[House Hearing, 107 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
THE DEVELOPING CRISIS FACING WILDLIFE SPECIES DUE TO BUSHMEAT
CONSUMPTION
=======================================================================
OVERSIGHT HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON FISHERIES CONSERVATION, WILDLIFE AND OCEANS
of the
COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
July 11, 2002
__________
Serial No. 107-137
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Resources
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/
house
or
Committee address: http://resourcescommittee.house.gov
______
80-615 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON : 2003
____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpr.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
Fax: (202) 512�092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402�090001
COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES
JAMES V. HANSEN, Utah, Chairman
NICK J. RAHALL II, West Virginia, Ranking Democrat Member
Don Young, Alaska, George Miller, California
Vice Chairman Edward J. Markey, Massachusetts
W.J. ``Billy'' Tauzin, Louisiana Dale E. Kildee, Michigan
Jim Saxton, New Jersey Peter A. DeFazio, Oregon
Elton Gallegly, California Eni F.H. Faleomavaega, American
John J. Duncan, Jr., Tennessee Samoa
Joel Hefley, Colorado Neil Abercrombie, Hawaii
Wayne T. Gilchrest, Maryland Solomon P. Ortiz, Texas
Ken Calvert, California Frank Pallone, Jr., New Jersey
Scott McInnis, Colorado Calvin M. Dooley, California
Richard W. Pombo, California Robert A. Underwood, Guam
Barbara Cubin, Wyoming Adam Smith, Washington
George Radanovich, California Donna M. Christensen, Virgin
Walter B. Jones, Jr., North Islands
Carolina Ron Kind, Wisconsin
Mac Thornberry, Texas Jay Inslee, Washington
Chris Cannon, Utah Grace F. Napolitano, California
John E. Peterson, Pennsylvania Tom Udall, New Mexico
Bob Schaffer, Colorado Mark Udall, Colorado
Jim Gibbons, Nevada Rush D. Holt, New Jersey
Mark E. Souder, Indiana Anibal Acevedo-Vila, Puerto Rico
Greg Walden, Oregon Hilda L. Solis, California
Michael K. Simpson, Idaho Brad Carson, Oklahoma
Thomas G. Tancredo, Colorado Betty McCollum, Minnesota
J.D. Hayworth, Arizona Tim Holden, Pennsylvania
C.L. ``Butch'' Otter, Idaho
Tom Osborne, Nebraska
Jeff Flake, Arizona
Dennis R. Rehberg, Montana
Tim Stewart, Chief of Staff
Lisa Pittman, Chief Counsel/Deputy Chief of Staff
Steven T. Petersen, Deputy Chief Counsel
Michael S. Twinchek, Chief Clerk
James H. Zoia, Democrat Staff Director
Jeffrey P. Petrich, Democrat Chief Counsel
------
SUBCOMMITTE ON FISHERIES CONSERVATION, WILDLIFE AND OCEANS
WAYNE T. GILCHREST, Maryland, Chairman
ROBERT A. UNDERWOOD, Guam, Ranking Democrat Member
Don Young, Alaska Eni F.H. Faleomavaega, American
W.J. ``Billy'' Tauzin, Louisiana Samoa
Jim Saxton, New Jersey, Neil Abercrombie, Hawaii
Vice Chairman Solomon P. Ortiz, Texas
Richard W. Pombo, California Frank Pallone, Jr., New Jersey
Walter B. Jones, Jr., North
Carolina
------
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on July 11, 2002.................................... 1
Statement of Members:
Gilchrest, Hon. Wayne T., a Representative in Congress from
the State of Maryland...................................... 1
Prepared statement of.................................... 2
Underwood, Hon. Robert A., a Delegate in Congress from Guam,
Prepared statement of...................................... 3
Statement of Witnesses:
Agnagna, Marcellin, Chairman, CITES Bushmeat Working Group... 30
Prepared statement of.................................... 32
Bakarr, Dr. Mohamed, Senior Technical Director, Center for
Applied Biodiversity Science, Conservation International... 72
Prepared statement of.................................... 75
Burnam, Jeffry M., Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for
Environment, Bureau of Oceans and International
Environmental and Scientific Affairs, U.S. Department of
State...................................................... 3
Prepared statement of.................................... 5
Carroll, Dr. Richard W., Director, West and Central Africa
and Madagascar Program, World Wildlife Fund................ 57
Prepared statement of.................................... 59
Graham, James A., Project Manager, Central Africa Regional
Program for the Environment, U.S. Agency for International
Development................................................ 18
Prepared statement of.................................... 19
Hutchins, Dr. Michael, Director, Department of Conservation
and Science, American Zoo and Aquarium Association, and Co-
Chairman, Bushmeat Crisis Task Force....................... 38
Prepared statement of.................................... 39
Robinson, Dr. John G., Senior Vice President and Director,
International Conservation, Wildlife Conservation Society.. 68
Prepared statement of.................................... 70
Stansell, Kenneth, Assistant Director for International
Affairs, Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the
Interior................................................... 6
Prepared statement of.................................... 8
Additional materials supplied:
Article ``Bushmeat and the Origin of HIV/AIDS'' submitted for
the record................................................. 84
Article ``Warfare on gorillas poses threat to survival''
submitted for the record................................... 90
Hoyt, Reginald, Senior Vice President, Conservation and
Science, Philadelphia Zoo, Statement submitted for the
record..................................................... 93
OVERSIGHT HEARING ON THE DEVELOPING CRISIS FACING WILDLIFE SPECIES DUE
TO BUSHMEAT CONSUMPTION
----------
Thursday, July 11, 2002
U.S. House of Representatives
Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans
Committee on Resources
Washington, DC
----------
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 11:05 a.m., in
room 1324, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Wayne T.
Gilchrest [Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. WAYNE GILCHREST, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MARYLAND
Mr. Gilchrest. The Subcommittee will come to order.
Good morning, everyone. Thank you all so much for being
here. We are looking forward to the testimony this morning for
this hearing on the present crisis in the African bush trade
problem, which I am sure is similar in nature in many other
places around the world. But the present crisis warrants our
focused attention and energy.
According to the U.S.-based Bushmeat Crisis Task Force,
hunters in Central Africa now kill more than a million metric
tons of wildlife each year. The total value of the bushmeat
trade has reached the staggering level of more than US$50
million annually and potentially could grow to hundreds of
millions of dollars in the next two decades. The trade has been
called the ``most significant threat to wildlife in Africa
today.''
Among the animals prominently killed for the trade are
forest elephants, gorillas, and chimpanzees. Each of these
species is endangered and internationally protected, but unless
we take steps, these flagships species could disappear forever.
In fact, earlier this month poachers killed two adult female
mountain gorillas in Rwanda. This is a tragedy for the species
that is already on the brink of extinction.
While no one would suggest that people in Africa should be
denied the opportunity to feed their families, the
international community must encourage the consumption of
alternative sources of protein and the creation of other types
of income-generating employment. According to Mr. Peter Walsh
of the Wildlife Conservation Society, ``We're not talking about
starving villagers needing meat. This is heavily organized
commercial poaching where money is the motivation.'' In
reality, a great deal of bushmeat is not even eaten by the
indigenous population but by consumers who order it from menus
at exotic restaurants in Paris, Tokyo, Taipei, and the United
States.
Furthermore, we are just beginning to understand the health
implications of eating tainted bushmeat. Wildlife, particularly
primates, harbor diseases which can jump between species and
cause lethal diseases such as AIDS and Ebola.
Our choices are quite simple. We can sit idly by and allow
the crisis to exterminate wildlife species throughout Africa,
or we can embrace the philosophy of E. O. Wilson who writes
that ``Every scrap of biological diversity is priceless, to be
learned and cherished, and never to be surrendered.'' I would
choose this approach.
We are here this morning to learn from the witnesses, who
we can work with to create a strategy so that we will be
prepared in this generation to meet the new ``Silent Spring''
challenge. We will save every scrap of biodiversity that we
can. And we will do it in an ever-increasing, wider team effort
with the international community.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Gilchrest follows:]
Statement of The Honorable Wayne T. Gilchrest, Chairman,
Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans
Good morning, today, the Subcommittee will conduct an unprecedented
oversight hearing on the growing crisis of bushmeat consumption on
various wildlife species.
According to the U.S. based Bushmeat Crisis Task Force, hunters in
Central Africa now kill more than a million metric tons of wildlife
each year. The total value of the bushmeat trade has reached the
staggering level of more than $50 million U.S. dollars annually. The
trade has been called the ``most significant threat to wildlife in
Africa today''.
Among the animals prominently killed for the trade are forest
elephants, gorillas and chimpanzees. Each of these species is
endangered and internationally protected but unless steps are taken,
these flagship species will disappear forever. In fact, earlier this
month, poachers killed two adult female mountain gorillas in Rwanda.
This is a horrible tragedy for a species that is already on the brink
of extinction.
While no one would suggest that people in Africa should be denied
the opportunity to feed their families, the international community
must encourage the consumption of alternative sources of protein and
the creation of other types of income generating employment. According
to Mr. Peter Walsh, of the Wildlife Conservation Society, ``We're not
talking about starving villagers needing meat. This is heavily
organized commercial poaching where money is the motivation''. In
reality, a great deal of bushmeat is not even eaten by the indigenous
population but by consumers who order it from menus at exotic
restaurants in Paris, Tokyo, Taipei and in the United States.
Furthermore, we are just beginning to understand the health
implications of eating tainted bushmeat. Wildlife, particularly
primates, harbor diseases which can jump between species and cause
lethal diseases such as AIDS and Ebola. Our choices are quite simple.
We can sit idly by and allow this crisis to exterminate wildlife
species throughout Africa or we can embrace the philosophy of E. O.
Wilson who writes that ``every scrap of biological diversity is
priceless, to be learned and cherished, and never to be surrendered''.
I choose this approach because each species is vital to the future
survival of the ecosystem of the continent.
While I do not have the answer on how to solve the bushmeat crisis,
I am confident that our distinguished witnesses will shed some light
and will propose some potential solutions to this vexing problem.
I am now pleased to recognize my friend, the distinguished
gentleman from Guam, Congressman Robert Underwood.
______
Mr. Gilchrest. At this point I ask unanimous consent that
the gentleman from Guam, Mr. Underwood's statement be put into
the record.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Underwood follows:]
Statement of The Honorable Robert A. Underwood, a Delegate in Congress
from Guam
Good morning, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for holding this hearing on
the bushmeat crisis in Africa. I look forward to hearing from the
experts about what the United States and the international community
can do to stop the wanton extermination of Africa's wildlife.
At first glance, this problem is simply appalling. Our closest
relatives, the Great Apes, with complex human-like social behavior, are
on the brink of extinction. Africa's diverse populations of mammals,
reptiles, and invertebrates are being decimated. In one example, a
single logging camp of 648 people in the Republic of Congo can harvest
8,251 animals annually, or the equivalent of 124 tons of wild meat.
Experts contend that the motivation for the consumption of bushmeat
varies from hunger and poverty to cultural traditions to sport. A
growing luxury market in urban centers for bushmeat is another ominous
threat.
Regrettably, the problem appears intractable. The only way to find
solutions is to ask the experts. And perhaps, our only hope to achieve
success may be to engage many types of organizations, including
commercial entities or industries operating in remote areas, that have
access to both financial resources and local people.
I contend that strong leadership by the United States is necessary
on this front. As you know, Mr. Chairman, I have been in support of,
and worked closely with you to reauthorize, several international
conservation laws. I have also supported increased funding for the
Multinational Species Conservation Fund.
We have the opportunity today to learn about a topic that could
become one of the world's great environmental tragedies. My hope is
that we will be spurred on to take more purposeful action.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for creating this forum for discussion. I
trust that this hearing is only the first of many discussions in this
Committee and in the Congress.
______
Mr. Gilchrest. And since I am alone up here on the dais and
the staff probably don't have any opening statements to make in
public, we will start the hearing.
Our first witness is Mr. Jeffry Burnam, Deputy Assistant
Secretary for the Environment, Bureau of Oceans and
International Environment and Scientific Affairs with the
Department of State; Dr. Kenneth Stansell, Assistant Director
for International Affairs, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Department of Interior; and Mr. James Graham, Project Manager,
Central Africa Regional Program for the Environment, USAID
Bureau of Africa.
Good morning, gentlemen. Mr. Burnam, you may begin, sir.
STATEMENT OF JEFFRY BURNAM, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR
ENVIRONMENT, BUREAU OF OCEANS AND INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL
AND SCIENTIFIC AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Mr. Burnam. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the
opportunity to share with you the Department of State's views
on the international aspects of the growing problem of bushmeat
consumption, which you highlighted in your opening remarks.
With your permission, I would like to submit my full statement
for the record and only read portions of it.
Mr. Gilchrest. Without objection, so ordered.
Mr. Burnam. On a recent trip to the Republic of Congo, I
saw firsthand the seriousness of the large-scale bushmeat
consumption problem. I had the opportunity to visit a pilot
project where a forestry concessionaire and a local community
were working together to help control poaching in a buffer zone
around a reserve. I believe that this pilot project suggests
that there are many opportunities in Central Africa to work
effectively with logging companies to help control activities
that have an adverse impact on forests and wildlife.
As you pointed out, the scale of bushmeat consumption is
threatening the survival of species such as elephants,
gorillas, and chimpanzees in Africa. While bushmeat provides
animal protein and a source of income for many families, the
bushmeat trade has recently increased dramatically. Concession
logging is an important activity in many of these countries.
However, it must be properly managed because concession logging
results in construction of roads as well as in the migration of
populations into previously undisturbed and remote forest
areas. In the pilot project I visited in the Republic of Congo,
for example, there were only a few hundred villagers in the
area prior to the opening of the logging concession, but now
there are four or five thousand employees of the logging
concession, so you can imagine the impact those additional
people have on bushmeat consumption.
The threat to wildlife from the bushmeat trade is also
related to political, social, and economic issues. In the Congo
Basin, wildlife harvesting is occurring beyond sustainable
levels. The illegal trade in wildlife often goes hand in hand
with illegal logging and with lack of respect for the rule of
law and good governance.
The Department of State has taken a number of steps to
address these concerns. The project which I visited in Congo
(Brazzaville) is supported by the Department of State, by the
International Tropical Timber Organization, and by the United
States Agency for International Development through the CARPE
program. Nongovernmental and private partners include the
Wildlife Conservation Society, the Columbus Zoo, and the
logging concessionaire itself. The pilot project employs local
people as ``eco-guards.'' It provides income for communities
living on the edge of a national park, and it provides a means
to enforce the forestry and wildlife laws.
Two aspects of the project I found particularly interesting
were the attempts to develop alternative sources of protein for
the local residents, and then, second, employees of the logging
company, who are, for the most part, the residents of the area,
are penalized if they violate the poaching laws. So you can be
fined if you are an employee and you violate the laws against
hunting, and there have even been some that have been
dismissed. So this buffer zone around the national park is
actually very helpful in protecting the national park because
it provides an effective way of reducing poaching and other
threats to wildlife in the area.
In the CITES convention, a Bushmeat Working Group was set
up which the Department of State has supported. We have also
supported the work of the Bushmeat Crisis Task Force. And our
own, my Bureau of OES has worked with the Bushmeat Crisis Task
Force in Central Africa, and CARPE, and there is a workshop in
Brazzaville at the end of this month and the beginning of next
month which should be very promising because it will review the
progress of a number of pilot projects in the area and get
people together to focus on an awareness of the issues
involved.
State considers commercial harvesting of bushmeat a
significant biodiversity issue. We are committed to working
with partners, both domestically and internationally, to
address the problem. In general, I believe there are four areas
we can focus on for international collaboration to address this
problem, which, as you point out, is badly in need of focused
attention.
First would be education about the bushmeat problem,
education in the concept of sustainability. The Columbus Zoo
was involved in the education aspect of this particular
project;
Working through international organizations and agreements;
Encouraging further pilot programs, and I only mention this
particular one because I visited it, but there are other
programs. The World Wildlife Fund will testify to pilot
programs that are similar in nature;
And, of course, educating those consumers in the fancy
restaurants about the impacts of their consumption on the
bushmeat trade.
Mr. Chairman, effective solutions to the bushmeat problem
require a multifaceted approach. We all share the common goal
of preserving biological diversity for future generations. Our
ability to do so depends upon devising practical measures to
move science and policy toward that end.
Thank you very much for the opportunity to testify, and I
would, of course, be pleased to answer any questions that you
may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Burnam follows:]
Statement of Jeffry Burnam, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for
Environment, Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and
Scientific Affairs, U.S. Department of State
Thank you for the opportunity to share the Department of State's
views on the international aspects of the growing problem of bushmeat
consumption.
On a recent trip to the Republic of Congo, I saw firsthand the
seriousness of the large-scale bushmeat consumption problem. I had the
opportunity to visit a pilot project where a forestry concessionaire
and a local community were working together to help control poaching in
a buffer zone around a reserve. I believe that this pilot project
suggests that there are many opportunities in Central Africa to work
effectively with logging companies to help control activities that have
an impact on forests and wildlife.
The scale of bushmeat consumption is threatening the survival of
species such as elephants, gorillas and chimpanzees in Africa. While
bushmeat provides animal protein and a source of income for many
families, the bushmeat trade has recently increased dramatically.
Concession logging is an important economic activity in many of these
countries. However, it must be properly managed because concession
logging results in construction of roads and the migration of
population into previously undisturbed and remote forest areas. These
factors, combined with the development of social and economic networks
to support the bushmeat industry and an increasing demand
internationally, have transformed bushmeat harvesting from a
subsistence activity into a commercial enterprise.
The United States recognizes the cultural and nutritional needs of
many communities who use bushmeat for subsistence. Our concern is that
the large-scale, unregulated and illegal trade in bushmeat could lead
to extinction of many wildlife species and irreversible impacts on
African ecosystems.
The threat to wildlife from the bushmeat trade is intimately
related to political, social and economic issues. In the Congo Basin,
wildlife harvesting is occurring beyond sustainable levels. The illegal
trade in wildlife often goes hand in hand with illegal logging and with
lack of respect for the rule of law and good governance.
The Department of State has taken a number of steps to address
these concerns. The project which I visited in the Republic of Congo is
supported by the Department of State, by the International Tropical
Timber Organization (ITTO) and by the United States Agency for
International Development through its Central African Regional Program
for the Environment (CARPE). Nongovernmental (NGO) and private partners
include the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS), the Columbus Zoo and
the logging concessionaire itself, the Consortium Industrielle Des Bois
(C.I.B.) This pilot project employs local people as ``eco-guards'' to
protect against commercial-scale bushmeat hunting. It provides income
for communities living on the edge of a national park and a means to
enforce the forestry and wildlife laws.
The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild
Fauna and Flora (CITES) set up a Bushmeat Working Group to promote
awareness of the issue of cross-border trade in bushmeat, which the
Department of State supported. The United States has also supported the
work of a coordinating NGO, the Bushmeat Crisis Task Force, which works
with governments and concerned NGOs to address the bushmeat crisis in
Africa. I understand that the Bushmeat Crisis Task Force has recently
secured several grants from private foundations and from the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service to assist six Central African governments in
addressing the bushmeat crisis.
At the Department of State, our Bureau of Oceans and International
Environmental and Scientific Affairs (OES) has supported the Bushmeat
Crisis Task Force's work in Central Africa in conjunction with the
Central African Regional Program for the Environment (CARPE). We are
also helping to sponsor a workshop on wildlife management and
conservation in timber concessions in Central Africa in August 2002,
focusing in particular on raising the awareness of government policy
makers and regulators on the relevance of these issues to sustainable
forest management.
The Department of State considers commercial harvesting of bushmeat
for widespread consumption a significant biodiversity issue and is
committed to working with partners domestically and abroad to address
the problems associated with it, including in the context of
sustainable development. In general, further international
collaboration on this issue could include:
LEducating governments, forest concessionaires, and local people
about the bushmeat problem and empowering them to understand the
concept of sustainability in terms of wildlife harvest.
LWorking through international agreements such as CITES, CBD and
ITTO to further efforts to control the illegal commercial bushmeat
trade.
LEncouraging governments, forest concessionaires, and local
communities to take responsibility and put programs in place for
maintaining viable and sustainable wildlife populations.
LEducating consumers internationally about the impacts of the
bushmeat trade on wildlife populations.
Mr. Chairman, effective solutions to the bushmeat problem require a
multifaceted approach that addresses the fundamental social, political
and economic causes of the problem. We all share the common goal of
preserving biological diversity for future generations. Our ability to
do so depends upon devising practical measures to move science and
policy towards this end.
Thank you very much. I would be happy to answer any questions that
you may have.
______
Mr. Gilchrest. Thank you, Mr. Burnam.
Dr. Stansell?
STATEMENT OF KENNETH STANSELL, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR
INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS, FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Dr. Stansell. Good morning, Mr. Chairman. I, too,
appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today to
present the views of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on the
growing crisis of illegal bushmeat consumption in Africa. We
have provided our written testimony for the record, so today I
would like to make a few brief remarks highlighting the causes,
current Service activities, and additional measures that we
feel may be needed.
The illegal commercial killing of wildlife, particularly
threatened and endangered species, is certainly not unique to
Africa. However, it is in Central and West Africa that world
attention has been focused on the serious threat to the
survival of great apes throughout the region. The lives of
humans and wildlife in Africa are intimately entwined. Many
rural communities must utilize wildlife resources to satisfy
their basic needs. Therefore, it is important to make clear a
distinction between the legal harvest of wildlife on a
sustainable basis and the unsustainable and illegal commercial
exploitation that now exists in many parts of Africa.
The underlying factors driving this exploitation include
social and political unrest, lack of adequate protected areas
for wildlife, inadequate law enforcement, lack of management
capacity in range countries, and a staggering increase in
demand.
Roads are built for harvesting timber, penetrating
previously inaccessible forests. Poachers have the increasing
availability of technology: large-caliber automatic weapons and
steel snares. The result is a greatly enhanced ability to kill,
process, and transport large quantities of bushmeat to meet an
ever-increasing demand.
Dozens of species, both common and endangered, are being
exploited at unsustainable rates. Long-lived and slow-
reproducing species, such as the great apes and elephants, are
among the hardest hit. Chimps and gorillas are particularly
prized and often command the highest prices in faraway markets.
Through our International Affairs Program, the Service actively
participates in a number of activities with a wide range of
partners, some that you will hear from today. These include
other Federal agencies, governments of other countries, and
national and international NGO's. Through our leadership role
in the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species,
we have supported efforts to bring this issue to a global
forum, resulting in the establishment of a working group that
very importantly includes the affected range countries to
explore ways to address the illegal trade and bring attention
to the conditions that foster it.
Also, through our Multinational Species Conservation Funds
particularly for African elephants and great apes, the Service
is supporting a number of on-the-ground projects. Our focus is
two-pronged: helping to foster local community awareness of the
need to manage wildlife sustainably for the long run, and
working with our counterpart agencies in range countries,
helping to build law enforcement capacity and, where
appropriate, to support development of effective systems for
legal hunting and trade in the near term.
Through the witnesses today, this Committee will hear a
great deal about the crisis and what is being currently done.
Regrettably, however, much more remains. We should sustain and
enhance these ongoing collaborative efforts. They are making a
difference. But we also must address more effectively the
underlying causes of this crisis, such as the lack of adequate
wildlife monitoring and sustainable management, inadequate
systems of protected areas, and, importantly, the need for
capacity building.
Range states and local communities must be provided the
tools to allow for greater enforcement of existing laws and
technical assistance to support wildlife conservation that is
sustainable, based both on science and the practical realities.
Mr. Chairman, the Service appreciates your interest in this
critical problem, and we look forward to working with you to
find solutions to this growing crisis. I, too, would be pleased
to respond to any questions that you might have. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Stansell follows:]
Statement of Kenneth Stansell, Assistant Director for International
Affairs, Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I am
Kenneth Stansell, Assistant Director for International Affairs for the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. I appreciate the opportunity to present
testimony for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on the issue of
illegal bushmeat consumption in Africa. My testimony will provide the
Subcommittee with information regarding the causes of the problems, and
the Service's role in wildlife conservation in Africa and how it helps
reduce the bushmeat trade. I will also suggest additional measures to
address the issue.
Background
Humans and wildlife in Africa share a long and intimately entwined
relationship. Many rural communities utilize wildlife resources to
satisfy nutritional, economic, and cultural needs. Some communities are
almost entirely dependent on wildlife for their subsistence. Meat from
domestic species, sometimes imported over long distances, is usually
more expensive in remote areas. Livestock husbandry is extremely
limited in the forest zone, and even when present, domestic animals are
usually utilized as a living bank account (i.e. to be bought and sold)
rather than as a sustained source of animal protein through
consumption. Urban dwellers are reported to maintain a preference for
meat from wild animals over available domestic meat such as beef, fish,
and poultry, and indulge this preference if it is affordable. The
contrast between the consumption of wildlife in urban centers and in
rural areas, and between legal and illegal exploitation of wildlife,
require careful qualification in the context of this discussion. The
Service would like to make clear the distinction between the legal
harvesting of wildlife on a sustainable basis and the unsustainable,
illegal trade that exists in many parts of Africa on such an enormous
scale.
The conservation community refers to the problem under discussion
as at the Illegal Commercial Trade in Bushmeat,@ to distinguish it from
legal, small-scale hunting for subsistence and use by local populations
in the areas of production. Dozens of species, from rodents to
elephants, and including numerous endangered and threatened species,
are utilized in the bushmeat trade. [A list of such species is
attached.] Legally harvested bushmeat forms a major component of many
rural household economies and is a vital source of protein,
particularly in rural areas in the forest zone, where alternatives are
few or expensive. However, the continued legal utilization of bushmeat
by local populations is threatened by illegal commercial-scale
exploitation.
Outside traders export large quantities of illegally, and legally,
taken bushmeat from areas of production using modern technology such as
firearms, wire snares, and transport on motor vehicles. Local hunters
are often stuck in a cycle of indebtedness to these traders who, along
with market sellers, acquire the major share of profits from the
bushmeat trade. It is important to note that some cultures, such as the
numerous BaAka Pygmy groups indigenous to the Central Africa region,
are at risk of extinction as a result of shifting economies and the
advent of the commercial bushmeat trade. The underlying factors driving
the bushmeat trade lack of adequate protected areas for wildlife, lack
of protein and economic alternatives for rural people, lack of law
enforcement capacity in regional governments, and increasing demand for
bushmeat must be addressed if the current unsustainable and destructive
practices are to be effectively managed. This requires an innovative
collaborative effort not only by governments and conservation
professionals, but also development experts from throughout the global
community.
The bushmeat problem is by no means unique to Africa; it is
widespread throughout Asia and Latin America as well. However, it is in
Central and West Africa that world attention has been focused on the
illegal, commercial killing of wildlife for meat and its impacts on
both faunal integrity and ecosystem functions. Due to the low
productivity of tropical forest ecosystems, the impacts of poaching
over a relatively short period are threatening many species with local
extinction and some species, such as the Great Apes, with extinction in
much of their range.
An important question to consider is, what has changed in Africa to
cause such a steep decline in wildlife populations? People have hunted
and eaten wildlife throughout known history, but until recently, large
areas still contained significant wildlife populations. However,
economic, technological, and social conditions have changed in ways
that make a once localized phenomenon widespread across the continent.
Over history, it is likely there were periodic local increases and
decreases of hunting pressure and wildlife population levels. Recent
decades have seen a dramatic increase in human population growth rates
in Africa and a corresponding increase in demand for meat. Wildlife
populations may now be unable to reproduce sufficiently to keep up with
this growing demand. They are being adversely affected by a combination
of over harvest and reduced availability of undisturbed habitat.
The introduction of modern cash economies and transport networks to
once isolated, traditional communities puts a monetary value and trade
mechanism on what had been only locally consumed and shared. This
opportunity for earning income in areas where virtually no alternatives
exist provides motivation for hunting that exceeds meeting the basic
needs of family or community. Studies have clearly shown that in some
places where economies are rapidly developing, there is an increase in
available income. A increase in the demand for and the consumption of
bushmeat usually follows.
Another economic change in some areas of Central Africa that
exacerbates the crisis is the collapse of commodity prices on the world
market for crops such as cacao. Previously productive plantations now
stand idle and overgrown in many places. Even crops such as oil palm
nuts are now produced and shipped more efficiently in West Africa or
Asia, thereby rendering these economic alternatives unattractive.
Another cause of the problem is the ease of access to wildlife
populations. Historically, access to distant tracts of forest was very
difficult, and the ability of poachers to kill, process, and transport
large quantities of bushmeat was limited. Today, roads penetrate into
previously inaccessible forests. In addition, the technology used to
kill wildlife has also changed dramatically in recent times.
Underlying these changes in Africa is the political and social
backdrop. Recent decades have seen abrupt and unpredictable, as well as
chronic civil conflict. With the breakdown of law and the displacement
of large numbers of people, hunting for bushmeat increases
dramatically. This is well illustrated in recent years in the
Democratic Republic of the Congo, formerly Zaire. National parks and
protected areas are settled by refugees and rebel soldiers who turn to
wildlife for money and sustenance. Enormous commercial operations in
the eastern parts of that country even export bushmeat northward to
countries that have already exterminated their wildlife.
The effects of the over harvest of wildlife for the commercial
bushmeat market may include species extinction over large areas or
entire ecosystems. Some species are more vulnerable than others. Long-
lived and slow-reproducing species such as elephants and apes are the
hardest hit. Elephants are usually the first species to be taken when a
new area is opened to bushmeat hunting. Until recently, elephants were
poached primarily for ivory, with their meat being a by-product for
local consumption or left in the forest. Now, because of the increased
demand for bushmeat, and the ease with which it can be transported and
sold often across international borders bushmeat commerce may be a
greater threat to the remaining elephant herds than ivory trading.
Gorillas, chimpanzees and bonobos are all illegally hunted for
bushmeat, and they are particularly sensitive to disturbance. As
species populations come under illegal hunting pressure, they often
move into the territory of a neighboring population. This may provoke
additional stress, including fighting, among individuals from the two
groups. Because of the slow reproductive rate, the loss of even a few
percent of a population of these species each year over long periods is
sufficient to drive species such as the bonobo to local extinction.
Chimpanzee and gorillas are prized by some bushmeat consumers and often
fetch the highest price on the market. Some hunters specialize in
hunting apes with devastating effects on local populations.
Many more endangered or threatened species are also victims of
over-exploitation, including numerous species of monkeys and three
species of crocodiles. Thousands of dwarf crocodiles are captured each
year in some areas and shipped live to markets in urban centers days or
weeks away by riverboat. Our Congolese colleagues inform us that dwarf
crocodile numbers are plummeting, and they now are absent from much of
their range. This carries serious implications for the aquatic
ecosystem.
Role of the Fish and Wildlife Service
The Service is an active participant in a variety of conservation
activities with a range of partners in the governments of developing
countries and with international and national non-governmental
organizations. The Service is responsible for the implementation of the
African Elephant Conservation Act of 1989 and the African Elephant
Conservation Fund (AfECF) created by the Act, as well as the Great Ape
Conservation Act of 2000 and Great Ape Conservation Fund (GACF) created
by that Act. With authority under these and two additional
Multinational Species Conservation Acts, the Service is forging
effective working relationships with range country governments and non-
governmental organizations (NGO) active throughout Africa and Asia. Our
Division of International Conservation is also a partner in U.S. Agency
for International Development (USAID)'s Central African Regional
Program for the Environment (CARPE), a collaboration of US-based NGOs
and government agencies working for conservation in the Central Africa
forest zone. Our experience in working with partners to conserve and
manage wildlife and their habitats in Africa continues to grow. Through
our involvement on the ground and in developing networks, the Service
has gained some valuable but alarming consciousness about serious
wildlife conservation issues.
