The Special Report

19th September 1999

Lost in the wilds

Amidst moves to set up an Authority, wild life management is under ADB scrutiny

By: Frederica Jansz

• Top environmentalist opposes move

Amidst growing con- troversy, conflict and discontent within the Department for Wild Life Conservation, Minister Ratnasiri Wickremanayake will soon table in parliament a bill aimed at setting up a Wild Life Conservation Authority.

The bill also seeks to empower the Minister in charge of wild life to deal with all matters related to the department.

Mr. Wickremanayake last week held a series of meetings with senior officials of the Department and stressed the need for an Authority to manage the Department which he reportedly said had been mismanaged.

Despite an annual government allocation of some Rs. 45 million and Rs. 50 million from the Global Environment Facility Project to the Wild Life Department, funds remain largely unused, The Sunday Times learns. In 1998, the department returned Rs. 7. 2 million to the Treasury, citing various reasons.

Finances are allocated for the purposes of rehabilitation and improvements to buildings, to plant and machinery, structures, vehicles and other capital assets. This also includes acquisition of equipment and construction of permanent improvements.

Our probe found that the department lacks a competent budget management as well as an internal audit and monitoring capacities.

Read on, and we will enlighten you on findings cited in a Memorandum of Understanding yet to be signed between the Government and the Asian Development Bank, supporting the observations in this article.

When The Sunday Times contacted Minister Wickremanayake to gain an insight into the re-structuring of the department, he appeared to be not so willing to comment. He denied that a proposal had been drafted, outlining details of what the new Authority would entail. "I don't know anything yet," he said, adding "contact me once such a document is tabled in parliament. I do not want to comment yet on this issue."

Asked if it is true that the department was in a mess and needed urgent structuring, the Minister refused to comment and abruptly cut the call.

According to our investigation, the proposed bill entrusts the minister with the power to appoint members of the Authority. The Authority will comprise the Secretary to the Ministry in charge of wild life or his representative, representatives from Ministries of Forestry & Environment, Fisheries & Aquatic Resources, Agriculture & Lands, the Director of Wildlife Conservation and six other members nominated by the Minister from among persons who have had wide experience and shown capacity in wild life conservation and management. The minister will also be empowered to appoint its chairperson.

The Sunday Times learns that Nalini Amarasekara, Co-ordinator for the Global Environment Facility Project, is likely to be appointed as Chairperson.

Dr. Nandana Atapattu is tipped to be Director. Under the present laws the Minister is required to appoint the Director for Wild Life Conservation from the Sri Lanka Administrative Service.

Members of the Authority will hold office for one year but the Minister may remove from office any member without assigning any reason. The remuneration of members of the Authority will be decided by the Minister in accordance with financial regulations.

In the exercise, discharge and performance of its powers, duties and functions the Authority will be subject to general direction and control by the Minister.

A fund called the 'Wild Life Conservation Fund' will be set up under the new Authority while all financial transactions and the management and control of the fund will be handled by the Board which will in turn report to the Minister.

There is also provision for officers of the department to either retire or leave public service and not become an employee of the new Authority.

The bill also states the Minister may make regulations on all matters in respect of or as required under this law. Every regulation made by the Minister shall as soon as it is convenient after its publication in the Gazette, be brought before the Parliament for approval.

Meanwhile, a startling but revealing report completed in June this year by the Asian Development Bank (ADB) outlines in detail what is wrong with Sri Lanka's bio-diversity conservation projects and the problems within the department.

An ADB fact finding mission was here from March 22 to April 9 in connection with a US$ 800,000 project named the "Protected Area Management and Wild Life Conservation Project" which will concentrate mainly on national parks, sanctuaries and protected areas in the Central Montane and Mahaweli regions which will include Horton Plains, Minneriya, Giritale and Wasgamuwa.

The Sunday Times learns, negotiations with the department on loans have not begun though such discussions were scheduled for August 18. The MOU asserts that at present the bio-diversity conservation and protected area management are considerably hampered due to inadequate coordination between the organizations and Government departments mandated with bio-diversity conservation. Mechanisms to protect and coordinate activities between Government departments at operational level are missing, the report says.

The ADB claims the department is ill equipped in terms of organizational structure, administrative procedures and policy development and implementation capacity to undertake effective management of protected areas.

Our investigation found that a frequent change in senior management has contributed to the malfunctioning of the department. In the past five years the DWLC has seen seven directors, most of them staying barely six months, a senior official said. Senior management positions remain vacant sometimes for a considerable period. Thus donor assisted projects are affected due to the unavailability of counterpart staff.

Sri Lanka with a land area of 64,652 sq. kms. is rich and varied with natural resources. The bank points out that Sri Lanka with a population of 18.5 million is one of the most densely populated countries with 286 persons per sq. km. With a current growth rate of 1.2 percent per year the population is expected to stabilize at about 24 million by the year 2025. The dense human population places the natural resources under heavy pressure of exploitation.

The ADB says that about one third of the land area is currently under permanent agriculture. But with 22 percent of the population living below the poverty line, and more than 11 percent of the labour force unemployed, increasingly marginal lands are being brought under cultivation.

Due to the high demand for wood for fuel and timber and the continuing encroachment of agriculture, deforestation continues at a rate of 1.3 percent per year. This in effect has reduced the natural forest cover to less than 22 percent of the land area.

