Evolving Conservation Objectives

National park objectives have evolved through four main phases (Figure 2.3). The first phase was the inception period which, through the efforts of nature-NGOs, saw national parks proliferate across the globe. Most national parks were set aside following the imperialist Yellowstone model, which was based on the exclusionary philosophy that nature – meaning visually outstanding landscapes and charismatic megafauna (the latter particularly true for national parks established on the African continent, where predators were culled in an attempt to raise the number of wild ungulates) – is best preserved in the absence of humans. Park management was based on a military model, where the park was treated as a fortress and protected from local communities wanting to exploit resources within the park boundaries (Anderson & James, 2001). The law that created Yellowstone National Park, the Yellowstone Manifest, dedicated the park for public recreation, excluding people

6

This is true for many developed countries, but one notable exemption is Scotland where the national park movement failed to enter legislation because of factors including the strength of the landowning interest, rural depopulation, and concern for jobs in a depressed economy (MacEwen & MacEwen, 1982). Scotland now has two national parks; the first was declared in 2002.

from living within the park, and forbidding its sale (Ahmend et al., 2003). Since their inception, national parks have been characterised by a dual mandate of environmental protection and recreational use.

Figure 2.3

The Evolving Role of National Parks: From Isolation to Integration

Source: Adapted from Dearden and Rollins(1993)

The second phase was based on ideas presented by the 1933 London Convention,7 including the protection of ‘flora and fauna’ and of sites of importance for public benefit (enjoyment and education) (Cumming, 2004). The London Convention also reinforced the Yellowstone Manifest’s dual mandate. This was further strengthened at the 1969 Tenth Assembly of IUCN held in New Delhi where two main axioms for national parks were established, namely that they are unoccupied areas and that there is a central authority in the nation that has the power to take measures to guarantee their conservation (Ahmend et al., 2003).

7

The full title is the 1933 London Convention on Preservation of Fauna and Flora in Their Natural State. It focused primarily on Africa.

26

The third phase was characterised by the emergence of Conservation Biology as a discipline in the 1980s. This led to a management focus concerned with the full range of biological diversity from genes to ecosystems, functional landscapes, and evolutionary processes (Cumming, 2004). These objectives were reflected in the Convention on Biological Diversity in 1992 and it is now recognised that they are best achieved through a combination of species and habitat conservation (Hambler, 2004).

The fourth and most recent phase, integrated management, increasingly emphasises social and economic benefits, ‘parks for people’ and the potential role of parks in rural development (Cumming, 2004).

National parks are still characterised by a dual mandate, defined most recently by the IUCN as a Category II protected area “managed mainly for ecosystem protection and recreation” (IUCN-WCMC, 1994, p.4). The IUCN Guidelines for Protected Area Management (Figure 2.4) describe the objectives of a national park as the protection of ecological integrity, management of threats, and provision for spiritual, scientific, educational, and recreational opportunities that are culturally compatible (IUCN-WCMC, 1994). Because most governments are members of the IUCN, this definition should apply to all national parks. However, some protected areas are known as national parks but do not fit the IUCN definition. For example, the national parks in England, established 20 years before the IUCN definition, incorporate human settlement and extensive resource use. These parks would be more appropriately assigned to Category V. However, a change in terminology now would be interpreted as downgrading the status of the parks (MacEwen & MacEwen, 1982). Many national parks in other countries also have resident human populations for park and tourism related staff, which is acceptable where the park is managed mainly for ecosystem protection and recreation.

Park managers face the challenges posed by the potentially conflicting dual mandate of national parks, which raises questions of conflict between preservation and use, and the diversity of the abovementioned objectives. In the late nineteenth century the ‘environmental crisis’ had not yet arrived and visitors on packaged tours were not envisaged because of high travel costs (Shah, 1995). Thus, the prime objective of national park management was preservation of the park’s

pristine condition, or at least the preservation of wildlife that was highly valued at that time, while human activities in and surrounding a national park were required to be minimal and unobtrusive. National park managers were initially concerned with the regulation of natural hazards like droughts, floods, fire and disease; wildlife management; modifying the mix of vegetation; reinforcing natural barriers against soil erosion; and biological and zoological research (Shah, 1995). Animal poaching was the only serious economic problem faced by park managers during this period (Shah, 1995).