The African Elephant Conservation Act
Central Africa has been a major focus of technical and financial
support through AfECF. One project developed and implemented in
cooperation with the World Wildlife Fund and the government of the
Central African Republic emphasizes conservation of elephants and their
habitats in protected areas such as the Dzanga-Ndoki National Park.
During the course of this project, an ecoguard force was trained and
equipped, and thousands of wire snares and dozens of illegal firearms
have been confiscated. Work with local communities has also led to a
better understanding, and increased level of cooperation, among
villagers and park personnel. The control of illegal bushmeat trade has
been greatly improved through this project.
AfECF funds two important bushmeat control projects in the Republic
of Congo, both led by the Wildlife Conservation Society and the
Congolese Ministry of Water and Forests. One is a seminal project to
regulate bushmeat production and trade in a logging concession south of
the Nouabale-Ndoki National Park in northern Congo. In addition to
controlling bushmeat poaching and traffic, the project is making
significant progress developing a model for the relationship among a
logging company, local communities and hunters, and an international
conservation NGO to minimize illegal trade in bushmeat. The model will
play an important role in the re-examination of policies and
regulations relating to logging concessions to address wildlife
management and exploitation concerns.
The other project is in the Lac Tele Community Forest Reserve in
the northern Congo. Because there are few roads in this remote area,
the river network is used to illegally transport large quantities of
bushmeat northward to markets in the Central African Republic. The
AfECF grant assists the reserves warden and his team from the Ministry
of Water and Forests with controlling key points in the river system
that traverses the reserve. In addition, the project has a community
awareness component that seeks to inform villagers of the need to
conserve wildlife for the long-term, rather than merely as a means for
immediate reward.
These three examples of joint projects pursued under AfECF
demonstrate that there are ways to help build law enforcement capacity
among African government agencies, and to support the development of
effective legal hunting and trade regulation systems in the near term.
In the longer term, the training and education provided by these
projects will yield sustained benefits to conservation efforts. As the
ability of the government to analyze and deal with emerging problems
increases, more effective conservation will follow.
The Great Ape Conservation Act
The GACF currently supports 18 projects in 15 countries in Africa.
An integral component of some of these projects is conservation
education and bushmeat awareness programs. These programs inform local
communities that the Great Apes are often targeted as bushmeat species,
and are particularly hard-hit by poaching. The Cameroon Wildlife Aid
Fund, a national NGO with a conservation education program at the
Yaounde Zoo, runs a project that educated an urban audience about the
bushmeat trade and its impact on apes and other wildlife. This project
is particularly valuable because urban audiences have been largely
neglected in most countries in Central Africa.
Another important contribution to public awareness of the crisis is
a wide-reaching project in partnership with the Bonobo Conservation
Initiative (BCI). BCI a small international NGO that is working with
the government of the Democratic Republic of Congo, local NGOs, and
communities in the area to the north of Salonga National Park. The
Salonga area and its surroundings comprise the entire range of the
bonobo. Therefore, protection and management of the area is critical to
the survival of the species. This BCI program studies bonobo
distribution north of Salonga NP and has a major component to exchange
information with communities about the threat posed to bonobos by
poaching. The BCI also plans a major radio campaign to raise awareness
at a national level and has established an excellent working
relationship with Congolese governmental agencies.
The Service's Division of International Conservation is a CARPE
partner and is now in its second year of working with many partners
from government agencies, NGOs and academia. Our broad range of
partners include U.S. Department of Agriculture/Forest Service, Peace
Corps, and the National Aeronautic and Space Administration (NASA);
World Wildlife Fund, Wildlife Conservation Society, Conservation
International, African Wildlife Foundation, World Resources Institute,
and Innovative Resources Management; and, the University of Maryland.
The focus of the Service's efforts under USAID's CARPE project is to
support the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species
(CITES) Bushmeat Working Group (CBWG). The CBWG was formed in response
to an adopted proposal at the Eleventh CITES Conference of the Parties,
April 2000. The proposal's mandate is to find ways to address the
illegal trade in endangered and threatened species (CITES Appendices I
and II) across international borders as bushmeat, and the conditions
that foster illegal trade in the countries from which the animals
originate.
The CBWG is composed of representatives from six Central African
countries including the Central African Republic, the Republic of Congo
(Brazzaville), the Democratic Republic of the Congo (Kinshasa), Gabon,
Cameroon, and Equatorial Guinea. The national representatives are the
heads of the respective wildlife divisions, and each country has an
appointed national bushmeat officer. A regional coordinator is planned
for Yaounde, Cameroon, who will work with the member countries to
develop and execute a series of priority actions to address this trade.
In addition, the CBWG Regional Coordinator will work closely with the
CITES-Monitoring of Illegally Killed Elephants Coordinator for Central
Africa to assure a harmonization of effort regarding monitoring of
elephant killing and law enforcement patrols.
The Service is working with the governments of these six range
countries, the United Kingdom, and international NGOs such as the
Bushmeat Crisis Task Force, to support the CBWG and its work. Current
efforts include: national wildlife policy reviews; understanding the
nature and details of the production sites, transport routes and means,
border crossing points, and other information that can be used to
control the illegal trade; a study on the status of various regulatory
mechanisms within forestry concessions, how they are designed and work,
and how they can be improved; and, ways to improve information exchange
and the harmonizing of laws among countries in the Central African sub-
region. In addition, the CBWG will be responsible for developing and
implementing a region-wide awareness campaign regarding the bushmeat
trade, which has been identified as a critically important and
effective mechanism for effecting beneficial change in behaviors with
regard to wildlife use.
Recommendations
The Service recommends the following to address the bushmeat
problem: (1) sustaining collaborative efforts such as the Multinational
Species Conservation Acts and CARPE Partnership; (2) Central African
wildlife policy review and revision, wildlife monitoring and
sustainable management, and strengthening the protected areas system in
Central Africa; and (3) licensing and regulation of hunting seasons and
wildlife trade should be based on science and practicality.
In Central Africa, as elsewhere on the continent, laws exist to
regulate hunting and commercial exploitation of wildlife and other
forest products. Certain species cannot be hunted, such as the great
apes; and some areas are off limits to hunters, such as national parks
and other protected areas. In some countries there are closed hunting
seasons, and legal methods of hunting and quotas for some species are
limited. In most areas, hunters must be licensed and their firearms
registered by the authorities. In other places, hunters may only employ
traditional means such as crossbows, spears, or nets made of natural
fibers. Although the law regulates the commercialization of wildlife,
the means to enforce laws and to regulate hunting and trade in wildlife
products is very limited. Enforcement of existing laws is needed to
regulate hunting and trade so that it is sustainable over the long
term.
The CBWG, in cooperation with the CARPE partnership, will conduct
policy review and revision in the coming year. Within existing
resources, the Service will examine ways to further support this work
with technical advice and to assist the range states, when asked, to
develop optimal wildlife policies that are harmonized across the sub-
region.
In order for wildlife to be sustainably used for food or
recreation, monitoring of populations, including threats, health
status, off-take, and habitat condition, must be carried out. The
Service supports monitoring elephant populations in this area through
the CITES Monitoring of the Illegal Killing of Elephants (MIKE)
project. As part of this program, information acquisition,
transmission, storage, analysis, and interpretation is being developed.
This approach is an efficient way to monitor certain bushmeat species
in key areas. Within existing resources, the Service could be of
assistance in building these essential capacities among range states
and local communities. Linking this effort and the CBWG mandate would
enable a harmonization of efforts and efficient use of limited
resources and personnel.
Protected areas form the nucleus of wildlife management in Central
Africa, and may play a vital role in a source and sink@ model. This
model describes a system that allows protected areas to act as a
sources@ of wildlife, that when reaching carrying capacity, could move
outward into multi-use forests, where they could be sustainable
harvested by local people. This model requires sound scientific
information, including wildlife monitoring, socioeconomic information
about local conditions and attitudes, and the ability to regulate
hunting and trade.
In some respects this situation is not unlike that which faced the
United States prior to the institution of scientific wildlife
management in the 1920s and 1930s. At that time market hunting and loss
of habitat had eliminated or nearly eliminated many species here in the
United States. Initiatives taken by American hunters and their
organizations led to the Migratory Bird Treaty, creation of State fish
and wildlife agencies, the Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration program,
and establishment of National Wildlife Refuges and state wildlife
management areas to protect habitat.
With the resulting increase in knowledge of how to manage wildlife,
dependable funding and continuing strong support from the hunting
community, even once severely depleted species of game animals are now
plentiful. Few Americans, even hunters, know that there were fewer than
500,000 white-tailed deer in the entire United States in the 1920s, and
that most States east of the Mississippi had no or very limited deer
seasons. At that time, hunting of wood ducks was banned, and it was
feared they would go extinct. They are now the most common breeding
waterfowl in the East.
While the American conservation experience cannot be transplanted
wholesale to Africa, we have acquired a tremendous body of knowledge
relating both to wildlife management and to fostering a conservation
ethic among the hunting community which can serve as models to be
adapted to local conditions elsewhere. Equally important, we know from
our own experience that these measures can work.
Finally, although anecdotal evidence identifies there is an
existing problem concerning importation of bushmeat into the United
States, there has yet to be a definitive review of the extent of the
problem. It is important to work with partners internationally to
identify how bushmeat is entering the United States and to develop
training programs for customs agents in the countries of origin to
control the export of bushmeat from the source.
Mr. Chairman, the Service appreciates your interest in the critical
problem of illegal bushmeat consumption and trade. We look forward to
working with you and members of the Committee to seek ways to address
this crisis. This concludes my testimony. I will be pleased to respond
to any questions you may have.
______
[Attachments to Mr. Stansell's statement follow:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.002
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.003
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.004
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.005
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.006
Mr. Gilchrest. Thank you very much, Dr. Stansell.
Mr. Graham?
STATEMENT OF JAMES A. GRAHAM, PROJECT MANAGER, CENTRAL AFRICA
REGIONAL PROGRAM FOR THE ENVIRONMENT, U.S. AGENCY FOR
INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Mr. Graham. Good morning, Mr. Chairman. I would like to
thank you for inviting me to testify. If I could, I would like
to have my written testimony submitted for the record and
instead provide a brief summary of my statement.
Mr. Gilchrest. Without objection.
Mr. Graham. Thank you.
As the project manager for USAID's Central Africa Regional
Program for the Environment, I am quite familiar with the
problem of commercial-scale bushmeat hunting in Sub-Saharan
Africa. Among the rural population in the Congo River Basin,
until recently, people made money growing and selling rice,
cotton, cacao, coffee, and peanuts. With farming unprofitable
and off-farm jobs difficult to come by, many rural people with
access to the forest have resorted to commercial hunting and
trading of bushmeat. The move toward bushmeat has occurred
because high returns can be realized from a relatively small
investment. Wildlife is a free good which is harvested when
other alternatives to earn money are limited. Bushmeat is
relatively inexpensive because hunters do not pay costs of
producing wildlife, as do farmers who raise livestock.
Moreover, logging companies have opened up once-isolated
forests, providing hunters with easy access to abundant
wildlife and traders with cheap transportation, which in turn
reduces bushmeat production costs and increases supply to urban
markets. Rampant availability of firearms as a spinoff from
political insecurity in the region has made harvesting bushmeat
easy.
Though habitat loss is often cited as the primary cause of
wildlife extinction, over the next 5 to 10 years commercial
bushmeat hunting will constitute the most immediate threat to
wildlife conservation in Central Africa. At current levels of
exploitation, this will result in the progressive depletion and
local extinction of most species of apes and other primates,
large antelope, and elephant from hunted forests.
Moreover, hunting indirectly impacts the forest by: first,
threatening the survival of forest carnivores that rely on
bushmeat species as prey; and, two, significantly reducing the
number of seed-dispersing animals, thus changing tree species
regeneration rates and forest structure and composition. The
direct and indirect impacts of this unsustainable hunting will
have both immediate and long-term adverse impacts on the
structure and function of the forest.
For example, while rates of deforestation in the region are
currently low, it is estimated by CARPE that forest cover may
decline by between 29 and 46 percent by the year 2050. The
transmission of disease from animals to humans is also well
documented. Bushmeat consumption may place people in increased
jeopardy of contracting and transmitting animal-derived
diseases or other emerging pathogens.
USAID's CARPE program has supported preliminary initiatives
in several areas to blunt the trend toward increased bushmeat
consumption. CARPE partners, among whom you will hear from WWF,
WCS, CI, and the Fish and Wildlife Service already, have
recently worked to help CARPE in creating CITES, the Convention
on International Trade in Endangered Species, Bushmeat Working
Group, which attempts to exchange information on bushmeat
activities among the Congo Basin states.
USAID is also directly supporting gorilla conservation
activities that include several efforts to ensure that primates
are not hunted for bushmeat in locations in Central Africa. In
addition, USAID conducts a number of health and nutrition
programs in the Congo River Basin that have the effect of
combating the spread of diseases stemming from practices such
as the consumption of bushmeat.
In conclusion, I would note that the bushmeat crisis is
only a symptom of a much greater problem of the lack of
sustained development in the Congo Basin. The solution to the
bushmeat crisis will only be achieved by fully involving
Africans in undertaking essential broad development actions,
thus raising their overall standard of living to allow them to
secure the alternative sources of protein.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would be happy to answer any
questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Graham follows:]
Statement of James A. Graham, Project Manager, Central Africa Regional
Program for the Environment, U.S. Agency for International Development
Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the Committee, I would
like to thank you for inviting me to testify about the environmental
problems confronting the Congo River Basin in light of the growing
trend of bushmeat consumption in the region. As the project manager for
the U.S. Agency for International Development's (USAID) Central Africa
Regional Program for the Environment (CARPE), I am quite familiar with
the problem of bushmeat consumption in sub-Saharan Africa.
While wildlife has been hunted for food throughout the history of
human existence, only in the last several years has bushmeat become
commercialized [What does this mean, ``become monetized''? Can we say
this more clearly?], and consequently, an important source of income in
Central Africa. Among the rural population in this region, until
recently, people made money growing and selling rice, cotton, cacao,
coffee, and peanuts. Over the past 20 years, however, livelihoods have
suffered as commodity prices have plummeted and increasingly poor road
systems have made it more difficult and costly to transport goods to
market. With farming unprofitable and off-farm jobs difficult to come
by, many rural people with access to the forest have resorted to the
commercial hunting and trading of bushmeat.
The move toward bushmeat has occurred because high returns can be
realized from a relatively small investment. Firearms, which have
become abundant as a result of assorted civil conflicts, and other
items, such as snares, are readily available for use in the hunting of
game for bushmeat. Furthermore, wildlife is a free good. Increasing
urban populations have fueled the demand for bushmeat and while these
populations have grown, their buying power has declined with the
weakening regional economy. Families that were once able to afford
beef, chicken, and pork now have shifted to typically less expensive
wildlife as their primary source of protein. Bushmeat is relatively
inexpensive because hunters do not pay the costs of producing wildlife,
as do farmers who raise livestock. Moreover, logging companies have
opened up once-isolated forests, providing hunters with easy access to
abundant wildlife and traders with cheap transportation, which in turn
reduces bushmeat production costs and increases supply to urban
markets.
Though habitat loss is often cited as the primary cause of wildlife
extinction, over the next 5 10 years, commercial bushmeat hunting
constitutes the most immediate threat to wildlife conservation in
Central Africa. The scale of commercial hunting required to supply
large, rapidly growing urban populations with meat is now exceeding
levels that can be tolerated by most large-bodied, slow-reproducing
forest animals. At current levels of exploitation, this will result in
the progressive depletion and local extinction of most species of apes
and other primates, large antelope, and elephant from hunted forests.
Only small, rapidly reproducing animals such as rodents and the
smallest of antelope are likely to survive the pressure from commercial
hunters.
Moreover, hunting indirectly impacts the forest by (1) threatening
the survival of forest carnivores such as leopards, golden cats,
crowned eagles, and snakes that rely on bushmeat species as prey; and
(2) significantly reducing the number of seed dispersing animals, thus
changing tree species regeneration rates and forest structure and
composition. The direct and indirect impacts of this unsustainable
hunting will likely have both immediate and long-term adverse impacts
on the structure and function of the forest. For example, while the
rates of deforestation in the region are currently low, it is estimated
by CARPE that forest cover may decline by between twenty-nine and forty
six percent by 2050. In addition, bushmeat consumption may place people
in increased jeopardy of contracting and transmitting animal-derived
(epizootic) diseases or other emerging pathogens. For instance, by
eating a partially cooked chimpanzee a bushmeat consumer could contract
a fatal disease such as Ebola. This transmission of disease from
animals to humans is well documented, with brucellosis and
toxoplasmosis serving as two additional examples.
Today, bushmeat continues to be an economically important food and
trade item for as many as 30 million poor rural and urban people in the
Congo Basin. In Central Africa, over 1 million metric tons of bushmeat
are consumed each year the equivalent of almost 4 million cattle. A
hunter can make the equivalent of $300 $1,000 per year more than the
average household income for the region. This income figure is also
comparable to the salaries paid to park officials, leaving them
susceptible to graft. Traders, transporters, market sellers and
restaurateurs also benefit from the commercial trade in bushmeat, and
in combating this problem, the USG must acknowledge that all of these
incomes would decline if laws against the trade were strictly enforced.
As demand for bushmeat increases, more people will be encouraged to
become involved in the trade, increasing the pressure on wildlife
populations, threatening the survival of rare species, and jeopardizing
access of future families to the nutritional and income benefits from
non-endangered wildlife.
Rising demand for bushmeat, lack of income-generating options for
rural and urban communities, the absence of affordable and acceptable
substitutes, the opening up of ``frontier'' forests by logging and
mining companies, the complicity of government lawmakers and law
enforcers, and the fact that almost anyone can go hunting anywhere
without restriction are the most important factors driving commercial
hunting and working against wildlife conservation. On top of all of
this there is an emerging link between what is becoming known as
``illegal logging'' and the bushmeat trade. While ``illegality'' is at
times a somewhat murky concept in the Congo Basin--in that the
enforcement of many laws often serves more as an inducement to pay
bribes than to benefit the state--much logging is done outside strict
application of the laws. Bushmeat (including the meat of endangered
species) is gathered as ``value added'' to logging activity. Increased
attention devoted to ``illegal logging'' may in time, however, have a
dampening effect on the worst excesses of the bushmeat trade.
International awareness and support for control of the bushmeat
trade was virtually non-existent until the late 1990s, and it is urgent
that concerned individuals and conservation groups work with an
expanded group of government personnel and other key decision makers to
convince them of the significance of the bushmeat crisis. They also
must cultivate the political will to ensure that adequate financial
resources and professional capacity are provided to address the
problem. Nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), governments, and
industry are awakening to the challenge, and are currently seeking ways
to address the bushmeat crisis at the local, national, and
international level. Their pilot initiatives include working with
logging companies to reduce or halt the flow of bushmeat from
concessions and to minimize employee reliance on bushmeat as a source
of food and supplementary income; convincing donors to increase their
long-term support for protected area management; piloting projects to
provide consumers with affordable and palatable alternatives to
bushmeat; encouraging governments to develop legislation and law
enforcement capacity appropriate to the local context; and facilitating
collaboration among the numerous organizations and agencies working in
the region.
USAID's CARPE program has supported preliminary initiatives in
several of these areas. CARPE partners have recently worked to create
the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES)
Bushmeat Working Group (CBWG), which attempts to exchange information
on bushmeat activities among the Congo Basin states. The CBWG is
composed of representatives from a half dozen Central African
countries. The national representatives are the heads of the respective
wildlife divisions of the individual countries and each nation has
appointed a national bushmeat officer. The organization plans to set up
a regional coordinator in Cameroon who will work with the member
countries to develop and execute a series of actions to limit the
bushmeat trade. Current efforts include: national wildlife policy
reviews; improving local understanding of the details of production
sites, transport routes, and border crossing points; a study of the
status of various regulatory mechanisms within forestry concessions;
and ways to improve information exchange and the harmonization of laws
among the countries. The CBWG will also be responsible for developing
and implementing a region-wide awareness campaign regarding the
bushmeat trade. USAID is also directly supporting gorilla conservation
activities that include efforts to ensure that these primates are not
hunted for bushmeat in three locations in Central Africa. We are doing
this by providing our U.S. private voluntary organization partners with
$1.5 million in each of the two past fiscal years.
USAID also conducts a number of health and nutrition programs in
the Congo River Basin that have the effect of combating the spread of
diseases stemming from practices such as the consumption of bushmeat.
As I mentioned earlier in my testimony, wildlife, particularly wild
primates, harbor viruses that can be transmitted between species. For
example, outbreaks of diarrhea have been associated with the
consumption of bushmeat. USAID supports a wide range of health and
nutrition programs in the Congo River Basin aimed at reducing the
morbidity and mortality of infectious diseases. These programs include
diarrheal disease control, prevention of tuberculosis, polio
eradication and routine immunization, integrated disease surveillance
and epidemic preparedness and response.
In conclusion, I would note that the bushmeat crisis is only a
symptom of the much greater problem of the lack of sustained
development in the Congo Basin. With burgeoning populations,
deteriorating terms of trade for most primary products, insecurity, and
dilapidated infrastructure, much of the Congo Basin has a lower
standard of living than at independence more than 40 years ago. The
``solution'' to the bushmeat crisis will only be achieved by fully
involving Africans in undertaking essential broad development actions,
thus raising their overall standard of living to allow them to secure
the alternative sources of protein.
Thank you. I would happy to answer your questions.
______
Mr. Gilchrest. Thank you, Mr. Graham.
A couple of months ago, I was in Africa and we went to
visit it, some for a couple of days, some for just a few hours,
I believe close to 13 countries. And the statement by a petite
German nun in an AIDS clinic in Ethiopia, Addis Ababa, she was
a dentist in Germany and gave that up to find a much more
satisfying way to find meaning in life, so she went to an AIDS
clinic for children in Ethiopia. She said ``Africa goes through
three cycles, and three cycles only: drought, war, and disease.
And each one of those has their own devastating ramifications
and causes.''
So we are engaged in a very, very difficult enterprise
that, unless we get the cooperation from vast numbers of
people, including governments and nonprofits and the people who
are looking to find some type of work, some type of food, some
type of dignity, and those that invest in opportunities in
Africa, which would be the miners, the loggers, essentially
foreign governments, I guess we are going to have a tough road
to hoe--not impossible but we just want to be as important a
part of that strategy as humanly possible.
Mr. Burnam, can you tell us about how many pilot projects
there are in this arena dealing with the bushmeat problem?
Mr. Burnam. No, I don't have an exact number. I think the
witness from the World Wildlife Fund might be able to fill you
in on their activities. This particular project has been going
on for about 3 years, and it is sort of widely regarded as a
potential model for the region. I know across the border in
Cameroon and the Central African Republic, there are also eco-
guards and there is cooperation between the eco-guards in this
trinational area. But my impression is the pilot projects are
just sort of getting off the ground.
Mr. Gilchrest. So this particular pilot project that you
went to--
Mr. Burnam. Yes.
Mr. Gilchrest. --there are eco-guards there as well?
Mr. Burnam. There are 39 eco-guards.
Mr. Gilchrest. How are they paid?
Mr. Burnam. They are paid partly by the logging concession
and also by the NGO's who are funded also by CARPE.
Mr. Gilchrest. What is the logging concession? Is that
locally owned? Is that foreign owned?
Mr. Burnam. No, it is actually a Swiss holding company. It
is one of the major logging companies in the area. Most of the
logging companies are--
Mr. Gilchrest. When you say one of the largest logging
companies in the area, does that go beyond the Congo?
Mr. Burnam. I'm not sure exactly what their holdings are.
There are a number of major French and European logging
companies that work--
Mr. Gilchrest. But they are fairly substantial?
Mr. Burnam. Oh, yes. There are also sort of fly by-night
logging companies.
Mr. Gilchrest. They are the fly by-night logging company?
Mr. Burnam. There are some, yes.
Mr. Gilchrest. Oh, there are some.
Mr. Burnam. Yes. One of the problems is if a responsible
company increases costs by 3 or 4 percent, can they compete
with the fly by-night ones? And that is a problem. But I do
think that having the concession there with the eco-guards and
the controls they place on the wildlife harvesting is very
important. It is encouraging, and I think more projects like
this need to be started up.
Mr. Gilchrest. What are the other sources of protein? I
guess if the eco-guards are fairly well paid and there is a bit
of an infrastructure there for employment for the loggers, but
we don't want people to eat the bushmeat, and agriculture is
not working very well or has disappeared, do they have a plan
right now for sources of food for the people in this region?
Mr. Burnam. Well, the plan really ensures that the local
residents have adequate supplies of bushmeat. I mean, you don't
need to cut them off entirely. There are hunting laws. They
hunt in certain zones in certain seasons, just the way you
would in the U.S.
Mr. Gilchrest. Who enforces that?
Mr. Burnam. The eco-guards and the logging company. And
some of them--some of the people turn in their firearms outside
hunting season so they won't be caught, they won't be tempted.
So it is really--there are a lot of controls. The alternative
sources of protein, vegetable gardens, they are trying to work,
as you would know, more effectively on the poultry farms, which
are a problem in Africa because of viruses, but they are trying
to work on poultry farms. They are bringing in beef in small
quantities. I was told anecdotally that the price of bushmeat
on the market has doubled, which is a sign that, you know, the
controls of bushmeat can raise the price. A lot of it is price.
The bushmeat, as Mr. Graham pointed out, is pretty cheap. It is
pretty cheap to harvest, and it is pretty cheap on the market.
And so if you have got the price of chicken and the price of
beef--they even have a snail project going on. You get those
things to--
Mr. Gilchrest. Peanuts, do peanuts grow there?
Mr. Burnam. Pardon me?
Mr. Gilchrest. Peanuts?
Mr. Burnam. Peanuts, I don't know.
Mr. Gilchrest. That wouldn't work there.
Mr. Burnam. I am not sure. But they--a lot of it is price
and education, and the people of the area, they love the
wildlife. They really don't want to see--they don't want to
lose their wildlife. So there is a lot of support for the
program from the people in the area, once they are educated as
to the nature of the problem. So I think it is a very promising
concept.
Mr. Gilchrest. Mr. Graham, are you familiar with the pilot
project that Mr. Burnam is talking about?
Mr. Graham. Yes, I am familiar with it because it is with
one of our CARPE partners that it is being implemented.
Mr. Gilchrest. Who is the partner?
Mr. Graham. I believe it is WCS in this particular area, if
it is the same project. This is a project that has basically
brought--it was a very innovative project on the part of WCS,
Wildlife Conservation Society of New York, bringing together
what I would like to characterize as a reformed lumber baron
who had his difficulties in court, et cetera, in Europe and has
basically come around a long way to being antagonistic to
national parks and to game preservation to now being very
cooperative. And I think the WCS deserves--
Mr. Gilchrest. How did that happen?
Mr. Graham. I think WCS deserves high credit for inducing
him to be a cooperator.
Also, the Government of Congo has cooperated a great deal
with the evolution of this project, as has a small eco-tourism
organization called Safari International. The four of them got
together and have basically created a large area in North Congo
which can serve the multiple requirements that are necessary
for the game to continue to exist. It is, as Mr. Burnam has
pointed out, it is possible to continue to harvest a very
moderate amount of bushmeat for the local needs. The biggest
issue is what happens when that bushmeat starts to go into the
urban areas where the demand is high, the price is high, and
the production just skyrockets.
Mr. Gilchrest. When you say bushmeat--I understand that we
still hunt deer here. They trap fox, possum, et cetera, all
over the country. And it makes sense to allow local people to
continue to harvest moderate amounts of bushmeat for
consumption. Would you include gorillas in that bushmeat?
Mr. Graham. No, sir. I believe that in most--the range of
the various different kinds of gorillas, the four major
divisions within the gorilla community, there is only one where
it isn't severely endangered, and that is in the area of
western lowland. But even in that area, it is by no means a
situation where it would be the kind of thing that you could go
out and have your--like a deer hunt. There should not be an
open season on gorillas under any circumstances.
Mr. Gilchrest. In reading and preparing for the hearing
today, it seemed that there was at least somewhere some
evidence--and I mentioned it in the opening statement--about
restaurants in various parts of the country that serve exotic
meals and in some cases maybe even gorilla meat.
What is done in those countries--Europe, Japan, or the
United States--as far as enforcement is concerned in dealing
with these international agreements to not deal in endangered
species? Are you aware of any restaurant--or any effort to
pursue the restaurants?
Mr. Graham. No, sir, I am not aware of any; in this country
I am not familiar. I have seen menus in Africa that include a
number of animals that I don't choose to eat and I am not sure
I would want to digest. But the issue that you bring up I would
defer to Dr. Stansell because it really falls under the CITES;
transportation of gorillas in any way, whether they are dead,
in a diplomatic bag or whatever, is strictly against CITES. And
I would defer--
Mr. Gilchrest. Dr. Stansell, can you tell us what the Fish
and Wildlife Service is doing in that area?
Dr. Stansell. Yes, Mr. Chairman, thank you. As I said in my
testimony, there are literally dozens of species that are
utilized for bushmeat. Some of those are fairly common
throughout the continent. Some of those are very rare and very
limited. Through the Convention on International Trade in
Endangered Species, we have identified those species that are
particularly threatened or endangered as a result of
international trade, which include species like gorillas,
elephants, and some of the crocodile species. There is a
complete commercial ban on the trade in their meat for any
reason. And the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service aggressively
enforces those kinds of imports into the United States.
I would say the Convention, however, is made up of 158
parties now, and the strength of that Convention is based on
the ability of those individual parties to do the enforcement.
You could very well see species that are technically listed on
the Convention appear in a situation like in a restaurant, but
hopefully not here in the United States. In fact, we have made
a few cases in the United States on certain species that were
illegally imported. So I think it is a problem and it is
outside the United States. I think there are--
Mr. Gilchrest. Has there ever been a restaurant cited or
fined or closed down because they have served gorilla meat or
some other type of endangered species?
Dr. Stansell. Not in the United States, and I don't know
about other countries and their enforcement. We have much
stricter domestic measures under the Endangered Species Act
that also cover a number of these species.
Mr. Gilchrest. Is there any way to know whether the trade
in bushmeat, especially to restaurants in foreign countries, is
widespread, is a small part of the bushmeat trade problem?
Dr. Stansell. I believe that it is a growing part of the
bushmeat problem, even if it affects species that are fairly
common and not gorillas. It feeds the demand and the desire for
others to have access to those kinds of species. So I think
that this is an example of how the process is growing now that
we are actually seeing these kinds of products showing up in
developed countries and in international markets far beyond the
borders of Africa.
We see this phenomenon in--not only Africa, but
particularly Southeast Asia, where a number of turtle species
are going into the food market. Our concern is that this is
growing, and perhaps bushmeat in Latin America may be the next
focal point. So it is leading the demand.
