Transcript of Web Audio Chat Featuring Andrés Ferrer

Director, The Nature Conservancy in the Dominican Republic

Peter in Tucson, Arizona:  As someone who spent many years in the northern neo-tropics, why wasn’t the issue of poverty and conservation brought forward as a topic of discussion at least 20 years ago?

Andrés Ferrer:  In the DR in the 70s and the 80s no one spoke about the environment.  We had the perception that we were surrounded by resources that would never be exhausted. We tend to see nature as a being that has our same life cycle, so we really tend to underestimate nature’s cycles. 

Now we are seeing the results of habitat destruction in terms of climate change.  We are seeing the sudden loss of hundred or even thousands of species, and I think that’s planted a red flag at some point.

In our specific case, eco-regional planning revealed that the major source of the most significant threats to our conservation targets was poverty.  So it was a clear signal that we needed to address poverty in the specific places where those resources were at most risk.

Jim Peterson:  You and The Nature Conservancy have joined with other groups in supporting projects that helped find new means for economic livelihoods for communities that also have significant conservation benefits. I wonder if you can talk a little bit about those projects.

Andrés Ferrer:  Yes, of course.  We identified, as I said before, poverty as a major source [of ecological destruction].  In the upper watershed of the Yuna and Blanco River, we had poverty over there. We had problems with invasives. We had goats running around in the park. And we had a plan that was introduced by a company that wanted to build hydroelectric infrastructure within the park.

So we were confronted with the need to remove those goats from the park because they were really increasing in number and exerting a great deal of pressure on the park. But at the same time the local communities needed those goats to sustain their well being.

One community member, a gentleman named Collado—an herbalist—started feeding goats caliandra.  Caliandra is an invasive species that was advancing pretty fast into the native forest. And all of a sudden we discovered that we could easily cut caliandra to make fences, fence the goats in that caliandra fence, and feed the goats with the leaves of the caliandra.
 
For me, this is a project that I cherish a lot, and that I visit every time I have the opportunity because we were getting rid of the goats within the national park, we were providing additional income to the peasants because they were able to have more goats in fences growing faster, and we helped keep in check the caliandra that is now controlled to some extent.

Also, at some point, we got the information from community leaders that many people were visiting national parks to go birding, but the tourists didn’t know where the birds were.  So we supported the creation of a network of friends of the birds -- Amigos de las Aves. 

In 27 communities neighboring national parks with sizeable population of birds, we conducted a census to identify people in the communities that love birds. And all of a sudden a number of kids and even mature people revealed their interest in birds. So those people received training in bird identification, and in bird watching.  They received binoculars and other gear, and all of a sudden we had a network.

Recently, we worked with the communities again to follow up. In one community everybody refers tourists to a man named Juan because he’s the one who knows where the Hispaniolan trogon is. That kind of thing is making a difference because not only are people making a better income, but they are assigning a value to bird populations because bird populations are resulting in an increase in their monthly income.

Alex from Rushville, Illinois:  While there are many benefits to the environment that can be gained by decreasing poverty, how does one balance these gains against the environmental costs of a higher standard of living?

Andrés Ferrer:  Well, that question really brings the discussion to a really big scale.  I would say we have a mission.  In simple terms, we are working to save the last, great places on earth, within the US, the DR or China or even Africa in the near future.  I am sure, I am confident, we are making progress at all ends.  Results attest to that.  But this is not an exclusive obligation of TNC

If we want to increase income for conservation, working in collaboration with others is a better way to get things done. And then there is the need of government and civil society also to influence a solid conservation ethic in every individual living on the planet.  I think promoting a solid conservation ethic in every individual, this alone will probably have more impact on climate change and species loss than anything big NGOs may do.

Christine from Chicago, Illinois:  Is the Conservancy planning to continue to use this approach in working with NGOs and the government in the Dominican Republic to address poverty issues and what other organizations are working in a similar fashion?

<< Previous   1 | 2 | 3 | 4    Next >>