Ahmad, Ashiq
Community-Based Natural Resources Management
in
Full Text:
Introduction
Planning for
Community-Based Conservation Initiatives
Khunjerab National
Park: Marco Polo sheep (Ovis ammon
polii), snow leopard (Uncia uncia) and Tibetan wild ass (Equus kiang) are among
the rare and endangered fauna of Northern Pakistan (Ahmad et al. 1989). In order to offer them adequate protection,
the Government of Pakistan designated their habitat as a national park in 1975
and created an organization for the necessary supervisory activities. However, these steps did not prove effective
for people from adjoining communities, who held centuries-old grazing rights to
the area, and were neither compensated nor offered alternative grazing
areas. A government-sponsored management
planning workshop did not embrace local residents or community-based management
(Bell 1989). This resulted in a long and
tiring conflict between local communities and the respective governments, with
the result that key or target wildlife species of the park were reduced even
further in number. Thus, the park failed
immediately as a primary conservation tool.
Bar Valley: Situated in
Lessons for Project
Planning and Design: As indicated
earlier, the infrastructure, including organizational and institutional arrangements,
will not operate efficiently unless all activities deemed essential are planned
in light of the existing socioeconomic condition, local culture and
tradition. Even these may not be
practical if people do not see conservation as the basis for their economic
development. In brief, a substantial
part of any project that deals with natural resource management must be spent
on planning and on the collection of data which relates to local community
involvement and the target resource conservation initiatives. Some of the information deemed necessary
follows:
1. Social Assessment: Community-based interviews and meetings are
required to establish the status of the existing social structure, local
village and user-group organizations and institutions. Among other things, social assessment will
determine if the society in question is heterogeneous or homogenous in nature,
and will better permit projects to ensure they respond to community needs and
priorities and to ensure interventions are appropriately designed;
2. Local dependence on natural resources: Managers quite often forget that a particular
resource is closely linked with the livelihood of the local community. In order to be effective, the conservation
project must determine if local dependence upon the resource in question is
heavy, average or low so that the question of whether to accommodate existing
rights, substitute other rights, or offer compensation, can be addressed
accordingly;
3. Legal rights and concessions: In most cases, necessary conservation
measures are poorly adapted because of the existence of certain rights and
concessions in critical conservation areas and the lack of a peaceful
resolution to any conflict. The present and past history of such rights and
concessions, if any, should be included in any project's fact sheets;
4. Nature of conflicts (if any): Natural resource conservation will remain
just a pipe-dream if there is any unresolved conflict, either within the
community, between different communities of the area, or between the
communities and their respective government agencies over questions of
ownership of targeted resources. The
nature and seriousness of such conflict, if any, should be given due emphasis
and consideration during the formulation of the overall conservation plan;
5. Existing level of awareness regarding
targeted resources: Local or indigenous
knowledge is sometimes taken for granted when conducting planning for the
management of natural resources. However, precise information about such
knowledge helps to avoid wasting limited resources by giving proper direction
to the necessary action programme.
Lessons Learned:
Some Successes and Failures
Wildlife Protection
in the
Ultimately, the
local people went to the court of law, demanding the decertification of the
park. This, coupled with other mistakes
and mismanagement, made it extremely difficult for park authorities to run the
park and thus achieve the objectives of its management. It was even harder for the planning team
headed by the author to go through its data-gathering process, as the local
communities were not cooperating and were not even willing to allow certain
members of the team to enter their areas.
The author thus decided to enter into a dialogue with community leaders,
which took quite a long time and which involved a series of meetings to discuss
the various options available. Several
dialogues failed because:
1. These dialogues focused only on the
importance of park resources from a conservation view point, while the local
people were more interested in continuing their traditional use of park
resources as the source of their living and subsistence;
2. The people were getting the impression that
everything inside the park, including wildlife, was the sole property of park
officials and that they were only responsible for protecting them.
Consequently, most local people took no interest in protecting the wildlife;
3. Government -
community dialogue avoided addressing anything related to the compensation of
existing rights, while the people absolutely refused to even discuss any issue
without receiving compensation. Since
the success of the dialogues was dependent upon the attitudes of both parties
(namely, government agencies and representatives of the local communities),
constant consultation with them on major issues helped the author to propose a
solution which was acceptable to all parties and which helped to resolve the
underlying conflict.