Mr. Gilchrest. As we move to try to find solutions to this
problem and create a strategy, the United States, I guess,
works with various elements in the international community. How
does State, Fish and Wildlife, and USAID collaborate in this
arena?
Dr. Stansell. I can certainly start to answer your
question. Fish and Wildlife Service has, through at least the
two grant programs that are directly related to conservation of
elephants and great apes, we are able to provide actual--
Mr. Gilchrest. Well, actually what I meant was do the three
of you or your representatives collaborate on the U.S. end as
you engage the international community? Mr. Burnam, Dr.
Stansell, and Mr. Graham, do you three or your representatives
discuss this issue in both the particulars and the big picture,
maybe as far as you have a region in the Congo or you are
dealing with Liberia or Sierra Leone or Guinea or some other
place, in your strategy do you include the medical community
for the problems of disease? Do you include the Department of
Agriculture to create an agricultural corridor or an
agricultural zone to tap the kinds of potentials that could be
a food source? Do you collaborate with the enforcers, the eco-
guards, you know, the full range--the nonprofits that are out
there? Is there a fairly coordinated, united front from the
U.S. perspective?
Mr. Burnam. Well, Mr. Chairman, forest law enforcement has
been a major diplomatic initiative of the U.S. Department of
State. In fact, President Bush has offered to help developing
nations combat illegal logging. And as we began to look at that
issue, we realized that the illegal trade in wildlife is
intimately related to illegal logging because of the connection
I tried to bring out in my testimony. So we have been studying
the issue on an interagency basis. Jim and I were in the Congo
for a planning meeting on forest law enforcement. That is what
we were there for. But as soon as you take up the issue of
forest law enforcement, you realize logging is both sort of a
problem and a solution. It is a problem because it opens up the
roads, but it also offers the opportunity to do some of the
things that the CARPE program and WCS and others have been
working on.
So there is a good deal of attention in the Administration
to this problem, which has been heightened by your hearing,
and--
Mr. Gilchrest. Did you say ``tension'' in the
Administration or ``attention''?
Mr. Burnam. I am sorry. Attention to it.
Mr. Gilchrest. Attention.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Burnam. Oh, there is no tension in this area. I am glad
you corrected the record.
Mr. Gilchrest. When we look at this issue--and I don't want
to broaden it beyond the scope of the hearing, necessarily. But
we are looking at an area of the world where there is
difficulty because of the banking system. The economic
infrastructure, in some cases, is totally absent. The cultural
differences of private property versus no concept of private
property, the investment potential, there is just a myriad of
issues out there that make it very difficult to make a
connection where there is very steady progress.
When I go to my district, people are always saying, ``What
are you doing to bring us jobs?'' Well, you know, they say that
to every Member of Congress. But there are some aspects of
economic growth in this country that are pretty standard and
almost taken for granted. But if you move into an arena where
you are working in West Africa and Central Africa, in much of
Africa, it seems that you are starting at the very beginning.
Each decade we start at the very beginning to try to develop
something that will take hold.
As you work with these governments--and I would assume
probably there is a great deal being done. And I guess to bring
the point home, when I was in Addis and in Mozambique and a
number of other countries, and we sat down with members of
parliament or the prime minister, there was an overwhelming
sense of trials and the difficulties that lie ahead in
stabilizing governments and countries where what we take for
granted is absent almost in its entirety.
So would State, would USAID, and the myriad of programs
that you have throughout the continent, as you move through
with these reborn logging folks and local people and create in
some way a sense of a stable government based in the early
stages on the rule of law, equal opportunity, representative
democracy, the concept of private property, those kinds of
things?
Mr. Burnam. I think you have focused very eloquently on the
factors that need to be addressed. You know, the Administration
believes that sustainable development has three pillars: the
environmental, the economic, and the social. And you really
have to--all those three pillars have to be strong if you are
going to have sustainable development. You cannot have--you
cannot just draw a line on a map and create a park and say, OK,
we have protected biodiversity. You have got to have the
economic and the social component. As you pointed out, you have
to provide a better livelihood for the people and a better
income for the people.
Some of the forests in Central Africa are still relatively
untouched. The resources that are there, many people within the
Congo Basin themselves are unaware of. There are waterfalls
that were discovered last June. There is a vast area here of
untouched moist forest, but riddled with logging concessions at
the moment. And so the question is--
Mr. Gilchrest. Where did the logging concessions come from?
Mr. Burnam. From the government. The government will--this
are national--
Mr. Gilchrest. And this is a source of revenue for the
government?
Mr. Burnam. The government, in some cases, yes, it is
viewed as a source of revenue, although the concessions are
often simply given out with the expectation that the economic
development, which--
Mr. Gilchrest. Is there any criteria that the government
uses to issue these concessions?
Mr. Burnam. Yes, there are.
Mr. Gilchrest. Such as conservation--
Mr. Burnam. Yes, and most of the governments have within
the past few years revised or are in the process of revising
their forestry laws.
I guess the point I am trying to make, in the Congo we are
kind of--we are at the fork in the road, and the question is
which way do we go. Do we move toward a system of sustainable
forestry with controls on wildlife harvesting? Or do we keep
going down the road of basically, you know, unregulated
activity? So I think it is a very--and the game isn't over yet.
There are a lot of opportunities to build on what the CARPE
program has already done. And so I think it is a place where we
should be focusing our attention and where the kind of focused
effort that you are calling for is, in fact, needed.
Mr. Gilchrest. Do you have any recommendations for the
Congress in this regard?
Mr. Burnam. Well, we will come back here with
recommendations if we develop some.
Mr. Gilchrest. Dr. Stansell? Mr. Graham?
Mr. Graham. I didn't have recommendations for the Congress.
I just wanted to underline the partnership among the three of
us, our institutions. I would bring to your attention a book
that the CARPE project has put down lessons learned over the
last 5 years, and I believe that this supports what Mr. Burnam
has indicated, that we are at a fork in the road. We have
learned a lot about the kinds of issues that are taking place
in the Congo Basin, broadly put, and also in detail on the
bushmeat crisis. And I believe that the partnership, the three
institutions that are sitting here are collaborating formally
and informally to try to address these. And I just wish for you
to realize that this is a process that is going ahead.
Mr. Gilchrest. Thank you very much.
Dr. Stansell?
Dr. Stansell. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would only
add that this is an extensive problem, as you have indicated,
that really gets at the heart of the social structure on the
continent.
That said, I would hope that we didn't lose sight of the
fact that there is an awful lot that we are doing, there is an
awful lot that we can continue to do, while we are trying to
sort out all of the bigger issues, the bigger social issues
that underlie this crisis. So I would just ask that we continue
to support, to the extent that we can, the collaborative
efforts that we have got going. We have participated in a dozen
or so projects through our various grant programs that really
have provided--
Mr. Gilchrest. How much money is in the grant programs?
Dr. Stansell. Right now we have $1 million in our elephant
grant program, $1 million in our great apes program, and--
Mr. Gilchrest. These grants go to--
Dr. Stansell. These grants go to on-the-ground projects,
either through participating nongovernmental organizations or
working directly with the African governments. And they really
do bring--it is a small focus, but they bring a focus to the
kinds of solutions that we have talked about today. A perfect
example is through CARPE we have collaborated in providing
additional funds for game guards, some very specific things
that can be done today to achieve a solution to those problems.
Mr. Gilchrest. Would you say a country like Liberia is lost
or is there anybody working in Liberia right now? Can that
country and its wildlife be saved?
Dr. Stansell. I don't know specifically about activities in
Liberia, but I do know enough about the country to know that
the answer is yes. Habitat is still there. If you look back at
the turn of the century in the United States and count the
number of wild turkeys or white-tail deer or wood ducks, with
all the market-based hunting that was going on at that point in
time. So I do believe that we still have time, but it is
running out, and the kinds of activities that we can move
forward are going to be critical.
Mr. Gilchrest. Is USAID in Liberia right now? Are they back
in Liberia? Anybody in Liberia?
Mr. Graham. I believe that USAID still has a presence
associated with Liberia. I am not sure whether it is in
Monrovia or in a separate city serving the interests of trying
to keep a presence in Liberia. Exactly what it is doing in
regard to the environment, I am sorry, Mr. Chairman, I am not
privy. I just simply don't know.
Mr. Gilchrest. Sierra Leone?
Mr. Graham. The same would be true in Sierra Leone. I do
know that USAID has activities that are associated with Sierra
Leone, but, again, I believe it is being managed out of another
city.
Mr. Gilchrest. I see. So you get some brave souls to go in
there. So your sense of the crisis is it is truly solvable, it
can get better? Is there some hope that the world's great
species will survive through this century?
Mr. Burnam. Oh, yes. I think we are at a fork in the road,
as I said. You know, there are a lot more elephants in Africa
than we thought. When they first went into Gabon to survey the
forests there in the 1980's, they thought there were only 5,000
elephants in Africa. Well, there are about 100,000 elephants in
Gabon. These areas are--I was at one clearing where I saw 87
elephants in one clearing. I mean, this Congo has enormous
natural resources that are there, and the whole question is:
Are the governments and the NGO's and the other countries other
than the United States, such as Germany and France and Great
Britain, are we going--the European Union has some programs in
the area. Are we going to really focus our efforts now and try
to build on what has been done in the past 5 years? That is
really the issue.
Mr. Gilchrest. The last question. I know there is just a
myriad of things to do and ways to approach this and dollars
that need to be spent and so on and so forth. Would you say--
with all the things that need to be done, what is the most
difficult problem in an ongoing solution? Is it competent,
stable governments?
Mr. Burnam. From my perspective, I think I would just cite
one factor as--I think competent, stable governments, respect
for the rule of law, are the heart of the problem. But, you
know, simply sending out eco-guards to catch poachers isn't by
itself going to do the trick. So I think the political and the
economic and the social aspects have to be addressed in an
integrated manner.
Mr. Gilchrest. Very good.
Dr. Stansell. I think I would only add to that that, of
course, you have to have stability, at least to a degree,
within the governments, but I think that the longer-term issue
is developing a long-term land-use strategy and forest
development strategy that would address many of these kinds of
issues, and then moving forward in a collective global approach
to try to get that kind of strategy implemented on a country-
by-country basis where the stability would allow it. We are
talking about a vast area that has geopolitical boundaries that
are just that. We can almost pick and choose in those areas
where it is stable enough to work. So if we could collectively
move forward, I would think that would probably be the most
important thing that we could do to achieve this.
Mr. Graham. I would like to simply make a complementary
addition to the previous two speakers, but also to add that one
of the real resources in Africa are the people. And the level
of human resources there varies from very, very, very sound,
professional, accomplished individuals to people who really are
out in the bush, literally and figuratively. And we need to
invest in those people.
One of the great things that is harming the investment in
those people, of course, is the diseases that are taking so
many of them away. But the human resource capacity building is
an extremely important complement to what the previous speakers
have already indicated.
Thank you, sir.
Mr. Gilchrest. Thank you very much. Gentlemen, this has
been very helpful and inspiring. We would like to stay engaged
with each of you as the process moves along over the coming
decades.
Mr. Burnam, Dr. Stansell, and Mr. Graham, thank you very
much, gentlemen.
Mr. Burnam. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Dr. Stansell. Thank you.
Mr. Graham. Thank you.
Mr. Gilchrest. Our next panel will be: Mr. Marcellin
Agnagna, Chairman, CITES Bushmeat Working Group; Dr. Michael
Hutchins, Director of the Department of Conservation and
Science, American Zoo and Aquarium Association, and Co-
Chairman, Bushmeat Crisis Task Force; Dr. Richard Carroll,
Endangered Species West and Central Africa Programs, World
Wildlife Fund; Dr. John Robinson, Vice President and Director
of Wildlife Conservation Society; Dr. Mohamed Bakarr, Senior
Technical Director, Center for Applied Biodiversity Science at
Conservation International.
I think there are more seats, if everybody wants to sit
down.
I want to thank the witnesses for traveling here now this
afternoon. We look forward to engaging you in your testimony,
and, Mr. Agnagna, you may begin, sir.
STATEMENT OF MARCELLIN AGNAGNA, CHAIRMAN,
CITES BUSHMEAT WORKING GROUP
Mr. Agnagna. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity
to speak to this Committee concerning a very important
challenge facing all Central Africans--the bushmeat crisis. But
first I would like you to excuse me because of my English. I
usually speak French, but I am going to try to express myself
in English.
Mr. Gilchrest. If it becomes difficult, you can speak
French. Someone will interpret. But you are doing just fine,
sir.
Mr. Agnagna. Thank you. I was going to say that the massive
African equatorial forest is the second largest humid tropical
forest in the world after the Amazon, both in size and its
biological wealth. It is an unequaled refuge for a number of
species of fauna and flora, some of which remain to be
discovered, while others are threatened with disappearance.
This immense natural resource heritage continues to be the
principal source of meeting the vital needs of the peoples of
the Central African forest. The subsistence needs of yesterday
have yielded to an improper lucrative exploitation of natural
resources beyond reasonable limits and, most notably, the
commerce of bushmeat.
The situation is complicated and enhanced by the armed
conflicts and logging activity in the region and the
accompanying proliferation of weapons that are now used for
poaching. Networks of well-equipped and well-organized poachers
empty the forests using Kalashnikov rifles to feed the urban
centers, penalizing the village populations that essentially
depend on bushmeat for their survival. Suddenly there is a food
security problem at the village level, and it is necessary that
the new management strategies take into account traditional and
long-forgotten knowledge.
The use of natural resources was essentially for
subsistence. Vital activities such as hunting, fishing, and
cutting large trees in the forest were well regulated and often
subjected to rituals.
Species such as the leopard, bongo antelope, Nile
crocodile, elephant, and the hippopotamus, to name a few, were
revered by most of the tribes in Central Africa, and often were
animals totemic or emblematic in the Bantu culture.
Although prized by most of the Africans, bushmeat is a
commodity that was not consumed daily It constituted an
exceptional meal and was often reserved for special occasions.
Even after the advent of firearms at independence, the
tradition always was respected. Every weapon that entered the
forest was only authorized to take a quota established by the
chief. Bushmeat was not marketed but was consumed only inside
the hunting territory.
Unfortunately, this effective type of management, adapted
to the African context, was rejected under the pretense of
modernity or economic development.
The economies of most countries of the region are supported
either by oil or forest exploration. Logging constitutes the
first or the second source of income to most of the countries
of the region.
Logging plays a very important role in growth of the
illegal bushmeat trade and constitutes a serious threat to
wildlife. The present situation is catastrophic in all the
countries of Central Africa. At the start, it was simply a
matter of small quantities for family usage, but this new type
of city dwellers whose purchasing power was growing with
employment found in the city began passing larger orders. The
existing market and the increased requests provoked an
unprecedented explosion of commerce of wild products, bushmeat
in particular. It was more or less in the same manner that
bushmeat found its place in the exotic restaurants of Western
cities, such as Paris, London, Brussels, New York, and
Washington.
Some important efforts are underway in the region at the
political level to mitigate the crisis, including establishment
of consultative frameworks. The CEFDHAC, the COMIFAC, and the
success of the Yaounde Declaration are illustrations of
regional political will.
One action which is taking place is the CITES Bushmeat
Working Group. Approved by the CITES Secretariat in April 2000,
this group has developed a five-point action plan and has
secured the basic funds to operate a central office with
support from National Bushmeat Officers. The five priority
actions are: to review policy and legislation in the region
with reference to bushmeat and establish a harmonization of
this legislation for the region; create a regionwide public
awareness campaign regarding the impacts of the illegal,
commercial bushmeat trade and impacts on cultural heritage;
develop a bushmeat trade monitoring system in conjunction with
the CITES/MIKE; establish a regional approach to wildlife
management and bushmeat control in logging concessions; and
provide training and capacity building to bushmeat officers,
ministry personnel, and law enforcement agents regarding the
bushmeat trade.
It is important to note that the approach taken by this
group is not to forbid the consumption of bushmeat for those
who actually need it but, rather, to increase strategies of
sustainable use while developing alternative protein and income
sources for local populations.
To attain this objective, there are needs for more time and
resources than the CITES Bushmeat Working Group alone has
available. The international community is being summoned, and
the Central African countries need international support to
fight against this scourge that not only is decimating the
wildlife habitat but is also a dangerous threat to the wildlife
of the forest people--threat to the life of the forest people,
notably the Pygmies.
And to finish, I would say that the bushmeat trade kills
the wildlife, but is also killing the village.
Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Agnagna follows:]
Statement of Marcellin Agnagna, Chair, CITES Bushmeat Working Group
The massive African equatorial forest, whose inhabitants are of
Bantu Pygmy origin, dominates the Central Africa region. This humid
tropical forest contains portions of six countries: Cameroon, Gabon,
Equatorial Guinea, the Republic of Congo, the Central African Republic,
and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. This forest is the second
largest humid tropical forest in the world after the Amazon, both in
size and its biological wealth. Various expeditions, scientific and
other, conducted in the region during the last decade, made apparent
the immensity of the biological, ecological and cultural potential of
this forest of Central Africa. It is an unequaled refuge for a number
of species of fauna and flora, some of which remain to be discovered,
while others are threatened with disappearance. In Democratic Republic
of the Congo, for example, more than 4,009 species of mammals, 1,086
species of birds, and 1,060 species of fishes have been identified. In
the Republic of Congo (Brazzaville), 45 species of reptiles, more than
450 species of mammals, and 600 species have been identified.
This immense natural resource heritage continues to be the
principal source of meeting the vital needs of the peoples of the
Central African forest. With no pastoral tradition, generations of
forest dwellers through myths, beliefs and customs, established sacred
rules of management of the resources that are essential to their
survival. The rational or sustainable management notion, therefore, is
not a new concept for these peoples, who already by tradition were
involved in the management and monitoring of such vital activities as
fishing, hunting and gathering (i.e. mushrooms, caterpillars, and wild
fruit). Nevertheless today, all these sacred rules are trampled under
foot, on the pretense of modernism and economic development. The
subsistence needs of yesterday have yielded to an improper lucrative
exploitation of natural resources beyond reasonable limits and most
notably, the commerce of bushmeat.
In Central Africa, the bushmeat trade is currently one of the
sources of income for many of the inhabitants of forested areas. The
development of logging has brought relatively large amounts of money to
formerly isolated areas and human populations that were once exempt of
excessive consumption habits. Poachers and game traders now use logging
roads and other transportation means to bring illegally captured meat
to market in the cities. The thousands of workers and their families,
employed by the forestry companies, constitute a potential market for
bushmeat, especially as logging companies usually prefer to ignore
their employees' protein needs. This situation is complicated and
enhanced by the armed conflicts of the region and the accompanying
proliferation of weapons that are now used for poaching.
The commerce of bushmeat is suddenly the principal income source
for a good number of the inhabitants in areas that still hold wildlife.
The conditions that favor the development of this activity are
numerous, among which are unemployment, poverty, growing demand for the
meat of wild animals (and thus, the existence of the market),
demographic growth, development of logging on a large scale and
ignorance, among others.
The bushmeat trade takes on enormous proportions throughout all
Central Africa. In all the markets of the large urban centers such as
Libreville, Yaounde, Bata, Bangui, Kinshasa, Brazzaville, Pointe Noire,
Malabo, or Douala, bushmeat is openly and consistently sold, whatever
the season, despite its illegality. The quantities are disturbing and
sufficiently illustrate the problem. In Pointe Noire, second largest
city and economical capital of the Congo, a study carried out in 1996
(PROGECAP) estimated that 150,000 metric tons of bushmeat is consumed
annually. It is certain that the current rate is now double.
Libreville, capital of Gabon, receives daily shipments of bushmeat by
railway. About 1,200 metric tons of bushmeat flows into the markets of
Libreville daily. Bangui consumes about 120,000 metric tons of bushmeat
yearly; Bata, second largest city of Equatorial Guinea, daily offers a
gruesome spectacle in its central market where transport vehicles bring
piles of the whole animal carcasses of all species. All the species are
impacted and some are threatened with extinction, notably the large
animals such as duikers, gorillas, chimpanzees, and elephants.
Everywhere in Central Africa, the bushmeat trade has become a true
scourge that threatens the survival of several wildlife species and is
of greatest conservation concern. The scarcity of game around some
forest towns forces the inhabitants to leave. Networks of well equipped
and well organized poachers empty the forests using Kalashnikov rifles
to feed the urban centers, penalizing the village populations that
essentially depend on bushmeat for their survival. Suddenly there is a
food security problem at the village level, necessitating the use of
more costly hunting methods that most villagers cannot afford. Some
villagers are obliged to constantly roam in search of a better life in
urban areas or forestry concessions. Although illegal in most countries
of the region, the bushmeat trade is expanding, with the governments
lacking the capacity to enforce the laws. The international community
is being summoned. The Central African countries need international
support to fight against this scourge that not only is decimating their
wildlife heritage, but is also dangerous threat to the life of the
forest peoples, notably the Pygmies. The bushmeat trade kills the
wildlife and the village.
The problem is complex, and the solutions cannot be found solely in
classic conservation approaches. It is necessary, therefore, that new
management strategies take into account traditional and long-forgotten
knowledge; a return to traditional management seems inevitable. The
participative management concept could be improved while taking into
account the traditional values of forest peoples.
Important efforts are underway in the region at the political
level, including the establishment of consultative frameworks. The
CEFDHAC (Conference on the Ecosystems of Dense and Humid Forests of
Central Africa), COMIFAC (the Conference of the Ministers in charge of
the Forests of Central Africa), and the success of the Yaounde
Declaration are illustrations of regional political will. Nevertheless,
the governments of the countries of this region do not have the means
to deal with this scourge. International support would be most welcome.
This political will is now augmented by the CITES Bushmeat Working
Group [Appendix A] (CITES BWG), set up by Decision 11.166 of the
Conference of the Parties to CITES in Nairobi Kenya in April 2000. The
CITES BWG brings together all the Directors of the Central African
Region, and their support staff, who are in charge of wildlife
management and protected areas. Since its inception, this group has met
several times with assistance of the international community, notably
the Government of the United Kingdom, the United States, thought the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and the Bushmeat Crisis Task
Force (BCTF). An action plan was developed and is being executed with
funding of $135,000, obtained by the BCTF from the John D. and
Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation. This financing, along with support
from USAID's Central Africa Regional Program for the Environment
(CARPE), is being used to execute the action plan and also permits the
installation of a Regional Coordinator based in Yaounde, Cameroon.
The BCTF closely collaborates with the CITES BWG and is helping to
find additional funds from international sources, as it is now an
international problem. It is not unusual to find African bushmeat in
the restaurants of certain capitals such as London, Brussels, New York,
and Washington. Well organized distribution networks allow the feeding
of far-flung international markets The airlines that link Africa to the
West play a very important role in this traffic. Just some months ago,
I flew on an Air France flight from Brazzaville to Paris. To my
surprise, I saw some passengers hurrying to embark with their
accompanied luggage: suitcases full of bushmeat and of smoked
freshwater fish, within the full view and knowledge of the customs
officers that gladly helped to close the suitcases after their
``inspection.'' The practice takes place in almost all the airports of
Central Africa. The domestic airlines that connect large urban centers
to the internal cities carry large quantities of bushmeat, as do other
means of transport such as trains and boats. This situation is serious
and demands the special attention of the international community.
TRADITIONAL MANAGEMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES.
To make a shift from classic conservation theory, we want here to
focus on traditional management of the natural resources. In fact
before and during the colonial period, the people of Africa had
established natural resource management systems based on the respect of
mythological beliefs. Every activity linked to the use of natural
resources followed precise rules. It was not anarchical, but instead
disciplined and respectful of established order. The system worked
well, it did not need law enforcement agents to assure respect for the
rules because they were inviolable. Mankind treated nature with care
because we were conscious that our survival depended on it. The use of
natural resources was essentially for subsistence. Vital activities
such as hunting, fishing, and cutting large trees in the forest were
well regulated and often subjected to rituals.
Traditional Hunting and Fishing: Traditional hunting was practiced
for a long time for subsistence and was subject to rules that varied
from one ethnic group to another. With the Bantu-speaking peoples of
Central Africa, for example, every clan or ethnic group had a territory
or well delimited zone used for hunting. Access and hunting could not
take place without the authorization of the traditional chief. A quota
system existed by species and included some forbidden prey species. The
belief was that spirits protected certain forbidden species, the taboos
and other myths created beliefs surrounding them were inviolable
barriers.
Respect for tradition was severe. Species such as the leopard,
bongo antelope, Nile crocodile, elephant, and the hippopotamus, to name
a few, were revered by most of the tribes in Central Africa, and often
were animals totemic or emblematic in the Bantu culture. Also, big game
hunts were only practiced for special occasions. Killing an elephant,
for example, took place with an agreement between neighboring villages
or clans. With the tribe of the ``Kouyous'' in the north of the
Republic of the Congo (Brazzaville), one organized a festival of folk
dances and demonstrations of strength during a week before the elephant
hunting party. The hunters were chosen among the elite of the town and
then were prepared. For a full week they received spiritual blessings
that protected them against the forces of the evil. Only after all
these formalities did the hunters enter the forest to confront an
elephant. The clan chiefs accompanied them at the end of the hunt to
give them some final blessings. Every hunter carried with him a full
measure of provisions and protection of amulets (talismans) and three
to four previously-prepared and blessed spears of mystical strength. It
was then that hunters began the long march tracking elephants. A large
bull elephant ``Kamba'' was sought. Once the tracks were found, he was
followed to the end. The endowed hunters were able to make themselves
invisible ``Indzombi'' and approached the beast and finally pierced him
in vital areas with their well sharpened spears, before disappearing
into the forest and again reappearing in a place that was identified in
advance. After reappearing, they returned to the assault by following
the blood tracks and killing the animal if it has withstood the first
attack. This process could repeat itself as much as necessary.
The parties hunting small game were organized in forms of a
collective between the inhabitants of a village or of neighbors, who
used nets, traditional weapons such as spears, lances, harpoons, and
hunting dogs. The meat was distributed freely among the inhabitants of
the town, with every family receiving its share, however small is was.
Although prized by most of the Africans, bushmeat is a commodity
that was not consumed daily. It constituted an exceptional meal and was
often reserved for special occasions (family gatherings, initiation
ceremonies, festivals of traditional dances, etc.). Twenty years ago,
this was practiced in most villages of the region. Even after advent of
firearms at Independence, the tradition always was respected. The names
of the possessors of firearms was known in every town. The use of these
weapons was verified and monitored. Every weapon that entered the
forest was only authorized to take a quota established by the chief.
The arm owner could only sell the part that was surplus to his need.
Bushmeat was not marketed but was consumed only inside the hunting
territory.
I remember during my youth in northern Congo, that my grandfather,
with the name of notable Agnagna, was customary chief of the region of
``Loko'' in the area of Owando (Fort Rousset). The notable Agnagna was
a powerful and respected traditional chief that embodied the life of
the inhabitants of Loko. It was he who gave the order to hunt, and it
was to him that all hunters had to present the rewards of the hunt
before any meat was eaten. He received the right hind leg and the
trophy (horns, skins or head). The trophies were collected and kept in
a sacred place where access was uniquely reserved to the initiated. A
fire was lit there in permanence for the conservation of the trophies.
The trophies were exposed during period ceremonies and served to
inventory the number of game hunted during a given period. It was also
a customary heritage and symbol of strength.
The largest collection of trophies that I saw in my youth belonged
to a big chief of the tribe of the ``Kouyous'' by the name of
``Etoumbakoundou''. He lived in a village called Kouyougandza situated
downstream of the city of Owando (former Fort Rousset) on the river
Kouyou. This collection included pieces of very big value of which the
dimensions were almost always records: antelope horns, leopard skins
and those of other animals, hippo teeth, cranes and cane cats, feathers
of rare bird, and elephant tusks. The notable Etoumbakoundou uniformly
received visits from white settlers (colonial administrators) and a few
tourists. The visitors' interest in the trophies led them to take one
or more before leaving. I remember in 1963, when one of the last
colonial administrators, whose name escapes me, the Commander of the
Prefecture of Likouala-Mossaka, visited Kouyougandza. He left with a
gigantic pair of elephant tusks. Six men were necessary to lift each
tusk, whose weight may have reached 120 kilograms. The boat used by the
Commander could not bear the weight of the tusks, and some passengers
had to be left out and later transported on a second trip.
I was greatly disappointed to note that at the time of my passage
to Kouyougandza in 1986, that all of the trophies had disappeared after
the death of the Chief Etoumbakoundou in 1974. An entire culture had
disappeared.
Fishing in freshwater was also seasonal. For example, the draining
of ponds for fish followed a ritual. During the dry season of 1965, I
witnessed the draining of a pond called ``Etsibi'' in the zone of
``Loko'' under the authority of the notable Agnagna. In fact, the
Etsibi Pond had a diameter of approximately 50 meters, and it
articulated with the Kouyou River through a small canal that dried in
dry season. ``Etsibi'' was forbidden to visit in period of the high
waters. In it lived a large Nile crocodile that only the Chief Agnagna
could observe.
Baskets were used to drain the pond, and men, women, and children
of the villages surrounding ``Ossambou'' camped around Etsibi during
the event. Before the draining of the pond, a ritual was conducted in
which Chief Agnagna struck the surface of the water with a stick and
ordered the gigantic crocodile to leave. One could see this 6-meter
long monster leave the pond and head toward the Kouyou River using the
canal. After this, the spectacle began. The quantity of fish collected
was enormous. The fish was smoked to conserve it for future needs. This
is an example of the manner used by one tribe to manage their natural
heritage. The efficiency of this traditional form of management was
clearly established.
Unfortunately this effective type of management, adapted to the
African context, was rejected under the pretense of modernity or
economic development. Now modern conservation laws have shown their
limits and cannot alone solve the problem of the management of natural
resources in Central Africa. The customary knowledge that has been long
forgotten merits revival.
CURRENT SITUATION
The problem of managing forest resources in Central Africa gives
rise today to several questions. The economies of most countries of the
region are supported either by oil or forest exploitation. Logging
constitutes the first or second source of income to most of the
countries of the region. For example, in Gabon, where oil reserves are
being exhausted, the plan is to then exploit the forest resources for
wood. The policy is to develop a logging industry, which is considered
a means of development. Nevertheless, questions can be posed about the
effect this policy will have upon gross national product and on local
human populations who are dependent on the forest.
In Central Africa almost all the logging companies are foreign
owned. They cut and sell the wood on the international market while
paying derisory taxes to the national government. Wood is given up
almost free of charge, while logging companies do not conduct
reforestation procedures. The logging methods are devastating. Some
speak of selective cutting that consists of exploiting only the largest
trees with the highest commercial value. In the northern Congo for
example, the most sought-after species is of the genus Entandophragma
(Sipo and Sapeli). It is not unusual to see a road of several
kilometers cut for a single sapeli tree. In the process, dozens of
other trees may be destroyed. The damage to the flora and fauna are
huge. As for the village communities, they seem to enjoy a short-lived
well being as long as there are desirable trees to cut. After that,
they are left alone in a state of abject poverty.
We can include some other negative effects of logging. The
prospection teams and other workers essentially nourish themselves with
bushmeat. The forest roads and the wood transport vehicles carry all
sorts of forest products including elephant ivory, animal skins and
bushmeat. The logging work sites are transformed into immense cities
wherein thousands of people reside. Merchants of all kinds spring up
because of the workers' salaries. Basic goods are sold in small shops.
