Lessons from rhe comm"Jlïf"i[ï x:"y:;:fl;il * a gianr nsh,Arapaima gigas, in Gentral Guyana by Damian Fernandes submitted to the 4.tr?,itj? Graduate studies in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Natural Resources Management Natural Resources lnstitute clayton H. Riddell Faculty of Environment, Earth and Resources University of Manitoba Winnipeg, MB, Canada, R3T 2N2 @ October 2005 THT ¡1Y¡1¡BRSITY OF' MANITOBA FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES úúútú COPYRIGIIT PERN/ilSSION "More eyes wøtching..." Lessons from the community-based management of a giant fish, Arapaima gÍgas, in Central Guyana BY Damian Fernandes A Thesis/Practicum submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies of The University of Manitoba in partial fulfillment of the requirement of the degree of MASTER OF' NATURAL RESOT]RCES MANAGEMENT Damian tr'ernandes O 2006 Permission has been granted to the Library of the University of Manitoba to lend or sell copies of this thesis/practicum, to the National Library of Canada to microfilm this thesis and to lend or sell copies of the film, and to University Microfilms Inc. to publish an abstract of this thesis/practicum. This reproduction or copy of this thesis has been made available by authority of the copyright o\ryner solely for the purpose of private study and research, and may only be reproduced and copied as permitted by copyright laws or with express written authorization from the copyright owner. Abstract This study aims to identiff lessons in how community-based conservation can be facilitated. The problems and potential of community-based conservation can only be understood by examining the histories of projects where community-based management has been planned and implemented. This thesis is based on one such examination; a case- study of the Arapaima Management Project in Central Çuyana. The objectives of the study were to: a) investigate the role of community self-organisation in the development of the Project; b) examine the role of cross-scale institutional linkages in facilitating or hindering the Project; and c) identiff tools or interventions that can be used by NGOs and community organisations to increase governmental support for community-based conservation. Guyanese law forbids harvesting of the Arapaima gtgas, but is rarely enforced. The Project includes a community imposed harvesting ban, the formation of fisher groups at village and regional levels, a local monitoring program, river check points, and community education and awareness campaigns. The Project aims to implement a quota based harvesting system in the long term. Field data were collected from July to November 2003, using Rapid Rural Appraisal and semi-structured interviews. A total of thirfy-nine (n:39) semi-structured interviews targeting fishery committee members (40%) and Arapaima fishers (-10.5%) were carried out in ten (10) communities. Government officials and NGos representatives were also interviewed (n:6). To date surveyed Arapaima populations have increased threefold, suggesting that management is contributing to the conservation of the species. Transfer of management authority to the communities has stalled, largely due to lack of Government commitment at senior levels. Planned harvesting has therefore yet to occur, and no d.irect income has been generated by the initiative. Project activities appear to have influenced social nonns, resulting in informal social pressure that has been more effective in enforcing the ban than more formal mechanisms, many of which are non-functional. The initiative highlights that local self-organisation for community-based conservation may be best facilitated through: 1) problem definition that involves a fine-scale, community-level approach to capture the perspectives of resource users; 2) a core goup of dedicated and committed individuals; 3) extemal groups that act as key transformative forces; 4) culturally sensitive environmental education and associated changes in social norms; 5) community-based monitoring which draws upon local knowledge; and 6) stock recovery as a starting point for community involvement in management. Effective cross- scale linkages for community-based conservation may be encouraged by 7) individual relationships based on respect, trust and reciprocity; 8) involvement of organisations that can navigate within, and link between, multiple levels of organisation; and 9) State endorsement of community management authority. Some tools or interventions that can increase governmental support for community-based conservation include 10) Local participation in stock recovery; 1l) third body recognition and legitimization of community institutions; 12) appropriate training for researchers and managers to effectively navigate the