The following
lessons were learnt from the entire process:
1. Allow equitable sharing of benefits and
responsibilities to increase "ownership": People are always happy not only with
benefits but also with certain responsibilities that give them a sense of
ownership. The park establishment had
several vacant positions and it was decided that 80% of these would go to
candidates from the local communities.
In turn, it was the responsibility of the entire community to protect
the wildlife in the park from local as well as outside hunters. In response to this decision, the local
community has established a check post near the park's entry point and posted
two guards on duty at all times. This
has deterred poaching in the park and, as a result, wildlife can now be viewed
from the KKH road side, a major highway that leads into China over the
Khunjerab Pass;
2. Compensate for
the loss of existing rights: Ways and
means were determined to compensate those who must surrender their grazing
rights and concessions in the interests of the park and its bio-diversity. Since it was not possible to arrange for cash
compensation, several activities which could potentially yield income in
various forms were identified in consultation with the local communities, and
duly approved by the respective government agencies. Such income has then to be distributed by the
local village council among those members of the community who have surrendered
their grazing rights within crucial habitats of the park;
3. Accommodate
legitimate uses: Not all human
activities and uses are detrimental to the park and its natural resources. If certain uses are proved to be of no harm,
they should be allowed in order to earn the goodwill of the people.
Sustainable Use of
Wildlife Species in the Bar Valley (Nagar Subdivision): The Siberian ibex is an important animal
species of the Northern Areas. This
animal used to be plentiful in a number of places until a few decades ago, but
because of uncontrolled and excessive hunting pressures, it has now been
reduced to isolated and scattered populations found only in the more remote and
inaccessible parts of the region. The
Bar valley, covering about a 200 km2 area, constitutes important habitat for
ibex. In 1989, people from the valley
decided to stop hunting ibex, provided they were assisted in obtaining certain
economic benefits.
Since the wildlife
rules and legislation of Pakistan have so far been silent on the sharing of any
benefits from wildlife with local communities, the author was asked to conduct
a feasibility study of this possibility (Ahmad 1994). The proposal was found to be valid as far as
the preliminary surveys were concerned, but when it was implemented a number of
problems emerged. Although the project
could not be expected to work miracles, certain problems did lead to failures
initially. These are discussed briefly
below:
1. Each individual
was not a hunter: There were 44 hunters
within a population of 1,100 people, and any decision to stop hunting directly
affected 44 hunters and their households.
However, since the project had to work for the development of the entire
community and not for individual hunters, the latter were not happy with the
arrangement. Several violations of the rules occurred in the beginning and,
reportedly, some of the hunters were involved in these;
2. Suspicious
nature of people: The majority of the
people in the valley believed that if they signed a MOU (memorandum of
understanding), their pastures and grazing lands would be annexed within
Pakistan's protected areas network - to which they would never again have
access;
3. Lack of
confidence in the resourceful people in the community: Since the idea of protecting wildlife in
order to get certain economic benefits in the future was mostly supported by
the few resourceful individuals in the society, the remaining population
assumed that such benefits, if any, would go directly to these individuals and
not to others in the same community;
4. Success of the
project was based only on the trophy hunting of ibex: The people were convinced that once the
population of ibex increased in number, and trophy hunting took place, a new
source of income would be generated which could meet their developmental
requirements. However, there are many
hurdles in the way of a successful trophy hunting programme. For instance, foreign hunters had to pass
through several procedures before they could actually hunt an ibex, and many
hunters became discouraged midway through this process. Secondly, the government of Pakistan had
banned all hunting of large mammals and export of trophies. It was thus up to the government to determine
whether such hunting should be allowed or not.
It was agreed that a substantial portion of the resulting revenue should
go to the local community, but there is no precedent in Pakistan's conservation
history of the government ever paying any income from trophy hunting to a local
community;
5. The elected committee was not sufficiently
influential: In order to achieve the
objective of sustainability, the project had to depend upon the elected board. However, later in the history of the project,
it was realized that the board was not sufficiently influential and effective
enough to stop hunting by a few individuals, nor courageous enough to report
the matter to the project's administration.