But behind the counters, merchants disregard the law and traffic in
wildlife products such as ivory and leopard skins.
In Pokola, northern Congo, for example, in a worksite created by
the logging company CIB (Industrial Congolese Wood), the bushmeat trade
is very well developed. Despite the strong local demand, large
quantities of bushmeat are transported out of the country, notably to
the neighboring Cameroon. Professional poachers install themselves
alongside the forest roads and quietly operate with the complicity of
the drivers of logging vehicles, who bring the illegal bushmeat to
distant markets. All the species are slaughtered without restriction,
the large game is preferred as it yields more profit. Even the species
once protected by local taboos and beliefs such as the Bongo antelope,
are poached. In the Pokola bushmeat market, one can daily find meat of
almost all species of forest animals. The taboo myth was shattered with
the intermingling of cultures among people who arrived in the area to
work for the loggers.
Logging plays a very important role in growth of the illegal
bushmeat trade and constitutes a serious threat to wildlife. The forest
roads open for removal of logs are used by the poachers to reach game-
rich areas that were previously inaccessible. In northern Congo near
the border with the Central African Republic in the zone Enyele, where
the logging company called ITBL operates, large camps of Central
African poachers are installed in permanent camps. They illegally hunt
and traffic bushmeat to feed the markets of Mbaiki and Bangui in the
Central African Republic. It should be noted that the CAR once had
forests rich in wildlife, but it has apparently been destroyed by the
bushmeat trade. Central African hunters now focus on Congo as a source
of game.
Former soldiers of the army of former Zairean President Mobutu Sese
Seko have hidden arms in the villages downstream of Bangui and of
Nzongo (in the DRC). These stocks of munitions and arms are now used
for poaching. These ex-soldiers have become professional poachers and
operate on well organized circuits, and in certain cases, supported by
the Central African Waters and Forests agents. Elephant poaching is
very common in this zone, and their meat is sold in the CAR or
elsewhere. The Central African Waters and Forests agents extract an
unofficial tax that varies between 1,000 to 2,000 French CFA ($2 to 3$
US) on every 50 kg bag of elephant meat that is then freely sold in the
markets of Bangui, despite the elephant's protected legal status.
The present situation is catastrophic in all the countries of the
Central African region. Tons of bushmeat are sold daily on the markets
of the big urban centers. In Bata, Equatorial Guinea for example, the
daily bushmeat market contains hundreds of baboons piled up for sale.
It is estimated that residents of neighboring Libreville, Gabon consume
more than 350,000 metric tons of bushmeat each year.
In witnessing this, one wonders if the Central African countries
have game laws. In fact, some of them have very good laws on paper,
although other countries need considerable revisions. However, none of
them effectively regulate the commerce of bushmeat, and it is sold
openly under the eyes of the authorities whose job it is to control the
illegal trade.
WHY THE FOREST INHABITANTS OF CENTRAL AFRICA CONSUME BUSHMEAT
As previously noted, the climatic and ecological conditions of the
humid tropical forest are hostile to raising cattle, and native people
are obligated to rely on protein from the forests and rivers. Over
several generations, myths, traditions, and a cultural preference for
bushmeat grew among the inhabitants of the forest. These days, almost
every family has some chickens. But poultry is used for the reception
of special guests or saved for special ceremonies. Families prefer
eating bushmeat.
Therefore, there is a problem caused by people's food preference.
Bushmeat often is considered as of better quality by its consumers, and
this seems justified if one considers the low fat content of game meat.
Still, the recent epidemics of Ebola or HIV/AIDS may originate from the
contact between humans and hunted animals. This situation raises many
questions: When did the bushmeat problem first appear? Was it not the
appearance of modernization? Did not the ancestors live in harmony with
nature? What does one say to the pygmies who have always lived in the
forest? Did they know of the problems of HIV and other pathologies of
the modern world? And what of the forest, wasn't it a holy place before
the penetration of machines and other arsenals used to exploit her
resources? Will bushmeat have to be forbidden for consumption? What
alternatives are there for the people of the forest to eat? The answers
to these questions will edify the approach to developing solutions to
the bushmeat problem.
The peoples of the forest always kept their food habits even when
they migrated far from their region of origin. Most of the urban
centers of the region are populated by rural migrants who have not
abandoned their habits. Even in the city they have a tendency to keep
their original food preferences such as bushmeat in the forest zone,
and grasshoppers, caterpillars and other in savannah zones). Suddenly
illegal dealings in forest products began developing (bushmeat, fruit
and wild vegetables, palm wine etc.) from the country towards the city.
At the start it was simply a matter of small quantities for family
usage, but this new type of city-dwellers whose purchasing power was
growing with employment found in the city began passing larger orders.
The existing market and the increased requests provoked an
unprecedented explosion of commerce of wild products, bushmeat in
particular. It was more or less in the same manner that bushmeat found
its place in the exotic restaurants of western cities.
THE SOLUTIONS
The bushmeat crisis in Central Africa is a daily preoccupation
regarding management and conservation of the forest resources in the
region. All the actors, at the political level, administrative,
scientific and private became aware of the seriousness of the problem
and are working hard to look for solutions which will minimize impacts.
In all the regional forums treating biodiversity conservation questions
bushmeat is always central to the discussion. As was expressed,
political will to find solutions to the management problems of the
forest resources is evident in the region. Some encouraging regional
initiatives include CEFDHAC, the COMIFAC and the reformation of OCFSA
(Organization for the Conservation of the Wildlife in Africa).
Nevertheless this political will is far from realizing its financial
and equipment needs. The recommendations and other suggestions for
solutions resulting from these discussions have barely begun to be
implemented.
One action which is taking place as was mentioned previously is the
CITES Bushmeat Working Group. Approved by the CITES Secretariat in
April 2000 this group has developed a five point action plan and has
secured the basic funds to operate a central office with support from
National Bushmeat Officers. The five priority actions of this group,
represented by the directors of wildlife and protected areas from all
Central Africa are: to review policy and legislation in the region with
reference to bushmeat and establish a harmonization of this legislation
for the region; create a region-wide public awareness campaign
regarding the impacts of the illegal, commercial bushmeat trade and
impacts on cultural heritage; develop a bushmeat trade monitoring
system in conjunction with the CITES/MIKE (Monitoring Illegal Killing
of Elephants); establish a regional approach to wildlife management and
bushmeat control in logging concessions; and provide training and
capacity building to bushmeat officers, ministry personnel, and law
enforcement agents regarding the bushmeat trade. Base funding for this
initiative has been secured and a reauthorization of the group will be
submitted at the next Conference of the Parties in Santiago, Chile,
November 2002.
It is important to note that the approach taken by this group is
not to forbid the consumption of bushmeat for those who actually need
it but rather to increase strategies of sustainable use while
developing alternate protein and income sources for local populations.
It will be important to eliminate the commercial aspect of this trade
and its impacts on wildlife populations.
To attain this objective, there are needs for more time and
resources than the CITES Bushmeat Working Group alone has available;
the international community is called upon to collaborate with African
nations to address this crisis. The current dimension of the bushmeat
crisis surpasses the regional context and is indeed continental, the
solutions to the problem cannot be found without a collaborative effort
of the international community.
APPENDIX A: CITES BUSHMEAT WORKING GROUP SUMMARY INFORMATION
The CITES Bushmeat Working Group was recommended in Document 11.44
and approved [Decision 11.166*] in Nairobi, Kenya in April 2000 at the
11th Conference of the Parties (COP) for the Convention on
International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora
(CITES).
The Working Group includes Cameroon, Central African Republic,
Democratic Republic of Congo, Republic of Congo (Brazzaville),
Equatorial Guinea and Gabon and incorporates these countries as the
case study region for underpinning the scope of work and possible
solutions for the bushmeat crisis. It also includes a wider range of
dissemination group countries, including: Benin, Cote d'Ivoire, Ghana,
Republic of Guinea (Conakry), Kenya, Liberia, Mali, Niger, Sierra
Leone, Togo, Zambia.
The primary objectives of the CITES BWG are to:
Set the scope of problems relating to bringing national
and cross-border bushmeat issues into the context of a sustainable and
legal process;
Work on identifying solutions that address the scope of
problems;
Facilitating the implementation process in achieving the
solutions.
The CITES BWG held its first meeting in Douala, Cameroon in January
2001 where they set forth a scope of work and identified priority
actions for the group. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service supported a
meeting of the members of the core working group along with
representatives from dissemination group and donor countries during a
special session of the BCTF Collaborative Action Planning Meeting in
May 2001 where opportunities for collaboration between BCTF and the
CITES BWG were identified.
The CITES BWG held a second formal meeting in Cameroon in July 2001
where they established a framework for their priority actions, which
formed the basis of a joint BCTF CITES BWG funding proposal approved by
the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation. With support from a
USAID grant, the BCTF will again be providing an opportunity for the
CITES BWG members to meet at the Ecole de Faune de Garoua [Garoua
Wildlife College] in March 2002 during the bushmeat curriculum
development workshop co-organized by the college and BCTF. During this
meeting the CITES BWG will set forth the framework for a three-year
implementation plan for the joint proposal funded by the MacArthur
Foundation to include planning for: policy and legislation review,
training for bushmeat monitoring and database development, review of
wildlife management authority structures, public awareness campaigns in
Central Africa, and developing wildlife management guidelines within
logging concessions. As a result of the funding from the MacArthur
Foundation bushmeat officers in each of the six core countries and a
regional coordinator will be supported for the next three years.
Matching funds to fulfill the CITES BWG efforts are being supplied by
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service through a grant from CARPE [Central
African Regional Programme for the Environment, USAID] and the UK
Wildlife Management Authority.
The CITES BWG has made excellent progress toward developing regular
communication among wildlife and protected area directors from the six
core countries of the Central Africa region. Having secured funding for
priority activities they will be able to develop databases regarding
trade in bushmeat, harmonize legislation related to wildlife
exploitation and trade, collate information for a regional perspective
on bushmeat trade, and raise awareness among the general public in
Africa regarding the consumption and exploitation of wildlife. These
steps will culminate in a set of recommended solutions that can be
`willingly implemented by range states'.
Decision 11.166 Available from: [http://www.cites.org/eng/decis/11/
166.shtml]
______
Mr. Gilchrest. Thank you, sir.
Dr. Hutchins?
STATEMENT OF MICHAEL HUTCHINS, DIRECTOR/WILLIAM CONWAY CHAIR,
DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND SCIENCE, AMERICAN ZOO AND
AQUARIUM ASSOCIATION, AND CO-CHAIRMAN, BUSHMEAT CRISIS TASK
FORCE
Mr. Hutchins. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the
opportunity to testify today on the bushmeat crisis in Africa.
I am here today representing the Bushmeat Crisis Task Force, or
BCTF. BCTF is a coalition of 34 U.S.-based nongovernmental
organizations and hundreds of individual experts all committed
to resolving the bushmeat crisis. While Africans have hunted
and consumed wildlife for millennia, it is only recently that
hunting and trading of wildlife has exploded into a
multimillion-dollar industry. Millions of tons of animals are
being killed and consumed annually, including gorillas,
chimpanzees, and elephants. This unsustainable commerce has the
potential to empty African landscapes of wildlife in less than
a generation.
The African bushmeat crisis is symptomatic of much deeper
socioeconomic problems that are affecting the entire continent.
The complex causes of the bushmeat crisis, some of which you
have heard about today, are interrelated and include growing
human populations, widespread poverty, social and political
instability, lack of economic or protein alternatives, lack of
law enforcement capacity, modernized hunting technologies, and
new transportation systems that facilitate the movement of
bushmeat from rural areas into urban markets.
The effects of the bushmeat trade will certainly be
catastrophic for both people and wildlife. First, the
commercial bushmeat trade removes this important resource from
the communities that are most dependent upon it. Second,
unsustainable hunting risks the irreversible extinction of
species across Africa. And, third, the loss of keystone species
could alter the structure and function of African ecological
systems.
Finally, as, again, you have heard before, butchering and
eating wildlife, particularly great apes and other primates,
increases the risk that people may contract and spread deadly
diseases such as Ebola. And bushmeat has also been implicated
in the emergence of HIV/AIDS.
BCTF recently hosted a meeting of African conservation
experts to identify priority solutions, and as a result, we are
focusing our collective attention on the following actions:
building local capacity to enforce existing wildlife laws;
securing long-term funding to maintain a system of well-managed
parks and reserves; increasing public awareness of the problem,
both in Africa and the United States; regulating hunting and
transportation of bushmeat used for commercial purposes;
improving agricultural production and consumer access to
bushmeat substitutes; building local capacity by training
wildlife managers, law enforcement officers, and forestry
personnel.
BCTF members are working actively on all these solutions,
but we recognize that the scale of the problem is so large that
it cannot be effectively addressed without increased government
involvement. We, therefore, make the following specific
recommendations to the Subcommittee:
First, recognize that unsustainable hunting for bushmeat is
the most immediate threat to African wildlife today and that it
threatens the livelihood of rural Africans, driving them
further into poverty.
Second, identify a Congressional Bushmeat Caucus to
collaborate with NGO's and African governments on actions to
address the bushmeat crisis.
Third, expand U.S. efforts to improve natural resource
management in Africa and, more specifically, help to develop an
effective system of protected areas.
And, last, expand U.S. support for sustainable economic
development in Africa, including agricultural development.
The bushmeat crisis is a wake-up call to longstanding
problems across the continent. We hope that this hearing will
put into motion a collaborative global effort to address the
significant threat to human welfare and biological diversity.
Time is of the essence, however, as our options for
intervention will become more limited with every passing year.
Thank you for your interest and attention.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Hutchins follows:]
Statement of Dr. Michael Hutchins, Director/William Conway Chair,
Department of Conservation and Science, American Zoo and Aquarium
Association, and Co-Chair, Bushmeat Crisis Task Force
Thank you Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee for
providing us an opportunity to testify this morning on a looming
biodiversity conservation and human welfare crisis in Africa the
illegal, commercial exploitation of wild animals for food, commonly
referred to as the bushmeat crisis.
My name is Dr. Michael Hutchins, Director/William Conway Chair,
Department of Conservation and Science at the American Zoo and Aquarium
Association or AZA. I also serve as Co-Chair of the Bushmeat Crisis
Task Force Steering Committee.
Established in 1999, BCTF represents over 30 US-based institutions
and hundreds of professionals from around the globe, all of whom are
committed to working with our partners in Africa, Europe and the U.S.
to address the bushmeat crisis.
On behalf of BCTF we would like to commend the Subcommittee and
specifically Chairman Gilchrest for the leadership you have shown in
identifying the bushmeat crisis as a priority for consideration by the
107th United States Congress.
Increasing demand and the commercialization of bushmeat hunting has
eradicated almost all large mammals from unprotected areas in West
Africa and threatens to do the same over the next 20 years in Central
Africa. East and Southern Africa are also currently experiencing
dramatic increases in illegal, commercial hunting and the data are just
beginning to emerge regarding its impacts.
The causes of the current African bushmeat crisis are many
including: widespread poverty; increasing consumer demand for meat;
development of roads by extractive industries, such as logging, mining
and petroleum which have opened up areas that were previously
inaccessible; increasing human populations; lack of economic or protein
alternatives; social and political instability; lack of capacity to
enforce existing laws; and modernization of hunting technologies (guns
and wire snares). Due to the complexities associated with the bushmeat
trade, any solutions will require a global partnership for long-term
success to be achieved.
The problem is really one of scale. To provide a sense of the
enormous impact of the bushmeat trade, Central Africans eat
approximately the same amount of meat as many Europeans and North
Americans, yet over 60% of this comes from indigenous wildlife. In
fact, over 1 million metric tons of antelope, primates, elephants and
rodents the equivalent of 4 million cattle are killed each year to
supply Central African families with what is either their primary
source of protein, or a desired luxury. Consumption of bushmeat by
large, growing, urban populations, that often view eating bushmeat as a
way to reconnect with their cultural traditions is one of many factors
fueling the commercial wildlife trade.
Although there is a significant bushmeat trade in Asia and Latin
America, BCTF has focused its attention on Africa where the problem is
most acute. We are particularly concerned about the Central African
rainforests as their productivity is dramatically lower than the
savanna ecosystems of East Africa and, as a result, the impacts of even
limited commercial hunting are more severe. Except in isolated regions,
commercial hunting of large, slow-growing wildlife species such as
elephants, gorillas, and chimpanzees already exceeds their replacement
rates. Forests are rapidly being emptied of animal life.
Why are we concerned about the bushmeat crisis?
Economics: The bushmeat crisis is not simply a wildlife crisis.
Rather, it is a symptom of much deeper socio-economic problems that
must be addressed immediately for global security, health, socio-
cultural, economic and environmental reasons. Economics is one of the
primary driving forces of the bushmeat trade. Much of the African
continent lives in a dire state of poverty. The commercial bushmeat
trade has emerged as a response to meet the basic needs for food and
income resulting from such poverty.
Logging, mining, petroleum and other large-scale extractive
industries have facilitated the bushmeat crisis by providing a means to
transport meat from the forest to large cities via newly constructed
roads. In addition, many companies do not provide food for their
employees who often become dependent on bushmeat for their protein
needs. For example, BCTF member, the Wildlife Conservation Society, is
working with a logging company and the Government of the Republic of
Congo to prevent illegal bushmeat hunting inside the logging
concession.
The primary source of foreign currency in many African countries is
wildlife tourism. Loss of charismatic species could result in less
tourism.
Human Health: Consumption of bushmeat also has critical public
health implications. Butchering and eating wildlife, particularly apes
and other primates, increases the risk that people may contract deadly
diseases such as Ebola, and has been suggested as one of the potential
vectors for the emergence of HIV/AIDS.
Furthermore, if people cannot meet their basic nutritional needs,
they are likely to become more susceptible to disease because of their
depressed immune systems. There are numerous communities throughout
Africa that are truly dependent on wildlife as a protein source. The
commercial bushmeat trade removes this important resource from the
communities most dependent upon it.
Ecological/Conservation: Unsustainable hunting risks the
irreversible extinction of species unique to Africa and the
irreversible loss of value they confer to communities and to the world.
These species include bonobos, chimpanzees, gorillas and forest
dwelling elephants. Loss of key species could result in irreversible
ecological change that could affect the entire forest ecosystem. For
example, loss of fruit eaters will alter the seed dispersal patterns of
up to 80% of the region's tree species. This could change forest
composition and potentially alter rates of carbon sequestration. Loss
of grazers could have an equivalent impact on savannah ecosystem
structure and function.
Cultural: Certain human communities are at risk of extinction. One
example is the Pygmy populations of Central Africa that are losing
their traditional hunting and gathering lifestyle. The loss of wildlife
from their forest home threatens the very basis of their culture.
What is the BCTF doing to address this crisis?
Collaboration among diverse groups is the primary way to mobilize
expertise and resources towards solving the bushmeat crisis. The
Bushmeat Crisis Task Force was formed as a result of a growing
awareness among conservation professionals working in Africa regarding
the dramatic impacts of the illegal, commercial bushmeat trade. BCTF's
objectives are to: a) work with the general members of the BCTF to
focus attention on the bushmeat crisis in Africa; b) establish an
information database and mechanisms for information sharing regarding
the bushmeat issue; c) facilitate engagement of African partners and
stakeholders in addressing the bushmeat issue; and d) promoting
collaborative decision-making, fund-raising and actions among the
members and associates of the BCTF.
BCTF recently hosted a meeting of the world's leading experts on
the bushmeat issue to identify the priority solutions for the immediate
and longer term. They are: policy development, sustainable financing of
conservation activities, development of effective protected areas,
increasing public awareness, facilitating public-private partnerships,
development of economic and protein alternatives, organization of
market seller and hunter associations and professional training. BCTF
is actively working with its members to assure action is taking place
in all these areas.
Policy Development: Appropriate policy development for the long-
term, including legislating and enforcing environmental standards is
likely to be the most effective way of ensuring that business practices
do not have unnecessary detrimental environmental impacts. BCTF has
made dramatic progress in policy development in its first two and a
half years of operation. First, we have supported the formation and
implementation of the CITES Bushmeat Working Group that consists of the
heads of the Central African nations' wildlife departments. Second, we
prepared the draft IUCN Resolution on Bushmeat that was adopted with
modifications. Third, we have supported recent efforts at the
Convention on Biological Diversity to enable the formation of a
Bushmeat Liaison Group.
Sustainable Financing of Conservation Activities: Securing long-
term funding to maintain a network of well-managed parks and resources
is essential if we are to protect plants and animals representative of
the region's unique biological heritage for future generations. BCTF
has been involved in discussions with other organizations exploring
mechanisms to fund a sustainable system of protected areas in Africa.
BCTF has also assisted its members in seeking grants to implement on-
the-ground actions to address the bushmeat issue and also encouraged
partnerships between and collective action by members.
Development of Effective Protected Areas: Protected areas are
critical because they are the only locations on the planet where
biodiversity conservation is valued more than economics, and wildlife
can be safe from the hunter's gun and the trapper's snare. As an
organization BCTF has emphasized the need for long-term support of
African protected areas. Many BCTF members such as World Wildlife Fund,
Conservation International and the Wildlife Conservation Society have
been extremely active in assisting African nations in the development
of national parks and equivalent reserves.
Increasing Public Awareness: Awareness campaigns across Africa are
essential in the short term. Several efforts have begun to emerge which
link cultural heritage with the information regarding the dramatic
losses of wildlife. These efforts are reporting dramatic and immediate
impacts with bushmeat sellers choosing to switch to alternative forms
of meat. In the US, we are developing educational outreach materials to
be used by BCTF supporting members and partners in educating the
American public. We are also developing a longer-term effort to support
public awareness campaigns across Africa with our many partners on the
ground.
We have established a Web site (www.bushmeat.org) and a global
information network of experts, compiled detailed databases of bushmeat
publications and projects, and provided connections among bushmeat
working groups around the globe. We work closely with international
NGOs, African governments and our colleagues in numerous U.S.
government agencies. We provide resources and contacts to international
media for bushmeat related stories including major media sources.
Facilitating Public-private Partnership: Public-private
partnerships enable improved regulation of the logging industry.
Partnerships have the potential to generate significant conservation
payoffs at relatively low cost. Innovative pilot projects are beginning
to realize significant conservation payoffs from the greening of
private sector business practices. BCTF and its members, particularly
the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS), have stressed the importance
of working closely with extractive industries to develop effective
wildlife management strategies in concessions. In addition, WCS has
encouraged logging companies to enforce existing wildlife laws in areas
under their control.
Development of Economic and Protein Alternatives: Revitalizing
agricultural production through strategic transportation planning and
domestic agricultural research and extension will increase food
production and consumer access to substitutes for bushmeat.
Alternatives would also provide income-generating options to farmers
turned hunters. BCTF has collected information on current efforts to
provide economic and protein alternatives.
Organization of Market Seller and Hunter Associations: Development
of market seller and hunter associations could be a component of a
highly effective bushmeat trade control system. Bushmeat sellers,
mostly women, represent potential partners in controlling the amount
and types of animals (non-endangered species) sold. BCTF has collected
information on the importance of such associations to the bushmeat
trade but has made little progress to date on this issue.
Professional Training: With Africa's three regional wildlife
colleges and support from USAID and the World Wildlife Fund US, we are
currently organizing and conducting a series of workshops intended to
develop bushmeat curriculum to be used in training wildlife and
protected area managers.
In summary, the BCTF model is showing promise as a new opportunity
for addressing critical wildlife conservation issues. The very
existence of BCTF has encouraged organizations and governments to view
the bushmeat issue in a different light. With the full support of the
U.S. government and international partners, we believe it is possible
to effectively address the bushmeat crisis.
Recommendations
BCTF makes the following recommendations for U.S. government
involvement in seeking solutions to the bushmeat crisis:
1. Recognize that uncontrolled hunting and consumption of wildlife
is the most immediate threat to tropical forest biodiversity and that
it increases the risk of deadly viral disease outbreaks, and further
compromises the livelihood of poor rural families in Africa;
2. Identify a Congressional Bushmeat Caucus to collaborate with
NGOs and affected governments on specific mechanisms to address the
bushmeat crisis;
3. Encourage Congress to support efforts to improve African
natural resource management and develop a system of effective protected
areas; and
4. Support Administration efforts to encourage alliances to
promote sustainable economic development in Africa through better
governance, improved agricultural practices, enhanced public health,
and open trade.
We applaud the efforts of Chairman Gilchrest and members of the
Subcommittee to raise the profile of this issue, and we are hopeful
that this hearing will put in motion a collaborative global effort to
address this complex threat to biodiversity conservation and human
health.
Included for your reference are fact sheets BCTF has developed on
various specific issues related to the bushmeat crisis:
Bushmeat and International Collaboration
Species Affected by the Bushmeat Trade in Africa
Bushmeat and Economic Development
The Role of the Logging Industry
Coltan Mining in the Democratic Republic of Congo and Its Impact on
Illegal Bushmeat Hunting
Bushmeat and Global Human Health
Bushmeat and Ecology
Culture and Bushmeat
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.007
Bushmeat and International Collaboration
Species Involved: All Bushmeat Species Rodents to Elephants
Stakeholders Involved: Rural Communities, Heads of State, National
and International Conservation Organizations, Zoological Parks, Animal
Welfare Organizations, Human Welfare Organizations, Tropical Forest
Conservation Agencies, Local and National Governments, and
International Treaty Organizations
Key Concepts:
The bushmeat crisis is the most significant immediate
threat to the future of wildlife populations in Africa.
Increased demand resulting from high population growth
trends, modernized hunting methods (guns and snares), and road
development, all contribute to the growth of the illegal commercial
bushmeat trade.
Tropical forests and other ecosystems are being emptied
of their wildlife for this unsustainable trade, which is leading to
severe ecological damage and human tragedy.
Solutions to the bushmeat crisis require international
collaboration on: policy reform, sustainable financing, long-term
support for protected areas, developing protein and income
alternatives, awareness and education campaigns.
Summary:
Approximately 30 million people live within the forested regions of
Central Africa, 40-60% live in cities and towns, and most rely on the
meat of wildlife as a primary source of animal protein. Forest antelope
(duikers), wild species of pig, and primates are most often eaten, and
as much as 1 million metric tons of wildlife is killed for food in the
region each year. In West African nations human population densities
are high (25-78 persons per square kilometer) compared to countries in
the Congo Basin (5-20 persons per square kilometer). West African
wildlife populations have been so depleted by years of unsustainable
hunting for meat, that bushmeat is no longer the most important source
of protein in families' diets. When bushmeat is eaten in West Africa,
rodents have replaced the over-hunted and now scarce antelopes and
primates as the most commonly eaten wild animals. East and Southern
Africa are facing a serious decline of many wildlife populations
outside of protected areas the bushmeat trade is believed to be largely
responsible for this decline with increasing human populations and
demand for meat driving the trade.
Background:
Wildlife has been hunted for food ever since humans first evolved,
and wildlife is still viewed as a resource `free' for the taking in
many areas. Today in Africa, bushmeat continues to be an economically
important food and trade item for thousands of poor rural and urban
families. Animal parts are also important for their role in ritual, and
bushmeat has become a status symbol for urban elites trying to retain
links to `the village'--often commanding high prices in city
restaurants. The immediate loss of wildlife and the secondary loss of
many plant species jeopardizes the function and stability of natural
habitats--including both forests and savannas threatening the long-term
survival of ecosystems and the people dependent upon them.
Current Understanding and Activities:
Hunting of wildlife to meet human demand for protein may still be
sustainable in the few remaining areas where population densities are
less than 2 people/km2, trade routes are poorly established, and human
population growth rates are low. Markets, however, drive the scale of
the commercial bushmeat trade now occurring in West and Central Africa,
with their large, rapidly growing populations of consumers. This
commercial-scale trade threatens the survival of many species,
including several unique to the dense forested regions of Africa.
Though deforestation has an obvious impact on wildlife dependent on
these habitats, over-hunting for the commercial bushmeat trade
constitutes a comparable threat to the ecosystem itself. It often
results in the Empty Forest Syndrome: a forest filled with trees, but
with few if any large animals. Such forests will, over the long term,
suffer dramatic changes in structure and composition as the wildlife
responsible for dispersing seeds are lost through over hunting. The
immediate loss of wildlife and the secondary loss of many plant species
jeopardize the function and stability of the forests' complex web of
life, threatening the long-term survival of the forests themselves.
Solutions:
Possible solutions include: implementation of wildlife management
efforts in logging and mining concessions; maintenance of a network of
protected areas; regulation of hunting and trade; increasing consumer
access to affordable and palatable protein substitutes; development of
alternative income-generating activities; enhancing national and local
resource management capacity; and, widespread awareness-raising and
education. These actions are all important components of comprehensive
action to resolve the unsustainable bushmeat trade. For these steps to
be taken, it is essential that conservation organizations, government
agencies, donors, and interested individuals collaborate to share
information and facilitate action. The Bushmeat Crisis Task Force was
formed with these goals in mind.
BCTF Summary:
Founded in 1999, the BCTF is a consortium of conservation
organizations and scientists dedicated to the conservation of wildlife
populations threatened by commercial hunting of wildlife for sale as
meat. The BCTF operates under the direction of an elected Steering
Committee and is funded by Supporting and Contributing Members.
BCTF goals are to: a) work with the general members of the BCTF to
focus attention on the bushmeat crisis in Africa; b) establish an
information database and mechanisms for information sharing regarding
the bushmeat issue; c) facilitate engagement of African partners and
stakeholders in addressing the bushmeat issue; and d) promote
collaborative decision-making, fund-raising and actions among the
members and associates of the BCTF.Species Affected by the Bushmeat
Trade in Africa: This is a summary of the major taxonomic groups
affected by the bushmeat trade in Africa. For a complete species list
please visit the BCTF Website: [http://www.bushmeat.org/html/
SpeciesAffected.htm]
ANTELOPE: Duikers (Cephalophus spp.) are one of the primary targets
for both subsistence and commercial hunting activities in many regions
of Africa. With a limited understanding of duiker life histories in
natural habitats and the difficulties of conducting monitoring
activities, conservationists are challenged to determine the ecological
effects of commercial bushmeat hunting on both duiker populations and
the ecosystems in which they live. Current research indicates that
duikers typically supply 40-80% of the meat available in bushmeat
markets across Central Africa. In West Africa, years of commercial-
level exploitation coupled with habitat loss have resulted in
considerably reduced duiker populations in many areas. Projections for
duiker populations in the long-term suggest dramatically decreasing
trends for the majority of species. Addressing the bushmeat trade
should involve approaches that include all species effected from
rodents to elephants, and should pay particular attention to Africa's
duikers as a group of primary importance to both present and future
generations of Africans.
ELEPHANTS: African elephants are considered keystone species
because of the pivotal role that they play in structuring the plant and
animal communities where they reside. The continental decline of the
African elephant and the contraction of its range have historically
been associated with the ivory trade as well as habitat fragmentation
due to human population expansion, and desertification. However,
elephants are increasingly targets of the illegal market in bushmeat.
Currently the majority of the elephants' range in Africa is outside of
protected areas, particularly in Central Africa, where elephants are
increasingly vulnerable to human encroachment and illegal hunting.
Despite the growing consensus and recognition that elephants are being
killed illegally not only for ivory, but also for their meat, there is
a lag in the research focus on this issue. Most likely this is because
illegal poaching for ivory has overshadowed investigations of the
poaching of elephants for bushmeat. It is important to delineate this
gap in the bushmeat research knowledge base in order to identify and
prioritize critical habitat, threatened elephant populations within
these regions, and the still un-asked research questions before it is
too late. By defining the gap in the current knowledge conservation
organizations will be better able to direct future field research and
conservation projects, and to help potential funders of these projects
to prioritize and allocate scarce research monies.
PRIMATES: The effects of the bushmeat trade are particularly
devastating to primate communities. Primates often become key targets
when populations of antelope and other higher-return species become
depleted due to over hunting. Currently there are more than 26 species
of primates being harvested for the bushmeat trade including all
species of great apes. The impacts of the bushmeat trade on primates is
well-outlined in the 1998 Ape Alliance bushmeat report, which suggests:
both local and complete extinctions of endangered and threatened
species, expansion of live trade in apes [aka bushmeat orphans],
destruction of subsistence-based human communities [due to loss of
their resource base], and increased risk of disease transmission
resulting from contact with primates. This final point is beginning to
emerge as a significantly important research topic. New studies are
identifying an increasing number of potential linkages between emerging
infectious diseases and primates through the bushmeat trade, including
HIV, Ebola, and others. The impacts of bushmeat hunting on both primate
and human communities threatens the future of all primate populations
locally and the human population globally.
CARNIVORES: In contrast to their savanna counterparts, carnivores
in rainforest habitats are inconspicuous (many are solitary and
nocturnal), yet they are numerically important members of forest mammal
communities throughout Central and West Africa. African forest
carnivores are difficult to census using traditional transect methods
and thus ecological information is rudimentary and the status of most
species in African forests remains largely unknown. Carnivores are not
`traditional' bushmeat species and are generally captured on an
opportunistic basis. When they can afford to be selective, African
forest hunters generally prefer duikers and primates. In some locales,
however, carnivores are targeted and the trade in carnivore skins (such
as leopard) can be significant. Cable snares are notoriously non-
selective and carnivores can be caught in such traps. They are better
equipped than most mammals to escape by chewing their way out; however,
the ``collateral mortality'' due to injuries incurred is unknown. While
all forest carnivores may not be directly threatened by over-hunting,
they are likely to be indirectly impacted due to competition with
humans for the hunting of their most important prey species.
Impacts of the escalating bushmeat crisis on forest carnivore
populations are not known. The extent to which carnivores fall prey to
humans is difficult to quantify or monitor over the long-term because
these animals are not highly marketable and are usually consumed rather
than sold. Evaluating the selectivity of hunters is impossible without
information on the availability (i.e. relative densities) of target
species, however, a given number of individuals extracted from an area
may have more impact ecologically than other mammal groups because of
their naturally low densities, low intrinsic rates of increase, and
position on the food chain. Presumably, hunting poses the most serious
threat to forest carnivore populations where they are already exposed
to the adverse effects of forest fragmentation, such as in the Upper
Guinea rainforests, considered a core area for the conservation of
small carnivores. The IUCN Small Carnivore Specialist Group listed
habitat destruction and hunting as the main threats facing small
carnivores.
RODENTS: Due to the difficulty of raising domestic hoof stock in
Africa, various sources of wild animal protein, including rodents, have
traditionally been used. As rodents are relatively abundant, easy to
capture, and are preferred by consumers, they have been proposed by
some as a potential alternate source of protein and income through game
ranching and micro-livestock domestication. However, other viewpoints
hold that rodent farming is an inefficient way to generate protein.
Human consumption of rodents does have associated health risks however.
In parts of tropical Africa, Lassa fever, an acute viral illness, has
become a serious problem in recent decades. The reservoir of the Lassa
virus is the multi-mammate rat of the genus Mastomys. Only a few of the
349 African rodent species appear with regularity in the commercial
bushmeat trade with the most commonly hunted rodent species including
grasscutters or cane rats (Thryonomys swinderianus and T. gregorianus),
giant pouched rats (Cricetomys gambianus and C. emini) and porcupines
(Atherurus africaphus ssp). But while the range of rodent species
directly affected by the bushmeat trade is not great, the numbers of
animals consumed can be considerable. The species that have been
documented by bushmeat market studies tend to be among the most
abundant, as they are easier to locate and capture, and because
ungulates, such as duikers, are still plentiful enough to make up the
bulk of the bushmeat trade affording hunters more meat for their
efforts than most rodents. However in some cases rodent species have
been locally exterminated as in the case of the giant pouched rat in
eastern Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), where the human population
is dense, the land fully cultivated, and other wildlife species
overhunted. Similarly, some populations of grasscutter rats are well
below carrying capacity, or have become extinct due to local
overexploitation (NRC 1991). Most African governments have laws
requiring that hunters have a license to take unprotected rodents.
These types of measures could help to protect rodent species from
overhunting, but are infrequently enforced (IUCN 1996).
Bushmeat and Economic Development
Bushmeat Focal Issue: Eco-Economics
Species Involved: Rodents to Elephants
Stakeholders Involved: Rural Communities, Urban Communities,
Hunters,
Traders, Market Sellers, Logging Companies, Development Agencies
and Donors
Key Concepts
1. Lack of economic options and the value of bushmeat relative to
its production and transportation costs make participation in the
commercial bushmeat trade attractive to poor rural and urban people.
Moreover, profits from the bushmeat trade attract non-local, commercial
hunters who are less likely to practice restraint when hunting.
2. In Africa, as in much of the rest of the world, growing urban
populations and rising household incomes drive the increasing demand
for meat. With wildlife ``free for the taking,'' and inadequate
production and marketing of alternative protein sources, bushmeat will
continue to fill this growing consumer demand for meat.
3. Most people eat bushmeat because it is the cheapest and most
readily available source of meat. Some are willing to use scarce
financial resources to eat a bushmeat meal. In other parts of the world
people shift away from eating bushmeat as soon as other sources of
protein become both reliably available and cheaper.
Summary
Economics drives the bushmeat crisis, although cultural attachment
may also play a role. Growing demand for meat in most cities provides
new economic opportunities for people whose traditional sources of
income have withered as agricultural prices have fallen and jobs have
become increasingly scarce. Although wealthier people will pay high
prices for gorilla, snake, and porcupine in the capital cities, most
bushmeat is eaten by families who cannot afford the more costly beef,
chicken and pork. Economics can also be a key component to developing
solutions to the bushmeat crisis. Cooperative efforts could help to
increase law enforcement and to tax commercial trade in wildlife will
contribute to solving the bushmeat crisis. Such activities would reduce
the supply and increase the price of bushmeat. This would encourage
consumers to seek alternatives, and thus help protect wildlife
populations. Local production of economically affordable alternatives
is vital, but may need to be subsidized initially to encourage
production and keep alternative protein prices significantly lower than
bushmeat. Reducing supply and shifting demand to locally produced
alternatives are the keys to curbing the commercial trade in bushmeat
without jeopardizing the health and welfare of Central Africans.
Background
Evidence from other parts of the world suggests that poor families
initially consume more bushmeat as their incomes rise. Consumption only
begins to drop when families become wealthy enough to switch to eating
more expensive cultivated sources of protein. Bushmeat consumption,
therefore, appears to follow an inverted U pattern with income. If this
pattern is also true for Central and West Africa, then changes in
livelihoods of rural and urban families may increase or decrease
consumption of bushmeat, depending on where they are on the income
axis.
Though people have eaten bushmeat on a subsistence basis for
millennia, only recently has it become such an important source of
income for so many people. In rural areas, people once made money
growing and selling a variety of products, including: rice, cotton,
cacao, coffee and peanuts. Over the past 20 years livelihoods have
collapsed as infrastructures have decayed, prices fluctuated and the
currency devalued. With farming unprofitable and limited off-farm jobs
available, many rural people have turned to commercial hunting and
trading of bushmeat. This is an attractive alternative because high
returns can be made from a relatively small investment, there are only
limited controls on hunting and trading of bushmeat, and logging
companies provide hunters with access to once isolated regions of the
forest, and traders with the means to transport bushmeat to markets.
Urban populations fuel the demand for bushmeat. These communities have
grown substantially since the 1960s and their buying power has
fluctuated with the unstable economy. Bushmeat is meeting urban demand
for meat because it is relatively cheap and available, particularly
since logging roads and vehicles have increased hunters' access to once
isolated forests and their wildlife populations.
Current Understanding and Activities
Central Africans typically eat as much meat as many Europeans and
North Americans (30-70 kg/person/year). Most of this meat comes from
wildlife. Approximately 30 million people live in the forests of
Central Africa, and they eat an estimated total of 1.1 million metric
tons of wildlife each year the equivalent of almost 4 million cattle.
The estimated annual value of this bushmeat trade in West and Central
Africa could exceed 1 billion U.S. dollars. A hunter can make $300-1000
per year from commercial hunting. This is more than the average annual
household income for the region and is comparable to the salaries of
those responsible for controlling the bushmeat trade. Hunters regularly
reinvest their profits on improved technologies, which makes killing
wildlife easier, more profitable, and less sustainable. The difference
between subsistence and commercial hunting are becoming less clear as
marketing opportunities increase. Traders, transporters, market
sellers, restaurateurs, and their families also benefit from the
commercial trade in bushmeat and we must recognize that all of their
incomes would be affected if laws against the trade were strictly
enforced. As demand for bushmeat increases, more people will be
encouraged to become involved in the trade, increasing the pressure on
wildlife populations, threatening the survival of rare species, and
jeopardizing future access to ecological, nutritional and income
benefits from wildlife. A few pilot projects have begun in West and
Central Africa to assess the extent and impacts of the bushmeat trade,
to place controls on the commercial bushmeat trade, and to develop
alternative sources of protein. Widespread collaborative efforts are
necessary to develop and implement bushmeat control and wildlife
management activities and to share the lessons learned from such
activities.
Recommended Solutions
Efforts to constrain the supply of bushmeat and enforce laws that
prohibit the commercial trade in bushmeat will, in the short-term,
decrease the amount of bushmeat available in markets. However, if
demand for bushmeat is strong and substitutes do not exist, bushmeat
prices will likely increase, providing incentives for people to enter
the trade and find ways to circumvent controls. Consequently, solutions
to the bushmeat crisis must include ensuring that consumers have access
to alternative protein sources that are both palatable and priced
competitively with bushmeat. Unless consumers have economically viable
alternatives they will continue, not surprisingly, to demand wildlife
as an affordable and tasty source of meat.
The Role of the Logging Industry
Species Involved: All Flora and Fauna--Entire Ecosystem
Stakeholders Involved: Local communities, international timber
producers, timber product traders and consumers, producer and consumer
country governments, World Bank, Multilateral Development Banks,
International Monetary Fund, Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO),
African Timber Organization, International Tropical Timber Organization
(ITTO)
Key Concepts:
After oil and minerals, logging typically provides the
next most significant source of national revenue for the densely
forested countries of West and Central Africa, and will continue to do
so for at least the next 25-50 years.
Road construction associated with selective logging
dramatically increases hunter access to isolated sectors of the forest,
and decreases the cost of transporting bushmeat to urban markets,
effectively increasing the supply to, and profitability of the bushmeat
trade.
Per capita bushmeat consumption is highest in logging
concessions, because the large numbers of company workers can afford to
eat more meat than poorer unemployed families, they have the money to
purchase guns and ammunition, and they have motorized access to the
forest to hunt.
Logging companies are the de facto managers of most of
the remaining relatively intact blocks of forest outside of protected
areas and have a key role to play in ensuring that logging practices do
not jeopardize the survival of wildlife populations within concessions.
Public advocacy has encouraged several logging companies
to partner with conservation organizations. Such companies are
developing and testing approaches to curb the export of bushmeat from
concessions and to decrease bushmeat consumption by loggers and their
families.
Summary
Logging is an economically important land-use throughout West and
Central Africa, and a major threat to wildlife. Present selective
logging practices not only result in increased consumption of bushmeat
within concession areas, but also facilitate the supply of bushmeat to
urban markets and enhance the profitability of the trade. With
assistance from governments and conservation NGOs, logging companies
are beginning to alter their practices so that they no longer directly
or indirectly promote the unsustainable consumption of bushmeat,
thereby minimizing the impact of logging on forest wildlife. Widespread
adoption and enforcement of appropriate forest and wildlife management
policies and practices is essential to effective control of the
commercial bushmeat trade.
Background
The tropical forests of West and Central Africa cover an area of
over 2 million km2 almost four times the size of France. Although as
many as 80 species of trees are logged commercially in these regions,
less than 5 account for the majority of wood exports. In Cameroon,
Sapelli (Entandrophragma cylindricum) and Ayous (Triplochiton
scleroxylon) comprise over 1/3rd of all log exports. In Gabon, Okoume
(Aucoumea klaineana) accounts for over 70% of exports. Logging
progresses like a wave over the landscape as timber companies enter
into unlogged areas in search of the few valuable trees that are
scattered in low density throughout the forest. Once these are logged
the company quickly moves on to the next area. To find and harvest
these individual trees, loggers must construct numerous survey trails
and roads. This road-building both heavily fragments the forest, and
opens it up to hunters. A hunting trip that might have taken days to
complete before the arrival of logging may be reduced to a few hours
when the hunter can hitch a ride on a logging vehicle. Moreover, with
the help of the logging company transport, hunters no longer have to
carry the dead animal(s) for long distances and therefore tend to kill
many more animals on each trip. Logging companies not only directly
increase demand for meat by hiring a large workforce, they also greatly
facilitate their workers entry into the commercial trade to supply
bushmeat to urban markets. This same scenario existed in West Africa in
the 1950s and 1960s, and contributed to the widespread and dramatic
declines in wildlife populations evidenced in West African forests
today.
Current Understanding and Activities
Decades of research and subsidies have convincingly demonstrated
that natural forest management for timber is both economically and
ecologically untenable. Yet, it may be possible to manage timber
harvesting to generate a relatively constant, and economically viable
stream of marketable wood, accepting that tree species composition will
change within the logged forest, but ensuring that logging practices do
not result in significant impacts on wildlife populations. The majority
of large, relatively intact blocks of forest outside of protected
areas, that comprise less than 6% of the landscape in Central Africa,
are currently being logged or are earmarked for logging. It is critical
that logging companies modify their practices to minimize the impact on
wildlife, and that protected areas are provided with funding sufficient
to ensure the long-term persistence of forest plants and animals. The
role of protected areas in conserving forest biodiversity is
particularly important in West Africa where less than 8% of the post-
Pleistocene forest remains, and protected areas constitute the last
bastions for forest dependent species. Advocacy and media attention at
the international level recently has encouraged several multinational
logging companies to develop partnerships with conservation NGOs to
design and implement pilot activities to curb the flow of bushmeat from
concessions, and to provide logging company workers and their families
with alternatives to bushmeat. Governments and donors are also working
with trade associations to develop a `code of good conduct' for all
logging companies active in the region.
Recommended Solutions:
Logging companies provide revenues and employment essential to the
economies of West and Central Africa, and have a major role to play in
determining the future state of forests and wildlife management in the
region. Providing logging companies with incentives to minimize impacts
on plant and animal communities within concessions, to establish long-
term wildlife management plans, to set aside unlogged refuges for rare
or threatened species, to halt the transportation of hunters and
bushmeat on logging vehicles, to deny hunters road access to logged
forests, and to seek ways to provide company employees with alternative
sources of protein, are all important steps in mitigating the adverse
impacts of logging on wildlife.
Coltan mining in the Democratic Republic of Congo and its impact on
illegal bushmeat hunting
Tantalum is a rare, valuable, metallic element which is
twice as dense as steel and highly resistant to heat and corrosion. It
can store and slowly release an electrical charge, a property that has
made it a vital material for capacitors in portable electronic
equipment including laptops, digital cameras, playstations and mobile
phones. Other applications include surgical equipment, turbine blades
for jet engines and lining chemical reactors.
It is mined in several countries with Australia
responsible for over 60% of world production. All of the production of
the largest mines is sold, in advance, on fixed price contracts to key
tantalum processors. There is no central market for tantalum and, other
than the major mine-processor contracts, prices are determined by
dealers on an individual transaction basis.
In 2000, increased anticipated demand for electronic
products caused a tantalum supply shortfall, precipitating a rush of
panic buying and a massive price increase. In the Democratic Republic
of Congo (DRC) this became a Klondike-style rush into the World
Heritage Site National Parks where `coltan', a tantalum-bearing gravel
ore, can be easily surface-mined with shovels and sieves. The mines are
in rebel-held areas of the war-torn, impoverished DRC where warring
factions are responsible for humanitarian atrocities and neighboring
countries are accused of perpetuating the war as a cover for systematic
exploitation of minerals.
The mining camps had a massive impact on local wildlife
through commercial hunting for food, including the wholesale killing of
endangered species such as the eastern lowland or Grauer's gorilla.
This species occurs only in DRC and it is estimated that over 85% of
the world's population occurred in Kahuzi Biega National Park prior to
the arrival of 10,000 miners and 300 professional hunters. The
population has likely been decimated.
The United Nations Security Council published two reports
in 2001 which clearly stated that the private sector must accept some
responsibility for contributing to this resource-based conflict through
the purchase of illegally mined material the spoils of war
The panic-buying coltan boom was followed by a tantalum
market slump in 2001. The plummeting prices were not, as widely
reported, due to international pressure to boycott Congolese coltan nor
to the development of alternatives to tantalum, but rather due to
companies working off their expensive inventories they simply didn't
need to buy it. Despite significant planned expansions of Australian
mining capacity, demand for tantalum is likely to continue to grow at a
steady rate that may again outstrip supply. Hence, sources such as DRC
will remain strategically important.
There has been international call for companies to
boycott Central African tantalum, which is the easiest and safest
corporate option, particularly in terms of public relations. There is
no need to purchase Congolese coltan at present due to large
inventories still being used up after the panic-buying phase. However,
due to smuggling and the nature of the world market, it is almost
impossible to guarantee that shipments of ore purchased on the `spot'
market are free of this `conflict coltan'. Sanctions may impact
negatively on the poverty stricken region, which is so desperately in
need of investment and may in fact increase dependence on bushmeat.
Food security for the Congolese people has been
profoundly compromised by the long-standing conflict that has ravaged
the country. Theft and destruction of crops and livestock has combined
with voluntary and forced desertion of agriculture for more lucrative
mining operations, and thereby to create growing dependence on food aid
and imports. Under such conditions of stress, dependence on bushmeat
has increased with sustainable wild harvest off-take hugely exceeded by
the desperate population.
A regulated, Congolese, coltan industry based on long-
term, transparently negotiated business arrangements with legitimate
Congolese coltan producers, under the terms of the DRC peace process,
should be explored. Payment of a fair market price for an ethically
sourced product could contribute significantly to the peace process in
the region, as business intervention may be a viable route to stability
in a conflict that is predicated on economics. This option is far more
complex, not least as it raises significant questions about the
acceptability and risk of doing business in a war zone. Paradoxically,
however, this route could demonstrate greater environmental and social
responsibility.
Fauna & Flora International (FFI) is global conservation
organization that builds the capacity of partner organizations to find
sustainable and innovative solutions to conservation issues in some of
the most politically complex and most important reservoirs of
biodiversity in the world. FFI is working with tantalum consuming
industries to identify their role and responsibilities with regard to
management of the coltan supply chain, and to find economically,
politically, socially and environmentally viable solutions to the
crisis.
FFI is working with corporations and industry bodies,
governments, conservation organizations, humanitarian NGOs and aid
agencies, inter-governmental bodies and financial institutions to
identify possible routes in which coltan can generate long term
benefits to DRC rather than fueling a war which has resulted in over 3m
`excess deaths' in 3 years.
Karen T. Hayes, B.A. Mod. Zoo, M.B.A. Cantab.
Corporate Affairs, Fauna & Flora International
Great Eastern House, Tenison Road, Cambridge, CB1 2TT, UK
tel: +44 (0)1223 571000 mobile: +44 (0)7968 179951 fax: +44 (0)1223
461481
www.fauna-flora.org
4 July 2002
Bushmeat and Global Human Health
Species Involved: Non-human Primates, Humans, Potential other
vector/reservoir species.
Stakeholders Involved: Rural and urban communities in Africa, World
Population, Centers for Disease Control, National Institutes of Health
(USA), University and Government Health Researchers around the Globe,
Private Companies engaging in extractive and/or construction-transport
activity in tropical forest areas,
Key Concepts:
Wildlife, particularly primates, harbor diseases that can
jump to humans and cause new and typically lethal diseases such as AIDS
and Ebola
Hunting, butchering, and consumption of bushmeat places
people at increased risk of contracting virulent animal borne diseases
Logging, Mining, and Hydroelectric or Fossil Fuel
Transport projects have opened up new areas of forest to commercial
hunting, increasing the risk that humans will be exposed to new animal
borne diseases
Bushmeat is an important source of dietary protein for
most Central Africans, and they are unlikely to stop eating bushmeat
unless they fully understand the risks to their health, and to the
continued presence of these animal populations, and possibly unless
other cheaper substitutes are available
Increasing our understanding of the factors likely to
promote transmission of diseases from wildlife to humans is critical to
evaluating the public health risks associated with the commercial trade
in bushmeat
Capacity building at local, national, and international
levels for disease monitoring, surveillance, and care provision among
forest populations not only provides better information in the medium
to long term, but also valorizes local knowledge, provides educational
opportunities, and offers economic alternatives to commercial hunting
for forest populations in the immediate term.
Summary:
Though bushmeat is often cited as essential to meeting the basic
nutritional needs of rural African communities, studies are beginning
to indicate considerable negative health implications connected with
the processing and consumption of wildlife. Reports are beginning to
emerge connecting non-human primates with Ebola virus in a variety of
African outbreak sites. Deaths have also resulted from outbreaks of
diarrhea linked with the consumption of bushmeat. Evidence of simian
immunodeficiency virus (SIV) infection has been reported for 26
different species of African non-human primates, many of which are
regularly hunted and sold as bushmeat. Two of these viruses, SIVcpz
from chimpanzees and SIVsm from sooty mangabeys, are the original cause
of AIDS in humans. Together, they have been transmitted to humans on at
least seven occasions. New research suggests that HIV recombinants are
also appearing in forest sites where commercial hunting and in-
migration of human populations has affected the distribution and
circulation of viruses. This has scientific as well as public health
implications, locally and globally.
Background:
Emerging infectious diseases are a major threat to global human
health. While dramatic outbreaks of Ebola virus or Sin Nombre (hanta)
virus have attracted widespread media attention, the disease with the
greatest global impact to have emerged recently is the acquired
immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS). First recognized in 1981, AIDS
represents the endstage of infection with one of two lentiviruses
(human immunodeficiency virus types 1 or 2) of zoonotic origin. HIV-1
has spread to most parts of the world, while HIV-2 has remained largely
restricted to West Africa. On a global scale, HIV/AIDS represents the
most important public health threat of the new millennium. These recent
research results emerge at a time when human populations are increasing
while availability of resources to meet basic nutritional needs are
decreasing. Finding ways to reduce human health threats potentially
caused by the bushmeat trade while addressing protein needs for
millions of people is a global imperative. Bushmeat in Central Africa
constitutes 80% of all meat consumed and provides poor rural and urban
families with as much as 50% of daily protein requirements. Forest
antelope (duikers) are the most popular species to hunt because they
are relatively large and abundant, and are easily trapped at little
cost using wire snares. As antelope numbers decline, hunters shift to
primates, which are easy but more expensive to hunt, as each animal
costs a shotgun shell. Eventually, as all large animals are depleted,
people resort to hunting and selling rodents. Given the greater genetic
proximity of apes and monkeys to humans, people are most at risk of
contracting animal borne diseases when bushmeat markets have a high
ratio of primates.
Current Understanding and Activities:
Commercial logging of tropical forests represents an important
economic activity for several African countries. Logging operations
facilitate the intensification of commercial hunting by building roads
into once relatively inaccessible areas of forest with abundant
wildlife, and by allowing hunters to travel on logging vehicles and to
transport their bushmeat to urban markets. This increased penetration
of tropical forest has the potential to increase human exposure to new
infectious agents. In west central Africa alone, numerous primate
species known to harbor SIV, including colobus, sun-tailed and DeBrazza
monkeys as well as mandrills, drills, chimpanzees, and red-capped
mangabeys, are regularly hunted and sold at local bushmeat markets.
Certain of the simian viruses have properties that render them at least
candidates for natural transmission. Thus, although there is no
evidence that zoonotic transmissions have occurred as a direct result
of this commercialized bushmeat trade, the potential for human exposure
has increased, as have the conditions that might support the emergence
of new zoonotic infections. A number of studies are currently being
undertaken to investigate the linkages between wildlife diseases and
human health. Such research is essential in addressing many important
questions concerning wildlife human interactions. Equally important are
projects to explore alternative models for economic development that do
not entail large scale ecological disturbance, and to develop and test
approaches to meeting Central Africans' basic nutritional and protein
needs, whilst shifting consumer preferences away from eating bushmeat.
The events that brought about the HIV-1 pandemic may never be fully
elucidated, though their connection to emergence mechanisms for other
pathogens, such as Ebola or Hepatitis, merits serious attention. Recent
research suggests that initial emergence of SIV into human populations
as HIV-1occurred during the first wave of extractive activity in
African forests, during the rubber boom of the 1920s and 1930s.
Regardless of what ultimately caused its explosive spread, conditions
that promote and sustain zoonotic disease emergence have likely
increased rather than decreased in the past two decades. Studies
underway seek to confirm and track continued transmission of SIVs to
humans at present, and to determine the prevalence of infection and
associated risk factors. Researchers are also developing and testing
diagnostic assays capable of recognizing a wide range of lentiviral
infections in both humans and primates, including the development and
application of non-invasive approaches to screen primate populations in
the wild for evidence of SIV infection. Related work trains local
forest residents to monitor and report on the health of gorillas and
other non-human primates, and has been instrumental in documenting and
responding to recent Ebola outbreaks. Addressing the origins and future
of HIV and other pathogens entails attention to the convergence of
issues such as environmental change, conservation of endangered primate
species, economic development, public health, environmental governance,
and corporate environmental leadership. Such work will increasingly
require interdisciplinary collaboration of scientists with expertise in
anthropology, history, ecology, political science, economics,
primatology, epidemiology, virology and conservation biology. It will
demand an emphasis on infrastructure development and training in the
areas concerned, sensitivity to feelings of stigma, and respect for
distinct culturally based attitudes to some of these issues. It will
foster discussions concerning resource allocations based on scientific
and public health priorities as well as the changing definitions and
perpetual demands of economic development.
Recommended Solutions:
An interdisciplinary working group of international researchers
studying emergent viral disease in tropical forest sites all over the
world met under the auspices of the International Society for Ecosystem
Health in June, 2002 in Washington D.C.; they will meet again at
Harvard University, under the auspices of the Harvard Academy for
International and Area Studies, and the Harvard AIDS Institute, in
November 2002 (for more information, write rhardin@wcfia.harvard.edu).
During the final roundtable session in June, with representatives from
Department of State, Department of Interior, Department of Agriculture,
and other government agencies as well as non-governmental
organizations, the following recommendations emerged:
Governments and donors:
1. Recognize that previous distinctions between domestic and
international health concerns are no longer necessarily accurate;
Pathogens in a tropical forest today could eventually reach Arizona or
Michigan.
Example: HIV history, above.
Recommendation: Institute internal training modules for government
agencies and policy makers, demonstrating and discussing links between
human health, ecosystem health, good governance, strong economic
performance, stability, and U.S. national interests/security concerns.
2. Consider a Relative Risk Framework: Place known risks (spread of
existing HIV strains, emergence of new HIV strains, and spread of
Ebola) on a continuum from high to low risk. Examples: Such an approach
has worked well for Food Safety in North America. Recommendations: In
the processes that make up the bushmeat trade (opening of forest areas,
in-migration, meat demand, market development, hunting intensification,
ecological change, market response, etc.) determine via hazard analysis
where are critical control points. Identify the risk reduction points
and develop a plan and standards for each point. Research can inform
that process, creating better management programs and training
programs.
3. Build better funding support for multidisciplinary research
initiatives with explicit health and ecology focus.
Examples: recent NIH initiatives under Fogarty auspices, and others
just taking shape.
Recommendations: strong research protocols protecting animal and
human health, and encouraging teams to share and archive their samples;
engage in old-fashioned, omnivorous survey work with open minds to
identify not only known but also as yet unknown pathogens.
4. Foster participation in training opportunities at research and
health career levels.
Examples: WCS training for local residents in Africa on Primate
Health, supported by USFWS; training for international researchers at
the Biology of Disease Vectors Program, Colorado State University,
supported by MacArthur Foundation.
Recommendation: Earmark funds for local capacity building in any
conservation or environmental protection initiative; create and/or
strengthen scholarship and fellowship initiatives in these fields for
international research training.
5. Senior Government leadership is needed in multilateral
negotiations and recently advancing initiatives related to forests and
trade where the U.S. has interest.
Examples: We are entering a new institutional era on forest
management: CBD has adopted a forest action program; G8 interest; Rio +
10 with clear forest-related deliverables.
Recommendation: While no one institution or organization has total
control over such issues as cross sectoral collaboration for
sustainable forest management, the U.S. can and should be aggressive on
public-private partnerships, as those emerging in Congo basin
countries.
6. Ensure the viability and perpetuity of protected areas in
tropical forests.
Examples: slow building of a transborder initiative in the western
Congo basin, where core areas are surrounded by public/private and
trinational government efforts at joint management of mixed-use zones.
Recent research suggests that core protected areas, more than buffer
zones or management areas, are the best chance for continued densities
of forest fauna, with viable population numbers, while experiments in
effective management play themselves out in adjoining areas. As
wildlife repositories, such core areas have clear value for the
education of international publics as well as local residents.
Recommendation: Maintain or increase funding levels for
establishment and management of protected areas. Earmark funds for
capacity building programs in core areas that value and reward local
forest and health knowledge, while expanding skills bases and providing
new economic opportunities in research, tourism, and health related
fields for local residents.
Private sector:
1. Identify appropriate protein alternatives to bushmeat and
mechanisms for making these resources available and affordable to rural
and urban communities.
Example: recent trials with imported chicken and fish in
Cameroonian logging concessions.
Recommendation: exploring protein alternatives must be done with an
eye open for the introduction of new pathogens to wildlife communities
via the domesticated animals introduced. However, care in the
distribution and marketing of alternatives can reduce such risks, while
also reducing consumption of wild animals.
2. Integrate research-based monitoring of disease processes into
development projects and for-profit activities in tropical forests.
Examples: PRESICA project in Cameroon, working with logging
companies and local populations to conduct blood tests of humans and
wildlife in logged areas, while increasing awareness and dialogue about
SIV/HIV among stakeholders; Brazilian example of Power Company funding
pre- and post- dam construction monitoring of arbovirus levels, and
offering treatment to local populations where levels have increased.
Recommendation: Partner with existing research projects, or create
an internal agency/service for research and monitoring, focusing on
links between human health and the bushmeat trade including mechanisms
of disease transmission, monitoring prevalence patterns, and
documenting and supporting human nutritional needs.
Environmental NGOs:
1. Work to develop health indicators, for use across ecosystems.
Example: Biodiversity indicators exist at various degrees of
specificity. How is that addressed and how we can combine the health
with the biodiversity? Also, robust (non-normative) indicators/criteria
are being implemented since the September 11 scare, in various sites
around the world.
Recommendation: Use current WCS wildlife health program as a model,
or starting point. Also, return to original Hotspots Monitoring plan
for Conservation International: biomedical issues were a part of the
plan. Let us pick those aspects up; work with medical and public health
resources in hotspots, and try to systematize our information gathering
and training on these topics.
2. Develop awareness raising activities, at various levels.
Example: The Bushmeat Crisis Task Force has effectively generated
interest in U.S. based zoo-going publics, and in the North American
media. Project PRESICA is developing and testing brochures and other
educational materials in Cameroon. Conservation International is doing
awareness raising work in Ghana.
Recommendation: weak spots on such work include reaching the outer
edges of the stakeholder spectrum: local residents of tropical forest
areas, and corporate leaders at the international level. Bolster
funding and collaboration across organizations on effective awareness
raising at these levels, learning from the successful experiences
mentioned above.
Bushmeat and Ecology
Bushmeat Focal Issue: Ecological Processes and Bushmeat
Species Involved: Seed-dispersing animals, including duikers,
monkeys, apes and elephants
Stakeholders Involved: Rural Communities, Hunters, Traders,
Protected Area Managers, Logging Companies, Development Agencies and
Donors, Future Generations
Key Concepts:
Hunting Wildlife for meat is a greater immediate threat
to biodiversity conservation than is deforestation.
People in the Congo Basin eat as much meat as do
Europeans and Americans; 60%-80% of animal protein is derived from
wildlife. As much as 1 million metric tons of bushmeat is eaten each
year in the Congo Basin.
Primates and antelopes that are commonly hunted for meat,
play an important role in the forest by spreading the seeds of trees,
vines and shrubs.
Forest wildlife productivity is very low compared to
savanna populations and cannot sustainably supply protein demands for
growing human populations in West and Central Africa.
Legitimizing and helping countries enforce existing
wildlife laws is central to effective wildlife conservation.
Securing long-term support for protected areas and buffer
zones will be the only solution for many species' survival.
A significant percentage of the animals being hunted are
classified as threatened or endangered and are protected by
international laws (e.g. CITES).
Summary
Though deforestation and habitat loss is often cited as the primary
cause of local wildlife extinction, hunting for both local consumption
and large commercial markets has become the most immediate factor that
threatens the future of wildlife in the Congo Basin in the next 5-15
years and has already resulted in widespread local extinctions
throughout the Upper Guinea Forest Ecosystem of West Africa. Empty
Forest Syndrome describes a forest that has been emptied of its
wildlife structurally, it appears normal, but no large-bodied animals
are present. As wildlife are being hunted out of forests, those
ecosystems lose important seed dispersers, thus affecting the ecology
of the entire ecosystem.
The short-term economic benefits derived from the commercial
bushmeat trade, though expedient for poor families today, may
jeopardize long-term economic opportunities for future generations. And
worse may place people in increased jeopardy of contracting and
transmitting animal-derived diseases such as Ebola or HIV (See BCTF
Fact Sheet on Health).
Background
If only one species of animal existed in the forest, hunters would
continue to hunt that species until it became so scarce, from over
hunting, that profits from hunting declined below that which the hunter
could make doing something else, such as farming or fishing.
Unfortunately for rare and endangered species, the forests of West and
Central Africa are home to numerous wildlife species that are hunted
for food. In this case, when hunters go hunting they are not targeting
single species, but are roaming the forest in search of any animal
worth (in economic terms) killing. A bushmeat hunter with a shotgun is
inclined to shoot the largest animal he can be assured of killing
because this will generate the most profit per cartridge. So although
an animal may become scarce, even to the point of almost going locally
extinct, a hunter will shoot it if he encounters it, and it is large
enough to warrant using up an expensive shotgun cartridge. Given this
fact, rare and endangered species are likely to be driven to extinction
by hunters when other more abundant animals continue to make hunting
profitable.
Moreover, even when over hunting and bushmeat scarcity causes
prices to rise and substitutes to be more competitive, hunting will
continue in areas where bushmeat capture and transport costs remain
comparable to the costs of livestock rearing.
Bushmeat is often a primary source of protein for local
communities, as other alternatives are frequently not viable. In
Central Africa, domestic animals such as cattle, goats, pigs, chickens
and ducks are raised by rural and urban households, but they are
primarily viewed as savings and insurance rather than as sources of
protein. This traditional value of livestock remains important to
households in the region today because inflation is high and access to
banks and formal credit is limited or absent. Furthermore, tsetse flies
and trypanosomiasis severely limit cattle raising in the forested and
scrubby savannah landscapes typical of the region. As a result, the
meat of domestic livestock tends only to appear in rural or urban
markets that are located relatively close to savannahs and ethnic
groups with a tradition of pastoralism.
Current Understanding and Activities
Hunting of wildlife to meet people's demand for protein may still
be sustainable in the few remaining areas where population densities
are less than 2 people/km2, trade routes are poorly established, and
human population growth rates are low or negative. The scale of the
commercial bushmeat trade now occurring in West and Central Africa,
however, is driven by markets with high human densities and growth
rates. This industrial-level market threatens the survival of many
species, including several unique to the dense forested regions of
Africa. While deforestation is an obvious menace to wildlife dependent
on these habitats, hunting constitutes an even greater threat to the
ecosystem. Even where tree cover is relatively intact, we find forests
without wildlife this is known as Empty Forest Syndrome. Such forests
suffer dramatic effects in structure and composition as the wildlife
necessary to disperse seeds and enable regeneration are gone. This may
result in loss of many plant species as well as considerable effects on
water flow, including streams and major rivers.
Loss of wildlife from hunting, means loss of seed dispersing
animals that play a key role in determining tree composition and
distribution, altering both the structure and function of the forest
and potentially causing irreversible ecological effects (e.g., carbon
sequestration) with global consequences.
Wildlife populations, though highly diverse in these forests, are
not as productive when compared with savanna-based wildlife
populations. In general, there is an order of magnitude difference
between the biomass available for hunting within the same amount of
space when we compare forests (2,500 kg per square kilometer) and
savannas (25,000 kilograms per square kilometer) (Robinson and Bennett
2000). Thus, animal husbandry programs such as the game ranching
efforts (commercial management of wildlife for meat and skins) found in
East and Southern Africa are not a viable alternative in West and
Central Africa.
Recommended Solutions
Long-term support for protected areas including provision
of well-equipped and trained anti-poaching units is a clear priority
for mitigating the commercial bushmeat trade. This is particularly true
for West Africa where much of the original forest cover has been
removed and protected areas provide some of the only land available for
many wildlife populations.
Target extractive industries to manage wildlife resources
in partnership with governments and conservation NGOs.
Increase support for national and transborder protected
area networks and for developing wildlife management capacity at local,
national, and regional levels.
Provide support for stabilization of conflicts throughout
the region an important link with dramatic losses of wildlife that
removes potential economic development and ecological importance from
future generations of Africans.
Support environmentally sound economic development
throughout West Africa and the Congo Basin. Influence broader
environmental strategy implementation (e.g. through National Bushmeat
Action Plans) and increase capacity for international cooperative
efforts.
Development of multi-level research and education
programs including: fundamental and applied research to increase
understanding of tropical forest ecosystems; to improve methods for
harnessing sustainable, renewable natural resources; to develop
alternative sources of income and protein; to adapt school and
university curricula to include an improved understanding of
biodiversity; to introduce new technology such as interpretation of
satellite imagery, communications and tools such as GIS and molecular
biology.
Support public awareness campaigns designed to reach out
to range states to raise awareness of the bushmeat crisis and their
role in implementing solutions.
Culture and Bushmeat
Bushmeat Focus Issue: Social Ecology
Species Involved: All bushmeat species: rodents, giant pangolins,
brush-tailed porcupine, duikers (forest antelope), monkeys,
chimpanzees, gorillas, elephants, and humans
Stakeholders Involved: Rural and urban communities, indigenous
groups, conservation and development organizations
Key Concepts:
Bushmeat is an important source of protein for poor rural
and urban families in West and Central Africa.
Many communities will continue to hunt even where
alternatives exist as bushmeat and hunting are culturally and socially
important.
When people do not have stable land tenure or livelihood
security, they are less likely to care for the resources in the areas
where they reside.
Population growth has a major effect on the demand for
bushmeat. Even if per capita consumption remains stable, increasing
population can have a devastating effect on wildlife and natural
resources. More land must be cleared for housing and agriculture, and
more forest resources must be extracted to meet basic needs.
Summary
Local communities are inextricably tied to the current bushmeat
crisis in West and Central Africa. They form the network of hunters,
traders, truck drivers, market-resellers, restaurateurs and consumers
that moves wildlife from the forest to the urban cooking pot. All
participants in their trade network rely on bushmeat for some of their
livelihoods. Wildlife provides protein, cultural and religious
linkages, and a source of income many rural families. People do not
typically view bushmeat hunting as a problem. Rather, wildlife is
viewed more as crop pests, threats to their lives and livelihoods, an
inexhaustible resource free for the taking, and a new source of income.
However, growing human population and changing economic conditions are
driving demand for bushmeat that now exceeds the rate that hunted
wildlife are replaced within the forest. Unsustainable hunting for meat
will mean the loss of a valuable source of food and income for the huge
number of families involved in bushmeat trade networks. Finding ways to
conserve threatened and endangered wildlife species, without
compromising the health and welfare of poor rural and urban families is
a challenge. Shifting demand to locally produced alternatives to
bushmeat and revitalizing the traditional agricultural economies of
recent entrants into the bushmeat trade, are the keys to curbing the
commercial trade in bushmeat without jeopardizing the health and
security of West and Central Africans.
Background
Wildlife species have held great importance for forest-dwelling
peoples for millennia. Duikers (forest antelopes), monkeys, rodents and
bushpigs all serve human communities as sources of protein, cultural
and social artifacts and now, as sources of cash when sold to bushmeat
markets. Hunting is vital to communities without access to agricultural
markets, or to those who are too poor to purchase other sources of
meat. Hunting is inextricably woven into many societies. Animal parts,
such as horns, feathers or bones are a crucial part of many cultural
and religious ceremonies. In areas where people live at low densities
and can rotate their usage of forest resources, wildlife populations do
not seem to suffer much damage. However, increasing population
densities and unstable land tenure risks depleting the wildlife upon
which many communities depend for their way-of-life and cultural
identity. Halting unsustainable hunting and helping to retain the
cultural value of wildlife is a challenge when many people involved in
the commercial trade in bushmeat view wildlife as abundant,
inexhaustible, and free to be used.
Current Understanding and Activities
Livelihood insecurity, and absence of land tenure facilitate the
unsustainable commercial trade of bushmeat. Poor people with few job
opportunities see hunting or trading or re-selling bushmeat as a source
of income to meet today's critical needs, and, not surprisingly, are
less concerned that their actions risk forfeiting their livelihood in
the future. Similarly, families without the legal or practical ability
to restrict who hunts how much in their forest, are encouraged to hunt
all the wildlife they can as quickly as possible, before others do.
Conservation and development organizations (both governmental and
nongovernmental) must tread carefully when working with local people on
the bushmeat issue. All of us resent ``outsiders'' imposing
restrictions on our behavior that seem artificial and unconnected to
our personal situations, needs and realities. Building relationships
and capacity among all key stakeholder groups enables the development
of appropriate solutions that can link resource use regulations and
activities that offer alternative sources of protein and economic
opportunities.
Recommended Solutions
Working with all participants in the commercial bushmeat trade to
increase livelihood and resource access security will increase the
success of any projects that seek to decrease the quantity of wildlife
hunted for food. Targeting development activities to draw population
pressure away from fragile areas, and promoting the use of family
planning can help secure access to forest resources over the long term.
People must have access to alternative, economically competitive, and
palatable protein sources, for bushmeat consumption to decrease.
______
Mr. Gilchrest. Thank you, sir.
Dr. Richard Carroll?
STATEMENT OF RICHARD W. CARROLL, DIRECTOR, WEST AND CENTRAL
AFRICA AND MADAGASCAR PROGRAMS, WORLD WILDLIFE FUND
Mr. Carroll. Yes, Mr. Chairman, thank you for the
opportunity to testify today on the devastating impact of the
bushmeat trade in Africa and to offer some solutions.
I am Dr. Richard Carroll, Director of the West and Central
Africa and Madagascar Program at the World Wildlife Fund. WWF
and its 5 million members worldwide is the largest private
conservation organization working internationally to protect
wildlife and wildlife habitats, and we currently sponsor
conservation programs in more than 100 countries.
Many of the issues have been raised by my colleagues, and I
will focus my comments on protected areas and logging
concession controls and the political process of the Yaounde
summit as three viable, concrete, and interrelated solutions to
the bushmeat trade in Central Africa.
Protected areas are the only land-use form fully dedicated
to biodiversity conservation where wildlife should be safe from
gun and snare. In the corridors between these protected areas
and in other forests where logging concessions operate, illegal
and uncontrolled logging and hunting must be stopped, and
transportation routes--roads, railways, and airplanes for the
international transport--must be controlled.
As a muddy-boot gorilla researcher who reached silverback
or gray-beard status in the forests of Central Africa, let me
take you to the ground level for a little run through the
jungle, if I may, to show you how one protected area, Dzanga-
Sangha in the Central African Republic, got started and its
impact on conservation.
In 1976, as a Peace Corps volunteer, I was asked by the
Minister of the Environment in the Central African Republic to
check out the wildlife conservation potential in the forests of
the southwest CAR. I arrived at the remote town of Bayanga, and
the next day I was in the forest with my new-found BaAka Pygmy
friends, Mekma and Mevanda. It was clear from the tracks,
nests, signs, and sightings that this was indeed a rich forest
and wildlife punctuated by beautiful forest glades called
``byes'' in the BaAka language, where wildlife congregates.
However, hunting camps were on every stream, and snare trails
crisscrossed the animal trails.
We walked over 2,000 kilometers of transsects and confirmed
the importance of the forest and the degree of threat to this
forest. Mike Fay joined me and completed the surveys in the
southern tip of the country. The network of logging roads
allowed access to migrant workers from the logging company even
to the deepest reaches of the forest, formerly the realm only
of the BaAka Pygmies. Company workers check their snares, and
the meat returns on the logging vehicles in the evening. The
forests is being emptied by outsiders with no long commitment
to the region, leaving little for the people that need it most.
For forest people like the BaAka Pygmies whose cultural,
physical, and spiritual life depends on an intact forest,
forest and wildlife depletion means cultural extinction for
these forest people. Where the forest is going and the wildlife
is gone, the Jengi, or the forest spirit, is no longer there.
The BaAka said to me that they wanted an intact forest and
wildlife and the continued use of these resources, but also the
skills to adapt to a changing way of life in this forest. That
required literacy, numeracy, and health care. So we set out to
try to establish a protected area system that will preserve the
forest and the wildlife with a management program that will
allow for the continued traditional uses of these resources and
provide health care and education that is so necessary.
We named it Dzanga-Sangha and the program was funded by the
WWF/USAID Wildlands and Human Needs Program, and continued
support has come from CARPE over many years. Additional support
came from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Elephant
Conservation Act that supported anti-poaching efforts. Former
poachers from the local population were trained as protectors,
and bushmeat camps and major elephant poachers were quickly
reduced.
A training camp was established to train eco-guards for
Dzanga-Sangha and other protected areas within the region.
Before this protection program began, you were lucky to see one
elephant at the now famous Dzanga bye. Today, at any time of
the day a visitor may encounter 50 to 200 elephants using this
clearing. Research at this bye has identified over 3,000
individual elephants using this clearing alone. I invite you
all to come and see this amazing place any time you would like.
By 1990, the Dzanga-Ndoki National Park and the Dzanga-
Sangha Dense Forest Reserve were officially created. The
interior regulations for the park and reserve called for 90
percent of the tourism revenues to be disbursed locally, and
close to 200 people found employment. As local people began to
receive the conservation dividend, they began to realize that
live elephants at the Dzanga bye were more valuable than dead
elephants. Conservation began to be seen as a viable
development tool, and the wildlife began to rebound.
We are also working with the logging companies in the
region, getting them to take their responsibilities, to close
off roads to poachers, to provide alternatives to poaching, and
to sanction the transport of meat on their logging vehicles.
We recognize, though, that elephants don't carry passports,
and this forest is contiguous across the borders into the Congo
and southeastern Cameroon, and the development of a trinational
protected area complex is proposed. Three national parks were
developed and officially joined into the Dzanga River
Trinational in December 2000, allowing trans-border anti-
poaching patrols. Now a poacher apprehended in Dzanga-Sangha
can no longer flee into Cameroon or the Congo. The result is a
trinational protected area system covering over 7 million
acres. This trinational program is a direct result of the
unprecedented political commitment expressed in the Yaounde
Declaration on Conservation and Sustainable Management of the
Forests, signed by the heads of state of six Central African
countries in March 1999 and has resulted in the creation of
additional forest protected areas totaling approximately 15,000
square miles. And they have a plan for 12 additional trans-
border programs like the Dzanga River Trinational which they
would like to implement in the next 5 years.
In order to stem the bushmeat crisis in Central Africa, we
are requesting the leadership of the U.S. Government to support
these Yaounde Summit commitments. The key to conservation of
the forests in the Congo Basin is the development of an
ecologically representative, financial viable protected area
network spanning the entire basin from the Mountains of the
Moon to the Gulf of Guinea, connected by conservation corridors
of sustainably managed forests.
Over the next few weeks, WWF, WCS, and CI will submit a
joint proposal to the U.S. Government requesting $15 million a
year for 10 years, likely to be administered through CARPE or
Fish and Wildlife Service, that we hope will result in over 30
million acres of functional national parks, over 60 million
acres of managed logging concessions in the surrounding areas,
and a vast reduction in the biodiversity loss through the
bushmeat trade.
Mr. Chairman, it is a time of great conservation
convergence in the Congo Basin. The stars are truly aligned for
the first time in the history where the political will of the
region's governments is at an all-time high. Key conservation
organizations are taking a common path to support a protected
area network spanning the basis. And the U.S. Government has
taken leadership in the Congo Basin Initiative, forming a
conservation constellation which bodes well for timely efforts
in this region.
I have also submitted for the record a report made by the
Traffic Bureau on the bushmeat trade in East and Southern
Africa that is not included in my oral testimony.
Thank you very much, and I would be happy to answer any
questions, and also happy to take you out in the field any time
you would like to.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Carroll follows:]
Statement of Dr. Richard W. Carroll, Director, West and Central Africa
and Madagascar Program, World Wildlife Fund
Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to testify today. I am Dr. Richard Carroll, Director for
West and Central Africa and Madagascar at the World Wildlife Fund. WWF
is the largest private conservation organization working
internationally to protect wildlife and wildlife habitats. We currently
sponsor conservation programs in more than 100 countries, thanks to
support of 1.2 million members in the United States and more than 5
million members worldwide.
We are here today to discuss the devastating impact of the bushmeat
trade in Africa and some solutions to protect the many species affected
by this trade. We are also here to discuss the future of millions of
Africans who depend on forest products for their livelihoods. The
United States, primarily through programs administered by the Fish and
Wildlife Service and USAID--in particular, CARPE--has played a critical
role in the protection and conservation of the forest and its wildlife.
World Wildlife Fund strongly urges that these programs be increased and
expanded to firmly establish a network of ecologically representative
protected areas spanning the Congo Basin.
The Bushmeat Crisis in the Congo Basin
The Bushmeat Crisis in the Congo Basin is a human health
and food security issue, an economic and political issue as well as an
urgent ecological issue. The bushmeat trade is the leading cause of
biodiversity loss in the Congo Basin and is driven by an accelerating
logging industry and growing human population.
Approximately 20 million people depend on the resources
of the forest for food, materials and shelter. Consumption of bushmeat
is estimated to be about one million metric tonnes per year. As human
populations are expected to double in the next 25 years, if no
alternatives are found to the bushmeat crisis, it will spell extinction
of most wildlife species and result in a massive food disaster.
If the demand for bushmeat continues to grow as expected,
and consumers do not switch to the meat of domestic animals, we can
expect that apes and most large bodied forest mammals will be
eradicated from the forest, throughout much of the region.
The bushmeat problem covers both subsistence hunting and
commercial hunting. Commercial hunting supplies urban markets in the
African countries themselves, and even serves consumption needs abroad
where there are large expatriate populations of Africans.
Projections of future logging trends suggest that an
estimated 70 percent of the region's forests could be lost by 2040
unless large-scale changes aimed at conserving the forest and the
livelihoods of its native people are taken now.
At the local level, bushmeat is a survival issue. Simple
subsistence is no longer possible. All communities and all families are
part of the cash economy, however modestly. Families must pay school
fees, buy medicines, purchase salt, sugar, soap and kerosene.
Civil conflict both stems from and creates resource
degradation. Increasingly, military weapons are used by commercial
poachers, especially for large animals such as elephants. Most illegal
shooting of bushmeat still takes place with shotguns using shells
manufactured in Congo or Nigeria. Pressure should be brought to close
these factories and limit the availability of hunting apparatus such as
steel cable used for snares.
Logging companies are showing an increasing willingness
to collaborate, especially on reduction of bushmeat hunting on their
concessions. Examples are the work of WCS in Congo and of WWF with a
Malaysian company near the Minkebe reserve in Gabon. These methods hold
promise for replication throughout the priority regions.
The chimpanzee and other primates have been suggested as
potential vectors for the emerging diseases related to HIV/AIDs and the
recent outbreaks of Ebola have been linked to the handling and eating
of wildlife.
For forest people like the BaAka pygmies, whose cultural,
physical and spiritual life depends on an intact forest, forest and
wildlife depletion means cultural extinction of these forest peoples.
WWF is working with governments and private railway
companies in Cameroon and Gabon to reduce transport of bushmeat.
In terms of GDP, all sub-Saharan countries allocate a
relatively larger percentage of their budgets to national protected
area systems than do either the United States or Canada.
The Yaounde Heads of State Summit and Declaration have
raised the political commitment to conservation in the Congo Basin by a
quantum leap and has presented a unique opportunity to establish a
coherent conservation plan for the Congo Basin. This plan calls for a
regional network of transborder and other protected areas, a halt to
uncontrolled and illegal logging, and hunting and greater integration
of local populations and the private sector in forest management.
WHY IT IS IMPORTANT: BIODIVERSITY AND RESOURCES IN THE FORESTS OF
CENTRAL AFRICA
Stretching from the Mountains of the Moon in eastern Democratic
Republic of the Congo to the coast of the Gulf of Guinea, the Congo
Basin contains a quarter of the world's tropical forests, covering 2.8
million square kilometers. Forest covers almost 50 percent of the
landmass spanning the political boundaries of Cameroon, Equatorial
Guinea, the Central African Republic, the Republic of Congo
(Brazzaville) and the Democratic Republic of Congo. The Congo Basin is
exceeded in size only by the Amazon Basin. The tropical forest block
also contains some of the richest biodiversity in Africa, which
includes countless plant, animal, and insect species. The region
harbors the most diverse assemblage of plants and animals in Africa,
with more than 1,000 species of birds and over 10,000 plant species of
which about 3,000 are endemic to the region. The forests are home to
about 400 mammal species, including intact populations of large
mammals, such as forest elephants, gorillas, bongos and buffaloes. They
are also important as a source of food, materials and shelter for over
20 million people.
The Central African forests are home to some of the most
spectacular and endangered wildlife species in Africa, including one
half of the remaining elephants on the continent. A keystone species of
these forests are the forest elephants, which create habitat for other
wildlife and disperse seeds. Also making their home in this region are
the three subspecies of gorilla: the endangered mountain gorilla, the
eastern lowland gorilla and the more numerous western lowland gorilla.
Other terrestrial wildlife found in the Congo Basin are chimpanzees,
bonobo, okapi, and bongo. The rivers of Central Africa harbor some of
the richest concentrations of the world's aquatic biodiversity, most of
which is endemic. Plant species in the Congo Basin, many with medicinal
properties, are numerous and continue to be discovered.
In addition to the myriad species of flora and fauna, the Congo
Basin is home to people representing a range of ethnic groups,
including the many different groups of indigenous hunter-gatherer
people. The BaAka are one such group whose lives and well-being--
physical, cultural, and spiritual--are intimately linked with the
forests. The forest also represents great economic importance and
promise to these people and their countries.
The Congo Basin is also extremely rich in natural resources. The
region's crude oil production surpassed four million barrels a day in
2000, more than Iran, Venezuela or Mexico. The United States gets 16
percent of its oil from sub-Saharan Africa--almost equaling imports
from Saudi Arabia. By 2015, it is expected that the region will supply
the United States with 25 percent of its oil--surpassing the Persian
Gulf. The vast majority of this oil will come from the Gulf of Guinea,
in the Congo Basin.
Development of this strategic resource area is vital to America's
national security. However, unless conservation of the rainforest is
expanded now, one resource will simply be traded for another. Both can
be used; one can be saved.
WHY IT IS THREATENED: BUSHMEAT, LOGGING, POPULATION GROWTH AND RESOURCE
EXTRACTION
Central African forests are under threat by a multitude of factors.
Almost four million hectares of Africa's forests are destroyed each
year as a result of forest clearance for agriculture to feed the
growing number of people in the region. Mineral and oil extraction,
unsustainable logging and pervasive political instability are other
factors. Road building by logging companies penetrates into the heart
of previously remote forests and gives easy access to commercial
hunters and buyers of bush meat. This, combined with a lack of
surveillance, has led to extreme over-hunting in Central Africa's
forests of such vulnerable species as the western lowland gorilla,
elephant and leopard. The chimpanzee--recently disclosed as the
potential source of the HIV 1 virus in humans and vital to medical
research--is also severely endangered; its forest home is being logged
and it continues to be hunted and sold as food in Central Africa. With
human populations growing at 2-3percent and subsistence level
agriculture still the predominant source of food and income for the
majority of Central Africans, habitat loss as a result of forest
conversion to agriculture, and climate change are likely to be the most
significant long term threats to biodiversity. The immediate threats
are illegal logging and commercial hunting and trading of wildlife for
meat and ivory facilitated by logging operations.
Logging is an economically important land-use throughout Central
Africa. All nations within the region are dependent on extractive
industries for a large percentage of their Gross Domestic Product,
almost all foreign exchange, and much of the tax revenues that finance
government expenses. Logging companies have control over 50-80 percent
of the forests outside protected areas. In many cases, poor management
practices and technical shortcomings cause needless damage and
degradation in and around logging concessions, while many operations
are carried out in violation of forestry regulations. Although it
contributes significantly to national economies and, to some extent, to
local needs, illegal logging has a particularly devastating impact on
biodiversity. Illegal logging deliberately targets the remaining
pristine forests, including protected areas. Available data indicate
that deforestation rates were relatively low until the 1980s, but
increased rapidly during the 1990s. This rate is still increasing.
Logging industries directly and indirectly facilitate a large
increase in commercial bushmeat hunting. While the hunting of bushmeat
has been a traditional livelihood for forest indigenous people, in
particular pygmies, the development of a large-scale commercial trade
in bushmeat is relatively recent and has been facilitated by the
development of logging roads deep into the forest. Current logging
practices not only result in increased consumption of bushmeat within
concession areas but also facilitate the supply of bushmeat to urban
markets and enhance the profitability of the trade.
This alarming level of threat is caused by many inter-linked
factors. In general, national governments have continued the forest
exploitation policies introduced last century by the colonial powers.
They are supported and encouraged in this by multilateral and bilateral
institutions, to which they are heavily indebted, as part of the
structural adjustment polices and economic liberalization programs
imposed as a condition of further lending. Thus, the primary goal of
forest policies in the region is to promote industrial timber
production for export by allocating most of the forest as logging
concessions. Unfortunately, the policy, institutional and legal
frameworks for controlling private sector interests and enforcing
conservation regulations are extremely weak. As a result, illegal
logging practices have flourished throughout the Congo Basin, combined
with unsustainable use of other wild resources by a growing population
with few economic alternatives to face rising poverty. Other root
causes include the lack of technical, scientific and financial
resources and, in some countries, political instability and recent
wars.
Neglecting the threats from unsustainable forestry operations in
the short and medium term will not only undermine the efforts to reduce
poverty but will create more poverty. The result of this will be more
instability in the Congo Basin. The costs for mitigating the impacts of
forestry operations will be much cheaper now than later within the next
10 or 20 years deforestation is likely to be at the maximum. It is
critical to urgently mobilize resources to implement a comprehensive
strategy to protect the invaluable forests and associated resources
within the Congo Basin.
WHAT CAN BE DONE: CROSS-BORDER COOPERATION, PROTECTED AREAS AND
SUSTAINABLE LOGGING
The Yaounde Summit
The Congo Basin is a challenging environment for forest
conservation. Political instability, high levels of government debt, a
decline in export commodity prices and a long history of poor resource
management have led some analysts to wonder if conservation can
actually happen. However, the good news is that low population
densities and large areas of intact forests provide an excellent
starting point for forest protection.
One of the most encouraging signs is the growing support among
governments and communities in Central Africa for region-wide,
collaborative forest conservation. A promising first step was taken in
1996 when the Ministers of Forestry, NGOs and international
organizations signed an international declaration for forest
conservation--The Brazzaville Process. Coordinated by the World
Conservation Union (IUCN), this provides a forum for governments and
other stakeholders to work together on forest conservation in the
region. What was urgently needed, however, was higher level commitments
to forest conservation that could be turned into practical action on
the ground.
The Yaounde Forest Summit held on March 17, 1999, hosted by
President Paul Biya of Cameroon and chaired by HRH The Duke of
Edinburgh, was the first public expression of the high level political
will to conserve the forests of Central Africa. The Summit created a
unique opportunity for the governments of countries of the Congo Basin
to make commitments to forest conservation. Bringing together six
African Heads of state and representatives from the international
community including the World Bank, the United Nations and European
Commission, the summit's aim was: To discuss and conclude new trans-
national protected areas in the Congo Basin and agree upon a shared,
long-term vision for these forests.
The Yaounde Summit marked a watershed in forest conservation in
Central Africa. The summit opened a new era of `conservation
convergence' in Central Africa and was the first time that regional
Heads of State came together to develop a coherent plan for the
conservation of the second largest contiguous forest in the world.
World Wildlife Fund helped organize the summit and the resulting
Yaounde Declaration contained plans to protect vast tracts of forest in
the Congo Basin. The summit marked a turning point in the political
commitment to the region's environment. A key element is that Central
African Governments have set aside areas of great economic value to
themselves that are of global biodiversity significance.
Far from being ``a series of empty promises,'' the Yaounde
Declaration has resulted in solid conservation achievements in Central
Africa. The total amount of additional forest protected areas created,
confirmed or in the final stages of gazettement since March 1999 totals
13,866 square miles! In Cameroon alone three new national parks and a
gorilla sanctuary have been created. Two other national parks are in
the final stages of gazettement. Six new protected areas have been
created, covering an area of 5,759 square miles (or 3 percent of the
national territory). Furthermore, these areas represent economic
forests that have been set aside for conservation in an area where
public auction of logging concessions yields offers of the equivalent
of $21 per hectare, representing foregone income to the Cameroon
Government of over $30 million. In a further indication of political
will, the government has recently withdrawn eight logging concessions
in an ecologically sensitive area and is negotiating with conservation
agencies to find ecologically acceptable alternatives to logging.
