côte Est-Atlantique entre10' 51" et 12' 09" de latitude Nord, elle couvre une surfaceterrestre de 36,125km2. Au Nord, le pays frontalier est le Sé-négal, à l'Est et au Sud-Est la Guinée-Conakry, et l'Océan At-lantique s'étend à l'Ouest et au Nord-Ouest (figure 1). La ré-gion côtière forme un système d'estuaires à profondesdigitations bordées d'une épaisse mangrove. Au large, setrouve un Archipel (figure 2) composé de plus de quatre-vingtîles dont seulement une vingtaine sont habitées.
Elle présente une claire transition ambientale, avec undomaine marin très avancé dans le continent, empruntant desestuaires et vallées (rias) qui s'allongent jusque près du cen-tre du territoire national, en même temps que le domainecontinental projette des indentations vers une mer à bas pla-teaux et plaines maritimes très peu profondes.
Le fond marin, parsemé d'îles parfois proches mais àmajorité concentrées au niveau d'un Archipel dit "desBijagos" (du nom de l'ethnie autochtone majoritaire), s'étalesous un environnement d'intense sédimentation. Les îles sontreliées au continent par d'innombrables bancs de sédimenta-tion psamitique et/ou pellitiques le plus souvent interrom-pus par des chenaux parfois relativement profonds.
La Guinée-Bissau se situe dans l'une des zones les plusriches de l'Afrique de l'Ouest. Son large plateau continental,la faible profondeur de ses eaux côtières, son caractèreestuarien hérissé d'innombrables îles et îlots, ajoutés à l'im-portante frange de mangrove qui contourne son littoral, lecourant côtier enrichissant du Nord baignant sa façade mari-
58
LA GESTION DURABLE DES PÊCHERIES DANS L'ARCHIPEL DES BIJAGOS ET DANS LE RIO GRANDE DE BUBA
Figu
re 1
: Afri
que d
e l'O
uest
59
60
Figu
re 2
: Situ
atio
n de
L'a
rchi
pel d
es B
ijago
setd
u Ri
o G
rand
e de B
uba
LA GESTION DURABLE DES PÊCHERIES DANS L'ARCHIPEL DES BIJAGOS ET DANS LE RIO GRANDE DE BUBA
time, sont quelques caractéristiques expliquant que ses fondssoient les plus productives (en particulier pour les crevettescôtières) dans toute l'Afrique de l'Ouest.
Le Secteur des Pêches couvre environ 45% de l'écono-mie nationale de la Guinée-Bissau. Les garants de la perennitédes ressources halieutiques, aussi bien pour la pêche artisa-nale que pour la pêche industrielle, sont l'équilibre dynami-que et la gestion durable et soutenue de la zone côtière richeet sensible sus-décrite.
Si nous considérons que la pêche côtière est celle cor-respondant à l'exploitation des ressources halieutiques ditescôtières, et considérant que les ressources côtières (pélagi-ques ou démersales) sont définies comme étant celles com-prises entre la côte et le rebord du plateau continental, lapêche côtière en Guinée-Bissau se divise en trois (3) compo-santes qui sont:
• la pêche artisanale traditionnelle;• la pêche artisanale commerciale; et• la pêche artisanale avancée.
Pêche Artisanale Traditionnelle
C'est une pêche de faible rayon d'action donc très côtière.On y distingue une pêche à pied et une pêche pirogière utili-sant presque toujours une embarcation de type monoxyle àrame ou propulsée par le vent (voile). Ses engins de prédilec-tion sont les éperviers, les barrages (en pierre, bambou, palis-sade ou de filet), les haveneaux (ou filets filtrant circulaire àmain des femmes), les pièges tels les nasses tressées (sou-vent archaïques) ou les lignes à main à hameçons. Les zonesde pêche sont souvent situées dans l'aire géographique desmangroves, des bancs de sable ou dans les chenaux des petitscours d'eaux, donc au niveau de zones très peu profondes.Les espèces capturées sont très variées et la caractéristiquedominante est leur petite taille. En effet, ce sont la plupart dutemps des juvéniles et jeunes individus qui sont capturés. Lazone de pêche ne se situe-t-elle pas dans l'aire de croissancedes juvéniles? Le groupe d'espèces caractéristiques des dé-barquements est constitué par la famille des Cyclidae(Tilapies). En dehors de quelques rares espèces à affinité trèscôtière (ethmalose, sardinelle plate et mulets), les tilapies sontles seules espèces qui sont capturées par cette pêcherie àl'échelle de son stock c'est à dire depuis l'état juvénile jus-qu'à l'âge adulte. L'existence de multiples stocks de tilapiesest soupçonnée (et même certaine de l'avis des pêcheurs pro-fessionnels migrants qui pratiquent une petite pêche de sub-sistance près des campements de pêche et qui se déplacent àlongueur d'année sur une grande région géographique). Cessuppositions attendent d'être confirmées par la conduite d'ac-tions de recherche sur l'identité des stocks. La quasi totalité
de la zone côtière de la Guinée-Bissau constitue une zone deconcentration et d'évolution des juvéniles de plusieurs espè-ces d'importance commerciale. Selon plusieurs auteurs, ellereprésente une des nurseries les plus importantes de notrerégion, ce qui lui vaut son appellation de "Reservoir des stocksde l'Afrique de l'Ouest", en ce sens que plusieurs études ontmontré que ces jeunes individus, une fois l'âge adulte atteint,migrent vers les pêcheries non seulement nationales, maisaussi de toute la sous-région voire la région Ouest Africaine.Il mérite d'attirer l'attention sur les captures de la crevettecôtière (Penaeus noticdis). En effet, il est connu que suivantle cycle de migration de cette espèce de crustacées d'intêretcommercial, les juvéniles et jeunes séjournent durant plusieursmois en zone côtière, dans les fleuves. La migration vers lesfonds de pêche industrielle s'effectue au delà d'un certainâge. Cela va s'en dire qu'une exploitation intensive des jeu-nes et juvéniles de cette espèce importante à plus d'un titreaura sans aucun doute une incidence négative sur le recrute-ment au niveau des fonds de pêche industrielle. Or, des pê-cheries artisanales spécialisées (en particulier celle très dyna-mique des femmes de la région de Biombo) ciblent la cre-vette dans ces zones côtières de croissance.
Cette notion de pêche de subsistance appelle à quelquescommentaires. Initialement, elle était destinée totalement àla consommation de la cellule familiale au sens large. Unecertaine partie des captures pouvait, si le besoin se faisait sen-tir, être échangée contre d'autres produits alimentaires au seindu village sous forme de troc. La vente, au sens commer-cial et lucratif du terme n'était pas de régie. De nosjours, même si beaucoup de changements ne sont pas inter-venus quant au rayon d'action et la forme d'exploitation, lafinalité des captures est tout autre. La terminologie de Pêchede Subsistance est aujourd'hui impropre. En effet, le produitde la pêche contribue non seulement à compléter la diétealimentaire de la famille, mais une partie (souvent la meilleure)est destinée à la vente en frais ou après transformation (fu-mage, séchage ou salage). Les conséquences de l'interven-tion de l'élément financier sont que l'effort de pêche (heuresde pêche) s'est notablement augmenté, notemment dans lespetits cours d'eaux où se pratique la pêche spécialisée à pieddes crevettes côtières. Devant l'intêret porté sur la crevettefraîche par les habitants et installations hotellières de la Capi-tale, l'utilisation des filet-barrage-filtrants à crevette (donc defaible maillage) s'est intensifiée.
Pêche Artisanale Commerciale
Plus de 450 campements ou ports de pêche (permanents outemporaires), occupés par 8218 pêcheurs (recensés en 1993dont près de 68% âgé de moins de 36 ans), appartenant à 8nationalités et 29 ethnies différentes, utilisant près de 2000embarcations et environ 6000 engins de pêche, tels sont les
61
DOMINGOS DE BARROS
paramêtres synthétiques descriptifs de l'état actuel de la pê-che artisanale commerciale en Guinée-Bissau. L'Archipel desBijagos et le Rio Grande de Buba, les deux aires géographi-ques qui nous interessent en particulier, représentent 36%de l'effectif des pêcheurs, 27% du parc piroguier, 30% desembarcations motorisées et 28% des débarquements annuelstoutes espèces confondues.
L'embarcation utilisée est certes en majorité de typemonoxyle simple ou monoxyle améliorée, mais l'effectif despirogues de type sénégalais ou ghannéens est assez élevé. Laprédominance des deux premiers types cités permet de pré-sager à une limitation du rayon d'action des embarcations nonmotorisées et à une tendance de concentration de l'effort depêche dans la zone très côtière. Cependant, à l'échelle natio-nale, la vraie pêche artisanale commerciale est le fait des em-barcations de types sénégalais ou ghanéen. Les pêcheurs pro-priétaires sont étrangers donc professionnels migrants.
Contrairement à la pêche de subsistance, la pêche artisa-nale commerciale couvre toute la zone qui lui est juridique-ment réservée, et même au-delà (cas de la pêche non autori-sée). Cependant, du fait de la configuration de la côte, del'étendue du plateau (donc de l'éloignement de la zone fran-chement marine) et de la disponibilité suffisante de la res-source au niveau de la zone côtière, la très grande majoritédes embarcations exploite la zone des estuaires et des fleu-ves, posant ainsi dans l'aire de pêche, le problème d'une pos-sible élévation de la pression de pêche sur les espèces séden-taires ou à faible migration, ce qui se traduirait par une réduc-tion drastique des rendements donc des débarquements.
En dépis des grands efforts de développement que l'Ad-ministration des Pêches a mis en oeuvre grâce à l'Aide Exté-rieure (du Japon en particulier), la pêche artisanale commer-ciale souffre toujours d'une insuffisance de disponibilité deglace de conservation, principalement au niveau des pêche-ries du Sud. La réaction adaptative des pêcheurs à cettesituation est de destiner les captures à la transforma-tion (fumage, séchage, salage). La transformation des pro-duits par fumage est un processus utilisant beaucoup d'éner-gie, et participe à la destruction progressive de la couverturevégétale (la mangrove en particulier) au même titre que l'ex-ploitation souvent non controlée du bois de palmier pour laconstruction.
Une autre caractéristique est la présence d'un nombreimportant de pêcheurs professionnels venant des pays de lasous-région, dotés d'une grande expérience et de moyens decaptures performants et qui sont responsables de la transfor-mation et l'acheminement de grandes quantités de produitsen direction des pays voisins. Une bonne partie d'entre euxexerce une pêche spécialisée dirigée sur la capture des grossélaciens afin de prélever leurs ailerons. La pratique de cetteactivité a posé dans un passé récent (et pose encore de nosjours dans une moindre mesure) plusieurs problèmes d'utili-sation irresponsables des ressources. Il a été constaté que la
plupart des pêcheurs professionnels migrants n'ont jamais depréoccupation de conservation de la ressource. La quasi tota-lité de leur capture est vouée à l'exportation.
L'exploitation des ressources dans la zone franchementmaritime est le fait d'un petit nombre d'unités de pêche quisont le plus souvent étrangers, parfois basées mais le plussouvent non basées et non autorisées. Les embarcations ba-sées sont généralement situées à l'extrême Sud du pays outout à fait au Nord en fonction de leur pays d'origine, maisaussi au niveau des multitudes de campements permanentsou temporarires de pêche des îles de l'Archipel des Bijagos.Celles qui sont non basées correspondent aux embarcationsexerçant une pêche non autorisée utilisant des embarcationsmotorisées particulières du point de vue de leur taille, de leuréquipement et de leur autonomie. En effet ces embarcationssont capables d'effectuer des déplacements d'un pays à unautre, en empruntant les voies maritimes du large. Leurs acti-vités sont signalées d'une part par les navires en direction deBissau ou par les agents de surveillance de la pêche artisa-nale. Quelques unes d'entre elles arrivent, dans des cas deforce majeure, à accoster au niveau du port le plus proche.Ces grandes embarcations dotées de caisses isothèrmiquesglacières effectuent une pêche spécialisée sur les fonds ro-cheux, généralement à la ligne mais ciblant en même tempsles espèces nobles de la Communauté des Sparidae (grosmérous, carpes rouges et grosses dorades surtout) ainsi queles gros Sélaciens (requins et raie-guitares) pour le commercelucratif des ailerons.
Les engins de pêche de prédilection sont les filetsmaillants de surface ou de fond (filet dormant), les lignes etles palangres. Une pêcherie piroguière fluviale particulièreportant sur la crevette côtière (zone de Farim sur le FleuveCacheu) utilise surtout les filets filtrants à crevettes (de faiblemaillage).
La majorité des sorties s'effectuent pendant la soirée maiscertains engins (en fonction du type de pêche peuvent êtreposés durant le jour). Les espèces capturées sont celles ca-ractéristiques de la zone côtière ouest africaine mais princi-palement celles de la Communauté des Scianidae Côtiers. Lemaximum d'effort de pêche se situe durant la saison séche(Octobre à Mai). La saison des pluies voit le développementd'une pêcherie particulière, celle des espèces de la familledes Sphyraenidae (les barracudas, encore appelés "brochets").En effet, ces espèces, capturées à longueur d'année dans lazone franchement maritime, constituent les cibles durant lasaison des pluies et dans les cours d'eaux de la Guinée-Bissau(dont le Rio Grande de Buba) où elles effectuent des migra-tions de reproduction. L'espèce majoritaire dans les débar-quements semblent être Sphyraena afra bien que 5.guachancho soit aussi très représentée. Les adultes des es-pèces à affinité franchement marine appartenant à la commu-nauté des Sparidae sont rarement capturés (cas desSerranidae). Par contre les adultes d'espèces à affinité côtière
62
LA GESTION DURABLE DES PÊCHERIES DANS L'ARCHIPEL DES BIJAGOS ET DANS LE RIO GRANDE DE BUBA
et d'eaux chaudes telle l'ethmalose (Ethmalosa fimbriata),la sardinelle plate (Sardinella maderensis) certaines espè-ces appartenant aux familles des Carangidae, Gerreidae,Drepanidae ainsi que plusieurs Scianidae sont normalementcapturées.
Les espèces pélagiques (ethmalose et mulets) constituentannuellement plus de 70% du total débarqué. Il est intêressantde noter l'importance de l'ethmalose à une échelle nationale.En effet, cette espèce, extrêmement minoritaire au niveaudes débarquements observés dans la capitale, se retrouve aupremier plan à l'échelle nationale avec près de 42% de la pro-duction artisanale annuelle toutes espèces confondues, pré-cédant ainsi les mulets (29% du total annuel) longtemps con-sidérés comme espèce majoritaire du fait que les informa-tions alors disponibles au niveau de la Capitale avant la miseen place de la Banque de données statistiques nationales neprovenaient que des ports de Bubaque et Bissau (Peralta etPindjiguiti) où les mulets sont de loin l'espèce prédominantedans les apports, puisque très demandés par les consommateurs.
Pêche Artisanale Avancée
Nous entendons par Pêche Artisanale Avancée, l'activité depêche effectuée par des embarcations motorisées d'un typeévolué. Il peut s'agir de pirogues de modèle sénégalais degrande dimension, équipées de caisses glaçières, parfois desondeur et quelques unes disposent de vire-palangre ou depower-bloc pour les filets ainsi que d'autres appareils de po-sitionnement. Ce type de pêche avancé s'exerce au-delà dessix milles de la ligne de base donc en dehors de l'Archipeldes Bijagos. Certaines embarcations sont en forme de bar-que ouverte, le plus souvent en fibre de verre. La puissancedes moteurs peut atteindre 60 CV. La raison d'introductionde ce type de pêche réside dans le désir de la Nouvelle Admi-nistration Centrale des Pêches de développer le sous secteurde la Pêche Artisanale dans sa composante maritime. L'ob-jectif de la promotion de ce type de pêche est double: d'unepart, initier et promouvoir l'exploitation de la zone franche-ment maritime très éloignée des côtes et d'autre part aug-menter les débarquements sans pour autant augmenter l'ef-fort de pêche au niveau de la frange côtière sensible.
Description écosystémique duRio Grande de BubaLe Rio Grande de Buba et situé au Sud de la Guinée-Bissaudans la région de Quinara (figure 2). D'une longueur de 52km,pour une largeur de 4km à l'embouchure, il couvre une su-perficie totale de 271km2. Le Rio Grande de Buba n'est pasun véritable estuaire, c'est une ria avec des apports d'eauxdouces très réduits, aucun cours d'eau permanent ne s'y dé-
versant. Le milieu présentant le plus de point commun en Afri-que Occidentale est le Sine-Saloum au Sénégal.
Le Rio Grande de Buba est un milieu unique en Afriquede l'Ouest (figure 2). Il n'y a pas d'autre exemple de bras demer s'enfonçant aussi loin à l'intérieur des terres avec un pro-fondeur moyenne d'une trentaine de mètres dans la partieaval, d'une vingtaine en amont et une fosse de plus de 60mdans la zone centrale.
Les marées sont semi diurnes et leur amplitude est parmiles plus fortes enregistrées sur la côte entre Dakar et Free-town, dépassant 6m en période de vives eaux et supérieure à2m en période de mortes eaux. Ce marnage donne une idéesur la grande vitesse des courants de jusant (82,6cm/s) et deflot (65,4cm/s).
Une augmentation de la salinité, liée à la diminution de lapluviosité au cours des quarante dernières années avait étéconstatée. Cette augmentation semble avoir atteint un pic audébut des années 80 (22g/l en 1953, 40g/l en 1984). La ten-dance parait s'être inversée depuis, la teneur fluctuant entre31 et 37g/l.
Les rives du bras central sont bordées, presque en con-tinu, d'une frange d'une dizaine de mètres de largeur de palé-tuviers (3 familles et 5 espèces). La faune terrestre, l'avifauneet la faune aquatique de cette aire géographique sont extrê-mement riches et diversifiées.
La Pêche Artisanale dans le RioGrande de BubaLe dernier recensement des pêcheurs riverains du Rio Grandede Buba et de leurs engins/pirogues révéle l'existance de 142pêcheurs, répartis entre 28 villages et équipés de 101 piro-gues avec un taux de motorisation relativement bas.
Les ressources halieutiques sont exploitées par les en-gins de pêche présentés plus haut. Les espéces débarquéesconcernent une quinzaine de rubriques correspondant la plussouvent à plusieurs familles ou genres. Seules quelques unescorrespondent à un seul et unique taxon.
Les barracudas figurent dans les captures pratiquementtoute l'année. Cependant, les grands individus, pêchés à laligne ou au filet maillant ne sont pratiquement capturés qu'ensaison des pluies alors que les jeunes et juvéniles sont pêchéstoute l'année dans les filets à mulets. En fait il a été démontrél'existence d'une migration de reproduction des barracudas(5. afra et 5. gauchancho) de la mer vers l'intérieur du RioGrande de Buba (RGB). Les autres rios du pays sont aussi lesiége du même phénomène de migration de reproduction.
Les importantes ressources halieutiques du RGB ont étéinitialement exploitées sans aucune mesure de gestion ou deconservation, pratiquement comme une "ressource nontarissable".
La théorie de la "Tragedy of Commons" à amener à
63
DOMINGOS DE BARROS
repenser le concept de gestion des ressources aquatiques.Considérant la faiblesse des moyens à la disposition de l'Ad-ministration des pêches, l'approche étatique et centraliséeinitialement utilisée laissait peu d'espoir d'une quelconqueamélioration de la situation pour le futur.
C'est ainsi qu'au terme de tout un processus de réflexionet d'étude initié depuis 1989 entre l'UICN et la Direction Gé-nérale des Forêts et Chasse, la composante pêche fut prise encompte, conduisant à l'identification et la formulation du Pro-jet Expérimental de Développement Durable des Pê-ches Artisanales dans le Rio Grande de Buba. Un Proto-cole d'accord entre l'UICN et le Ministère des Pêches, signéen 1992, a permis le démarrage de la première phase du Pro-jet qui en est de nos jours dans sa seconde phase.
L'objectif principal du projet est d'arriver à définir, etimplémenter, des mécanismes de co-gestion permettant uneutilisation à aussi long terme que possible des ressources ha-lieutiques existantes, au bénéfice des populations locales, enessayant de concilier une durabilité en termes économiquesautant que biologiques.
Utilisation Durable des Ressources(Situation Initiale— Figure 3)
Population Locale
Une utilisation très limitée du potentiel halieutique, prin-cipalement pour des raisons socio-culturelles (pluriactivité àdominante agricole) et économiques (manque de moyens deproduction, techniques d'exploitation peu performantes etpeu diversifiées). Par conséquent, il n'existe pas de zoned'étude de système traditionnel de gestion des ressources.
Population Exogéne
Elle se compose d'une part d'un groupe originaire duNord du Sénégal, disposant d'un haut niveau technologiqueet d'un pouvoir économique important, pêchant saisonn -ièrement des espèces de haute valeur commerciale dont lesressources sont limitées, et exportant l'intégralité des captu-res; et d'autre part d'un groupe originaire de Guinée, SierraLéone et Ghana, sans grands moyens de production, ciblantles petites espèces pélagiques, bien valorisées et intégrale-ment exportées. Bien qu'on note une légère tendance à lasédentarisation, les deux groupes n'ont pas d'intérêt immé-diat à la conservation des ressources.
Stratégie du Projet
Miser sur le développement de l'activité pêche artisanale
locale comme un facteur pouvant contribuer à l'émergenced'une classe réduite de pêcheurs locaux prof-essionnalisés,conscients de l'importance d'un bon état des ressources etintéressés par leur conservation.
Au-delà du développement sectoriel, promouvoir unedynamique d'auto-développement: organisation communau-taire à la base, création et gestion de petites caisses d'épar-gne-crédit villageoises, alphabétisation, etc. permettant d'as-surer une amélioration des conditions de vie dans la région(revenus augmentés, bien-être social), garantie d'une fixationdes populations et de leur responsabilisation dans la gestionde leur environnement.
Mettre en place un espace de concertation inter-institu-tionnel (réunissant les associations professionnelles locales,les services administratifs au niveau local et central, le pou-voir traditionnel, les partenaires, les opérateurs privés, et idéa-lement tous les groupes d'intérêt), où se discutent les mesu-res de gestion à proposer au Ministère des Pêches, dans lebut d'assurer une répartition adéquate de l'accès aux ressour-ces et une utilisation durable de celles-ci.
Moyens mis en oeuvre:
• Développement d'une institution représentative dugroupe d'intérêt local:
La mise en pratique de l'approche bio-antropologiquedéfinie par Emmerson (in Scuder et al, 1985) qui com-bine la sensibilité aux ressources icthyologiques et auxcommunautés de pêcheurs, a conduit à mener enparalélle des études sur les caractéristiques biologiquesde la ressource, de la pêcherie, du contexte socio-écono-mique et un dialogue permanent avec les pêcheurs etl'Administration. Un Comité de Gestion, qui réunit desreprésentants des Groupements de Pêcheurs, des Chefstraditionnels, de l'Administration, de l'UICN et des ONG'sintervenant dans la région est l'un des instruments decette concertation;
• Initiation d'une dynamique de développement alternatifet durable, principalement en promouvant des activitésvalorisant les ressources naturelles tout en assurant unmeilleur niveau de vie;
• Assurance de l'appui des autorités traditionnelle et gou-vernementale;
• Sensibilisation à l'importance du caractère limité etrenouvelable de la ressource;
• Suivi scientifique de la ressource; suivi technique de l'ex-ploitation des ressources.
Le CIPA, avec l'assistance technique de l'UICN, assureun suivi scientifique de la ressource par la conduite d'ac-tions de recherche biologique dont les premiers résultatssont la base scientifique du décret de réglementation despêches dans le Rio Grande de Buba De plus, l'exploitation de la
64
LA GESTION DURABLE DES PÊCHERIES DANS L'ARCHIPEL DES BIJAGOS ET DANS LE RIO GRANDE DE BUBA
Figu
re 3
: Situ
atio
n Ini
tiate
65
DOMMGOS DE BARROS
ressource, en terme d'application du décret est suivi par lesagents du Service de la Surveillance de la Direction Généralede la Pêche Artisinale (DGPA) avec l'appui financier de l'UICN,D mérite d'être souligné que les populations locales partici-pent activement à la surveillance de la pêcherie et au respectde l'application de la Réglementation. En effet toute infrac-tion dans les zones de pêche est signalée sans complaisancesoit à l'équipe de surveillance (si elle est présente dans la pê-cherie), soit à l'autorité locale.
D a été constaté d'une part que le rendement par sortie(toutes espèces confondues) a notablement augmenté, pas-sant de 70kg en 1993 à 95kg en 1995, mais d'autre part etsurtout que le barracuda, cette année (1996) est cap-turé à la ligne par les pêcheurs à pied au niveau duport de Buba, fait non observé depuis fort longtempset prouvant l'importance de la réduction de la pression depêche à des fins de conservation de la ressource et de ladurabilité de son utilisation.
Résultats(Figure)
1. Mesures de ConservationLes résultats de la recherche confirment l'opinion des pê-cheurs résidents sur un risque de surexploitation de laressource.
Le Comité de Coordination, réunissant les associa-tions professionnelles et l'Administration, permet de fairele point sur les risques et les mesures à prendre.
Le Gouvernement reconnaît la validité des proposi-tions issues de la recherche et émet un décret interdi-sant la pêche au filet maillant durant la période de repro-duction des barracudas, et limitant l'effort de pêche du-rant le reste de l'année.
2. Valeur Economique de la FilièreLes pêcheurs locaux diversifient leur stratégie d'exploita-tion en respectant les mesures de gestion, et produisentune proportion plus élevée de poisson à haute valeurcommerciale. Les possibilités d'écoulement sont rédui-tes, mais des techniques appropriées et non consomma-trices d'énergie (bois de mangrove surtout) permettentde conserver plusieurs mois un produit à haute valeurajoutée, facilement commerdalisable à certaine périodede l'année.
Le Groupement des pêcheurs, pendant la période d'in-terdiction de l'utilisation des filets pour la pêche des barracu-das en reproduction, a développé une campagne de pêche àla ligne. Le produit est acheté par le Groupement des fem-mes. Parallélement, l'UICN a apporté son appui à la commu-nauté en contractant un technologue de la Direction Géné-
rale de la Pêche Artisanale (DGPA) qui procéde (avec les fem-mes) à la transformation du produit frais en "bacalhau" (salé-séché) du fait des dures contraintes liées à la commercialisa-tion en frais (problèmes de glace, de transport etc.). Le pro-duit ainsi transformé suivant cette procédure non consom-matrice d'énergie (protection de la mangrove et de la forêt)est stocké dans l'attente de la période de vente. Le prix du«bacalhau» étant très largement supérieur à celui du produitfrais, la rentabilité de l'opération est évidente. Les femmes,qui suivent en même temps une formation avec le tech-nologue, se chargeront elles mêmes de la transformation dansle futur.
3. Evolution des Pêcheries Relations PêcheursEtrangers/ Population LocaleLes pêcheurs étrangers de barracudas diminuent sensi-blement leur présence dans le rio, mais s'orientent versles autres zones de reproduction ou de migration (autresestuaires, Archipel des Bijagos), appelant les autorités àétendre les mesures de gestions spécifiques à une grandepartie de la zone côtière. Des pêcheurs d'ethmaloses ori-ginaires d'autres pays augmentent leur présence dans lerio. Les relations avec les pêcheurs locaux se dégradentdès lors que ceux-ci veulent faire diminuer la pression sur lesressources non encore soumises à réglementation.
Devant l'impossibilité d'utilisation des filets dans leRio Grande de Buba pendant la période de reproductiondes barracudas, la réaction adaptative des pêcheurs étran-gers a été de sortir de la zone pour pratiquer la pêche aufilet dans les autres estuaires que la réglementation n'apas encore touchée ainsi que dans l'Archipel des Bijagosqui constitue le chemin de passage des barracudas du-rant leur migration. Ce constat appelle à l'extension desmesures de gestion à toute la zone cotière pour unemeilleure préservation de la ressource. D'autre part, l'aug-mentation des rendements dans la pêche des barracudasest perçu par les pêcheurs comme résultant de la dimi-nution de la pression de pêche qu'exercaient les étran-gers. Or, la diminution du nombre des pêcheurs étran-gers de barracuda a été accompagnée d'une augmenta-tion de l'effectif des pêcheurs d'ethmalose. Les capturesde cette espèce pélagique sont totalement vouées au fu-mage (destruction de la mangrove et des forêts) et à l'ex-portation (vers la Guinée-Conakry en particulier). Devantcette pratique, les populations locales, riches de l'expé-rience du barracuda et responsabilisés dans la conserva-tion de leurs ressources halieutiques et conscient de lanécessité d'un équilibre environnemental (protection dela couverture végétale) veulent faire diminuer la pressionde pêche sur ces ressources non encore soumises à ré-glementation. Cela va sans dire que les relations entre lesdeux communautés de pêcheurs se sont vite dégradées.
66
LA GESTION DURABLE DES PÊCHERIES DANS L'ARCHIPEL DES BIJAGOS ET DANS LE RIO GRANDE DE BUBA
67
Figu
re 4:
Util
isatio
n Dur
able
Ces
t...
DOMNGOS DE BARROS
4. Auto-DéveloppementPar ailleurs, le développement d'activités économiquesrenforce l'organisation associative: augmentation des re-venus au niveau du village, introduction de technologiesaméliorant le bien être social et permettant un gain detemps pour les femmes, entraînant à leur tour la possibi-lité de développer de nouvelles activités (auto-dévelop-pement). L'alphabétisation constitue un catalyseur del'auto-développement en augmentant la confiance despersonnes en elles-mêmes face à des situations nouvel-les et créant une demande pour l'initiation de nouvellesactivités (capacité d'innovation).
De nos jours, la communauté des pêcheurs du RioGrande de Buba évolue selon un processus d'auto-déve-loppement certain. En effet, bien que l'activité de pêchefut le premier maillon du processus organisationnel, l'as-sistance de l'UICN a permis de faire comprendre à la com-munauté la nécessité de prise en compte de l'écosystèmecomme un tout. Cette prise de conscience a été grande-ment facilitée par l'alphabétisation des populations. LeGroupement des femmes par exemple conduit à la per-fection des activités de pêche, de maraîchage et de com-merce de produits agricoles divers, augmentant ainsi leursrevenus et améliorant le mieux-être des populations. Leslégumes qui jadis étaient consommés que par ceux quiavaient les moyens de les acquérir depuis la capitale oules autres grandes villes, sont aujourd'hui cultivés au seinde la communauté, contribuant ainsi à l'amélioration ainsila diéte alimentaire donc la santé.Les échanges entre les groupements augmentent:
• la conscience d'une unité d'intérêts au niveau de la ré-gion se développe, facilitant le travail de sensibilisationet l'organisation;
• le choix de représentants au niveau régional est réaliséd'un commun accord, et facilite le dialogue avec les ins-titutions centrales;
• les groupements s'approprient le Comité de Coordina-tion et en programment les réunions; et
• les institutions centrales et régionales sont plus fortementsollicitées pour exercer leurs fonctions de contrôle.
Le développement est un processus d'enseignementet d'apprentissage. L'expérience accumulée de la com-munauté entraîne un ajustement continuel des croyan-ces et valeurs. La base de connaissance qui ouvre de nou-velles possibilités pour la façon dont la communauté voitle monde et y réagit est elle aussi continuellement ajus-tée. Les éléments essentiels de ce processus sont le dé-veloppement des compétences et des connaissances lo-cales, ainsi que l'amélioration personnelle et des capaci-tés d'organisation.
La somme de connaisssance et d'expérience des
membres de la communauté et des intervenants exté-rieurs crée une synergie. Pour tous, même quand le sa-voir est importé, le processus d'exploration et de décou-verte est essentiel. 11 permet à celui qui reçoit l'informa-tion de la normaliser selon ses propres références d'ex-périence-connaissance. C'est ce processus qui est l'es-sence du développement.
Dans ces circonstances, le processus du haut vers lebas d'une politique de développement et celui du basvers le haut exercé par la communauté à travers pres-sions et initiatives ont tous deux un rôle légitime à jouer.L'approche du haut vers le bas cherche à créer les con-ditions pour que la communauté influence ce quila concerne, et à les engager dans un débat pluslarge. Bâtir à partir de la base vers le haut est importantet essentiel parce que les actions doivent répondreaux idées et initiatives des bénéficiaires. Là où ellessont appliquées, idées et initiatives se manifesteront.
Les conditions semblent réunies pour tenter de re-produire avec succès l'expérience de Buba à d'autres ré-gions sensibles de la zone côtière de la Guinée-Bissau.
Description Ecosystémique del'Archipel des Bijagos (figure 5)Les environnements insulaires constituent des écosystèmesd'une haute complexité et d'une extrême fragilité vis à vis desinterventions humaines. A l'origine, la distance par rapport àla côte et la taille des îles tiennent un rôle décisif dans la ca-ractérisation de l'environnement et la diversité des êtres vi-vants qui les habitent.
Le substrat du littoral guinéen est constitué de dépôtsédimentaire tertiaire présentant parfois une couverture qua-ternaire. La reconstitution de l'histoire géologique révéle quesuite à une grande baisse du niveau des mers il y a déjà plu-sieurs milliers d'années,une forte érosion côtière a conduit àla formation de vallées plus ou moins profonde qui, avec l'élé-vation progressive du niveau marin se sont transformées enchenaux, séparant les parties hautes devenues alors des grou-pes d'îles constituant ainsi la physionomie actuelle de l'Archi-pel des Bijagos.
Comme le Rio Grande de Buba, L'Archipel des Bijagosest un exemple unique en Afrique Occidentale. Il se situe aucoeur d'un système complexe tant du point de vue climati-que que de celui de la dynamique des eaux, ce qui expliquesa vulnérabilité vis à vis des influences externes. Les différentscourants transportent dans l'Archipel de l'eau douce, de lamatière organique et du plancton, éléments qui contribuentà la grande productivité biologique du milieu, laquelle expli-que la présence des grandes quantités de poissons, crustacéset mollusques. La densité élevée des larves et juvéniles iden-
68
69
Figu
re5:
L'a
rchi
pel d
es B
ijago
set L
e Rio
Gra
nde
de B
uba
LA GESTION DURABLE DES PÊCHERIES DANS L'ARCHIPEL DES BIJAGOS ET DANS LE RIO GRANDE DE BUBA
DOMINGOS DE BARROS
tifîés et mesurés à l'échelle de l'Archipel démontre son rôleessentiel comme aire de reproduction et de croissance pourdifférentes espèces commerciales. C'est dans l'aire des man-groves entourant les îles et au niveau des bras de mer que lavie animale est plus abondante. La mangrove couvre un tier(1/3) de la superficie des îles. La superficie totale de L'Archi-pel des Bijagos est de plus de 10,000km2 dont 1600 pour laseule zone intertidale (bancs de sable et vasières). La surfacedes terres émergée (l'île de Bolama non comprise) représente900km2 desquels il convient de soustraire les 350km2 de lacouverture de mangrove. La superficie restante (550km2) serépartit en 88 îles dont la moitié constituée d'îlots. Sur les 42îles ayant une surface significative, vingt et une sont habitéesen permanence et le reste occupé seulement temporairement(culture saisonnière ou cérémonies traditionnelles). La po-pulation de l'Archipel (Bolama non comprise) approche les19,000 habitants.
Il n'est pas nécessaire d'avoir des connaissances appro-fondies en écologie marines pour comprendre et s'assurerde la richesse des eaux côtières de la Guinée-Bissau.
La richesse biologique et les difficultés de pénétrationdu littoral explique ainsi la présence d'une importante com-munauté d'animaux aquatiques unique en Afrique de l'Ouest:Hippopotames (normalement d'eau douce mais ici, se sontadaptés au milieu saumâtre à salé, au terme d'une longueévolution), lamantins, crocodiles, tortues marines dont cer-taines très rares. Plusieurs espèces de mollusques sont quoti-diennement exploitées par la population locale et l'avifaunede plusieurs millions d'individus se caractérise par plusieursespèces qui viennent hiverner dans les tropiques avant deretourner vers leurs zones de reproduction situées dans l'Arc-tique.
Couvrant près de 22% de la superficie totale de la région,la formation végétale la plus représentative de l'Archipel estconstitué de palmier à l'huile. Cependant, plusieurs espècesarborées (parfois à bois précieux) existent. Traditionnelle-ment, l'activité économique principale de l'ethnie autochtoneBijagos est l'Agriculture (riz et haricot surtout) et l'élevage.L'exploitation forêstière est une activité complémentaire aumême titre que la pêche et la collecte des mollusques. Cesont plutôt les autres groupes ethniques venant du continentqui se sont spécialisés dans des activités bien précises: lesPepels à l'exploitation intensive des palmiers, à la pêche et àla collecte des mollusques; les Mancagnes essentiellement àl'horticulture; les Beafadas à la fruticulture. Un autre groupeimportant s'adonne essentiellement à la Pêche ArtisanaleCommerciale, il s'agit des Nhomincas (d'origine Sénégalaise).
La pêche tient un rôle important dans l'économie régio-nale. Le fait que cette région soit la principale productricepour la capitale Bissau, tient à ses conditions naturelles et à laprésence des pêcheurs Nhomincas, les Bijagos, traditionnel-lement n'exerçant qu'une pêche de subsistance. La commer-cialisation s'effectue soit à Bubaque (la principale île de nos
jours) par l'intermédiaire des commerçantes (plus connueslocalement sous l'appellation de bideiras) venant de Bissauet utilisant les bateaux de liaison hebdomadaire, soit par lepêcheur directement à Bissau par utilisation des piroguesmotorisées.
La fragilité et la sensibilité des espèces va aussi en aug-mentant lorsque l'on s'approche du littoral. Au large, les es-pèces pélagiques vivent en pleine eau dans un milieu relati-vement simple. Plus prés des côtes les espèces démersalescôtières présentent des exigences territoriales pour leur re-production et dépendent d'un habitat sensible à la destruc-tion par certains modes de pêche tel le chalutage. Enfin, dansles estuaires, qui sont des zones de nurseries pour près des2/3 des espèces, les conditions écologiques sont complexesaux niveaux physico-chimiques et biologiques, et sensiblesaux risques de pollution et de détérioration en raison du dé-veloppement des activités humaines.
Toute la zone archipellaire est assimilée à une nurseriesous-régionale aussi bien pour les poissons pélagiques oudémersaux que pour les crustacés, mais aussi pour d'autresanimaux aquatiques.
Les débarquements de la pêche artisanale sont en aug-mentation du fait de l'installation récente sur l'île d'Uracaned'une Fabrique de Glace, en complément de celle déjàexistante au Complexe de Pêche Artisanale sis sur l'île deBubaque. En terme économique, il mérite de souligner l'im-portance des mulets (près de 70% des captures). En saisondes pluies, les requins (Carcharinidae), carpes blanches(Haemulidae), les grandes carangues (Carangidae), les raies-guitare (Rhinobatidae) et les barracudas (Sphyraenidae) sontfortement représentées. Pendant la saison séche, ces espèces(sont accompagnées par les sardinelles et l'ethmaloseclupeidae). De plus, du fait de leur intêret commercial en fraisou après transformation, plusieurs espèces (souvent de laCommunauté des sparidae) sont ciblées. D s'agit des doradesroses, des dorades à points bleu (Sparidae), des carpes rou-ges (Lutjanidae), dans une moindre mesure des mérous(Serranidae), mais aussi des barracudas (Sphyraenidae).
Au niveau de certains campements, une pêche intensedes sélaciens (requins, raies et raie-guitares) est essentielle-ment mais non uniquement le fait des pêcheurs étran-gers, à cause du commerce lucratif des ailerons mais aussipour l'exportation de la chair fumée très demandée au ni-veau de plusieurs pays africains mais aussi hors d'Afrique.
D mérite aussi de signaler que la pêche industrielle, nor-malement interdite dans la zone car devant s'exercer au-delàdes 12 milles nautiques, est pratiquée clandestinement parquelques bateaux étrangers. Cependant cette pêche fraudu-leuse non autorisée se touve de nos jours très réduite du faitde la protection naturelle de l'Archipel des Bijagos par unebarrière corralienne et l'existence de nombreux bancs de sa-ble, mais aussi grâce à une meilleure surveillance des eauxsous juridiction nationale par la marine nationale.
70
LA GESTION DURABLE DES PÊCHERIES DANS L'ARCHIPEL DES BIJAGOS ET DANS LE RIO GRANDE DE BUBA
Physionomie de la Pêche Artisanaledans l'Archipel
Dans l'Archipel des Bijagos, la Pêche Artisanale s'exerce parconséquent dans des eaux à la fois riches et sensibles. La des-cription de la Pêche Artisanale déjà présentée plus haut (casdu Rio Buba est valable aussi pour l'Archipel des Bijagos, avecla différence que dans l'Archipel, l'activité de pêche a tradi-tionnellement toujours été de subsistance, pratiquée par l'eth-nie autochtone, les Bijagos.
De nos jours, avec plus de 1000 pêcheurs en majoritéagé entre 21 et 35 ans représentant environ 20% de l'effectifnational, dont 65% de Bijagos,utilisant 15% du parc nationaldes embarcations avec un taux de motorisation de 45%, dé-barquant 22% du total national, l'Archipel des Bijagos est laprincipale productrice de poisson pour l'approvisionnementde la Capitale Bissau.
Les ressources halieutiques sont exploitées par les en-gins de pêche déjà décrits plus haut. Les espéces débarquéesconcernent une quinzaine de rubriques correspondant le plussouvent à plusieurs familles ou genres. Seules quelques unescorrespondent à un seul et unique taxon.
Le Dilemme Posé par l'Archipel:les défisLe dilemme posé par l'Archipel des Bijagos n'est autre quecelui de la conciliation des impératifs de développement nonseulement de la pêche artisanale mais de tous les secteurséconomiques d'une part, et de conservation des ressources,de l'environnement et du patrimoine existant dans cette zoneparticulière et sensible d'autre part.
Pour un pays comme la Guinée-Bissau où la pêche as-sure près de 45% des recettes de l'Etat, et dans le cas particu-lier de l'Archipel des Bijagos qui est la première région pro-ductrice approvisionnant la Capitale, il est évident que les défissont nombreux pour assurer le mieux être des populationsconcernées. En effet, il faudra arriver à:
• Garantir la conservation des valeurs socio-ambientales,principalement la biodiversité des écosystèmes et l'équi-libre dans l'utilisation des ressources naturelles.
• Ultrapasser les limitations pour un développement du-rable, en particulier la carence des infrastructures socio-économiques, les questions législatives et institutionnel-les, les aléas des phénomènes naturels (pluviométrie,érosion, intrusion saline...), l'insularité.
• Résoudre et/ou minimiser les conflits actuels dans la re-lation conservation/développement. Ces conflits peu-vent se résumer, dans le cas particulier de la pêche arti-sanale par:
• la nécessité d'augmentation des débarquementspour, d'une part l'approvisionnement des populationsen protéine animale d'origine marine, et d'autre part lanécessité de constante augmentation des recettes de lapêche, face à la nécessité de réduction de l'effort de pê-che dans les zones côtières et de limitation de l'activitédes pêcheurs étrangers;• la nécessité de mise en valeur des produits de lapêche face au cas particulier de l'impératif de controlede la pêche des sélaciens à ailerons; et• le désir des propriétaires d'embarcation de rentabi-liser leurs unités de pêche face à la nécessité de réduc-tion du maillage des filets pour la préservation des juvé-niles et jeunes poissons.
Vers une Gestion Durable desRessources de l'Archipel
Dans l'Archipel des Bijagos, la Pêche Artisanale s'exerce par con-séquent dans des eaux à la fois riches et sensibles, d'où la néces-sité d'une bonne gestion, gestion durable et soutenue s'entend.
C'est ainsi qu'au terme d'un processus de réflexion,d'étude et d'analyse critique long d'une dizaine d'années ayantinteressé plusieurs institutions nationales et étrangères ainsique l'ensemble des populations de l'Archipel; riche du prin-cipe de PARETO qui postule qu'un état B est supérieur à unétat A s'il procure du mieux-être à une personne sans pourautant retirer du bien-être à une autre et que le passage de Aà B correspond à un progrès si le bénéfice social net est posi-tif; conscient de la nécessité impérative de Gestion et Utilisa-tion Durable des ressources au bénéfice des populations etde Conservation de l'Environnement et de tout le Patrimoinesocio-culturel de l'Archipel; la décision courageuse de consti-tution de la Réserve de la Biosfère de l'Archipel Bolama-Bjagosfut prise.
Durant tout ce processus la participation communautaireoccupe une importance primordiale. En effet à chaque étapede l'évolution du processus, les communautés locales furenttoujours impliquées. Le nombre de réunions organisées jus-qu'à ce jour par île ou en assemblée générale des représen-tants de toutes les îles est extrêmement élevé mais répond àla logique de responsabilisation des interessés et des bénéfi-ciaires que sont les populations locales.
RésultatsSur la demande du Gouvernement de la République de Gui-née-Bissau, et avec l'acceptation de l'UNESCO, la ConférenceInternationale sur la Réserve de la Biosohère de l'ArchipelBolama-Bijagos publia au mois de juin 1996 à l'île de Bubaque,la création de la dite Réserve avec les fonctions suivantes:
71
DOMINGOS DE BARROS
• conservation: c'est-à-dire contribuer à la conservation despaysages, des écosystèmes des espèces et de la variabi-lité génétique;
• développement: encourager un développement économi-que durable sur les plans écologique et socio-culturel; et
• appui logistique: servir pour la recherche, la surveillancecontinue, la formation et l'éducation en matière de con-servation et de développement durable aux niveaux lo-cal, régional et global.
La Zonation de la RéserveAfin d'atteindre les objectifs assignés, et de disposer d'un ins-trument opérationnel de Planification et de Gestion permet-tant de répondre aux différentes fonctions sus-décrites, il futprocédé à la Zonation de la Réserve.
Les zones traditionnellement définies pour toute Réservefurent ici aussi identifiée dans le cadre de l'élaboration duPlan de Gestion Durable de la Reserve de l'ArchipelBolama-Bijagos, à savoir:
Les Zones Centrales avec priorité pour la conservationde la nature et comprenant les aires de restriction majeures.
Les Zones Tampons destinées au développement dura-ble et soutenu avec des restrictions suivant le type d'activité.Ces sont par excellence les zones de développement des acti-vités traditionnelles.
Les Zones de Transition destinées à la conduite possibled'actions de développement, mais le cadre d'une gestion in-tégrée c'est à dire systèmique.
Les Zones de Récupération qui inclut les aires plus oumoins dégradées où des actions doivent être conduites pourle rétablissement des caractéristiques originales des écosys-tèmes et/ou du patrimoine socio-culturel.
De nos jours, le Plan sus-cité Gestion Durable de laReserve de l'Archipel Bolama-Bijagos est encore en coursd'élaboration dans l'objectif d'assurer un développementdurable de toute la Région Bolama-Bijagos.
La Nouvelle Réglementation desPêches ArtisanalesC'est durant la seconde quinzaine du mois de Septembre 1996que le premier document législatif de la Pêche Artisanale futdiscuté et adopté au terme d'un atelier spécialisé organisé àcet effet.
La nécessité de Réglementation des Pêches Artisanalesse manifesta dans un consensus général en 1990, lors de laPremiere Rencontre Nationale de la Pêche Artisanale, bien queplusieurs autres occasions antérieures peuvent être aussi re-tenues.
De plus, la recommendation Sous-régionale d'harmoni-sation (au mieux) des réglementations au niveau de tous lespays de la Sous-région amena la Commission Sous-Régionaledes Pêches (CSRP) à demander l'assistance de la FAO à tra-vers son Projet Sous Régional d'Assistance Juridique, pourproposer, après études des réalités spécifiques locales et exa-men de la bibliographie existante, un Projet de Réglementa-tion de la Pêche Artisanale en Guinée-Bissau.
Certes, il existaient auparavant, plusieurs ordonnanceset décret qui ont permis jusqu'à ce jour à l'AdminstrationCentrale de Gérer légalement le Sous-Secteur, mais devantles résultats obtenus au niveau des diverses expériences tel-les celles du Rio Grande de Buba, de l'Archipel des Bijagos,des conflits entre pêcheurs nationaux et migrants étrangers,il s'est avéré nécessaire et impérieux d'établir une réglemen-tation de la pêche artisanale.
Le dit projet de réglementation, après amendement destechniciens compétents en la matière mais aussi après criti-ques et amélioration de la part de tous les intervenants duSous-Secteur (pêcheurs, intermédiaires, commerçants, ONGs,etc), suit actuellement la procédure d'approbation par le Con-seil des Ministres.
Résumé Des Axes Majeurs• En son article 2, la Réglementation définit la pêche arti-
sanale comme celle pratiquée dans les fleuves, zones in-sulaires, ou dans la mer territoriale par des embarcationsdu type pirogue, propulsées avec des rames ou à la voile,ou avec des moteurs de puissance inférieur ou à 60 CV,et dont la longueur ne dépasse pas normalement 18m,et sans autre moyen de conservation que la glace.
• La définition de la pêche artisanale n'étant pas simple,celle ci, en dépis du fait qu'elle ne prend pas en comptela pêche artisanale à pied, a l'avantage de présenter deforte similarité avec les autres définitions au niveau de lasous région.
