Mangrove wetlands conservation project and the shrimp farming industry in Ecuador: Lessons learned Raúl Carvajal1 and Juan José Alava 1,2
Mangroves are one of the most important and productive coastal wetlands in the world. Among other ecological services or benefits, this coastal ecosystem offers protection against hurricanes, storms and flooding, natural water treatment systems and sedimentation sinks, as well as eco-tourism and fisheries. In Ecuador, mangroves provide nursery areas and habitats for several species of crustaceans, such as the Pacific white shrimp, Litopenaeus vannamei; Pacific blue shrimp Litopenaeus stylirostris; red crab, Ucides occidentalis; fishes, including croakers, Cynoscion spp.; mullets, Mugil spp. (e.g., Mugil cephalus), and snook, Centropomus nigrescens; shellfishes, including mussels, Mytella strigata and M. speciosa; and mangrove cockles (= ark shells), Anadara spp., such as Anadara tuberculosa, A. similis and A. grandis; reptiles, such as the critically endangered American crocodile, Crocodylus acutus and iguanas, Iguana iguana; birds, including mangrove black hawk, Buteogallus anthracinus; white ibis, Eudocimus albus; roseate spoonbill, Ajaia ajaja; and several species of herons, including great egrets, Ardea alba; snowy egrets E. thula; little blue herons, E. caerulea; tricolored herons, E. tricolor; green-backed herons, Butorides striatus, as well as black–crowned Nycticorax nycticorax and yellow-crowned Nyctanassa violacea night herons; and, mammals, including crab-eating raccoon, Procyon cancrivorus, and neotropical otter, Lontra longicaudis. Bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) are also common marine mammals residing around the mangrove estuarine waters along the Ecuadorian coast (Gulf of Guayaquil). Several mangrove tree species has been identified in the Ecuadorian coast: red mangroves, Rhizophora mangle and R. harrisonii; black mangrove, Avicennia germinans; white mangrove, Laguncularia racemosa; button or jelí mangrove, Conocarpus erectus; piñuelo mangrove, Pelliciera rhizophorae; and nato mangrove, Mora oleifera, which is only distributed northwest Ecuadorian coast (Esmeraldas province). Even though all the mangroves species are threatened in Ecuador, four of these species (red, white, black and button mangroves) are currently at risk of extinction (Ministerio del Ambiente 2001). Wetlands are defined by Davis (1994) as: “areas of marsh, fen, peatland or water, whether natural or artificial, permanent or temporary, with water that is static or flowing, fresh,
14 September 2007
brackish or salt, including areas of marine water the depth of which at low tide does not exceed six meter.” Under this concept, estuarine wetlands from the Ecuadorian coastline, including deltas, tidal marshes and mangroves, show a major importance inasmuch as these areas are considered the most productive and richest in the planet. For example, the Guayaquil Gulf Estuary is a typical case, with approximately 81 percent of the total area of Ecuadorian mangroves (149,556.23 ha) (CLIRSEN 1999). The Guayaquil Gulf is not only the most important and complex coastal environment of Ecuador, but also the richest environmental management unit along the Pacific South American coast. It is one of the five regions of special management in which the implementation of The Ecuadorian Biodiversity Policy and National Strategy is a priority (Ministerio del Ambiente 2001). From 1969 to 1999, a mangrove area of about 54,000 ha, which represented 26 percent of the original area (203,625 ha) was lost in Ecuador because of the non-controlled clearcutting of mangroves, mainly for construction of illegal aquaculture, agriculture, timber extraction, urban sprawl, as well as affection of mangrove remnants by plague infestations, including fungus and insects (Table 1). On the contrary, the shrimp farm industry augmented from 0.00 to 178,072 ha between 1969 and 1995. This dramatic scenario in overuse and misuse of a natural resource reflected a typical case of the classical thesis “The Tragedy of the Commons” by Hardin (1968), emphasizing that the lack of both property rights and regulation enforcement on environmental resources cause their depletion or decimation. Thus, during the last decade, to face this challenging environmental crisis, Fundación Natura Guayaquil Chapter undertook and enhanced its actions and strategies to conserve and protect the Ecuadorian mangroves forest areas, with special emphasis on the mangroves forest remaining on the Guayaquil Gulf Estuary. From September 1995 to September 1997, Fundación Natura Guayaquil Chapter carried out a project named “Inter-institutional Coordination for the Control and Surveillance of Mangrove Clear-Cutting on the Guayaquil Gulf ”, which contributed a case study of joint-participation and cooperation between a non-government organization (Fundación Natura) and a state office, the Conservation
Table 1.