Figure 2.4

Guidelines for the National Park Management Category

Source: IUCN-WCMC (1994, p. 10)

Some wildlife management strategies adopted in the early years of national park management are now viewed as inappropriate. For example, wolves were eradicated from many national parks in the USA because public opinion favoured protecting the interests of livestock farmers. This attitude extended to national CATEGORY II National Park: protected area managed mainly for ecosystem protection and recreation

Definition

Natural area of land and/or sea, designated to (a) protect the ecological integrity of one or more ecosystems for present and future generations, (b) exclude exploitation or occupation inimical to the purposes of designation of the area and (c) provide a foundation for spiritual, scientific, educational, recreational and visitor opportunities, all of which must be environmentally and culturally compatible.

Objectives of Management

• to protect natural and scenic areas of national and international significance for spiritual, scientific, educational, recreational or tourist purposes;

• to perpetuate, in as natural a state as possible, representative examples of physiographic regions, biotic communities, genetic resources, and species, to provide ecological stability and diversity; • to manage visitor use for inspirational, educational, cultural and recreational purposes at a level which

will maintain the area in a natural or near natural state;

• to eliminate and thereafter prevent exploitation or occupation inimical to the purposes of designation; • to maintain respect for the ecological, geomorphologic, sacred or aesthetic attributes which warranted

designation; and

• to take into account the needs of indigenous people, including subsistence resource use, in so far as these will not adversely affect the other objectives of management.

Guidance for Selection

• The area should contain a representative sample of major natural regions, features or scenery, where plant and animal species, habitats and geomorphological sites are of special spiritual, scientific, educational, recreational and tourist significance.

• The area should be large enough to contain one or more entire ecosystems not materially altered by current human occupation or exploitation.

Organizational Responsibility

Ownership and management should normally be by the highest competent authority of the nation having jurisdiction over it. However, they may also be vested in another level of government, council of indigenous people, foundation or other legally established body which has dedicated the area to long-term conservation.

28

parks in order to protect neighbouring livestock and the national park’s large ungulates. Wolves are keystone predators that play and important role in the regulation of ungulate species. In the absence of predators, ungulates have serious impacts on vegetation, their populations fluctuate greatly, and individuals often starve to death (Fritts, 1996)8. In southern Africa, artificial waterholes were created in many national parks in order to attract animals for tourists to view (Child, 2004b). This is thought to have contributed to a series of changes in species composition that lead to the near extinction of the roan antelope (Hippotragus equinus) (t' Sas-Rolfes & Fearnhead, 2001). In other national parks exotic species were intentionally introduced; for example, heather (Calluna

vulgaris) was introduced by park rangers to Tongariro National Park, New Zealand, with the intention of providing habitat for grouse hunting (Tetrao tetrix and Lagopus lagopus scotica), though grouse were never introduced. Heather is now considered a serious invasive weed throughout the park.

Many national parks were established without the participation of the local people who lived in or near the area and/or used it for their livelihoods. Such parks were characterised by centralist management that corresponded with national, rather than local interests (Abakerli, 2001; Ahmend et al., 2003). ‘Third World’ national parks were established for various reasons. Many parks in India were originally the hunting preserves of maharajahs. In Africa, some parks resulted from the whims of influential individuals, while others were created in order to protect a single species such as the gorilla (Shah, 1995). Many authors have noted that unless conservation has local support, it will fail (Beltran, 2000; Brosius, 2004; Child, 2004a; Geist & Galatowitsch, 1999; Huston, 2001; Kiss, 2004; Nepal, 2000; 1998). We know human life depends upon natural systems, but many people believe if natural resources do not generate some economic benefit, their protection is unnecessary (Nicholls, 2004). National park systems generate greater total economic benefits than those obtained from continued habitat conversion (Balmford, Bruner, Cooper, Costanza, Farber et al., 2002). However, the benefit

8

Wolf populations in the USA reached their lowest numbers in 1930. Wolves were protected with the passing of the 1973 Endangered Species Act and reintroductions to national parks began in the 1990s following largely successful efforts to change public attitudes towards wolves (Fritts, 1996).

distribution from protected areas is not geographically homogenous and in many nations the conservation of nature is perceived as an elitist luxury. In developing countries, park management has had to address issues like consumptive uses of wildlife, cultural obligations, and the involvement of stakeholders in land management strategies. Similar issues have been brought to the fore in developed countries through land claims by traditional owners. In some cases, joint management arrangements that attempt to satisfy both Western agendas and those of traditional owners have emerged (English & Lee, 2003). Thus, protected area management is increasingly focusing on the economic values of natural systems, on equity issues regarding benefit distribution, and on stakeholder involvement in the designation and management of protected areas.