• Les principes directrices orientant la Politique relative auSous-secteur souligne (article 3) la nécessité de stimuleret de développer la pêche artisanale à travers (i) l'appuiet la promotion des communautés et organisations despêcheurs de la Guinée-Bissau, (ii) l'établissement demécanismes facilitant la participation effective des pê-cheurs dans la gestion des ressources, (iii) la réservationde certaines zones à l'exploitation exclusive des artisanspêcheurs au bénéfice prioritaire des populations et com-munautés dépendant de la pêche artisanale.
• Trois zones sont distinguées (article 4) : la zone maritime,la zone estuarinne (ou insulaire) et la zone continentale.
La zone maritime est celle où exerceront les embar-cations propulsées par un moteur d'une puissance nonsupérieure à 60 CV. C'est la zone comprise entre la ligne
72
LA GESTION DURABLE DES PÊCHERIES DANS L'ARCHIPEL DES BIJAGOS ET DANS LE RIO GRANDE DE BUBA
de base située au delà de l'Archipel et la limite des 12milles nautiques.
La zone insulaire est celle où exerceront les embar-cations utilisant un moteur d'une puissance inférieureou égale à 40 CV. C'est la zone de l'Archipel proprementdit, se situant entre la continent est la ligne de base.
La zone continentale est celle où exerceront lesembarcations utilisant un moteur d'une puissance nonsupérieure à 15 CV, correspondant approximativementaux réseaux fluviaux (bras de mer, rias etc.).
La grande première, suivant l'option de responsabilisationdes communautés bénéficiaires est la création des Con-seils Consultatifs Régionaux (articles 6 à 11) composés,en plus des représentants de l'Administration, de tousles intervenants du Sous-secteur de la Pêche Artisanale;
La composition, la compétence et le fonctionnement deces Conseils sont bien définis. Le Ministère des Pêchesapportera aux divers Conseils Consultatifs Régionaux,tout son appui, dans la limite de ses disponibilités finan-cières et matérielles.Le régime des licences de pêche artisanale, leur concessionet leur validité et taxation ont été précisés (articles 12 à 18).La limitation et le controle de la pêche effectuée par lesartisans pêcheurs migrants étrangers ainsi que la défini-tion des lieux spécifiques pour l'établissement de cam-pements de pêche.Les mesures de conservation font l'objet des articles 19 à25: les engins prohibés, les dimensions de mailles nonautorisées par type d'engin, les tailles mininales prohi-bées ainsi que les espèces protégées sont traités.
SummariesGuinea Bissau, with a territory of 30,125km2, is one of the richest zones in West Africa. The complex coastalecosystem is unusual not only on the regional level, but it also has unique characteristics on a global scale,and in the Bijagos Archipelago in particular. The entire coastal zone is, in fact, a sub-regional nursery orhatchery for pelagic and demersal fish and crustaceans, as well as for certain protected (some endangered)and unprotected migratory species including marine turtles, barracuda, etc. For this reason, the region islabelled as a "reservoir" (or precious resource) for West Africa.
The Bijagos Archipelago proper has a total area of more than 10,000km2, with 1,600km2 in the intertidalzone alone (consisting of sand banks and salt pans). The surface area of the exposed lands (not includingBolama Island) represents 900km2, of which 350km2 are mangrove forest. There are 88 islands, and half areislets. Only about twenty islands are permanently inhabited and the rest are occupied periodically for seasonalagriculture or traditional initiation ceremonies. The population of the archipelago is nearly 19,000 persons.
The wealth, fragility and sensitivity of species increases near the coasts. On the open waters, the pelagicspecies live in a relatively simple milieu. Closer to the littoral areas, coastal demersal species have biotopicrequirementsfor reproduction and depend on a habitat vulnerable to destruction from fishing practices suchas trawling. Finally, in the estuaries, which are nurseries for approximately two-thirds of the species, theecological conditions are biologically and chemically complex and sensitive to pollution and deteriorationdue to the development of human activities.
The Rio Grande de Buba is a finger of salt water penetrating the continental area (Ria), characterised by aspecial biotope: a wide coastal area of mangroves, the preferred habitat for barracuda, also serving as asanctuary, or refuge, for many pelagic and demersal species. The mouth of the river opens out into the BijagosArchipelago, creating a permanent link between the zones. The Rio Grande de Buba is one of the preferredmigratory destinations for the reproduction of barracuda (sphyraenidae) in West Africa.
The fisheries sector accounts for more than 43% of the national economy of Guinea Bissau. To guaranteethe future viability of these resources —for both artisanal and industrial fisheries—the rich, sensitive coastalzone described above must retain a dynamic, ecological equilibrium and a sustainable system of management.Nationally, the Bijagos Archipelago and Rio Grande de Buba are home to 36% of the fishermen, 27% of thecanoes, 30% of the motorised boats and 28% of all craft.
The priority assigned to sustainable management in these two regions has led to a programme of biological,economic and social research that has resulted quite recently in the following for the Bijagos Archipelago: 1)identification and ranking of sensitive areas; and 2) formal creation of a "Man and the Biosphere" Reserve.In the case of Rio de Buba, management measures to conserve vital resources have led to the official adoption
73
•
•
•
•
DOMINGOS DE BARROS
Guinea Bissau (véasemapa), con un territorio de 30,125km2, es una de las zonas más ricas de Africa occidental.El complejo ecosistema costero es inusual no solo a nivel regional, sino también posee características únicasa escala mundial y particularmente en el archipiélago de Bijagos. Toda la zona costera es, de hecho, unvivero o criadero subregional para peces pelágicos, demersalesy crustáceos, así como para ciertas especiesmigratorias protegidas (algunas en riesgo de extinción) y no protegidas, que incluyen las tortugas marinas,la barracuda, etc. Por este motivo, la región está clasificada como un "reservoir" (o recursos preciosos) paraAfrica occidental.
El archipiélago de Bijagos tiene propiamente un área total de más de 10,000km2, con 1600km solo en lazona entre mareas (consistente en bancos de arena y hondonadas de sal). La superficie de las tierras expuestas(sin incluir la isla de Bolama) representa 900km, de los cuales 350km son de bosques de manglar. Hay 88islas, de las cuales la mitad son isletos. Solamente alrededor de 20 islas están permanentemente habitadas; elresto está habitado temporalmente durante la temporada agrícola o en las ceremonias tradicionales deiniciación. La población del archipiélago es alrededor de 19,000 personas.
La abundancia, fragilidad y sensibilidad de las especies se incrementan cerca de las costas. En aguasabiertas, las especies pelágicas viven en un medio ambiente relativamente sencillo. Más cerca de las zonasdel litoral, las especies demersales costeras presentan requerimientos biotópicos para la reproducción ydependen de un hábitat vulnerable por la destrucción que traen ciertas prácticas de pesca como la de rastreo.Finalmente, en los estuarios, que son viveros aproximadamente para dos terceras partes de las especies, lascondiciones ecológicas son complejas biológica y químicamente y sensibles a la contaminación y deterioro acausa de las actividades que realiza el ser humano.
El Río Grande de Buba es un dedo de agua salada que penetra en la zona continental (ría), concaracterísticas biotópicas especiales: una ancha zona costera de manglares, el hábitat preferido de labarracuda, que sirve también como santuario o refugio de muchas especies pelágicas y demersales. La bocadel río se abre hacia el archipiélago de Bijagos y forma un permanente enlace entre las zonas. ElRíoGrandede Buba es uno de los destinos migratorios preferidos para la reproducción de la barracuda (Sphyraenidae)en Africa occidental.
El sector pesquero responde a más del 43% de la economía nacional de Guinea Bissau. Para garantizar lafutura viabilidad de estos recursos — tanto para la pesca artesanal como para la industrial — la rica ysensible zona costera descrita anteriormente debe mantener un equilibrio ecológico dinámico y un sistemasostenible de manejo. Nacionalmente, el archipiélago de Bijagos y el Río Grande de Buba albergan al 36% delos pescadores, al 27% de las canoas, al 30% de las lanchas motorizadas y al 28% de todos los barcos.
La prioridad asignada al manejo sostenible en estas dos regiones ha llevado a un programa de investigaciónbiológica, económicay social que, muy recientemente, ha dado como resultado, enfavor del archipiélago deBijagos lo siguiente: 1) identificación y clasificación de las zonas sensibles; y 2) creación formal de unaReserva "El Hombre y la Biosfera". En el caso del Río de Buba, las gestiones de manejo para conservar losrecursos vitales han llevado a la emisión oficial de un decreto que define y especifica el periodo de veda paralopesca de la barracuda durante la reproducción. La participación de la comunidad ha desempeñado unimportante papel en el proceso de manejo sostenible integrado de las dos regiones geográficas, lo que hacontribuido a la toma de medidas para el manejo, así como al control y vigilancia de su aplicación.
74
of a decree defining and specifying the closed period for fishing of barracuda during reproduction. Communityparticipation has played a large part in the process of integrated, sustainable management of the twogeographical regions, contributing to the development of management measures, as well as to monitoring(and surveillance) of their application.
Section Three
Community Forestry in South AmericaEduardo MansurSummaries
Sustainable Management of Mangrove Forests in AsiaZakir HussainSummaries
Sustainable Use of Mangroves in Central AmericaAlejandro Imbach and Néstor Windevoxhel-LoraSummaries
Roles et Place des Communautes Villageoisesdans la Conservation et l'UtilisationDurable des RessourcesEl Hadj Saley GamboSummaries
Sustainable Timber Harvesting in Belize:The Columbia Controlled Felling ProgrammeN.M. Bird and Virginia VasquezSummaries
La Experiencia del Plan Piloto Forestade Quintana Roo, Mexico, en Relation alUso Sostenible de RecursosAlberto VargasSummaries
77
78
79
83
85
102
103
111
113
116
117
122
Community-based Management of Forests
Community Forestry in South America
In historical terms, the Andean region represents the start-upof community forestry in South America as it is known nowa-days. Since the 1970s, and mainly due to the support of inter-national organisations and bilateral cooperation, around 60million dollars were invested in community forestry projectsin countries such as Peru, Ecuador, Bolivia, Colombia, Chileand Argentina. The Andes represent an important area forthis type of activity, due to its characteristics of land tenure("minifundios"), the organisation of the local (mainly Indian)communities and the degradation of its forests and soils.
The funds came mostly from the governments of theNetherlands, Switzerland and Germany. Amongst the agen-cies implementing these projects, the roles of FAO, CARE,Intercooperation and GTZ should be noted.
During the 1980s, the consolidation of social forestryprojects in the Andes and in other parts of the world moti-vated the launch of similar projects in other parts of SouthAmerica, such as the Brazilian Northeast Social Forestry Project(UNDP/FAO/IBAMA), and the various social forestry andagroforestry projects carried out in the Amazon basin in Bra-zil, Peru, Ecuador, Bolivia and others.
At least one of the Amazon projects deserves special ref-erence: the Chiquitanos community of the department ofSanta Cruz, Bolivia, helped by the long-term support they re-ceived from a local NGO, is a very interesting example of com-munity involvement in sustainable forest management. TheChiquitanos forest is now certified by Smart Wood, the com-munity possesses its own sawmill and produces, beyond tropi-cal timber, a series of non-wood forest products. The case istaken as the South American "Quintana Roo", in a reference
to this successful Mexican community forestry case.Two examples of less successful projects in Ecuador were
also discussed: the ecotourism in Capirona, Ecuador, thatconduced the community to different (and unsustainable)consumption habits; and the example of the use of "tagua"(vegetal ivory) in the Esmeraldas province, a project centeredon only one species (phvteledhas macrocarda) that causedproblems to the ecosystem.
The late 1980s and early 1990s were characterised by thedevelopment and institutionalisation of methodologies forcommunity forestry, such as the PAC (Andean CommunityPlanning) developed by Gal Ramon in Ecuador. Some issueswere at the top of the agendas of the projects, such as partici-patory planning, valorisation of non-wood benefits from theforests, gender and conservation of natural resources.
At present, two main issues represent the new challengesof community forestry in South America:
• biodiversity conservation through community involve-ment in forest management; and
• policy issues regarding communities and their forests.
As an example of the new approach to projects in SouthAmerica, IUCN and Intercooperation, with financial supportfrom the Swiss government, started in 1993 the implementa-tion of a Native Andean Forests Programme. At this timePROBONA is active in Bolivia and Ecuador. In these countriesthe programme is developing, in a totally participatory way,16 different, integrated models of community forest manage-ment plans. They will be validated and disseminated amongst
1IUCN Regional Office for South America —Av. Atahualpa 955 y Republica, Edif. Digicom Piso 4,Casilla Postal 17-17-626, Quito, Ecuador
77
Eduardo Mansur1
The presentation focused on an overview of the South American experience in community involvement inforestry and forest conservation. It addressed the evolution of social forestry projects in the region in the last20 years, and stressed the main issues throughout this period. Present challenges relate to biodiversityconservation, community forestry and policy issues.
EDUARDO MANSUR
Andean communities in various countries, as a way of pro-moting rural development and conservation simultaneously,through the wise use of the forests and other natural resourcesaccessible by the rural people, in ways defined by the ruralpeople themselves.
Other integrated development and conservation projects(IDCP's) are appearing, and lobbying groups such as the IUCNWorking Group on Community Involvement in SustainableForest Management (WG-CEFM) are more and more activeand accepted in the global forest policy debate. The IUCNGroup has participated since the first session of the Intergov-ernmental Panel on Forests (IPF), pressing governments toadopt policies that commit themselves to community forestry.
New topics are addressed in the region, and more NGOs,Community-Based Organisations and government planningauthorities get involved in themes such as traditional knowl-edge, underlying causes of deforestation, the role of the Statein community forestry and how to return the responsibilitiesand benefits of the forest use and conservation to the localcommunities. It is a move away from the "emotional" com-munity forestry of the 1970s toward a more "rational" com-munity forestry of the 1990s, addressing the complex needsto preserve the biodiversity of the region and to improve thelife standards of the rural poor.
La présentation a principalement porté sur un aperçu global de l'expérience sud américaine en ce quiconcerne la participation des communautés à la foresterie et à la conservation des forêts. Elle traite del'évolution des projets forestiers de la région, penchés sur la prise en compte de ses dimensions sociales, aucours des 20 dernières années et met l'accent sur les principales questions qui se sont posées au cours de cettepériode. Les défis actuels concernent la conservation de la biodiversité par rapport à la foresteriecommunautaire, et à la conception et à la mise en oeuvre des politiques.
La exposición se centró en una visión general de la experiencia sudamericana en participacióncomunitaria en silvicultura y conservación de bosques. Expuso la evolución de los proyectos forestalessociales en la zona en los últimos veinte años, y puso de relieve los asuntos principales que se plantearonen todo este período. Los desafíos actuales tienen que ver con la conservación de la biodiversidad y lasilvicultura comunitaria y con asuntos de políticas.
78
Summaries
Sustainable Management of MangroveForests in AsiaZakir Hussain1
Mangroves occur extensively in Asia. In addition to an economically important crop of forest trees, themangrove forests of Asia are rich in wildlife and a whole range of non-forest resources. The mangroves in Asiaconstitute important habitats for a number of threatened and endangered species of animals.
Mangroves are considered a major forest resource base in Asia, where communities have been dependenton mangroveforestsfor both subsistence and income generation for ages. Mangroves in many Asian countriesare important sources for timber, fuelwood, poles, industrial raw materials and a whole array of non-timberas well as non-forest products of great economic significance.
Mangrove formations in many South and Southeast Asian countries have been under sustainablemanagement for a long time. The Sundarbans, which is the single largest chunk of contiguous mangroveforest in the world, has been under sustainable management for more than a hundred and twenty years. TheMatang Forest in Malaysia hasbeen under scientific management from the 1920s. Mangroveforestformationsin a number of countries in the region have been under appropriate management regimes for decades.
Based on the silvicultural requirement, local conditions and the objective of fulfilling the demand for specificproducts, site and situation specific management regimes have been developed in these countries to guaranteethe supply of desirable products, while ensuring the sustainability of the forests. These management practiceshave withstood the test of time and have proved that the management interventions have been appropriatebecause these forests still exist in good condition even though they have been providing a steady yield ofproducts for several decades.
Introduction
About 40% of the world's mangrove forest occur in Asia incountries between Arabian Peninsula in the West and Japanin the east. There are substantial areas of mangrove forests incountries like Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Thailand,Cambodia, Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia and The Philippines.Indonesia is reported to have the largest area under mangroveforest, while the Sundarbans in India and Bangladesh is thesingle largest chunk of contiguous mangrove forest in theworld.
Unlike most other regions of the world where only lim-ited, large-scale and organised exploitation of mangroves arecarried out — mangroves in Asia are considered a major re-source base which large communities have been dependenton for both subsistence and income generation for a long time.
Mangroves in Asia are sources of both timber and non-timberforest products, as well as several non-forestry products whichgenerate livelihoods for a large number of people.
Timber, fuelwood, poles, pulpwood, chipwood, wood forcharcoal making, thatching material, fodder, honey, bee's wax,fish, crustaceans, mollusks and shells are the main productsof the mangrove forests in Asia. However, most extensivelyharvested products of these forests are timber, fuelwood,wood for charcoal making and nipa palm leaves, which areextensively used for thatching houses in rural areas. Mangrovesplay a very important role in the lives and economies of coastalcommunities as these communities often depend on man-grove forests for meeting their need of aforementioned prod-ucts, as well as the generation of income. According to an
1IUCN Thailand, c/o Asian Institute of Technology, GPO Box 2754, Bangkok 10501 Thailand.
79
ZAKIR HUSSAIN
estimate as many as one million people may be enteringBangladesh each year to exploit some of the forest resources.According to a Forest Department estimate, up to 45,000people are engaged in harvest related activities inside the for-est on any day in the peak working season.
Harvest and utilisation of mangrove tree species for bothdomestic uses as well as commercial purposes have been inpractice in Asia for several centuries. Starting from the 16thcentury, local kings imposed a levy on exploitation of man-groves from the Sundarbans (Curtis, 1.933). This indicates thateven in those days there was enough demand for mangroveforest products to justify the imposition of a levy on exploitation.
History of Management
Regulated harvest of mangroves began in several countries inthe region in the last century. In the early stages, only harvestfrom assigned areas within the forest was being practised inthese countries where the mangrove forests were mostly un-der the control of governments. In most cases revenue wascollected against the harvest of a specified quantity of wood.
Scientific management of mangrove forest was first initi-ated in the Sundarbans in the 1870s when a Forest Manage-ment Division was established exclusively for the managementof mangrove forests of the Sundarbans in the Gangetic Delta.Specific management prescriptions were gradually formulatedfor the regulation of exploitation of the yield. These prescrip-tions were formulated with a view to ensuring restocking ofthe harvested area through natural regeneration. The first ten-year management plan for the Sundarbans forest in India andBangladesh was established in 1893. Several revisions of theplan have been made since then. Other mangrove forests inAsia have subsequently come under scientific management.Matang Forest in Peninsular Malaysia (Haron, 1981) andIrrawaddy Delta Mangrove Forest in Myanmar were broughtunder scientific management during the second decade ofthis century while some mangrove formations in Ca Man Pe-ninsula in Mekong Delta in Vietnam were brought under sci-entific management in the 1930s (Hong and San, 1993). Thefirst management plan for mangrove forest management inIndonesia was prepared for Segara Anakah in 1930. Thailandand Pakistan have been under scientific management for sev-eral decades.
Wood for charcoal manufacture is the single most im-portant product from the mangrove forests of Southeast Asia.Other important products are timber, fuelwood and poles.The harvest of mangrove forests for supplying raw materials(wood-chips) for rayon mills in Japan and Taiwan gainedprominence in the 1970s and large quantities of mangrovewood was harvested for wood chip in countries like Thailand,Malaysia and Indonesia. Nipa palm leaves are still extensivelyused as thatching material in most countries in the region.
Mangrove waters are rich in aquatic organisms including fish,crustaceans and mollusks and are a major source of fisheryresources in these countries.
The main products of the forests in South Asia andMyanmar are timber and fuelwood. Charcoal making is notcommon in these countries. Other wood products are poles,raw materials for paper, packing box and matchwood indus-tries. Nipa palm leaves are extensively harvested and used forthatching, while grasses and mangrove leaves are collectedand used as fodder. In Myanmar Phoenix pelludosa palm treesare used extensively for poles. Honey, bees' wax and shellsare other products which deserve mention. Shells are burntto produce common lime. Fisheries are very large-scale ac-tivities in the creeks and rivers within mangrove forests and isa major source of fish in the countries. A large number ofpeople are involved in fishing, fish processing and retailing fish.
Sustainable ManagementRegimes
Two different silvicultural systems, with some modificationsto suit local conditions, have been in use for the managementof mangrove forests in Asia.
The South Asian mangrove forests, in general, are char-acterised by stands where predominant species do not be-long to the family Rhizophoraceae. Even though somerhizophores occur in these forests, the main commercial spe-cies are mostly shade-loving, particularly in the sapling andseedling stage.
The most important and frequently occurring commer-cial species in the Sundarbans in Bangladesh, where large ar-eas of productive forest still exist, is Heritiera fames, which isa shade bearer in the early stages of development. When ex-posed to direct sunlight, the species is unable to withstandthe competition from more aggressive and light demandingspecies and often are replaced by those species.
The management regime in the Sundarbans was devel-oped gradually over decades and is designed to promote theestablishment of Heritiera fames and is an adoption of theselection system of forest management. The forest is workedon a 20-year cycle and one twentieth of the productive por-tion of the forest is harvested each year.
Under this regime, all trees above a certain predetermineddiameter in the annual coupe or felling area are removed aslong as such removals do not create any permanent gaps inthe canopy. Once the timber harvest is completed, an improve-ment filling is undertaken to remove all diseased, dead anddeformed trees as well as to remove any congestion in thetree crops. The products of this improvement felling are soldas fuelwood. Under this selection cum improvement systemeach section of the forest is harvested once in each 20 yearperiod and as a result, forest is allowed to grow without any
80
SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF MANGROVE FORESTS IN ASIA
disturbances for almost 20 years at a time (Hussain and Ahmed,1994). This practice in the Sundarbans, which is very rich inbiodiversity, causes a minimum of disturbances to the faunaof the forest. As a limited number of trees are removed, thereis very little change in the habitat condition for the other liv-ing components of the ecosystem.
This system, which allows only the removal of a numberof selected trees, creates enough opening in the canopy andentry of light into the forest floor for the creation of favour-able conditions for the promotion of the establishment of thepreferred species. This management regime was introducedto the Sundarbans more than 100 years ago and has so farworked out very well. Whatever depletion has occurred inthe forest during the last 100 years cannot be attributed to afaulty management system.
Management prescriptions have also been formulated fornon-wood species like Nipa fruticans, Phoenix pelludosa(both palms) and some grasses and climbers. In theSundarbans the palm leaves are harvested annually in the dryseason and while harvesting the central leaf (frond) and theleaf next to it are retained in each clump. Dead and dry leavesare cleared and flowers and fruits are not disturbed.
Grasses are harvested in the same fashion as cereal cropsand only mature Pelludosa palm trees are allowed to be har-vested. In the Sundarbans small wood products, which areharvested as fuel wood, fence post, etc. are also collected ona 20 year cycle and only plants above a certain prefixed diam-eter are exploited (Hussain and Ahmed, 1994). Selective fell-ing has also been in practice in the mangrove forests of Paki-stan, Myanmar and India (Hussain, 1995).
The most dominant and commercially important speciesin the mangrove forests in Southeast Asian countries are anumber of species from the family Rhizophoraceae. Thesespecies are strong light demanders and can establish them-selves on suitable barren substrate and under direct sunlight.
Different modifications of clear felling systems are usedfor the management of these forests. In the Matang ReserveForest in Malaysia, the forest stands are clear felled for collec-tion of wood for charcoal making. Clear felled areas are al-lowed to regenerate naturally and enrichment plantings arecarried out whenever it becomes necessary to augment thenatural regeneration (Harun, 1981). In practice, young seed-lings and saplings of Rhizophora are not cut during clear fell-ing. The Matang Forest is worked on a 30 year rotation. Twothinnings are carried out at ages 20 and 25 years (Keong, 1995).A 3m belt of trees are maintained along rivers and creeks.
In Sabah and Sarawak a selection system is applied wheretrees above a minimum prefixed diameter are harvested inannual coupes. As the prefixed diameter is very small, 10 &6.5cm in case of Sabah and Sarawak respectively, an extrac-tion operation results in the removal of most of the trees in acoupe. However, in Sabah 40 trees of desirable species of sizesabove 10cm in diameter along with a 10 metre wide strip of trees
are retained along the coast and waterways (Chan et al., 1993).In Thailand rotation has been fixed at 30 years with a
felling cycle of 15 years. This is practised by dividing the areainto 15 coupes, each of which is further divided into 40 metrewide strips forming an angle of 45 degrees to the tide. Alter-nate strips are cut every 15 years, thus giving a rotation of 30years (FAO, 1985). Seedlings and saplings of valuable speciesare left undisturbed in the strips. In situations where suffi-cient regeneration cannot occur, enrichment planting is car-ried out (Aksornkoae, 1993).
In Indonesia, which has the largest area (4.25 million ha)of mangrove forest in the world, the forest is divided into threecategories. Production Forest, which comprise about 17%of all mangrove forest area in Indonesia which have been ear-marked for timber, fuelwood, chipwood, poles, nipa leavesand other production purposes. Another 14% is designatedas Conservation Forests which are protected against hu-man disturbances and constitute sanctuary reserves and na-tures conservation areas. Some additional areas are maintainedas Protection Forests for the purposes of water regulation,flood prevention and other protection functions. However, alarge area of mangroves in Indonesia still remains unregulated.
In Indonesia, both clear felling and clear felling in 50mstrips at right angles to the coastline are practised. No loggingis allowed within 50 metres of the coastline or within 10 me-tres of a river. Ten metre wide strips of undisturbed mangroveforests are left between each two 50 metre wide harvestedareas to provide seeds for natural regeneration. Only trees of7cm breast height diameter or more can be harvested (FAO,1985). In some areas forty Rhizophora, Bonguiera and Ceriopstrees above 20cm diameter and evenly distributed are, retainedas seed trees in each hectare of harvested forest(Soemodihasdjo and Soerianegara, 1989).
Mangrove Forest Harvest andBenefit to PeopleAll major mangrove forests in Asia are state owned, and as aresult are controlled by government agencies. Individuals andcommunities have very little, if any, participation in the man-agement of these forests.
However, the management regimes in most countrieshave been designed to benefit maximum number of people.There is no provision in most countries to allow large-scaleconcessions. Mangrove forest resources are mostly sold insmall lots or quantities which allow people with very limitedresources to participate in this income generating activity.
In the Sundarbans, each year's coupe or felling area isdivided into small lots which result in the creation of a largenumber of small plots. These plots are sold in an open auc-tion where anyone can bid. This process allows participationin the purchase by large number of people. Since the cost of
81
ZAKIR HUSSAIN
each lot varies, people with limited financial resources arealso able to participate in the process. The lot purchasers areallowed to pay for the lots in installments and can take out acertain proportion of the produce against the payment of eachinstallment. The process employed in the extraction offuelwood from the forest allows a participation by a muchlarger number of people. Fuelwood of all types are sold byboatloads and the maximum allowable size of boat is 18,500kg.In a transparent process, a wood collector registers his boatfor fuelwood collection at a specific forest station outside theforest and is given a serial number. The boats are then sent tofuelwood collection centres serially. In the Sundarbans, allother products from the forest, including Nipa leaves, grasses,fish, honey, bee's wax and shells are sold in small lots whichallow anyone with a small capital to engage in these activities.There is no provision for allowing the grant of any conces-sions to large-scale entrepreneurs. The exception is a papermill which is allowed to harvest a predetermined quantity ofExcoecaria agallocha pulpwood each year. It may be men-tioned here that this species is not in demand for any otherpurposes and if it was not harvested by the paper mill, then itmay have remained in the forest. The extraction of wood forcharcoal in the Matang forest is also done through the grant-ing of licenses to approved wood harvest contractors. Theannual felling area in Matang for charcoal coupes under thecurrent management plan is 7980.3ha. These areas are har-vested against issuance of licenses to the charcoal contrac-tors. The size of these coupes range between 50 and 100 hec-tares, allowing the issuance of licenses to a large number ofcontractors at a prefixed royalty (Keong,1995). The provisionfor selling some wood by tender in the new management planhas raised concerns that this process will allow monopoliza-tion by a few with strong financial standings. Materials fromthinning are sold through an issuance of licenses to contrac-tors.
The management practices in other countries in Asia alsoallow harvest by individuals directly without going through aconcessionaire. Thailand is an exception, where most produc-tive mangrove forests have been leased out in concessions ofbetween 500 and 5000 hectares.
Wildlife Conservation
In addition to a wide floral diversity, some of the mangroveforests are very rich in fauna diversity as well. In the Bangladeshportion of the Sundarbans for example, among a whole rangeof species belonging to different orders, 49 species of mam-mals, including the famous Bengal Tiger (Pantherea Tigrisligris), 45 species of reptiles including the Saltwater croco-dile (Crocodylus porosus), 315 species of both resident andmigratory birds, 177 species of fish and 31 species of shrimpsand crabs occur (Rashid et al., 1994). Many species of mam-
mals, birds and insects live in the canopy of mangrove forestin Malaysia (Berry, 1972). The intertidal and aquatic fauna arevery rich in diversity in the mangroves of many countries.Mangroves in Asia constitute important habitats for a largenumber of threatened and endangered species of animals.
In most forests, no special efforts are being made for theconservation of the fauna. Areas have been delineated as wild-life sanctuaries and national parks in the Sundarbans (Hussainand Acharya, 1994), and in the Indian Sundarbans, protec-tion, training, monitoring and research programmes aimedat promoting the conservation of tigers are being implementedunder a National Tiger Conservation Project (Chaudhuri andChoudhury, 1994).
Even though very few efforts have been directed towardthe sustainable management of mangroves in general in Asia,the conservation of their habitat and the general protectionof forests and their resources have played a major role in theconservation of wildlife in mangrove forests. Even though thisarrangement is not enough, the general protection of man-grove forests and the limited conservation and managementefforts have played a major role in wildlife conservation inmangrove forests like the Sundarbans.
The forest harvest system in the Sundarbans, where thetwenty-year extraction activities are completed in a little morethan a year, the practice ensures that a minimum of distur-bance is created for the wildlife. As the habitat is not greatlychanged, the wildlife can move back to these areas once theexploitation has been completed.
Conclusion
The management of mangroves in Asia, particularly inBangladesh, India and Malaysia, has been in place for severaldecades and has withstood the test of time. The Sundarbansin Bangladesh have been under a simple, easy-to-implementmanagement regime which was installed more than a hun-dred years ago. This has ensured sustainability and if the man-agement practices are followed properly, this will ensuremaintenance of the stands in stable condition for an indefi-nite period of time.
The clear felling system employed in Southeast Asiancountries has also given equally good results. There has notbeen much change in the crop quality at Matang over the last70 years. The fact that the current crop of trees are smaller insize has resulted from a short rotation designed to producesmaller sized trees for charcoal manufacture.
The deterioration of vegetation that has occurred in someforests has either been caused by a change in habitat condi-tion, which is a national phenomenon, or has resulted fromover exploitation of the resources which has been carried outwithout due regard for standardised management regimes orthe silvicultural needs of the forest.
82
SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF MANGROVE FORESTS IN ASIA
One major weakness of the management regimes imple-mented in Asian mangrove forests is that they almost exclu-sively aim to specifically manage economically important spe-cies of plants. A mangrove forest is not just a collection oftrees. It is an ecosystem which has a rich diversity of bothfloral and fauna resources. A management strategy for the in-tegrated management of all resources of a mangrove foresthas not been formulated yet.
The management of fauna resources is very weak. Verydetailed information is available on the commercially impor-tant tree species. However, very little information has so farbeen generated on the fauna population. Current manage-ment practices are restricted in most countries to the desig-nation of sanctuaries, and the protection that wildlife receivesas a result of the protection provided to the economicallyimportant resources. However, the management regimes havebeen standardised and this has allowed for the maintenanceof a stable crop, which in turn has resulted in the conserva-tion of wildlife habitats. These indirectly help in the conserva-tion of wildlife in the forests. All that is needed now is theincorporation of the sustainable management interventionsfor the other components of the mangrove forests to ensurethat sustainability, which has been achieved at the mangrovetree resource level, can also be achieved at an ecosystem level.
ReferencesAksornkoae, S. 1993. Ecology and Management of Mangrove.IUCN-The World Conservation Union, Bangkok, Thailand.
Berry, A. J. 1972. The Natural History of West Malaysian Man-grove Fauna. Malay, Nature Journal, 25. Pp.135-62.
Chan, H.T., One, J.E., Gong, W.K. and Sasekumar, A. 1993.The Socioeconomic, Ecological and Environmental Values ofMangrove Ecosystems in Malaysia and Their Present State ofConservation. In: Clough, B.F., The Economic and Environ-mental Values of Mangrove Forests and Their Present Stateof Conservation in the Southeast Asia/Pacific Region. ISME,Nishihara, Okinawa, Japan.
Chaudhuri, A.B., and Choudhury, A. 1994. Mangrove of theSundarbans Volume One: India. IUCN - The World Conser-
vation Union, Bangkok, Thailand.
Curtis, SJ. 1933. Working Plans for the Forests of theSundarbans Division for the Period from 1st April 1931 to31st March 1951. Volumes I and II. Bengal Government Press,Calcutta, India.
FAO. 1985. Mangrove Management in Thailand, Malaysiaand Indonesia. FAO Environment Paper no. 4. Rome, Italy.
Haron, H.A.H. 1981. A Working Plan for the Second 30-yearRotation of the Matang Mangrove Forest Reserve, Perak: TheFirst 10-year Period 1980-1989. Perak State Forestry Dept.,Perak, Malaysia.
Hong, P.N., and San, H.T. 1993. Mangroves ofVietnam. IUCN-The World Conservation Union, Bangkok, Thailand.
Hussain, Z., and Acharya, G. 1994. (Eds), Mangrove of theSundarbans Volume Two: Bangladesh. IUCN-The WorldConservation Union, Bangkok, Thailand.
Hussain, Z., and Ahmed, I. 1994. Management of Forest Re-sources. In: Mangroves of the Sundarbans Volume Two: Bang-ladesh. IUCN, Bangkok, Thailand.
Hussain, Z. 1995. Silviculture of Mangroves. Unasylva 46(2):36-42.
Keong, G.B. 1995. A Working Plan for the Sprang MangroveForest Reserve, Perak (fourth revision). The State ForestryDepartment of Perak, Darul Ridzuan. Malaysia.
Rashid, S.M.A., Khan, A., and Akonda, A.W. (1994). Fauna. In:Mangroves of the Sundarbans Volume Two: Bangladesh.IUCN, Bangkok, Thailand.
Soemodihasdjo, S., and Soerianegara, I. 1989. Indonesia (coun-try report). In: Mangrove Management: Its Ecological andEconomic Considerations. BIOTROP Special Publication No.37. SAEMED-BIOTROP. Bogor, Indonesia.
SummariesLes palétuviers sont très répandus en Asie. Outre leur importance économique, les forêts de palétuviers del'Asie sont riches en espèces sauvages et en ressources non-forestières très diverses. Les forêts de palétuviersabritent un nombre important d'espèces animales menacées.
Les palétuviers sont considérés comme un importantréservoir de ressources en Asie où les communautésdépendent, depuis fort longtemps, de ces forêts pour leur subsistance et leurs activités génératrices de revenus.
83
ZAKIR HUSSAIN
En Asia hay grandes extensiones de manglares. Desde el punto de vista económico, además de una cosechaimportante de árboles, los bosques de manglar de Asia son ricos en fauna y en una amplia gama de recursosno forestales. Los manglares en Asia constituyen hábitats importantes para una serie de especies de animalesamenazadas y en peligro.
En Asia se considera a los mangares como un recurso forestal fundamental ya que las comunidades handependido de los bosques de manglar tanto para su subsistencia como para la generación de ingresos. Enmuchos países asiáticos los manglares son fuentes importantes de madera para construcción, leña, postes,materia prima industrial y también de productos no forestales de gran importancia económica.
Las formaciones de manglares en muchas comunidades de Asia meridional y sur oriental han sidomanejadas por bastante tiempo en forma sostenible. Los Sundarbans, que es la zona más grande del mundode bosque continuo de manglares, han sido manejados en forma sostenible por más de ciento veinte años. Elbosque Matang en Malasia ha estado bajo manejo científico en forma científica desde la década de los añosveinte. Toda una serie deformaciones de bosques de manglar en varios países de la región han estado bajoregímenes adecuados de manejo durante décadas.
Apartir de las exigencias silviculturales, de las condiciones localesy con el objetivo de satisfacer la demandade productos específicos, se han elaborado en esos países regímenes específicos de manejo según el lugar y lasituación, para garantizar el suministro de productos deseables, asegurándose al mismo tiempo de lasostenibilidad de los bosques. Estas prácticas de manejo han superado la prueba del tiempo y han demostradoque las intervenciones de manejo han sido apropiadas puesto que estos bosques siguen encontrándose enbuenas condiciones a pesar de que han estado suministrando productos por décadas y con un rendimientoconstante.
84
Dans beaucoup de pays asiatiques, les forêts de palétuviers constituent d'importantes sourcesd'approvisionnement en bois de construction et de chauffage, en perches, en matières premières industrielleset en une gamme de produits non-ligneux et non-forestiers ayant une grande importance économique.
Dans beaucoup de pays asiatiques, les forêts de palétuviers constituent d'importantes sourcesd'approvisionnement en bois de construction et de chauffage, en perches, en matières premières industrielleset en une gamme de produits non-ligneux et non-forestiers ayant une grande importance économique.
Dans bon nombre de pays du sud et du sud-est asiatique, les forêts de palétuviers sont gérées de manièredurable depuis longtemps. Les Sundarbans, l'endroit au monde où l'on trouve la plus vaste superficie de forêtcontiguë de palétuviers, sont gérés de manière durable depuis plus de cent vingt ans. La forêt du Matang, enMalaisie, fait l'objet d'une gestion scientifique depuis les années 1920. Dans plusieurs pays de la région, lesforêts de palétuviers connaissent un régime d'utilisation appropriée depuis des décennies.
A partir des exigences sylviculturales et des conditions locales—ayant pour objet à faire face à la demandeen produits divers—des régimes de gestion pour les sites et les situations spécifiques ont été mis en place dansces pays afin de garantir l'approvisionnement en produits voulus, tout en assurant la durabilité des forêts.Ces pratiques de gestion ont résisté à l'épreuve du temps et ont prouvé que ces interventions sont appropriéesparce que ces forêts sont toujours en bon état, même si elles fournissent un rendement régulier de produitsdepuis plusieurs années.
Sustainable Use of Mangroves in CentralAmerica
BackgroundAt the last two IUCN General Assemblies (Perth, 1990 andBuenos Aires, 1994) resolutions were approved calling for anintensification of IUCN efforts to promote sustainable use ofwildlife as a way of ensuring the conservation of biologicaldiversity.
After the last General Assembly, the SSC Sustainable UseSpecialist Group launched the Sustainable Use Initiative (SUI)to address the sustainable use of forests, fish and other wild-life resources in marine, freshwater and terrestrial ecosystems.The working structure organised includes an Advisory Group,regional Specialist Groups and a Secretariat to provide sup-port and coordination.
The Advisory Group met for the first time in June 1995,in Zimbabwe, and the Mesoamerican Region selected two mainareas upon which to focus its efforts: Sustainable Managementof Wildlife and Community Forest Management. The secondwas later divided into two parts, mangrove and terra firmaforests.
This paper reports on the situation of community-basedmanagement of mangrove forests. Most of the informationwas presented at the Workshop on Productive Managementof Mangroves held in Leon, Nicaragua, in August 1995 andorganised jointly by the Mangroves Project of the TropicalAgricultural Training and Research Centre (CATIE), the IUCN
1Coordinator, Latin America Network of Strategies Towards Sustainability; tel: (506) 325 0659; e-mail: [email protected] Technical Director, IUCN/ORMA, PO Box 1160-2150, Moravia, Costa Rica; e-mail: [email protected]
85
Alejandro Imbach1 and Néstor Windevoxhel-Lora2
Only 7% of the forests remaining in Central America are mangroves, but they constitute one of the mostrepresentative ecosystems to be found in the region's protected coastal areas. Due to accelerated reduction ofCentral American tropical forest, particularly dry forest, mangroves have currently become an importantsource of resources for satisfying the basic needs of families living in and near coastal zones. In some dryPacific coast areas, communities meet 40-90% of their energy requirements using firewood from mangroves.Mangroves provide for basic necessities in food (fish, wildlife and shellfish), forest resources (firewood, wood,poles and charcoal) and non-wood resources (tannin, honey), as well as abundant wildlife for indirect anddirect use (tourism, recreation). Central America's mangroves also fulfill significant ecological functionsand contribute important benefits to the local and national economy, suchaspotablewater, waterforirrigationand support for external activities.
Economic conditions in Central America, and the marginal situation of populations located in coastalareas, in particular, encourage an extractive and unsustainable use of mangroves. Production systems havebeen identified whose variability and complexity make it difficult to evaluate sustainability of use. However,it has been possible to identify important principles for sustainable use of mangrove through varyingdevelopment and conservation projects. Significant variables in use sustainability include those relating toproperty ownership or access to resources, as well as distribution of benefits and their impact on the familyeconomy. The heterogeneity of mangroves and their particular conditions — and the implications of thesefactors for use — have also been recognised. Along with traditional and non-traditional knowledge ofmangroves, such variables are determinative with respect to sustainable use of the resource.
ALEJANDRO IMBACH AND NÉSTOR WINDEVOXHEL-LORA
The workshop brought together representatives fromalmost every project and institution dealing with the sustain-able use of mangroves in the region. Several participants aremembers of the Regional SUI Specialist Group.
This report is organised in three main sections: 1) a briefpresentation of the different initiatives presently active in theregion; 2) a detailed analysis of SUI priorities (ecologic, so-cioeconomic, cultural and institutional); and 3) conclusionsand recommendations.
Importance of Mangrove Forestand Management Experience inCentral AmericaGeneral Remarks
Central America is a region with great biogeographical im-portance since it serves as a bridge between the northern andsouthern parts of the continent, and lies between the PacificOcean and the Caribbean. Innumerable ecosystems and
coastal wetlands are represented, particularly mangroves andcoral reefs. These ecosystems are among the world's mostproductive (Day et al, 1989); as such, they not only possesshigh ecological value but contribute significantly to regionaleconomies. Given Central America's socioeconomic charac-teristics and resource distribution, coastal zones in general,and mangroves in particular, are ecosystems with an evidentand determinative role in the regional economy.
Only 7% of the forests remaining in Central America aremangroves, but they constitute one of the most representa-tive ecosystems to be found in the region's protected coastalareas. Due to accelerated reduction of Central American tropi-cal forest, particularly dry forest, mangroves have currentlybecome an important source of resources for satisfying thebasic needs of families living in or near coastal zones. In somedry Pacific coast areas, communities meet 40-90% of theirenergy requirements using firewood from mangroves.
Mangroves provide for basic necessities in food (fish,wildlife and shellfish), forest resources (firewood, wood, polesand charcoal) and non-wood resources (tannin, honey), aswell as abundant wildlife for indirect or direct use (tourism,
COUNTRY
POPULATION(MILLIONS1 9 9 4 )
DENSITY (PERKM2)
COASTALINHABITANTS(%)
POVERTY (%POP.)
EAP (% OFPOP.)
UNEMPLOYME-NT (% OFEAP)
GDP (PERCAPITA, US$
1 9 9 1 )
TOURISM
INCOME
(MILLIONS
US$, 1 9 9 3 )
50% OR MORE
OF TOURISM
IN COASTAL
MANGROVEAREAS (KM2. )
CONTINENTALSHELF ( K M 2 )
BEL
1.23
.067
39.0
23.0
25.8
13.1
2.627
108
yes
115
8.250
GUA
10.332
9.1
26.0
75
27.3
5 5
1.255
260
no
160
12.300
HON
5.497
94.8
15
76.5
31.1
59
576
32
yes
1.458
53.500
E.S.
5.641
49
13
75.4
40.9
8.1
1.398
41
no
268
17.800
NIC.
4.275
269.5
24
74.4
34.9
21.8
449
26
yes
1.550
72.700
C.R.
3.334
36.1
7.0
20.7
32.6
4.2
2.180
441
yes
410
15800
PAN.
2.611
65.8
50
54.2
35.3
12.5
2.642
208
yes
1.708
57.300
TOTAL
31.889
62.4
21.6
62.7
35.7
8.7
1.274
1.116
yes
5.669
237.650
Table 1: Socioeconomic Characteristics of Central America
86
SUSTAINABLE USE OF MANGROVES IN CENTRAL AMERICA
recreation). Central America's mangroves also fulfill signifi-cant ecological functions and contribute important benefitsto the local and national economy, such as potable water, waterfor irrigation and support for external activities.
Other than biological research, mangrove ecosystems didnot receive much attention in this region until the late eight-ies, when IUCN established a Regional Wetlands Programmeto call attention to the situation of mangroves and foster re-search, sustainable use, training, information disseminationand other activities aimed at conserving these valuable eco-systems.
In the following years several initiatives flourished in theregion, most of them on the Pacific coast (see maps) due tothe higher level of degradation in this area and strong pres-sure for conversion to other uses (intensive agriculture,aquaculture, urban development, coastal infrastructure, etc.).This trend is still evident, despite initiatives involving Carib-bean mangroves, mostly in Honduras, that are less developedin biological terms and suffer much less pressure due to scarcepopulation in these areas.
The following sections summarise relevant experiencesin the different countries of the region, citing also the mostrecent literature on different topics related to sustainable useof mangroves.
Guatemala
Identification and mapping of mangroves in Guatemala havebeen recently reviewed by Aragón et al. (1994), and resultsare presented in Map 1. Areas with initiatives for sustainableuse are also indicated. These are:
• Monterrico• Manchón — Huamuchal
The activities carried out in these areas and their resultswere recently summarised by Barrios (in press a, b), Arrecis(1992) and Santos (in press).
El Salvador
Identification and mapping of mangroves in El Salvador wererecently reviewed by Abrego (1994), and results are presentedas Map 2. Areas with initiatives for sustainable use are alsoindicated. These are:
• Jocotal• Barra de Santiago• Jiquilisco
Advances toward sustainable use in these areas are in-
cipient since these activities are in their initial stages (pers.comm.: Martnez, A., Assessor. SEMA, El Salvador; Melara, R.,Shrimp Technologist. Programa ALA, El Salvador; and Villeda,J.A.,AMAR, El Salvador.)
Honduras
Initiatives for the sustainable use of mangroves in Hondurasare concentrated on the Pacific coast in the Gulf of Fonseca,which this country shares with Nicaragua and El Salvador.
The situation of mangroves in this area was reviewed byOyuela (1994) while Varela (in press) presented a summaryof activities carried out by CODEFFAGOLF, a local NGO pro-moting sustainable use of mangroves in the Gulf.
Nicaragua
Identification and mapping of mangroves in Nicaragua wererecently reviewed by Hurtado and Camacho (1994), and re-sults are presented as Map 3. Areas with initiatives for sustain-able use are also indicated. These are:
• Estero Real• Alemania Federal• Peñitas-Salinas Grandes
Several presentations outlined activities and results in thedifferent areas. Advances of the Estero Real Mangroves Projectregarding production systems were presented by Paniagua(in press); mangroves reforestation, Conrado (in press); greeniguana farming, Delgado (in press); honey production, Davila(in press); artisanal shrimp farming, Martínez (in press) andwoodcutters cooperatives, Gallo (in press).
Concerning the situation in Peñitas-Salinas, there are re-ports regarding mangrove reforestation by Cruz (in press);honey production by Gutiérrez (in press); and mangrove for-est inventory and management by Ramírez and Marmillod (inpress). The experience in Alemania Federal with green iguanafarming was reported by Céceres and Gutiérrez (in press),while Gutiérrez (in press) provided information on honeyproduction. Forestry legislation in Nicaragua and its applica-tion to mangroves was reviewed recently by Díaz and Paiz (inpress).
Costa Rica
Identification and mapping of mangroves on the Pacific Coastof Costa Rica was recently reviewed by Pizarro and Angulo(1994), and results are presented as Map 4. Areas with sus-tainable use initiatives are also indicated. These are:
87
ALEJANDRO IMBACH AND NÉSTOR WINDEVOXHEL-LORA
88
Map
1:
Dis
trib
utio
n of
man
grov
es o
n th
e P
acifi
c C
oast
of G
uate
mal
a
SUSTAINABLE USE OF MANGROVES IN CENTRAL AMERICA
• Térraba—Sierpe• Tamarindo
Advances toward the sustainable use of mangroves weresummarised for Terraba-Sierpe by Gonzalez and Rodriguez(in press), while Franco (in press) informed on tourism inmangrove areas. The situation of mangrove concessions inCosta Rica was analysed by Vazquez (in press), while man-grove legislation in Costa Rica was reviewed by Gonzalez (1995).
Panamá
Identification and mapping of mangroves in Panamá wererecently reviewed by Osorio (1994), and results are presentedas Map 5. Areas with sustainable use initiatives are also indi-cated. These are:
• Chame• Chiriquí• Azuero
Several recent works presented advances regarding sus-tainable use in these areas. Reports address different issues,such as mangrove silviculture by Ruiz et al. (in press); com-munity organisation by Hidalgo (in press) and a general re-view of mangrove legislation in Panamá by Vergara (in press).
