Alarming disappearance of wildlife.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

Ecuador is one of the seventeen most diverse countries on the planet, rich in biodiversity and endemic species. Even there, however, where it is still possible to find considerable extensions of tropical and subtropical rainforest, there have been signs of large scale extinction of wildlife. It is a panorama of empty forests, where the vegetation appears normal but there are almost no animals.

Alarming statistics point to the occurrence of ecological extinction of animals in Ecuador and in all the other countries of the region. This phenomenon is demystifying the western vision of indigenous peoples as guardians of the forest and showing that what conservationists have done so far in protected areas hasn't been enough to slow, let alone solve, the problem. In an article titled "The Empty Forest" (BioScience Magazine, 1992) Kent H. Redford, the vice president of the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) said, "Many large animals are already ecologically extinct in vast areas of neo-tropical forests where the vegetation still appears intact."

For many years, people took from the forests as many animals as they could hunt. But now, indigenous peoples are experiencing hunger as they continue to eke out their survival by hunting large and medium sized mammals, birds, and fish. In a recent conference on food security in Quito, Marcelo Moreano, an officer of the United Nations World Food Program for Ecuador, spoke of the Awa indigenous leader who had moved him by pleading: "Help us to plant more meat in the forests."

That expression from the lips of the indigenous leader is far from being nonsensical. It expresses one of the biggest problems for conservation in the tropics today and sensitizes us to the hunger and malnutrition that is resulting from the disappearance of animals that indigenous people have depended on for centuries.

While the problem of animal extinction is not new, many people have a hard time believing that that we could fined ourselves with empty forests, and conservationists have often projected the idea that indigenous people live in harmony with nature and therefore could not possibly participate in overhunting. They have also often convinced us that the best way to assure the survival of different species, especially large mammals, is simply to preserve the ecosystems that they need by creating protected areas.

The Convention on Biological Diversity, signed in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, points to the need to conserve biodiversity, promote the sustainable use of the components of biological diversity, and provide fair and equitable participation in the benefits that come from the use of genetic resources. Almost 200 countries have signed onto this agreement, most of them countries from the western hemisphere. It is a bit uncomfortable to look at the causes of the problem, however. Redford and existing data suggest that indigenous people are partially responsible, as are homesteaders in the area, and the rest of humanity. In general, we can say that our human species is the responsible party.

So far in Ecuador, about 30 studies have been conducted on the effects of subsistence hunting. Most of the evidence shows that this ancestral practice is a problem for the conservation of wildlife. But game is now becoming scarce.

In 2001, WCS-Ecuador found that four Kichwa communities, with an average of 25 families each, hunted and caught 1,231 individual mammals in a period of nine months. Two years earlier in the same area, three Waorani communities, with about eleven families each, caught about 2,400 animals in one year--this, according to a study by Maggie Frazen of the University of California, Davis. Many of these animals were consumed by the people in the communities, but they were also sold in local markets.

Another way to look at the problem is the following: According to the 2001 census of population and housing in the two most protected areas of the Ecuadoran Amazon-Cuyabeno and Yasuni--about 1,500 people were living in the town of Cuyabeno where the Cuyabeno wildlife production reserve is located. Half of these people are men. Because of the geographic area, it is possible to assume that a large number of them are indigenous. Another 5,000 people are living In Aguarico where the Yasuni National Park is located. Of the 5,000 people who live there, approximately 60 percent are men. It is also reasonable to assume that in this area, the great majority of them are indigenous.

Thus, a total of 6,500 people are living in these two areas. They are mostly indigenous and approximately 50 percent of them are men. In other words, there are around 3,000 potential hunters. Anyone who has been in these areas knows that people, even the elderly, use hunting as a primary way of getting enough protein.

Conservative estimates suggest that these 3,000 hunters have been hunting and catching about 42,000 animals a year for six years (2001-2007), making a total of 252,000 animals hunted. These statistics, of course, do not include the fact that the local indigenous population has grown since 2001 and that there are also many non-indigenous settlers who live around the area who also engage in the same practices.