Evidence of the change in approach to national park planning and management since 1872 and the diverse range of benefits now associated with national parks are highlighted in Table 2.4. This diversity is reflected in the staff of national park management agencies around the globe, with many of these agencies now employing specialists in disciplines including ecology, anthropology, law, history, archaeology, and public education (English & Lee, 2003).

Simply contemplating the outputs from the IUCN’s six commissions – including the World Commission on Protected Areas (Table 2.5), which unite volunteer experts from a range of disciplines – gives an impression of the conservation movement’s perspectives on the many facets of what constitutes good conservation practice.

Table 2.4

Traditional and Emerging Protected Area Paradigms

Traditional paradigm Emerging paradigm

Objectives: - ‘set aside’ for conservation/taken out of productive use

- established mainly for scenic protection and spectacular wildlife - managed mainly for visitors and tourists, whose interested normally

prevail over those of local people;

- management focussed on the protection of existing natural and landscape assets

- run with conservation, recreations, social, and economic objectives - often established for scientific, economic and cultural reasons

- managed in order to help meet the economic and cultural needs of local people - management focussed on restoration and rehabilitation, as well as protection, so

that lost or eroded values can be recovered

Governance: - usually run by central government - run by many partners; e.g. different tiers of government, local communities, indigenous groups, the private sector, non-governmental organisations Local people: - parks planned and managed against the impact of people (except

for visitors), and especially to exclude local people

- managed with little regard to the local community, who are rarely consulted or informed of management intentions

- run with, for and, in some cases, by local people who are seen as active partners – even initiators and leaders – in policy and management decisions

- managed to help meet the economic and cultural needs of local people The wider

context:

- planned one by one, in an ad hoc manner

- managed as ‘islands’ without regard to the areas around them

- planned as part of national, regional and international systems

- developed as ‘networks’ linked by green corridors, and integrated within surrounding land that is managed sustainably by communities Perceptions: - viewed primarily as a national assets, with national considerations

prevailing over local ones

- viewed exclusively as a national concern

- viewed as a community asset, balancing the idea of a national heritage - management is guided by international responsibilities and national/local

concerns, sometimes resulting in transboundary arrangements Management

technique:

- technocratic with little regard to political considerations - little regard to the need to learn from experience

- adaptive according to a long-term, learning perspective

- selection, planning and management are viewed as a political exercise, requiring sensitivity, participation and astute judgement

Finance: - government-funded - funded through a variety of means to supplement/replace government subsidy Management

skills:

- managed by natural scientists or natural resource experts - management is expert led

- managed by people with a range of skills, especially people-related skills - management values and draws on the knowledge of local people

Source:Adapted from Lockwood and Kothari (2006) and Phillips (2003)

3

Table 2.5

The Roles of the IUCN’s Six Commissions

Commission Role Species Survival Commission

(SSC)

Provides advice on technical aspects of species conservation and mobilises action for species threatened with extinction.

World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA)

Promotes the establishment and effective management of a worldwide representative network of terrestrial and marine protected areas.

Commission on

Environmental Law (CEL)

Advances environmental law by developing new legal concepts and instruments, and by building the capacity of societies to employ environmental law for conservation and sustainable development.

Commission on Education and Communication (CEC)

Champions the strategic use of communication and education to empower and educate stakeholders for the sustainable use of natural resources.

Commission on

Environmental, Economic and Social Policy (CEESP)

Provides expertise and policy advice on economic and social factors for the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity.

Commission on Ecosystem Management (CEM)

Provides expert guidance on integrated ecosystem approaches to the management of natural and modified ecosystems. Source:Adapted fromIUCN (2005a)