Analysis of Priority Aspects ofthe Sustainable Use Initiative
Ecological Issues
Ecological aspects of mangrove ecosystems on the Pacific coastof Central America were recently reviewed extensively byJimenez (1994). The general ecological characteristics of theseecosystems will therefore not be addressed in this paper inorder to focus directly on those issues SUI identified as critical.
A) Multiple Species vs. Single SpeciesManagement
In broad terms, multiple species management is characteris-tic in the traditional use of mangroves ecosystems in CentralAmerica. Different plant and animal species are used to sat-isfy different needs of the local population, as well as sold inlocal, regional and even international markets.
Mangrove tree species are used for the production offuelwood, roundwood, charcoal and tannin, while fish, mollusksand crustaceans are traditional sources of food and income.
Despite the variety of species used, extraction usuallyconcentrates on a small number of species within each group.
Rbizophora spp. (commonly known as red mangrove) ac-count for more than 90% of all tree products harvested in themangrove areas, despite the high concentration of other ex-isting species (Avicennia spp., Laguncularia spp., Pellicierarhizophorae, etc.). In addition, concentrated harvesting ofselected segments (high diameters for fuelwood, small diam-eters for roundwood, etc.) affects the health of the naturalpopulation's structure to different degrees, depending on thesite.
Similar processes take place with other species and prod-ucts, such as shrimp larvae, which are probably being overharvested in the Gulf of Fonseca. Grandiarca grandis (pre-viously Anadara grandis, Arcidae, "chucheca") was so heav-ily harvested on the Pacific coast of Costa Rica that the Gov-ernment has banned its extraction since 1977. Extraction lev-els of Anadara tuberculosa and Asimilis (Arcidae, "pianguas")seem to be following the same route as Grandiarca; morethan thirteen million individuals are harvested annually, witha continuous trend of decreasing sizes.
Nevertheless, the main threat to mangrove ecosystemsand their renewable resources is conversion to other uses,such as infrastructure (as in the mangroves of Colon, Panamá,and other areas, cleared for housing, harbor facilities, etc.),and aquaculture (mainly shrimp farming, as in the Honduranand Nicaraguan mangroves on the Gulf of Fonseca). In somecountries the construction of aquaculture ponds is only al-lowed in salt marshes, as a means of protecting mangroveforests. The problem is that the role of these marshes in theecology of coastal ecosystems, including mangroves, is stillpoorly understood in the region. Thus there is a still unknownlevel of risk that these marshes may be affected, and manyspecies that use them to complete their life cycles may showundesirable effects in the future.
The increasing impact of tourism in all coastal areas, in-cluding mangroves, is another force pressuring conversion ofmangroves to other uses, especially in Belize, Costa Rica andHonduras.
Projects promoting sustainable use of mangrove ecosys-tems in Central America are addressing these managementproblems through three basic strategies:
a) reposition of the extracted species, as in Jiquilisco, El Sal-vador, where extractors olRhizophora spp. trees mustreplant five trees for each one logged,
b) use of other species for the same or other uses, as inTerraba-Sierpe, Costa Rica, where Pelliciera rbizopboraeis promoted for construction wood, or in Peñitas andEstero Real, Nicaragua, where Avicennia spp. andLaguncularia spp. is encouraged for the obtention ofcharcoal.
c) use of other resources in order to alleviate pressure on afew species. Examples of this approach are found in Nica-ragua, where honey production in mangrove forests has
89
ALEJANDRO IMBACH AND NÉSTOR WINDEVOXHEL-LORA
90
Map
2: D
istr
ibut
ion
of m
angr
oves
in E
l Sal
vado
r
SUSTAINABLE USE OF MANGROVES IN CENTRAL AMERICA
been tested for the last three years with encouraging re-sults, or the farming of green iguanas (Iguana iguana)for sale in the international pet market, and as meat andleather at the local level. Green iguana production is stillbeing validated due to wild price fluctuations and thevarying costs of different management practices that re-sulted in profitable operations in some places and un-profitable operations in others.
Another alternative tested successfully in Nicaragua wasthe production of handicrafts using shells. This is a comple-mentary activity that provides a source of income for womenand children.
Alternatives such as salt production, tannin productionand artisinal fishing along the coast and in mangrove inletsproved unprofitable in Nicaragua. In fishing activities, this wasdue to equipment depreciation (boat, engine, nets and fish-ing gear).
To summarise, in Central America several mangrove spe-cies are being used, generating a first impression that theiruse is diversified and appropriate, but heavily selective use isproving unsustainable in the long term, due to the high-levelpressure on a small group of species. This problem is par-ticularly severe in poorer countries, and much less importantin relatively wealthy ones (Costa Rica and Panamá).
B) Impacts of Consumptive vs.Non-consumptive Uses of Wild Species
Unfortunately, there are very few scientific studies on theimpact of use of wild plant or animal populations in the man-groves of America Central. Most of the existing informationconcerns conversion of mangroves to other uses. A recentreview (Suman, 1994) mentions that:
• 65% of the mangrove forest in Mexico disappeared inthe last 20 years;
• in the same period, Ecuador, Colombia, Guatemala andEl Salvador lost more than 20% of their mangroves; and
• between 1973 and 1991, more than 15,000ha of man-groves, salinas and salt marshes were converted toaquaculture in the Honduran part of the Gulf of Fonseca.
Among the few studies dealing with species decline inthe region, Marmillod (especialist in silviculture, ProyectoOlafo, CATIE. Turrialba, Costa Rica. pers. comm.), compar-ing mangrove forest inventories in Estero Real between 1988and 1994, found significant reductions of height and diam-eter in all the mangrove species, but particulany in Rhizophora spp.
All other comments about the decline of populations ofAnadara spp., Ucides spp. (crabs), Grandiarca spp.,Rhizophora spp., Pennaeus spp. (larvae and adults), etc. arebased on the personal estimations of local fishermen or wood-
cutters who mention the reduction in size and/or abundance.
C) Effectiveness of Adaptive Managementin Conserving Renewable Resources
Efforts to establish sustainable practices for mangrove man-agement are very recent, and it is not yet possible to establishwhether they are contributing significantly to natural resourceconservation. Projects and local communities are very enthu-siastic, but there is still no evaluation of real impact on re-source conservation, adoption of these practices in and outof areas assisted by the Projects, or enforcement of the differ-ent laws that regulate mangrove use. The only, and sad, truthis that the scarce statistics on land use in the region continueto show that mangrove areas are decreasing in almost everycountry in the region.
D) Current Knowledge about KeyBiological Variables
The remarks made in section B) above show clearly that thisissue must be addressed, even though this is not an SUI prior-ity. There is an urgent need for more information about thegeneral productivity of mangroves in the region, and aboutthe structure, size, growth and sustainable harvest capacity ofthe different populations of species with commercial use andvalue.
Biological studies of the mangrove ecosystems speciesare not very frequent, but those relating population charac-teristics with use are almost nonexistent, and these are theones most needed for achieving sustainable use. The impor-tance of these studies and of integrating multidisciplinaryteams to bridge the fields of ecology and sustainable use can-not be overly stressed. The standing crop of these forests mustbe evaluated in order to assess their potential for sustainable use.
Socioeconomic Issues
While there are some isolated studies on these issues and somegeneral chapters on this subject in recent publications(Jimenez, 1994; Suman (Ed), 1994), a comprehensive and thor-oughly researched review of the Socioeconomics of mangroveecosystems has not been made. Indisputably, and despite theshortcomings mentioned, the field of biology has dominatedresearch in mangrove ecosystems in Central America.
A) Markets
Information on markets varies according to the product be-ing considered. Moreover, the information is scattered andthe situation is variable throughout the region. Despite theseconstraints, it is possible to summarise present understand-ing of the market situation as follows:
91
ALEJANDRO IMBACH AND NÉSTOR WINDEVOXHEL-LORA
Map 3: Distribution of mangroves in Nicaragua
92
SUSTAINABLE USE OF MANGROVES IN CENTRAL AMERICA
Shrimp. Good international and national markets forevery kind and size of shrimp, regardless of whether it has beenproduced intensively, extensively or just captured in the wild.
Red mangrove products. (fuelwood, roundwood, char-coal). Good national and local markets.
Fish. Same as the above for a group of well known, tradi-tional species.
Anadara spp. Good local and national markets.Ucides occidentalis. Good local markets.
Laguncularia spp. There is an acceptable local mar-ket for fuelwood. Despite a clear preference for red mangrove,people accept Laguncularia pieces mixed with red mangrove.There is no problem with charcoal.
Avicennia spp. There is an incipient market for dryAvicennia fuelwood and charcoal. Fuelwood from wet woodis rejected because it produces a great deal of smoke whenburned. Woodcutters do not cut Avicennia to avoid havingto dry the wood. Charcoal made from Avicennia performedwell in several tests carried out in Nicaragua. This species alsohas some potential for stakes and fine roundwood for con-struction, but these markets are small.
Pelliciera rbizophorae. It showed good characteris-tics as construction wood in tests in Costa Rica, but the mar-ket potential is still unknown.
Charcoal. The charcoal market varies in each country.In Costa Rica and Panamá, charcoal is used mostly for recrea-tional purposes (barbecue) and some industrial ones (artisinalbakeries, barbecue restaurants, etc.). In these countries themarket is seasonal (low in the rainy season, high in the dryone). There is strong competition from charcoal made ofhardwoods. Red mangrove charcoal is considered top qualityin this market. In the other countries charcoal is used in asmall number of households for cooking (fuelwood is the mainsource of domestic energy), and in some industries for cook-ingand drying (i.e., tobacco in Nicaragua). It has strong com-petition from charcoal made of terra firma forest woods. De-spite studies made by CATIE in Nicaragua showing that char-coal production is more profitable than fuelwood production,woodcutters reject this on the basis that they are paid forfuelwood on the same working day, while with charcoal theyneed to wait for a week before receiving any money. Similarsituations were personally reported for the other countries.In Panamá (Chame) and Costa Rica (Terraba-Sierpe) fuelwoodproduction is very low; activity centres on charcoal produc-tion, probably reflecting a better organisational situation oflocal groups that acquired some financial capacity to bridgethe period of charcoal obtention.
Tannin. There is a market, but tannin from mangrovesproved uncompetitive. No tannery in the region is presentlyusing mangrove tannin.
Honey. The market is variable. Honey from far inlandareas is generally preferred since product from coastal zoneshas a salty taste. Experiences from Cuba show that more so-
phisticated management is required to obtain good quality,such as moving the beehives between mangrove and terrafirma forests on a seasonal basis.
Shell handicrafts. Tested only in Nicaragua. There isan attractive market in terms of price, but small regarding thenumber of pieces demanded.
These market descriptions show only how easily man-grove products can be sold. The issue of prices is highly influ-enced by the long chains of middlemen present in the mar-keting channels of these products. This situation is commonin all agricultural frontier areas, which have low levels of localorganisation, low income levels and difficult access. In thefew cases where local groups are able to market their prod-ucts closer to the consumer level in the marketing chain, theyreceive good income (higher than in analogous agriculturalactivities). A good example of this last situation is Coopemanglein Terraba-Sierpe, Costa Rica, which is selling charcoal directly toretail store chain in San Jose (the capital city).
B) Dependence of Rural People onRenewable Resources
This issue must be addressed along two lines. One is relatedto the amount of people living in the mangrove areas, andthe other to the situation of these people. Regarding the first,it must be noted that in the relatively richer countries of theregion (Costa Rica and Panamá) mangrove areas are fairlyunpopulated. The reason is simple: almost no one likes work-ing in the mangroves. When the national economy offers othertypes of employment (industry, services, etc.) people tend tomove towards these occupations and leave the mangrovesalone. Obviously, some people do remain in the mangrovesbut their numbers are small, as in Terraba-Sierpe, where nomore than 50 families inhabit an area of l4,000ha of man-groves (CATIE Mangroves Project, pers. comm.).
The opposite situation occurs in the other countrieswhere mangrove areas are the final destination of the mostmarginalised rural groups, those displaced by violent conflicts(war, guerrillas, etc.) or by the continuous process of concen-tration of land ownership. In these cases mangroves are oc-cupied by large numbers of people, who usually have no ex-perience in managing this type of ecosystem. Since the in-dustrial, or service sectors of these countries are small, thereare no alternatives. The result is a high population density, as inEstero Real, Nicaragua, where at least 650 families live within the19,000ha of mangroves, and an almost equalnumberspendsometime extracting resources from these areas (Hurtado, 1994).
This situation is relevant to the second issue. In coun-tries where there are few mangrove inhabitants, they do notdepend heavily on natural resources because there are alter-natives outside of the mangroves. In the poorer countries,the people living in these areas are highly dependent on natu-ral resource use because there is no other alternative. There
93
ALEJANDRO IMBACH AND NÉSTOR WINDEVOXHEL-LORA
Map 4: Distribution of mangroves on the Pacific Coast of Costa Rica
94
SUSTAINABLE USE OF MANGROVES IN CENTRAL AMERICA
are some very specific situations involving communities whichlive on mangrove resources, but also have access to marginalurban jobs because they are close to large cities. This is thecase of Peñitas, in Nicaragua, which is located 12km from Leon(the country's second largest city).
C) Cost and Benefit from Investment inMaintaining Renewable Resources
Information about this issue is unavailable, and there is nodata to make such an assessment. It is expected that the CATIEProjects (Olafo and Mangroves, both in Nicaragua) will haveelements for performing these estimations at the end of 1997.
There is some work on the economic evaluation of man-grove ecosystems, basically that carried out by Windevoxhel(1992) in the mangroves close to Leon, Nicaragua, and guide-lines produced by a team supported by Barbier, Constanzaand Twiley during 1991 (Barbier et al., 1991) with CATIE andIUCN participation. Barton (1995)is working on this aspect inCosta Rica.
D) Land Use Allocation
In general, all mangroves in Central America are State prop-erty by law. Up to now, the different countries are managingthese areas by issuing permits to extract some amount of prod-uct and collecting the pertinent fees. Some medium-term for-est concessions have been made on a trial basis, as in Terraba-Sierpe (Costa Rica), where Coopemangle received a 200haconcession for a period of 10 years. Other countries such asNicaragua and Panamá are also considering the forest con-cession as an acceptable mechanism for promoting sustain-able use. All activities leading to conversion of mangroves forother uses are managed through permits.
One noteworthy aspect which has been gaining momen-tum during the last couple of years is the elaboration of largermanagement schemes to help national institutions managetheir mangrove areas better. Costa Rica is working on a Na-tional Wetlands Strategy with the participation of every insti-tution involved with mangrove ecosystems and with techni-cal assistance from IUCN.
In Nicaragua, a Management Strategy for Estero Real (thecountry's largest mangrove area) will be completed in early1996, and will result in a General Management Plan. In thefuture, this exercise will be extended to all Pacific coast man-groves in Nicaragua. The next step will be the preparation ofRegulation Plans for every individual mangrove on the coastin order to establish maximum extraction quotas for each area.This will permit greater control from a sustainable manage-ment perspective. Initially, these schemes will only involvemangrove forests, but not the other species used (fish, shrimp,crabs, etc.). This activity is coordinated by the CATIE Man-groves Project with IUCN technical support.
Given State ownership of mangroves, the marginalisedeconomic situation of populations neighbouring these eco-systems, local governments' lack of capacity for control andthe absence of incentives for sustainable use, communitieswhich extract mangrove resources are attempting to maxim-ise the quantity of material that can be used and marketedright now, without concern for the future. They are awarethat these resources are deteriorating, but say there are noincentives for conservation.
Cultural Issues
A) Role of Traditional Knowledge inManagement of Natural Resources
It is not possible to speak about traditional knowledge in themangroves of Central America. Most of the present population came to these areas during the last 40 years, and this isnot enough time for a coevolution of management practicesand ecosystem responses. Obviously, local people living inthe mangroves have developed a series of skills to extract re-sources and properly manage the different natural variablesgoverning cycles in the mangroves (seasons, tides, etc.), butthese skills do not yet qualify as traditional knowledge in thesense that they have not yet reached a state of balance be-tween human intervention and conservation of natural eco-systems.
B) Philosophical and Cultural Perceptionsof Renewable Resource Use
For the same reasons stated in the previous point, there areno philosophical or cultural perceptions about resource usethat are the result of a long process of human-mangrove co-existence. Nevertheless, although most of the values held bypeople in Central America's mangrove areas have not changedsince their arrival, there are some new emerging characteris-tics which are different from current campesino behaviour inthe region:
• Activities are highly monetised. Every product is ex-changed for cash, there is no bartering, and self-consump-tion is very low. This is strikingly different from campesinoactivities, in which both self-consumption and barteringare fairly common.
• Products are exchanged quickly for cash. Most of thepeople extracting mangrove resources demand instantpayment (I work today, I have these products, I want themoney now). Again, this is extremely different fromcampesinos, who usually spend a great deal of time andwork in preparing the land, sowing, tending the crop,
95
ALEJANDRO IMBACH AND NÉSTOR WINDEVOXHEL-LORA
Map
5: L
ocat
ion
of m
angr
oves
in P
anam
aáá
96
96
SUSTAINABLE USE OF MANGROVES IN CENTRAL AMERICA
harvesting, doing some processing such as threshing orshelling, sometimes storing for a time, and finally selling.In this sense, the campesino has a sense of future andplanning that is lacking in mangrove inhabitants.
• Lack of accumulation. The quantity of product extractedis that amount which must be sold to cover daily needs.If there is a surplus, this is not saved but used to takesome days of rest until there is a need for more cash.
• In many areas, biological opportunity (seasonal existenceof a resource to be extracted) is adroitly combined withmarket opportunity (good price and high demand) toobtain maximum returns on effort invested. In practice,this means that people seek out windows of opportu-nity, and the type of resources they extract shift fromfuelwood to crabs to shrimp larvae and others.
These characteristics are not necessarily bad, they sim-ply reflect a different perspective on life. Nevertheless, Projectsand other external agents must be very aware of these charac-teristics in order to avoid promoting organisational structuresand activities in mangrove areas which have been designedfor a campesino context.
The different projects have demonstrated that change ofattitude is possible as a result of sustainable use incentivesinvolving ownership or concessions of resources, informationand training. Communities are thus motivated to engage insustainable, or long term, use.
C) Epistemological Issues in the Analysisof Sustainability
In terms of the contribution of sustainable mangrove use ex-periences in Central America to the concepts, validity andapproach to sustainability in general, there are several relevantissues that may be raised:
• The main constraint today regarding progress towardsustainability is in operationalising the nice concepts wehave developed. Sustainability is not some final destina-tion, but an endless search for a better balance betweensatisfaction of human needs and the capacity of the envi-ronment to generate goods and services on a permanent,sustainable basis. What we need now are not ultimate solu-tions but some clues as to how to proceed more quickly.
• Sustainability is still a diffuse concept which is difficult tooperationalise, and it will probably remain that way for along time. It is necessary to identify more immediate andattainable goals along the path toward sustainability. Sus-tainable use of renewable natural resources is such a goalbecause it is a condition for sustainability, it is attainable,and it does not require that the world be turned upside
down. Therefore, let us pursue this goal.From a broader perspective, sustainable use not onlyencompasses natural ecosystems and wild species ofplants and animals, but also cultivated ecosystems. Westill need solid, real examples about how to achieve it inevery ecosystem category. Mangroves provide a goodopportunity to explore the potentials and constraints ofsustainable use concepts applied to natural ecosystemsand the integrated management of different wildpopulations.
There are other types of natural ecosystems that can beused for such a purpose, but in the tropics, mangroveshave the advantage of being ecologically simpler andeasier to understand and manage than lowland rainfor-ests or similar ecosystems. Not only does it make senseto start with easier situations before addressing the com-plicated ones, but the importance of mangroves in thedaily life of thousands of people cannot be overly em-phasised.
To operationalise sustainable use of mangroves, we needmore than good concepts. We need elements for fieldwork that can be easily understood by technical staff andlocal people, and which are simple to measure and ap-ply. If we want to move toward self-regulation and cross-regulation with less government intervention, we needpractical instruments such as harvest quotas, minimumsizes, uncomplicated calendars of activities, physical andbiological thresholds and similar mechanisms.These mechanisms cannot be developed through isolated,sectoral work. There is a great need for multidisciplinary ef-forts to address the intricate web of ecological and socialproblems underlying sustainable use, and there will beno significant advances until this type of work becomes adaily reality for specialists and institutions in the region.Even with joint, multidisciplinary work, there is no guar-antee of progress. It is also necessary to adopt a hypoth-esis-driven process permitting us to move ahead with-out waiting until everything is known (by then it will betoo late). We need to be able to put together what isknown, define a hypothetical path and proceed, usingappropriate monitoring and evaluation to track what hap-pens and rectify our course, or even to go backwards, ifnecessary. This process, coupled with research to fillknowledge gaps, will enable us to advance more quicklythan we have in recent years.Finally, we must simply start with what we have. There isenough knowledge, expertise and resources in the re-gion to begin, without waiting for additional externalfunding. Better funding is obviously helpful, but it doesnot guarantee that things will move faster unless we havealready gotten underway by our own means.
97
•
•
•
•
•
ALEJANDRO IMBACH AND NÉSTOR WINDEVOXHEL-LORA
Institutional IssuesA) Rights of Access, Tenure or Ownership
of Renewable Resources
This is a very relevant issue in the SUI context, because fieldexperience has shown that it is almost impossible to promotesustainable use of natural resources without ensuring sometenure or access rights for local people. This issue has notbeen properly addressed by government institutions respon-sible for mangrove management. The result is that almost allmangrove areas in Central America are still common lands,with all the corresponding problems and difficulties for properuse and conservation widely documented throughout the world.
As mentioned previously, there is only one experienceof forest concession in mangroves (Coopemangle in CostaRica), in which rights were granted for product but not land.All other concessions are granted for conversion of mangrovesto other uses (aquaculture, salt production, construction ofinfrastructure, etc.). In Panamá and Guatemala there are alsosome experiences in extraction licenses. In these cases, localinhabitants own the products they extract, and the State sim-ply collects taxes on the products.
There are no quota systems to ensure, at a minimum,that harvest is not greater than regeneration, and no one isdirectly responsible for maintenance of ecosystem productiv-ity. Neither are there any regulations to keep the number ofextractors within certain limits. The only regulation aimed at somekind of sustainable use is the minimum harvest size establishedfor Anadara tuberculosa and Asimilis in Costa Rica. It shouldbe mentioned that the CATIE Mangroves Project is attempting toestablish forest concessions in Estero Real, Nicaragua
B) Government Policies and LegislationGoverning Use of Renewable Resources
The law establishes that mangroves cannot be used. In gen-eral, however, there are no clear policies (in terms of well-defined goals) related to mangrove ecosystems other thanthose concerning protected areas with mangroves. Costa Rica'sNational Wetlands Strategy is probably the first real advancein the region toward establishing mangrove policies.
Extraction of red mangrove (Rhizophora spp.) is re-stricted or totally banned throughout the region. Use of man-grove forests is totally prohibited in some countries. Never-theless, to alleviate the impact of these regulations, govern-ment agencies do authorise extraction of dead trees; as a logi-cal consequence, woodcutters regularly strip the bark off liv-ing trees to kill them and then extract them later as dead trees.This little game makes it apparent that total prohibition is notfeasible in densely populated areas where people dependheavily on the extraction of renewable resources, and thatthese prohibitions do not guarantee either conservation or
sustainable use.In general, there is no regulation on the use of other re-
sources with the exception of minimum harvest-size estab-lished in Costa Rica for Anadara spp. Some countries pro-hibit conversion of mangroves to other uses, but this doesnot extend to the conversion of other parts of the ecosys-tems, such as salinas and salt marshes. There is no evaluationof the ecological impact of massive conversion of salinas toaquaculture ponds in these countries.
In all countries, forest management regulations are thesame as those applying to terra firma forests, except for afew cases in Costa Rica and Guatemala where specific regula-tions for mangroves were issued. Forest concessions are thekey element in Costa Rican legislation, although the new for-est law would eliminate this possibility for local communities.The Wetlands Conservation Law jointly prepared by MINAEand IUCN will serve to guarantee regulations on sustainableuse of mangroves.
In Guatemala, the Forest Bureau (DIGEBOS) permits co-management of mangrove resources. In this programme, com-munities may use mangrove trees for purposes of subsistencefarming, and for construction and improvements of housing.Participants sign a contract in which they agree to reforest anarea of mangrove with technical assistance and supervisionfrom DIGEBOS extension workers. Work is performed bygroups of beneficiaries, and not only provides an opportunityfor social exchange, but also constitutes a method of in-serv-ice environmental education.
Mangrove restoration generally replicates what has beenestablished for terra firma forests. The problem is that ecol-ogy and use are so different in the two types of forests thatthe regulations established or adapted for mangrove forestsare useless. A couple of examples to illustrate the point:
• In El Salvador, reforestation with mangrove does not le-gally qualify as such because these trees cannot achievea success rate of 85% (85 trees alive after one year out of100 trees planted). This despite the fact that the pro-gramme in Guatemala reaches 90 and 95% survival.
The rate of 85% is commonly used for Eucalyptus orPinus species, but since the natural survival of mangrovetrees rarely exceeds 60% this type of reforestation can-not qualify for tax benefits, promotional credits, etc.
• Forest management plans in Nicaragua require that everytree to be harvested must be visibly marked with paint,colour tape, etc. This is a common practice in forestswhere less than 100 trees/ha are logged and their diam-eter is usually larger then 40cm. But it is totally inapplica-ble in mangrove forests, where harvesting involvesfuelwood or small roundwood with diameters of less than10 cm, and five hundred or more axes (no trunks) perhectare are logged. Economic analysis by CATIE Olafoshowed that the cost of implementing tree marking to
98
SUSTAINABLE USE OF MANGROVES IN CENTRAL AMERICA
satisfy forest management plans requirements made theoperation unprofitable.
A final but no less important problem with legislation isthe overlapping jurisdiction of different legal bodies respon-sible for mangrove areas. Usually legislation on forests, coastalzones, water, fisheries and protected areas includes overlap-ping, conflicting and even contradictory regulations on man-grove use. The confusion caused by such situations results ina legislative vacuum where anything is permitted, or else leadsto local enforcement of highly arbitrary measures with no reallegal support.
C) Government Capacity to PromoteSustainable Use
This issue is very tricky because it depends on how govern-ment action is construed. Under the traditional conceptionin Central America, it was assumed that government was re-sponsible for the proper management and conservation ofnatural resources through direct planning, regulation, enforce-ment and action. These functions are no longer possible dueto the continuous shrinking of state structures and budgets.These reductions are affecting some areas of the governmentmore than others, with natural resources institutions usuallybeing the most affected. It thus becomes clear that govern-ments do not have the capacity to promote sustainable usebecause they lack funding, personnel and trained staff, in ad-dition to the problem of inappropriate regulations and ab-sence of policies. Worse, under continuous pressure to in-crease exports, regulations are being relaxed and conversionof mangrove areas for shrimp farming is iavoured.
The other perspective is for governments to establish aframework, laws and regulations for sustainable use manage-ment and seek mechanisms to promote self-regulation andcross-regulation. This would reduce government involvementto a minimum and ensure conservation through sustainableuse. While governments may not have the capacity to developsuch a framework themselves, they do have the authority toconvene different sectors who can prepare such a framework.Governments also have the political power to put it in place.
Given the present situation of Central American govern-ments, it is quite clear which option is more promising, sowhat is required in these countries is more clarity, courageand leadership rather than larger budgets. It is worthwhile inthis respect to note once again the current efforts of CostaRica (National Wetlands Strategy) and Nicaragua (Estero RealManagement Strategy).
D) Management Structures
As mentioned previously, there are no management structuresfor mangroves in the region. Some initiatives are being ad-
vanced in Costa Rica and Nicaragua, but these are still in thepreparation phase. The only management structure in actualoperation is that of Protected Areas, but these are for ecosys-tem preservation; sustainable productive management is a verylow priority in the Protected Areas scheme at this moment.
Gonclusions and RecommendationsBasic conclusions on sustainable use of mangroves in CentralAmerica can be summarised as follows:
• Mangroves are rich and productive ecosystems that arebeing intensively used in Central America, particularly inthe northern countries of the region (Guatemala, Hon-duras, El Salvador and Nicaragua).
• While there is empirical evidence that populations of sev-eral species are becoming degraded, there is no scien-tific evidence as yet.
• The productivity of mangroves and their forest speciesmust be better understood in order to improve planningfor sustainable use.
• Policies are needed to promote sustainable use of man-grove resources, as well as incentives to ensure that thesepolicies will be implemented.
• Communities will not become interested in sustainableuse unless they have access to mangrove resources.
• Use of mangrove resources is a social and economic ne-cessity. As such, the sustainability of such use must be anongoing process tested in the field with participation bycommunities.
• Given the absence of traditional or cultural knowledgeof mangrove use in Mesoamerica, training and the ex-change of opinion must be promoted at all levels, butparticularly in user communities.
• Finally, experimental management of mangroves by com-munities requires close monitoring in order to developmanagement techniques and principles for sustainableuse.
Main Recommendations
• Despite the problems described above, sustainable usestill seems more easily attainable in mangrove ecosystemsthan in others, so efforts should be intensified in this area.
• There is an urgent need for joint, multidisciplinary workbetween the different scientific and management fieldsand institutions to build strong links between the bio-logical, social and economic sciences and managementpractice in the field so as to establish a solid operationalbase for sustainable management of mangroves. This ef-fort must also include lawmakers and political decision
99
ALEJANDRO IMBACH AND NÉSTOR WINDEVOXHEL-LORA
makers in order to involve and commit them in the sub-sequent implementation of sustainable management.Field implementation will not be achieved successfullywithout the appropriate involvement of local communi-ties. In the end, they are ultimately responsible for sus-tainable management of the resources that constitute thematerial base for their lives.
ReferencesAbrego, C. 1994. Situatión de los Bosques Salados en El Sal-vador. In: Suman, D.O. (Ed), El Ecosistema de Manglar enAmérica Latina y la Cuenca del Caribe: Su Manejo yConservacion. Rosenstiel School of Marine and AtmosphericScience of the University of Miami and The Tinker Foundation.
Aragón, B., Barrios, A., and De León, L. 1994. Los Manglaresde Guatemala. In: Suman, D.O. (Ed) El Ecosistema de Manglaren América Latina y la Cuenca del Caribe: Su Manejo yConservacion. Rosenstiel School of Marine and AtmosphericScience of the University of Miami and The Tinker Foundation.
Arrecis, M. 1992. Anlisis de la Asociacion de Manglar enManchon, San Marcos-Retalbuleu, Guatemala. Thesis. Gua-temala. Universidad de San Carlos de Guatemala.
Barbier, E.B., Costanza R. and Twiley, R. 1991. Guidelines forTropical Wetland Evaluation. Report of "Taller Internacionalde Trabajo para la Elaboration de un Manual de EvaluationEconomica de Bienes y Servicios de los HumedalesTropicales". CATIE, Turrialba, Costa Rica.
Barrios, A. (in press, a). Reporte de Guatemala: Usos yAprovechamiento de Manglar en Guatemala. In: Suman, D.,Imbach, A. and Windevoxhel, N. (Eds) Manejo Productivo delos Manglares en América Central.
Barrios, A. (in press, b). Reforestatión en Areas Manglares delLiteral Pacífico de Guatemala. In: Suman, D., Imbach, A. andWindevoxhel, N. (Eds) Manejo Productivo de los Manglaresen América Central.
Barton, D. 1995. Valoración Económica Parcial deAlternativas de Manejo para los Humedales de Terraba-Sierpe, Costa Rica. M.Sc. Thesis. Heredia, Costa Rica,Universidad Nacional de Heredia.
Cáceres, F. and Gutiérrez, M. (in Press). Reproductión de laIguana Verde en Cautiverio. In: Suman, D., Imbach, A. andWindevoxhel, N. (Eds) Manejo Productivo de los Manglaresen América Central.
Conrado, CH. (in press). Reforestatión en Estero Real. In:Suman, D., Imbach, A. and Windevoxhel, N. (Eds) ManejoProductivo de los Manglares en América Central.
Cruz , R. (in press). Moluscos de Manglar. In: Suman, D.,Imbach, A. and Windevoxhel, N. (Eds) Manejo Productivo delos Manglares en América Central.
Day,J.W., Jr., Hall, C., Kemp, W. and Yañez-Arancibia, A. 1989.Estuarine Ecology. John Wiley & Sons, USA.
Díaz, M. and Píaz, P. (in press). Documento sobre la LegislatiónForestal en Nicaragua. In: Suman, D., Imbach, A. andWindevoxhel, N. (Eds) Manejo Productivo de los Manglaresen América Central.
Dávila, G. (in press). Aprovechamiento de la Miel en Nicara-gua. In: Suman, D., Imbach, A. and Windevoxhel, N. (Eds)Manejo Productivo de los Manglares en América Central.
Delgado, E. (in press). Manejo de Iguana Verde en Semicautiverio.In: Suman, D., Imbach, A. and Windevoxhel, N. (Eds) ManejoProductivo de los Manglares en América Central.
Franco, E. (in press). Turismo en Manglares de Costa Rica:Una Alternativa para Mejorar. In: Suman, D., Imbach, A. andWindevoxhel, N. (Eds) Manejo Productivo de los Manglaresen América Central.
Gallo, M. (in press). Las Cooperativas de Leñadores de laComunidad Luis Andino, Marena, Puerto Morazán, Nicaragua.In: Suman, D., Imbach, A. and Windevoxhel, N. (Eds) ManejoProductivo de los Manglares en América Central.
Gonzàlez. J. and Rodríguez, D. (in press). ExperienciaOrganizativa de Coopemangle, Terraba-Sierpe, Costa Rica. In:Suman, D., Imbach, A. and Windevoxhel, N. (Eds) ManejoProductivo de los Manglares en América Central.
Gonzàlez, M. (1995). La Legislación Reguladora de losHumedales en Costa Rica. Thesis. San José, Costa Rica.Universidad de Costa Rica.
Gutiérrez, M. (in press). Proyecto Conservacin para elDesarrollo Sostenible en America Central. Alternativa deApicultura. In: Suman, D., Imbach, A. and Windevoxhel, N. (Eds)Manejo Productivo de losManglares en América Central.
Hidalgo, M. (in press). Aspectos Organizativos de lasComunidades Relacionadas con Mangle en Panamá. In:Suman, D., Imbach, A. and Windevoxhel, N. (Eds) ManejoProductivo de los Manglares en América Central.
100
SUSTAINABLE USE OF MANGROVES IN CENTRAL AMERICA
Hurtado, N. 1994. Estudio de Caso: Manejo y Uso Adecuadode los Recursos del Manglar en Estero Real, Nicaragua. In:Suman, D.O. (Ed), El Ecosistema de Manglar en AméricaLatina y la Cuenca del Canbe: Su Manejo y Conservacion.Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science of theUniversity of Miami and The Tinker Foundation.
Hurtado, N. and Camacho, J.J. 1994. Informe sobre Manglaresde Nicaragua, América Central. In: Suman, D.O. (Ed), ElEcosistema de Manglar en América Latina y la Cuenca delCaribe: Su Manejo y Conservacion. Rosenstiel School ofMarine and Atmospheric Science of the University of Miamiand The Tinker Foundation.
JimenezJA 1994.Los Manglares del Pacífico Centroamericano.Editorial Fundación UNA Heredia, Costa Rica.
Martínez, L. (in press). Camaronicultura en Estero Real. In:Suman, D., Imbach, A. and Windevoxhel, N. (Eds) ManejoProductivo de los Manglares en América Central.
Osorio, O.1994. Situatión de los Manglares de Panamá. In:Suman, D.O. (Ed), El Ecosistema de Manglar en AméricaLatina y la Cuenca del Caribe: Su Manejo y Conservacion.Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science of theUniversity of Miami and The Tinker Foundation.
Oyuela, O.1994. Los Manglares del Golfo del Fonseca—Hon-duras. In: Suman, D.O. (Ed), El Ecosistema de Manglar enAmérica Latina y la Cuenca del Caribe: Su Manejo yConservacion. Rosenstiel School of Marine and AtmosphericScience of the University of Miami and The Tinker Founda-tion.
Paniagua, C. (in press). Identificatión y Caracterización deSistemas de Productión en la Comunidad Luis Andino (1993y 1995). In: Suman, D., Imbach, A. and Windevoxhel, N. (Eds)Manejo Productivo de los Manglares en América Central.
Pizarro, F. and Angulo, H. 1994. Diagnóstico de los Manglaresde la Costa Pacífica de Costa Rica. In: Suman, D.O. (Ed), El
Ecosistema de Manglar en América Latina y la Cuenca del
Caribe: Su Manejo y Conservación. Rosenstiel School ofMarine and Atmospheric Science of the University of Miamiand The Tinker Foundation.
Ramírez, R. and Marmillod, D. (in press). Plan de AprovechamientoExperimental de Manglares en la Comunidad de Las Peñitas,Leon — Nicaragua. In: Suman, D., Imbach, A. andWindevoxhel, N. (Eds) Manejo Productivo de los
Manglares en América Central.
Ruiz, O., Gonzalez, A. and Hidalgo, M. (in press). Silviculturade Manglares. In: Suman, D., Imbach, A. and Windevoxhel, N.(Eds) Manejo Productivo de los Manglares en América Central.
Santos, O. (in press). Recurso Manglar de la Reserva NaturalMonterrico, Departamento de Santa Rosa, Guatemala. In:Suman, D., Imbach, A. and Windevoxhel, N. (Eds) ManejoProductivo de los Manglares en América Central.
Suman, D. (Ed) 1994. El Ecosistema de Manglar en AméricaLatina y la Cuenca del Caribe: Su Manejo y Conservacion.Rosentiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science of theUniversity of Miami and The Tinker Foundation.
Suman, D. 1994. Status of Mangroves in Latin America and theCaribbean Basin. In: Suman, D.O. (Ed), El Ecosistema deManglaren América Latina y la Cuenca del Caribe: Su Manejo yConservacion. Rosenstiel School of Marine and AtmosphericScience of the University of Miami and The Tinker Foundation.
Varela, J. (In Press). Description del Comité para la Defensade la Flora y Fauna del Golfo de Fonseca. In: Suman, D.,Imbach, A. and Windevoxhel, N. (Eds) Manejo Productivo delos Manglares en América Central.
Vasquez, A. (in press). Las Concesiones en los Manglares deCosta Rica In: Suman, D., Imbach, A. and Windevoxhel, N. (Eds)Manejo Productivo de los Manglares en América Central.
Vergara, B. (in press). Los Manglares y su Legislation. In:Suman, D., Imbach, A. and Windevoxhel, N. (Eds) ManejoProductivo de los Manglares en América Central.
Windevoxhel, N. 1992. Valoración Económica Parcial de losManglares de la Region II de Nicaragua. M.Sc. Thesis.Turrialba, Costa Rica. CATIE.
101
ALEJANDRO IMBACH AND NÉSTOR WINDEVOXHEL-LORA
SummariesLes palétuviers ne constituent que 7% de la couvertureforestière de l'Amérique centrale, mais ils représententun des écosystèmes les plus caractéristiques que l'on puisse trouver dans les régions côtières protégées de larégion. En raison de la réduction accélérée de la forêt tropicale de l'Amérique centrale, en particulier la forêtsèche, les palétuviers sont actuellement devenus d'importantes sources d'approvisionnement pour lasatisfaction des besoins fondamentaux des familles vivant à l'intérieur et aux abords des zones côtières. Danscertaines zones sèches de la côte pacifique, les communautés font face à 40-90% de leurs besoins en énergie enutilisant le bois de chauffage issu des palétuviers. Ces forêts contribuent à la satisfaction des besoins essentielsen aliments (poissons, crustacés et autres espèces sauvages), en ressourcesforestières (bois de chauffage, boisde service, piquets et charbon) et en ressources non-ligneuses (tannin et miel), et regorgent d'une fauneabondante destinée à l'utilisation directe et indirecte (tourisme, loisirs). Les palétuviers de l'Amérique centralejouent également un rôle écologique très important et sont très utiles à l'économie locale et nationale —notamment pour assurer de l'eau potable, de l'eau pour l'irrigation et des ressources pour les activités externes.
Les conditions économiques qui prévalent en Amérique centrale et la situation marginale des populationsvivant dans les zones côtières, en particulier, favorisent l'utilisation extractive et non durable des palétuviers.Les systèmes de production ont été identifiés, mais leur variabilité et leur complexité rendent difficilel'évaluation de la durabilité de l'utilisation. Toutefois, il a été possible d'identifier d'importants principesd'utilisation durable des palétuviers grâce à divers projets de développement et de conservation. Les variablesles plus importantes qui déterminent l'utilisation de la durabilité sont celles relatives à la propriété foncièreet à l'accès aux ressources, ainsi qu'à la distribution des bénéfices et à leur impact sur l'économie familiale.L'hétérogénéité entre les différentes formations de palétuviers et leurs conditions spécifiques—et les implicationsde ces facteurs en ce qui concerne l'utilisation — ont également été reconnues. Ces variables, ainsi que lesconnaissancestraditionnelles et non-traditionnelles sur les palétuviers,durable de la ressource.
102
Los manglares de América Central representan tan sólo un 7% de los bosques existentes en la Región. Sinembargo son uno de los ecosistemas costeros mas representativos de las costas protegidas de Centroamérica.Actualmente, debido a la reducción acelerada del bosque tropical en Mesoamérica —particularmente delbosque seco — los manglares han pasado a ser una fuente muy importante de recursos para suplir lasnecesidades básicas de las familias en las zonas costeras y sus áreas adyacentes. Se ha encontrado paraalgunas zonas del Pacífico seco comunidades que consumen entre un 40 y un 90% de leña de manglar confines energéticos. Sin embargo el manglar atiende necesidades básicas de alimentación (peces, crustáceos ymoluscos), recursos forestales (leña, madera y carbón), no forestales como toninos, miel de abeja, así comoabundante fauna silvestre de uso directo o indirecto a través del turismo y la recreación. Por otra parte, losmanglares de Centroamérica, brindan funciones ecológicas importantes y servicios a la economía local ynacional como; transporte, agua potable, aguas para riego y soporte de actividades externas entre las masresaltantes.
Las condiciones económicas de Centroamérica y en especial la marginación de las poblaciones ubicadasen las áreas costeras son un estímulo al uso extractivo e insostenible del Manglar. Se han identificado lossistemas de producción de las comunidades adyacentes al manglar y su variabilidad. La complejidad de lossistemas de producción dificulta la evaluación delasostenibilidaddeluso. Sin embargo, a través de diferentesproyectos de desarrollo y conservación en la región se han identificado principios importantes para el usosostenible de los manglares de la región.
Entre las variables mas importantes para la sosteniblidad del uso se encuentranfactores relacionados a lapropiedad o acceso a los recursos, así como en lo referido a la distribución de los beneficios y su impacto enla economía familiar. Del mismo modo, se reconoce la heterogeneidad del manglar y de su productividadcomo factores determinantes en su uso, los cuales aunados al conocimiento—tradicional o no—del recursoson determinantes para manejo sostenible. Se identificó igualmente que, en ausencia de un conocimientotradicional o cultural del manglar, la información y educación de los usuarios es un factor determinantepara su uso sostenible.
Rôles et Place des CommunautésVillageoises dans la Conservation etl'Utilisation Durable des Ressources
Les Rôneraies du Dallol Maouri et du Fleuve Niger constituent un terroir d'attache de quelques 64,336 personnesréparties dans 74 villages et hameaux.
Avant 1978, la coupe peu sélective de pieds vivants par des commerçants munis de permis a poussé lespopulations à "tirer sur la sonnette d'alarme" et à demander au gouvernent ent la suspension de la délivrancedes permis et d'envisager des actions de réhabilitation de l'écosystème.
Ceci s'est traduit par la succession d'un certain nombre de projets d'Aménagement et de reconstitutionmais le rôle joué par les communautés villageoises dans leur conception et leur mise en oeuvre a été très faible.
Après 16 ans d'intervention, les efforts déployés par les populations, la reconnaissance par l'état d'unpotentielde connaissance et d'un savoir faire local en relation avec les besoins du développement de la gestion desRôneraies ont donné lieu à un "Programme d'Appui aux Initiatives de Gestion Locale des Rôneraies".
Avec l'adoption de l'approche gestion des terroirs, le programme place les communautés villageoises aucentre des décisions et des actions relatives à leur propre développement.
Aujourd'hui, l'état et les populations s'attèlent à la mise en place d'un cadre qui puisse permettre à celles-ci de mieux profiter des ressources forestières tout en les conservant.
Introduction
Les rôneraies du Dallol Maouri et du fleuve avec une superficiede plus de 30,963ha constituent une source potentielle degénération de revenus susceptibles non seulement de financerle développement local, mais aussi de contribuer audéveloppement sous régional et même national.
Considérées longtemps par l'état comme principalespourvoyeuses de bois de service (lattes de rônier), la conser-vation de ce domaine protégé dans lequel vivent plus de 64,336habitants (population 1995) a été plus la préoccupation despopulations riveraines que de l'état compte tenu de la valeur(rônier qualifié de mère nourricière et d'arbre providence)que les rôneraies représentent pour celles-ci.
C'est ainsi qu'à la demande des populationsutilisatrices,une série de projets de reconstitution etd'aménagement ont vu le jour de 1978 à 1991 mais la politiquenationale en matière de gestion des ressources naturelles neprévoyait pas un partage de responsabilités dans la gestiondes ressources.
Depuis la conférence nationale souveraine de 1991, lecontexte politique en pleine mutation a favorisé la prise encompte effective de "la dimension humaine" dans la concep-tion des programmes et stratégies d'intervention en milieurural. C'est dans ce cadre que s'inscrivent entre autres:
• l'adoption et la publication en 1992 des principesdirecteurs d'une politique de développement rural auNiger (organisation du monde rural, participation despopulations, modification du rôle de l'état...);
• l'adoption et la promulgation en mars 1993 des principesd'orientation du code rural (appartenance des ressourcesnaturelles d'un terroir aux populations qui s'y trouvent dansle respect des règles de la propriété privée et des droitsdes tiers, appartenance de tout ce qui s'unit au sol aupropriétaire du sol sous réserve des droits des tiers...); et
• la signature d'une ordonnance consacrant le principe de con-cession rurale permettant aux communautés rurales de gé-
1Coordinateur du Programme, c/o IUCN Niger, BP 10933, Niamey, Niger
103
El Hadj Saley Gambo1
EL HADJ SALEY GAMBO
rer, dans un cadre bien défini par la loi, des espaces fo-restiers délimités, etc.
Le Programme d'Appui aux Initiatives de Gestion Localedes Rôneraies, en capitalisant les leçons et expériences desphases précédentes, vise depuis 1994, un partage des respon-sabilités dans la gestion des rôneraies et un transfert progres-sif aux populations de certaines activités jusque-là réaliséespar l'état.
De 1994 à 1995, les populations ont eu à:
• régénérer plus de 1694ha;• constituer 59 brigades villageoises regroupant 311 briga-
diers qui assurent la protection quotidienne de larôneraie;
• recenser, fendiller et vendre plus de2370 pieds de chablis; et• participer à l'élaboration et à la mise en oeuvre de 9 plans
de gestion de terroirs.
Les Rôneraies de Gaya et leurImportance Socio-économique
Présentation des Rôneraies.
Les Rôneraies du Dallol Maouri et du fleuve sont situéesau Sud-Ouest du Niger, dans la zone soudano-sahélienne (600à 900mm) plus particulièrement dans les dépressions humi-des appelées Dallols et dans les alluvions du Fleuve:
• La Rôneraie du Dallol Maouri, avec une superficie de28,274ha s'étend sur une longueur de 85km depuis levillage de Makani (à 12°28 latitude Nord) jusqu'au fleuveNiger et la largeur variant de 0,1 à 6km; et
• La Rôneraie du Fleuve longe la rive gauche du fleuve Ni-ger avec 2,689ha et s'étend de Momboye à Ouna et dansl'île de l'été. (Voir carte en Figure 1).
L'ensemble de la Rôneraie se réparti en 9 blocs totalisantquelques 30,963ha.
Importance Socio-économique desRôneraies
Les Rôneraies du Dallol Maouri et du fleuve représen-tent une énorme richesse pour la population riveraine. Eneffet ces rôneraies renferment :
• des terres relativement de bonne qualité, offrant ainsid'énormes possibilités agricoles;
• de ressources fourragères importantes ;• d'important plans d'eau offrant d'énormes possibilités
pastorales, agricoles et halieutiques;
- l'alimentation humaine sous diverses formes (fruitsmûrs, colchini, miritchi...);- l'alimentation du bétail (fleurs mâles);- l'artisanat (confection des meubles);- la médecine traditionnelle;- l'habitat à travers les lattes et les feuilles mortes.
Cette importance socio-économique explique la grandeconvoitise et l'installation de quelques 74 villages et hameauxavec une densité de plus de 206 Habitants au km2.
Rappel des Interventions dansles Rôneraies de 1978 à 1991C'est à partir de 1978 que la Rôneraie du Dallol Maouri, surdemande de la population riveraine, a bénéficié d'attentionde la part de l'état. Ceci s'est traduit par la succession d'uncertain nombre de projets "Aménagement et Reconstitutionde la Rôneraie du Dallol Maouri" sur financement FAC/FNI;ensuite vient le Projet Aménagement de la Rôneraie du DallolMaouri (PARDM) qui a connu trois (3) phases de 1981 à 1991,sur financement Suisse.