Clearly, the primary cause of animal extinction in these areas is the basic need to obtain food. It is a free source of protein in a monetarized world. Robeiro Criollo, a Cofan Indian boy just thirteen years old, for example, can provide food for his family. He can hunt a tropical rodent called a guanta and get about three kilograms of meat in just one morning. This protein, together with the carbohydrates, minerals, and vitamins provided by yucca, plantains, and other fruits provide an adequate balance in his diet and that of his six other brothers and sisters. Hunting will also help him to maintain his status and identity in the community. He and his family live together with four other families (a total of 23 people) in the community known as Pacuyo.

For Robeiro's community, and the community of Zabalo about a half an hour away by canoe where another 100 people live, hunting is apparently not a problem yet. Their territory includes about 200,000 acres and there is no other pressure on it. But, about ten years ago one indicator of the problem did arise when the populations of Charapa turtles began to disappear due to excess consumption of their eggs by the indigenous people. A hatching initiative and a change of habits have kept the turtle population from disappearing completely.

But subsistence hunting is not the only thing causing the disappearance of animals. Growing market demand for wild game meat is another cause. One study on wild game sales conducted by the Wildlife Conservation Society in 2005 in the Yasuni National Park--and specifically in the market of Pompeya, a Kichwa community on the banks of the Napa River--shows that every year in this area, Waorani and Kichwa hunters from no more than 30 localities sell between 28,000 and 30,000 pounds of wild game meat. Some maintain that the number has actually tripled in the last three years due to the growing demand for this kind of meat in the cities of Puerto Francisco de Orellana (Coca), El Tena, La Joya de los Sachas, and Lago Agrio.

One of the significant results of this study is the fact that the great majority of the meat sold ends up in El Tena, a city in the Amazon located about 157 miles from Pompeya, in which the final consumers are primarily indigenous Kichwa people. This question then arises: is it possible that since all of the wildlife has disappeared in this region of the Amazonia, they are now consuming resources from another place?

According to a WCS study, the sales prices along the marketing chain for wild game increase about 77 percent between the hunters, the intermediaries, and the restaurant owners, and about 314 percent between the hunters and the final consumer. In other words, it's a good business.

The problem is that no wildlife population reproduces fast enough to be able to resist the enormous pressure placed on it by subsistence hunting, much less the growing demands of the market. A danta, or tapir, has just one offspring a year. They live alone, they are territorial, and they need large forest spaces to live in. A sahino, or wild boar, has a couple of offspring every nine months. They live in herds, and they also need large spaces to roam. Even the large and medium sized rodents like guantas and guatusas give birth to a maximum of two offspring in periods of no less than three months. And of course in addition to hunting, populations may decline from disease or because of other natural predators.

The possible solutions to this problem so far are very complex. All of the initiatives in the region involving raising wildlife in captivity have failed because of diseases, high costs, the lack of knowledge about the animals, and the fact that indigenous people are not accustomed to raising animals in this way.

Prohibiting hunting is also not a viable option, since there are few other options for protein sources for indigenous peoples in these areas. We cannot keep indigenous peoples from improving their living conditions or increasing their population density. Like all people, they have rights.

Some people believe that when the natural supply of meat is exhausted, we can simply create other engineered sources of animal protein for indigenous people and others. What these technocrats don't understand, however, is that we are devastating the natural world and that that in itself is cause for action.

Given the existing armed conflicts, economic problems, displacement of people, and climate issues, the extinction of wild game is just one more new cause of hunger in the indigenous territories. It is increasing poverty levels, accentuating social problems, and creating new political problems. What should concern us about this scenario is that neither local governments nor conservationists are coming up with any strategies and actions to avoid disaster.

Photographs by Enrique De la Montana

Paul Tufino Mateus is a biologist from Ecuador who specializes in social and environmental issues.