Perspective of Tonle Sap Biosphere Reserve
October 2000
1.
Introduction
2.
Tonle
Sap Biosphere Reserve Nomination
According to statutory framework of the World Network of Biosphere Reserves, general criteria for an area to be qualified for designation as a biosphere reserve should be the following:
·
It should encompass a mosaic of ecological systems
representative of major bio-geographical regions,
·
It should be significance for biodiversity conservation
·
It should provide opportunity to explore and demonstrate
approaches to sustainable development on a regional scale,
·
It should have an appropriate size to serve the three
functions of biosphere reserves,
·
It should include these functions through appropriate
zonation to core area, buffer zone and transition zones, where the core area
should be legally constituted and devoted to long term protection according to
the conservation objectives of a biosphere reserve,
·
Organizational arrangement should be provided for the
involvement and participation of a suitable range of public authorities, local
communities, and private groups in the design and carrying out the functions of
biosphere reserve. In addition, provisions should be made for:
-
mechanism to manage human use and activities in the
buffer zone
-
a management policy or plan for area as a biosphere
reserve
-
a designated policy or mechanism to implement the policy
-
programmes for research, monitoring, education, and
training.
2.1 Tonle Sap Biosphere Reserve Zoning
Based
on present land use, vegetation cover and biological hotspots, the Tonle Sap
Lake is divided into three core areas, a buffer zone and transition zone.
Core areas: are located in Prek Toal,
Boeng Tonle Chhmar, and Stoeng Sen. The three core areas are characterized by
preserved flooded forests, rich river system and biodiversity. Nearly one
hundred waterbird species are found in the areas, a dozen of which is
considered as of international significance. Besides rich fish stock, the areas
are known for other wildlife species such as crocodile, turtle, macaque,capped
languor, otter, water snakes (including python and king cobra). The areas are
currently used mainly for fish production, wildlife hunting, and firewood
collection. Total population living inside the three core areas is about 2,000,
mainly in Boeng Chhmar core area.
Buffer zone: is covered largely by
flooded forest with high productivity of biodiversity, especially fish. The
area is divided into fishing concessions, which are auctioned for every two
years to the private businessmen. The area is also competed by other land use
practices such as agriculture encroachment, human settlement, navigation,
firewood production, aquaculture. The population is about 100,000.
Transition zone: is the agricultural belt surrounding the Lake, where a variety of rice farming is practiced. The rapid urban and agricultural development with the increased use of pesticide and fertilizer in the area pose a threat to the flooded forest and water quality.
2.2
Management
Challenge for Tonle Sap Biosphere Reserve
Core Areas
In the biosphere reserve context, the core area is defined as national park or wildlife sanctuary, where conservation and protection is the priority management option. But the core areas of Tonle Sap Biosphere Reserve are demarcated within the concession areas called fishing lot, which is sold to the private for fishing rights. By nature the fishing lot is a kind of development that harvest fish for market. This management category is no doubt contradictory to conservation concept of the core areas. However, the present Cambodia economic and institutional conditions do not allow translation of the concepts to immediate practice. In the case of the Core areas of Tonle Sap Biosphere Reserve, conservation programmes would be introduced step by step along with fishing lot practices without causing rivalry feeling among stakeholders concerned. The first step is to elaborate a legal and institutional arrangement, which enables relevant agencies to work together in a coordinated and cooperative manner. Meanwhile more research and monitoring activities will be conducted to build knowledge for proper decision making. Some risks are identified as follows:
· When the fishing lot is allowed within the core area as stated above, there is a fear of disputes or uneasy working relationship between fishery department and conservation department. The fishing lot owner may be reluctant to cooperate with conservation team for protection of resources because of economic interest.
· The research and monitoring activities may be hampered by limited access to the core area during the fishing operation. The result of research or monitoring efforts produced by conservation team may not be accepted by fishing lot owner or fishery department.
· The integrated management plan incorporating conservation regulations and fishery law may take long time to be adopted before consensus is reached between agencies concerned.
Buffer zone
· The buffer zone covering about 540,000 ha can be divided into two zones: the flooded forest and the open lake. Fishing concession is the major land use in the buffer zone. Because of the seasonal flooding, some part of the buffer zone is also used for farming such as dry season rice, lotus plantation, mung bean, vegetables and other crops. Conflicts between stakeholders over land use competition and practices often occur, because of the lack of inadequate land use policy or integrated management.
· The lake bottom is believed to be filled up by siltation from the Mekong waters and Tonle Sap catchment, due to logging, resulted in change of water regime. Such environmental change would have ecological effects on biodiversity and flooded vegetation of the lake.
· The current fishery law was written since the beginning of 20 century for the purpose of tax collection for the colonial administration. Since then the law has not been changed and is now too old to address the emerging problem like environmental change, population increase, development needs…etc. The fishing lot boundaries are demarcated with disregard to traditional rights of local communities. In addition, the inadequate salary and unskillful government staff led to inefficient law enforcement and overfishing.