Au cours de ces périodes, plus de 5,000ha ont été régé-nérés en régie et 5 postes forestiers de surveillance construitsmais la rôneraie ne constituait pas pour les populations desfacteurs de développement compte tenu de leur faible impli-cation dans la perspective d'une prise en charge des acquis.
Le montant total des financements se chiffre à quelques882,700,000 F CFA.
Le Programme d'Appui aux Initiatives de Gestion Locale desRôneraies
Il est dans sa deuxième phase après une phase intérimaire de6 mois (1993), puis une phase test de 18 mois en 1994-1995.
Les phases PAIGLR visent un partage des responsabilitéset un transfert progressif aux populations des activités jus-que-là réalisées par l'Etat.
Objectifs du Programme (voir Figure 2 )Le PAIGLR vise essentiellement à créer et à mettre en
place les conditions nécessaires à la conservation, à la préser-vation et à la valorisation du milieu naturel par les popula-tions de la zone d'intervention du programme.
Les objectifs spécifiques sont:
• promouvoir les initiatives locales et créer un cadre favo-rable au développement durable;
• mettre en place des structures villageoises et amener lespopulations sous rôneraie à gérer de façon durable leursressources naturelles;
104
Figure 1: Carte des Rônerais de Gaya
105
RÔLES ET PLACE DES COMMUNAUTÉS VILIAGEOISES DANS LA CONSERVATION ET L'UTILISATION DURABLE DES RESSOURCES FORESTIÈRES
106
Anne
se 2:
Tab
leau
Syno
ptiq
ue de
Pla
nific
atio
n
EL HADJ SALEY GAMBO
RÔLES ET PLACE DES COMMUNAUTÉS VILIAGEOISES DANS LA CONSERVATION ET L'UTILISATION DURABLE DES RESSOURCES FORESTIÈRES
niques améliorées de production et d'exploitation des res-sources naturelles en particulier du rônier;
• contribuer à la mise en oeuvre des principes d'orienta-tion du code rural à travers la mise en place des disposi-tifs juridiques favorisant la gestion locale; et
• renforcer les capacités d'encadrement des agents desservices de l'Etat et du PAIGLR.
Approche et Démarche du PAIGLR
Le PAIGLR en "donnant la parole aux paysans" cherche à trans-former un projet de régénération de la rôneraie en un vérita-ble programme de développement à la base piloté par lespopulations locales.
L'Approche Gestion de Terroir
La gestion de terroir est un processus de valorisation concer-tée des ressources naturelles du terroir par une populationresponsabilisée avec l'appui des acteurs de développementafin d'atteindre un développement économique et socio-cul-turel harmonieux qui respecte l'équilibre écologique. L'ap-proche vise donc essentiellement à placer la population aucentre des décisions et des actions relatives à son propre dé-veloppement. Par le choix de cette approche, le PAIGLR sefixe un certain nombre de résultats à atteindre notamment:
I. Parvenir à un aménagement cohérent de l'écosystèmerônier (rôneraie) par une planification multisectorielleconcertée des interventions.
II. Asseoir un développement participatif qui place la com-munauté rurale au centre de toutes les décisions et ac-tions.
III. Accroître la capacité d'organisation et d'auto promotiondes populations.
Le produit de cette approche est le plan Gestion des res-sources naturelles qui est un outil de sensibilisation pour unegestion participative et rationnelle des ressources. Il est éga-lement un moyen d'auto-gestion et de planification au niveaudes terroirs villageois.
La Démarche du PAIGLR
Elle est basée sur la responsabilisation des acteurs paysans et
opte pour une gestion participative. Toute action à mener
doit être entreprise par la population afin qu'elle soit effecti-
vement impliquée et réellement responsabilisée.
Le personnel d'encadrement du programme apporte un
appui aux populations. Mais, il ne doit en aucun cas se substi-tuer à elle dans la conception, la planification, l'exécution etle suivi des activités. Cet appui doit être une forme d'appren-tissage à travers lequel les agents apprennent de la popula-tion et inversement.
L'animation a, pour principale tâche d'aider la popula-tion à s'organiser.
Rôles et Place des CommunautésVillageoises dans la Conservationet l'Utilisation Durable desRessources Forestières
Les Acteurs du Programme et leur Cahierde Charge
Il s'agit des Directions de l'Environnement aux niveau natio-nal et régional, des services techniques d'arrondissement, desstructures villageoises, de la cellule de coordination du Pro-gramme, de l'UICN et de la Coopération Suisse, des comitésde pilotages (restreint et élargi). Voir Annexe 1 le cahier decharge des différents acteurs.
Rôles des Communautés Villageoises
a) Activités Prises en Charge par les Populations
Il s'agit de la régénération (semis rônier, reboisement com-plémentaire), la protection et l'exploitation/commercialisationdes chablis.
Régénération-reconstitution de l'Écosystème
Cette activité a été exécutée en régie jusqu'en 1993 oùprès de 5,000ha ont été régénérés. Depuis le démarage duPAIGLR, elle est totalement prise en charge par la populationqui définit les superficies à semer, planifie les opérations pourle semis direct des noix de rônier (la collecte de semences, letransport, le semis et le gardiennage sont assurés par la po-pulation).
Il est à noter d'ailleurs l'extension de la rôneraie du DallolMaouri dans la partie Nord de l'arrondissement de Gaya (Can-tons de Kara Kara et Zabori) à partir de cette année 1996 oùplus de 10,000 fruits ont été rassemblés par les populationssous rôneraie et envoyés aux populations de 19 villages, à lademande des deux chefs de cantons concernés.
Parallèlement, le programme de reboisement complé-
mentaire dont l'objectif est la biodiversification du milieu, la
protection et l'enrichissement des sols des Dallols est con-
107
ELHADJ SALEYGAMBO
ces débats, l'insuffisance du système de protection par l'étata été mis en évidence, et aussi les populations se sont enga-gées à participer effectivement à cette activité en mettant enplace des brigades de protection de l'environnement appuyéespar les chefe de villages et de canton dans leur travail. Actuelle-ment, 311 brigadiers réunis autour de 59 brigades assurent laprotection quotidienne des rôneraies.
Exploitation et Commercialisation des Chablis
L'exploitation et la commercialisation de bois sont régies parla loi 92-037 d'Août 1992 organisant les marchés de bois éner-gie au Niger. Cependant, pour la rôneraie, de par sa spécifi-cité et la nature du bois de rônier, il a été créée à Gaya et sousla tutelle du service de l'environnement une régie de coupe.Avec la mise en place du PAIGLR, il s'est établi un partenariatentre le service et les populations. A la demande des popula-tions, il a été mis fin à la mise en oeuvre du plan d'aménage
ment (exploitation de 4,000 pieds de rôniers vivants à condi-tion de régénérer 225ha). Aussi, il revient à chaque village àtravers ses brigadiers de procéder au recensement des chablis,au fendillage et transport des lattes au niveau village.
La vente s'effectue au village en présence du chef de vil-lage et des brigadiers (et populations).
b) Rôte dans l'Élabciration des Plans de Gestion de Terroir
La zone d'intervention du PAIGLR compte quelques 74 villa-ges et hameaux dont 9 bénéficient actuellement de plans degestion élaborés et mis en oeuvre. Ce sont les communautésvillageoises qui définissent les critères de choix et choisissentle village. Puis, elles participent activement à tout le proces-sus d'élaboration (diagnostic, planification à la base, recher-che de financement, mise en oeuvre) et au suivi évaluationdes actions comme l'indique le tableau n°l suivant:
ETAPES
ChoisVillages
Connaissancedu millieu
Diagnostic dumilieuphysique etsocioéconomique
ROLES
Définition des critères de choix Choixdate et lieu de réunionRéunionPrésentation participants et OJBienvenue et PrésidenceRappel philosophie et démarchePAIGLRRappel des engagements prisRappel critères de choixPrésentation activités menéesBilan exécution des PGTDésignation village
Acceuil et hébergement anim.Participation aux débats sur l'avenirdes rôneraiesDétermination période diagn.
Accueil et hébergementLecture de terroirElaboration cartesIdentification contraintes etpotentialitésProposition solutions possiblesIdentification pratiques etconnaissances traditionnelles
ACTEURS VILLAGEOIS
Chefs canton/villages, délég.
Chefs Canton/villagesAnimateur villagoisChef Canton
Chef CantonChefs villagesChefs villages sous rôneraieStructures villageoisesChefs villages sous rôneraie
Chef village, Tout villageTout village
Tout village
Chef village, tout villagepaysanspaysans appuyés par STPaysans
paysanspaysans
OBSERVATIONS
Report réunion en casd'absence de + de 2 villages
Désignation par seuls chefsvillages sous rôneraie
2 à 3 jours
1 à 2 semaines
Suite..108
ETAPES
Planification àla base
Structure etorganisation degestion deterroir
FinancementPlan de gestion
Mise en oeuvre
Suivi et autoévaluation
ROLES
Présentation du terroirRestitution travaux groupes sectorielsAnalyse donnéesElaboration programme d'action GTet dossiers de financementAdoption PGT par Assembléevillageoise
Mise en place des différents comités degestion
Présentation des dossiers de terroir auxcomités de pilotage
Exécution du PGT, Identificationbesoins appui
Organisation forums cantonnaux
ACTEURS VILLAGEOIS
Délégué paysanDélégué par groupeEnsemble villageDélégués villageois appuyés par servicestechniques et PAIGLR en présence chefde village
Ensemble village sur convocation du chefde village
Délégués villageois (3 par terroir dont 1femme)
Ensemble terroir, structuresvillageoises (comités gestion)
chefs de canton, de villagescomités de gestion
OBSERVATIONS
1 à 2 mois après le diagnostic
1 à 2 moisaprès le diagnostic
Présence de l'animateur duPAIGLR en cas de besoin
Tous les 6 mois à 1 an
3à5ans
6 mois à 1 an
Tableau n°1: Rôles des communautés villageoises dans l'élaboration et la mise en oeuvre Plan de GestionTerroir
Place des Communautés Villageoises
Leur contribution à la réalisation de toutes les activités duprogramme est estimée à 336,960,000 F CFA (21%) contre104,700,000 (6%) pour le Gouvernement et 1,187,921,061pour la DDC Suisse (73%).
Elles sont les maîtres d'oeuvre et maîtres d'ouvrage desactivités de gestion de leurs ressources. A ce titre, il leur re-vient de définir la nature de l'appui et le cadre organisation-nel à mettre en place dans le village pour assumer efficace-ment leurs nouvelles responsabilités.
En établissant un partenariat avec les communautés vil-lageoises en matière de gestion des ressources de leurs ter-roirs, le programme rôneraie entend s'enrichir des initiativespaysannes et contribuer ainsi à la définition des politiquesnationales en matière de Gestion des Ressources Naturelles.
Conclusion
Quoique les vraies motivations qui poussent les communau-tés villageoises sous rôneraies à s'investir dans les actionsd'aménagement et de gestion des ressources ne soient pasencore bien identifiées, leur prise de conscience de préser-ver et de promouvoir la régénération et l'exploitation des
leur volonté d'agir ensemble et leur adhésion à tous les ni-veaux à la philosophie du programme, leur connaissance etleur savoir faire en relation avec les besoins de développe-ment de la gestion des rôneraies les placent dans une situa-tion confortable et augurent une bonne conservation et utili-sation durable des ressources.
Le Programme d'Appui aux Initiatives de Gestion Localedes Rôneraies en injectant des fonds d'appui villageois (fondsd'investissement et fonds d'appui à la production), fournit labase pour l'avenir de la gestion locale des rôneraies par lespopulations grâce au financement des actions de développe-ment qu'elles initient.
L'état en transférant progressivement les responsabilités
aux communautés villageoises doit mettre en place les méca-
nismes de suivi pour réduire les risques de l'exploitation
anarchique et destructrice des ressources.
References
Bawa Gaoh Ousmane. Juin 1996. Une Initiative Locale deGestion d'un Écosystème à Borassus aethiopum mart. Com-munication au Coloque Panafricain Hararé, Zimbabwé.
109
RÔLES ET PLACE DES COMMUNAUTÉS VILIAGEOISES DANS LA CONSERVATION ET L'UTILISATION DURABLE DES RESSOURCES FORESTIÈRES
EL HADJ SALEY GAMBO
Bawa Gaoh Ousmane. 1996. Rapport d'Activités 1er Semestre 1996.
Inoussa Abdoulkader. 1993. Filière Hypocotyle "Miritchi" et
ses Effets sur la Rôneraie et la Population de Gaya.
Laouali Abdoulkarim. 1995. Contribution des Produits et sousProduits du Rônier dans le Revenu des Femmes de la Régionde Gaya.
Madické Niang. 1995. Aide Mémoire Visite au PAIGLR.Sécrétariat P. du Code Rural. Mars 1996. Code Rural et Ges-tion Communautaire des Ressources Naturelles
PAIGLR. Février 1996. Document de Base de la 2 ème Phase.
PAIGLR. 1996. Plan d'Opération 1996.
PAIGLR. 1996. DocumentSignalétique TerroirdeKoutoumbou,Magé.
ACTEURS
Structures Villageoises
Services techniquesd'arrondissement
Cellule de CoordinationPAIGLR
Animateurs
Comité de pilotagerestreint
Comité de pilotageélargi
UICN/Cop. Suisse
DirectionEnvironnement
Direct Dép.Environnement
CAHIERS DE CHARGES
Voir point 4.2
Assurer l'encadrement populations Veuiller à la bonneexécution activités
Appui technique et méthodologique ST et animateurs;Appui organisation et formation populations; Suivipermanent activités; mobilisation appuis nécessaires
Appui organisation populations; Info/sensib /formation;Identification initiatives paysannes
Approbation PGT et Plan de travail Examen, amendementet approbation textes
Mise en application textes, conseil, financement activités,réorientation objectifs au besoin
Appui financier, technique, méthodologique, participationréunion Comité Pilotage
Tutelle adm. et technique, gestion financière, supervisionet suivi, participation réunion CP
Appui-conseil, participation réunions Comités PilotageRestreint et Elargi
OBSERVATIONS
Voir point 4.2
SA/Alpha/SAEIA/SAE/SAPUSRC/GR/EDUCATION
Coordonnateur/Conseill-er Technique/ConseillerSocial
6 dont 2 Femmes; 10 à14 villages à
"animer/agent"
ST/Cellule Coord/Animat. / DDE/chefsVillages et cantons,Sous Préfets.
ST/Cellule Coord/Animat. / DDE/chefsVillages et cantons,Sous Préfets + DE +UICN + Coop. Suisse
Annexe 1: Cahier de charge des différents acteurs
110
SummariesThe Ron Palm populations in the Dallol Maouri and in the basin of the Niger River are within a territory("terroir") managed by some 64,000 people, distributed among 74 villages with hamlets.
Before 1978, traders—armed with permits—indiscriminately felled live palms. The local population "rangthe alarm", and asked the government to suspend the issue of such permits and to envisage activities torehabilitate the ecosystem.
The result was a succession of projects designed to improve and recuperate the local ecology. However,village communities played a weak role in the design and implementation of these projects.
After 16 years of intervention, the combination of community efforts and State recognition of the potentialimpact of local knowledge and techniques to better manage the Ron Palm paved the way for the birth of the"Support to Local Initiatives for Ron Palm Ecosystem Management" Programme.
With the adoption of the "village land-use management'' ("gestion de terroirs") approach, the programmehas placed village communities at the centre of decision-making and actions related to their own development.
Currently, the government and local communities are striving to establish a framework that would enablethe population to better take advantage offorestry resources,and at the same time guarantee their conservation.
Las poblaciones de Ron Palm en el Dallol Maouriy en la cuenca del río Niger están dentro del territorio("terroir") manejado por unas 64.000 personas, distribuidas entre 14 pueblos y aldeas.
Antes de 1978, mercaderes—con los respectivos permisos—talaban indiscriminadamente palmeras vivas.La población local "hizo sonar la alarma "y solicitó al gobierno que suspendiera la emisión de dichos permisosy que tomara las medidas para rehabilitar el ecosistema.
El resultado fue una cadena de proyectos destinados a mejorar y recuperar la ecología local. Sin embargo,las comunidades rurales cumplieron un débil papel en la elaboración e implementación de esos proyectos.
Después de 16 años de intervención, la combinación de los esfuerzos comunitarios y el reconocimientoestatal del impacto potencial del conocimiento y técnicas locales para un mejor manejo de Ron Palm,allanaron el camino para el nacimiento del programa "Apoyo a las iniciativas locales para el manejo delecosistema de Ron Palm".
Con la adopción del proyecto de "manejo de los territorios" ("gestion de terroirs"), el programa ha colocadoa las comunidades rurales en el centro de la toma de decisionesy medidas en relación con supropio desarrollo.
Actualmente, el gobierno y las comunidades locales se están esforzando por establecer un marco que hagaposible que la población obtenga mayores ventajas de los recursos forestales y, al mismo tiempo, garantice suconservación.
111
RÔLES ET PLACE DES COMMUNAUTÉS VILIAGEOISES DANS LA CONSERVATION ET L'UTILISATION DURABLE DES RESSOURCES FORESTIÈRES
Sustainable Umber Harvesting in Belize: TheColumbia Controlled Felling Programme
Introduction
One of the biggest challenges in forest conservation today ishow to influence the nature of timber harvesting already be-ing carried out in the forest. Logging of natural forest is anestablished major economic activity throughout much of thetropics. In many areas controls on logging are urgently re-quired if the forest ecosystem is not to be degraded. This pa-per describes a recent initiative in the species-rich tropicalforest of Belize, Central America, where a new system of fell-ing control is being introduced as part of an attempt to estab-lish sustainable forest management.
The Columbia Forest Management Unit (CFMU) coversan area of 53,100 hectares of natural broadleaf forest. It con-sists of two government-owned forest reserves in the southof the country. In 1994 a forest management plan was draftedwhich included prescriptions for controlled timber harvest-ing over 38% of the area (the production forest). The remain-der of the area was designated for complete preservation, tomeet both environmental protection and biodiversity conser-vation objectives. In 1995 the Government of Belize issued atwenty-year timber licence to a logging company, followingthe guidelines set out in the plan.
Evolution of the Felling ControlSystem
Forest Zonation
Timber harvesting is controlled in several complementaryways. Underpinning the whole approach is the concept ofarea control, where each year logging is confined to one areawithin the forest. The size of this area is determined on thebasis of the estimated felling cycle (the period of time be-tween successive harvests). This has been set at forty years,on the basis of general estimates of growth and mortality. Theproduction forest area within the CFMU has therefore beendivided into forty annual compartments of equal area (500hectares). Although this approach can only be described as a ru-dimentary form of control (it does not take into account varia-tion in stocking over the area) its simplicity is also an advantage,allowing implementation to proceed quickly and withoutoutam-biguity.
Area control, by itself, represents a major step forward intimber harvesting controls. Previous logging practice was char-acterised by felling operations which were allowed to take placethroughout the area under licence. The same area of forestcould therefore be repeatedly logged with no period allowedfor recovery of the stand.
Calculating the Global Timber Yield
The Annual Allowable Cut (AAC) has been calculated using amethod developed by Alder (1992), where the sustained yieldis estimated by an iterative method using a spreadsheet pack-
1Forest Planning and Management Project, Ministry of Natural Resources, PO Box 16 Belmopan, Belize2Slatecreek Nature Reserve/ODA Programme, 283 Belama, Extention 1 PO Box 2038, Belize City, Belize
113
N.M. Bird1 and Virginia Vasquez2
A timber harvesting system being developed in the natural forests of Belize is described. One of the distinctivefeatures of this system is that it places emphasis on those trees that need to be protected during logging ratherthan only considering the trees to be felled. It has been tested at the operational level, with timber controloperating in blocks of forest 100 hectares in size.
N.M. BIRD AND VIRGINIA VASQUEZ
age. The AAC is defined here as the level of timber harvestwhich results in a constant number of trees felled over threefelling cycles. It was calculated using the results of a forestinventory carried out in 1976, although only those species con-sidered to have commercial timber value by the Forest De-partment were included. A total of 39 species were selectedoutof the inventory list of 77 named species. (An additional cat-egory included all those individual trees which could not bereliably identified at the time of the inventory). The main as-sumptions of this simple modelling approach are:
For all species:
optimum felling size = 60cm dbhaverage tree mortality = 1.25 % per annumaverage tree growth = 5mm per annum
The 1976 forest inventory was carried out over part of themanagement plan area, including most of the production for-est. Twenty transects, each five kilometres long and 20 metreswide, were laid out in a stratified random design. Trees of allspecies greater than 20cm diameter at breast height (dbh)were measured. The results of this inventory have been usedto provide the overall estimate of timber stocking within theproduction forest area, as very little timber exploitation hastaken place since 1976.
The AAC calculation gave a sustainable cutting level of518 mature trees (equal to or greater than 60cm dbh) percycle. This estimate has been used to set the upper limit onthe number of trees to be harvested in any 100 hectare blockof forest. It will be refined as growth and mortality data arecollected from Permanent Sample Plots (PSPs) within the for-est. PSPs established in 1993 will soon provide such data. Furtherreconnaissance level forest inventories may also be required.
Calculating the Local Timber Yield
The next level of control is based upon an intimate knowl-edge of the trees within the compartment. This allows thecrop trees to be selected prior to the start of the logging op-eration. The number of individual trees by species, and theirspatial distribution, is determined during a pre-harvest inven-tory of the area, using a technique known as stock survey.The stock survey has two principal objectives:
• to identify potential crop trees for the current harvest;and
• to identify potential crop trees for the next harvest.
These two objectives can only be met by completing asurvey of the entire area to be harvested. Sampling methods
cannot provide sufficiently precise estimates for these twogroups of trees in this species-rich forest, where many spe-cies show non-random distribution patterns.
The latter objective is as important as the first. In polycy-clic felling a sustained yield depends on there being a suffi-cient number of established trees remaining in the residualstand to form a significant part of the next timber harvest.The estimated time for a tree to grow from seed to a stemdiameter of 60cm for many species growing in the CFMU isbelieved to be between 80 and 120 years. Hence, a felling cy-cle of 40 years will result in at least one return period duringthe life cycle of many trees. The identification of established,yet immature, trees is therefore an important element of thestock survey.
A list of the twenty most important commercial timberspecies has been compiled from the larger number of specieswhich were included in the calculation of the AAC. For theseimportant timber trees immature individuals are also recordedduring the stock survey. These trees are called reserve trees.
Main features of the stock survey:
Forest area surveyed in 100ha blocks, with each blocksubdivided into hectare survey units
For all trees => 60cm dbh:identified, measured and mapped
For twenty commercial timber trees(the reserve trees) 30-59cm dbh:identified, measured & mapped painted withstem band any climbers present are cut
Tree Mortality Considerations
Mortality rates are known to increase as a result of logging.Assuming different rates has a profound effect on the num-ber of trees required to maintain a similar harvest level in thenext cutting cycle:
@ 1.25% annual mortality: 518 trees in 40 years = 857 trees now@ 2.50% annual mortality: 518 trees in 40 years = 1426 trees now
Using 2.5% as the upper limit of the expected annualmortality rate following logging, the current average numberof seed trees (see below) and reserve trees of approximately12,000 trees per lOOha would result in 436 harvestable treesin 40 years time. Should this mortality rate remain constantthroughout the felling cycle period, i.e., for the next forty years,the balance of the allowable cut would have to come from
114
SUSTAINABLE TIMBER HARVESTING IN BELIZE: THE COLUMBIA CONTROLLED FELLING PROGRAMME
fast growing pioneer species capable of growing to a com-mercial size within the cutting cycle period. Two species cur-rently of marginal commercial interest (not contained in thetimber yield) would fall into this category, Quamwood(Scbizolobium parahybum) and Hogplum (Spondiasmombin). At present their mean stocking of large trees withinthe compartment is 77 trees per 100ha. The large gap sizeresulting from the planned timber harvest should result ingood regeneration of these two species. Hence, even at thishigh level of mortality there would be sufficient commercial-sized timber trees in 40 years time to sustain the present cut-ting intensity. However, it is expected that the mortality ratewill drop after a number of years (the ACC assumes a meanvalue of 1.25% per annum over 40 years) and so there seemslittle risk that the timber harvest will fall at the next fellingcycle. Based upon this indicative analysis, the felling programmeof up to 518 trees per 100 hectares is considered to meet stand-ards of sustainable timber harvesting.
Tree Growth Considerations
The AAC estimate assumes a constant growth rate, set at 5mmstem diameter per annum, for all species and all size classes.This is clearly a first approximation and will be refined as datafrom PSPs become available. It is recognised that this assumedpattern of increment may be quite different to the real situa-tion, as has been found in other tropical moist forests (Alder,1983). Several studies have shown that a few dominant treesput on significant growth whilst the vast majority of trees growonly very slowly. If this growth behaviour is found to occur inthe CFMU then it has an important implication for forest man-agement; the current yield prediction, based upon mean val-ues, would underestimate the wood production potential ofthe forest. However, at this early stage of forest managementa cautious approach to the level of the expected yield is rec-ommended.
Biodiversity Safeguards
Another consideration in determining the level of the sus-tainable timber harvest concerns the issue of biological con-servation. As a guiding principle, no tree species should beimpacted upon so that logging causes the local extinction ofthat species. Local extinction has been defined here as to meanwithin any one 100-hectare block of forest. However, atpresent the biological data necessary to set rigorous techni-cal criteria to guarantee meeting this objective is absent. Thisconsideration has to be evaluated at the species level, andhence requires auto-ecological studies. Successful regenera-tion of a tree species is controlled by many factors, two of themost important being the mechanisms for pollination and seed
dispersal. A matrix of these two factors could be compiled toevaluate how sensitive a species is to the removal of mature,large trees. In the absence of such information, a pragmaticapproach has been adopted whereby a minimum number oftrees per species must remain after logging. Based upon anarea of 100 hectares, the decision rule is that ten trees perspecies, capable of producing seed, must be left. It is assumedthat all trees equal to or greater than 30cm stem diameter arecapable of producing viable seed. This is based on the obser-vation that trees of this size have normally reached the forestcanopy and might be expected to have become seed bearing.For each species where there are not ten reserve trees identi-fied during the stock survey the balance is selected subse-quently from larger trees of good phenology. These trees arecalled seed trees.
This approach will have to be refined over the next fewyears as knowledge is built up on the biology of the harvestedspecies. This should not be an onerous task as less than 20species are being logged. The impact on non-targeted treespecies and other taxa will also require investigation. Suchstudies will more likely be long-term in nature.
Ecological Considerations
The intensity of logging per unit area is also an importantconsideration in the logging control system. An upper limitof eight trees per hectare has been set to ensure that the for-est canopy is not destroyed over too large an area. A numberof the commercial timber trees appear to be light-demandingspecies and should therefore regenerate well under increasedlight conditions. However, in the absence of research studiesin this forest, a conservative approach is advocated at present.The planned logging intensity will still be much higher thanhas been the case in the past. In addition to the increasedlight regime, the logging operation may cause significant soilcompaction and changes to soil conditions. The effects ofthese impacts will have to be monitored so that controls canbe developed if any deleterious effects become apparent.
Environmental Considerations
General environmental safeguards which feature in the log-ging plan include the exclusion of logging from within 20metres (66 feet) of any permanent watercourse. Logging isalso prohibited on steep slopes (here defined as any slopeover 25 degrees with a slope distance of 100 metres or more).
Selection of the Timber Yield
One innovation of this programme lies in the design of the
115
N.M. BIRD AND VIRGINIA VASQUEZ
field sheet. This form is completed for each one-hectare sur-vey unit and contains a map to indicate the location of all thesurveyed trees. This is completed during the field exercise.The stock map for the 100ha block is therefore produced sim-ply by glueing together all the field sheet maps. The data areentered onto spreadsheets and the yield is determined fromthe trees of good form, following the protocols outlined inthe sections above.
An important element in the process of yield selection isthe priority list made by the licensee stating which timberspecies he prefers. This is important as the yield is built up bytaking the preferred species first. The limit placed on loggingintensity means that commercial-sized trees of low priorityspecies may not be selected for felling if the lmit on extrac-tion has been reached in any one-hectare survey site.
Marking the Timber Yield
The forest guard responsible for felling control takes the com-pleted map back to the harvesting block. Together with twoworkers he walks through the area marking the crop treeswith red paint. The paint mark is made at breast height sothat it is clearly visible to the licensee's felling gangs. A broadline is also painted from the dbh paint band down to groundlevel. This ensures that each stump has a paint mark, and there-fore acts as a further control to be checked during the post-harvest inspection.
Post-harvest Controls
When the licensee informs the Forest Department that fell-ing has been completed a post-harvest inspection is carriedout. This survey is carried out in two parts. First an inspectionof five randomly selected, one-hectare survey units is made.Several factors are examined during this check:
• whether the marked crop trees (and only those) havebeen felled;
• whether the reserved trees have not been damaged;• the layout and condition of skid trails; and• the general level of damage to the residual stand.
The second part of the survey is a check to see whetherthe seed trees of the most valuable timber species remain.The locations of these trees throughout the entire harvesting blockare determined from the stock map, and then visited in the field.
If both of these surveys find that felling has been carriedout to an acceptable standard then the licensee is given per-mission to enter the next harvesting block. Any failings whichshow up in the post-harvest survey are discussed betweenthe Forest Department forester and the licensee's managerbefore any further logging is allowed.
Conclusion
This system has been developed over the past twelve months.It is therefore at an early stage of development. However, evenat this point in its development, two aspects are already clear.Firstly, the costs of this programme need to be evaluated toensure economic sustainability (an issue which lies outsidethe scope of this paper). Secondly, natural forest managementhas to be based upon an understanding of the ecological pro-cesses which drive the dynamic of the forest. At present, thisknowledge is scanty: only with a complementary research ef-fort can sustainable forest management be guaranteed.
References
Alder, D. 1983. Growth and Yield of the Mixed Forests of theHumid Tropics: A Review. FAO, Rome, Italy.
Alder, D. 1992. Simple Methods for Calculating MinimumDiameter and Sustainable Yield in Mixed Tropical Forest.Paper presented to the conference "Wise Management ofTropical Forests 1992", Oxford, UK 30 March-1 April 1992.
L'étude décrit un système de collecte de bois en cours d'élaboration dans les forêts naturelles de Belize. Unaspect remarquable de ce système est qu'il met l'accent sur les arbres qui ont besoin de protection pendantl'abattage, au lieu de ne se préoccuper que des arbres à abattre. Ce système a été testé au niveau opérationnel,avec les opérations de contrôle qui se font sur des unités de 100 hectares carrés de forêt.
116
Se describe el sistema de cultivo de árboles maderables que se está desarrollando en los bosques naturales deBelice. Uno de los rasgos distintivos de este sistema es que enfatiza los árboles que deben protegerse durante latala, en vez de tener en cuenta sólo los árboles que se van a talar. Se ha sometido aprueba a nivel operativo,con el empleo del control de árboles maderables en bloques de bosque de un tamaño de 100 hectáreas.
Summaries
La Experiencia del Plan Piloto Forestal deQuintana Roo, México, en Relación alUso Sostenible de RecursosAlberto Vargas1
En este documento se describe la experiencia del Plan Piloto Forestal de Quintana Roo (PPF) comoejemplo de un proceso conducente hacia el uso sostenible de los bosques selvas tropicales. En 1983, alfinalizar una concesión por 30 años a una empresa público/privada, se inició un proceso detransferencia del control sobre la explotación forestal a las comunidades locales (ejidos). La estrategiadel PPF consistió en crear nuevos mecanismos institucionales entre los diferentes grupos de interés(ejidos, industria, agencias oficiales) para promover incentivos que permitieran a los ejidatarios elpercibir los beneficios económicos de la explotaciónforestal. De acuerdo a esta estrategia, estos beneficiosalentarían a los ejidatarios (y alas otras partes involucradas) a manejar los bosques de manerasostenible.
Después de 12 años de trabajo, el PPF incluye cerca de 50 ejidos organizados en 5 asociacionesregionalesy cubreaproxirnadamente500,000hectáreas de bosquesproductivos. Hay una clara tendenciaa que el manejo sostenible se convierta en una práctica aceptada en la región, aunque existe aún unagran variación en el progreso que los ejidos participantes han alcanzado rumbo a tal manejo sostenible.Esta ponencia describe la evolución del PPF, enfatizando la interacción entre los aspectos ecológicos,económicos, sociales e institucionales que conducen hacia el manejo sostenible de los bosques. Tambiénexpone los retos actuales que enfrenta el PPF, incluyendo la diversificación de actividades y el mercadeode especies menos conocidas.
Introducción
En esta presentación quisiera comunicar tres cosas: 1)Describir brevemente la experiencia del PPF; 2) Relacionaresta experiencia con el entendimiento actual que se tiene enla UICN sobre el uso sostenible de recursos2; y 3) Mencionaralgunos retos actuales que enfrenta el PPF.
Enfoque Conceptual del UsoSostenible
Para iniciar, quisiera hacer referencia a nuestro entendimien-to actual sobre uso sostenible. Si reflexionamos sobre los te-mas principales que se discuten en este Taller, podríamos
concluir que los elementos o factores más importantes paralograr un manejo sostenible están bien identificados, siendoéstos de distinta índole: ecológicos, económicos; sociales einstitucionales; pero que el reto principal para tener éxito estáen la implementación o la adecuación de dichos factores a lascircunstancias locales.
Esta conclusión se refuerza consultando los resultadosde otros talleres y reuniones similares. En Febrero de 1995,se llevó a cabo en la Universidad de Wisconsin en Madison elSimposio 'Forestería en las Américas: Manejo Comunitario ySostenibilidad'. En dicho Simposio se compararon experien-cias de manejo forestal comunitario en los Estados Unidos(Menominee); México (Oaxcaca, Michoacán, y Quintana Roo);
1Candidato a Ph.D. en el Instituto de Estudios Ambientales de la Universidad de Wisconsin-Madison, 1225 Vilas Avenue, Madison, W153715, USA; [email protected] las ponencias plenarias de John G. Robinson "Evolving Understanding of Sustainable Use" y de Marshall W. Murphree"Strategic Roots and Implementation Evolution: Considerationsfor theFuture in the Sustainable Use Initiative" en este mismo taller.
117
ALBERTO VARGAS
Figure 1. Factores importantes para la sostenibilidad y su interacción.
Quintana Roo); y Sudamérica (Cooperativa Yanesha en Perú,y Comunidades Chiquitano en Lomerío y Territorio IndígenaMultiétnico en Chimanes, Bolivia)3.
En el Simposio de Madison se concluyó también que laclave para alcanzar un manejo sostenible de bosques en pro-yectos comunitarios no está 'cubrir' una lista de factores im-portantes (económicos, ecológicos, de tenencia, y culturales)sino en encontrar la 'combinación adecuada' y la interacciónde dichos factores para cada situación particular4. (Ver Figura. 1).
Este enfoque, en que lo más importante es la interacciónentre los elementos más que los factores mismos, coincidecon el estado actual de nuestro entendimiento sobre uso sos-tenible resumido por John Robinson y con el caráctersistémico de la estrategia del UICN para uso sostenible discu-tido por Marshall Murphree.
Otro concepto útil, más allá de la interacción entre losfactores que influyen en el uso sostenible, es el carácter evo-lutivo para alcanzar 'robustez' en las instituciones de accióncolectiva para manejo de recursos comunales explorado porElinor Ostrom5. Ostrom analizó los casos más exitosos y tam-bién casos que han fracasado en el manejo de comunal derecursos. Halló que el concepto de instituciones robustas es
útil para explicar el exito o el fracaso en términos de la degra-dación o no del recurso. Instituciones robustas (Ostrom,1990:58) son aquellas que han evolucionado en un procesocontinuo de cambio y ajuste de las reglas (para manejar unrecurso en común evitando su degradación) de acuerdo amecanismos establecidos de antemano que permiten estoscambios. Así, muchas de las experiencias exitosas identifica-das por Ostrom tienen reglas que han evolucionado por cien-tos de años. Pero también hay casos que han logrado iniciareste proceso y alcanzar la 'robustez' necesaria en poco tiem-po para disminuir las posibilidades de que el uso del recursosea no sostenible. Estos conceptos son útiles porque nos per-miten poner en perspectiva experiencias o intentos de poneren práctica el uso sostenible de bosques en apenas una dece-na de años de existencia
El Plan Piloto Forestal
En el caso del PPF, sus antecedentes conceptuales (de finesde 1970s y principios de 1980s) se conocían como 'plani-ficación estratégica', 'forestería comunal' y 'uso múlti-
3Ver 'Case Studies of Community-Based Forestry Enterprises in the Americas'. Papers presented at the Symposium "Forestry in theAmericas: Community-Based Managgement and Sustainability". University of Wisconsin-Madison, February 3-4, 1995. LandTentare Center and Institute for Environmental Studies. Madison.4Vargas, Alberto, 1995, 'Reevaluating community forestry paradigm'. Comentarios presentados en la sesión final del Simposio'Forestry in the Americas'... manuscrito no publicado.5Como ejemplo de este enfoque ver Ostrom, Elinor, 1990, 'Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for CollectiveAction'. Cambridge University Press. En mi opinión, el trabajo que Ostrom y su grupo han venido desarrollando en el 'Workshopin Political Theory and Policy Analysis' en la Universidad de Indiana en Bloominton, ofrece ricas posibilidades para entenderel porque algunos grupos tienen éxito en el manejo sostenible de recursos y otros no.
118
LA EXPERIENCIA DEL PLAN PILOTO FORESTAL DE QUINTANA ROO, MÉXICO, EN RELACIÓN AL U S O SOSTENIBLE DE RECURSOS
El Mapa 1: Quintana Roo, Mexico
119
ALBERTO VARGAS
ple'6. En ese entonces, el término 'uso sostenible' apenas seestaba acuñando entre la comunidad conservacionista mun-dial. Sin embargo, los conceptos de los orígenes del PPF sonmuy similares a los mismos que se incluyen ahora bajo el rubrode "uso sostenible".
Un aspecto clave en la estrategia del PPF fué el que no sepreparó un plan maestro, integral, con todas las interaccionesrelevantes y buscar luego su implementación, sino que se iden-tificaron 1 ó 2 elementos en los cuales concentrarse para ini-ciar el proceso e ir avanzando gradualmente hacia laintegralidad. Tampoco se trató de influir o cambiar la manerade operar de las agencias oficiales responsables de la admi-nistración forestal, sino que se apoyó a un grupo de campesi-nos de la región como un nuevo actor en el proceso7.
Si volvemos nuevamente a examinar la figura 1 en rela-ción a la experiencia del PPF, podemos apuntar que un ele-mento importantísimo para las fases iniciales (muy vulnera-bles) del PPF fue el aspecto político/institucional. En un ini-cio había que concentrar una gran parte de la estrategia enabrir espacios políticos para que la experiencia pudiera arrai-garse, aún a costa de no tener todos los elementos ecológicosy silvícolas perfectamente definidos. Así, se logró contar conal apoyo y participación activa del Gobernador local y del Se-cretario Forestal en turno.
En resumen, el PPF consitió en promover y apoyar a ungrupo de campesinos (aproximadamente 2000 miembros en10 ejidos que abarcaban cerca de 290,000 hectáreas) dentrodel área previamente concesionada a la empresa MaderasIndustrializadas de Quintana Roo (MIQRO). Durante los 30años que duró la concesión los ejidos se encontraban en si-tuación desventajosa frente a la empresa concesionaria y bajoel tutelaje oficial.
Para iniciar el PPF se decidió concentrarse exclusivamen-te en la explotación de la madera, principalmente caoba(Swietenia macrophylld), y no incluir otras actividades pro-ductivas que dependían o competían por espacio con el bos-que (apicultura, recolección de chicle, cacería, agricultura yganadería), que si bien eram importantes, hubieran compli-
cado excesivamente las etapas iniciales y además muchas deestas actividades estaban inmersas en dinámicas propias, difí-ciles o en momento inoportuno para cambiar.
El primer paso rué establecer la ordenación mínima te-rritorial de los ejidos mediante: 1) la delimitación por los mis-mos campesinos de las Areas Forestales Permanentes; 2) laelaboración de un plan de manejo a 25 años que incluía lautilización de especies secundarias para reducir la dependen-cia exclusiva en la caoba; y 3) la conducción de inventarios enlas áreas anuales de corta. El incentivo para los ejidos fue laposibilidad de comercializar en fonna directa por primera vezsu madera. Se eliminaron las restricciones de la concesiónmediante las cuales el producto era entregado a la industria aun precio simbólico (básicamente por derecho de monte) yen el primer año los ejidos obtuvieron ganancias considera-bles al incrementarse el precio que recibieron por la maderaen el orden de 20 veces.
El resultado de este proceso, 12 años después, lo pode-mos apreciar al observar en el MAPA 1. El estado de QuintanaRoo se localiza en la península de Yucatán y tiene un exten-sión total de 5 millones de hectáreas. El mapa muestra lasregiones del estado en que existen organizaciones campesi-nas para el manejo forestal.
Actualmente podemos anotar losprincipales logros del PPF.
1) Abarca un área de aproximadamente 500,000 hectáreasde bosques productivos prácticamente la totalidad de losbosques productivos maderables del estado—que cons-tituye la reserva forestal estratégica del mismo. Esta su-perficie es el resultado de la suma de las áreas forestalespermanentes de los ejidos.
2) Participan cerca de 50 ejidos (aproximadamente 6000 fami-lias) agrupados en 5 organizaciones. Estas organizacionesse han constituido legalmente bajo la categoría de Socieda-des Civiles con lo cual se independizan del tutelaje oficial.
6Ver por ejemplo los trabajos de: Janka, Helmut, 1981, La Economía Forestal Comunal, ¿Una alternativa para el trópico húmedo?,pp55-64, In: In: SARH-1N1F, Alternativas para el uso del suelo en áreas forestales del trópico húmedo, Public. Especial No. 26, TomoI, Mexico, D.F;Janka,H. et al, 1981, Bases metodológicas para laformulación de un programa de investigación de uso múltipleen el trópico húmedo. pp. 33-53, In: SARH-INIF, Alternativas para el uso del suelo en áreas forestales del trópico húmedo, PublicaciónEspecial Ato. 26, Tomo I, Mexico, D.F.; Galletti, Hugo A and Alfonso Arguelles, 1987, "La Experiencia en al Aprovechamiento delas Selvas en el Estado de Quintana Roo,Mexico: del modelo forestal clásico a un modelo forestal alternativo", Paper presentedat the International Workshop on Silviculture and Forest Management. SARH-COFAN-PAO. May 11-20, 1987, Chetumal, México,27 pp.; Steinlin, Hansjorg. 1981. Contribución de la economía forestal al mejoramiento de la situación económica y de lascondiciones de vida en las áreas rurales tropicales y subtropicales. pp 9-32, In: SARH-INIF, Alternativas para el uso del suelo enáreas forestales del trópico húmedo, Publicación Especial No. 26, Tomo I, Mexico, D.F.7Ver la ponencia: Janka, Helmut y Rodolfo Lobato. 1994. Alternativas para Enfrentar la Destrucción de las Selvas Tropicales:Algunos Aspectos de la Experiencia del Plan Piloto Forestal de Quintana Roo. Ponencia presentada en el Taller Políticas deGobierno en Relación a Recursos Forestales, 1 al 3 de junio de 1994, Washington DC. USA.
120
LA EXPERIENCIA DEL PIAN PILOTO FORESTAL DE QUINTANA ROO, MÉXICO, EN RELACIÓN AL U S O SOSTENIBLE DE RECURSOS
3) Lo que se inició como inventarios forestales en las áreasanuales de corta, constituye ahora un modelo deinventarios forestales, con participación local, reconoci-do a nivel mundial, con un sistema de informacióncomputarizado para análisis, interpretación y acceso a losdatos, y con más de 400 parcelas permanentes demuestreo8.
4) Cuatro ejidos han sido certificados por el Programa SmartWood del Rainforest Alliance y por Scientific CertificationSystems (Green Cross) — ambos reconocidos por elForest Stewardship Council — reconociendo que susprácticas de manejo forestal conducen a la sostenibilidad.
5) Se ha logrado obtener reconocimiento internacional y anivel nacional, el PPF ha jugado un papel importante enla creación a de la Unión Nacional de Organizaciones deForestaría Comunal (UNOFOC).
6) Algunos ejidos han logrado cierta capitalización e indus-trialización.
7) El proceso ha influenciado el establecimiento de otrasexperiencias similares en el vecino estado de Campeche,disparando con esto un proceso regional de desarrollobasado en el manejo y conservación de recursos. Conesto se sientan las bases para un corredor de conserva-ción biológica que se extiende desde el centro y el orien-te del estado de Quintana Roo (incluyendo la Reserva dela Biósfera Sian Ka'an) hasta la Reserva de la Biósfera deCalakmul en Campeche.
Retos Actuales del PPF
A pesar de los logros alcanzados por el PPF, aún existen pro-blemas serios y retos que hay que enfrentar. En esta últimasección apuntamos algunos de los retos más importantes enla actualidad.
1) Volviendo a la figura 1, podemos mencionar que el ele-mento económico (ingreso) resultante de la venta de lamadera ha sido muy importante para el PPF. La caobatiene un mercado asegurado y los precios son atractivos.Sin embargo un elemento importante del PPF ha sido elpromover la diversificación de las especies secundariascomercializadas tanto para aumentar el ingreso y reducirla dependencia en una sóla o pocas especies, como parafavorecer la regeneración de la misma caoba al abrir es-
pacios mayores en el dosel. El desarrollo de mercadospara especies secundarias ha sido difícil. Actualmente sehacen intentos de desarrollar mercados locales y de ex-portación, pero esto acarrea cambios necesarios en lasestructuras a nivel ejidal y de las Sociedades Civiles asícomo el perfeccionar los sistemas de manejo y procesa-miento para entregar productos en la calidad y en el tiem-po que requieren los compradores.
2) Los cambios requeridos en las estructuras sociales yorganizativas en los ejidos y en las empresas forestalesejidales son difíciles y lentos e incluyen aspectos críticostales como la distribución de las utilidades, la reorgani-zación de las funciones en las distintas fases de la empre-sa, la toma de decisiones, la reinversión y capitalización.
3) Desde 1988 el PPF ha perseguido la diversificación deactividades para apoyar aquellos ejidos que carecen decaoba o que son pequeños y que por lo tanto enfrentandificultades para mantener el interés de los ejidatariosen el proceso. En todos estos esfuerzos se mantiene unenfoque conceptual similar al original del PPF. Se haniniciado trabajos en:
a) Manejo de fauna. Se han realizado inventarios de fau-na y se han hecho cálculos para estimar la contribuciónde esta actividad al ingreso y/o a la subsistencia. Se en-frentan ahora problemas referidos al marco legal para queesta actividad pueda llevarse a cabo bajo un plan de ma-nejo y que no sea penalizada por la ley o desalentada porun excesivo burocratismo.b) El 1993 se inició un proceso activo para revitalizar laextracción de chicle. Para ese entonces, entró en crisis elesquema de explotación y comerciazación previamentecontrolado por la Federación de Cooperativas Chicleras(creada en los 1940s), misma que había llegado a gradosextremos de corrupción e ineficiencia, e intervenido porla comercializadora oficial IMPEXNAL que controlaba elmercado del producto a nivel nacional e internacional.El PPF logró iniciar un "Plan Piloto Chiclero»"en 1993 parael diseño de nuevos esquemas que permitieran máslibertad, responsabilidad y beneficios a los ejidos y quealentaran el cuidado mejor del recurso.c) Se han establecido algunas experiencias de ecoturismo,con la construcción de albergues y cabañas en la selva.d) Se continúa con la promoción del esquema del PPFen la parte norte del Estado y se promueven nuevosmercados para el carbón y materiales de construcción.
8Ver el trabajo: Carter, Jane, Mary Stockdale, Felipe Sánchez-Román y Ana Lawrence, 1995, 'Local people's participation in forestresource assessment: an analysis of recent experience, with case studies from Indonesia and Mexico', Commonwealth ForestryReview 74(4): 333-342.
121
ALBERTO VARGAS
A Manera de ConclusionEl PPF nos ofrece lecciones valiosas (tanto en sus éxitos comoen sus fracasos) para la puesta en práctica de los conceptosdel uso sostenible. A manera de conclusión, quisiera simple-mente recalcar que los esfuerzos de las comunidades paraconservación de sus recursos basados en un uso racional de-ben ser más reconocidos y apoyados por el resto de la socie-
dad. Los campesinos tienen su reto. Por otra parte, una lectu-pretexto de la competividad y de un crecimiento sin sentido,nos fuerzan a preguntarnos si será posible que las experien-cias que buscan lograr el uso sostenible resistan el debilita-miento que sufren frente a los embates de tales políticas. Estees el reto para el resto de nosotros.
SummariesThe purpose of this paper is to describe the experience of the Plan Piloto Forestal (PPF) of Quintana Roo asan example of a process that is leading toward the sustainable use oftropicalforests. After a 30-year concessionto a public/private enterprise, in 1983 the PPF started a process to transfer the rights to manage and benefitfrom mahogany rich and other types of forests to local communities, or ejidos. The strategy of the PPF was tocreate new institutional arrangements among the different stakeholders and promote incentives so the ejidomembers could receive benefits from the forest. According to the PPF strategy, these benefits would encourageejido members (and other parties involved) to manage forests sustainably.
After 12 years, the PPF includes now about 50 ejidos organised in five regional associations and coveringapproximately 500,000 hectares of productive forests in the state. These ejidos vary widely in their degree ofprogress toward a sound commitment to sustainable use, but there is a clear trend to make the sustainableuse of the forests an accepted practice in the region. This paper reviews the evolution of this experience,emphasising the interaction of social, ecological and institutional aspects as important elements that leadtowards sustainable use of the forest. It also mentions the current challenges that the PPF faces now includingthe crucial role of marketing and diversification of activities to assure that the needs of both the forest and thepeople are met.
122
La présente étude a pour but de décrire l'expérience du Plan Forestier Pilote (PFP) de Quintana Roo, commeun exemple de démarche qui conduit vers l'utilisation durable des forêts tropicales. En 1983, après uneconcession de 30 ans à une entreprise publique/privée, le PFP a entamé un processus de transfert des droits degestion des forêts riche en acajou et ou en d'autres espèces, aux communautés locales (ejidos), pour qu'ellespuissent en tirer profit. La stratégie a consisté en l'élaboration de nouveaux arrangements entre les différentesparties prenantes et la promotion de mesures incitatives susceptibles de permettre aux membres des ejidos detirer profit de la forêt. Selon cette stratégie, ces avantages encourageraient les ejidos (et les autres partiesconcernées) à gérer la forêt de façon durable.
Douze ans plus tard, le PFP regroupe maintenant environ 50 ejidos organisés en cinq associations régionaleset couvrent environ 500,000 hectares de forêt productive. Le niveau d'évolution des ejidos dans leur engagementréel en faveur d'une utilisation durable des forêts varie considérablement, mais on observe une nette tendanceà faire de l'utilisation durable une pratique acceptée dans la région. L'étude examine l'évolution de cetteexpérience, en mettant l'accent sur l'interaction entre les aspects sociaux, écologiques et institutionnels, entant qu'éléments importants pouvant conduire à l'utilisation durable de la forêt. Il fait également état desdéfis actuels du PFP, notamment le rôle central du marketing et de la diversification des activités en vue degarantir à la fois la satisfaction des besoins de la forêt et de la population.
Section FourManaging Wildlife For Sustainable Use
A Case Study in the Sustained Use of Wildlife:The Management of Beaver in theNortheastern United StatesJohn F. Organ, Robert Gotie, Thomas A. Deckerand Gordon R. BatchellerSummaries
The Management and SustainableUse of Duck and Geese in North AmericaJ. Gregory Thompson and James H. PattersonSummaries
La Chasse Commerciale et la Gestion Durable de laFaune en Afrique CentraleDjoh a NdiangSummaries
125
138
141
155
157
160
Uso Sostenible de la Vida Silvestre en América Central:Un Instrumento para laConservacion de la Biodiversidad 161Manuel Benítez and Vivienne Solis RiveraSummaries 166
Seven Case Studies on Wildlife ManagementCarried Out by the North AmericanSustainable Use Specialists GroupRichard M. ParsonsSummaries
A Case Study of the Management of Barren-GroundCaribou from the Beverly and QamanirjuaqHerds in Northern CanadaKevin A. Lloyd and Roland P. GrafSummaries
169
172
173
178
A Case Study in the Sustained Use ofWildlife: The Management of Beaver in theNortheastern United States
We focus on the history of the beaver (Castor canadensis) and beaver management in the Northeastern UnitedStates. The present management system, which is based on sustained use principles, is compared to the archaicmodel of unregulated use. This semi-aquatic species is a herbivore capable of modifying its own habitat byconstructing dams in wetlands and streams. They have a high reproductive rate, low mortality and are long-lived. In the 17th and 18th centuries, the beaver provided a significant source of income to both native Americansand European settlers, profiting by the strong European-based trade in furs. The use of beaver during thisperiod was unregulated; harvests were completely unrestricted. Simultaneously, and through the middle ofthe 19th century, beaver habitat was significantly reduced due to agriculturally based land-clearing. Beaverwere nearly eliminated from most of the Northeastern United States by the mid-1800s. In vast areas of theirhistoric range, they actually were extirpated. Early in the 20th century, conservation leaders in the UnitedStates recognised the need to regulate the harvest of wildlife and establish a scientifically based wildlifeconservation system. By the 1920s, wildlife conservation agencies were established at both thefederal and sub-federal (i.e., state) level to monitor the status and use of wildlife. The establishment of these agencies andprogrammes was possible because of financial support from hunters and trappers, via both license fees andexcise taxes on equipment. Many laws were enacted to place controls on the harvest of wildlife. Thesemeasureswere based on the principles of sustained use, including: wildlife has value; the uncontrolled use of wildlife isunacceptable; wildlife is a public resource that belongs to everyone; government intervention is needed toconserve wildlife for future generations; the use of wildlife can be controlled; and wildlife populations can beperpetuated indefinitely while sustained use is occurring. With the full support of the public who harvestsnatural resources, beaver were restored in the Northeastern United States, primarily through the translocationof individual beaver. Due to the decline of agriculture during the 19th century, translocated beaver thrivedand expanded. By the 1970s, beaver had been restored to nearly all of the species' historic range in theNortheastern United States. This monumental wildlife restoration programme has enhanced regionalbiodiversity because beaver create wetland impoundments benefiting a wide array of other species. Moreover,the complete restoration of the beaver has once again provided people with the opportunity to harvest beaverfor fur, meat and other useful products. The difference is that modern-day beaver management is based onsustained use principles, not the obsolete model of uncontrolled exploitation. The key components of modern-day beaver management are: the existence of a viable market for beaver goods; regulatory controls on the useof beaver; monitoring the level of use; monitoring the status of beaver; and controlling damage caused bybeaver flooding. (About 15% of all beaver colonies cause economic damage due to flooding. Millions of dollarsin damages are sustained by people each year.) Clearly, the sustained use model depends on the continuedavailability of the user. The condition of the fur market, access to those markets and the legal ability to effectivelytrap are essential ingredients to the perpetuation of this clear sustained use success story. Some of these critical
1United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Federal Aid, 300 Westgate Center Drive, Hadley MA 01035, USAe-mail: [email protected]
2 New York Division of Fish, Wildlife and Marine Resources, 1285 Fisher Avenue, Cortland NY 13045, USA3 Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, Field Headquarters, Westboro MA 01581, USA4 New York Division of Fish, Wildlife, and Marine Resources, 108 Game Farm Road, Demar NY 12138, USA;e-mail: gordon. [email protected]. state.ny. us
125
John F. Organ1, Robert F. Gotie2, Thomas A. Decker3 and Gordon R. Batcheller4
factors currently are in jeopardy. Of particular concern is the European Union's Wild Fur Regulation whichpotentially could devastate the international market for beaver and other wild furs. Devastation of the economicmotivation for conserving beaver would imperil the continued sustained use of this valuable species. In thispaper, we evaluate the sustainable use of beaver, an abundant North American mammal. While our analysisis applicable to most areas of the continent, we focus on our experience with the management of beaver intwo sub-federal jurisdictions of the United States of America, the State of New York and the Commonwealth ofMassachusetts. By taking this approach, we are able to provide both a broad-scale and narrow focus on thesustainable use of one of North America's most significant wildlife species.
The sustainable use of beaver, an abundant North Americanmammal, is considered herein in the context of the species'biology, the ecosystems it occupies, the human uses it pro-vides and the social, political and scientific regimes that pre-vail. While our analysis is applicable to most areas of the con-tinent, we focus on our experience with the management ofbeaver in two sub-federal jurisdictions of the United States ofAmerica, the State of New York and the Commonwealth ofMassachusetts. By taking this approach, we are able to pro-vide both a broad overview and narrow focus on the sustain-able use of one of North America's most significant wildlifespecies.
Species Data
The beaver, the largest native rodent in North America, hasseveral morphological, physiological and behavioural adapta-tions used to exploit semi-aquatic freshwater environments.(Adult beaver weigh 15-30kg, and individual beaver have ex-ceeded 35kg) These adaptations include: 1) a broad flat tailused for propulsion and manoeuvring in water and supporton land when in a bipedal stance; 2) an ability to fell and eatwoodyvegetation, including large trees, using their specialiseddentition; and 3) the use of woody material to dam water-ways, build lodges and flood adjacent lands, in essence creat-ing their own habitat.
Beaver are monogamous and live in family units calledcolonies. A typical colony is composed of five animals, butcan range from one to 14, and has three generations of bea-ver: breeding adult pair; yearlings; and young-of-the-year. Theyproduce between two and four young (kits) annually. Twoyear old beaver disperse from their natal colony to establishnew colonies. Beaver fur is highly prized, particularly for mak-ing felt. They have castor glands that are valued for medicinaland cosmetic uses. Beaver meat is important economicallyfor native peoples and others in rural areas (Novak, 1987).
Beaver currently are distributed very widely in NorthAmerica. In the US they are present in every state except Ha-waii, and are absent only in peninsular Florida, portions ofthe arid southwest and arctic Alaska above the tree line (Fig-ure 1). They occupy every Canadian province, but are absentabove the timberline in the Arctic. In Mexico, they are limited
to isolated areas along the US border, such as the ripariancorridor of the Rio Grande River (Jenkins and Busher, 1979).
The fur trade fuelled the exploration and settlement ofNorth America for over two hundred years, and beaver werehighly sought after. There were no regulations controllingharvests and methods of take, and no agencies staffed withprofessionals to enforce regulations and monitor the statusof wildlife species. During this period, from the mid-l600s to1900, unregulated exploitation of beaver and clearing of for-ests led to dramatic declines in beaver populations; they wereeliminated from most of their historic range (Hill, 1982).
In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, state wildlifemanagement agencies began to restore beaver to areas of theUnited States where they had been extirpated. They were live-trapped from the isolated pockets where populations re-mained, and placed in suitable habitats. Populations werereestablished rapidly. In New York, for example, there werereports of only one active colony with five animals in 1894.Between 1901 and 1907, 34 beaver were released in theAdirondack mountains of northern New York. These releases,coupled with total protection, resulted in an estimated popu-lation of 100 animals by the end of 1907. By 1915, there werean estimated 15,000 beaver in the Adirondacks, and due tothe damage inflicted on personal property, a trapping seasonwas considered. In 1923, the State Legislature gave authorityto the New York Conservation Commission to enact a legaltrapping season for beaver. By 1955, all of New York State wasopen to beaver trapping except for New York City and LongIsland, the only portions of the state where beaver are ab-sent, due to habitat limitations.
In 1928, beaver expanded across the New York borderinto the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, where they hadbeen absent since the 1770s. This was initially met with inter-est and excitement until the new colony flooded a farmer'sroad and crops. Beaver continued to expand in Massachu-setts, and nuisance complaints continued to rise. The Massa-chusetts Department of Conservation decided to treat bea-ver as a valuable resource worthy of protection and manage-ment, rather than as a nuisance to be suppressed or elimi-nated. In 1946, a legal trapping season was established (Shaw,1948) to allow expansion while controlling damage. Beavernow are present throughout Massachusetts except for CapeCod. It is important to note that the restoration of beaver in
126
JOHN F. ORGAN, ROBERT F. GOTIE, THOMAS A. DECKER, GORDON R. BATCHELLER
A CASE STUDY IN THE SUSTAINED USE OF WILDLIFE: THE MANAGEMENT OF BEAVER IN THE NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES
Figure 1: Current Range of Beaver (Castor canadensis) in North America
127
JOHN F. ORGAN, ROBERT F. GOTIE, THOMAS A. DECKER, GORDON R. BATCHELIER
New York and Massachusetts has occurred in an area withsome of the highest human densities in the United States.(About 25 million people live in these two states at densitiesaveraging 168 persons/km2).
The beaver's habit of damming streams and buildinglodges makes their presence highly visible on the landscape.This visibility, combined with territoriality and site fidelity,greatly enhances the ability of wildlife managers to assess thestatus of beaver populations and conduct management pro-grammes. Management of beaver is relatively intense in NewYork and Massachusetts because of the economic importanceof beaver fur, glands and meat, the ability of beaver to dra-matically alter the landscape, and their conduciveness to man-agement.
Management authorities have invested a great deal of timeand money into beaver research and management. Few ques-tions remain on the biology and ecology of beaver from amanagement perspective, with the exception of some popu-lation control related questions. The greatest challenges forwildlife managers do not lie in the realm of beaver biology,but in human society. There is an absence of public under-standing and awareness of the fundamental relationships be-tween beaver and people on the landscape. This results inhumans and beaver occupying the same spaces. The inevita-ble conflicts can be reduced through management pro-grammes that integrate population measures, knowledge ofpopulation dynamics, methods of regulating use and socio-political support.
Ecosystem Data
New York and Massachusetts contain diverse land forms andecosystems, and have a humid temperate climatic regime. TheWisconsin glaciation of the Pleistocene Epoch is responsiblefor the current land forms and relatively young soils that pre-vail. New York is 79,718km2 in area and has a human popula-tion in excess of 18 million. Lake plain, plateau, mountain,river valley and rolling hills are dominated by open agricul-tural lands and boreal spruce-fir, northern hardwood/hem-lock and Appalachian oak/hickory forest types. Massachusettsis 13,043km2 in area and has a human population in excess ofsix million. While Massachusetts does not have lake plain eco-systems, it has an extensive coastal plain bordering the Atlan-tic Ocean with an abundance of wetlands. Agriculture is lessdominant on the Massachusetts landscape, and the state isover 70% forested. Forest types are similar to those in NewYork, and cover mountainous areas in the west to the rela-tively flat terrain in the east. Rolling hills characterise much ofthe state.
Beaver require water, and wetlands and deep-water habi-tats are prominent on the landscape of New York and Massa-chusetts. Beaver inhabit wetlands and waterways of all types
provided herbaceous food resources are available and waterdepth is adequate for over-winter survival. In the absence ofadequate water depth, beaver can modify their environmentprovided they have access to woody vegetation and fine-grained soils for dam and lodge construction, and adequatewater flow to ensure appropriate pond depth.
The landscape beaver returned to was very different thanthe one they occupied prior to western European coloniza-tion. The forests that dominated the landscape in pre-Columbian times were mostly eliminated, and over one halfof the wetlands were destroyed (Frayer et al., 1983). Althoughmuch of the forests have regenerated, they are interspersedwith transportation corridors and human developments.When the transportation infrastructure was developed in thenortheastern United States, beaver had already been extir-pated. Therefore, early planners gave no thought to potentialproblems with beaver. Once beaver returned, conflicts wereinevitable.
The Use
The use of beaver and other small, furbearing mammals byhumans in North America dates back in the archaeologicalrecord 11,000 years. Native Americans used small furbearers,like the beaver, extensively for food, clothing, tools, art workand as part of their spiritual life. Beaver were by far the mostimportant species of all the small furbearers used by NativeAmericans before European contact. They captured beaverwith snares, dead falls, clubs and by draining their ponds.Beaver fur was processed into robes, while beaver flesh servedas a source of fat and protein. The bones and teeth were fash-ioned into tools and the remaining unused parts were returnedto the water as a symbol of spiritual renewal (Wright, 1987).
Until European contact, the use of furbearers by indig-enous people was primarily related to survival and self suffi-ciency. Furbearer products were also bartered, exchanged andtraded in early aboriginal economies (Hutchins, 1987). Euro-pean contact changed this culture and led to the establish-ment of a commercial trade in wild furbearers, which eventu-ally played a major role in the economic development of NorthAmerica. Of all the furbearers present in North America at thetime, beaver played the most pivotal role in this trade. Theydrove the expansion of the fur trade throughout the conti-nent. The demand in Europe for beaver felt to supply the hatmarket lasted nearly three centuries and ultimately collapseddue to the near elimination of beaver and a shift in fashion tosilk (Ray, 1987).
Although by the late 1880s beaver no longer played sucha prominent role in the fur trade, the trade survived, and con-tinues to this day. Throughout most of North America, lawsto protect furbearers and to regulate trade in their pelts werepassed during the late 19th century and early 20th century.
128
A CASE STUDY IN THE SUSTAINED USE OF WILDLIFE: THE MANAGEMENT OF BEAVER IN THE NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES
New York State was the first sub-federal jurisdiction in theUnited States to protect beaver from exploitation throughcareful regulations. It was also the first to rescue beaver fromextirpation through a government restoration programme. Itshould be pointed out that the use of beaver and otherfurbearers from the 16th to the 20th century was absoluteand unregulated exploitation. Sir George Simpson of theHudson's Bay Company tried to change this philosophy whenhe implemented a sustainable use conservation system in1821, after noticing a decline in the trade of beaver pelts acrossthe continent. His measures failed for reasons mostly relatedto greed and profitability (Hardin, 1968 and Ray, 1987).
Since the early 1900s, conservation laws and harvest regu-lations have produced a steady increase in beaver populationsacross the US and Canada. Through careful regulation of theannual beaver harvest, beaver populations have increased. Forexample, beaver in New York State increased from nearly nonein 1895 to about 81,000 in 1995. From the first regulated pub-lic trapping season in 1924 to the present, trapper harvest inNew York has rarely exceeded 40% of the fall beaver popula-tion. Most states and Canadian provinces employ similar com-prehensive government management programmes to ensurethat beaver and other economically important furbearers neverbecome depleted again due to over-exploitation.
The fur trade today is no different from any other indus-try, such as agriculture, that produces a commodity. Beaverare trapped and prepared for market by people skilled in trap-ping and fur preparation methods. In North America, peoplewho trap are private citizens, not government agents. Rawproducts, like pelts and dried castor glands are then boughtand sold through a complex system of buyers, auction housesand fur producer cooperatives. Fur ceases to be a commoditywhen it reaches the manufacturing sector, and is convertedinto a luxury item for sale. The regulation of this industrythrough the production and marketing sector by governmentwildlife management or conservation agencies is funded al-most entirely by the people who trap or hunt furbearers; thisis unique among agricultural enterprises (Southwick Associ-ates, 1993).
The latest figures available reveal that the 1990 fur indus-try in the US had a total of retail sales worth of $1.2 billion.Over one hundred sixty-four thousand trappers in the US re-ceived $21.4 million from the sale of their pelts (SouthwickAssociates, 1993). The value of beaver to the US trapper wasabout 16% of total pelt sales (Hamilton et al., 1994). This networth and the number of people using beaver and otherfurbearers has fluctuated considerably over time. Because fin-ished fur products offered for consumption are expensive,fur garments have become widely viewed as luxury goods.Fur goods fluctuate in value mainly because of changing fash-ion, the amount of disposable income available and the exist-ing supply of finished products. As demand fluctuates, so doesthe market value of raw fur pelts (Shieff and Baker, 1987).
Trappers react to fluctuating pelt values by increasing or de-creasing their participation in producing the raw commodity(Obbard et al., 1987). An example of this relationship in NewYork with beaver trappers is depicted in Figure 2.
Currently the US, Canada and the Russian Federation arethe three principal producers of wild fur in the world. Canadaand the US are the most important international exporters.The most important consumers of wild fur products live inEurope, Asia, Japan and North America (Shieff and Baker,1987). According to the Fur Institute of Canada about 70% ofall wild fur produced in North America reaches Europe. Be-cause the fur trade remains a global enterprise, an embargoon fur by any major market would have a disastrous effect onthe fur industry in the US and Canada today (Southwick Asso-ciates, 1993). Furthermore, a contraction in the market willalso result in drastic consequences for sustainable use man-agement of beaver and other economically importantfurbearers (Bhat et al., 1993).
Although the use of beaver and other furbearers is quiteclearly a commercial business enterprise, the people who trapdo not see themselves as merely the production sector of thisindustry. In fact, very few trappers earn their entire living fromtrapping (Todd and Boggess, 1987). In New York State, only2% of those people surveyed reported that trapping was aprimary source of household income (Siemer et al., 1994).Hamilton et al. (1994) found that 8% of the trappers in a na-tional survey of trappers in the US reported that 10-20% oftheir household incomes came from trapping. For people liv-ing near the poverty level, this marginal income source repre-sents a significant portion of their annual income. Neverthe-less, even these people rarely offer economic incentives asthe only reason they trap furbearers.
The factors that motivate people to trap furbearers arenot easily separated. People trap for a variety of reasons be-sides profit, most of which relate to personal rewards andvalues (Boddicker, 1980; Kellert, 1980; Todd and Boggess,1987; Glass et al., 1991; Siemer et al., 1994; Brown et al., 1995;Daigle et al., 1995). Certainly the value of the pelts they mar-ket influences their decision to trap in any given year or inany given region of North America, but it is not the singlemost important motivator (Todd and Boggess, 1987; Daigleet al., 1995).
Other factors have been found to be intertwined alongwith the economic incentive. Todd and Boggess (1987) de-scribed trapping as a "lifestyle preference" for people whochoose to live close to the land. Siemer et al. (1994) confirmedthat trapping is most commonly practised by people who re-side in rural areas of New York. They went on to support ear-lier findings that trapping is an important component of anoutdoor lifestyle. More recently, Muth et al. (1996) from theirsurvey in the northeastern US described trapping as a "cen-tral life interest", closely tied to an array of sociocultural val-ues and motives just as trapping furbearers by indigenous
129
130
Figu
re 2:
Ave
rage
Pelt
Val
ues a
nd th
e num
ber o
f Bea
ver T
rapp
ers i
n New
Yor
k Sta
te (U
SA)
JOHN F. ORGAN, ROBERT F. GOTIE, THOMAS A. DECKER, GORDON R. BATCHELLER
A CASE STUDY IN THE SUSTAINED USE OF WILDLIFE: THE MANAGEMENT OF BEAVER IN THE NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES
peoples in the United States and Canada is closely tied to anarray of sociocultural values and motives. Unfortunately, atthe present time, trappers as a group represent a decliningpercentage of people needed to control populations offurbearers, including beaver.
We can expect continued regulated fur trapping even inthe face of a declining market, but the fur trapper who playedsuch a pivotal role in the management of beaver will no longerbe a potent force (Bishop et al., 1992). Evidence for this clearlycan be seen in the southeastern US, where a steady decline inthe value of the fur harvest since the early 1980s has beenaccompanied by a dramatic increase in the beaver population(Woodward, 1983; Iinscombe, 1994; Southwick Associates,1994). Associated with this increase in beaver populations hasbeen a subsequent increase in the amount of damage due toincreased beaver activity (Bullock and Arner, 1985; Woodwardet al., 1985; Fowler et al., 1994). To mitigate the consequencesof unregulated growth in damage caused by beaver, most ofthe southeastern states (North Carolina, South Carolina, Geor-gia, Arkansas, Alabama, Tennessee and Mississippi) have re-cently enacted laws to allow the destruction of beaver at anytime (P. Sumner, N.C. Wildl. Res. Comm., Goldsboro N.C.,pers, comm.). They also have been forced to implement costlymitigation programmes for landowners at state and federaltaxpayer expense (Mastrangelo, 1995).
Parts of the upper Midwest and the northeastern US alsohave been experiencing these same growing pains (Slate,1995). Just a short distance southwest of Montreal along theSt. Lawrence River Valley in New York, a century of sustain-able use beaver management is being undone (Enck et al.,1992), similar to what occurred in the southeastern US. Inresponse to public criticism over the unchecked growth inthe beaver population there, laws regulating the destructionof beaver and their dams have been proposed which ultimatelycould affect the entire state (J. Lamendola, N.Y.S. Dept. Envir.Cons., Watertown, N.Y., pers. comm.). Where once the bea-ver was viewed as a special wildlife species to be conserved atall costs (Bump and Cook, 1941), it is now becoming a wildlife pest
Identification of Benefits
Society generally views the values of beaver and their effectson ecosystems as both positive and negative. Individual per-spectives vary greatly depending on a person's backgroundand experience with beaver. In purely economic terms, bea-ver pelts and other products of harvest (e.g., meat and castorglands) provide a direct benefit to the primary user, the furharvester. For many, including the fur harvester, beaver en-hance the enjoyment of the landscape, strengthen people'sappreciation for nature, and help to instill an ethic which fo-cuses on maintaining the integrity of natural environments.
Yet, clearly, beaver impose high costs on society as well.
These are related to their predisposition to construct damsto impound water. This in turn causes flooding in areas wherehuman activity may render beaver occurrence incompatibleor at least difficult. (In New York and Massachusetts, most ofthe roads within transportation corridors were located in ar-eas with low or gradual gradients, which at the time [ca. 1750-1850] made perfect sense. However, this was done at a timewhen there were few or no beaver and there is no evidencethat road builders gave any thought to the possibility of hav-ing beaver activity over 100 years later.)
In addition to positive economic values and negativenuisance values, beaver have a positive influence on manywildlife species by creating beneficial aquatic habitat. Theirrecolonization has heralded the return of many other spe-cies. A study in New York found that beavers positively influ-enced the number of bird and mammal species found inwetlands (Grover, 1993). A study in Massachusetts docu-mented that beaver increased the diversity of wetland habi-tats on the landscape (Organ, 1983). In the 1960s and 1970s,research was done in New York which firmly established theimportance of beaver to waterfowl and other wetland wildlife(Brown and Parsons, 1979). A comparison was made betweenwetlands produced by beaver versus those produced by hu-man construction (Ermer, 1984), and it was found that bea-ver were more cost-efficient at doing so.
During the 1980s and 1990s the broad effects of beavergained greater recognition. Naiman et al. (1986) found thatbeaver cause significant changes to stream ecosystems. Theyhelp wildlife that require ponds, pond edges and dead trees.Beaver increase plant and animal diversity in forested ecosys-tems (Hammerson, 1991). It has been found that beaver ben-efit other wildlife such as river otter (Lontra canadensis), mink(Mustela vison), muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus), raccoon(Procyon lotor) and a wide variety of birds (Reese and Hair,1976; Hammerson, 1991; Dubuc et al., 1990). Managementregimes can reduce negative interactions associated with bea-ver. Beaver have provided the means to maintain biodiversityin wetland ecosystems. In this case, single species manage-ment has benefitted a diversity of wildlife on both private andpublic land.
The diverse values, both positive and negative, that areassociated with beaver lead to multiple social reactions to theirpresence. There are advocates for preservation, advocates forutilization and advocates for destruction of beavers. Manage-ment of beaver for sustained yield provides the benefits ofwetlands creation and enhancement, while holdingpopulations to socially acceptable levels. The fur trapper hasbeen the instrument for management. In both New York andMassachusetts, wildlife managers at the sub-federal level bal-ance the benefits that beaver produce with the costs that theyimpose on society. This is done through the annual establish-ment of trapping seasons to balance their populations withthe social and biological carrying capacity of their habitat.
131
JOHN F. ORGAN, ROBERT F. GOTIE, THOMAS A DECKER, GORDON R. BATCHELLER
RegimesProgramme Structure and AdministrativeAuthority
Massachusetts was the first state in the United States to de-velop a fish and wildlife administration in 1865. All northeast-em states developed comparable agencies by 1880. Under thestate authority, these agencies adopted laws for fish and wild-life protection and began to employ officials to enforce theselaws.
Comprehensive wildlife conservation programmes, laws,regulations and enforcement authorities were implementedby all states by 1923. This set the stage for recovery ofpopulations of wildlife, including beaver, that had previouslybeen extirpated.
Today, all northeastern states continue to have legisla-tive authority for wildlife management within their jurisdic-tion. Wildlife is owned by the public and is held in trust andmanaged by each respective state fish and wildlife agency("Public Trust Doctrine", Bean, 1983). Every state where bea-ver are harvested has regulations governing their manage-ment. In the late 1980s northeastern wildlife agencies had atotal of 26 professional biologists and 13 technicians who con-ducted research and managed furbearers throughout the re-gion, along with hundreds of law enforcement officials(DiStefano, 1987). Regulations are a part of overall manage-ment programmes. Regulations include: season length andtiming; open and closed zones or regions; method of harvest,including trap size and placement; mandatory trap checking;education or training requirements; tagging and accountingof numbers of animals taken seasonally; and regulations onthe purchasing and sale of pelts.
Other factors influence total harvest levels, including win-ter weather and water levels, pelt prices and the economy.Agencies monitor these components as part of broader man-agement programmes for beaver. Other aspects of manage-ment programmes include: collection of biological specimens;field surveys; annual census; habitat assessment and manage-ment; nuisance animal control; and population assessmentthrough population modelling. Beaver managementprogramems are comprehensive and complex. Massachusettshas over 35 laws and regulations governing the protection ofbeaver, their dams, lodges and methods of harvest. Annualprogramme assessment follows well-established evaluationand monitoring stages (Figure 3).
Funding
Most funding of beaver management comes from the sale ofhunting, trapping and fishing licenses, as required by statelaw. Additionally, there is a federal excise tax on the sale offirearms and ammunition. The revenues derived from this tax
are distributed to state fish and wildlife agencies, for a varietyof wildlife management activities, as required by federal law(Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act, 16 USCode 669-669i).In fiscal year 1996, these monies constituted annual appor-tionments between $1.2-9.3 million for individual states.Programme funding for furbearers is represented by 2.4-20%of total agency budgets in the Northeast (DiStefano, 1987).
Except for limited projects by national or state trapperorganizations, no private monies are available for beaver man-agement. Private trapper organizations exist in each state, withapproximately 20% of trappers belonging to such organiza-tions. These private organizations promote trapping ethics,encourage responsible use of the resource as well as supportfurbearer research activities and habitat protection. Privateanimal rights groups also exist within these states. Thesegroups are well funded, politically active and they oppose kill-ing beaver for any purpose.
Policy Development
Policy for beaver management is influenced by stakeholders(interested or materially affected private groups). Tradition-ally, these are people such as beaver harvesters, farmers, homeowners, railroad companies and roadway superintendents(Decker et al., 1996). Management decisions are made by wild-life conservation officials at the sub-federal level, with the le-gal mandate to manage wildlife. Agencies involve the publicat various points in the management process. Legislators atboth the state and local level may develop beaver manage-ment policy depending on public input that they receive. TheNew York State Legislature, for instance, has recently consid-ered new laws to make it easier for people suffering damagefrom beaver to get relief.
Research and Technologies
Advancement of new technologies for the harvest and use ofbeaver has not jeopardised their sustainable use. This is dueto the existence of programmes that monitor trapper num-bers, harvest rates and population levels. Harvest regulationscan be adjusted very quickly to restrict or increase the har-vest. This ensures the viability of beaver populations for fu-ture generations.
Our ability to monitor and manage beaver populationshas improved due to modern technology. Censusing meth-ods and habitat evaluations have improved by refinement ofsampling protocol and shortening of time-frames for assess-ing beaver populations. For example, Global Positioning Sys-tem technologies, and Geographic Information Systems, alongwith aerial photogrammetric imagery have improved our abili-ties to measure beaver habitat. We can now assess beaver oc-
132
A CASE STUDY IN THE SUSTAINED USE OF WILDLIFE: T H E MANAGEMENT OF BEAVER IN THE NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES
133
Figu
re 3
: Th
e Ann
ual M
anag
emen
t Cyc
le fo
r Bea
ver
JOHN F. ORGAN, ROBERT F. GOTIE, THOMAS A. DECKER, GORDON R. BATCHELLER
ties to measure beaver habitat. We can now assess beaver oc-cupation rates (the proportion of suitable beaver habitat thatactually has beaver present), and target areas for increased ordecreased occupation abilirates and harvest objectives. Radiotelemetry technology has improved our ability to monitor bea-ver, and measure many physiological parameters that were pre-viously very difficult to document because beaver live in water.cupation rates (the proportion of suitable beaver habitat thatactually has beaver present), and target areas for increased ordecreased occupation rates and harvest objectives. Radio te-lemetry technology has improved our ability to monitor bea-ver, and measure many physiological parameters that were pre-viously very difficult to document because beaver live in water.
Early research in Massachusetts focused on reproductiveinhibitors or controls for beaver (Brooks, 1977; Brooks et al.,1980; Fleming, 1977; Kennelly and Lyons, 1983). However,this technique has not proven successful or effective in con-trolling a population of free-roaming beaver. Recent researchhas sought to improve our understanding of trapping meth-ods on beaver (Gilbert and Gofton, 1982). Trap research hasbrought us humane, safe and efficient trapping methods forcapturing beaver (Novak, 1987; Baker and Dwyer, 1987).
Evaluation of the Use
The beaver conservation programmes of New York State andMassachusetts are typical of other sub-federal jurisdictions inthe United States and Canada. They are an unequivocal suc-cess story. As described earlier, beaver were once nearly ex-tirpated in North America. The development of conservationand other protection laws around the turn of this century madeit possible to protect and manage their populations. Wildlifeconservation agencies have worked very hard to restore theirpopulations wherever the habitat was suitable. Beaver havebeen viewed by the public and governmental agencies as avaluable asset that should be managed to provide a high levelof benefit. At the same time, however, it is clear that beaverhave significant economic effects on society. In New York Statealone, it is estimated that beaver cause in excess of $6 millionin damages annually.
Wildlife conservation agencies rely on private citizens totrap beaver. By doing so, the public becomes an essential toolin achieving beaver population objectives. This balance re-quires an assessment of the benefits provided by beaver, in-cluding the production of fur, meat and castor glands, andthe costs associated with their existence, particularly the flood-ing of property, both public and private. Trapping seasonsare adjusted accordingly to maintain management objectives.This sustainable use system only functions effectively if suffi-cient market conditions are in place to stimulate trapping ac-tivity. Since beaver fur is an international commodity, marketconditions and constraints in countries other than the point
of origin have significant effects that influence the sustaineduse model for beaver management. The European Union'sproposed embargo on wild fur undoubtedly will significantlydisrupt this model and reduce beaver to more of a pest spe-cies in many jurisdictions, as they already have become in thesoutheastern United States.
When beaver are not managed for sustained use, theirpopulations, as well as subsequent property damage increase.Because most public wildlife conservation agencies are notlegally liable for beaver damage incurred on private land, thecosts of beaver damages are passed on to the private indi-viduals suffering the losses. The greater the number of indi-viduals aggrieved by beaver damage, the greater likelihoodthat this species will be declared a public pest.
There is overwhelming evidence that the use of beaveris sustainable in New York and Massachusetts (Figure 4).Moreover, the sustained use model for beaver has been veri-fied in the rest of the continent. Harvests in North Americahave increased from 65,276 in 1931-32 to over ten times thatnumber in a fifty year period (Novak, 1987). The keys tosustainability have been regulations and management by stateand provincial wildlife agencies at the sub-federal level, and astrong international market for beaver fur. Regulations andmanagement have historically adhered to the principle ofharvesting the population surplus, and this has allowed bea-ver populations to grow, while hundreds of thousands of in-dividual beavers are trapped annually across North America.
The sustainability of the user is currently in question. Asmentioned earlier, recent events such as the European Un-ion's proposed fur embargo on certain species, including bea-ver, threaten the international fur market, the major incen-tive for the beaver trapper. Human demographic trends inNorth America, such as increasing percentages of the popula-tion residing in urban environments, mitigate against the re-cruitment of new trappers. Further, certain social movements,such as the animal rights movement, cast consumptive use ofanimals in a negative light, and may provide disincentives fortrapping. Other disincentives include lack of access to landfor trapping and competing leisure activities (Muth et al.,1996).
The sustainable use of beaver contributes significantly totheir conservation as well as to the protection of their habi-tats. As long as beaver have value to humans that outweightheir social costs, there will be strong conservation pro-grammes. This is not cause for complacency, however, be-cause declines in the international market coupled with thedisincentives listed above have resulted in lower beaver har-vests in several parts of North America in recent years. Ex-panding beaver populations have meant greater conflicts withhumans, and reduced human tolerance for beavers. Whereasbeavers have historically been viewed as an asset to perpetu-ate, increasingly they are considered a nuisance animal thatshould be eliminated. Fortunately, state and provincial wild-
134
A CASE STUDY IN THE SUSTAINED USE OF WILDLIFE: THE MANAGEMENT OF BEAVER IN THE NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES
Figu
re 4
: Be
aver
Pop
ulat
ion
and F
ur H
arve
st in
New
Yor
k an
d Mas
sach
uset
ts (1
824-
1944
)
135
JOHN F. ORGAN, ROBERT F. GOTIE, THOMAS A. DECKER, GORDON R BATCHELLER
life management authorities have adopted laws that protectbeaver and allow for sustained use. Trappers are advocatesfor the laws and regulations that restrict harvest, because theyvalue the resource that the laws are designed to protect. Man-agement programmes for beaver are funded from trapper li-cense fees and federal user fees on hunting equipment. There-fore, as long as there are users, there will be well-regulatedsustained-use programmes designed to perpetuate beaver.
ReferencesBaker, J.A. and Dwyer, P.M. 1987. Techniques for Commer-cially Harvesting Furbearers. In: Novak, M., Baker, J.A, Obbard,M.E., and Malloch, B. (Eds), Wild Furbearer Management andConservation in North America. Ontario Trappers Associa-tion, North Bay, Ontario, Canada.
Bean, M.J. 1983. The Evolution of National Wildlife Law.Praeger Publishers, New York, USA.
Bhat, M., Gotie, R. and Keller, L 1993. The Impact of Euro-pean Community's Humane Trapping Resolution on USWildlife Damage Control Programme. Proc. Eleventh GreatPlains Wildl. Dam. Cont. Workshop, Kansas City, Missouri, USA.
Bishop, P.G., Brown, M.K., Cole, R., Ermer, E.M., Gotie, R.G.,Lamendola, J., Penrod, B., Smith, S. and Sharick, W. 1992.Beaver Management in New York State: History and Specifi-cation of Future Programme. N.Y.S. Department of Environ-mental Conservation, Albany, New York, USA.
Boddicker, M.L. 1980. Profiles of American Trappers and Trap-ping. In: Chapman, J.A. and Pursley, D. (Eds), WorldwideFurbearer Conference Proceedings. Worldwide FurbearerConference, Inc., Frostburg, Maryland, USA.
Brooks, R.P. 1977. Induced Sterility of the Adult Female Bea-ver and Colony Fecundity. M.S. Thesis, Univ. Mass., Amherst.Brown, M.K. and Parsons, G.R. 1979. Waterfowl Productionon Beaver Flowages in a Part of Northern New York. N. Y. Fishand Game J. 26:142-153.
Brooks, R.P., Fleming, M.W. and Kennelly, J.J. 1980. BeaverColony Response to Fertility Control: Evaluating a Concept.J.Wildl. Manage. 44:568-575.
Brown, T.L, Decker, D.J. and Enck, J.W. 1995. PreliminaryInsights about the Importance of Hunting and Trapping.Hum. Dimensions Res. Unit Publ. 95-2. Dep. Nat. Resour.,Cornell Univ., Ithaca, New York, USA.
Bullock, J.F. and Arner, D.H. 1985. Beaver Damage to Non-impounded Timber in Mississippi. Southern J. Applied For-estry 9:137-140.
Bump, G. and Cook, A. 1941. Black Gold: The Story of Beaver
in New York State. N. Y.S. Fish and Game Manage. Bull. No.2. Albany, New York, USA.
Daigle, J.J., Muth, R.M., Zwick, R.R. and Glass, R.J. 1995. SocialValues and Motivations of Trappers in Six Northeastern States.Proc. Fourth International Outdoor Recreation and Tour-ism Trends Symposium and the 1995 National RecreationResources Planning Conf St Paul, MN, USA.
Decker, D.J., Krueger, C.C., Baer, RA, Jr., Knuth, BA andRichmond, M.E. 1996. From Clients to Stakeholders: A Philo-sophical Shift for Fish and Wildlife Management. Human Di-mensions of Wildlife 1:70-82.
DiStefano, J.J. 1987. Wild Furbearer Management in the North-eastern United States. In: Novak, M., Baker, J.S., Obbard, M.E.and Malloch, B. (Eds), Wild Furbearer Management andConservation in North America. Ontario Trappers Assoc,North Bay, Ontario, Canada.
Dubuc, L.J., Krohn, W.B. and Owen, R.B., Jr. 1990. PredictingOccurrence of River Otters by Habitat on Mt. Desert Island,Maine.J. Wildl. Manage. 54:594-599.
EnckJ.W., Bishop, P.G., Brown, T.L. and Lamendola, J.E. 1992.Beaver-related Attitudes, Experiences and Knowledge of KeyStakeholders in Wildlife Management Unit 21. Hum. Dimen-sions Res. Unit. Publ. 92-7. Dep. Nat. Resour., Cornell Univ.,Ithaca, New York, USA.
Ermer, E.M. 1984. Analysis of Benefits and Management CostsAssociated with Beaver in Western New York. N. Y. Fish andGame J. 31:119-132.
Fleming, M.W. 1977. Induced Sterility of the Adult Male Bea-ver and Colony Fecundity. M.S. Thesis, Univ. Mass., Amherst.Fowler, J. F., Verma, S and Delphin, T. 1994. An Impact As-sessment of Beaver Damage in Louisiana During 1993. Louisi-ana Coop. Ext. Service, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA
Frayer, W.E., Monahan, T.J., Bowden, D.C. and Graybill, FA1983. Status and Trends of Wetlands and Deepwater Habi-tats in the Conterminous United States, 1950s to 1970s. Colo-rado State Univ., Ft. Collins, CO, USA
Gilbert, F.F. and Gofton, N. 1982. Terminal Dives in Mink,Muskrat and Beaver. Physiology and Behavior 28:835-840.Glass, R.J., More, TA and DiStefano, J.J. 1991. Vermont Trap-pers: Characteristics, Motivations and Attitudes. Trans. North-east Sect. Widl. Soc. 48:134-43.
Grover, AM. 1993. Influence of Beaver on Bird and Mam-mal Species Richness within Wetlands of Different Sizes inSouth-central New York. U.S. Thesis, State University of NewYork, Syracuse, New York, USA
Hamilton, D., Boggess, E., Linscombe, R.G., Kinler, N.,
136
A CASE STUDY IN THE SUSTAINED USE OF WILDLIFE: THE MANAGEMENT OF BEAVER IN THE NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES
Batcheller, G.R., Hubert, G., Decker, T., Phelps, J., Baker, O.,McKay, I. and Peterson, S. 1994. Ownership and Use of Trapsby Trappers in the United States in 1992. The Fur ResourcesCommittee of the International Association of Fish and Wild-life Agencies, Inc. and The Gallup Organization, Inc.
Hammerson, G. 1991. Element Stewardship Abstract for Cas-tor Canadensis (beaver). The Nature Conservancy, Arlington,Virginia, USA.
Hardin, G. 1968. The Tragedy of the Commons. Science162:1,243-1,248.
Hill, E.P. 1982. Beaver. In: Chapman, JA and Felderhamer,G. A. (Eds), WildMammals of North America. Johns HopkinsUniv. Press, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Hutchins, P.W. 1987. The Law Applying to the Trapping ofFurbearers by Aboriginal Peoples in Canada: A Case of Dou-ble Jeopardy. In: Novake, M., Baker, J.A., Obbard, M.E. andMalloch, B. (Eds), Wild Furbearer Management and Conser-vation in North America. Ontario Trappers Assoc., North Bay,Ontario, Canada.
Jenkins, S.H. and Busher, P.E. 1979. Castor Canadensis. Mamm.Species 120:1-8.
Kellert, S.R. 1980. Trappers and Trapping in American Soci-ety. In: Chapman, J.A. and Pursley, D. (Eds), WorldwideFurbearer Conference Proceedings. Worldwide FurbearerConference, Inc., Frostburg, Maryland, USA.
Kennelly, JJ. and Lyons, PJ. 1983. Evaluation of Induced Ste-rility for Beaver Management Problems. Proc. East. Wildl.Damage Control Conf. 1:169-175.
Linscombe, R.G. 1994. US Fur Harvest (1970-1992) and FurValue (1974-1992) Statistics by State and Region. InternationalAssoc. Fish and Wildlife Agencies, Washington, DC, USA.
Mastrangelo, P.M. 1995. Beaver Damage Management in theSoutheast: A Cooperative Effort. In: Brown, C.L. (Ed), Proc.1995 Joint Fur Res. Workshop. W. Virginia Div. Nat. Res.,Charleston, VA, USA.
Muth, R.M., Zwick, R.R., Daigle, J.J., Glass, R.J. and Jonker,S.A. 1996. The Sociocultural and Economic Value ofFurbearer resources: A Study of Trapping in Six Northeast-ern States. Fin. Tech. Rep., Div. Fed. Aid., Hadley, MA, USA
Naiman, R.J., Melillo, J.M. and Hobbie, J.E. 1986. EcosystemAlteration of Boreal Forest Streams by Beaver (Castorcanadensis). Ecology 67:1,254-1,269.
Novak, M. 1987. Beaver. In: Novak, M., Baker, J.A., Obbard,M.E. and Malloch, B. (Eds), Wild Furbearer Management andConservation in North America. Ontario Trappers Assoc.
North Bay, Ontario, Canada.
Obbard, M.E., Jones, J.G., Newman, R., Booth, A.,Satterthwaite, A.J. and Linscombe, G. 1987. Furbearer Har-vests in North America. In: Novak, M., Baker, J.A., Obbard,M.E., and Malloch, B. (Eds), Wild Furbearer Management andConservation in North America. Ontario Trappers Assoc,North Bay, Ontario, Canada.
Organ, J.F. 1983. Palustrine Wetland Dynamics in 15 Massa-chusetts Communities (1951-1975/77). M.S. Thesis, Univ.Mass., Amherst.
Ray, A.J. 1987. The Fur Trade in North America: An Overviewfrom an Historical Geographic Perspective. In: Novak, M.,Baker, J.A., Obbard, M.E. and Malloch, B. (Eds), WildFurbearer Management and Conservation in NorthAmerica. Ontario Trappers Assoc, North Bay, Ontario,Canada.
Reese, K. and Hair, J. 1976. Avian Species Diversity in Relationto Beaver Pond Habitats in the Piedmont Region of SouthCarolina. Proc. Annu. Conf Southeast Assoc. Fish and Wild-life Agencies 30:437-447.
Shaw, S.P. 1948. The Beaver in Massachusetts. Bur. Wildl. Res.and Manage. Bull 11.
Shieff, A. and Baker, J.A. 1987. Marketing and InternationalFur Markets. In: Novak, M., Baker, J.A., Obbard, M.E. andMalloch, B. (Eds),Wild Furbearer Management and Conser-vation in North America. Ontario Trappers Assoc, North Bay,Ontario, Canada.
Siemer, W.F., Batcheller, G.R., Glass, R.J. and Brown, T.L 1994.Characteristics of Trappers and Trapping Participation in NewYork. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 22:100-111.
Slate, D. 1995. USDA, Animal Damage Control Involvementin Furbearer Management: An overview in the Eastern Region.In: Brown, C.L. (Ed), Proc. 1995 Joint Fur Res. Workshop, June4-7,1995 W. Virg. Div. Nat. Res., Charleston.
Southwick Associates. 1993. An Economic Profile of the USFur Industry. Southwick Associates, Arlington, Virginia, USA.
Southwick Associates. 1994. State and Provincial Beaver Sta-tus Survey. Southwick Associates, Arlington, Virginia, USA.
Todd, A.W. and Boggess, E.K. 1987. Characteristics, Lifestylesand Attitudes of Trappers in North America. In: Novak, M.,Baker, J.A., Obbard, M.E. and Malloch, B. (Eds),WildFurbeamManagement and Conservation in North America. Ontario Trap-pers Assoc, North Bay, Ontario, Canada
Woodward, D.K. 1983. Beaver Management in the Southeast-ern United States: A Review and Update. Proc. East. Wildl.
137
JOHN F. ORGAN, ROBERT F. GOTIE, THOMAS A. DECKER, GORDON R. BATCHELLER
Damage Control Conf. 1:163-165.
Todd, A.W. and Boggess, EX 1987. Characteristics,Lifestyles and Attitudes of Trappers in North America.In: Novak, M., Baker, J.A., Obbard, M.E. and Malloch,B. (Eds), Wild Furbearer Management and Conservationin North America Ontario Trappers Assoc., North Bay,Ontario, Canada.
Woodward, D.K. 1983. Beaver Management in theSoutheastern United States: A Review and Update.Proc. East. Wildl. Damage Control Conf. 1:163-165.
Woodward, D.K., Hazel, R.B. and Gaflhey, B.P. 1985. Economicand Environmental Impacts of Beavers in North Carolina. Proc.East. Wildl. Damage Control Conf. 2:89-96.
Wright, J.V. 1987. Archaeological Evidence for the Use ofFurbearers in North America. In: Novak, M., Baker, J.A.,Obbard, M.E. and Malloch, B. (Eds), Wild Furbearer Man-agement and Conservation in North America. Ontario Trap-pers Assoc., North Bay, Ontario, Canada.