The ADB fact finding mission which comprised Adrian Ruthberg, Senior Project Economist, Henry Tucker, Project Specialist, Dewi Utami, Economist, Environment, Barbara Darling, Institutional Development Consultant, and David Clark, Economist Consultant found that that rich biodiversity in Sri Lanka presents both problems and opportunities to Sri Lanka's people.

The conflict between humans and elephants in Sri Lanka remains a serious problem yet unresolved. Confrontation between man and beast continues as elephant migration routes are blocked by settlements or cultivated areas. The bank maintains that annually some 120 elephants and 50 people lose their lives as a result of this conflict.

Although the Government in 1992 approved the landmark National Policy on Wildlife Conservation aimed at updating and modernizing the regulation, management and use of Sri Lanka's wildlife biodiversity, this action, the ADB maintains, has passed virtually unnoticed in terms of follow-up action.

Wildlife conservation continues to be governed by the outdated Fauna and Flora Protection Ordinance (FFPO) instituted in 1937, a last remnant of a colonial era and shaped by the concern to conserve wild game for hunting purposes and Sri Lanka's unique terrestrial plants and natural habitat.

Instead of coming forward with a strategic management framework, the wild life department made a few modifications to the FFPO, introducing stiffer fines, and clarifying its application to aquatic resources, essentially reinforcing the outdated strategy of an enforcement approach to wildlife, the bank observes.

Stakeholders, particularly local communities, the bank asserts, need to understand the value of natural resources and help conserve and protect rather than exploit it.

The ADB mission found that due to the multiplicity of ministries and agencies in Sri Lanka with overlapping and conflicting roles, there is confusion which agencies play what roles. More recently the bank says these conflicts and gaps have been manifested in the growing role being assumed by the Forestry Department in the protection of natural forests, and the roles being played by the Ministry of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources, the Coast Conservation Department and the Central Environment Authority. Unless the Wild Life Department regains its stature as a serious science department, it will become increasingly difficult for it to carry out its role in wildlife conservation and be treated as a credible player in the increasingly complex policy dialogue that surrounds the management of biodiversity conservation issues, the bank says.

The history of the Wild Life Department has been dogged by an outdated policy management framework, with limited capacity to take the initiative to change it.

The ADB points out that it requires a policy development and strategic planning capacity as well as strengthened science capacity at the senior levels. This view was further articulated by some senior officers at the department who spoke to The Sunday Times on grounds of anonymity.

They said there was an urgent need for a comprehensive human resource management and development. The present management structure, they claim, relies on central command, and bureaucratic systems that hinder an increasingly complex management agenda.

The human-elephant conflict seen as the most serious problem facing the Department has only resulted in a continuous battle where lives are lost as some protected area boundaries are constantly exploited. For example people living in the vicinity of protected areas enter them to collect various natural resources both for family consumption and sale of commercial purposes. Unmanaged tree felling degrades natural forests and ecological systems.

While the uncontrolled collection of rare species of fauna and flora places those stocks in danger of degradation and depletion, unregulated mining, the bank says, degrades or destroys local environments, increases soil erosion, and often leaves open pits, which are dangerous to wildlife.

People also release large numbers of livestock into protected areas to graze in direct competition with elephants, wild buffalo and other wildlife thus reducing the wildlife carrying capacity of the areas. And then of course, elephants regularly leave the protected areas to search for food or follow traditional migration routes, leading to direct conflict with farmers and villagers in their paths.

In Wasgamuwa National Park, gem mining has severely degraded about 500 hectare of land spread over an area of 40 sq. km.

But what are more lethal are the open pits where wild animals maybe trapped or wounded when they fall in.

Wildlife poaching is common in many protected areas as evidenced by the ready availability of venison in village restaurants near their boundaries.

One problem contributing to the permeability of protected area borders is that most borders have not yet been surveyed and demarcated. According to the Surveys Department, of 73 protected areas managed by the Wild Life Deaprtment, only Yala and Wilpattu National Parks have been fully surveyed and demarcated, the ADB says.

Both poverty and unemployment are more prevalent in rural areas than in urban. Around some of the protected areas the occurrence of poverty is estimated at over 50 percent. An estimated 1.5 million people currently live within 5 km of a protected area boundary resulting in high demand not only for the land but for other resources like wood for fuel.

Yet another recurring problem is the lack of suitable accommodation both in the national parks and in the buffer zones. The bungalows operated by the department are subsidized and rarely used by foreign tourists because of difficulties of booking and high competing demand from local tourists. There is a dearth of trained guides who speak foreign languages, and visitor and interpretation centers, restaurants and tourist shops, which are potentially major income earners and sources for employment generation.

The Eco-tourism concept stresses the importance of community involvement and participation and the market segment would generally require a high level of community involvement.

The ADB reiterates that Sri Lanka's high population density, high levels of poverty and unemployment, and widespread dependence on subsistence agriculture have exerted considerable pressure on its natural resources including biodiversity.

Extensive deforestation, land degradation and unregulated exploitation of natural resources are manifestations of the social problems the country faces, and are degrading or destroying the natural ecosystems and the species they contain.

The conservation of biological diversity is vital for Sri Lanka's economic and social development, given that the economy is still heavily based on agriculture, and many people rely on wild plant species for food, medicine and other domestic products, the bank observes.

Editorial/Opinion Contents