· Uncontrolled trade with neighbor and poor market system put added pressure on The Tonle Sap Lake’s natural resources, especially fish and wildlife.
· Inequitable sharing of the resources is the main reason causing conflicts among stakeholders. Most of the rich fishing grounds are granted to concessionaires for exclusive fishing rights (fishing lots), leaving a little space with poor fish productivity for local community to maintain the livelihood. To subsist their basic needs, people exploit other resources including wildlife, forest, and farming, which contribute to the reduction of fish stock itself. Some fishermen illegally fish in fishing lot, which result in conflicts with fishing lot owners. With the general population increase, the diminishing fishing stock for the local population would further worsen the living standard, causing social unrest and instability.
· Unclear land tenure practice is another issue within the buffer zone. Because of the seasonal flooding, the same area is subject to different land use namely fishing in the wet season until the soil dry up, which then is followed by rice or upland crop farming. The alternate ownership with no sense of responsibility can be regarded as the tragedy of the commons. Indeed, during the ownership people try to maximize the benefit by over exploiting the resources, knowing that the resources would be transferred to another owner.
· The low education level and poor social organization of local community are the main obstacle for promoting community-based management of resources. Normally, each individual family acts in the interest of its own benefit, has little sense of personal accountability before the common property. No community committee or association is established for the interest of a group of stakeholders. The reason is not only the capacity of community itself, but also because of the lack of support from the government. Community based management needs a strong commitment of community members and high ranking decision-makers. For example, to allocate a fishing lot for community management, the community should have the skill to plan resources development, equitable resources sharing, collection of revenue for government tax, conflict resolution among themselves, resources control and monitoring…etc. And at the same time community should get the rights to manage this area with clear provision from the lawmakers.
Transition Zone
· Land encroachment for agricultural purpose from the transition zone onto the buffer zone pose serious threats on flooded forest, and the fish stock of the great lake. Moreover, intensive agricultural production would lead to the increase in fertilizer and pesticide use, resulting in water quality deterioration. Control over the land use practice is difficult because of the lack of regulations, human and financial resources for land management.
· A lot of people in the transition area seasonally migrate to the buffer zone for firewood collection, wildlife hunting, and fishing to subsist consumption needs during the dry season after rice is harvested. These people compete with the local community for the dwindling resources.
· Lack of environmental consideration and poor coordination among government agencies and provincial authorities may lead to uncontrolled development such as irrigation, dam construction, agriculture, navigation facilities, infrastructure, factories, oil and gas exploitation around Tonle Sap region, which would have adverse effects on the lake’s ecology.
3.
Recent Achievement
Legal Issues: A draft royal decree for
Tonle Sap Biosphere Reserve is developed as a legal basis for the implementation
of biosphere reserve concepts. The critical elements of the draft decree are
the formulation of directions and management objectives for each zone,
inter-ministerial coordination body, and institutional arrangement for
implementation. The draft decree is still under discussion by an
inter-ministerial working group. The major points of the draft decree have been
revised as the following:
·
The
core areas are defined likewise national park or wildlife sanctuary, which are
devoted to long term protection and conservation of natural resources and
ecosystem, in order to preserve flooded forest, fish, wildlife, hydrological
system, and natural beauty. Scientific researches, monitoring, and ecotourism
are allowed here in the core areas. Management activities that would cause
degradation and destruction of biodiversity are not permitted.
·
Fishing
lots within the core areas of Tonle Sap Biosphere Reserve shall continue to
function in accordance with the Fishery Law, while the fishing lot owner must
be committed to the long-term conservation objectives as defined above. These
fishing lots are then subject to a periodic review every four years in order to
develop a viable management plan that allows fishing lot functioning in a
complementary manner along with the protection and conservation objectives of
the core areas.
·
The
buffer zone surrounding the core areas is covered by flooded forest of a
variety of species. Activities are managed to be consistent to the protection
and conservation plan of the core areas. Fishery activities and other
development plans will be managed based on existing law and regulations in a
co-ordinated and cooperative manner. The buffer zone is also subject to
experimental research and discovery of method for the management of flooded
forest, fishery, agriculture, housing settlement, land use, and navigation to
ensure their sustainability, increased production, while preserving the
environmental quality and fish.
·
The flexible transition
area is the integrated economic zone, which is managed for the sustainable
agriculture, human settlement and land uses, without having adverse effects on
the flooded forest, water quality and soils of the region around Tonle Sap
Lake.
Institutional
arrangement: The
most difficult elements of the Tonle Sap Biosphere Reserve are the arrangement
of responsibility among different agencies, especially between MAFF and MoE.
According to the last version of draft decree, MoE should be the leading agency
in the preparation of protection and conservation plan for the core areas,
while the buffer and transition zones are managed according to line-agencies.