Nous avons axé nos recherches sur l'histoire du castor (Castor canadensis) et sa gestion dans le nord-est desEtats-Unis. Le système de gestion actuel, qui est basé sur les principes d'utilisation durable, est comparé aumodèle archaïque d'utilisation non-régulée. Cette espèce semi-aquatique est un herbivore capable de modifierson propre habitat en construisant des barrages dans les marécages et les cours d'eau. Ils se caractérisent parleur fort taux de natalité, leurfaible taux de mortalité et leur grand longévité. Au 17e et au 18e siècle, lecastorconstituait une importante source de revenus pour les américains autochtones et les colons européens, tirantprofit de l'important commerce de fourrures qui se pratiquait en Europe. L'utilisation du castor pendantcette période n'était pas réglementée; les prélèvements étaient totalement illimités. Simultanément, etaucoursdu 19e siècle, l'habitat du castor s'est considérablement réduit du fait des défrichages des terres pourl'exploitation agricole. Les castors avaient pratiquement disparu de la majeure partie dunord-est américainà la moitié des années 1800. En fait, ils avaient été extirpés de vastes zones qui constituaient historiquementleur habitat. Au début du 20e siècle, les leaders de la conservation des Etats-Unis ont reconnu la nécessité deréglementer les prélèvements des espèces sauvages et ont mis en place un système scientifique de conservationdes espèces sauvages. Dans les années 1920, les agences de conservation des espèces sauvages ont été crééesaux niveaux fédéral et régional Cstate") pour suivre la situation et l'utilisation des espèces sauvages. La miseen place de ces programmes et agences a été rendue possible grâce à la contributionfinancière apportée pardes chasseurs et des trappeurs, à travers les frais de permis et de taxes indirectes prélevées sur l'équipement.De nombreuses lois ont été promulguées afin de contrôler les prélèvements des espèces sauvages. Ces mesuresétaient basées sur les principes d'utilisation durable ci-après: les espèces sauvages ont une valeur; l'utilisationincontrôlée des espèces sauvages est inacceptable; les espèces sauvages constituent une ressource publique;l'intervention de l'Etat est nécessaire pour la préservation des espèces sauvages pour les générations futures;l'utilisation des espèces sauvages peut être contrôlée; les populations d'espèces sauvages peuvent se perpétuertout en faisant l'objet d'une utilisation durable. Avec l'appui total des utilisateurs des ressources naturelles,les castors ont été ramenés dans le nord-est des Etats-Unis, notamment grâce à la réintroduction d'individus.Les castors réintroduits se sont développés et multipliés à la faveur du déclin de l'agriculture au 19e siècle.Enfin dans les années 1970, les castors avaient été réintroduits dans pratiquement tous leurs habitats historiquesdans les états du nord-est des Etats-Unis. Cet important programme de restauration des espèces sauvages aamélioré les conditions pour la biodiversité dans les régions concernées puisque les castors créent des réservesmarécageuses qui profitent à une gamme très large d'autres espèces. De plus, le rétablissement total de l'airedes castors a donné aux intéressés occasion encore de les prélever pour la fourrure, la viande et autresproduits utiles. La différence est que la gestion moderne des castors est basée sur les principes d'utilisationdurable et non sur l'ancien modèle d'exploitation incontrôlée. Les principaux éléments de la gestion modernedes castors sont les suivants: l'existence d'un marché viable pour les produits dérivés des castors; le contrôlerégulateur de l'utilisation du castor; le suivi du niveau d'utilisation et de la situation des castors et le contrôledes dégâts causés par les inondations provoquées par les castors. (Environ 15% de l'ensemble des colonies decastors causent des dégâts économiques du fait des inondations qu'ils provoquent; chaque année, lesindividussubissent des dégâts évalués à des millions de dollars). Il est clair que le modèle de l'utilisation durabledépend de la disponibilité constante de l'utilisateur. La situation dumarché de fourrures, l'accèsàcesmarchés,et la possibilité légale de tendre des pièges constituent les éléments essentiels de la poursuite de ce cas évidentde réussite. Certaim de ces facteurs dâerminants sont actuellement en danger.Laloieuropéennerelatweauxfourrures, qui peut à terme détruirele marché de fourrures des castors et autres espèces sauvages, constitue
138
Summaries
Nos centramos en la historia del castor (Castor canadienses) y del manejo del castor en el nordeste de losEEUU Se compara el sistema actual de manejo, que se basa en los principios de uso sostenible, con el viejomodelo de uso no regulado. Esta especie semiacuática es un herbívoro capaz de modificar su propio hábitatcon la construcción de embalses en humedales y cauces de agua. Tienen una elevada tasa de reproducción,mortalidad baja y gran longevidad. En los siglos XVII y XVIII, el castor significó una importante fuente deingresos tanto para los aborígenes norteamericanos como para los colonizadores europeos, quienes sacabanprovecho del vigoroso negocio de pieles que tenía su base en Europa. En todo ese período no existíanregulaciones para el uso del castor; no había restricción ninguna para su captura. En forma simultánea, yhasta mediados del siglo XIX, se redujo considerablemente el hábitat del castor debido a la limpieza deterrenos que iban a dedicarse a la agricultura. Hacia mediados de ese siglo el castor casi había desaparecidoen el nordeste de los EEUU. De hecho quedaron totalmente exterminados en amplias zonas de su hábitathistórico. A comienzos del siglo XX, algunos líderes conservacionistas en los EEUU cayeron en cuenta de lanecesidad de regular la captura de la fauna, y crearon un sistema con base científico para la conservaciónde la misma. Para la década de los años veinte, se habían creado agencias de conservación de la faunatanto a nivel federal como subfederal (o sea, estatal) para monitorear el estado y el uso de la fauna. Fueposible crear estas agencias y programas gracias al apoyo financiero de cazadores y tramperos, por mediode cuotas por permisos de caza y también de impuestos indirectos a equipos. Se promulgaron muchas leyespara establecer controles de la captura de la fauna. Estas medidas se basaron en los principios de uso sostenible,incluyendo: la fauna tiene un valor, el uso sin control de la fauna no es aceptable, la fauna es un recursopúblico propiedad de todos, se requiere la intervención del gobierno para poder conservar la fauna parageneraciones futuras, se puede controlar el uso de la fauna, y se pueden perpetuar en forma indefinida laspoblaciones de la fauna simultáneamente con su uso sostenible. Con el apoyo total de quienes cultivabanrecursos naturales, se restauró el castor en el nordeste de los EEUU, sobre todo por medio del desplazamientodecastores. DebidoaldeclivedelaagriculturaduranteelsigloXIX, el castor desplazado prosperó y se expandió.Para la década de los años setenta los castores se habían restaurado en casi todas las zonas históricas de laespecie en el nordeste de EEUU. Este enorme programa de restauración de la fauna ha mejorado labiodiversidad porque el castor genera embalses en humedales que benefician a una amplia gama de especies.Además, la completa restauración del castor le ha brindado también a las personas la posibilidad decapturarlo tanto para pieles como para carne y otros productos útiles. La diferencia es que el manejo actualdel castor se basa en principios de uso sostenible y no en el modelo obsoleto de explotación incontrolada. Loscomponentesesencialesdelmanejomodernodelcastorson: la existencia de unmercado viable para productosdel castor, controles que regulen el uso del castor, monitores del nivel de uso, monitores del estado del castory control del daño que genera la inundación de castores. (Alrededor del 15% de todas las colonias de castoresproducen perjuicios económicos debido a inundaciones; las personas enfrentan millones de dólares en dañoscada año.) Sin duda que el modelo de uso sostenible depende de la disponibilidad continua del usuario. Lascondiciones del mercado de pieles, el acceso a dichos mercados, y la capacidad legal para capturar entrampas, son ingredientes esenciales para perpetuar esta historia de éxitos en uso sostenible. Algunos de estosfactores críticos se encuentran actualmente en peligro. Preocupa en forma especial la Reglamentación dePieles de Animales Silvestres de la Unión Europea que podría potencialmente destruir el mercado internacionalde pieles de castor y de otros animales silvestres. La destrucción de la motivación económica para conservarel castor pondría en peligro el uso sostenible continuo de esta valiosa especie. En este trabajo, evaluamos duso sostenible del castor, mamífero norteamericano que abunda mucho. Si bien nuestro análisis es aplicablea la mayor parte de las zonas del continente, nos centramos en nuestra experiencia en el manejo del castoren dos jurisdicciones subfederales de los EEUU, el estado de Nueva York y la Comunidad de Massachussetts.Este enfoque nos permite brindar un punto focal, tanto a amplia escala como preciso, en el uso sostenible deuna de las especies más significativas de la vida silvestre de América del Norte.
139
A CASE STUDY IN THE SUSTAINED USE OF WILDLIFE: THE MANAGEMENT OF BEAVER IN THE NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES
tout particulièrement un objet de préoccupation. La destruction de la motivation économique qui sous-tendla conservation du castor mettrait m péril la poursuite de l'utilisation durable de cette espèce précieuse. La présenteétude évalue l'utilisation durable du castor, un mammifère qui existe en grand nombre en Amérique du Nord.Bien que notre analyse soit applicable à la plupart des régions du continent, nous matons l'accent sur notreexpérience concernant la gestion des castors dans deux juridictions sous-fédérales: l'Etat de New York et le"Commonwealth'' du Massachusetts. Nous pouvons, grâce à cette approche, donner un aperçu à la fois général etspécifique de l'utilisation durable de l'une des espèces sauvages les plus importantes de l'Amérique du Nord
The Management and Sustainable Use ofDucks and Geese in North America
Ducks and geese are the most prominent and economically important group of migratory birds in NorthAmerica. Waterfowl are harvested for subsistence and recreation by millions of hunters and contribute tomeeting the nutritional needs of many remote, northern aboriginal communities. Many more people enjoywaterfowl in non-consumptive activities such as bird watching and natural history study. Sustaining viablewaterfowl populations is based on effective harvest management and the maintenance of habitat andenvironmental quality throughout the range. A key element of success is that all management activities aredirected by state-of-the-art science.
North American waterfowl management exemplifies the concept of sustainable use. It is predicated on thefundamental premise that conservation of the resource is the ultimate priority with use being a legitimateproduct of successful conservation. Management actions to achieve these ends are first characterised bycomprehensive science. Conservation programmes are implemented by cooperative public and private sectorpartnerships delivering integrated approaches to conserving the quality and quantity of habitat. Harvestregimes are cooperatively developed as shared, rather than allocated, benefits and are based on acomplementary international legal regime. These programmes continue to demonstrate a high degree offlexibility and adaptation in responding to climatic unpredictability, new scientific findings, changing publicexpectations and in refining the suite of tools required to ensure the perpetuation of healthy and diversepopulations of ducks and geese in North America.
IntroductionIn North America, migratory waterfowl are a finite, common-property resource that are in high demand. In fact, ducks andgeese are the most prominent and economically importantgroup of migratory birds throughout the continent. Water-fowl are harvested for food and recreation by millions of hunt-ers and contribute to meeting the subsistence needs of manyremote northern and aboriginal communities. Many morepeople enjoy waterfowl in non-consumptive ways. Success inmaintaining sustainable waterfowl populations is dependentupon effective harvest and habitat management.
North American waterfowl are the shared responsibilityof Canada, the US and Mexico. Historically, the continent haswitnessed periods of significant decline in duck and goosepopulations precipitated by drought, harmful land use prac-tices and unregulated taking. To their credit, North America's
wildlife management agencies, private sector organisationsand the public have responded to these threats. Beginning inthe early 1900s, an impressive array of protected sites, har-vest regulations, scientific programmes and recovery effortshave been implemented in support of waterfowl conserva-tion and sustainable use throughout the continent. The re-sults of these efforts are encouraging, for today this continen-tal programme is maintaining healthy waterfowl populationsfor continued recreational and subsistence taking as well asfor viewing (Hawkins et al, 1984). We are constantly re-minded, however, of the complexity of this task and of theoften confounding data and the competing viewpointsamongst waterfowl professionals that "guide" managementdecisions (see Boyd, 1991 and Ankney, 1995). This paper ad-dresses the management system for the conservation of ducks
1Senior Policy Advisor, Biodiversity Convention Office, Environment Canada, Place Vincent Massey, 9th Floor, 351 St. JosephBlvd., Hull, Quebec K1A OH3, Canada; e-mail: [email protected],#1, Arnprior, Ontario, K7S 3G7, Canada; e-mail: [email protected]
141
J. Gregory Thompson1 and James H. Patterson2
J. GREGORY THOMPSON AND JAMES H. PATTERSON
America. It describes the management regime developed forthis continental resource and discusses the features essentialfor the sustainable use of migratory wildlife on a continentalscale. It is distinguished from earlier assessments of the west-ern hemispheric situation (for example, Boyd, 1983 andNichols, 1991) by placing emphasis on waterfowl managementas political ecology. In doing so, this paper illustrates the chal-lenges faced when several bordering countries try to cooper-ate in managing a shared, cross-border migratory wildlife re-source, a resource that is entirely dependent upon the main-tenance of rich wetland ecosystems.
Species Data
Waterfowl are divided into three basic groups: ducks, geeseand swans, of which the majority are ducks. An extensive bodyof literature covers all aspects of waterfowl biology and ecol-ogy (see for example, Bellrose, 1980). This case study dealslargely with the first two groups although much of the discus-sion also pertains to swans.
Few bird species are permanent residents of northernportions of North America due to the prevalence of arctic andsubarctic conditions. As a consequence, North America's forty-three species of waterfowl depend upon annual migration tocomplete their life-cycles; breeding and nesting in central andnorthern regions during the brief but highly productive spring,and migrating in the fall to wintering grounds in the southernUS and Mexico. This annual cycle, characterised by a highdegree of complexity, is caused by the varied habitat and foodrequirements of individual species, their mobility and adap-tive behaviour, as well as seasonal and longer-term changesin breeding, migration and wintering habitats (McCabe, 1989and 1990).
Significant developments in the systemic study of water-fowl distribution and migration during the 1940s and 1950sled to the identification of four major North-South migrationcorridors in North America, now described as the Pacific, Cen-tral, Mississippi and Atlantic flyways (Bellrose, 1980).
The abundance and distribution of both ducks and geeseare highly dependent on the quantity and quality of wetlandsand upland nesting habitat. Although Arctic-breeding geesehave been less affected by loss of breeding habitat than ducks,the recovery and perpetuation of waterfowl populationsthroughout the continent depends on restoration and main-tenance of wetland habitats. Wetland loss, caused chiefly byagriculture, has been aggravated by urban development, for-estry and other land uses. Draining and dredging have alsoresulted in persistent wetland losses throughout NorthAmerica. The maintenance of healthy duck and goosepopulations is likewise dependent upon the application ofpopulation and harvest regulation that is appropriate to theunique reproductive strategies of these two waterfowl groups.
Ecosystem restoration and management, combined withpopulation management and harvest regulation, have becomeessential tools in the continent-wide effort to restore andmaintain waterfowl populations and provide maximum ben-efit to conservation of biological diversity. As integral compo-nents of wetland communities, waterfowl represent one ofthe best-documented sources of long-term data associatedwith North America's wetlands (United States Fish and Wild-life Service (USF&WS), 1988).
Ducks
North American ducks are divided into three groups basedon similarities in ecological requirements. Dabbling ducks arethe most abundant and widespread, with the highest densityfound on the prairies. This group includes mallards, gadwall,black ducks, wood ducks, wigeons, teals and pintails, as wellas the mottled ducks and three whistling-duck species thatoccur only in the southern US and Mexico. Dabblers nest inupland cover and frequent shallow ponds, marshes and creeksthroughout the year. The principal diving and sea ducks in-clude: canvasback, redhead, ringneck, scaup and the harle-quin duck, and eiders, scoters and old squaw, respectively.The highest breeding density of divers also occurs on the prai-ries, where they tend to use the deeper inland waterbodies.In winter, divers concentrate on coastal bays. Sea ducks inNorth America breed largely throughout the Arctic and Bo-real regions of North America and winter in offshore areas(Bellrose, 1980). Of the three groups of ducks, data on seaduck biology and populations is the most limited (USF&WS,1993 and Ad Hoc Sea Duck Committee, 1994).
Ducks are distributed across the continent. Most NorthAmerican ducks breed in Canada and the northern US andwinter in the southern US and Mexico. Surveys have shownthat almost 65 percent of most duck species breed in Canada,12 percent in Alaska, and 23 percent in the north-central statesof the US. The importance of these northern areas for breed-ing is confirmed by the fact that 70 percent of mallards breedin Canada; 85 percent of diving ducks breed in the combinedareas of Canada and Alaska; and 85 percent of all black ducksand ring-necked ducks breed in Canada The wood duck isthe only important game duck which has more abundantbreeding populations in the US than in Canada (USF&WS,1988).
Since 1955, annual surveys have been conducted duringthe spring and summer in major duck nesting areas of thecentral continent to assess habitat, breeding population andannual production. In combination with various other regionalsurveys in California, Colorado, Nebraska, Wisconsin, Minne-sota, Oregon and portions of eastern Canada and the US, thesesurveys allow waterfowl managers to determine annual abun-dance and long-term population trends. For the period 1955
142
THE MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABLE USE OF DUCK AND GEESE IN NORTH AMERICA
to 1996, these trends indicate several up and down cycles ofduck populations in the surveyed areas, which fluctuatearound a mean of 36 million breeding ducks (USF&WS, 1988and Canadian Wildlife Service, 1995). Biologists have deter-mined that duck numbers, particularly prairie-breeding spe-cies, have historically tracked the number of wetlands avail-able. Wetland numbers in the prairies are greatly influencedby the drought cycle in this region.
According to Table One, the estimated average totalbreeding duck population in all of Canada, the US and Mexicoduring the period 1970-1979 was 61.5 million (North Ameri-can Waterfowl Management Plan, 1994). Severe drought con-ditions in the early 1960s, and again in the 1980s, caused ma-jor duck declines, with mallards and pintails, for example,reaching their lowest ever recorded numbers in the early1990s. Persistent drought on the prairie breeding grounds ledto these declines in duck numbers, assisted by relentlesswetland losses throughout the continent. These lossesstemmed largely from agricultural conversion, concentrationof nesting areas that favoured predators, and by ecosystemdegradation from toxic pesticides and other contaminants.
Coupled with restricted sport harvest regulations duringthe period of low duck numbers in the 1980s, improvedwetland conditions and nesting habitat programmes are nowleading to the recovery of mid-continent breeding duckpopulations (USF&WS, 1995a). The continental estimate (sur-veyed areas) for 1996 is 37.5 million ducks, up five percentfrom 35.9 million in 1995 (USF&W, 1996).
A small number of duck species, including the harlequinduck (eastern population), spectacled eider and Steller's ei-der, are known to be threatened or endangered. These spe-cies are the subject of regulatory protection and populationrecovery efforts led by the responsible federal migratory birdagencies in Canada and the US, and are protected from hunt-ing (CWS, 1993a and US Department of the Interior, 1990).
GeeseThe US, Canada and Mexico also share a responsibility tomaintain and manage continental populations of white-fronted, snow, Canada, Ross' and brant geese. Canada geeseare widely distributed across the continent, with nesting ar-eas extending from the mid-continent US to the Arctic. Theirwintering areas range from southern Canada through the USinto Mexico.
Most geese nest in remote areas of the arctic and subarcticregions of North America, areas that have not been subjectedto land conversion or development. However, the same can-not be said for their staging and wintering grounds which havein some cases been affected seriously by agriculture and wa-ter development projects. The effects on geese have beenmixed, although most populations have adapted to modernagriculture and respond well to management actions that haveevolved to now include the establishment of refuges alongmigration corridors and regulation of hunting (NAWMP, 1994).
Since geese, as contrasted to ducks, do not breed untilthey are at least two years of age and most not until three orfour, annual production and fall flight size is heavily deter-mined by the age composition and size of the spring breed-ing population. Most goose species are also longer lived thanducks, and these significant differences in reproductive strat-egies require a different approach to their management. An-nual production is also markedly affected by the extent andduration of snow cover on the breeding grounds around nest-ing (USF&WS, 1988). If nesting is delayed beyond June 15,the proportion of young birds decreases significantly.
Table Two provides a summary of continental goosepopulations. Since it is not practical to census all major north-ern nesting areas, fall and winter surveys have generally pro-vided most of the population trend information, with the assist-ance of spring survey and northern aerial reconnaissance work.
Table 1: Temporal trends in populations of breeding ducks (in millions) in the North American
traditional survey area.
Species Group
Dabbling Ducks
Diving Ducks
Mergansers
Sea Ducks
Total
1970-79 Average
26.82
9.55
.40
1.93
38.70
1980-89 Average
20.57
9.19
.54
2.03
32.33
1990-94 Average
19.81
8.20
.57
1.12
29.7
1995
26.81
9.10
.91
1.02
37.84
Source: NAWMP update 1994, K. Dickson Pers. Comm.
143
J. GREGORY THOMPSON AND JAMES H. PATTERSON
Table 2: Status of North American Goose Populations
SPECIES
Canada Goose
Snow Goose
Ross1 Goose
White-Fronted Goose
Brant
Total (approx)
WINTER POPULATIONINDEX (1984-1985)
2,409,000
2,299,300
no estimate
261,000
290,800
5,260,100
1992-1993
2,785,000
2,467,000
221,000
526,700
225,000
6,224,700
RECENT TREND(1986-1995)
Increasing
Increasing
Increasing
Stable
Stable
Source: NAWMP Update 1994 and K. Dickson, J. Hines Pers. Comm.
Most snow goose populations have increased in recent yearsto the extent that there is concern that some parts of the breed-ing grounds are being overgrazed and that coastal lowlandtundra in some areas will be destroyed (e.g., southern HudsonBay). The Ross' goose population has increased since 1986and brant are either recovering (Atlantic) or stable (Pacific).Most populations of Canada geese are either increasing orstable. Presently, management concern is focused on the de-clining population of Canada Geese nesting in northeasternNorth America and in southern James Bay (NAWMP, 1994).Endangered populations of geese, including Aleutian, Cack-ling and Canada Geese and the Emperor Goose, are the sub-ject of recovery efforts and are protected from hunting (CWS,1993a and US Department of Interior, 1990).
As North America's waterfowl utilise a broad range of habitatsduring their seasonal migrations, Canada, the US and Mexicoshare in the responsibility of ensuring an adequate habitatbase for these wildlife populations. All migratory waterbirds,many other migratory birds, and half of all threatened andendangered species in North America depend on wetlandsand associated upland habitats for their survival. The recov-ery and perpetuation of waterfowl populations depends onrestoring wetlands and associated ecosystems throughout themigratory range. Wildlife managers have determined that thisapproach is not only the most effective and long-lasting meansto restoring waterfowl, but that it also provides the maximumbenefit to conservation of biological diversity and the overall en-vironmental integrity of all affected ecosystems (NAWMP, 1994).
144
Habitat Loss and DegradationThe loss and degradation of wetlands and associated uplandhabitat remains the major waterfowl conservation problemtoday in North America. As stated previously, draining anddredging of wetlands for agriculture, urbanisation and indus-trial development has severely impacted breeding, migrationand wintering habitat throughout the continent.
These wetland losses, which began well before 1900, hadremoved over 50 percent of the original wetland acreage inthe continental US by the mid-1970s. Similar rates of loss haveoccurred in some areas of Canada, including the mid-conti-nent prairie region, the most important duck breeding areain North America. A particular problem in Canada has beenthe expansion of agriculture and the associated loss of bothwetlands and the wetland margins — habitat critical to up-land nesting waterfowl. Other areas have suffered even more.California, for example, has lost over 90 percent of its wetlands,compelling the over 60 percent of the Pacific flyway populationthat normally relies upon this region, to winter on extremely lim-ited and now degraded wetland habitat (NAWMP, 1994).
Similar examples of significant wetland losses can befound in the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence region, in the south-ern US bottomlands and in many bays and estuaries along thePacific, Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico coasts (USF&WS, 1988).Formerly secure wetlands in the vast boreal region of Canadaused by breeding, molting and staging ducks are now facingthreats by hydroelectric power, recreation, industrial pollu-tion, atmospheric contamination and certain forestry practices.In the far north of Canada and in Alaska, where habitat forsignificant portions of the continent's goose populations re-main relatively untouched, future land use decisions will need
Ecosystem Data
THE MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABLE USE OF DUCK AND GEESE IN NORTH AMERICA
to take habitat conservation and the needs of subsistence us-ers into account (IAFWA, 1994).
The map identifies important waterfowl habitat areas inNorth America. The areas represent an international consen-sus on priority habitats that require the continent's attention.While waterfowl are important in Mexico, the primary con-cern is the conservation of biodiversity and the maintenanceof natural aquatic ecosystems that can provide a sustainablelivelihood for local people. Mexico is one of the richest coun-tries in the world in terms of biodiversity (NAWMP, 1994).
In addition to wetland loss, unsustainable agriculture andother land-use practices have caused major environmentalproblems in some areas due to soil erosion, siltation, chemi-cal contamination and increased salinity. Environmental deg-radation has become a particular problem in wintering areaswhere birds concentrated on remaining wetlands becomeincreasingly vulnerable to disease and contamination. Out-breaks of avian botulism can occur. A striking example of suchmortality occurred at Mexico's Silva Reservoir, where between20,000 and 40,000 birds are estimated to have died duringthe winter of 1994-95 (CEC Secretariat, 1995).
Habitat ConservationHabitat conservation initiatives have evolved significantly dur-ing the ongoing struggle to preserve and maintain wetlands(see Hawkins et al., 1984). Responsibility for waterfowl habi-tat is shared amongst various jurisdictions in all three coun-tries, with private sector organisations playing an importantrole in habitat conservation and research. These activitiesbegan in the late 1800s with the establishment of NorthAmerica's first migratory bird sanctuary at Canada's Last Moun-tain Lake, and with the subsequent establishment of the USNational Wildlife Refuge System. They are often supported bynon-government organisations, such as Ducks Unlimited,which was founded in the 1930s to promote wetlands conser-vation on private and public lands in both the US and Canada.Ducks Unlimited's programmes now extend into Mexico.
Despite these accomplishments in wetland restorationand enhancement, losses in each important waterfowl habi-tat area persist. Continued wetland losses threaten the long-term recovery of waterfowl populations and jeopardise thestatus of other wetland-dependent migratory birds (NAWMP,1994).
North American Waterfowl PlanRecognising that both waterfowl and wetlands continue to bein urgent need of long-term, continent-wide assistance,Canada, the US and Mexico signed the revitalised North Ameri-can Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP, 1994). The plan
manifests an ambitious strategy for international cooperationin maintaining and enhancing waterfowl populations andwetlands.
The first plan, signed in 1986 by the Canadian Minister ofthe Environment and the US Secretary of the Interior, estab-lished common international population goals for NorthAmerican waterfowl. When Mexico joined the Plan in 1994,the continent-wide conservation effort became assured. ThePlan recognises major land use changes as well as the corre-sponding loss of waterfowl production capability of key habi-tats, and states a firm resolve for the three countries to worktogether to restore habitats and populations to levels last ex-perienced in the early 1970s. The Plan reflects the need for apartnership of organisations, citizens and governments to in-tensify their efforts on behalf of waterfowl. It provides a newand broader forum for resolution of problems facing water-fowl and their habitats.
The Plan identifies the key waterfowl areas of NorthAmerica, consisting of 12 areas covered by existing joint habi-tat ventures, 25 other areas of major concern, and Mexico's32 priority wetlands (see Figure 1 over). Habitat objectiveshave been developed for each joint venture area. Specifically,the Plan calls for the protection of more than 11 million acres(4.5 million hectares), the restoration of 5 million acres (2million hectares) and the enhancement of an additional ninemillion acres (3.6 million hectares) in joint venture areas.
Joint ventures, partnerships involving governments, pri-vate-sector organisations and landowners, have evolved as theprincipal vehicle for implementing projects to meet Plan goals.All eight habitat joint ventures and two research joint ven-tures (Black Duck and Arctic Goose) recommended in the1986 Plan, have been created. Four new habitat joint ventureshave since been added. The primary approach of the habitatjoint ventures is ecosystem restoration and enhancement. Thisis the most effective and durable approach, and it also pro-vides the maximum benefit to the conservation of biodiversityand the overall integrity of the joint venture landscapes. Byalso fostering the economic and social well-being of privatelandowners, the Plan exemplifies sustainable development andstimulates a shift to sustainable agriculture. The research jointventures are directed at improving knowledge for enhancedmanagement.
To the credit of NAWMP partners, conservation ofwetlands and associated habitats have progressed tremen-dously since the Plan was signed in 1986. The 1986 Plan is-sued a challenge to the conservation community to raise $1.5billion over a 15-year period. Between 1986 and 1994, publicand private sector partners have invested more than $500million in waterfowl and wetland conservation, and more than2 million acres (810,000 hectares) of habitat have been pur-chased, leased, restored, secured or enhanced for wildlife inthe US and Canada. In Mexico, over $5.5 million has beencommitted to conservation projects in the 32 priority areas
145
J. GREGORY THOMPSON AND JAMES H. PATTERSON
146
Figure 1: North American Waterfowl Management Plan, 1994 (mapcit.)
THE MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABLE USE OF DUCK AND GEESE IN NORTH AMERICA
(NAWMP, 1994). As well, changes in public attitudes towardwetlands have resulted from a better understanding of thefunctions wetlands provide. Many of the public policies andprogrammes that encouraged and financed wetland destruc-tion are being reoriented to consider wetland values. Land-owners, private conservationists, and public conservationagencies have taken significant steps to integrate wetland andwildlife conservation into profitable sustainable agriculture.
The highest priority region under the NAWMP continuesto be the mid-continent prairie breeding grounds in the USand Canada. The move to sustainable agriculture in these ar-eas has been encouraged by NAWMP joint ventures throughthe provision of incentives for adjustment to conservationfarming. Success here has helped demonstrate the viability ofcooperative partnerships working at a landscape level for sus-tainable land use. As the traditional role of the public sectorin the delivery of waterfowl habitat programmes declines, withdeficit reduction at all levels of government, NAWMP is help-ing demonstrate how new partnerships can achieve conser-vation goals.
Uses and Benefits
Habitat Loss and Degradation
North American waterfowl and the wetlands upon which theydepend are valuable resources providing environmental, so-cial, cultural and economic benefits to all segments of NorthAmerican society.
Healthy wetlands and associated uplands are among theworld's most biologically diverse and highly productive eco-systems. Wetland basins collect runoff, thus replenishing wa-ter supplies needed to sustain natural vegetation, crops, live-stock, fish and wildlife. They also play a role in the purifica-tion of surface and ground water, prevent soil erosion, andmoderate regional impacts of drought and flooding. NorthAmerican wetlands are also of global significance in the con-servation of biodiversity and in storing or sequestering car-bon. With 24 percent of the world's wetlands, Canada has aparticularly significant global stewardship role to play in theconservation of wetland habitats (CWS, 1989).
Waterfowl Uses and Benefits
The uses of waterfowl and benefits derived from these re-sources are important to North Americans (IAFWA, 1995).Waterfowl are valued as an essential subsistence food and asan important and tradition-steeped focus for recreationalhunting, as well as for viewing and photography. Annually,more than 30 million people observe, photograph, hunt andotherwise appreciate waterfowl in North America (NAWMP,
1994).In the far north, the arrival of ducks and geese signifies
spring and the provision of essential food when other speciesare scarce. In other regions of the continent, staging or mi-grating geese provide spectacular tourist attractions. For ex-ample, staging Greater Snow Geese on the St. Lawrence Riverbelow Quebec City attract hundreds of thousands of visitorsto watch the birds and attend the annual Snow Goose festi-val.
Throughout the continent, waterfowl hunting is an im-portant part of the hunting and wetland conservation herit-age. In certain areas such as Delta, Manitoba and southernLouisiana, duck and goose hunting is a way of life, both so-cially and economically. In Mexico, waterfowl provide impor-tant economic benefits from nonresident hunting as well asan important food source for local inhabitants.
Sport and subsistence hunters of waterfowl in all threecountries derive significant recreational and food value fromthe pursuit of this activity. Active recreational hunters of wa-terfowl in Canada and the US have been as numerous as 2.4million in 1970 and as low as 1.4 million in 1991. In 1991,more than 24,000 waterfowl hunting permits were issued inMexico. Annual harvests of ducks in Canada and the US haveranged from a low of 10.8 million in 1968 to a high of 20.2million in 1970. The annual goose harvest averages 2.3 mil-lion birds in North America, varying from 2.5 million in 1980to 1.8 million in 1991. With subsistence duck and goose har-vests in northern Canada and Alaska being approximately 12percent and 27 percent respectively of total continental har-vests, waterfowl are clearly an important subsistence resource(Thompson, 1994). In Mexico, the estimated annual water-fowl harvest is just over 50000 duck and about 5500 geese(Kramer et al., 1995).
A 1995 study by the International Association of Fish andWildlife Agencies (IAWFA) shows that American hunters spend$545 million, while Canadians spend $178 million annuallyon waterfowl hunting (IAFWA, 1995). The beneficiaries ofhunter expenditures include the manufacturers and sellers ofshotguns, ammunition, boats and other equipment. Hotels,marinas, dog breeders and hunting clubs also benefit directly.In addition, 19 million Americans spent $3.3 billion on non-consumptive uses of waterfowl and shorebirds. In Canada,4.8 million people spent approximately $1 billion enjoyingwaterfowl. These expenditures result in direct economic ben-efits to society that include income, employment and taxa-tion revenue (NAWMP, 1994). There are no reliable estimatesavailable of the food and economic value of the subsistenceharvest of waterfowl, though in some areas of Alaska andCanada, these benefits to communities are significant(Thompson, 1994).
Given the direct economic benefits and the recreationalvalue obtained from the hunting of migratory birds, the sporthunters, subsistence users, management agencies and con-
147
J. GREGORY THOMPSON AND JAMES H. PATTERSON
servation organisations have a considerable interest in main-taining healthy waterfowl populations. This interest is dem-onstrated by a high level of commitment to habitat protec-tion and rehabilitation, as seen in the NAWMP and in the longtradition of wetland conservation established by Ducks Un-limited. It is also reflected in the active and continuing par-ticipation by many jurisdictions, agencies and public organi-sation in the ongoing regulation of waterfowl hunting, par-ticularly in Canada and the US.
However, not all the economic impacts related to water-fowl are positive. Crop damage can be significant, particularlyon Canadian breeding grounds, where field damage has beenestimated at over $1.2 million annually (USF&WS, 1988). Pre-vention and compensation programmes to mitigate crop dam-age losses to farmers have become a feature of the waterfowlscene in Canada.
Waterfowl are also subjected to an undetermined illegalharvest, ranging from minor technical violations to deliberatepoaching, that occurs in violation of the hunting regulations.Although there are reliable surveys that annually estimate thelegal harvest of waterfowl, it is difficult to estimate the magni-tude of the illegal harvest. This is because law enforcementdata is not consolidated, the illegal poaching goes unreportedand enforcement and compliance efforts are not consistentor uniform across the continent. Crude estimates, using bandrecovery data, suggested that the unreported harvest is con-siderably less than the reported harvest (USF&WS, 1988).Management agencies recognise, however, that illegal harvestshould be of concern to all those interested in conservation.
Management Regime
International Cooperation
Harvest regulation and the resulting allocation of birds be-tween the three countries is an important component in themanagement of waterfowl use. Prior to 1916 in Canada and theUS, and 1936 in Mexico, regulations governing the hunting ofmigratory birds existed only at the provincial, state or local level.
The signing of the 1916 Migratory Birds Convention be-tween Canada and the US, and subsequent passage of do-mestic legislation in each country, provided a framework topreserve birds and sustain their use (Convention, 1916). The1916 Convention, between Canada and the US, established acooperative basis to protect and conserve shared populationsof migratory birds. The Convention designates migratory birdsas either game, non-game or insectivorous. Waterfowl spe-cies, mostly ducks and geese, comprise the bulk of the huntedgame birds. The Convention prescribes a closed season onhunting of migratory game birds between the dates of March10 and September 1. Further, it limits the total length of theannual hunting season to a maximum of three and a half
months. The hunting of non-game birds and insectivorousspecies at any time of the year is prohibited (CWS, 1991).Mexico and the US entered into a similar migratory bird treatyin 1936, thereby extending throughout North America theframework for the conservation and shared use of migratorybirds (Convention, 1936).
Implementation of the 1916 and 1936 Conventions hasled to the development of various administrative, scientificand policy instruments that allow for the protection of water-fowl and their habitat on a national level and that encouragecooperation and exchange between countries in science, data,technical expertise and programme delivery (see Wagner, 1995and CWS, 1993b). For example, the US Flyway Council sys-tem advises on US harvest regulation and management ofmigratory birds and provides a useful forum for technical andpolicy exchange between waterfowl managers in Canada andthe US (Wagner, 1995). The NAWMP identifies populationgoals for all harvested waterfowl and now provides objectivesfor management action in all three countries. Other exam-ples of cooperative efforts include the recently signed Trilat-eral agreement between Mexico, Canada and the US intendedto further continental migratory bird conservation, along withother regional conservation objectives (Memorandum, 1996).There are also formal agreements in place that enable theconduct of population surveys and the collection and ex-change of banding, harvest, population and habitat data.
There are other cooperative international mechanismsin place for the promotion of conservation and understand-ing of wetlands and waterfowl in North America. Togetherwith the initiatives described above, these mechanisms formthe basis for a comprehensive and integrated managementframework benefiting waterfowl and other wetland-depend-ent species across the continent. US and Canadian waterfowlmanagers have separately negotiated various agreements withJapan, Russia, Denmark and other countries to ensure thatopportunities exist for cooperative research and harvest man-agement throughout the range of North America's migratorybirds. In addition, Canada, the US and Mexico participate inthe RAMSAR Convention, an international agreement for thedesignation and protection of internationally significantwetlands. All three countries are also active participants ininternational shorebird conservation programmess, and in theprogrammes of such groups as Wetlands International.
In addition to the regulatory role played by federal agen-cies, the continental waterfowl management regime isuniquely characterised by a high degree of participation bynon-government organisations, such as Ducks Unlimited, and theextensive involvement of universities and research institutes.
Monitoring and Research
Recruitment and mortality rates of waterfowl differ between
148
THE MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABLE USE OF DUCK AND GEESE IN NORTH AMERICA
ducks and geese. They also vary in response to many otherfactors including habitat quantity and quality. As well, hunt-ing is a major factor in waterfowl mortality. In order to scien-tifically manage waterfowl harvest, information is required onan annual basis for both species and populations. The datarequirements of waterfowl managers include information ondistribution, breeding population, habitat conditions, annualproduction, migration chronology and harvest.
Waterfowl management in North America realised itsmodern beginnings following the Second World War. NorthAmerican waterfowl have been evaluated for decades and aresubject to the most extensive and intensive wildlife surveysconducted anywhere in the world today. Managers and ex-perts from government, private organisations and universi-ties have dedicated significant effort to the development ofwhat is now a continent-wide programme of population sur-veys, harvest monitoring and research.
Population Surveys
Different population surveys take place on breeding, winter-ing or migration areas and depending on the time of year,include non-breeders, sub-adults and/or young birds. Theinformation gathered from population surveys directly reflectsthe status of a population. In general, it is assumed that anincreasing or stable population is healthy, whereas a declin-ing population (below some threshold value) requires atten-tion (Caswell and Dickson, 1997).
Annual breeding ground surveys were first establishedin the early 1950s by the USF&WS and the Canadian WildlifeService with the cooperation of provinces, states and someNGOs. Pilot biologists and observers fly predeterminedtransects to estimate the distribution and abundance of allduck species. Abundance and distribution of wetlands is alsorecorded. Ground crews survey a sub-sample of the aerialtransects. This information is used to "correct" the aerial sur-vey to calculate the final survey results. Two surveys are con-ducted annually: the first in May to determine breedingpopulations and the second in July to determine reproduc-tive success, or production levels. These surveys are confinedto the mid-continent region, ranging from South Dakota tothe Beaufort Sea, along with selected areas of Alaska andNorthwestern Ontario. Numerous improvements have beenmade to the annual Breeding Population and Habitat Surveyover the years. In addition, a major survey of breeding ducksand habitat in Eastern Canada is now underway with the as-sistance of the Black Duck Joint Venture. As well, a number ofUS state agencies also conduct population and habitat sur-veys.
Total continental duck populations are, of course, some-what higher than the breeding surveys indicate because manyducks breed outside the surveyed area. Nevertheless, the
breeding ground surveys have proven to be valuable tools inthe evaluation of long-term duck trends.
Breeding ground surveys of Arctic nesting geese are con-ducted opportunistically. Photographic surveys are conductedat some breeding colonies, but it has been difficult to ensurelong-term funding. Therefore, the results of the photographicsurveys are becoming scattered in location and time, and theirvalue in monitoring is hampered. Efforts to improve the man-agement of these northern populations are now underway bythe Arctic Goose Joint Venture, one of two research joint ven-tures established under the NAWMP. Here the efforts of goosemanagers are being directed at managing geese on their breed-ing grounds instead of attempting to assess discretepopulations as they mix on wintering areas.
The breeding ground surveys are complimented by sur-veys on key migration and wintering areas. One of the long-est running wildlife surveys in the world is the winter water-fowl survey conducted by the USF&WS and Mexico since 1937.With the mid-winter survey, an attempt is made to count totalnumbers of ducks and geese. These surveys provide cover-age of species not readily surveyed at any other time includ-ing some goose populations, ring-necked ducks and woodducks (USF&WS, 1988).
Generally, little breeding ground data is available on arc-tic nesting oldsquaw, scoters and eiders. The data that is avail-able from the wintering surveys is not sufficient to allow long-term trends to be determined (USF&WS, 1988).
Banding and Marking
Banding is another important technique in monitoring andinvestigating the population dynamics of waterfowl speciesand populations. Banding programmes in Canada were re-cently reviewed by Caswell and Dickson (1997). Banding, orother kinds of markings, are commonly used to help identifymigration routes or staging and wintering areas of birdsbanded on breeding grounds (or vice versa). In addition, bandrecoveries help in estimation of parameters such as annualsurvival rates and partitioning of mortality can be comparedto local changes in population size to help explain popula-tion trends. Markers that allow recognition of live individualsfrom a distance also permit estimation of population sizethrough a variation on mark-recapture techniques (Caswelland Dickson, 1997).
Duck banding programmes focused on breeding-groundpopulations have been in place for many years in Canada andthe US with most efforts directed toward mallards and blackducks. Short term banding is conducted for other duck spe-cies, including pintail and for most goose populations, withefforts intensifying in the late 1970s to gather information ongoose survival and recovery rates. More recent marking ofgeese through the use of neck collars has allowed improved
149
J. GREGORY THOMPSON AND JAMES H. PATTERSON
understanding of regional goose stocks and their distribution.There is now an effort to mark samples of all populations ofCanada and white-fronted geese across the entire Arctic(Caswell and Dickson, 1997).
Annual Harvest Estimates
According to Caswell and Dickson (1997), harvest surveysestimate the mortality due to hunting by monitoring the sizeand composition of the take. For populations with little di-rect information of other kinds, the take per unit effort byhunters is sometimes used as an index of population trend.Harvest can also be compared to other parameters such asthe size of the breeding population or its production of young,to determine whether trends in population size are coinci-dent with changes in the rate of harvest. The proportion ofyoung birds in the harvest, corrected for age specific differ-ences in vulnerability to hunting mortality, can provide infor-mation on annual productivity (Caswell and Dickson, 1997).
Annual harvest surveys are conducted in both Canadaand the US (see CWS, 1995 and USF&WS, 1995b). While therehas recently been an effort to review subsistence take, thebulk of harvest estimates derive from surveys of recreationalwaterfowl hunters. Additional harvest surveys have also beenimplemented in Mexico under the auspices of the US/MexicoJoint Committee on Wildlife Conservation. In Canada, salesof hunting permits are used as a sampling universe from whichto select a sample of hunters who will receive questionnaireson their season's hunting record. This survey provides infor-mation on the size and location of harvest (Caswell andDickson, 1997). Recent efforts are underway in the US to im-prove data on hunters and harvests through similar surveysof permit holders.
Waterfowl Research
Research on waterfowl populations is conducted by academ-ics, federal and provincial/territorial scientists, and biologistsin non-government organisations. Coordination among gov-ernment agencies is facilitated through a number of bodies,such as the CWS Waterfowl Committee, the NAWMP JointVentures, and the Flyway Councils. The two NAWMP researchjoint ventures, the Black Duck Joint Venture and the ArcticGoose Joint Venture, are also of particular note in coordinat-ing the continent-wide efforts of waterfowl researchers. Bothjoint ventures are fostering cooperative research efforts byCanadian and American partners in the areas of monitoring,population dynamics, harvest management and ecological re-quirements (NAWMP, 1994). There is, in fact, a very long his-tory of waterfowl research by private groups, such as at Deltain Manitoba.
There remain a multitude of other highly relevant areasof scientific investigation on waterfowl biology, ecology andpopulation dynamics, particularly in modelling harvest regu-lation effects on population mortality. The most recent re-search advance currently being conducted in regulation ofharvest is the development and testing of adaptive decision-making tools. This approach was introduced to the US fed-eral regulation of waterfowl harvests in 1995 in an effort tobalance short-term hunting opportunities with the long-termbenefits of understanding how populations respond to theharvest. The distinguishing features of adaptive harvest man-agement are: 1) clear, concise and unambiguous managementobjectives; 2) a limited set of hunting-season options; 3) a setof alternative hypotheses describing population dynamics andthe effects of harvest; and 4) a measure of reliability for eachalternative hypothesis. After the hunting season, existingmonitoring programmes permit a comparison of predictedmanagement responses with those that actually occurred, ena-bling managers to eventually identify the most appropriatehypothesis of population dynamics. This new approach of-fers some exciting prospects for refining both our understand-ing of population dynamics and improving the effectivenessof harvest regulation in achieving both population objectivesand maintaining hunting opportunities (Johnson et al., un-dated). It follows an earlier attempt to understand the mor-tality process and role of hunting through the application andevaluation of stabilised duck hunting regulations (McCabe, 1987).
Harvest Regulation and Implementation
Prior to 1917 in Canada and the US, and 1936 in Mexico, thehunting of waterfowl was regulated locally in some jurisdic-tions, or not at all. Concerns about declining waterfowl popu-lations, particularly wood duck, eiders, black duck and can-vasback, led to the development of international agreementsamongst the three countries to protect species and managetheir harvest. Generally, wood ducks and other duck specieshave increased significantly since early in this century. As aresult of these cooperative international efforts and the sub-sequent development of a large and complex regulatory andprotection program, they remain relatively plentiful today(IAFWA, 1994).
The provisions of the 1916 Convention are implementedin the US through the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) of1918 and in Canada through the 1917 Migratory Birds Con-vention Act (MBCA). Pursuant to domestic legislation, annualwaterfowl hunting regulations in each country control suchaspects of harvesting as season dates, zones, species, bag lim-its, equipment and harvesting practices, and are supportedby a comprehensive programme of population, harvest andhabitat monitoring and research. Similar arrangements occurin Mexico for the regulation of harvest under the 1936 treaty
150
THE MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABLE USE OF DUCK AND GEESE IN NORTH AMERICA
with the US.In Canada and the US, the process for developing hunt-
ing regulations for waterfowl is conducted annually under thesupervision and guidance of each federal wildlife agency. In-formation on population size, long-term population trends,harvest, habitat conditions and annual productivity are col-lected and analysed for all major hunted species, covering abroad area of North America. This information, which formsthe basis for the determination of population harvest objec-tives, is also supplemented by regional and local assessmentsof particular populations and is made widely available to theinterested public. Detailed reports prepared by both federalagencies describe, on an annual basis, the waterfowl popula-tion status, habitat and production conditions, anticipated fallflight forecast and proposed regulatory changes (CWS, 1993band 1995, USF&WS, 1993 and Wagner, 1995).
State, provincial and territorial agencies, private conser-vation organisations, and more recently Canadian aboriginalwildlife management boards, play an active role in the deter-mination of annual hunting regulations through scientific andsurvey support and the provision of advice. Their level of in-terest in the regulation and allocation of harvest reflects theeconomic importance of the resource and also the sharedresponsibility for its stewardship.
In the US, the foundation of cooperative management isthe flyway system. For both biological and administrative rea-sons, the US is divided into four flyways: Atlantic, Mississippi,Central and Pacific. The flyways provide a forum for the statesto develop waterfowl harvest proposals, debate them, andspeak with a unified voice to the federal government. Effortsare currently underway to modernise and broaden the rolesof the Flyway Council.
While Canadian provinces are full members of the flyways,the concept is not appropriate for regulation setting in Canada.Instead, provincial wildlife directors meet separately with CWSregional directors and their technical committees to proposeharvest regulations. The regulations are subject to public re-view and approved on an annual basis.
Implementation of the annual hunting regulations is alsoa cooperative undertaking between federal and provincial/territorial or state agencies, particularly in permit sales, com-pliance promotion, harvest reporting and enforcement (CWS,1993c). In Canada, there is a heavy reliance upon provincialand territorial governments for habitat protection, regulationof hunting access and safety, and enforcement of the MBCA.Similar arrangements between federal and state agencies arefound in both the US and to a lesser extent in Mexico, wherethere is a heavy reliance upon federal resources and programmes.
Sharing of Harvest
The sharing of waterfowl harvest in Canada, the US and Mexico
is based upon waterfowl population trends and not on a ne-gotiated allocation. As these populations decline or increase,regulations designed to modify harvest throughout the fly-way/species range are adjusted accordingly and generally ap-plied as the need or opportunity dictates. The desired effectof these regulations is to ensure that all relevant users sharein harvest reductions as well as harvest increases. Success inachieving this shared stewardship is based, in part, on theability to distinguish between stocks and to accurately describetheir distribution and chronology of migration. Close coop-eration between countries in managing harvest has remainedan important feature of this management framework. It pro-vides the reassurance that users require, while complying withharvest restrictions, that others along the flyway are behavingin a like fashion. This approach has succeeded in reinforcingthe obligation of each country and on each user to share inthe conservation of populations throughout the range.