Temporal and spatial evolution of mangrove forest, shrimp farming and salt flat areas (ha) on the continental coast of Ecuador from 1969 to 1999.
Land use/coverage Mangrove forest Shrimp farming Salt flat areas Total
1969
1984
1987
1991
1995
1999
203,624.6
182,157.30
175,157.40
162,186.55
146,938.62
149,556.23
0.00
89,368.30
117,728.70
145,998.33
178,071.84
175,253.50
51,496.30
20,022.10
12,273.70
6,320.87
5,109.47
4,531.08
255,120.90
291,547.70
305,159.80
314,505.75
330,214.97
329,340.81
Source: Centro de Levantamiento Integrado de Recursos Naturales por Sensores Remotos (CLIRSEN 1999).
and Surveillance Unit of Guayaquil (UCV). Based on this inter-institutional experience, Fundación Natura sought an agreement with the National Chamber of Aquaculture of Ecuador (Camara Nacional de Acuacultura-CNA), an important stakeholder involved with mangrove conservation, to negotiate and sponsor, through individual financial support from some of its members (shrimp farming owners), a new environmental project called “Control and Surveillance System of the Mangrove Clear-Cutting on the Ecuadorian Continental Coast.” The total invested budget was about $ US 367,000 allowing Fundación Natura to administrate and conduct this project from November 1998 to October 2001. This project had a national scope, and its main goal was to avoid and control the clear-cutting of mangrove forest areas by the cooperation of public, private (CNA) and NGO entities involved on this environmental issue. Simultaneously, new environmental laws and guidelines for the mangrove conservation were established by the time that the project was underway. The major environmental strategies of these laws were the mangrove zones concessions (Official Register # 243, 28 July 1999) to traditional human communities that depend on mangroves resources, as well as the establishment of the environmental economic value (benefit/cost) for a damaged mangrove area (one ha = $13,068) by the National Procuratorial Agency (Official Register # 139, 2 March 1999). Two additional laws were also enacted, the new Environmental Management Law (Official Register # 245, 30 July 1999) and the improvement of the General Applied Normative for the Forest Law (Official Register # 245, 30 July 1999). These environmental laws established new terminology that was useful for mangrove conservation. For instance, the term ‘restoration’ means not only the focal point of reforestation but, also, the recovery of an unique biotic component, the mangrove tree, giving a global scope of conservation in terms of ecological services and natural subsidies. The operational plan of the project had three components: Surveillance Technical System, Legal Control Technical System, and Environmental Education. These approaches are described below.
Fig. 1–2. Aircraft surveillance system was a key component to detect illegal mangrove clearance and hot spots of deforestation due to anthropogenic activities during the mangrove conservation project in the Gulf of Guayaquil, Ecuador (Photo by Raul Carvajal).
Component I. Surveillance Technical System Using aircraft surveys of the mangrove forest in the coastal zone, hot spots of mangrove clear-cutting and areas of potential conflict on the Ecuadorian estuaries, with special attention on Guayaquil Gulf, were systematically identiWorld Aquaculture
15
cal and legal approaches to enhance the legal documentation, legal inspection and generation of legal evidence/proofs, including pictures and geo-referencing in multi-temporal maps, for each case of mangrove clear-cutting. Of the 76 mangrove clear-cutting cases presented to the Wildlife and Forest Agency/ Environment Ministry that were followed, the authorities stated that 37 Administrative Resolutions were completed during a record period of about nine months for each case. Legal evidence, such as photos of mangrove removed by tractors in situ, absence of permits to develop shrimp farming, which was illegal, video cassette records of clear-cutting of mangrove areas, official field reports and testimonies were used in the persecution of these cases. Fig. 3. Isolated patches of mangroves remnants were rescued and protected by the authorities (UVC and Ecuadorian Navy) and organizations (Fundación Natura and Camara Nacional de Acuacultura) involved in the terrestrial inspections before illegal shrimp farm activities cut the trees down (Photo by Juan José Alava).