Inter-ministerial coordination: The Technical Coordination Unit for The
Tonle Sap (TCU) has been working since her establishment in 1996 at technical
level for the promotion and development of Tonle Sap Biosphere Reserve. Based
on this coordination mechanism, it has been proposed under the draft royal
decree to create a secretariat (or sub-committee) for Tonle Sap Biosphere
Reserve under CNMC, which would further promote coordination at the decision
making level. The major task of this secretariat is to coordinate with all
stakeholders for involvement in the management of Tonle Sap Biosphere Reserve,
to facilitate adoption of strategic policy towards sustainable development, and
to play facilitation role in conflict
resolutions. The secretariat through CNMC would also help build partnership
with regional bodies such as MRC for incorporation of Tonle Sap Biosphere Reserve
into regional planning.
Incentives for
conservation and sustainable use: Some initial activities, including identification
of community natural resources use, participatory workshops, and conservation
of critical resources have been undertaken at the provincial and local level.
At the same time alternative livelihood system is also developed in the form of
credit, aquaculture, animal raising, and ecotourism for one of the communities
living adjacent to Prek Toal core area. The latter initiative aims to encourage
local community to practice alternative options (though not so many) and
opportunity cost which are more environmental friendly and economically viable
than harmful activities such as forest cutting and waterbirds hunting. A good
success has been achieved. For example, illegal activities such as waterbird
hunting, forest felling are significantly reduced in Prek Toal Core Area.
According to three year census, the number of important bird species increase
significantly. This offer opportunity for ecotourism promotion. Ecotourism was
initiated by TCU and a local NGO Osmose in 1999, which already brought
additional income to the local population. So people can see immediately the
benefit and incentive for wise use of natural resources. However such
programmes, though are useful, would not guarantee the long term success if
access rights to land and water resources are not duly addressed. Equitable
sharing and decision-making role of community are encouraging factors for
sustainable practices, because the people would feel that they are also
important actors and have the rights to voice any concern about wrong decision.
So community empowerment should be regarded as important step if one wants to
see the robust achievement of sustainable use.
4.
Conclusion
There is a large agreement among government agencies over the importance
of Tonle Sap Lake and the need for wise use and management, but it seems little
progress has been made on how to deal with the issues. Tonle Sap Biosphere
Reserve nomination gets large endorsement from almost all agencies, but
obstacle still exists. Preparation of legal and institutional framework is the
important step to guarantee long-term promotion and development of Tonle Sap
Biosphere Reserve. Although difficulties are encountered at this step, the
establishment of the inter-ministerial working group signifies the interest of
the concerned agencies for consensus building and further cooperation.
Meanwhile, satisfactory success has been achieved at local level in the
involvement of local community in the conservation, research, and wise
management of selected area - Prek Toal Core Area. The success of TSBR would
also depends on the ability to build partnership with key stakeholders,
particularly fishery and agriculture, for devising management regime
incorporating key factors of sustainability concepts, namely social, cultural,
economic, and environment. If this step passed, the next plan would be
concentrated on development of integrated management plan for the core areas,
research and monitoring programme, and environmental awareness, community
empowerment.
References
1.
TCU 17-18 July
1996, report of the Tonle Sap Forum on provincial level planning.
2. TCU, September-December 1997, proceedings of the five provincial workshops “Sustainable Management of Tonle Sap Lake”.
3. Seville Strategy 1995 “Statutory framework for Biosphere Reserve”.
4. J. Andrew McDonald, Pich Bunnat, Phauk Virak, Leeu Bunton, 30 April 1997, “Plant Community of the Tonle Sap Floodplain”, UNESCO, IUCN, WI, SPEC.
5. Jorge Malleux, April 7 1998, presentation at regional workshop on strategy for the sustainable management of the natural resources.
6. Wayne Gum, 3 August 1998, “Natural Resources Management in the Tonle Sap Biosphere Reserve in Battambang Province”, SPEC.
7.
Neou Bonheur,
September 1998 “Project Proposal for Tonle Sap Biosphere Reserve”.
8.
Fishery Department
19-21 January 1999, proceedings of the Annual meeting “Present Status of
Cambodia’s Freshwater Capture Fisheries and Management Implications”.
9.
Frederic Goes, Hong
Chamnan, Long Kheng, Soun Mean, and Meas Rithy, May-July 1998, “Waterbird
counting and survey”, TCU.
10.
Nicolai Doroshenko,
Long Kheng, Meas Rithy, Nov-Dec 1998, “Reptiles and Small Wildlife at Tonle Sap
Lake”, SPEC.
11.
Hong Chamnan, TCU
May 1998-May 1999, “Waterbird observation and data collection in Prek Toal and
Boeng Chhmar core areas in the Tonle Sap Biosphere Reserve”.
12. Peter Degen, Frank Van Acker, Nik van Zalinge, Nao Thouk, and Deap Loeung, May 2000 “Taken for granted: Conflicts over Cambodia’s fresh water fish resources”, presented at the 8th IASCP conference.