In contrast to many fishery allocation disputes, wherecountries often insist on equal shares of harvest, waterfowlharvest allocation resulting from the regulation of harvest inNorth America has evolved to directly reflect the distributionof recreational hunting throughout the continent. As a result,the bulk of the harvest, approximately 80 percent, occurs inthe US, where the majority of the continent's recreationalhunters are found (Dickson, 1995). Canada and Mexico enjoymuch smaller portions of the continental harvest in direct pro-portion to their numbers of licensed recreational hunters (ap-proximately 20 percent and less than 1 percent respectively).
The three countries have managed to avoid disputes overallocation, disputes that in other sectors have contributed lit-tle to conservation and sustainable use. However, within eachcountry, harvest regulation has become increasingly complexdue to continuing high expectations on the part of hunters,changing public attitudes respecting wildlife use, protectiondeclines in certain species, and new obligations to integratenorthern subsistence harvest into the continental manage-ment regime. These challenges, in part, are being met throughefforts to generate widespread support amongst users andregulators for the establishment of discrete goals forpopulations of ducks and geese. The NAWMP has played apivotal role in this regard. While not a regulatory agreementbetween Canada, the US and Mexico, the plan has an indirecteffect on the issuance of annual regulations by establishingdesirable population goals for most North American water-fowl. The overall goal of the plan is 62 million breeding ducks,supporting a fall flight of at least 100 million birds under aver-age environmental conditions. The plan also establishes de-sirable and achievable goals for 26 populations of geese and itrecommends that all management agencies and partners co-operate in achieving these objectives for geese and ducks(NAWMP, 1994).
Additionally, waterfowl agencies have also devoted par-ticular effort to the establishment of management plans for
151
J. GREGORY THOMPSON AND JAMES H. PATTERSON
key regional stocks. For most goose populations, managementplans have been developed by the USF&WS, CWS and theappropriate Flyway Council. Population goals, harvest strate-gies and cooperative management programmes are featuresof these plans. Cooperatively developed management plansalso exist for certain species and populations of ducks. A re-cent example is the Prairie Canada Mallard Strategy developedby CWS, and provinces of Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Al-berta. Some of the key management purposes of the strategyare to change the focus for evaluation of hunting regulationsaway from the annual details onto the longer term strategy(Prairie Canada Mallard Harvest Strategy, 1993). In total, theseregional and international management plans and populationtargets provide a common basis for regulatory action andhunter compliance throughout the range.
Evaluation of Uses
Accomplishments
Conservation and sustainable use of wildlife, managed as acommon-property resource, requires science, cooperationamongst users, harvest regulation, compliance and the main-tenance of healthy habitats. Prior to the signing of the twomigratory bird treaties, North American waterfowl were in veryserious trouble. Uncontrolled harvest, spring hunting andhabitat destruction were having devastating impacts on popu-lations. No one was accountable for overall conservation ofthe resource and the overriding motivation was to take asmany birds as possible. The passenger pigeon and bison aretestament to the reality of these attitudes.
The 1917 and 1936 migratory bird treaties in NorthAmerica have changed all that. The management frameworkthat has evolved is science-based, continent-wide and is ag-gressively undertaken through innovative partnerships, tomanage harvest as well as promote habitat conservation. Thebenefits of this effort remain significant (IAFWA, 1995). As aresult of these agreements, a high degree of cooperation hasbeen fostered between the three countries and a number ofspecies including wood ducks, canvasbacks, and redhead havebeen brought back from dangerously low levels to relativeabundance (Buffington and MacLaughlan, 1993).
There has recently been a remarkable improvement induck populations despite serious declines over the past tenyears. In the prairie-pothole region of Canada and the north-central US, abundant water has returned, along with the nec-essary upland nesting cover. According to the US Fish andWildlife Service, spring breeding duck survey numbers are attheir highest level since 1979. The breeding duck survey re-corded an estimated 37.5 million ducks, up five percent from35.9 million in 1995. Populations of four species — gadwell,blue-winged teal, northern shoveler and canvasback—reached
record highs. In particular, the blue-winged teal, up twenty-five percent to 6.4 million and the northern shovelers, up fif-teen percent to 3.4 million, showed substantial gains (USF &WS, 1996).
Early indicators are that NAWMP and the US Conserva-tion Reserve Programme have played an important role in therecovery of habitat and populations. Coupled with improvedwater and habitat conditions, expenditures since 1986 of morethan $500 million and protection of over 2 million acres ofwetlands under NAWMP have contributed to the recovery ofduck populations.
The NAWMP is the largest and most successful interna-tional conservation initiative in history. Although the Plan pre-ceded the Bruntland Commission Report by one year, it em-pirically defined sustainable development where it counts —on the land. In fact, it has also been cited internationally asthe best example of sustainable development in action. Be-cause of its broad ecosystem approach to habitat conserva-tion and sustainable agriculture, the NAWMP makes the ma-jor contribution to biodiversity conservation.
The current status of waterfowl serves as a testament tothe overwhelming success that Canada, the US and Mexicohave achieved in implementation of their respective treatiesand the NAWMP. Indeed, today North America serves as amodel for the development of range-wide management plansfor waterfowl in many other areas of the world. The contin-ued harvest of waterfowl for subsistence and recreation, alongwith all of the other uses and benefits derived from this re-source is an expected and ongoing outcome of these man-agement and conservation efforts. None of these accomplish-ments and the continued benefits from use of the resourcewould have been possible in the absence of an extensive pro-gramme of monitoring and research. Our understanding ofhow waterfowl populations are regulated, and the impact ofhunting, has come a long way since the signing of the Migra-tory Bird Convention in 1916. Waterfowl management hasevolved from simple regulation of harvest to monitoring ofpopulations and protection of habitat. Today waterfowl man-agers are working to integrate knowledge of habitat impacton recruitment and summer survival with harvest relation-ships to total mortality, to determine harvest managementregimes consistent with long-term resource conservation.
The utility of monitoring data has also grown substan-tially from its original intent to manage hunting (Caswell andDickson, 1997). It is instrumental in evaluation of large scalehabitat improvement programmes, such as those sponsoredby NAWMP and implemented through its joint ventures. It isused for evaluating protected areas programmes of all agen-cies, environmental effects assessments, research on climatechange, and as an indicator of environmental quality. Water-fowl monitoring data also provides some of the baseline in-formation needed as we move toward adopting an ecosystemapproach to wildlife management and conservation (Caswell
152
THE MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABLE USE OF DUCK AND GEESE IN NORTH AMERICA
and Dickson, 1997).
Challenges
In spite of the many impressive accomplishments in NorthAmerican waterfowl conservation, the future of the resourcesis dependent upon the ability of governments, private sectororganisations, users and landowners alike to address and re-solve a number of key outstanding challenges. Habitat lossand degradation remain the greatest threat to the resourceand the greatest challenge to sustainable harvest. Unless thecontinuing downward trend in wetland numbers and qualityis reversed, the long-term future of all wetland-dependentspecies, including waterfowl, is in jeopardy. New approaches,partnerships and resources are required.
All three countries recognise that the single largest con-tribution to meeting North American habitat and populationobjectives is to be made by adjustments in national and inter-national agricultural and trade policies that encourage con-servation practices. Creation of the North American Commis-sion on Environmental Cooperation presents some excitingnew possibilities to address these needed policy and tradeadjustments, though it will need to be recognised that trad-ing patterns in the Pacific basin also have a direct bearing onagriculture production and conservation in North America.There remain some significant opportunities to achieve land-scape-level improvements to wetland ecosystems throughland-use and economic policy adjustments.
Major changes are already occurring in the managementof subsistence hunting, an issue that has required attentionfor some time. The 1916 Convention is being considered foramendment to provide a legal framework for subsistencehunting at all times of the year. Co-management boards inCanada, created under comprehensive land claims agree-ments, will likely serve as local management authorities forsubsistence waterfowl harvest in that country. There are on-going discussions with Alaskan natives respecting the man-agement of subsistence harvest in the state of Alaska. The in-volvement of Canadian Aboriginal people and Alaskan sub-sistence hunters in conservation of waterfowl is necessary toobtain reliable harvest data and to secure their participationin conserving local breeding populations. From an Aboriginalperspective, greater involvement is desirable to sustain tradi-tional harvesting practices and, in Canada, to ensure the fullexpression of harvesting rights (IAFWA, 1994).
There are other major challenges in hunting managementand regulation. With the decline in the number of waterfowlhunters and increases in non-consumptive uses, the regula-tory agencies are facing significant public policy questionsabout hunting, to which they need to be sensitive. Also re-lated to the changing trend is kinds of uses; whereas the hunt-ing community has generously contributed funding to water-
fowl and wetland conservation in the past, will funding to sup-port these programmes continue if hunter numbers decline?There remains the difficulty in effectively managing overpopu-lation of some waterfowl, i.e. snow geese and urban Canadageese.
Additionally, there remain some important gaps in ourknowledge about the distribution, biology and trends for cer-tain groups of waterfowl that need to be met. Information onsea ducks remains poor, and the situation for Canada Geesepresents a complex picture of races and migratory patterns(Dickson, 1995). Efforts underway through the Arctic GooseJoint Venture will be instrumental in addressing the latter prob-lem and the conduct of regional coastal winter surveys will beof benefit in addressing the former.
Finally, our consideration of future challenges must ex-amine briefly the evolving roles of government. In all aspectsof government, there has been a trend for federal govern-ments to transfer responsibilities to other levels of govern-ment and the private sector. This trend is certain to continue,both for reasons of fiscal necessity and the recognition thatregional issues and problems are best addressed at that level.This is particularly true in the area of habitat conservation.With the financial and programme roles of governments ever-shrinking, market-driven approaches to sustainable develop-ment will continue to become m6re important. The upcoming1998 update to the NAWMP may provide a timely opportu-nity to broaden the partnership for wetland and migratorybird conservation in North America.
Conclusions
North American waterfowl management is an example of sus-tainable use, characterised by comprehensive science, adap-tive management, reliance upon partnerships, integrated ap-proaches involving habitat, shared benefits and a compatiblelegal and international regime. These programmes continueto demonstrate a high degree of flexibility and adaptation inresponding to scientific findings, public needs and expecta-tions, and in refining the tools necessary to ensure continu-ing healthy populations of ducks and geese in North America.
The development of these essential features and theirongoing delivery constitute the key ingredients for success insustainability using these internationally-shared migratoryresources. Furthermore, management programmes provideimmense environmental, social and economic benefitsthroughout the continent, benefits that can be expected tobe sustained with the continuing commitment to waterfowlconservation that is growing across the continent.
153
J. GREGORY THOMPSON AND JAMES H. PATTERSON
AcknowledgementsThis paper is one of a series of case studies on the sustainableuse of wildlife prepared under the auspices of the IUCN Sus-tainable Use Initiative-North American Specialist Group andwas prepared with the financial assistance of EnvironmentCanada. The authors wish to extend their appreciation to thosein each country who assisted in the preparation and reviewphases of this case study. In particular, we wish to acknowl-edge the assistance of S. Wendt, K. Dickson, H. Boyd, R.O.Bailey, P. Schmidt, D. Ryan, J.C. Guevarao and J. Herity. Thanksalso to Michelle Ellis, Margaret Armstrong and Leigh Nicholsonof the Biodiversity Convention Office, Environment Canada,who provided valuable assistance in preparation of the manu-script. Any errors that remain are the responsibility of theauthors.
References
Ad Hoc Sea Duck Committee. 1994. Status of Sea Ducks inthe Atlantic Flyway. Unpublished Report for Atlantic FlywayCouncil. P.72.
Ankney. 1995. Why Did the Ducks Come Back in 1994 and1995: Was Johnny Lynch Right? Unpublished Manuscript. P.17.Bellrose, F.C. 1980. Ducks, Geese and Swans of NorthAmerica, 3rd ed. Stackpole Books, Harrisburg, PA. P.68.
Boyd,H.(Ed.) 1983. First Western Hemisphere, Waterfowl andWaterbird Symposium. Supply and Services Canada. P.147.
Boyd, H. 1991. Science and Craft in Waterfowl Managementin North America. In: Perrins, C.M., Lebreton,J.D. and Hirons,G.J.M.(Eds), Bird population Studies-Relevance to Conser-vation and Management. Oxford University Press, Oxford.P.683.
Buffington, J.D. and MacLauchlan, D.E. 1993. Sustaining theDiversity of Birds: Intercontinental Experiences. Acts Press,Nairobi, Kenya. P.32.
Canadian Wildlife Service. 1989. Wetlands. Supply and Serv-ices Canada. P.6.
Canadian Wildlife Service. 1991. Birds Protected in CanadaUnder the Migratory Birds Convention Act. Canadian Wild-life Service Occasional paper. No 1. P.32.
Canadian Wildlife Service. 1993a. Endangered Species inCanada. Draft unpublished report. P.36.
Canadian Wildlife Service. 1993b. Status of Migratory GameBirds of Canada with Proposals for 1994 Hunting Regulations.
Unpublished report. P.31.
Canadian Wildlife Service. 1993c. Regulatory Review Discus-sion Document. Unpublished report. P.102.
Canadian Wildlife Service. 1995. Status of Migratory GameBirds in Canada. Unpublished report. P.57.
Caswell, F.D. and Dickson, K.M. 1997. Evaluating the Statusof Waterfowl Populations in Canada. In: Dunn, E.H., Cadman,M.D. and Falls, J.B. (Eds), Monitoring Bird Populations: TheCanadian Experience. Canadian Wildlife Service OccasionalPaper. No. 65.
Commission on Environmental Cooperation. 1995. CEC Sec-retariat Report on the Death of Migratory Birds at The SilvaReservoir (1994-95). Report of the Commission of Environ-mental Cooperation Secretariat. Unpublished report.
Convention for the Protection of Migratory Birds and GameMammals. Feb. 7, 1936. US/Mexico. 50 stat 1311 T.S. No 912.
Convention of August 16, 1916 for the Protection of Migra-tory Birds in Canada and the United States. In: Migratory BirdsConvention Act, S.C., 1985, C.-7, as amended and regulations(LCOM).
Dickson, K. M 1995. Origin of Waterfowl Harvested in theUnited States. Canadian Wildlife Service. Ottawa. P.10.
Hawkins, A.S., Hanson, R.C., Nelson, H.K. and Reeves, H.M.1984. Flyways: Pioneering Waterfowl Management in NorthAmerica. US Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service.
International Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies(IAFWA). 1994. Discussion Paper of the IAFWA Migratory BirdConvention Ad Hoc Committee. Unpublished report. April1994. P.54.
International Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. 1995.The Economic Contribution of Bird and Waterfowl Recrea-tion in the United States During 1991. Unpublished reportprepared by Southwick Associates. March 1995. P.22.
Johnson, F., Williams, B.K., and Schmidt, P.R. (undated). Adap-tive Decision-Making in Waterfowl Harvest and HabitatManagement. United States Fish and Wildlife Service. DraftManuscript.
Kramer, J.W., Carrera, E., andZavelta, D. 1995. Waterfowl HarvestandHunter Activity in Mexico.In: Transactions 60th North Ameri-can Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference, 1995. Pp.243-249.
154
THE MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABLE USE OF DUCK AND GEESE IN NORTH AMERICA
McCabe, R. (Ed.) 1987. Results of Stabilized Duck HuntingRegulations. Wildlife Management Institute, Washington DC,USA P.149.
McCabe, R. (Ed.) 1989. Duck Harvest Management: Ques-tions and Needs. Wildlife Management Institute, WashingtonDC, USA P.599.
McCabe, R. (Ed.) 1990. Goose Management in the '90s. Wild-life Management Institute, Washington DC, USA P.377.
Memorandum of Understanding Establishing the Canada/Mexico/United States Trilateral Committee for Wildlife, Plantsand Ecosystem Conservation and Management. 1996. Unpub-lished. P.7.
Nichols, J.D. 1991. Responses of North American DuckPopulations to Exploitation (488-525). In: Perrins, C.M.,Lebreton,J.D., and Hirons, G.J.M. (Eds), Bird Population Stud-ies: Relevance to Conservation and Management. OxfordUniversity Press, Oxford. P.683.
North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP). 1994.1994 Update to the North American Waterfowl ManagementPlan — Expanding the Commitment. Canadian Wildlife Serv-ice. P.44.
Prairie Canada Mallard Harvest Strategy. 1993. Canadian Wild-life Service. Unpublished report. P.15.
Thompson, J.G. 1994. Subsistence Hunting of Arctic Anatidaein North America. In: Proceedings of IWRB-Anatidae 2000Conference (in preparation). P.24.
United States Department of Interior. 1990. Endangered andThreatened Species Recovery Program. United States Fish andWildlife Service - Report to Congress. Washington DC, USADecember, 1990.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 1993. Status of SeaDucks in Eastern North America. Unpublished report for Of-fice of Migratory Bird Management. P.28.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 1988. Final Supple-mental Environmental Impact Statement: Issuance of An-nual Regulations Permitting the Sport Hunting of MigratoryBirds. SEIS 88. Washington DC, USA
United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 1995a. Waterfowl Popu-lation Status, Office of Migratory Bird Management, Unpub-lished Report, P.45.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 1995b. Age and SexComposition of Ducks and Geese Bagged in 1994 HuntingSeason in Comparison With Other Years. Unpublished report.P.47.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 1996. Good News fromthe Prairie: Breeding Duck Populations Rise for ThirdStraightYear. Press release, July 12, 1996.
Wagner, W.C. 1995. Flyway Council System Review: FinalProject Report, August 1995. Prepared under contract toUSF&W Service and IAFWA. P.76.
SummariesLes canards et oies constituent le groupe le plus important, au plan numérique et économique, parmi lesoismux migratoires del'Amérique du nord. Les oiseaux d'eau sont chassés à des fins alimentaires ou récréativespar des millions de chasseurs et contribuent à la satisfaction des besoins nutritionnels de nombreusescommunautés aborigènes des contrées éloignées du nord. Un nombre plus élevé d'individus apprécient lesoiseaux d'eau pour des raisons autres qu'alimentaires, notamment pour l'observation et l'étude de l'histoirenaturelle. La conservation de populations viables d'oiseaux d'eau nécessite une bonne gestion de la chasse etle maintien de la qualité de l'habitat et de l'environnement dans toute la région. Un élément clé du succèsréside dans le fait que toutes les activités de gestion ont recours aux connaissances scientifiques les plusrécentes.
La gestion des oiseaux d'eau d'Amérique du nord illustre le concept d'utilisation durable. Elle repose surl'idée selon laquelle la conservation de la ressource est l'ultime priorité, l'utilisation étant un aboutissementlégitime d'un effort réussi de conservation. Les actions de gestion permettant d'atteindre ces objectifs sontd'abord caractérisées par des connaissances exhaustives. Les programmes de conservation sont mis en oeuvreà travers des partenariats entre secteur public et privé qui adoptent des approches intégrées pour laconservation de la qualité des habitats. Les régimes de prélèvement sont développés dans l'esprit d'une
155
Los patosy losgansos constituyen el grupo más destacado y económicamente importante de las aves migratoriasen América del Norte. Millones de cazadores cazan aves acuáticas para subsistir y para recreación. Esasaves contribuyen a satisfacer las necesidades alimenticias de muchas comunidades aborígenes septentrionalesy remotas. Muchas personas disfrutan de las aves acuáticas en actividades de no consumo como observaciónde aves y estudio de la historia natural. El mantenimiento de poblaciones viables de aves acuáticas se basaen el manejo eficaz de la captura y de la conservación del hábitat y de la calidad ambiental en todo elámbito. Un elemento clave de éxito es que todas las actividades de manejo se basen en los últimos adelantoscientíficos.
El manejo de las aves acuáticas de América del Norte ilustra el concepto de uso sostenible. Se basa en lapremisa fundamental de que la conservación de recursos es la prioridad final y que el uso es un productolegítimo de una conservación exitosa. Las acciones de manejo para lograr estos fines se caracterizan antetodo por ser científicamente comprensivas. Los programas de conservación los ejecutan los sectores públicoy privado asociados entre sí que utilizan enfoques integrados para conservar la calidady cantidad de hábitats.Los regímenes de captura se comparten en forma cooperativa, en lugar de asignar las ganancias y se basanen un régimen legal internacional complementario. Estos programas siguen mostrando un elevado gradode flexibilidad y adaptación en su respuesta a lo impredecible del clima, a nuevos hallazgos científicos, alcambio de expectativas de parte del público, y ala mejora del conjunto de instrumentos que se requierenpara garantizar la continuidad de poblaciones saludables y diversificadas de patos y gansos en América delNorte.
156
J. GREGORY THOMPSON AND JAMES H. PATTERSON
répartition conjointe-au lieu d'une partage individuelle et exclusive-des bénéfices, et sont basés sur un cadrelégislatif international complémentaire. Ces programmes continuent à faire preuve d'un niveau élevé deflexibilité et d'adaptation en réponse aux aléas climatiques, aux nouvelles découvertes scientifiques, auxattentes changeantes du public et au perfectionnement de l'éventail d'outils nécessaires à la perpétuation depopulations saines et diversifiées de canards et d'oies d'Amérique du nord.
La Chasse Commerciale et la GestionDurable de la Faune en Afrique CentraleDjoh à Ndiang1
En Afrique Centrale, le commerce de la viande de brousse prend une part importunate dens les activités despopulations. La valeur monétaire de cette activité est souvent difficile à déterminer à cause de son caractèreillicite et informel. D'après Lamarque et aL (1996), la consummation de la viande de brousse été estimée à33,500 tonnes en RCA et 17,000 tonnes au Gabon, ce qui correspond à une valeur monétaire de 30,000,000US$ et 50,000,000 US$ respectivement. Cette consummation importante de la viande de brouss et le commerceillicite de ces produits dans nos vines vent entretenus par une chasse illégale pratiquée à des fms lucrativesappelées "Chasse commerciale". Elle est motivée par:
1) les habitudes alimentaires des populations;2) la pauvreté;3) les croyances traditionnelles;4) les besoms en protéines animates, etc.Cette chasse a lieu pendant la saison des pluies d est pratiquée par les allogènes et ne profits pas aux
populations locales. Il s'agit d'une chasse destructive et non sélective:1) ni pour les espèces;2) la taille;3) le sexe; et4) l'âge.Les méthodes de chasse vent dévastatrices et la plus pratiquée dans la région, est celle de pièges aux câbles
d'acier. Chaque chasseur pose près de 50-200 pièges qui n'épargnent aucun animal. Nous assistons amsi àune nettoyage systématique de notre potential gibier dans les forêts sans osuci du lendemain. L'impact négatifde cette chasse commercials sur la gestion durable des ressourcesfauniques en Afrique centrale est indéniablesur le triple plan biologique, économique et sociologique. Des solutions pourraient être envisagées; en créantdes aires protégées et des zones de chasse, en renforc,ant la surveillance, en organisant les différentes activitésdutourisme, en associant les populations locales dens la gestion de la fauna, en encourageant le ranching etle farming du gibier, en proposant des alternatives aux commerçants de la chasse.
IntroductionAu début de l'histoire des hommes, les populations cites primi-tives vivaient de la chasse, de la pêche et de la cueillette. Dèscette époque lointaine, elles tiraient de la faune sauvage, desprotéines pour leur alimentation et des produits secondairespour leur habillement et leurs soins.
En Afrique noire, jusqu'avant la colonisation, la chassetraditionnelle prenait une part importante dans les activitésdes populations. A l'heure actuelle encore, dans presque tous
les pays, on peut observer les habitudes cynégétiques parmiles tribus chasseuses. Avec les moyens rudimentaires, ellesprélevaient juste ce qu'il fallait pour l'autoconsommation; iln'y avait pas d'impact destructeur sur la faune. L'homme vivaitainsi en harmonic avec la nature.
L'évolution socio-économique récense a gravementbouleversé l'équilibre ancestrale avec l'introduction des armesperfectionnées et l'argent, la chasse qui longtemps était considérée
1Chair, Central Africa Sustainable Use Specialist Network, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Yaounde, Cameroon
157
DJOH À NDIANG
comme une activité de subsistence est progressivement de-venue une source de richesse. On a assisté à une destructionmassive des animaux sauvages due à une chasse abusive etanarchique pratiquée par l'homme à des fins lucratives. Jus-qu'à l'heure actuelle, la chasse commerciale représente unepart importante dans les activités des populations.
Tous les jours des cargeison de viande de brousse issuede cette chasse illégale alimentent les grands centres urbainsde l'Afrique Centrale.
Dans le cadre de cet exposé, nous nous proposons d'axernotre réflexion sur:
• le commerce de la viande de brousse;
• la chasse commerciale;• l'impact de la chasse commerciale sur la gestion durable
de nos ressources fauniques; et• conclusion et recommendations.
Le Commerce de la Viande deBrousseLes grandes forêts tropicales humides qui recouvrent le Sud-Est du Cameroun, le Nord-Est du Congo et le Sud-Ouest de laRCA possèdent une richesse biologique extraordinaire sur-tout en ce qui concerne les grands mammifères: Eléphants,Buffles, Gorilles, Bongo, Sitatunga, Chimpanzés, etc. Notreétude est localisée jans cette zone d'un projet de conserva-tion trinationale avec le pare national de Dzanga Sangha enRCA, le pare national de Nouabelé-Ndoki au Congo et la ré-serve du Lac Lobéké au Cameroun. Les forêts de cette régiontrinationale ne font seulement l'objet d'initiatives de conser-vation, mais subissent aussi la pression du fait de l'exploita-tion forestière et minière, de la chasse sportive, de la captured'animaux vivants, mais aussi de la chasse commerciale, à desbesoins économiques et de subsistance des communautés lo-cales. Nous ne nous intéresserons qu'à la chasse commerciale.
Le marché de la viande de brousse est porteur dans lazone d'étude. La valeur monétaire de cette activité est sou-vent difficile à déterminer à cause de son caractère illicite etinformel. Des efforts vent déployés ça et là pour collecter desinformations sur le commerce de la viande de brousse. C'estainsi que d'après les études de Lamarque et al. (1996), la con-sommation de la viande de brousse a été estimé à 33,500 ton-nes en RCA et à 17,000 tonnes au Gabon, ce qui correspond àune valeur monétaire de 30,000,000 US$ et de 50,000,000 US$respectivement. Si nous évaluons la quantité de viande con-sommée dans ce pays en éléphant, en considérant qu'un élé-phant de forêts pèse 5t: la RCA consommerait 6700 éléphants/an, le Gabon 3400 éléphants/an. En Céphalophes, si nous pre-nons le poids moyen d'un céphalophe à 10kg, la RCA con-somme 3,350,000 céphalophes/an et le Gabon 1,700,000
céphalophes/an. Ces chiffres parlent d'eux-mêmes n'est ce pas?Cette consommation importante de la viande de chasse
et le commerce illicite de ces produits dans nos villes vententretenus par une chasse illégale pratiquée à des fins lucrati-ves appelée "chasse commerciale".
la Chasse CommercialeCette chasse est motivée par:
• les habitudes alimentaires des populations;• l'engouement à manger la viande de brousse;• les croyances traditionnelles;• la pauvreté;• le fait que les autres viandes de boucherie ne vent pas à
la portée de toutes les bourses; et• l'élévage des bovine n'est pas pratiqué à cause de la pré-
sence de la mouche tsé-tsé.
En outre, les activités des entreprises forestières dans larégion ont favorisées la pression sur la ressource. En effet:
• les entreprises favorisent souvent l'immigration des enquête d'emploi ce qui favorise la pression familles sur lesressources fauniques;
• la plupart de ces individus, souvent sans aucune sécuritéd'emploi restent dans la région et se prêtent aux activi-tés illégales tel que le braconnage;
• de nouvelles routes et pistes de débardage facilitent ainsil'accès à des zones préalablement inaccessibles, et trèsgiboyeuses; et
• les employés des entreprises forestières participant eux-mêmes aux activités de braconnage, que ce soit en pla-çant les pièges aux alentours des camps et de chantiers,en fournissant des arrnes et des munitions aux chasseursou en transportant la viande de chasse vers les centrescommerciaux.
Au Sud-Est du Cameroun, près de 85% de viande dechasse abattue dans les camps des braconniers vent évacuéespar les véhicules des entreprises forestières en direction soitdes chantiers, soit dans la plupart des cas, des centres urbainsou la demande pour la viande est insatiable. Les chauffeursqui transportent les grumes de la SNBS et CIB au Congo etSIBAF au Cameroun jouent les rôles les plus importants dansce commerce. D'après une étude réalisée par WCS, environ95% des chasseurs vent des Camerounais originaires d'autresrégions, les populations locales ne vent pas tellement concer-nées et la majorité soit 75% vent d'anciens travailleurs d'en-treprises forestières opérant dans la région. Ils viennent dansla zone à la recherche d'opportunités économiques qui nevent plus disponibles chez eux. Au Sud-Est ils retrouvent une
158
LA CHASSE COMMERCIALE ET LA GESTION DURABLE DE LA FAUNE EN AFRIQUE CENTRALE
forêst riche en ressources fauniques où la non application dela loi crée un climat très propice à l'exploitation incontrôlée.La chasse est prépondérante pendant la saison des pluies onnote une augmentation du nombre de campement des bra-conniers pendant cette période. Les traces ou empreintes desanimaux vent des indicateurs de leur passage pour poser lespièges aux endroits bien déterminés. Les méthodes de chas-ses vent essentiellement destructives. Ces chasseurs de for-aine chassent avec les armes modernes: calibre 12 ou desarmes de guerre. Mais la chasse au piège en câble d'acier cons-titue la technique principale utilisée par les chasseurs de larégion; qui détiennent entre 50-200 pièges chacun. Cette pra-tique entraîne souvent des pertes, plus de 10% des animauxpourrissent avant d'être récupérés par les chasseurs (uneétude faite par ECOFAC au Dja indique que ce chiffre peutatteindre 30%), cette chasse est essentiellement destructive:elle n'est pas du tout sélective en termes d'âge, de sexe, detaille ou d'espèces chassées.
Les espèces les plus communément tuées par les chas-seurs vent par ordre d'abondance; les cephalophinées, lesrongeurs, les suidées, les primates, etc.
En fin Aout 1996, j'ai effectué une mission dans le Sud-est du Cameroun à près de 900km de mon lieu de service, six(6) campements de braconniers ont été visités, les chasseursse vent installés autour de la réserve du Lac LOBEKE, il y a 3(trots) mods, les espèces tuées vent Céphalophes à bandesdorsales noires, à dos jaune ou bleu, les potamochères, lesgorilles, un éléphanteau, ils font fûmer la viande sur des sé-choirs pour une longue conservation en attendant les moyensde transport. Parfois la viande fraîche est vendue sur placeaux revendeuses qui p artent de la ville avec des pro duitscomme la b oisson, le tab ac, la nourriture, les allumettes enéchange de la viande de chasse qu'elles vont revendre à desprix très élevés en ville.
L'Impact de cette ChasseCommerciale sur la FauneImpact Économique
Cette forme d'exploitation ne profite qu'aux braconniers dont
les revenue très modestes ne permettent pas à résoudre leur
problème de sans emploi.
Comparativement à la chasse sportive, il s'agit d'une perte
pour l'Etat qui devrait percevoir: les droits de location de la
zone, les droits de perrnis de chasse, de licence de guide de
chasse et de taxes d'abattage.
Les populations locales profiteraient des retombées grâce
aux petits metiers de porteurs, pisteurs ou manoeuvre dans
les campments des guides de chasse.
Impact Sociologique
Les populations locales ne profitent pas de cette chasse. Toutleur échappe: l'argent issu de la chasse et la viande.
Une gestion rigoureuse de la chasse ou de l'aire proté-gée devraient avoir ides retombées pour la population locale.
Les autochtones qui ne prélèvent le gibier que pour lasubsistence et en préservant le capital se retrouvent dépouillerde tout leur cheptel.
Impact Biologique
Destruction massive de la faune sans distinction de l'âge, dela taille, du sexe, ni de la classe de protection, puisque la chassesportive ne prélève que de mâle adulte et des espèces chassables:
• les prélèvements ne respectent aucun quota;• les pertes vent énormes d'après une étude faite par
Dethier (1995) dans la réserve du Dja dans le cadre duprojet ECOFAC, composante Cameroun en Mai 1995. Enforêt 20% des animaux prélevés aux pièges sont vivantsparrni les morts, 30% vent pourris; et
• cette chasse de type extensif, balaie toute la forêt et legibier s'éloigne de plus en plus des agglomérations. Pourprotéger la faune, il est nécessaire d'en parler à la popu-lation villageoise, en terme monétaire.
Conclusions et Recommandations
Une gestion durable de la faune suppose que la ressourceparticipe au développement économique de notre pays, auxbiens être des locaux, et qu'une partie soit conservée pourles générations futures. Pour ce faire, il faut limiter la chassecommerciale:
• en renforçant le système de surveillance;• en créant les aires protégées;• en organisant la chasse sportive;• en associant les populations locales dans la gestion de la chasse;• en encourageant l'élevage et le ranching du gibier autour
de grands métropoles; et• en proposant des alternatives aux populations rurales
dans les domaines de l'agriculture et de l'élevage.
Mais ici, une étude faite par ECOFAC Dja au Cameroun
nous a amené à constater que les revenue annuels d'un plan-
teur des cultures de rentes (café et cacao) est de 200 US $/an
alors que la chasse commerciale qui se fait sans grand effort
parce que la ressource est disponible donne pratiquement le
même montant par an: l)en augmentant la production de la
159
DJOH À NDIANG
viande de boucherie à bon marché dans les villes; et 2) endéveloppant un programme de récolte durable du petit gi-bier pour les populations locales et pour leurs subsistancesdans la région transfrontalières
ReferencesDethier, M. 1995. Etude chasse Projet ECOFAC composanteCameroun.
Lamarque, F. 1996. Reasing (sic) of Small Game: the Exam-ple of the Grasscutter in West Africa.
Summaries
La venta de carne de animales silvestres es la actividad más importante de los habitantes de Africa Central.Debido a la naturaleza de ilicitud e informalidad de dicha actividad, se hace confrecuencia difícil determinarsu valoración monetaria. Según los autores Lamaraque et al, (1996), el consumo de carne de animalessilvestres se ubica en alrededor de 33,500 toneladas en la República Centroafricana y de 17,000 toneladas enGabón, lo que, en cuanto a valoración monetaria, representa cerca de $30,000,000 y $50,000,000respectivamente. Este alto consumo de carne de animales silvestres, asícomoelcontrabandodetalesproductos,están incrementándose mediante actividades de caza furtiva llevadas a cabo confines lucrativos y conocidascomo "caza comercial". Estos son algunos de los motivos:
1) Los hábitos alimentarios de la gante;2)la pobreza;3) las creencias tradicionales;4) la necesidad de proteína animal...Personas no nativas realizan la caza comercial durante la estación lluviosa; sin ningún beneficio, por lo
tanto, para la población local. Se trata de un tipo de caza no selectiva que no toma en cuenta la especie y eltamaño ni el sexo y la edad de los animales. Los métodos utilizados son devastadores: el más común en lazona es la trampa de alambre de acero. Cada uno de los cazadores coloca entre 50 y 200 trampas, que noperdonan a ningún animal. Ello está llevando a una sistemática desaparición del potencial de caza ennuestras selvas, sin pensar en el futuro. El impacto negativo de esta caza comercial sobre el manejo sosteniblede los recursos de vida silvestre en Africa se está sintiendo desde el punto de vista biológico, económico ysociológico. Todo ello podría controlarse mediante la institución de zonas protegidas y zonas de caza,reforzando la vigilancia, organizando diversas actividades turísticas, involucrando a la población local enel manejo de la vida silvestre, promoviendo la creación de ranchos y granjas para animales silvestres, asícomo sugiriendo otras opciones a los cazadores comerciales.
160
The sale of bush meat is the most important activity of the inhabitants of central Africa. Due to the illicit andinformal nature of this activity it is often difficult to determine its monetary value. According to Lamarque etal. (1996), bush meat consumption stands at some 33,500t in the Central Africa Republic and at 17,000t inGabon, which in monetary value, represents some $30,000,000 and $50,000,000 respectively. This highconsumption of bush meat and the smuggling of such products in our citiesareenhancedby poaching activitiescarried out for lucrative purposes, known as "commercial hunting". Its motives include:
1) people's eating habits;2) poverty;3) traditional beliefs;4) animal protein needs, etc.Commercial hunting is carried out by non-natives during the rainy season and therefore does not benefit
local populations. It is a destructive and non-selective type of hunting that takes neither the species, the height,nor the sex and age into consideration. Methods used are devastative ones and the most common within thearea is that of steel-wire traps. Each hunter sets some 50 to 200 traps that spare no animals. This gives way tosome systematic clearing of the game potential of our forest, with no thought for future days. The negativeimpact of this commercial hunting on the sustainable management of wildlife resources in Africa is feltbiologically, economically and sociologically. This could be checked through the creation of protected areasand game hunting areas, the reinforcement of monitoring the organisation of various tourism activities, theinvolvement of local populations in the management of wildlife, the promotion of game ranching and gamefarming, and by suggesting other alternatives to commercial hunters.
Uso Sostenible de la Vida Silvestre enAmérica Central: Un Instrumento para laConservación de la Biodiversidad
IntroducciónPartimos de la idea de que la utilización sostenible de la vidasilvestre constituye una opción válida para promover el desa-rrollo de la región Centroamericana. Consiste en una alterna-tiva complementaria a las acciones que proponen la protec-ción estricta de los recursos, principalmente en aquellos lu-gares en donde las condiciones sociales, económicas y cultu-
rales demandan la acción de comunidades locales como princi-pales protagonistas del desarrollo. A partir de este enfoque,el uso sostenible de los recursos silvestres se convierte en unelemento esencial en los esfuerzos de conservación de laBiodiversidad a nivel de esta región.
Las ideas que trataremos de plantear en esta ponencia,
1Independent Consultant, Calle Aconcaqua 5-bis, Colonia Miramonte, San Salvador, El Salvador; e-mail:[email protected] Programme for Central America, IUCN ORMA, Apartado 0146-2150, 100m sur de la Iglesia, Moravia, San Jose, CostaRica; e-mail [email protected]
161
Manuel Benítez1 and Vivienne Solís Rivera2
Reafirmamos la idea de que el uso sostenible de la vida silvestre es una opción válida para promover eldesarrollo en América Central. Se trata de una alternativa complementaria a las acciones que promuevenla rigurosa protección de los recursos, en concreto en aquellas zonas donde las situaciones sociales,económicas y culturales exigen la participación comunitaria como agente primario en el desarrollo. Estoquiere decir que en nuestra región, el uso sostenible de la vida silvestre es un elemento esencial para laconservación de la biodiversidad.
Por lo menos tres planteamientos configuran el principio de uso sostenible de la vida silvestre en nuestra región:
1. La conservación de la naturaleza y la mejora de la calidad de vida de los centroamericanos son dospartes del mismo proceso. Las personas son el elemento básico de cualquier planteamiento o esfuerzo dedesarrollo sostenible.
2. El desarrollo comunitario, la consolidación de la organización local y la promoción de la participaciónen la toma de decisiones son aspectos fundamentales de este proceso, que mejora la calidad de vida de laspersonas por medio de la conservación de los recursos naturales.
3 Un enfoque integral en el manejo de los recursos naturales es la base para alcanzar la conservación y el desarrollo.A partir de la experiencia de campo dé Programa Regional de Vida Silvestre para América Central, el
documento brinda un análisis del debate en torno a varios temas:1. Tráfico ilegal de la vida silvestre vs manejo de la vida silvestre;2. Caza vs eliminación de especies y destrucción del hábitat; y3. Manejo de una especie vs. manejo integral del hábitat.El uso sostenible de la vida silvestre en América Central debería necesariamente analizar las siguientes
dimensiones descritas y examinadas en la presentación:Dimensión biológica-científica;Dimensión sociocultural;Dimensión legal-administrativa; yDimensión económica. Sustainable Use of Wildlife in Central America: An instrument for Biodiversity Conservation.
MANUEL BENÍTEZ AND VIVIENNE SOLÍS RIVERA
pertenecen a un amplio grupo de hombres y mujeres de nues-tra región, profesionales de las ciencias sociales y biológicas,técnicos en manejo de vida silvestre, naturalistas, y campesi-nos. Nuestro objetivo será, basados en ejemplos extraídos dela práctica de nuestra región, brindar algunos elementos ycriterios que enriquezcan el debate sobre el uso sosteniblede la vida silvestre en este importante foro mundial.
Recientemente, el nivel político centroamericano ha de-finido una orientación en la cual, el uso sostenible de la vidasilvestre se enmarca en el contexto del desarrollo sostenible.De acuerdo con la Declaración Presidencial de la Alianza Cen-troamericana para el Desarrollo Sostenible, "este se entende-rá como un proceso de cambio progresivo en la calidad de lavida del ser humano, que lo coloca como centro y sujeto pri-mordial del desarrollo, por medio del crecimiento económi-co con equidad social y la transformación de los métodos deproducción y de los patrones de consumo y que se sustentaen el equilibrio ecológico y soporte vital de la región. Esteproceso implica el respeto a la diversidad étnica y culturalregional, nacional y local, así como el fortalecimiento y plenaparticipación ciudadana, en convivencia pacífica y en armo-nía con la naturaleza sin comprometer y garantizando la cali-dad de vida de las generaciones futuras." (Comisión Centro-americana de Ambiente y Desarrollo, 1994).
Consideramos que hay al menos 3 premisas que podríanfundamentarse en este principio y que marcarían la pauta parael uso sostenible de la vida silvestre en nuestra región:1. Conservar la naturaleza y elevar la calidad de vida de los
centroamericanos son dos aspectos de un único proce-so. Las personas son el elemento central en cualquieriniciativa de conservación y desarrollo sostenible. La re-ducción de la pobreza, la distribución equitativa deriva-da del manejo de los recursos son condiciones necesa-rias para la mejora de la calidad de vida de los pueblos enCentroamérica.
2. El desarrollo comunitario, la consolidación de las organi-zaciones de base, así como el estímulo a la participaciónen la toma de decisiones, son aspectos fundamentalesde este proceso que busca el mejoramiento de la calidadde vida de las personas en el marco de la conservaciónde los recursos naturales.
3. El enfoque integral de manejo de los recursos naturales,es la base para que la conservación y el desarrollo seanparte de un mismo proceso, que tenga como objetivoprimordial mejorar la calidad de vida de las personasinvolucradas.Estas consideraciones están todavía lejos de ser una rea-
lidad para nuestra región, más bien, en todo momento, esposible darse cuenta de los efectos que las actividades huma-nas mal planificadas generan sobre los recursos silvestres:
• Eliminación o alteración drástica de los ambientes yecosistemas naturales continentales, costeros y marinos.
• Presión sobre poblaciones silvestres y reducción de lasmismas a causa de la sobre-explotación o cosecha, cace-ría, recolección, comercialización.
• Contaminación de los ambientes naturales indispensa-bles para la vida silvestre.
• Falta de ordenamiento jurídico y administrativo que res-ponda a la necesidad de utilización de los recursos sil-vestres.
• Debilitamiento de las estructuras administrativas estata-les, encargadas de velar por la viabilidad de implementaracciones de uso sostenible de vida silvestre.
Varias noticias en Centroamérica refuerzan lo menciona-do anteriormente:
• CITES está observando con mucha atención, el procesode incremento de la exportación de iguanas en El Salva-dor, que representa más de un millón de dólares en in-gresos anuales para la economía del país. Actualmenteun proyecto de ley en este país promueve una veda na-cional total para la caza.
• Costa Rica a punto de perder la "lapa verde". Si no sefrena la explotación acelerada del árbol de almendro y eltráfico ilegal de pichones, se perderá la viabilidadreproductiva de la especie en su territorio y con ella sedisminuye el potencial turístico y económico para lascomunidades de la zona norte del país.
• Panamá recientemente aprueba nueva ley de Vida Silves-tre pero requiere de estudios biológicos para permitir lacacería deportiva en el territorio nacional.
• No se armonizan los derechos indígenas y la legislaciónestablecida en materia de recursos naturales. RegiónAutónoma del Atlántico Sur de Nicaragua—DiagnósticoNicaragua. (Sáenz, 1996).
• Los recursos marinos utilizados para fines ornamentalescomo los peces de arrecife entre otros son extraídos delos países de la región de manera ilegal y sin los estudiospoblacionales previos que garanticen su viabilidadreproductiva. (Bussing, comm. personal).
A partir de la experiencia generada por los proyectosdemostrativos del Programa Regional de Vida Silvestre paraCentroamérica de la UICN, podemos ofrecer algunos puntosde análisis para el debate sobre el uso sostenible de los recur-sos silvestres.
Trafico de Especies Silvestres vs.Manejo de Especies SilvestresCorto Video: El Tigrillo
Uno de los aspectos de mayor relevancia para el uso sosteni-
162
USO SOSTENIBLE DE IA VlDA SILVESTRE EN AMÉRICA CENTRAL: UN INSTRUMENTO PARA LA CONSERVACIÓN DE LA BIODIVERSIDAD
ble de la vida silvestre en Centroamérica es el que el poten-cial de uso de las especies debe de considerar las necesida-des básicas de las personas. "Nadie puede ser obligado a loimposible, con hambre no puede haber conservación" (Ayaleset al., 1996).
En este sentido, el proyecto de manejo comunitario deiguana verde y garrobo por la Cooperativa Ornar Bacca enCosigüina, se orienta a promover un uso sostenible basadoen el logro de negociaciones más justas que ayuden a reducirlas condiciones de pobreza que alienan y limitan a las pobla-ciones de esta región. Paralelo a la información científica quese genera y compila cuidadosamente por los pobladores, elasegurar la participación de los diferentes sectores sociales(equidad), su organización, la transferencia de conocimientoy el potenciar el conocimiento tradicional y el apoyo a la reso-lución de conflictos son componentes esenciales que asegu-raran que este uso del recurso sea en efecto sostenible almediano y largo plazo.
Corto Video: Con arte y parte
Es urgente trascender el proyecto de iguanas y garrobos, esclaro que la historia no se puede cambiar a partir de una solaactividad. Los pequeños proyectos de manejo de vida silves-tre son viables en el marco de acciones más amplias en dosdirecciones: al interior del proyecto mismo, mediante el de-sarrollo de un agroecosistema, que integre el manejo de to-dos los recursos disponibles(agua, suelo, bosque), y comoparte del todo, la vida silvestre.
Caza vs. Extinción de Especies yDestrucción de los HábitatsCentroamérica necesita reforzar la capacidad de las instan-cias nacionales responsables del manejo de los recursos sil-vestres en dos sentidos: primero para facilitar la promociónde servicios de extensión a comunidades de base interesadasen el uso sostenible de estos recursos, y segundo para forta-lecer su capacidad de generación de políticas nacionales:incluidos los instrumentos jurídicos- para el uso sosteniblede estos recursos basados en las nuevos conceptos de con-servación y manejo.
Recientemente, se realizó un análisis regional sobre lasfortalezas, debilidades y oportunidades de los principales ins-trumentos de control al manejo que son utilizados por losgobiemos en Centroarnérica— Cuadros de Veda, listas de Especiesen Peligro de Extinción, Instrumentos de CazayPesca, Sanciones.
Algunos de las debilidades comunes determinadas fue-ron las siguientes:
• no existen mecanismos de consulta y participación de los
grupos interesados en la generación de estos instrumentos;faltan estudios biológicos que sustenten las decisionesde manejo;se asumen posiciones en extremo conservadoras para eluso de especies no se reconoce ni se toma en cuenta elconocimiento tradicional;conceptos sobre caza, pesca comercial, de subsistencia ydeportiva, poco claros y no compartidos;superposición de competencias administrativas; yinstrumentos de control en su mayoría de carácter re-presivo.
Corto Video: Más que madera, Petén,Guatemala
En este caso, un buen ejemplo de cómo promover el queestos instrumentos sean más efectivos y eficaces han sido losproyectos de manejo comunitario de los recursos de faunasilvestre en Uaxactún, Guatemala y el de Manejo Comunitariodel caimán en Caño Negro, Costa Rica. En ambos casos, elvalor principal de los proyectos radica en el esfuerzo de pro-mover el manejo in situ de los recursos de valor para la caza.
Ambos proyectos mantienen entre sus objetivos el pro-mover el reconocimiento de las prácticas tradicionales en lasregulaciones de la caza y el establecimiento de compromisosentre el estado y las comunidades que apoyarán el adecuadocontrol de las actividades de uso.
En estas comunidades, la cacería tiene un alto valor eco-nómico y social, es el sustento esencial de su dieta diaria. Enel caso del proyecto de Guatemala se discutió el calendariocinegético con los pobladores de esta comunidad y este esahora un ejemplo real que demuestra la importancia de dis-cutir con aquellos grupos que serán más afectados por la apro-bación de una norma jurídica para el enriquecimiento de losprocesos de elaboración de estas normas, pero lo que es másimportante, para obtener el apoyo local necesario para suimplementación.
Manejo de una Especie vs.Manejo Integral del HábitatEste proyecto de manejo comunitario de patos silvestres,piches (Dendrocygna autumnalis) en la Laguna de el Jocotales un buen ejemplo de como el manejo de una especie enparticular es un motivo para organizar y capacitar a las comu-nidades en la resolución de problemas y necesidades de ma-yor magnitud. Comprueba que el manejo de una especie, fa-cilita las condiciones para que la comunidad llegue a plan-tearse la necesidad de una estrategia de conservación y desa-rrollo de un plan de ordenamiento del uso del suelo y de la
163
MANUEL BENÍTEZ AND VIVIENNE SOLÍS RIVERA
diversificación agroecológica.En esta pequeña laguna, un grupo de organizaciones han
logrado concertar sus esfuerzos para sacar adelante un pro-yecto en medio de las secuelas de la guerra civil que afectó lazona por doce años y en medio, de dificultadessocioeconómicas y políticas. El proyecto consiste en propi-ciar la organización, capacitación y educación ambiental co-munitaria para favorecer el uso sostenible de la vida silvestredel área, en un proceso en el que la comunidad asuma podery capacidad para administrar sus recursos.