fied (Figures 1–2). Each identified case was communicated to the UCV, which determined the date to carry out official inspections and verification of a given case of mangrove clear-cutting. Official members from four government organizations (the Provincial Department of Wildlife and Forest, the General Fishery Undersecretary, the Navy and the Municipalities) and technical personnel from two-invited NGOs (Aquaculture National Chamber and Fundación Natura Guayaquil Chapter) were involved in these inspections. The material used during airplane monitoring and aquatic inspections were a camera (Nikon 400 4S), video camera (Panasonic M-9000), GPS (Geoexplorer II) and thematic maps for multi-temporal studies. Based on the aerial and aquatic monitoring and inspections, three hot spots of mangrove forest clear-cutting areas were identified. These areas were the Jambelí Archipelago (Archipiélago de Jambelí) and Naranjal Mouth River (Boca del Rio Naranjal), located southeastern Gulf of Guayaquil, and an area northeast of Puna Island, center of Gulf Guayaquil. From November 1998 to October 2001, a total of 79 cases of clear cutting of mangroves were detected, from which 96 percent were assessed, verified and closed under the UCV-authority (Figure 3). The legal and administrative processes for each entrusted case were pursued.
Component II. Legal Control Technical System This component focused on the pursuit of legal and administrative processes concerned with mangrove clearcutting cases and illegal taking of beach and bay areas. A main objective of this component was to accelerate the legal processes to obtain a positive resolution in favor of the natural resource. The technical system of legal control was undertaken by the logistical support of both techni-
16 September 2007
Component III. Environmental Education
A socio-economic survey was performed on five human communities that depend on mangrove resources. The objective of this survey was to elucidate the environmental issues concerning the harvest of the mangrove red crab (U. occidentalis), identification of working zones as well as relevant socio-economic aspects, including family income, facilities, economic and community activities. This assessment was conducted in the Churute Mangrove Ecological Reserve (REMCH), one of the mangrove areas on the Guayaquil Gulf with human conflict. The findings generated from this component provided a baseline to integrate these communities into the Environmental Education Program. Community-based conservation (CBC) activities were incorporated to manage and conserve the mangrove forest resources. Additionally, an educational strategic program of mangrove conservation was deployed to develop education material, pamphlets and posters, and to increase awareness of the importance of the mangrove forest and the laws that protect them. A socio-economic survey was completed of five human communities that depend on the mangrove forest in the Churute Mangrove Ecological Reserve. The results of this socio-economic study are available in Fundación Natura Capítulo Guayaquil and from the first author, Raúl Carvajal.
Environmental Indicator of Control and Surveillance The mangrove forest area increased about 2 percent (2,618 ha) from 1995 to 1999 (Table1; Figure 4). On the contrary, a decrease of 1.6 percent (2,818 ha) was observed on the total shrimp farming areas for the same period of time (Table 1). This scenario might indicate that several clear cutting areas were controlled in, at least, some areas, and the natural regeneration of mangrove forest was allowed in others; for example, closure of illegal shrimp ponds or abandoned shrimp farms, because of the recoverability of hydrological and tidal conditions, which enhanced the ecological succession
and restoration of mangrove communities. Mangrove remnants affected by natural events also get recovered, showing the importance of the ecosystem resilience in getting back to its original condition. Additionally, a reduction in salt flat areas of 11 percent was noticed during the 1995–1999 period (Figure 5), suggesting their usage for other human-made activities. The temporal and spatial data reflecting the evolution of mangrove, shrimp farming and salt flat areas were processed by the Remote Sensing and Natural Resources Center/Defense Ministry (Centro de Levantamiento Integrado de Recursos Naturales por Sensores Remotos– CLIRSEN) (Table 1).
Discussion and Conclusion
Fig. 4. Historical trend of the reduction of mangrove and salt flat areas due to human activities (agriculture, aquaculture, timber extraction, and urbanization). Of particular interest is the slight decreasing in the reduction of mangrove forest coverage from 1995 to 1999, when environmental actions and mitigation strategies were undertaken by NGOs and the Ecuadorian government. The lost of salt flat coverage (91%) have been more drastic compared to mangrove areas. 1969 is the baseline period, reflecting the total original land cover (0% reduction) for both mangrove and salt flat areas (Table 1), existing at that time and before the arriving of the shrimp farming industry.