Other countries in the region (Gabon, Congo, Equatorial Guinea)
have also increased their protected areas in response to the Yaounde
Declaration. In the Congo Republic in December 2000, the government
announced that it would quadruple the size of the Odzala National Park
to over one million hectares, thereby creating one of the largest
national parks in Central Africa.
Regional officials took another major step forward in December
2000. A collaborative management agreement between the governments of
Cameroon, Central African Republic and Congo has been signed, creating
the Sangha River Trinational, which links three contiguous national
parks (Lobeke in Cameroon, Dzanga-Ndoki in Central African Republic and
Nouabale-Ndoki in the Congo Republic) protecting 2.8 million hectares
extending into all three countries. A similar transborder conservation
program covering 15,000 square miles in the boundary region of
Cameroon, Gabon and Congo is currently being negotiated. Africa already
spends a greater relative proportion of its GNP on its protected areas
than does Europe and the United States combined.
Tropical forests represent not only reservoirs of biodiversity but
are also important economic resources. Forest exploitation will
continue. Recent experiences in Congo (Nouabale-Ndoki) and Gabon
(Minkebe) show that logging companies are increasingly willing to
collaborate with conservationists and that when agreements are
established, they can effectively control the level of bushmeat
hunting.
While Africa has shown considerable political will in creating this
protected area network, it is clear that demographic trends and the
need for agricultural land are unlikely to result in more than 10
percent of the African territory being set aside for protected areas in
the long term.
Conservation in Central Africa should concentrate on securing
protected areas and in ensuring that they are well-managed and
effectively protected. Central Africa is one of the last remaining
areas in the world where vast, fairly intact forest still exist. We
have the unique opportunity and political momentum to support the
positive efforts fostered within the region to create a world class
network of protected areas spanning much of the central African
forests, linked by corridors of sustainable managed forests. The
potential represented by the Yaounde Summit may be the last window of
opportunity for conservation in central Africa and writing it off as
`empty promises' will certainly result in an empty forest.
We live in a world filled with bad news, especially the news which
comes from much of Central Africa. It is easy to write these countries
off as a loss. I submit that the results demonstrated from the Yaounde
Summit represent a great glimmer of hope for the forest, wildlife and
people of the region and the world should come to their aid. Failure to
substantively act now will be a failure for the international community
and an irretrievable loss for humanity.
WWF and its partners recognize that protected areas alone are not
sufficient to conserve biodiversity or to ensure the continued
provision of vital goods and services from the forest. For this reason,
WWF seeks to promote more sustainable management of the vast majority
of the world's forest that remain outside of protected areas.
Sustainable Forest Management
The forests of Central Africa are currently under threat from
logging as a result of demand for timber from transnational logging
companies in Asia and Europe. In 1990, the volume of timber exported
from the Congo Basin to Asia was less than 200,000 cubic meters. In
1997, this has risen to over two million cubic meters. Today, in Gabon,
800,000 hectares of forests are allocated to logging concessions and
this is likely to increase to more than two million hectares under
current pressures. In neighboring Equatorial Guinea, exports have
tripled since 1994. A growing demand for timber in China and other
emerging economies has led to exploitation of forests in West Africa's
coastal states--where traditionally there have been weak controls and
legislation--mobilizing major capital resources with unprecedented
speed and flexibility, and exploiting greater proportions of timber
resources than ever before. Conservationists predict that most forests
which are not currently designated as protected areas will be subject
to some logging activity within the next five years.
WWF is promoting sustainable forest management in Cameroon, CAR and
Gabon through a collaborative program between WWF Belgium, the WWF-
Cameroon Program Office and the WWF-Central Africa Regional Program
Office funded by the European Union. In each country, national working
groups have been established to develop regional certification
standards under the auspices of the Forest Stewardship Council. In
addition, WWF is providing support to one private logging company in
Gabon to design a sustainable forest management plan which takes into
account the impact of the logging activity on biodiversity and the
local population.
In CAR, WWF, in partnership with the government, is working to
promote sustainable management of the Societe de Bois de Bayanga
logging concession within the Dzanga-Sangha Dense Forest Special
Reserve. The Dzanga-Sangha Project is charged with assisting in the
control of logging operations to ensure that the practices are
consistent with the Forestry Code and with assisting in the development
of a sustainable forest management plan for this concession.
In Cameroon, WWF is implementing the Jengi initiative, a pilot
project to establish sustainable forest management and a protected
areas system in the forests of south-eastern Cameroon. Although the
Lake Lobeke Reserve (part of the Sangha River Trinational Protected
Areas complex) and Boumba-Bek-Nki Complex (a component of the trans
border initiative) will preserve part of this forest and help ensure a
homeland for the BaAka pygmies, the speed and nature of current
commercial logging, if unchecked, will result in three forest islands
in a sea of devastation.
Jengi to the BaAka is the spirit of the forest. Jengi presides over
the initiation ceremonies of youth and provides guidance for these
forest people whose cultural, physical and spiritual live depends on an
intact forest. The BaAka have lived in harmony with the forest for
centuries and now their songs are being drowned by the noise of
bulldozers and chainsaws. Poaching camps follow the bulldozers, the
wildlife disappears, and in many villages, the Jengi has not come for
years. The Jengi project aims to halt and reverse forest mining, to
achieve large-scale sustainable forest management and timber
production, to develop alternative sources of income for local
communities and to develop a conservation trust fund to support the
three protected areas. The aim is to restore the Jengi as the guardian
of the forest.
Most of the protected areas in Central Africa are surrounded or
impacted in some way by logging concessions. Logging operations often
bring in a significant immigrant labor force and become a pole of
attraction for others seeking economic opportunities with these
companies. Those that find work have money to buy food and clothes, and
those that don't have time to kill literally--by becoming bush meat
hunters to supply the concession work force. In many concessions, bush
meat is the only source of protein available and is sanctioned by the
companies, who are responsible to ensure adequate food and supplies to
their laborers.
Although to date, the forest certification process has had limited
success in Central Africa due to a reluctance by companies to adopt
logging practices that may be more costly and where there is limited
market demand for certified products, we have found a willingness by
companies to try to limit bush meat hunting and transportation on their
concessions. Concessions bordering the Minkebe Forest Reserve in Gabon,
the Dzanga-Sangha Reserve in CAR, Lake Lobeke in Cameroon and Nouabale-
Ndoki in Congo-Brazzaville have all put in place measures to control
bush meat exploitation, including sanctions of employees and drivers
involved in hunting or transportation, closing roads to prevent access,
providing alternative food sources, and closer collaboration with
international NGOs and government authorities.
Congo Basin Initiative
Overall, the key to conservation of the forests of the Congo Basin
is the development of a network of ecologically representative,
financially viable, protected areas spanning the basin, from the
Mountains of the Moon to the Gulf of Guinea, connected by conservation
corridors of sustainable managed forests. Over the next month, WWF, WCS
and CI will submit a joint proposal to the U.S. government and to
private sector donors to co-fund this program. If funded, this program
will have a profoundly beneficial impact on the environmental and
economic welfare of the Congo Basin.
WWF, WCS and CI believe that expanded U.S. support for the Congo
Basin Initiative will demonstrate the leadership role that the United
States can and is playing in environmental conservation. U.S. support
of this initiative will have a prominent impact at the upcoming World
Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg later this year.
The tangible benefits of this project will be:
Over 30 million acres of functioning national park land
in five Congo Basin countries.
Over 60 million acres of managed logging concessions in
surrounding areas.
Increased number of host governments in natural resource
management.
Significant shift in land-use management practices in
host countries.
Significant and vibrant eco-tourism industry established.
Increased sustainability from tourism revenue.
The more intangible benefits of this project will be:
Reduced rates of deforestation.
Vast reduction in biodiversity loss.
Increased U.S. presence and economic opportunities.
Better governance and transparency.
Significantly increased security over vast areas of
forest.
Reduction of increase in levels of communicable diseases.
Sustainable development based on renewable outputs.
In 1995, a USAID program called CARPE was created for Central
Africa. This program was designed to increase forest management in the
Congo Basin and its extreme success has been documented. WWF, WCS and
CI believe that this program should be expanded and extended to
coincide with the pressures being put on the Congo Basin from
development and other human factors. WWF and other organizations are
also seeking vastly increased funding for the African Elephant and
Great Ape Conservation Acts. These programs managed through the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife service have been extremely instrumental in
protection of these keystone species and helping to stem the bushmeat
tide.
In closing, Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, WWF
wishes to express our gratitude for your active interest in helping
governments in the Congo Basin region to address the bushmeat crisis.
We stand ready to assist the Committee in providing constructive
solutions to this serious problem.
______
[Attachments to Mr. Carroll's statement follow:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.008
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.009
Mr. Gilchrest. I think we will have to pay a visit maybe
sometime this fall.
Dr. Robinson?
STATEMENT OF JOHN G. ROBINSON, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT AND
DIRECTOR, INTERNATIONAL CONSERVATION, WILDLIFE CONSERVATION
SOCIETY
Dr. Robinson. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for the
opportunity to comment on this issue. I am here to represent
the experiences of Wildlife Conservation Society, WCS, which
conserves wildlife and wildlands throughout the world.
Fifteen years ago, our field conservationists began to
describe a mounting wave of hunting that was affecting wildlife
around the world. The wave first passed through Asia,
extirpating wildlife in the forests of Southeast Asia. It is
now cresting in Africa, and we anticipate that hunting at a
similar scale will well in Latin America within the next 5 to
10 years.
The present magnitude of the problem in Africa has captured
all of our attention, and our testimony will focus on this part
of the world, but recognize that this is a global phenomenon.
The phenomenon has been called the ``bushmeat'' or ``wild meat
crisis'' because hunting is being driven by the demand for wild
meat for human consumption.
The Wildlife Conservation Society would like to thank the
Subcommittee, and particularly you, Mr. Chairman, for
recognizing the importance of this issue.
The recent explosion of hunting in Africa, like the
situation in Southeast Asia 20 years ago, has been stimulated
by road construction associated with logging and petroleum
development. The network of roads reaches into the most remote
areas and allows commercial hunters entry into the forest and
provides hunters with access to urban markets. It has been open
season on all wild species.
The scale of hunting in Africa right now is really truly
vast, and you have heard a lot of testimony to that effect. In
Central Africa alone, consumption of meat from wild animals is
at least one million metric tons, and estimates go as high as
five. One million metric tons is equivalent to 9 billion
quarter-pound hamburgers of wild meat a year, enough to give
even McDonald's pause. There are 33 million people living in
Central Africa, and on average, every man, woman, and child
eats the equivalent of one bushmeat hamburger each and every
day of the year. Central African families eat as much meat as
most families in Europe and the U.S., but most of the meat,
unlike in Europe and U.S., comes from wildlife.
This level of harvest is not sustainable. Harvest threatens
the survival of many wildlife species and is especially
pernicious to those large-bodied, slow-breeding species, a
special conservation concern, such as great apes, large
carnivores, and elephants--all species recognized by the U.S.
Congress as needing special attention. And as Mr. Graham said
earlier, the loss of wild species affects the functionality and
integrity of forests as a whole.
In addition to the forests and the species themselves, it
is the millions of rural poor living at the ecological frontier
who suffer the most from the loss of wild species. While they
themselves hunt and sell bushmeat, they are losing their food
resources. These are the people identified as the focus for the
New Partnership for Africa's Development, NEPAD, which was
supported at last month's G-8 meeting, who live on less than
US$1 a day.
Addressing the bushmeat problem is difficult. In our
programs and in the programs of many of our collaborators, we
have found some approaches which offer a way forward.
First and foremost, establishing refuges for wildlife
populations is essential. A network of well-managed protected
areas will both support diverse populations of wildlife and
provide reservoirs for wildlife that are being hunted
elsewhere.
Second, the commercial trade in bushmeat needs to be
regulated and phased out as quickly as possible, and the
distinction has been made often between subsistence and
commercial trade. Often this can be accomplished by working
with the logging companies themselves. As you heard from Mr.
Burnam, the Wildlife Conservation Society has been working with
a private timber company, Congolaise Industrielle des Bois, and
the Ministry of Forest Economy in northern Congo since 1998 to
reduce hunting and transport of bushmeat in 4.5 million acres
of its concession.
Third, ways to provide alternative sources of animal
protein to rural communities and to workers in companies that
are exploiting those natural resources must be developed.
The U.S. has several immediate opportunities to help stem
the tide of bushmeat hunting. The G-8 Africa Action Plan in
support of the New Partnership for Africa's Development, for
example, identifies a very general strategy that is of
relevance to the bushmeat problem.
We would specifically urge the Subcommittee to: recognize
the enormity of the bushmeat crisis, both for wild species and
for the ecosystems where they occur, and for the rural poor who
have traditionally depended and will depend on wildlife
resources; recognize also that the bushmeat crisis is not just
about driving some species to extinction, it is not just about
great apes and elephants, it is about the destruction of the
very fabric of tropical forests and the lives of the people who
are supported by those forests.
We also urge that we support the Administration efforts to
establish partnerships with African countries and provide
support through mechanisms like NEPAD that will strengthen good
governance, encourage peace and security, build institutional
capacity, and provide the hunting to accomplish these tasks.
And, finally, we encourage Congress to increase funding for
the Central Africa Regional Program for the Environment, CARPE,
which you heard about earlier, the Multinational Species
Conservation Fund, and the Global Environment Facility, GEF. To
varying degrees, these underfunded programs support critical
conservation activities, including protected areas
establishment and management, anti-poaching enforcement, local
and institutional capacity building, and monitoring.
I thank you for the opportunity to comment on these issues,
and I would be pleased to answer any questions.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Robinson follows:]
Statement of Dr. John G. Robinson, Senior Vice President and Director,
International Conservation, Wildlife Conservation Society
Mr. Chairman, Members of the Subcommittee: Thank you very much for
the opportunity to comment on the growing problem of bushmeat
consumption. I am here today to represent the views of the Wildlife
Conservation Society, founded in 1895 as the New York Zoological
Society, a 107-year old US-based membership organization. The Wildlife
Conservation Society conserves wildlife and wild lands throughout the
world, as well as managing animal collections at the Bronx Zoo and
other ``Living Institutions'' in the New York area.
Fifteen years ago, our researchers and conservationists in the
field began to describe a mounting wave of hunting that was affecting
wildlife living in the forests and grasslands around the world. Since
humans evolved we have hunted and eaten wildlife. Today it is only the
poorest families that rely on meat from wild species as an important
source of protein. This is true even in the United States where
families in poor rural districts still hunt for the freezer. When
hunting becomes commercial to satisfy demand from urban populations, it
quickly becomes unsustainable, as we found in this country at the turn
of the last century. Now it is the tropical regions that face a
bushmeat crisis. The wave first passed through Asia, extirpating
wildlife in the forests of South-east Asia and Indochina. It is now
cresting in Africa, and we anticipate that hunting at a similar scale
will swell in Latin America within the next five to ten years. The
present magnitude of the problem in Africa has captured all of our
attention, and our testimony will focus on this part of the world, but
recognize that it is a global phenomenon. The phenomenon has been
called the ``bushmeat'' or ``wild meat crisis'' because the hunting is
being driven by a demand for wild meat for human consumption.
The Wildlife Conservation Society would like to thank the
Subcommittee, and especially Chairman Gilchrest, for recognizing the
importance of this issue. Unrestrained wildlife harvest threatens the
survival of many wildlife species, especially those living in the
tropical forests of the world. Hunting is especially pernicious for
those large-bodied, slow breeding species of special conservation
concern such as the great apes, large carnivores, and elephants all
species recognized by the U.S. Congress as needing special attention.
The local extinction and loss of wild species has cascading effects on
the functionality and integrity of forests as a whole, and endangers
efforts to both protect and manage those forests in a sustainable
fashion. And the loss of wildlife resources threatens people's health
and well-being and affects their cultural integrity.
The recent explosion of hunting in Africa, like the situation in
South-east Asia and Indochina twenty years ago, has been stimulated by
the opening up of previously inaccessible regions. Road construction
often associated with logging and petroleum development has created a
network of roads that reach into the most remote areas. This network
allows commercial hunters entry into the forest, and provides hunters
with access to urban markets. Moreover, much of forested Africa has
experienced in recent years the additional challenge of civil unrest
and conflict. The resulting breakdown of national and local authority
has left a governance void in many places and precluded most attempts
to manage and control the hunting. It has been open season on all wild
species.
The scale of hunting in forested Africa is vast. In central Africa
alone, consumption of meat from wild animals is estimated at between
one and five million metric tons a year. If we take the most
conservative figure of one million metric tons, this is equivalent to 9
billion quarter-pound hamburgers of wild meat a year enough to give
even McDonalds pause. Who eats all those hamburger-equivalents? There
are 33 million people living in Central Africa, and, on average, every
man, woman and child eats the equivalent of on bushmeat ``hamburger''
each and every day of the year. Central Africa families eat as much
meat as do many families in Europe and the United States, with one
difference most of the meat eaten in rural Central Africa comes from
wildlife.
This level of harvest is not sustainable. We estimate that today's
harvest rate in Central African forest is at least five times what
could be produced sustainably under even optimal conditions. The
consequence of this overexploitation is that wildlife is being strip-
mined out of tropical forests, resulting in what has been called the
``Empty Forest'' a forest without wildlife, unnaturally quiet. Across
Central Africa, we are estimating that, except in adequately protected
or inaccessible areas, ungulate populations have been already reduced
by 50%, primate populations perhaps as much as 90%. Elephants, so long
pursued for their ivory, are now also hunted for their meat. Hunters
rarely target particular wildlife species because they are simply
hunting for meat. So almost all animals from mammals, to birds, to
replies are affected by hunting. Constant heavy hunting is destroying
local populations of the most vulnerable species, especially those that
large-bodied and breed slowly: gorillas, chimpanzees, bonobos, many
monkey species, the large carnivores, and elephants. As species are
extirpated from one area, hunters move into new areas.
The loss of wildlife species has wider implications on the forests
themselves. The species preferred by hunters generally are large-
bodied, typically fruit eaters and herbivorous browsers. These species
frequently play keystone roles in forest ecology as pollinators, seed
dispersers, and seed predators, as well as comprising the majority of
the vertebrate biomass. Their reduction or extirpation produces
cascading effects through the biological community, causing other
species to disappear, and the ability of the forest to recover from
disturbance to diminish.
In addition to the forest and the species themselves, it is the
rural poor who suffer the most from the loss of wildlife species. The
commercial trade in bushmeat provides only a transitory benefit and a
long-term cost to these people. It is the millions of people at the
margins of the cash economy, who are at the ecological frontier, and
whose lives are intertwined with the wildlife, plants and wider
functioning of the forest. It is they who experience drops in daily
protein consumption as forests are opened up to outsiders. It is the
people identified as the focus on the New Partnership for Africa's
Development (NEPAD), launched at last month's G8 meeting, who live on
less than US$1 per day. They lack the education, skills and cultural
context to take advantage of cash-earning jobs from plantations and
industry, and as their wildlife resources disappear, their backs are
against the wall. Lacking capital and access to markets, they cannot
switch to alternative sources of animal protein.
Addressing the bushmeat problem is difficult. How to impose
regulation on a human activity too variable and dispersed to be
considered a true industry? How to draw the line between subsistence
hunting by local people and commercial exploitation by outsiders, when
there are so many examples that fall between the two extremes? How do
we tackle a problem that is but an indirect effect of national
expansion into the frontier? In our programs we have found some
approaches that offer a way forward.
First and foremost, establishing refuges for wildlife populations
is essential. A network of well-managed protected areas will both
support more diverse and abundant populations of wildlife and provide
``reservoirs'' for wildlife that are being hunted elsewhere.
Establishment of such reserves is thus crucial to steward the resources
essential to the nutritional, social and cultural well-being of the
rural poor living in forest environments. The Wildlife Conservation
Society, and our collaborators WWF and CI, are active in establishing
and managing parks throughout the Congo Basin. Proposed and existing
parks in the five countries of the Basin might cover some 30 million
acres. The key to better management of protected areas is expanding and
strengthening staff capacity to regulate access to and use of protected
forest resources.
Second, the commercial trade in bushmeat needs to be regulated and
phased out as quickly as possible. Many tropical countries lack the
government institutions needed to accomplish this. Often the only
effective institutions to be found in remote forest areas are the
timber companies themselves. The Wildlife Conservation Society, for
instance, has been working with a private timber company, Congolaise
Industrielle des Bois (CIB), and the Ministry of Forestry Economy in
northern Congo since 1998 to reduce hunting and transport of bushmeat
in 4.5 million acres of its concession. The effort is a four-pronged
one of education, enforcement, provision of alternative sources of
animal protein, and monitoring. So it involves the local communities in
managing and protecting wildlife populations, and monitors markets in
logging camps and villages. It has established an ``ecoguard'' brigade
to close down the commercial trade through the control of vehicle
traffic on logging roads, and by preventing wild meat being carried out
of the area on flights down to the cities.
Third, ways to provide alternative sources of animal protein to
rural communities and to workers in companies exploiting natural
resources must be developed. The Wildlife Conservation Society, for
instance, is working with the CIB logging company to establish other
economically-feasible sources of animal protein for people living
within their concessions.
The U.S. has several immediate opportunities to help stem the tide
of bushmeat hunting: making nonconcessional debt eligible under the
Tropical Forest Management Act; encouraging USAID programs and the UN
Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) efforts that focus on the
development of alternative protein sources and livelihoods; and playing
a leadership role in establishing an African forest certification
program for logging companies that practice wildlife management and
help prevent bushmeat hunting and trade. In addition, the G8 Africa
Action Plan in support of the New Partnership for Africa's Development
(NEPAD) identifies a general strategy for Africa that is highly
relevant to the bushmeat problem. NEPAD calls for:
Resource mobilization. In the context of the bushmeat
problem, there is a need to establish funding mechanisms to support the
establishment and sound management of protected areas. Even in the
United States, the National Park Service is not economically self-
sufficient. Economic incentives are also needed to encourage the timber
industry to manage forest resources more sustainably including forest
wildlife. Further funds are needed to develop alternative animal
protein sources for the rural poor living in the forest frontier.
Peace and security. This almost goes without saying. The
protection of wild areas and the sustainable use of natural resources
requires good governance and appropriate management. And this requires
political, social and economic stability.
Governance. In this context there is a need to ensure
that national governments have the capacity to engage with the natural
resource extraction companies in ways that are transparent and promote
long-term, sustainable management of all forest resources. In addition,
the responsibility for many management decisions still remain with
local governments, and it is important that their authority derives
from well-informed, transparent, democratic processes.
Human resources. To ensure that the capacity to manage
Central Africa's wild forests develops to address the threats from
unsustainable hunting, we must reinforce and scale up ongoing training
mechanisms and launch new avenues for learning and in so doing help
educate the next generation of conservation leaders. We need to ensure
that the region's resource management agencies have the capacity to
protect and manage the region's natural resources.
We would therefore urge the Subcommittee to:
Recognize the enormity of the bushmeat crisis, both for
wild species and the ecosystems where they occur, and for the rural
poor who have traditionally depended and will need to depend on
wildlife resources and forest biodiversity in the future. Recognize
that the bushmeat crisis is not just driving some species to
extinction, it is not just about threats to the Great Apes and
elephants, it is about the destruction of the very fabric of tropical
forests and the lives of the people who are supported by those forests.
Understand that consumption of bushmeat also has severe
public health implications. Handling and eating wildlife, especially
apes and other primates, increases the risk that people will contract
deadly hemorrhagic diseases such as Ebola, and has facilitated the
emergence of new diseases like HIV/AIDS.
Support Administration efforts to establish partnerships
with African countries and provide the support through the NEPAD
process and the other identified opportunities for the establishment of
protected areas, efforts to curtail the commercial bushmeat trade, and
ways to provide alternative sources of animal protein for the rural
poor of Africa.
Encourage Congress to increase funding for the Central
Africa Regional Program for the Environment (CARPE), the Multinational
Species Conservation Fund and the Global Environment Facility (GEF). To
varying degrees, these underfunded programs support critical
conservation activities including protected areas establishment and
management, anti-poaching enforcement, local and institutional capacity
building, and monitoring.
I thank you again for the opportunity to comment on these issues. I
would be happy to answer any questions.
______
Mr. Gilchrest. Thank you, Dr. Robinson.
Dr. Bakarr?
STATEMENT OF MOHAMED I BAKARR, SENIOR TECHNICAL DIRECTOR,
CENTER FOR APPLIED BIODIVERSITY SCIENCE, CONSERVATION
INTERNATIONAL
Dr. Bakarr. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I have
already submitted my written testimony for the record and will,
therefore, focus on specific aspects with your permission, sir.
Mr. Gilchrest. Yes, sir.
Dr. Bakarr. I am here to represent the views of
Conservation International in my capacity as senior technical
director in the Center for Applied Biodiversity Science, which
is leading CI's strategy for addressing the bushmeat issue in
Africa. Thank you very much for the opportunity to testify on
this issue.
CI is a nonprofit organization dedicated to conservation of
biodiversity, focusing specifically on the world's biologically
richest and most threatened ecosystems where the risk of
extinction is so very real, as well as on tropical wilderness
areas where opportunities for protecting large tracts of
natural habitats still remain. With programs in more than 30
countries around the world, CI's work focuses on demonstrating
that human societies are able to live harmoniously with nature.
Wildlife utilization in general and the bushmeat issue in
particular are, therefore, at the very crux of our conservation
efforts and actions around the world.
For more than 10 years now, we have been working with local
communities, government agencies, scientists and other
conservation professionals to analyze and understand the global
implications of wildlife utilization and consumption. From the
extensive commercial trade of turtles in Southeast Asia to the
subsistence hunting practices of Pygmies in Central Africa, it
has become clear to us that the issues at stake are indeed
very, very complex.
Mr. Chairman, the bushmeat issue and its consequences for
African wildlife and people has been eloquently outlined in the
testimony of my colleagues on this panel. Therefore, I do not
wish to reiterate the same points but, rather, specifically
highlight the concerns that we bring forward as an institution.
And I will specifically ask that you allow me to draw one very
significant conclusion about the current status quo, and that
is, whereas wildlife is still very much an important resource
for human livelihoods in Africa, bushmeat utilization is no
longer sustainable because populations of most of the species
involved are being greatly impacts and some locally extirpated
throughout their range. And as you can rightly surmise, this
implies a double-edged sword with respect to the bushmeat
problem in Africa. On the one hand, populations are being
extirpated; on the other hand, the livelihood of a great
majority of people is increasingly at risk from the loss of
wildlife. It is this complex challenge we are confronted with
for achieving conservation on the continent.
As a conservation organization that cares about people and
wildlife, CI has been very keen on exploring and implementing
solutions that accommodate this concern. We are committed to
pursuing an integrated approach that accommodates diverse
perspectives and involves multiple stakeholders and partners to
maximize success in mitigating the threat. In this regard, we
have helped organize regional workshops in West and Central
Africa where major stakeholders have analyzed and discussed the
social, cultural, economic, and biological contexts, and have
helped establish frameworks for developing and implementing
solutions. Our involvement in the BCTF also reflects our
commitment toward a broader alliance to tackle this complex and
large-scale problem.
More specifically, our country programs are confronting the
problem head on in the field by targeting all major
stakeholders at the national level. In Ghana, for example, the
focus has been on mobilizing the public through a massive
awareness and sensitization campaign based on cultural and
traditional practices, known as totems. Totems are wildlife
entities, mostly animals, that symbolize cultural values and
beliefs to people. Although success is yet to be translated in
terms of actual reductions in bushmeat hunting and threats to
wildlife, the effort to link bushmeat problem to totems has
garnered the attention of all Ghanaians. We are pursuing
similar approaches in Liberia with our partners, in Cote
d'Ivoire and Sierra Leone, in order to find locally appropriate
solutions to the problem.
Mr. Chairman, the scale of the bushmeat problem in Africa
is enormous. Long-term success, therefore, requires solutions
that are scaled up proportionally to ensure a balance between
human livelihood needs and biodiversity. The piecemeal approach
simply has not worked, and even when it does, we are only
prolonging the inevitable. We need landscape approaches that
allow integration of social, economic, and biological
priorities. This is no doubt a daunting task for African
countries and conservation organizations, and one that will
require major investment and commitments by governments and
funding agencies.
The leadership of U.S. Government agencies in supporting
bilateral initiatives on biodiversity conservation across
Africa has been formidable, as we heard this morning. The
bushmeat crisis cannot be separated from all other conservation
challenges on the continent, which means that the U.S.
Government assistance through the USAID and international
programs of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife and the USDA Forest
Service has already made crucial contributions in one way or
another toward addressing the problem. Therefore, I propose
here that considerations be given to the following specific
strategies for increased funding from the U.S. Government,
possibly through an especially targeted mechanism:
The expansion and effective management of protected areas
is absolutely crucial. As we heard this morning from my
colleagues, it is the only way we can guarantee the survival of
viable populations of wildlife on the continent. Protected
areas are for people. They are not against people. That message
will be made clear.
We need to promote alternative sources of protein. Africans
are very good at adapting. All of the wildlife can be hunted to
extinction, and people will still have protein to feed on. So
what is stopping us from raising the profile of those
alternative sources right now when we have a chance to save
wildlife from extinction?
We need to be very, very strong and efficient at monitoring
activities of extractive industries. Many of these countries
depend on extractive industries as a major source of income. If
we cannot stop those industries, we need to make their
practices much more efficient.
We need to raise public awareness and engage wider
involvement of people across the continent. There are
traditional and cultural implications for using bushmeat. We
cannot work against people. We have to understand their
perspective and build it into our strategies in order to
succeed at the bigger scale.
And, of course, we still need to promote more research and
enhance our understanding of the species at hand.
I thank you very much once again, Mr. Chairman, and applaud
the efforts of this House Subcommittee in its attempt to
understand the ramifications of this critically important
challenge in Africa. We look forward to working with you on any
initiative that will emerge from this hearing.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Bakarr follows:]
Statement of Dr. Mohamed I Bakarr, Senior Technical Director,
Center for Applied Biodiversity Science, Conservation International
Mr. Chairman, members of the Subcommittee, and colleagues on this
panel good morning. I thank you all very much for the opportunity to
testify before you on the growing problem of bushmeat consumption in
Africa. I am here to represent the views of Conservation International,
in my capacity as Senior Technical Director in the Center for Applied
Biodiversity Science, which is leading CI's strategy for addressing the
bushmeat issue in Africa. CI is a non-profit organization dedicated to
the conservation of biodiversity, focusing specifically on the world's
biologically richest and most threatened ecosystems where the risk of
extinction is ever so real, as well as on tropical wilderness areas
where opportunities for protecting large tracts of natural habitats
still remain. With programs in more than 30 countries around the world,
CI's work focuses on demonstrating that human societies are able to
live harmoniously with nature. Wildlife utilization in general and the
bushmeat issue in particular are, therefore, at the very crux of our
conservation efforts and actions around the world.