La idea es pasar ahora del manejo del "piche" a la elabo-ración de una estrategia de conservación y desarrollo sosteni-ble para el área que potencie al máximo la experiencia localdesarrollada en la administración y manejo del proyecto deuso sostenible de patos. Entre los aspectos de mayor relevan-cia para que los. grupos de base se comprometan con unaestrategia de conservación está la definición de la propiedadde la tierra. Recientemente el gobierno de El Salvador ha de-clarado la zona oficialmente área protegida nacional.
Reflexiones
El más complejo proceso técnico o problema ambiental seexpresa y tiene su manifestación en las relaciones sociales,económicas y políticas. La relación ser humano-naturaleza nose da en abstracto, es una manifestación histórica, que se sin-tetiza en la vida cotidiana de los pueblos, o en las más com-plejas relaciones macroeconómicas y decisiones políticas. Estoa partir de estilos y modelos de desarrollo particulares. En elcontexto actual enfrentamos en Centroamérica dos situacio-nes particulares que plantean nuevos desafíos:
1. La frontera agrícola es, en este momento, el límite de lasáreas silvestres protegidas. Varios grupos campesinos eindígenas se encuentran dentro de las áreas protegidaso al menos en las áreas de amortiguamiento.
2. La globalización de la economía y la inserción de la re-gión centroamericana en este proceso ha producido unnuevo auge de los procesos productivos extensivos detipo empresarial, principalmente de las compañíastransnacionales que buscan mayores extensiones de te-rreno para el desarrollo de monocultivos para la expor-tación de productos tradicionales como el algodón, ba-nano o actividades no tradicionales como los viveros yplantas ornamentales.
Cada vez más el límite de la economía global se muevehacia la biología. Precisamente, es en el uso sostenible de labiodiversidad en donde se presentan opciones para el desa-rrollo de las comunidades indígenas y locales. Por eso se con-sidera que los proyectos demostrativos de manejo sosteniblede la vida silvestre entendidos como espacios de observación
e intercambio, pueden brindar grandes aportes para la cons-trucción de estrategias más amplias de desarrollo.
Se busca una nueva racionalidad productiva y financieraque satisfaga las necesidades básicas y contemple el uso du-radero de los recursos, con la creación de estructurasorganizativas y administrativas apropiadas para que la pobla-ción alcance sus propósitos.
Las distintas experiencias de conservación y desarrolloque se están llevando a cabo en Centroamérica, permiten ca-racterizar aquellos proyectos comunitarios que se ubican enla perspectiva una economía popular, sustentada en la utiliza-ción y gestión integral de los recursos locales.
Sin embargo, para que sean experiencias realmente al-ternativas, deben considerar el eje de la autonomía financieray la autosuficiencia alimentaria. Se debe potenciar el conoci-miento tradicional acerca del recurso, formular planes inte-grales de manejo e integrarlos en el marco de las estrategiasregionales de desarrollo sostenible.
Esta estrategia, donde las comunidades reivindican suespacio para la utilización sostenible de los recursos natura-les, no sigue los derroteros confrontativos, sino más bienpropositivos. Utiliza los instrumentos de diálogo, concertacióny manejo de conflictos.
Trata de generar un nuevo concepto de poder, basadoen el fortalecimiento de las capacidades personales y locales,en el ejercicio y crecimiento de la libertad individual, en lacapacidad única del ser humano de aceptar y proponer com-promisos.
Este compromiso personal y comunitario requiere de unrespaldo científico y exige a su vez un compromiso profesio-nal de las diferentes disciplinas del conocimiento ya sea so-cial o científico.
El uso sostenible de los recursos de vida silvestre debe nece-sariamente de considerar el análisis de las siguientes dimensio-nes:
Dimensión Científico-biológica
Esta dimensión plantea dos tareas complementarias entre síe ineludibles:
1. Decidir cuáles son los recursos naturales que no se pue-den tocar, porque se trata de ciclos o ecosistemas indis-pensables para sustentar la vida. En este caso la ciencianatural debe ser incisiva en su comprensión (y la socie-dad inclaudicable a la hora de su defensa), considerandoque la estabilidad de estos ecosistemas es fundamentalpara la sobrevivencia futura de la especie humana.
Fortalecer y desarrollar la ciencia básica para cono-cer de la mejor manera posible la dinámica de losecosistemas tropicales.
164
USO SOSTENIBLE DE LA VlDA SILVESTRE EN AMÉRICA CENTRAL: UN INSTRUMENTO PARA LA CONSERVACIÓN DE LA BIODIVERSIDAD
2. Definir las prioridades para la investigación que permitacomprender la conservación de aquellos recursos silves-tres que sustentan a corto y largo plazo a las comunida-des rurales de Centroamérica, facilitando su manejo, pre-viniendo impactos, introduciendo modificaciones en losecosistemas y en las especies para facilitar su aprovecha-miento. La investigación en esta línea tiene carácter es-tratégico si se quiere mantener la base de los recursosnaturales que sustentan la vida de las comunidades quetanto interesan desde la perspectiva social.
Por lo tanto, esta relación ineludible de la ecología conel ser humano, otras especies vivas y el ambiente inerte, de-penderá en mucho de qué tanto conozcamos de la biologíatropical, su diversidad y susceptibilidad al aprovechamiento.
165
La perspectiva de género no toma en cuenta solo a lasmujeres, sino las relaciones que hombres y mujeres estable-cen entre ellos y en relación a los recursos organizativos, eco-nómicos, políticos, de manera que surjan nuevas posibilida-des de pasar de relaciones desiguales a relaciones cada vezmás justas.
El conflicto es un aspecto que forma parte de las relacio-nes sociales, económicas y políticas. Los pequeños pro-yectos de manejo de vida silvestre no escapan a esas con-tradicciones, desde los problemas de tenencia de la tierrahasta los conflictos organizativos y/o género.
La biología, siendo la ciencia que estudia la vida, esqui2á el aporte medular para sustentar acciones quegaranticen la posibilidad de que los recursos silvestressean utilizados para beneficio del ser humano.
Dimensiones Socio-culturales
Los técnicos y científicos, al investigar los ecosistemas o lasespecies, tienen un estrecho contacto con los grupos huma-nos, aproximándose a su realidad social, a su cultura, a sustradiciones, a sus preocupaciones y esperanzas, así como suslimitaciones.
En este acercamiento, surge la necesidad de ir formu-lando alguna respuesta a estrategias de apoyo a las incitativasy aspiraciones comunitarias. Pero debe reconocerse que muya menudo, la relación entre un técnico o científico y una co-munidad se da sobre bases empíricas, sin contar con sufi-cientes herramientas e instrumentos de análisis conceptual ymetodológico, que les permita enriquecer su trabajo.
Si se habla de potenciar en las comunidades su capaci-dad de decisión, de uso y manejo de los recursos, estamosrefiriéndonos a la autogestión como capacidad de las comu-nidades para desarrollar soluciones a partir de esfuerzos co-lectivos. Esto incluye la iniciativa que poseen o desarrollanlos miembros de un grupo o comunidad para definir sus ob-jetivos y metas de acuerdo a sus intereses. Esto no excluye elapoyo externo, pero dentro de una perspectiva de acompa-ñamiento.
La profundización de la democracia empieza en cadaindividuo, y cuando hablamos de democratizar laparticipación, es necesario que pensemos tanto enlos hombres como en las mujeres. El papel de lamujer en cada comunidad debe ser analizado,visualizado y valorado.
El derecho se debe fundamentar en el convencimien-to de una mayoría de que la regulación es necesaria.
Para avanzar hacia la democratización de los instrumen-tos jurídicos para la regulación de las actividades relacionadascon el uso de la vida silvestre, es necesario que estos partande las condiciones concretas de la convivencia social de unpaís, de una región, en determinadas y específicas circunstan-cias económicas, políticas, culturales y biológicas.
El enriquecimiento de los proyectos de ley al ser consul-tados con las personas que se verán afectadas de una u otraforma, mejora la aplicación de las normas, porque hay un com-promiso de la gente con lo que se va a regular, y sobretodocon el cómo se va a regular.
Dimensiones Jurídico-adminisirativas
Aún cuando los proyectos de manejo de vida silvestre sonpequeños y en su mayoría locales, no por esto debe perder suvisión de conjunto en el país y región en la que están insertos.
Se hace necesario pasar de niveles operativos y de comu-nicación circunstanciales, a procesos más amplios de integra-ción local y regional. Se trata de que los mismos participantestrasciendan a una posición que les permita actuar como fuer-za social en las relaciones políticas y de concertación de losdistintos grupos sociales.
Cuando pensamos en esfuerzos concertados, estamoshablando de diferentes niveles en la toma de decisiones. Mien-tras se adoptan políticas, acuerdos, decretos, leyes, reglamen-tos, convenios, también debe impulsarse y apoyarse esfuer-zos concretos con las personas que manejan los recursos, demanera que estos diferentes niveles se retroalimenten.
El fortalecimiento del Estado de Derecho y laprofundización de la democracia son requisitos funda-mentales si se quiere una legislación ambiental queapoye los esfuerzos de uso sostenible de los recursos.
MANUEL BENÍTEZ AND VIVIENNE SOLÍS RIVERA
ConclusionesHemos aprendido al menos 5 grandes lecciones de este pro-ceso en que las dimensiones del conocimiento y lasobrevivencia humana se entrelazan.
1. El uso sostenible de la vida silvestre es una condiciónpara la conservación de la biodiversidad enCentroamérica.
2. En la medida en que se logre afinar el instrumentalmetodológico en cuanto al enfoque de género, la orga-nización para la producción y la capacitación para la par-ticipación comunitaria, el manejo de la vida silvestre po-drá contribuir efectivamente a mejorar la calidad de vidade las comunidades.
3. El conocimiento tradicional de las comunidades localesdebe ser reconocido e incorporado como otra forma desaber, válida para la gestión de manejo de los recursosnaturales.
4. Casi todas las experiencias de manejo comunitario de vidasilvestre orientadas al uso sostenible de la misma, apun-tan hacia la conformación de una estrategia alternativade manejo de la biodiversidad que se sustenta en la equi-dad, en la justicia social y en la reducción de la pobreza.
5. Estas experiencias no están aisladas de otros esfuerzosregionales, y confluirán en un cauce que desembocaráen la conformación de una vía alternativa para el desa-rrollo de los pueblos centroamericanos y debe ser vistadesde esta perspectiva como un potencial para elevar alos niveles políticos las ideas que desde la base, seretroalimentan en una práctica cotidiana de los usuariosde los recursos.
Las ideas presentadas en este trabajo son el resultado dela sistematización regional de las experiencias que formanparte del Programa Regional de Vida Silvestre paraCentroamérica. "Experiencias de manejo de vida silvestreen Centroamérica: pequeños proyectos grandes lecciones"(Ayales, et al.,1996).
Bibliografía
Ayales, I., et al., 1996. Experiencias de Manejo de VidaSilvestre en Centroamérica: Pequeños Proyectos GrandesLecciones, l.ed. UICN, San José, Costa Rica.
CCAD, 1994. Alianza Centroamericana para el DesarrolloSostenible. Guatemala.
Sáenz, R. 1996. Diagnóstico Jurídico de la Legislación deBiodiversidad de Nicaragua. (en prensa).
Referencias Adicionales
Madrigal, P., y Solís, V. 1992. Un encuentro necesario, elmanejo de la vida silvestre y sus regulaciones jurídicas.
Pasos, R. 1994. La Frontera Agrícola.
SummariesWe affirm the idea that sustainable use of wildlife is a valid option to promote development in Central America.It constitutes a complementary alternative to those actions that promote the strict protection of the resources,specifically in those areas where social, economic and cultural conditions require that the communityparticipate as a primary actor in development. This is to say that in our region, sustainable use of wildlife isan essential element for biodiversity conservation.
At least three considerations make up the principle of sustainable use of wildlife in our region:
1. Nature conservation and improvement of the quality of life of Central Americans are two parts of thesame process. People are the central element of any consideration or sustainable development effort.
2. Community development, local organisation, consolidation, and the promotion of participation indecision making are fundamental aspects of this process, which improves the quality of life of people throughconservation of natural resources.
3. An integral approach to natural resource management is the basis for achieving conservation anddevelopment.
Based on the field experience of the Regional Wildlife Management Programme for Central America thedocument offers an analysis of the debate concerning several issues:
• Illegal wildlife traffic vs. wildlife management;• Hunting vs. species extinction and habitat destruction; and
166
• Managing one species vs. integral habitat management.Sustainable use of wildlife in Central America necessarily should consider the following dimensions described
and analysed in the presentation:Biological-scientific dimension;Sociocultural dimension;Legal-administrative dimension; andEconomic dimension.
167
USO SOSTENiBLE DE LA VIDA SILVESTRE EN AMÉRICA CENTRAL: UN INSTRUMENTO PARA LA CONSERVACIÓN DE LA BIODIVERSIDAD
Nous confirmons que l'idée de l'utilisation durable des espèces sauvages est une option valable pourpromouvoir le développement de l'Amérique centrale. Elle constitue une alternative complémentaire auxactions de protection stricte des ressources, en particulier dans les régions où les conditions sociales,économiques et culturelles exigent que les communautés participent comme principaux acteurs dudéveloppement. Cela pour dire que dans notre région, l'utilisation durable des espèces sauvages constitue unélément essentiel pour la conservation de la biodiversité.
Le principe d'utilisation durable des espèces sauvages dans notre région est composé d'au moins troiséléments:
1. La conservation de la nature et l'amélioration de la qualité de vie des habitants de l'Amérique centralesont deux éléments du même processus. Les populations constituent l'élément moteur de toute considérationou initiative de développement durable.
2. Le développement communautaire, la consolidation des organisations locales et la promotion de laparticipation aux prises de décision sont des aspects fondamentaux de cette démarche, qui améliorent laqualité de vie des populations grâce à la conservation des ressources naturelles.
3. Une approche intégrale (comportant plusieurs dimensions dont l'écologique et la sociale) par rapport àla gestion des ressources naturelles est la condition nécessaire à la réalisation de la conservation et dudéveloppement.
En se basant sur l'expérience acquise sur le terrain par le Programme Régional de Gestion des espècessauvages pour l'Amérique centrale, l'exposé examine le débat relatif à plusieurs aspects:
1. le trafic illégal des espèces sauvages par rapport à la gestion;2. la chasse par rapport à l'élimination des espèces et la destruction des habitats; et3. la gestion d'une espèce par rapport à la gestion intégrale d'un habitat.L'utilisation durable des espèces sauvages en Amérique centrale devra nécessairement tenir compte des
dimensions décrites et analysées dans l'étude, qui sont les suivantes:Biologiques et scientifiques;Socio-culturelles;Administratives et juridiques; etEconomiques.
Seven Case Studies on Wildlife Manage -ment Carried Out by the North AmericanSustainable Use Spedalists Group
IntroductionThe Sustainable Use Specialists Group for North America se-lected seven species or groups for our initial case studies.These were: American alligator; Beverly-Qamanirjuaq herd ofcaribou; Sonoran desert bighorn sheep; migratory waterfowl;beaver; wild turkey; and Atlantic cod.
Our goal was to take an unbiased look at a number ofwell-known use regimes. We wanted each case study to in-volve a situation that was well-enough studied and reportedso that we could conclude whether the use had been sustain-able or not and could know what were the most importantfactors. We also wanted our information developed as muchfrom the "ground up" as possible, that is, from people re-sponsible for or knowledgeable of resource management andconservation on a working basis. We were able to recruit vol-unteers from the ranks of wildlife officials and biologists withknowledge in each area to provide the case studies.
In order to be able to draw comparisons and to developconclusions, we set out a standardised framework for the stud-ies. We asked each group of volunteers to provide us extractedand digested information in each of the following categories:species information; ecosystem information; description ofthe uses; description of the benefits; description of the re-gimes; and evaluation of the uses.
Summary of the Case StudiesAmerican Alligator
The population is currently at 750,000 (up from 200,000 in1972). It occupies 5 million acres of wetlands, primarily coastalmarshes. The species is notably sensitive to salinity, thus mak-ing it important to prevent salt-water intrusions into the coastalmarshlands in order to maintain populations.
25,000 adults are taken per year for their skins. In addi-tion, about 55,000 eggs are taken from wild for farm-rearing(20% of total farm-reared stock). Private landowners, who geteconomic benefit from the harvest, preserve the marshlandsoccupied by the alligator.
The regulatory regime is complex and the level of man-agement is intensive. The primary management is at the state(as opposed to national) level, within a framework of nationaland international (CITES) controls. The use is judged to besustainable, with important benefits to the state in the formof wetlands preservation.
Beverly-Qamanirjuaq Caribou Herds
These two herds occur in Arctic tundra (migrating to taiga) in
1Director, Conservation Department, Safari Club International, 441-E Carlisle Drive, Hemdon, VA20170, USA
169
Richard M. Parsons1
The Sustainable Use Specialists Group for North America carried out seven case studies of wildlife managementon: 1) the American alligator; 2) the Beverly-Qamanirjuaq herds of caribou; 3) the Sonoran Desert bighornsheep; 4) migratory waterfowl; 5) the beaver; 6) the wild turkey; and 7) the commercial fishery for the Atlanticcod. We summarised each case study to be able to compare them, and analysed them to identify factorsaffecting sustainability. The analysis showed that: each situation was unique in that there were many elementsthat had to be considered individually; many uses, including those in very high numbers, can be achieved inthe context of sustainability; sustainability can be achieved at varying levels of management intensity;motivations for management actions and expenses by governments vary widely; land ownership andjurisdiction are significant influences on management regimes; involvement of local people varies and mayor may not have an impact on conservation; cultural circumstances vary quite a bit.
RICHARD M. PARSONS
Canada and have a combined population estimated at 782,000(up from 138,000 in 1980). The tundra is susceptible to air-borne contaminants (e.g. cesium).
16,000 animals are taken annually for subsistence by11,000 people. The beef replacement value is $850/animal,an annual value of $13.5 million. Sport hunting is consideredpossible, with an estimated value up to $3000/animal.
$350,000/year is spent for management, which is coop-erative between users, provincial and national governments("co-management"). The condition of the herds improvednotably once co-management was introduced. The use is con-sidered sustainable and has significant cultural value.
Sonoran Desert Bighorn Sheep
The population is estimated at 2000 to 2500 (up from 900+in 1976-80). It occupies a dry mountainous region of north-ern Mexico, which is subject to loss of vegetation due to graz-ing, clearing and habitat fragmentation.
Sport hunting is the use, and it occurs on private land. 6-9animals/year are taken. The management regime is primarily fed-eral, with the benefits of the use going to the government (li-cense fees) and to the landowner. The local population is notinvolved in the management and gets no benefit from the use.The use is considered sustainable, but it is noted that nothing isreinvested and there is no local support for the use.
Migratory Waterfowl
There are 43 species of ducks, geese and swans that migratethroughout North America. The population goal by 2001 is62 million. The birds are highly migratory, dependent on wet-lands and associated with highlands for breeding and on wet-lands for staging, migration and wintering.
The use is for recreational hunting, subsistence and wild-life observation. 9.7 million ducks and geese taken annuallyfor hunting and 1.5 million for subsistence. Hunters spendnearly $5 billion/year in US and Canada.
The management regime is complex, with the NorthAmerican Waterfowl Management Plan coordinating severaltreaties and federal and provincial/state management in allthree countries of North America. The private sector is be-coming more involved, especially in habitat preservation andimprovement on agricultural lands. The use is sustainable.
Beaver (study focuses on New York andMassachusetts)
The beaver population of New York and Massachusetts (statesin the northeast of the US) is 100,000 currently, up from vir-
tual extinction in 1895. The general range of the species isfrom the Canadian Arctic timber line south to isolated areasalong US-Mexican border, where it occupies wetlands withsufficient woody material and water depth. Much of the origi-nal forest and wetland habitat has been destroyed, with re-generated areas nowbeing cut for roads and other development.
The species is managed at the state level and is used forits fur, castor and meat. The use provides supplemental in-come of $3.4 million annually in the US and meets socio-cul-tural needs for rural people. The managed use results in re-duction of damage from flooding, especially road systems andhabitat improvements for many species due to changes instream ecosystems.
Wild Turkey
The population is estimated at 4.2 million (up from 30,000 atend of 1930s). It occupies forests in the United States, north-ern Mexico and Ontario, Canada.
The turkey is used for recreational hunting and for gameviewing. 665,000 turkeys are taken each year by 2.2 millionhunters in 49 states of the US, generating $750 million (ex-cluding license fees) in revenues to local and regional econo-mies.
The management of turkeys is done on the state level.During the first half of the 20th century management focusedon reducing illegal shooting and habitat improvement. In thesecond half-century state-level trapping and release pro-grammes, combined with habitat improvement have been thefocus of management. The use is sustainable.
Atlantic Cod
Atlantic cod is a ground-feeding fish occupying the continen-tal shelf. Some populations stay mostly inshore, some occuron offshore banks and some migrate from offshore to inshore.
The cod has provided an economic framework for muchof the European settlement in parts of north-eastern Canada400,000 tonnes were taken annually by commercial fishermenin the 1800s, rising to high of 2 million tonnes taken in the1960s before the population collapsed.
Jurisdiction for the fisheries ranges from national juris-diction to a fisheries zone to the high seas. The managementis at the national level. Warnings from the users were notheeded and the stocks severely declined. The use was notsustainable.
Findings
Our Group was able to draw the following findings from the
170
SEVEN CASE STUDIES ON WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT CARRIED O U T BY THE NORTH AMERICAN SUSTAINABLE USE SPECIALISTS GROUP
series of case studies.
1. Many types of uses, including those in very high num-bers, can occur without affecting sustainability of spe-cies or use.For example, 25,000 alligators are taken annually from a
population of 750,000 and the population has risen to thislevel from 200,000 in 1972.16,000 caribou are used out of apopulation of 782,000.11.2 million migratory waterfowl aretaken annually out of a population that is approaching 62million. Another high-volume use is turkey, with 665,000 takenannually out of 4.2 million. The turkey population bottomedout at 30,000 in late 1930s. However with the Atlantic cod, a400,000 ton take in 1800s, increasing to 2 million tons in 1960s,turned out to not be sustainable.
With the Sonoran desert bighorn sheep, 6 to 9 animalsare taken annually and the population is up from 900+ in1976-80 to more than 2000 currently. Out of 100,000 beaverin New York and Massachusetts, 40,000 are harvested annu-ally. The species was nearly extinct in both states in 1895.2. Sustainability of the species under various uses can be
achieved at varying levels of management.Alligators are subject to moderate to intensive manage-
ment, while the caribou herds we studied are managed at alow to moderate level in a co-management regime. Similarly,waterfowl in North America are subject to intensive manage-ment, turkey are managed at a moderate level, and theSonoran bighorn is minimally managed. All of those uses aresustainable. By contrast, the Atlantic cod was managed at anintensive level and the population was not sustainable at thelevels of use that occurred. Beaver are subject to a moderatelevel of management and the population is sustainable at theuse level.
3. Motivations for management and expenditures by gov-ern ments varies widely.In the case of alligators, wetland conservation was the
primary motivation for management. With caribou, subsist-ence is the reason. With both turkey and migratory birds, theprimary motivation for management is to provide for recrea-tional use. There is also a subsistence component with migra-tory birds. In the case of bighorn sheep, the species is man-aged for sport harvest for the economic return. With Atlanticcod, the management motivation was socio-economic. Thestate effort on beaver management is for socio-economic rea-sons and for damage control.4. Land ownership or jurisdiction has a significant influ-
ence on management regimes.In the case of alligators, they occur primarily on private
land, the state has jurisdiction and the market is international.With caribou, the lands are public and the users have beengiven a jurisdictional role. Waterfowl range over both publicand private lands, and jurisdiction is a complex mixture ofinternational (by treaty), national and state. The Sonoran big-
horn sheep occurs on private land and the jurisdiction is pri-marily national. Turkey and beaver occur on both public andprivate land and jurisdiction is exercised at the state level.The Atlantic cod is the example where there is no land or areaownership and the jurisdictional regimes vary from high seasto a national fishery zone.5. The involvement of local people in the management of
the use and enjoyment of the benefit varies, and may ormay not have an impact.With alligators, the landowner is not the direct user but
is a beneficiary and his involvement is high and significant.With caribou the user and beneficiary are the same and theirinvolvement is high and significant.
Waterfowl shows a high variation. For the subsistenceuser involvement is local and significant, but for the hunterand game viewer involvement is low. Private landowners getsome benefits and affect the habitat.
In the case of the Sonoran bighorn sheep, the privatelandowner gets most of the benefit while local people get lit-tle benefit. Although the team carrying out the case studypointed out that this has led to a low level of support for theuse, there is no apparent present impact on the use or thesustainability of the population. It is possible that the lack oflocal involvement beyond the landowner may have a greaterimpact in the future.
With the Atlantic cod, the team carrying out the case studyfelt that local involvement in management was low and thathad it been higher, the collapse of the population under thehigh level of use might have been avoided.
In the case of wild turkey, the involvement of the hunter/viewer involvement is low, but landowners get benefits andthere is incentive to use those for improvement of habitat.With beaver, the local involvement is high for the landowners(regarding damage) and mixed for the trappers.6. Socio-cultural circumstances can be significant factors
that can affect the sustainability of the use.
For example, landowners who harbor alligators have sig-nificant pride in their ownership and their ability to use theproducts of their land. Also, among the landowners and thestate-level managers, there is a strong element of "state'srights" versus national or international jurisdiction. Finally,the alligator occurs in an area where there is a strong huntingtradition.
With caribou, the cultural factors (in addition to the sub-sistence factor) were found to be very significant. This wasalso true in the subsistence use of migratory waterfowl. Thehunting use of migratory waterfowl also has cultural factors,and that culture has been molded into strong political andfinancial support for management and habitat improvement.In a similar way, the hunting culture associated with the useof wild turkey supports national-level funding for research andfor state-level regulations. With the beaver, trapping, and therural life-style associated with it, is a factor in the use and man-
171
RlCHARD M. PABSONS
agement of the species. In the case of the Atlantic cod, thesocio-cultural factors were high, and the economic underpin-ning of local communities was seriously affected when theuse crashed.
SummariesLe groupe de spécialistes de l'utilisation durable de l'Amérique du nord a réalisé sept études sur la gestion desespèces sauvages: 1) l'alligator américain; 2) le castor; 3) le mouton à grandes cornes du désert de Sonora; 4)les troupeaux de caribous de Beverly et de Qamanirjuaq; 5) les oiseaux d'eaumigrateurs; 6) ledindon sauvage,et 7) la pêche commerciale de la morue de l'Atlantique. Nous avons fait un résumé synoptique de chacune deces études de cas afin de pouvoir les comparer, faisant nos analyses en vue d'identifier les facteurs qui affectentla durabilité. L'analyse a montré que: chaque situation est unique en ce sens qu'il y avait de nombreuxéléments qui ont dû être étudiés individuellement; de nombreuses utilisations, y compris les plus fréquentes,peuvent se faire dans un contexte de durabilité; il est possible d'atteindre la durabilité à divers niveauxd'intensité de gestion; les raisons pour la mise en oeuvre d'actions de gestion et de dépenses par les Etatsvarient considérablement; la propriété foncière et la juridiction sont très influencées par les régimes de gestion;la participation des populations locales varie et peut avoir ou nepas avoir un impact sur la conservation; lesconditions culturelles varient d'une manière considérable.
El Grupo de América del Norte de Especialistas en Uso Sostenible realizó siete estudios de caso de manejo devida silvestre acerca de 1) el caimán americano, 2) el castor, 3) el carnero salvaje del Desierto de Sonora, 4)las manadas Beverly—Qamanirjuaq de caribús, 5) las aves acuáticas migratorias, 6) el pavo salvaje, y 7) lapesca comercial del bacalao del Atlántico. Resumimos cada uno de los estudios de caso para podercompararlos y analizarlos para identificar factores que afectan la sosteniblidad. El análisis mostró que:cada situación era única por cuanto había muchos elementos que había que tomar en cuenta en formaindividual; pueden dárseles muchos usos, incluyendo los muy cuantiosos, en el contexto de la sostenibilidad;se puede alcanzar la sostenibilidad en varios niveles de intensidad de manejo; varían mucho las motivacionespara acciones y gastos de manejo por parte de los gobiernos; la tenencia de la tierra y la jurisdicción ejerceninfluencias significativas en los regímenes de manejo; la participación de la gente local varía y puede tenero no impacto en la conservación; las circunstancias culturales varían bastante.
172
A Case Study of the Management of Barren-Ground Caribou from the Beverly andQamanirjuaq Herds in Northern Canada
Introduction
More than two million barren-ground caribou (Rangifertarandus groenlandicus) roam the taiga and tundra of north-ern Canada. The range of these caribou is vast and remoteand only sparsely populated by people. The caribou are in-valuable to the majority of the communities of people; if thecaribou did not migrate through the hunting areas of thesepeople there would be no people living there.
These caribou return to the same places on the tundrato have their calves and they return to the same places on thetaiga to spend the winter as they have done every year sincethe end of the last glaciation approximately six thousand yearsago.
The purpose of this paper is to present a brief case studyof the management of barren-ground caribou from the Beverlyand Qamanirjuaq herds in northern Canada. This case studyis one of several being prepared for the IUCN Species Sur-vival Commission's Sustainable Use Specialist Group for North
America; the others are American alligator, Sonoran desertbighorn sheep, migratory waterfowl, beaver, wild turkey andAtlantic cod.
The paper has been developed according to a set of guide-lines established by the Chair of the group and, as such, thecontents reflect the answers to questions posed in the guide-lines.
This paper is not intended to be comprehensive but itwill guide the reader toward an interesting story of caribouand people that will continue to evolve over time.
Species Data
Distribution
Both the Beverly and the Qamanirjuaq herds calve in June
1Assistant Deputy Minister of Resource Development, Department of Renewable Resources, Government of the Northwest Territo-
ries, Box 1949, Yellowknife NT X1A 2P5, Canada2Director ofWildlife Management Division, Department of Renewable Resources, Government of the Northwest Territories, 510250th Avenue, Yellowknife NT X1A 3S8, Canada
173
Kevin A. Lloyd1 and Ronald P. Graf 2
More than two million barren-ground caribou (Rangifer tarandus groenlandicus) roam the taiga and tundraof northern Canada. This paper provides a brief case study of the status and management of two of the maincaribou herds: the Beverly and the Qamanuriaq herds. The Beverly herd was last estimated (1994) at 286,000animals and recruitment ranged between 11 and 27% per year between 1982 and 1992, indicating that thepopulation was stable to growing. The Qamanuriaq herd was estimated at 496,000 animals and was alsostable to growing. State of knowledge relative to management is good to excellent. Primary factors affectingthese populations are predation by wolves, hunting by people and forest fires. Fallout from the accident atChernobyl generated a lot of concern since caribou rely primarily on lichen for food. The general long termtrend in the increase in contaminants in the Arctic is of concern, as are the effects of global warming. Thecaribou from these herds are invaluable to the people that live on the range of the caribou. If there were nocaribou there, there would be no people. The minimum economic value of caribou hunting to the 13,500people whodependon them is 13.5 million dollars per year. The management system for these herds is described
KEVIN A. LLCTO AND ROLAND P. GRAF
Figure 1: Relevant Area of Canada
each year on the tundra, the Beverly north and east of BakerLake and the Qamanirjuaq south of Baker lake (Figure 1).Within a week of calving the females and their calves begintheir summer movements on the barrens to continue to findnew pasture, to avoid predators and eventually to try and avoidbiting insects.
The Beverly herd tends to head southwest to the treelinewhere the rut is carried out in early fall. With the coming ofthe snows the herd moves into the trees for the winter. Thesecaribou are hunted during the winter by the native and otherresidents of northern Saskatchewan and several communi-ties in the Northwest Territories. By April the cows are begin-ning to move north and east again towards their traditionalcalving area on the tundra of the Keewatin near Beverly Lake.
The Qamanirjuaq herd tends to head south toward thetreeline near the NWT/Manitoba border. Once the rut is com-plete and the weather turns, the herd moves into the treesand farther south into Manitoba. In recent years the herd haswintered as far south as the Nelson River, its most southernincursion into this province. The caribou are hunted by manynative and non-native residents of northern Manitoba Simi-larly, in April the herd begins to move northward to its calv-ing area on the tundra near Qamanirjuaq Lake in the Keewatin.
Population Status
The Beverly herd was last surveyed in 1994 and estimated at286,000 animals. Recruitment into the population between1982 and 1992 ranged between 11 and 27% per year indicat-ing that the population is stable to growing.
The Qamanirjuaq herd was also surveyed in 1994 andwas estimated at 496,000 animals. Recruitment into the popu-lation between 1982 and 1992 ranged between 14 and 26%per year indicating that the population was also stable to grow-ing.
The state of knowledge relative to management is goodto excellent. The primary factors that effect these populationsare predation by wolves, hunting by people and forest fireson the winter range. These herds are not vulnerable at thepresent time as all hunting is well within the limits of sus-tained yield and commercial use is very limited. The accidentat the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Station was a major scaresince caribou rely primarily on lichen for food and lichen getsall of its nutrients from the air. Although the consumption ofreindeer by people had to be reduced in northern Finland,Norway and Sweden, test results did not indicate a cause forconcern in Canada. However, the levels of cesium in cariboumeat did increase above the background levels that were al-ready there from the atmospheric testing of atomic weapons
174
A CASE STUDY OF THE MANAGEMENT OF BARREN-GROUND CARIBOU FROM THE BEVERLY AND QAMANKJUAQ HERDS IN NORTHERN CANADA
that took place in the 1950s.The general long term trend in the increase in contami-
nants in the Arctic is of concern (eg. cadmium), as are theeffects of global warming.
Ecosystem data
The herds spend the summer on the Arctic tundra. Duringthis period they feed on lichen but also on the new growth ofgrasses, forbs, sedges, willow and birch shoots and leaves.During this period while the calves grow larger and stronger,the herd remains some distance from the concentrations ofwolf denning areas at treeline and do their best to avoid therare, barren-ground grizzly bears. Insect harassment duringthe summer can be a significant factor affecting where andhow much time herds can spend grazing and thus affectinghow quickly caribou put on weight.
In winter after they move into the northern boreal for-ests (taiga), their main staple is the lichen growing on theground but they will supplement this with some willow andbirch twigs (Hall, 1989). The availability of lichen in a particu-lar area can be dramatically affected by the location and se-verity of summer forest fires. After a significant burn, approxi-mately 50 years are required before lichen returns to the den-sities preferred by caribou. Wolves have now weaned theiryoung and whole packs may move with the herds as they passthrough an area. Some young wolves may stay with a herd formost of the winter and even follow them out onto the tundrain the spring.
Use and Value
The following is a quotation from the 1995 Draft DiscussionPaper for the New Management Plan:
The Value of Caribou:The barren-ground caribou of the Beverly andQamanirjuaq herds are a valuable resource for anumber of reasons. More than 13,500 people currentlylive on or near the range of the two herds. Of thisnumber, at least 11,000 are of native ancestry andqualify as "traditional users" under the Agreement. Theuse of these caribou fulfils economic, social and cul-tural needs.
During the first eight years of the Agreement, an esti-mated annual average of 16,000 caribou were reported takenfor subsistence use from these two herds. An average caribouyields 45 kilograms (100 pounds) of meat with a replacementvalue equal to the value of beef, thus the economic value of acaribou harvested is $850 (using a beef value of $8.50 per
pound in northern communities) and approximately $13.5million per year for the two herds. This is the minimum eco-nomic value at the current kill rate, and could be much higher.The economic potential of the resource is considerably largerwhen uses such as outfitting for nonresidents are considered(up to $3000 per animal harvested).
Apart from purely economic factors, the use of caribou isimportant to the culture and traditional lifestyle of native peo-ple. This importance cannot be fully evaluated and quantifiedusing the analytical tools of measuring economic value, as thecaribou confer considerable benefits and strengths upon lifein native communities. As well, the nutritional value of cari-bou meat is superior to beef.
Nonresident trophy hunting has been carried out onlysporadically but may prove to be a valuable use in the future,in combination with other tourism activities. Commercial har-vesting for meat has been limited to only a few small harvestsof less than 1000 animals. If the herds continue to grow, in-creased commercial use maybe an option. In fact, regulationsare now being put into place which shall allow two more ofthe communities on the range in the Keewatin to begin totake small numbers of caribou for commercial purposes.
Identification of Benefits
If these two great herds of migratory caribou were not there,the people could not, and would not, be living in this area ofCanada.
The benefits of the use of these caribou have a majorinfluence on decision making. The various agencies that co-operate on the management of these herds collectively spentabout $700,000 in 1989/90 but are now closer to $350,000 peryear (1994/95 B/Q Annual Report) on research, managementand communication on these herds each year.
Land Tenure
In the provinces of Saskatchewan and Manitoba, the land ismanaged by the provincial governments. The native peoplesin those areas do not hold Indian Reservations but are gov-erned under Treaty 8 and thus many of their needs are handledby the federal Department of Indian Affairs and NorthernDevelopment. In the NWT the situation in the western por-tions of the range is similar to the provinces except that thefederal government still manages the land. In the Inuit areas,generally north of the treeline, now known as Nunavut and in1999 to be a new Territory, the land tenure is detailed in theland claim and includes Inuit-owned land as well as federalland.
175
Regimes
KEVIN A. LLOYD AND ROLAND P. GRAF
Current Managers of Wildlife
In the provinces, the provincial governments have the man-date to manage wildlife and wildlife habitat, including cari-bou. In the NWT, similar conditions exist for the Territorialgovernment except that in the Nunavut area, since the Inuitsettled their claim in 1993, all important wildlife managementmatters are to come before the Nunavut Wildlife ManagementBoard (NWMB) for their decision. These decisions are for-warded to the appropriate government Minister for his con-sideration.
Both provincial and territorial governments are respon-sible for the management of their forests and forest fires.
Historical Management
In the late 1970s and early 1980s, based on an analysis of thebest scientific information of the day, the two caribou herdswere found to be in trouble (Gates, 1985). While there wasmuch debate and disagreement about causes of the decline,and whether there really was a decline, both users and man-agers concluded that neither group alone could find a solu-tion. The users, land managers, wildlife biologists and wildlifemanagers had to sit down together as equals to overcomethis crisis. From this declared emergency, and from the obvi-ous concern all players had for the resource, came the birthof the Beverly and Qamanirjuaq Caribou Management Boardin 1982.
This Board was based on an agreement signed by fourgovernments and was made up of users, biologists and man-agers, with the native users holding the majority of seats. TheBoard sends its recommendations directly to the Minister ofthe relevant department, depending upon the issue at hand(Scotter, 1991). Today, the Board also sends its recommen-dations to the NWMB for its consideration who in turn sendtheir decision to government. Thus, Ministers will now re-ceive two opinions for each issue within the Nunavut Settle-ment Region. This system may evolve further as the NunavutTerritory comes into being.
Evaluation of Use
The history of the management efforts up to 1991 on theBeverly and Qamanirjuaq herds of barren-ground caribou havebeen reviewed by Scotter (1991). The situation since that timehas remained essentially the same with two exceptions:
(1) The Government of Canada proclaimed the Nunavut Actwhich established the Nunavut Wildlife ManagementBoard as the main instrument of wildlife management inthe Nunavut Settlement Region. On April 1,1999 the new
territory of Nunavut will be created in Canada and newarrangements for the coordination of the managementof caribou from the Beverly and Qamanirjuaq herds willhave to be formalised. In the meantime, the simplest viewis that the Beverly and Qamanirjuaq Caribou ManagementBoard is advisory to both the Ministers and to the NunavutWildlife Management Board which in turn has both advi-sory and absolute powers with respect to the manage-ment of caribou and their habitat.
(2) The federal Department of the Environment and theDepartment of Indian and Northern Affairs are withdraw-ing their funding from the Board. Tight budgets in Canadahave meant that the main communication mechanismthat supports the management of these herds, a news-paper called Caribou News has been shut down.
There are no major barriers to trade in any of the prod-ucts from barren-ground caribou either nationally or interna-tionally, although there are strict, minimal quotas on guidedsport hunting by nonresident and commercial hunting for thevery limited sale of some meat.
There are very disturbing negative trends in the socialclimate for many communities in the remote parts of north-era Canada; these trends will only become worse if there arenew problems with the supply of caribou. There are not manyjob opportunities in most small communities and there areno immediate solutions in sight that will provide relief to thisregion of Canada. Social problems in this region are severaltimes more prevalent than the national average and includefamily violence, suicide and substance abuse. As well, the trendlines for successful completion of junior and senior levels ofsecondary school are declining rather than improving. In short,there is not a lot of hope for the young people in the commu-nities. Television creates unrealistic expectations for a stand-ard of living that will not be within the reach of most people.Human population growth rates are about 4 percent per yearso the human population will double about every 19 years.
Caribou and fish are an essential part of the staple diet ofpeople in all of these communities. If this protein source be-comes less available or becomes contaminated with a com-pound like cesium then the social and economic conditionsin the communities will become more desperate than theiralready bleak situation. The loss of the harp seal market sev-eral decades ago caused a decline of drastic proportions to ahunter's income and his ability to provide for his family. Thiswas a major factor in the increase in social problems in theArctic communities. A loss of caribou could cause similar prob-lems.
The use of caribou from these two herds, the availabilityof caribou and their management is not an intense situation,at least at the present time. In the past people starved if theymisjudged the migration of caribou. As the seasonal migra-tions of these great herds of caribou ebb and flow so too does
176
A CASE STUDY OF THE MANAGEMENT OF BARREN-GROUND CARIBOU FROM THE BEVERLY AND QAMANIRJUAQ HERDS IN NORTHERN CANADA
the availability of caribou. Some years, some communities ei-ther do without or travel great distances to get caribou at con-siderable expense.
The use of caribou is sustainable for the most part, how-ever that situation could change and there is still some ques-tion about the ability of Canadian management institutions'capabilities to regulate hunting by aboriginal people from thesouthern parts of the Canadian provinces of Saskatchewanand Manitoba during a period of low caribou numbers. Evenif the Beverly and Qamanirjuaq Board had agreement from allof the range communities to voluntarily restrict their take ofcaribou, aboriginal people from other parts of Canada couldtake caribou as they did in the winter of 1980 when some18,000 animals were taken from the Beverly herd.
The only real incentive operating in this system is thebasic human need for food and clothing. There are no disin-centives operating at the present time.
The use of caribou from these two herds does not de-tract from its conservation. If there were no use, there wouldbe no conservation issues to speak of. In fact, the boundariesof the Thelon Game Sanctuary would have been removed oraltered a long time ago if the caribou were not valued by thelocal people. As well, there would have been no court injunc-tion on mining exploration if caribou were not a vital part ofthe diet of the people of Baker Lake and there would havebeen no caribou protection measures established.
Conclusion
There are more than three quarters of a million barren-groundcaribou in these two herds. The minimum annual economicvalue of the take from these herds is 13.5 million Canadiandollars (9.72 million dollars US). The total cost of all manage-ment efforts is about 350 thousand Canadian dollars per year.The annual cost of managing the resource and protecting theinvestment is therefore 2.6 percent of the annual benefits.
This is only the beginning of a very long story.
Acknowledgements
Thanks go to Ms. Judy Dragon who drafted Figure 1 and toMs. Iisette Self who handled the word processing of variousdrafts of the manuscript. Both of these ladies lent cheerfulassistance in the face of other competing demands.
Suggested Reading
Beverly and Qamanirjuaq Caribou Management Board. 1996.Beverly and Qamanirjuaq Caribou Management Plan 1996-2002.
Beverly and Qamanirjuaq Caribou Management Board. 1995.Beverly and Qamanirjuaq Caribou Management Plan 1993-1997. Discussion Draft. September 1995.
Beverly and Qamanirjuaq Caribou Management Board. 1995.The Beverly and Qamanirjuaq Barren-Ground Caribou.(colour pamphlet produced for schools on the Beverly andQamanirjuaq caribou ranges). Available in Dene and Inuktitut.
Cizek, D. 1990. The Beverly-Kaminuriak Caribou Manage-ment Board: A Case Study of Aboriginal Participation in Re-source Management. Canadian Arctic Resources CommitteePolicy Paper No. 6. Ottawa, Canada.
Department of Renewable Resources. 1990. Economic Valu-ation of the Current Domestic Harvest of the Beverly andKaminuriak Caribou Herds. Government of the NorthwestTerritories, Yellowknife, Northwest Territories, Canada.
Gates, C.C. 1985. The Fall and Rise of the Kaminuriak CaribouPopulation. In: Meredith, T.C. and Martell, A.M. (Eds), Pro-ceedings of the Second North American Caribou Workshop.McGill Subarctic Research Paper No. 40. McGill University,Montreal, Canada.
Hall, E. 1989. People and Caribou in the Northwest Territo-ries. (Ed) Department of Renewable Resources, Governmentof the Northwest Territories, Yellowknife, Northwest Territo-ries, Canada.
Heard, D.C., Jackson, F.J. and Williams, T.M. 1990. BeverlyCalving Ground Survey 2-14 June 1987. Department of Re-newable Resources, Yellowknife, Northwest Territories,Canada. File Report No. 85.
Heard, D.C. and Jackson, F.J. 1990. Kaminuriak CalvingGround Survey 5-17 June 1988. Department of RenewableResource, Yellowknife, Northwest Territories, Canada. FileReport No. 84.
Horizon Group. 1996. Thelon Wildlife Sanctuary Draft Man-agement Plan. Horizon Group, 2034 Casa Marcia Cres., Victo-ria, BC, Canada.
Lloyd, K.A. and Graf, R.P. 1990. An Overview of Wildlife Man-agement in the Northwest Territories, Canada. Paper pre-sented to Workshop on Sustainable Development at the 18thGeneral Assembly in IUCN, Perth, Australia. November, 1990.
Scotter, G.W. 1991. The Beverly and Kaminuriak Caribou Man-agement Board: An example of cooperative management.Trans. 56th N.A. Wildl, and Nat. Res. Conf. 56:309-320.
177
KEVIN A. LLOYD AND ROLAND P. GRAF
SummariesPlus de deux millions de caribous (Rangifer tarandus groenlandicus) des terres dénudées et frigides errentdans la taïga et la toundra du nord du Canada. L'exposé présente une étude de cas sur la situation et lagestion de deux principaux troupeaux de caribous: les troupeaux "Beverly" et "Qamanirjuaq". Le troupeauBeverly a été récemment estimé à 286,000 têtes (1994) et son taux de recrutement, entre 11 et 27%par an entre1982 et 1992, indiquant que la situation du cheptel était stable voire croissante. Le troupeau Qamanirjuaqétait estimé à 496,000 têtes, et sa situation également considérée stable voire croissante. L'état des connaissancessur la gestion est bon, même excellent. Les principaux facteurs qui affectent ces populations sont la prédationpar les loups et les chasseurs, et les feux de forêt. Les retombées de l'accident de Chernobyl ont suscité beaucoupd'inquiétude puisque les caribous se nourrissent surtout de lichen pour leur alimentation. La tendancegénéraleà long terme de l'accroissement des contaminants dans l'Arctique constitue souvent une préoccupation, toutcomme le sont les effets du réchauffement de la terre. Les caribous appartenant à ces troupeaux ont unegrande valeur pour les populations vivant dans la zone où ils évoluent. S'il n 'y avait pas de caribous, personnenevivraitdans ces régions Lavaleur économiqueminimale de la chasse des caribous,pourlesl3,500personnesqui en dépendent, est de 135 millions de dollars par an. L'exposé décrit le système de gestion de ces troupeaux.
178
Más de dos millones de caribús de terrenos yermos (Rangifer tarandus groenlandicus) recorren la taiga y latundra de Canadá septentrional. Este trabajo presenta un breve estudio de caso del estado y manejo de dosde las principales manadas de caribús: la Beverlyy la Qamanirjuaq. La manada Beverly se calculó en 1994en 286,000 cabezas y el reclutamiento abarcaba entre el 11 y el 27% por año entre 1982 y 1992, lo cualindicaba que la población estaba entre establey en aumento. La manada Qamanirjuaq se estimó en 496,000cabezasy también estaba entre establey en aumento. El nivel de conocimiento en cuanto a manejo es entrebueno y excelente. Los factores primordiales que afectan a estas poblaciones son la depredación de parte delobos, la cacería y los incendiosforestales. Las lluvias radioactivas ocasionadas por el accidente de Chernobylprodujeron mucha preocupación dado que el caribú se alimenta sobre todo de liquenes. La tendencia generala largo plazo en cuanto a incremento de contaminantes en el Ártico también preocupa, lo mismo que losefectos del calentamiento mundial. Los caribús de esas manadas son de gran valor para quienes viven en elterritorio de los caribús. Si no hubiera esos animales, no habría personas. El valor económico mínimo de lacacería del caribú para las 13.500 personas que dependen de ellos es de 135 millones de dólares anuales. Sedescribe el sistema de manejo de estas manadas.