Wetlands embrace a diversity of habitats for plants and wildlife, especially for waterbirds habitat conservation, as well as ecological benefits and natural resource subsidies for local human communities (Davis 1994, Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2004). Inter–institutional cooperation among stakeholders is a key issue in resource environmental management to accomplish sustainability. The conservation mangrove project conducted in Ecuador reflected a positive example of management strategies to mitigate environmental impacts generated by unsustainable activities and misuse of mangroves. Furthermore, it is worthwhile to mention that The Codes of Practice for Responsible Shrimp Farming of the Global Aquaculture Alliance (GAA) emphasizes in one of the guidelines that “The shrimp aquaculture industry will promote responsible and sustainable development and management practices ensuring the preservation of mangroves and the sustainability of shrimp aquaculture” as well as in its first management practice for protection of mangrove ecosystems that “New shrimp farms should not be developed within mangrove ecosystems” (Boyd 1999). In the field, it was observed that a large number of rescued mangroves areas reached natural regeneration. However, this aspect deserves more investigation in future multi-temporal studies of mangroves, shrimp farming and salt flat areas. Furthermore, Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) has been recently legalized in Ecuador as a technical and a regulatory approach to examine previously whether or not a particular aquaculture project, such as inland shrimp farming, can cause potential environmental insults or effects (Alava 2005). In addition to environmental regulation, local incentives, community-based conservation and environmental education to manage coastal environmental resources in developing countries, decision makers must consider in their local agendas the coordination and joint-participation among all the entities involved, the multi-stakeholder process, in the use and conservation of mangroves.
Notes Raúl Carvajal, Fundación Natura Capítulo Guayaquil, Avenida Carlos J. Arosemena, Km 2.5, Edificio Investamar, 2° piso, P.O. Box 09-01-11327, Guayaquil, Ecuador.
[email protected] 1,2 Juan José Alava, Fundación Natura Capítulo Guayaquil, Ecuador, Environmental Consultant for the Center for Environmental Studies (CEMA)/ESPOL, Guayaquil, Ecuador. Present Address: Juan José Alava, PhD Candidate/Graduate Research Assistant Environmental Toxicology Research Group, School of Resource & Environmental Management, Simon Fraser University, 8888 University Drive, Burnaby, British Columbia V5A 1S6, CANADA; Office Phone: (604)268-7375; Lab Phone: (604)291-5776; Fax: (604)291-4968;
[email protected] 1
Acknowledgments The Project “Control and Surveillance System of the Mangrove Clear-Cutting on the Ecuadorian Continental Coast” was sponsored by the National Chamber of Aquaculture of Ecuador (Cámara Nacional de Acuacultura– CNA). We thank the ex–executive directors of CAN (Rodrigo Laniado and Sandro Coglitore), Joaquin Orrantia, as well as Deborah Chiriboga, previous executive director of Fundación Natura Capítulo Guayaquil, for their commitments in negotiating and encouraging the development of this project. We warmly thank the technical personnel (we specially acknowledge José Torres for his devoted field work as well as Héctor Mosquera, Mariuxi Thompson, and Sandra Chalacán for the legal and educational work), administrative staff and volunteers of Fundación Natura, CAN, (Continued on page 69) World Aquaculture
17
Ergotropics in Aquaculture
Mangroves and Shrimp