For more than 10 years now, CI has been working with local
communities, government agencies, scientists and other conservation
professionals to analyze and understand the global implications of
wildlife utilization and consumption. From the extensive commercial
trade of turtles in Southeast Asia to the subsistence hunting practices
of pygmies in Central Africa, it has become clear to us that the issues
at stake are indeed very complex. Although bushmeat utilization has
been flagged since the early 1960s as a potential long-term threat to
wildlife populations in Africa, it is the same practice that has
sustained the livelihoods of many generations of Africans. For the most
part, people in Africa still hunt wildlife and consume bushmeat for the
same reason their forefathers before them did. Bushmeat hunting has
been a tradition and a way of life in Africa for eons, and all animal
species (from rodents to great apes) are hunted for consumptive use.
But like for many other facets of life on the continent, the ethics
of wildlife exploitation has undergone dramatic changes in recent
years. Human populations have grown rapidly on the continent, and more
people are now engaged in the exploitation of wildlife than ever
before. More importantly, use of low-tech hunting tools such as traps
have been replaced by easily accessible guns and rifles that facilitate
rapid extirpation of large numbers of animals. With access to more
powerful and highly effective weapons, large mammals such as elephants
and great apes that were once hunted by only the most experienced and
traditionally revered hunters, have become easy prey for the
commercially minded hunters. These itinerant commercial hunters are in
turn being aided by gradual transformations of the African landscape
through the activities of extractive industries (logging and mining),
which are opening up previously remote areas and creating transient
settlements.
Mr. Chairman, members of the Subcommittee and fellow panelists, I
do not need to reiterate the consequences of these transformations for
Africa's wildlife and biodiversity, because the media has done an
excellent job bringing it to the global community. Please allow me,
however, to just draw one very significant conclusion about the current
status-quo. And that is, whereas wildlife is still very much an
important resource for human livelihoods in West Africa, bushmeat
utilization is no longer sustainable because populations of most of the
species involved are being greatly impacted, and some locally
extirpated throughout their range. As you can rightly surmise, the
bushmeat problem in Africa has emerged as a double-edge on the one
hand, wildlife populations are being extirpated, and on the other, the
livelihood of a great majority of people is increasingly at risk from
the loss of wildlife. It is this complex challenge we are confronted
with for achieving biodiversity conservation on the continent.
As a conservation organization that cares about people and
wildlife, Conservation International has been very keen on exploring
and implementing conservation solutions that accommodate this concern.
We are committed to pursuing an integrated approach that accommodates
diverse perspectives and involves multiple stakeholders and partners to
maximize success in mitigating the threat. In this regard, we have
helped organize regional workshops in West and Central Africa where
major stakeholders discuss and analyze the social, cultural, economic
and biological contexts, and establish frameworks for developing and
implementing solutions. Our involvement in the Bushmeat Crisis Task
Force (BCTF) also reflects our commitment toward a broader alliance to
tackle this complex and large-scale problem. Through BCTF, CI and other
organizations committed to saving biological diversity around the world
have been able to reach decision-makers and the general public, with
the strongest possible messages that reflect our collective concern on
this crucial issue.
More specifically, CI country programs are confronting the problem
head on in the field by targeting all major stakeholders at the
national level. In Ghana for example, the focus has been on mobilizing
the public through a massive awareness and sensitization campaign based
on cultural and traditional priorities, such as totems. Totems are
wildlife entities (animal species) that symbolize cultural values and
beliefs. Although success is yet to be translated in terms of actual
reductions in bushmeat hunting and threats to wildlife, the effort to
link bushmeat problem to totems has garnered the attention of all
Ghanaians. To put this into an even better perspective, let me quote a
recent message from the Director of CI's Ghana Program, Okyeame Ampadu-
Agyei: ``The bushmeat crisis is now receiving national attention. This
is mainly due to our sustained awareness campaign based on the
conservation of totems in Ghana. The new concept has galvanized the
entire citizenry to address the problem by involving politicians,
traditional rulers, hunters, market women and the general public. The
attached paper presents the novelty approach. It shows how our culture
is inextricably linked with animals. This could be the final key to
address the bushmeat crisis in many parts of Africa.''
Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, the scale of the
bushmeat crisis in Africa is enormous. Long-term success therefore
requires that solutions such as those emerging in Ghana be scaled-up
proportionally to ensure a balance between human livelihood needs and
biodiversity conservation goals. Additional approaches are needed to
ensure effective protection of species already threatened by the
commercial trade. This is in no doubt a daunting task for African
countries and conservation organizations, and one that would require
major investment by governments and funding agencies. So what role
should the U.S. Government play? The leadership of U.S. Government
Agencies in supporting bilateral initiatives on biodiversity
conservation across Africa has been formidable. The bushmeat crisis
cannot be separated from all other conservation challenges on the
continent, which means that U.S. Government assistance through the
Agency for International Development (USAID), and International
Programs of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife and the U.S.D.A. Forest Service
has already made crucial contributions in one way or another toward
addressing the bushmeat problem. Therefore, I propose here that
considerations be given to the following specific strategies for
increased funding from the U.S. government, possibly through an
especially targeted mechanism:
Creation, expansion and effective management of forests
parks and protected areas: The creation, expansion and effective
management of forest parks and protected areas that maintain a safe
haven for forest animals is the only way of guaranteeing viable
populations of many wildlife species on the long-term. It is from these
last remaining natural areas that repopulation of depleted landscapes
can occur, to give future generations of Africans a chance at
sustaining traditional livelihood practices.
Promotion of alternative sources of protein: As long as
people depend on wildlife as a source of protein, bushmeat hunting will
remain a major factor in sustaining rural livelihoods. But the
commercial trade can be greatly reduced by promoting stable,
competitively priced supplies of animal protein other than bushmeat,
particularly in urban areas across the region, where bushmeat is more
of a luxury food item.
Monitoring and influencing activities of extractive
industries: By working closely with extractive industries such as
logging and mining, government agencies and conservation organizations
can ensure that activities associated with resource extraction (i.e.
the creation of roads etc.) do not lead to the widespread slaughter of
wildlife for commercial purposes.
Promotion of public awareness raising and public
education on risks of bushmeat consumption: The traditional, cultural
and livelihood implications of impending wildlife extinctions are still
not effectively understood by most Africans. With recent reports of
potential links between bushmeat consumption and HIV (the virus that
causes AIDS in humans), there is need to use this critical message as
part of a large-scale effort to change attitudes towards bushmeat
hunting and consumption.
Promotion of research on sustainable hunting: There is
need to continuously increase understanding of wildlife population
dynamics by conducting research and monitoring to determine the
practicality of sustainable hunting for long-term survivability of
animal populations.
I thank you very much once again, Mr. Chairman, and applaud the
efforts of this House Subcommittee in its attempt to understand the
ramifications of this critically important conservation challenge in
Africa. We look forward to working with you on any initiative that will
emerge from this oversight hearing.
______
Mr. Gilchrest. Thank you very much, Dr. Bakarr.
Each of the witnesses today at one point or another made
reference to more resources, and some of you have mentioned
specifically the United States and have given us actual figures
for those resources, which is always helpful.
Dr. Bakarr, you mentioned a number of things that you would
like this Committee and the Congress and the United States to
consider with our participation in preserving and restoring
much of the beauty and the magnificence of the forests in
Africa. You suggested that we participate more in the expansion
of protected areas, alternative sources of protein, monitor
extractive industries, more public awareness, and so on.
What would be helpful for us to pursue those goals, along
with a number of other goals that you have all suggested and
made some specific dollar amounts available, would be to give
us in our deliberation with our colleagues to win their heart
and mind to vote for these issues. Apparently the road to
Damascus enlightened Paul and enlightened apparently this
logging company from Europe. It doesn't always work in the
bowels of the House of Representatives.
But what makes it easier is for us to be as specific and as
targeted as possible with these issues, so what would be
helpful, Dr. Bakarr--and I am not sure if you are prepared to
do it here, but if you gave us a map of Africa, Central Africa,
West Africa, and you said here is where the--here are the areas
that are benefiting from this type of attention. This is where
the people are finding alternative sources of protein. These
are the protected areas that we need to expand, and this is why
we have to expand them, because of the hydrology, because of
the species that are there, because of the stability of the
community. Here is the local community that we can get into in
Liberia. When we mention Liberia in the Congress, we see
instability, we see tragedy, we see horrific acts; Sierra
Leone, to some extent as well.
So if you could be--and your colleagues this afternoon, you
can educate us, and I think it is a good idea. I am not sure
who mentioned the Bushmeat Congressional Caucus. We wouldn't
serve any endangered species. We might serve some invasive
species that we have here in this country. And I also think
that is a good idea to have a Bushmeat Caucus to connect us
with your issues.
But, Dr. Bakarr, just two questions. Can you give us some
specific areas that need to be protected and how would they be
protected? And what would the acreage be? Do you have any idea
as to the alternative sources of protein which would involve
local agriculture that would be beneficial? Some ideas on how
to monitor the extractive industries. It is hard for us to
monitor our extractive industries in this country with all our
capabilities. And one last question: Is there a future for
subsistence consumption in Africa?
Dr. Bakarr. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. That is a
very excellent question.
With respect to protected areas, I think I can reiterate
that the efforts on the ground currently have been site-based.
They need to be scaled up at the regional level, and those
sites where investments have been making tremendous
achievements can then become core areas that we can build upon
to expand across the larger landscape that we are discussing.
Such a proposal is already coming forward, as you heard from
one of my colleagues here, through a partnership involving all
the major international NGO's and the U.S. for Central Africa.
We don't have yet such a large-scale partnership for West
Africa, and we need that in order for protected areas to be
scaled up to that level.
The approach here is that various institutions usually
focus on holding onto sites where they believe viable
populations of species exist. But if you can integrate those
sites into bigger sites, bigger areas, then you have a chance
of building stronger and more efficient landscapes for longer
success in conservation, and that is the approach we hope to
take in West Africa as well.
In West Africa, Liberia and Ivory Coast represent the best
hope for safeguarding biodiversity, not only just wildlife but
also the forest ecosystem itself because they have the best
tracts of forest left at the moment. There are still
significant tracts in Sierra Leone, but they are becoming
increasingly isolated from the rest of the forest block, and
efforts need to be made to make those links as well. But as you
correctly pointed out, the issue of stability is a big one
right now, and it is probably going to take us a few more years
before we can get to that level.
With respect to alternative protein, the forest ecosystem
in West and Central Africa is very difficult to raise
domesticated animals. It is not an easy thing. And so the
majority of the people have relied on fish resources and
occasionally some vegetable crops as well for alternative
sources of protein. Now, if wildlife were to disappear
completely, Africans are so adaptive that they will find
something else to focus on as a priority, and I will not be
surprised if fish, both freshwater and marine, don't play a
major role in that. There is a lot of fish--in fact, there are
graphics to show that many of the countries where bushmeat is a
problem produce the largest tonnage of fish that is consumed
domestically.
Mr. Gilchrest. Is this fish farming? Is this aquaculture?
Dr. Bakarr. Aquaculture, collection from freshwater
sources, as well as marine fisheries. So there is no shortage
of alternative sources of protein. The real dilemma we have is
being able to sensitize the public to understand that wildlife
is not as sustainable as they might think. And what we are
ending up with is smaller and smaller bodied animals, which
people are fine with. They will eat them. They will live on
cane rats. That is no problem at all. So to them, all this
noise about bushmeat is not real because they get hundreds of
ken rats every day. But the reality is the large mammals are
disappearing because they are the ones that are easy targets,
they are the ones that are easy prey. They bring more money.
They are more cost-effective for the hunter.
So our problem is not a shortage of protein. It is being
able to raise the profile of those that are more sustainable so
that the pressure on those that are not can be reduced and
eliminated in the long term.
With respect to monitoring extractive industries, I think
there are very good lessons already from programs in Central
Africa, but they will not succeed without good backing and
support from the government. And I think that is the dilemma we
have in Liberia, unfortunately. With the good support of
government agencies, logging companies can be monitored
effectively by NGO's and local partners. Not a problem.
Mr. Gilchrest. Does anyone else want to comment? Dr.
Robinson?
Dr. Robinson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman--
Mr. Gilchrest. Just to interrupt just for a second, you can
also comment on this. I know I fired a lot of questions out at
you, Dr. Bakarr. And all of you, I would like your input on
those questions, and also the question of is there a future for
subsistence living, farming in this part of Africa.
Dr. Robinson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Dr. Bakarr actually
addressed, I think, these questions extremely well, but let me
elaborate on a couple of these ideas.
One, let me reiterate that certainly in Central Africa
right now we are seeing this constellation of stars coming
together that Dr. Carroll talked about, that the conservation
community is developing a very systematic consensus on really
what is needed, and that consensus involves the establishment
of protected areas. And we are talking about 30 million acres
of land which could be under protection, double that under some
kind of management, forest management.
Mr. Gilchrest. So we are talking about 60 million acres.
Dr. Robinson. There are about 30 million acres in protected
areas and about 60 million acres in managed forests.
Mr. Gilchrest. There are 30 million acres right now in
protected areas?
Dr. Robinson. About 8 right now.
Mr. Gilchrest. Eight.
Dr. Robinson. Yes, but there is the potential of basically
getting up to about 30. There are discussions going on with
African governments and within the community to establish those
areas at the present time.
Mr. Gilchrest. This would be in Central and West Africa?
Dr. Robinson. This is primarily Central Africa.
Mr. Gilchrest. Central Africa.
Dr. Robinson. That is correct. At the present time, funding
going into Central Africa for environmental and conservation
reasons probably doesn't exceed more than about $12 million a
year, and that is from bilateral, multilateral, and all
conservation organizations. The amount of funding going into
Central African conservation is insignificant.
Mr. Gilchrest. It is $12 million.
Dr. Robinson. Yes, $12 million.
Mr. Gilchrest. From all sources?
Dr. Robinson. From all sources. And so the potential, there
is a political will in Africa which is really exciting right
now. There is a consensus among the conservation organizations
within--
Mr. Gilchrest. Where did the $12 million come from?
Dr. Robinson. Pardon?,
Mr. Gilchrest. That is everybody?,
Dr. Robinson. That is everybody. It is actually shocking
when you add it up. And, clearly, there is an opportunity to
make a huge difference with not very much more of an increment.
And so when you hear calls for additional funding through
mechanisms like CARPE, through the multi-species funds, we have
mechanisms in the U.S. to provide that kind of funding.
I think there is also the potential to work very
systematically with logging companies who are increasingly
under pressure to say that they are producing wood in a more
sustainable way and having less of an impact on the forest
landscape, especially with respect to wildlife.
Mr. Gilchrest. Is one of the criteria for the logging
companies to replant after they log? Can you replant that type
of forest?
Dr. Robinson. At the present time, few, if any, companies
are doing any replanting. At the minute they are very much high
grading, just taking off a few trees, a few high-value trees
over very, very extensive areas. So the impact on the forest,
if you look at the forest, sometimes it is not that great. But
as the logging companies move through the forest, they hunt,
and the forest is just being stripped out. But those companies
are interested in working with conservation communities, with
certification agencies, and I think there is a real potential
to have an impact there.
Let me just sort of say something very quickly about the
future of subsistence hunting in Africa. Even in the United
States, people still hunt for the freezer. And those are people
for the most part who have the opportunity and who frequently
have their backs against the walls in other contexts.
In the long term, subsistence hunting in Africa will have
to dwindle. But I think the major thrust at the minute is not
focusing so much on stopping the subsistence hunting because we
don't have the alternative sources of protein to replace in
much of Africa at the present time. The real thrust from a
conservation standpoint and from a sustainability standpoint is
to really focus on that commercial hunting, because it is the
commercial hunting which is having the impact.
Mr. Gilchrest. So you would say, Dr. Robinson, that the
local consumption compared to the lucrative cash markets is
small?
Dr. Robinson. The amount of meat which is actually being
consumed for subsistence may be actually as high as about
three-quarters of all the meat which is being hunted. But it is
that quarter which goes to the commerce which is hitting the
large species, hitting those species which people want to eat,
and is basically pushing the whole system over the top.
Mr. Gilchrest. That is a vote, but I think we can finish.
Dr. Carroll?
Mr. Carroll. Yes, thank you very much. You asked about
specific targets for the development of protected areas across
the Congo Basin, and in my written testimony I have included a
map of conservation priorities that were developed in a
workshop facilitated by WWF, but it included 160 experts on
biodiversity and biogeography in the Congo Basin. And this was
produced really at the request of the Yaounde Summit
governments as they were trying to develop a coherent plan for
the Congo Basin conservation.
So we got together; you know, all these experts developed a
map of conservation priorities with the key overlap areas of
species diversity, species richness, and opportunity for
conservation. And that map has been adopted, as well as the
blueprint for the conservation by the Yaounde Summit. And their
plans that they are trying to put in place in the next 5 years
are based on the landscapes identified in this map.
Now, WWF and WCS are working with these countries to try to
refine those big priority blobs on the map into really specific
areas defined with limits that could be potential protected
areas.
For instance, in the country of Gabon right now, the
Government of Gabon is very interested in very quickly putting
in place 12 new national parks that are being proposed by the
joint work of WWF and WCS. And we are very optimistic that will
be put in place, but that is a result of this priority-setting
exercise, the Yaounde Summit commitment to putting 10 percent
of each national country's forest into protected area
management--into protected areas. And when we talk about the
cost, that map that you see in front of us, our estimates--just
to put in place protected areas to cover only 10 percent of the
Congo Basin in protected areas, our estimates are that that
could range up to $100 million a year in cost to do that.
So when we are making--as Dr. Robinson pointed out,
currently our levels are so far below that, you know, $12
million, that we have a major gap, and we are hoping for
leadership from the U.S. Government to try to help fill those
gaps and help--
Mr. Gilchrest. Your recommendation was $15 million.
Dr. Robinson. Yes.
Mr. Gilchrest. A year, for 10 years.
Dr. Robinson. Yes, sir. To go through, probably through
CARPE, because CARPE we look at as a mechanism to bring
together--that brings together the--
Mr. Gilchrest. Is there a commitment--some of us will try
to reach that commitment. Are you asking--it would be actually
a little bit easier for us to do it if we knew that Japan,
England, France, Germany, Italy, whoever, they were also making
a commitment.
Dr. Robinson. Yes, and we hope that happens as well. We
hope that the leadership of the U.S. Government will push those
other countries to make that commitment. The European Union has
been a major supporter of protected areas through a program
called ECOFAC that has been managing six protected areas across
the Congo Basin. And we are going to urge them, based on the
leverage that we hope will come from the U.S. Government Congo
Basin Initiative to continue their funding for the same period
of time for those protected areas so that it nestles together
very well.
Now, the governments are also making commitments to put
these in place through the Yaounde process. They are putting
their own money on the table to get these areas in place. You
know, there have been many declarations by heads of state, but
this one really seems to be taking hold because of the
international spotlight that is being put on it.
Like I said, since 1999 there have been 15,000 square
kilometers of new protected areas put in place through this
process, and they have committed to 12 major landscapes in
protected areas. And if we can only keep that encouragement
going by providing the funding for that--
Mr. Gilchrest. We will do our best. I don't want to
interrupt, but I think there is a vote going on. There is more
than one vote, apparently, so I am going to have to wrap this
up in just about 2 minutes, and I apologize for that. Here
comes the buzzers again.
Just a couple more questions before I leave, though, and
you have all been very, very helpful. Dr. Hutchins and all of
you mentioned in various ways the bushmeat trade. is there any
way to know where the more expensive markets of the bushmeat
trade are, that 25 percent?
Mr. Hutchins. I might just address that. Actually, BCTF has
been working on a project that is intended to try to identify
not only where the major markets are but the important trade
routes, where is the bushmeat being transported to and from,
because we do feel that these are important places where
control could be effected. And this is called the Bushmeat Hot
Spots Map Project, and we are working with our members, which
are, in fact, represented by all the organizations that are at
this table, and with the CITES/MIKE people who have been for
several years monitoring the trade in elephants, illegal trade
in elephants and the taking of elephants throughout Africa.
We are hoping to try to bring those processes together
because they do collect a lot of information on bushmeat as
well. So the monitoring, I think, will be very important for
developing a strategy to address the bushmeat issue.
Mr. Gilchrest. Bring a big light and a camera, show
somebody eating gorilla meat in a restaurant in Paris or
Washington, D.C., God forbid.
Mr. Agnagna, you stated very eloquently some of the ancient
traditions and sacred rules of the various peoples of the
continent of Africa. And we talked about subsistence farming
and the future of it. Can some of those ancient traditions and
sacred rules of managing resources be retained and passed along
to succeeding generations?
Mr. Agnagna. I didn't get the last part of the question.
Mr. Gilchrest. Can the traditions, the ancient traditions
of subsistence farming, with their sacred rules, are they still
alive in the hearts of people in Africa? And are they being
passed down to the children?
Mr. Agnagna. I will say that in the deep Africa--I am
talking about a village.
Mr. Gilchrest. Yes.
Mr. Agnagna. I think the villager or the local population,
the rural population, they still have those traditions. The
problem is that, as I said, you know, the modernization, the
technology, but people in the deep village, they still have
this tradition. The problem is that our laws are modern laws.
They didn't take really in consideration the rules, the
traditional rules.
What I am--you know, I wanted to say that now there is a
process in Central Africa, a big process of revising wildlife
laws, and we want to include--we want to take some of the
values, traditional values and put them in the laws, because I
think that that was really the best way. I don't think that the
population or the local population--they don't have some more
to learn from modern conservation because they know, they know
how to manage, how to manage the natural resources.
Mr. Gilchrest. Maybe we can blend the two together. I hope
the spirit of the forest stays in the forest.
Thank you all very much. I appreciate it. We will stay
engaged.
The hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 1:05 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
[Additional material submitted for the record follows:]
[The article ``Bushmeat and the Origin of HIV/AIDS''
submitted for the record follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.015
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.016
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.017
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.018
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.019
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.020
[The article ``Warfare on gorillas poses threat to
survival'' submitted for the record follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.011
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.012
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.013
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.014
[A statement submitted for the record by Reginald Hoyt,
Senior Vice President, Conservation and Science, Philadelphia
Zoo, follows:]
Statement of Reginald Hoyt, Senior Vice President,
Conservation & Science, Philadelphia Zoo
Introduction:
This testimony was prepared to respond to the questions of the
Chairman that were directed to panelists on 11 July, concerning
conservation activities in Liberia, West Africa. Liberia has been
recognized as a global conservation priority as it retains nearly 40%
of its lowland tropical rainforest intact. These forests represent the
largest remaining tracts of the Upper Guinea Forest block that once
covered much of West Africa (Togo to Sierra Leone). Home to forest
elephants, the pygmy hippopotamus, a host of primates (including the
chimpanzee, Diana monkey, red colobus and black and white colobus), and
seven species of antelope (including the Jentink's and zebra duikers,
which are unique to West Africa) Liberia represents the best chance for
the long-term survival of many species of conservation concern.
Unfortunately, Liberia was embroiled in a violent civil war that
lasted from 1989 to 1997. This war resulted in 40% of the population
being either killed or made refugees before it was to end. To this day,
political and economic instability plague conservation efforts in
Liberia.
The Philadelphia Zoo's One With Nature conservation program has
been working with Liberia partners since 1992. Given that the civil
conflict in Liberia did not subside until 1997, our earlier efforts
focused on maintaining the capacity to conduct conservation activities
within the country via stipend support to professional staff within the
Forestry Development Authority and the Society for the Conservation of
Nature of Liberia. In addition, in-kind donations of uniforms, office
equipment and a used vehicle were made. From 1997-1999 the Zoo focused
its attention on assessments that evaluated the condition of Sapo
National Park or data collection concerning species of conservation
concern. It was not until 2000, that our efforts came to focus on the
harvest and commercial use of wildlife.
Problem Outline and the Philadelphia zoo's work in Liberia:
A conservation assessment conducted in 1997 via a grant from the
Philadelphia Zoo found that Liberia's only national park, Sapo National
Park, had survived the civil conflict intact and that it appeared that
wildlife populations had actually thrived during the war. While
bushmeat harvest has been a long-term problem in Liberia, with an
estimated value of $47,000,000 prior to the war, the ferocity of the
fighting within the region adjacent to Sapo National Park had resulted
in much of the population becoming refugees. Those that remained lacked
the equipment (guns or shot) or materials (wire for cable snares) to
continue to harvest wildlife with any efficiency, so during the
conflict wildlife populations rebounded. But with much of post-war
Liberia, things were to change rapidly.
In economic collapse and led by Charles Taylor, the former warlord
who began the conflict in 1989, Liberia is currently listed among the
poorest countries in the world. The desire for economic growth have led
to a ``gold rush'' like approach to resource utilization in Liberia,
with timber extraction being among the most obvious. With the arrival
of Oriental Timber Company in Liberia in 1999 the destruction of
Liberia's forest reserves has proceeded at an alarming rate.
The construction of logging roads has fragmented the Krahn-Bassa
National Forest, providing access for settlers, who practice slash and
burn agriculture, and hunters. While the road networks continue to
expand, impacting nearly all of the remaining forest blocks in Liberia,
people in need of work (unemployment estimated at 85%) turn to the only
sources of income they know. Those who returned from refugee camps to
their homes in Liberia's towns and cities found no work. Over the years
many of them have turned to Liberia's natural resources as a source of
income. Some have found work in logging or mining, while a growing
number have turned to the harvest of wildlife.
In 1997, we found very little commercial bushmeat hunting in those
areas adjacent to Liberia's forest reserves in Sinoe County. However,
during a survey of the Cestos River in 1999, our team discovered a
nearly ``empty forest'' where we found few antelope. We discovered that
hunters from a near-by logging camp were setting between 150 and 300
wire snares each per night. With much of the meat rotting in the
forest, since 150 snares are far too many to efficiently manage, local
villagers were angry and routinely destroyed the snares of the loggers.
But every night we heard gunfire as hunters ``called'' in duikers to be
shot.
Unlike the testimonies presented by our colleagues representing the
situation in Central Africa, primates were not the primary targets of
hunters in 1999. At the time antelope were plentiful, having been given
a reprieve from hunting during the war years. With gun shot costing
nearly $2 per cartridge, and antelope representing a larger and easier
killed prey, primates were not heavily hunted. However, should antelope
populations decline, a switch to primates could be expected.
In 2000, the Philadelphia Zoo working with its Liberian partners
conducted a hunter survey to better understand the distribution of
selected animals of concern. During that survey hunters requested
posters that would show them which species were protected by law, and
complained that the government was not doing enough to protect the
forest or the wildlife resources of Liberia. During that same year, to
improve communications between conservationists and communities, the
Zoo founded its ``Community Relations Officer'' program in the area
adjacent to Sapo National Park. In addition to public awareness and the
facilitation of communications, the duties of the position included the
collection of data on bushmeat activities in the region.
Since the founding of this program we have seen dramatic shifts in
the pressure on wildlife. In 2000, to meet financial needs, villagers
were selling one half of all large animals killed by the handful of
snares set by a hunter. By 2002 hunters were only retaining the heads
and entrails for their family's protein needs. Everything else is being
sold to merchants who transport the meat to Monrovia. Becoming more and
more organized, traders are now requesting large antelope, as it will
bring them greater profit. In addition, villagers complain that
``outsiders'' from the cities have begun hunting within their tribal
lands. While local hunters typically use 25-35 wire snares, these
``commercial hunters'' often set more than 150 snares. Data shows that
when these large-scale hunting operations begin, everyone's hunting
success per unit effort declines.
In an effort to better understand the bushmeat trade in Liberia,
the Philadelphia Zoo developed an Urban Public Opinion and Bushmeat
Survey that was conducted earlier this year in eight communities
throughout Liberia with funding from the Conservation Endowment Fund of
the American Zoo and Aquarium Association. The survey engaged 20
Liberian students in the effort, and was coordinated through several
partner organizations in Liberia. The more than 2,300 interviews that
were conducted are providing insights into the beliefs of the Liberian
public, and the bushmeat market. Data analysis continues, as does work
on the next phase of our bushmeat initiative. In 2003, the Zoo will
again partner with Liberians to conduct a Rural Public Opinion and
Bushmeat Survey (funded by the Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund
managed by Conservation International) in five forested regions of the
country so that we can better understand the viewpoint of rural
villagers.
To address the requests of hunters surveyed in 2000, the Zoo has
produced a poster of ``Liberia's Protected Wildlife'' and distributed
5,000 during the Urban Public Opinion and Bushmeat Survey. Currently,
our partners in Liberia are conducting a Pilot Public Awareness
Campaign, so that we may evaluate various media and its effectiveness
in transmitting conservation messages to the public. In 2003, a
National Public Awareness Campaign will take advantage of what we will
have learned from the Pilot Campaign, and will focus efforts on
addressing Liberia's pressing environmental issues. This Campaign will
also be funded by a grant from the Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund.
Today the Philadelphia Zoo is taking the lead role in addressing
the bushmeat crisis in Liberia, by conducting research and coordinating
the activities of our Liberian partners. The goal of our work in
Liberia is to identify the causes and aggravating activities that drive
the bushmeat market. While we do not have figures on how many animals
are killed annually, nor on how much money this extractive industry
produces each year, it is clear that the bushmeat trade in Liberia is
growing rapidly and that numerous species are already being harvested
unsustainably. Further, it is clear that Liberia's bushmeat industry is
not restricted to its boundaries, and that this environmental crisis
must be addressed on at least a regional if not global level.
Finally, I must point out that the ``Bushmeat Crisis'' is not the
creation of international conservation organizations. Our work
demonstrates that Liberians recognize the need for the management of
their natural resources. Some communities have even attempted to stop
bushmeat hunting as they see it as a serious threat to their wildlife
resources, but there is a lack of capacity at all levels of society to
deal with the challenges.
Financial commitment to conservation in Liberia
During the decade that the Philadelphia Zoo has worked in Liberia
our efforts have been primarily funded by donations from our
membership. Grants have been difficult to acquire due to the political
instability of the region, but we have remained committed. While the
Zoo has received funding recently from the American Zoo and Aquarium
Association and from the Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund, and our
colleagues have received support from the World Bank and a handful of
European organizations, funding has been lacking for conservation in
West Africa. While testimony given on 11 July indicated that
$12,000,000 a year was being spent on conservation in Central Africa,
all of West Africa receives considerably less than $1,000,000 in
financial support annually. As a global conservation priority, West
Africa should be given greater financial support to meet the threat of
habitat loss and the bushmeat crisis. This support can also be used to
leverage development and good governance efforts in the region.
Recommendations
1. USAID, USFWS, and the State Department work together with US-
based conservation organizations to support conservation priorities in
Liberia and West Africa
2. USAID funds currently being withheld in Liberia be released to
address projects that meet both development and conservation goals
3. US work with the EU and others to develop stronger financial
support to address the bushmeat crisis in West Africa
4. Congress support efforts of US-based organizations to improve
forest and wildlife management and conservation in West Africa
5. Recognize that development and conservation are not mutually
exclusive, and support partnerships that promote sustainable economic
development that is also compatible with the conservation of natural
resources for the betterment of future generations of West Africans
We appreciate the Committee's attention to this issue, and hope
that our testimony will be of service. Additional information is
available upon request.
[An attachment to Mr. Hoyt's statement follows
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.010
-