Evolution of the
Strategy: A number of important observations and conclusions for community-based
conservation initiatives arose during the design and implementation of
WWF-Pakistan's programmes in the Bar Valley Project:
1.Creation of
Awareness: The project kept close
contact with all individuals in the community to educate them and assure them
on certain issues. No one ever believed
that ibex, if hunted for trophy purposes, could bring enough money to the
village. Furthermore, the people were
still suspicious that once the ibex population grew in number, the valley would
be declared as a National Park or Wildlife Sanctuary and they would be asked to
vacate it. It took a long time, using
constant contacts with individuals and groups, to wash this idea away and to
convince the local community;
2.Organization of
the community: Prior to the project, the
people of Bar Valley had certain traditional organizations for undertaking
various social activities. However,
since the nature of this wildlife protection project was different from more
ordinary and routine village activities, the people had to be organized in a
different way. Each individual had to be
involved and to make a personal commitment to abide by the rules. In order to do this, existing inter-communal
conflicts had first to be searched out and then resolved, and certain
incentives provided in order to keep the community intact and united in its
resolve;
3.Flexibility of
the targets: The project over-emphasized
trophy hunting from the beginning. It
was, however, soon realized that in view of the possible problems in reaching a
successful trophy hunting programme, alternate development activities and
sources for the generation of income should be explored and advocated
equally. This was essential because if
one programme failed, then there would be others in hand or in operation. The project thus started work on the
development of eco-tourism in the valley, improvement of agricultural crops,
the establishment of fruit orchards, etc.;
4.Vigilance: The project initially relied totally upon the
community for watch and ward activities.
However, when a few instances of rule violations were reported to the
project, it was necessary to be more strict on certain occasions. This strategy
worked well initially but it created a general feeling of "bossing the
project." The strategy was thus modified to a rather flexible approach of
keeping eyes open and discussing any violation in the village meeting to allow
the people themselves to decide on a reasonable solution to the problem at
hand;
5.
Transparency: Villagers often think that
a project is very rich, having lots of funds that can be shared with them. Such
a belief is quite detrimental to the overall cause of conservation, and it is
thus useful to keep issues related to funding of the project as transparent as
possible and the funds available for development within locally realistic
limits;
6. Leading
role: It is true that the initial
guidance has to come from the project, but if this process continues, the
village community will fail to take over the project subsequently, and its
overall sustainability will be in serious doubt. After a series of such
mistakes, the project confined its help to certain areas, and the major leading
role was given to the community.
Problems of Snow
Leopards in the Northern Areas
The snow leopard
population of the Northern Areas is reasonably good, but it is subject to
continued depletion by graziers and skin traders. WWF-Pakistan has been trying to develop
certain approaches that would help the graziers better understand the situation
and refrain from killing snow leopards. These proposed approaches for
addressing the graziers are described in the following paragraphs.
Facts and Figures: Because of the reduction in the natural prey
population, snow leopards have certainly increased hunting pressures upon
domestic livestock. However, predation
by snow leopards is not as high as is usually claimed by the graziers
themselves. At four distant locations in
the snow leopard range, statistics were collected from graziers on various
types of losses to their animals. Almost
all graziers agreed that their animals were not getting enough food or
nourishment, and as a result were weak and more susceptible to various kinds of
diseases (from which about 40% of the herd may die each year). Against this fact, the average loss
attributed to snow leopards is around 1%.
Apparently, the losses to snow leopards are not high; however, the root
of the problem lies in the fact that only a few graziers suffer such loss,
which is not being shared by others.
Proposed
Solution: WWF-Pakistan proposes a number
of actions for testing and evaluation:
(1) Include all
graziers in a watershed in the snow leopard conservation programme;
(2) Keep a record
of all animals being killed by diseases, accidents, starvation and snow
leopards;
(3) Develop
programmes and interventions to control diseases, improve pastures, reduce the
amount of animals to the carrying capacity of their pastures, and educate
graziers to improve animal care and improve the design of cattle sheds.
The fur trade
represents another important threat to the snow leopard, which is an endangered
species that is protected by law in many countries, especially those which are
parties to CITES (including Pakistan).
WWF-Pakistan's approach is to encourage government agencies to fulfill
their international obligations, and organize communities against skin traders.
This involves three steps: providing
incentives under certain conditions, encouraging reporting to the law
enforcement agencies, and publicizing such activities to deter skin traders.
Conclusions
Because of the reduction in the prey population and the increase in livestock numbers, predatory losses of domestic animals have increased within the snow leopard's range. The graziers, being a poor community, always try to kill predators and thus reduce the losses of their valuable livestock. Although the snow leopard is a protected species by law, they are killed whenever possible by graziers as well as fur traders. The problem, although serious and difficult, could be solved, provided concrete efforts were initiated which focused equally on the conservation of snow leopards as well as the economic uplift of the grazier community.