(Continued from page 24) Pacific Magazine, January / February. Mabahinzireki, G. B., K. Dabrowski, K. J.Lee, D. El-Saidy and E. R. Wissner. 2001. Growth, feed utilization and body composition of tilapia (Oreochromis sp.) fed with cottonseed meal-based diets in a recirculating system. Aquaculture Nutrition 7:189-200. Massam, J. 2005. Direct fed microbials in growout ponds: Industrial scale results. Abstract, World Aquaculture Society, World Aquaculture 2005, May 9-13, 2005, Bali, Indonesia. Naylor, R.L., R.J. Goldburg, J.H. Primavera, N. Kautsky, M.C.M. Beveridge, J. Clay, C. Folke, J. Lubchenco, H. Mooney and M. Troell. 2000. Effect of aquaculture on world fish supplies. Nature 405:1017-1024. New, M. and I. Csavas. 1995. Will there be enough fish meal for fish meals? Aquaculture Europe 19:6-13. Ramli, N., U. Heindl and S. Sunanto. 2005. Effect of potassium-diformate on growth performance of tilapia challenged with Vibrio anguillarum. Abstract, World Aquaculture Society, World Aquaculture 2005, May 9-13, 2005, Bali, Indonesia. Ringø, E. 1991. Effects of dietary lactate and propionate on growth, and digesta in Arctic charr, Salvelinus alpinus (L.). Aquaculture 96:321-333. Ringø, E., R. E. Olsen and J. D. Castell. 1994. Effect of dietary lactate on growth and chemical composition of
Arctic charr Salvelinus alpinus. Journal of the World Aquaculture Society 25 (3): 483-486. Sissons, J. W. 1989. Potential of probiotic organisms to prevent diarrhoea and promote digestion in farm animals. A review. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 49:1-13. Sugiura, S. H., J. Gabaudan, F. M. Dong and R. W. Hardy. 2001. Dietary microbial phytase supplementation and the utilization of phosphorus, trace minerals and protein by rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss (Walbaum) fed soybean meal-based diets. Aquaculture Research 32: 583-592. Tacon, A.G.J. 1996. Feeding tomorrow’s fish. World Aquaculture 27: 20-32. Tomasso, J. and M. New. 1999. Aquaculture in Global Fisheries Production. Fisheries 24: 32. Verbeeke, W. 2001. The influence of consumerism on livestock production and eventually the feed industry. Pages 6, 1-18 In Recent Developments in animal feeds and feeding. Proceedings of the Animal Feed Manufactures Association (AFMA) Forum 2001, 21st-23rd of February 2001, Sun City, Northwest Province, South Africa. Williams, M.J., J.D. Bell, M.V. Gupta, M. Dey, M. Ahmed, M. Prein, S. Child, P.R. Gardiner, R. Brummet and D. Jamu. 2000. Responsible aquaculture can aid food problems. Nature 406: 673.
(Continued from page 17) and government agencies (Provincial Departments of the Wildlife and Forest Service, the General Fishery Undersecretary, the Ecuadorian Navy and the Municipalities) for their participation during the project.
References Alava, J.J. 2005. Inland Shrimp Aquaculture and Environmental Impact Assessment in Ecuador. World Aquaculture 36(3): 54-58. Boyd, C. E.1999. Codes of Practice for Responsible Shrimp Farming. Global Aquaculture Alliance. St. Louis, Missouri, USA. CLIRSEN (Centro de Levantamiento Integrado de Recursos Naturales por Sensores Remotos ). 1999. Estudio Multitemporal de Manglares, Camaroneras y Salinas al año 1999.Ministerio de Defensa-PATRA. Guayaquil, Ecuador. Davis, T.J., editor. 1994. The Ramsar Convention Manual: A guide to the Convention on wetlands of international importance especially as waterfowl habitat. Ramsar Convention Bureau. Gland, Switzerland. Hardin, G. 1968. The tragedy of the commons. Science 162:1243-1248. Ministerio del Ambiente. 2001. Política y Estrategia Nacional de Biodiversidad del Ecuador. Ministerio del Ambiente. Quito, Ecuador. Ramsar Convention Secretariat. 2004. The Ramsar Convention Manual: a Guide to the Convention on Wetlands (Ramsar, Iran, 1971), 3rd ed. Ramsar Convention Secretariat, Gland, Switzerland.
Advertisers’ Index Aquaculture America 2008................................ 43
Northern Aquaculture....................................... 29
Aquaculture Europe.......................................... 34
Parkway Research by Brandt Consolidated....... 33
Aquafauna Biomarine......................................... 7
Seabait, Ltd. ............................ Inside Back Cover
Aquatic Eco-Systems, Inc.................................. 39
USAS Sponsored Publications........................... 61
AREA..................................................Back Cover
WAS Future Meetings....................................... 66
Argent Laboratories................. Inside Front Cover
WAS Online Store.............................................. 55
Caribbean and Latin American Aquaculture 2007............................................ 30
World Aquaculture 2008.................................... 49
World Aquaculture
69