political process; 13) interaction between fishers and Government; 14) activities that increase project visibility, and promote dialogue between Government and Project persorurel. In the end, successful community-based conservation may boil down to 15) a good understanding of the local culture and history of resource use in the area; 16) a recognition that effective management takes time to develop; and 17) the right ingredients at the right time. Acknowledgements Thanking everyone who helped me on this journey would require its own document. Although preparing such a document would certainly be gratifying, I will defer my gratification for the sake of practicality this once. Let me begin by thanking the people of the North Rupununi, who welcomed me into their homes and lives during my time in the communities. Without their participation and generosity this thesis would have been impossible, and I would not be the person I am today. Special thanks to the North Rupununi District Development Board, the Bina Hill Institute, Eugene Issacs, Emily Allicock, Ellen Davis and Paulette Allicock for their help, conversation and friendship. Thanks to the Iwokrama International Centre, especially Graham, Aiesha, Deidre, Indrannee, Odacy, Sambhu, Samantha and Shivon, for treating me like I never left, and giving me the space to grow both as a researcher and as an individual. In Canada, I would like to express my gratitude to the International Development Research Centre, the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council and the Canada Research Chairs program for their support. I would also like to thank the students and faculty of the Natural Resources Institute, in parLicular Julie, Jessica, Jane and Manju for making Winnipeg a little \¡/arrner. I would especially like to thank my advisor, Dr. Fikret Berkes, who was always generous with his wisdom, guidance and support I would also like to acknowledge my family. Thanks to Nanni, for staying with me, even after you left; and to my parents, Robert and Luana Fernandes, for always lending their wisdom, love and shoulders whenever I need them. Thanks to Guy for all your help, and for being there at every step. I worfd like to thank my brothers and sisters: Christina, for your inspiration and love; Robert, for being the best big brother I could want; Dominic, for making me a better person; Shad, for your special brand of advice; Nicolette, for listening and understanding; Chantelle, for loving me in spite of myself; and René, for helping me to keep the faith. I would also like to thank Lianne and Aisha for being there in the hard times. Finally, I apologise to all those not mentioned by name, and I am eternally grateful for your support, time and patience. Thanks everybody. iii To my parents, for øllowing me to dreøm. IV Table of Contents Abstroct Acknowledgements i¡¡ List of Figures, Tobles ond Boxes ... ....... viíi List of frequently used terms ond ocronyms ...... íx Chopter I - The journey begins .........1 1.1. Of giants and black water....... .................2 1-2. community-based conservation: tensions and possibilities .....,..........3 1.3. Study area and situational background............ ......6 1.2.1 The P1ace......... ........ 6 7.2.2 The People ..............6 1.2.3 The North Rupununi District Development Board. .. 1g 1.4. Purpose and Objectives........ ...................9 1.5. Methodology............ ...............9 1.6. Organisation of the thesis .................... l0 chopter ? - community, conservotíon...where to stort? . .... 11 2.1. lntroduction ........... .................12 2.2. Community-based conseryation........... ...........,.....12 2.3. Gommunity, local knowtedge and institutions.............. ....... l6 2.4. Biodiversity and sustainable livelihoods............ ...,..............21 2.5, Systems view, resilience and self-organisation ............. .....2g 2.6. Gross-scale linkages and co-management ..........27 2.7. Small-scale fisheries.............. ................31 2.8. Arapaima fisheries and management.... ............... 34 2.9. Literature summary ............... 3Z "Plenty Chopter 3 - goffing": Reseorch methods ...... 39 3.1. lntroduction ........... ................. 40 Philosophical and theoretical approach ................40 ?.?. participatory 3.3. Research techniques: and Rapid RuralAppraisal .........41 3.4. Getting ready to go ............... 43 3.4.1. Selecting the case-study and scope ........... 43 _ 1.4.2. Reading, reading, reading .......44 3.5. Flip-flops and mosquitoes - My time in the communities...................45 3.5.1. Getting acquainted with the land and people....... .......45 3.5.2. Collecting data.......... .............. 46 3.5'3' A lot of gaffing: informal interviews and discussions.......... ........47 3.5.4. Gettingtogether: