    [House Hearing, 107 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

        THE DEVELOPING CRISIS FACING WILDLIFE SPECIES DUE TO BUSHMEAT
                                  CONSUMPTION

    =======================================================================

                               OVERSIGHT HEARING

                                   before the

          SUBCOMMITTEE ON FISHERIES CONSERVATION, WILDLIFE AND OCEANS

                                     of the

                             COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES
                         U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                          ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS

                                 SECOND SESSION

                                   __________

                                 July 11, 2002

                                   __________

                               Serial No. 107-137

                                   __________

               Printed for the use of the Committee on Resources

     Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/
                                     house
                                       or
             Committee address: http://resourcescommittee.house.gov

                                     ______

    80-615              U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
                                WASHINGTON : 2003
    ____________________________________________________________________________
    For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
    Internet: bookstore.gpr.gov  Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
    Fax: (202) 512�092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402�090001

                             COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES

                        JAMES V. HANSEN, Utah, Chairman
           NICK J. RAHALL II, West Virginia, Ranking Democrat Member

    Don Young, Alaska,                   George Miller, California
      Vice Chairman                      Edward J. Markey, Massachusetts
    W.J. ``Billy'' Tauzin, Louisiana     Dale E. Kildee, Michigan
    Jim Saxton, New Jersey               Peter A. DeFazio, Oregon
    Elton Gallegly, California           Eni F.H. Faleomavaega, American
    John J. Duncan, Jr., Tennessee           Samoa
    Joel Hefley, Colorado                Neil Abercrombie, Hawaii
    Wayne T. Gilchrest, Maryland         Solomon P. Ortiz, Texas
    Ken Calvert, California              Frank Pallone, Jr., New Jersey
    Scott McInnis, Colorado              Calvin M. Dooley, California
    Richard W. Pombo, California         Robert A. Underwood, Guam
    Barbara Cubin, Wyoming               Adam Smith, Washington
    George Radanovich, California        Donna M. Christensen, Virgin
    Walter B. Jones, Jr., North              Islands
        Carolina                         Ron Kind, Wisconsin
    Mac Thornberry, Texas                Jay Inslee, Washington
    Chris Cannon, Utah                   Grace F. Napolitano, California
    John E. Peterson, Pennsylvania       Tom Udall, New Mexico
    Bob Schaffer, Colorado               Mark Udall, Colorado
    Jim Gibbons, Nevada                  Rush D. Holt, New Jersey
    Mark E. Souder, Indiana              Anibal Acevedo-Vila, Puerto Rico
    Greg Walden, Oregon                  Hilda L. Solis, California
    Michael K. Simpson, Idaho            Brad Carson, Oklahoma
    Thomas G. Tancredo, Colorado         Betty McCollum, Minnesota
    J.D. Hayworth, Arizona               Tim Holden, Pennsylvania
    C.L. ``Butch'' Otter, Idaho
    Tom Osborne, Nebraska
    Jeff Flake, Arizona
    Dennis R. Rehberg, Montana

                          Tim Stewart, Chief of Staff
               Lisa Pittman, Chief Counsel/Deputy Chief of Staff
                    Steven T. Petersen, Deputy Chief Counsel
                        Michael S. Twinchek, Chief Clerk
                     James H. Zoia, Democrat Staff Director
                   Jeffrey P. Petrich, Democrat Chief Counsel
                                     ------

           SUBCOMMITTE ON FISHERIES CONSERVATION, WILDLIFE AND OCEANS

                     WAYNE T. GILCHREST, Maryland, Chairman
               ROBERT A. UNDERWOOD, Guam, Ranking Democrat Member

    Don Young, Alaska                    Eni F.H. Faleomavaega, American
    W.J. ``Billy'' Tauzin, Louisiana         Samoa
    Jim Saxton, New Jersey,              Neil Abercrombie, Hawaii
      Vice Chairman                      Solomon P. Ortiz, Texas
    Richard W. Pombo, California         Frank Pallone, Jr., New Jersey
    Walter B. Jones, Jr., North
        Carolina
                                     ------
                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page

    Hearing held on July 11, 2002....................................     1

    Statement of Members:
        Gilchrest, Hon. Wayne T., a Representative in Congress from
          the State of Maryland......................................     1
            Prepared statement of....................................     2
        Underwood, Hon. Robert A., a Delegate in Congress from Guam,
          Prepared statement of......................................     3

    Statement of Witnesses:
        Agnagna, Marcellin, Chairman, CITES Bushmeat Working Group...    30
            Prepared statement of....................................    32
        Bakarr, Dr. Mohamed, Senior Technical Director, Center for
          Applied Biodiversity Science, Conservation International...    72
            Prepared statement of....................................    75
        Burnam, Jeffry M., Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for
          Environment, Bureau of Oceans and International
          Environmental and Scientific Affairs, U.S. Department of
          State......................................................     3
            Prepared statement of....................................     5
        Carroll, Dr. Richard W., Director, West and Central Africa
          and Madagascar Program, World Wildlife Fund................    57
            Prepared statement of....................................    59
        Graham, James A., Project Manager, Central Africa Regional
          Program for the Environment, U.S. Agency for International
          Development................................................    18
            Prepared statement of....................................    19
        Hutchins, Dr. Michael, Director, Department of Conservation
          and Science, American Zoo and Aquarium Association, and Co-
          Chairman, Bushmeat Crisis Task Force.......................    38
            Prepared statement of....................................    39
        Robinson, Dr. John G., Senior Vice President and Director,
          International Conservation, Wildlife Conservation Society..    68
            Prepared statement of....................................    70
        Stansell, Kenneth, Assistant Director for International
          Affairs, Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the
          Interior...................................................     6
            Prepared statement of....................................     8

    Additional materials supplied:
        Article ``Bushmeat and the Origin of HIV/AIDS'' submitted for
          the record.................................................    84
        Article ``Warfare on gorillas poses threat to survival''
          submitted for the record...................................    90
        Hoyt, Reginald, Senior Vice President, Conservation and
          Science, Philadelphia Zoo, Statement submitted for the
          record.....................................................    93

    OVERSIGHT HEARING ON THE DEVELOPING CRISIS FACING WILDLIFE SPECIES DUE
                            TO BUSHMEAT CONSUMPTION

                                  ----------

                            Thursday, July 11, 2002

                         U.S. House of Representatives

          Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans

                             Committee on Resources

                                 Washington, DC

                                  ----------

        The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 11:05 a.m., in
    room 1324, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Wayne T.
    Gilchrest [Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.

      STATEMENT OF THE HON. WAYNE GILCHREST, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
                  CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MARYLAND

        Mr. Gilchrest. The Subcommittee will come to order.
        Good morning, everyone. Thank you all so much for being
    here. We are looking forward to the testimony this morning for
    this hearing on the present crisis in the African bush trade
    problem, which I am sure is similar in nature in many other
    places around the world. But the present crisis warrants our
    focused attention and energy.
        According to the U.S.-based Bushmeat Crisis Task Force,
    hunters in Central Africa now kill more than a million metric
    tons of wildlife each year. The total value of the bushmeat
    trade has reached the staggering level of more than US$50
    million annually and potentially could grow to hundreds of
    millions of dollars in the next two decades. The trade has been
    called the ``most significant threat to wildlife in Africa
    today.''
        Among the animals prominently killed for the trade are
    forest elephants, gorillas, and chimpanzees. Each of these
    species is endangered and internationally protected, but unless
    we take steps, these flagships species could disappear forever.
    In fact, earlier this month poachers killed two adult female
    mountain gorillas in Rwanda. This is a tragedy for the species
    that is already on the brink of extinction.
        While no one would suggest that people in Africa should be
    denied the opportunity to feed their families, the
    international community must encourage the consumption of
    alternative sources of protein and the creation of other types
    of income-generating employment. According to Mr. Peter Walsh
    of the Wildlife Conservation Society, ``We're not talking about
    starving villagers needing meat. This is heavily organized
    commercial poaching where money is the motivation.'' In
    reality, a great deal of bushmeat is not even eaten by the
    indigenous population but by consumers who order it from menus
    at exotic restaurants in Paris, Tokyo, Taipei, and the United
    States.
        Furthermore, we are just beginning to understand the health
    implications of eating tainted bushmeat. Wildlife, particularly
    primates, harbor diseases which can jump between species and
    cause lethal diseases such as AIDS and Ebola.
        Our choices are quite simple. We can sit idly by and allow
    the crisis to exterminate wildlife species throughout Africa,
    or we can embrace the philosophy of E. O. Wilson who writes
    that ``Every scrap of biological diversity is priceless, to be
    learned and cherished, and never to be surrendered.'' I would
    choose this approach.
        We are here this morning to learn from the witnesses, who
    we can work with to create a strategy so that we will be
    prepared in this generation to meet the new ``Silent Spring''
    challenge. We will save every scrap of biodiversity that we
    can. And we will do it in an ever-increasing, wider team effort
    with the international community.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Gilchrest follows:]

           Statement of The Honorable Wayne T. Gilchrest, Chairman,
          Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans

        Good morning, today, the Subcommittee will conduct an unprecedented
    oversight hearing on the growing crisis of bushmeat consumption on
    various wildlife species.
        According to the U.S. based Bushmeat Crisis Task Force, hunters in
    Central Africa now kill more than a million metric tons of wildlife
    each year. The total value of the bushmeat trade has reached the
    staggering level of more than $50 million U.S. dollars annually. The
    trade has been called the ``most significant threat to wildlife in
    Africa today''.
        Among the animals prominently killed for the trade are forest
    elephants, gorillas and chimpanzees. Each of these species is
    endangered and internationally protected but unless steps are taken,
    these flagship species will disappear forever. In fact, earlier this
    month, poachers killed two adult female mountain gorillas in Rwanda.
    This is a horrible tragedy for a species that is already on the brink
    of extinction.
        While no one would suggest that people in Africa should be denied
    the opportunity to feed their families, the international community
    must encourage the consumption of alternative sources of protein and
    the creation of other types of income generating employment. According
    to Mr. Peter Walsh, of the Wildlife Conservation Society, ``We're not
    talking about starving villagers needing meat. This is heavily
    organized commercial poaching where money is the motivation''. In
    reality, a great deal of bushmeat is not even eaten by the indigenous
    population but by consumers who order it from menus at exotic
    restaurants in Paris, Tokyo, Taipei and in the United States.
        Furthermore, we are just beginning to understand the health
    implications of eating tainted bushmeat. Wildlife, particularly
    primates, harbor diseases which can jump between species and cause
    lethal diseases such as AIDS and Ebola. Our choices are quite simple.
    We can sit idly by and allow this crisis to exterminate wildlife
    species throughout Africa or we can embrace the philosophy of E. O.
    Wilson who writes that ``every scrap of biological diversity is
    priceless, to be learned and cherished, and never to be surrendered''.
    I choose this approach because each species is vital to the future
    survival of the ecosystem of the continent.
        While I do not have the answer on how to solve the bushmeat crisis,
    I am confident that our distinguished witnesses will shed some light
    and will propose some potential solutions to this vexing problem.
        I am now pleased to recognize my friend, the distinguished
    gentleman from Guam, Congressman Robert Underwood.
                                     ______

        Mr. Gilchrest. At this point I ask unanimous consent that
    the gentleman from Guam, Mr. Underwood's statement be put into
    the record.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Underwood follows:]

    Statement of The Honorable Robert A. Underwood, a Delegate in Congress
                                   from Guam

        Good morning, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for holding this hearing on
    the bushmeat crisis in Africa. I look forward to hearing from the
    experts about what the United States and the international community
    can do to stop the wanton extermination of Africa's wildlife.
        At first glance, this problem is simply appalling. Our closest
    relatives, the Great Apes, with complex human-like social behavior, are
    on the brink of extinction. Africa's diverse populations of mammals,
    reptiles, and invertebrates are being decimated. In one example, a
    single logging camp of 648 people in the Republic of Congo can harvest
    8,251 animals annually, or the equivalent of 124 tons of wild meat.
        Experts contend that the motivation for the consumption of bushmeat
    varies from hunger and poverty to cultural traditions to sport. A
    growing luxury market in urban centers for bushmeat is another ominous
    threat.
        Regrettably, the problem appears intractable. The only way to find
    solutions is to ask the experts. And perhaps, our only hope to achieve
    success may be to engage many types of organizations, including
    commercial entities or industries operating in remote areas, that have
    access to both financial resources and local people.
        I contend that strong leadership by the United States is necessary
    on this front. As you know, Mr. Chairman, I have been in support of,
    and worked closely with you to reauthorize, several international
    conservation laws. I have also supported increased funding for the
    Multinational Species Conservation Fund.
        We have the opportunity today to learn about a topic that could
    become one of the world's great environmental tragedies. My hope is
    that we will be spurred on to take more purposeful action.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for creating this forum for discussion. I
    trust that this hearing is only the first of many discussions in this
    Committee and in the Congress.
                                     ______

        Mr. Gilchrest. And since I am alone up here on the dais and
    the staff probably don't have any opening statements to make in
    public, we will start the hearing.
        Our first witness is Mr. Jeffry Burnam, Deputy Assistant
    Secretary for the Environment, Bureau of Oceans and
    International Environment and Scientific Affairs with the
    Department of State; Dr. Kenneth Stansell, Assistant Director
    for International Affairs, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
    Department of Interior; and Mr. James Graham, Project Manager,
    Central Africa Regional Program for the Environment, USAID
    Bureau of Africa.
        Good morning, gentlemen. Mr. Burnam, you may begin, sir.

      STATEMENT OF JEFFRY BURNAM, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR
     ENVIRONMENT, BUREAU OF OCEANS AND INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL
            AND SCIENTIFIC AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE

        Mr. Burnam. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the
    opportunity to share with you the Department of State's views
    on the international aspects of the growing problem of bushmeat
    consumption, which you highlighted in your opening remarks.
    With your permission, I would like to submit my full statement
    for the record and only read portions of it.
        Mr. Gilchrest. Without objection, so ordered.
        Mr. Burnam. On a recent trip to the Republic of Congo, I
    saw firsthand the seriousness of the large-scale bushmeat
    consumption problem. I had the opportunity to visit a pilot
    project where a forestry concessionaire and a local community
    were working together to help control poaching in a buffer zone
    around a reserve. I believe that this pilot project suggests
    that there are many opportunities in Central Africa to work
    effectively with logging companies to help control activities
    that have an adverse impact on forests and wildlife.
        As you pointed out, the scale of bushmeat consumption is
    threatening the survival of species such as elephants,
    gorillas, and chimpanzees in Africa. While bushmeat provides
    animal protein and a source of income for many families, the
    bushmeat trade has recently increased dramatically. Concession
    logging is an important activity in many of these countries.
    However, it must be properly managed because concession logging
    results in construction of roads as well as in the migration of
    populations into previously undisturbed and remote forest
    areas. In the pilot project I visited in the Republic of Congo,
    for example, there were only a few hundred villagers in the
    area prior to the opening of the logging concession, but now
    there are four or five thousand employees of the logging
    concession, so you can imagine the impact those additional
    people have on bushmeat consumption.
        The threat to wildlife from the bushmeat trade is also
    related to political, social, and economic issues. In the Congo
    Basin, wildlife harvesting is occurring beyond sustainable
    levels. The illegal trade in wildlife often goes hand in hand
    with illegal logging and with lack of respect for the rule of
    law and good governance.
        The Department of State has taken a number of steps to
    address these concerns. The project which I visited in Congo
    (Brazzaville) is supported by the Department of State, by the
    International Tropical Timber Organization, and by the United
    States Agency for International Development through the CARPE
    program. Nongovernmental and private partners include the
    Wildlife Conservation Society, the Columbus Zoo, and the
    logging concessionaire itself. The pilot project employs local
    people as ``eco-guards.'' It provides income for communities
    living on the edge of a national park, and it provides a means
    to enforce the forestry and wildlife laws.
        Two aspects of the project I found particularly interesting
    were the attempts to develop alternative sources of protein for
    the local residents, and then, second, employees of the logging
    company, who are, for the most part, the residents of the area,
    are penalized if they violate the poaching laws. So you can be
    fined if you are an employee and you violate the laws against
    hunting, and there have even been some that have been
    dismissed. So this buffer zone around the national park is
    actually very helpful in protecting the national park because
    it provides an effective way of reducing poaching and other
    threats to wildlife in the area.
        In the CITES convention, a Bushmeat Working Group was set
    up which the Department of State has supported. We have also
    supported the work of the Bushmeat Crisis Task Force. And our
    own, my Bureau of OES has worked with the Bushmeat Crisis Task
    Force in Central Africa, and CARPE, and there is a workshop in
    Brazzaville at the end of this month and the beginning of next
    month which should be very promising because it will review the
    progress of a number of pilot projects in the area and get
    people together to focus on an awareness of the issues
    involved.
        State considers commercial harvesting of bushmeat a
    significant biodiversity issue. We are committed to working
    with partners, both domestically and internationally, to
    address the problem. In general, I believe there are four areas
    we can focus on for international collaboration to address this
    problem, which, as you point out, is badly in need of focused
    attention.
        First would be education about the bushmeat problem,
    education in the concept of sustainability. The Columbus Zoo
    was involved in the education aspect of this particular
    project;
        Working through international organizations and agreements;
        Encouraging further pilot programs, and I only mention this
    particular one because I visited it, but there are other
    programs. The World Wildlife Fund will testify to pilot
    programs that are similar in nature;
        And, of course, educating those consumers in the fancy
    restaurants about the impacts of their consumption on the
    bushmeat trade.
        Mr. Chairman, effective solutions to the bushmeat problem
    require a multifaceted approach. We all share the common goal
    of preserving biological diversity for future generations. Our
    ability to do so depends upon devising practical measures to
    move science and policy toward that end.
        Thank you very much for the opportunity to testify, and I
    would, of course, be pleased to answer any questions that you
    may have.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Burnam follows:]

      Statement of Jeffry Burnam, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for
       Environment, Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and
                  Scientific Affairs, U.S. Department of State

        Thank you for the opportunity to share the Department of State's
    views on the international aspects of the growing problem of bushmeat
    consumption.
        On a recent trip to the Republic of Congo, I saw firsthand the
    seriousness of the large-scale bushmeat consumption problem. I had the
    opportunity to visit a pilot project where a forestry concessionaire
    and a local community were working together to help control poaching in
    a buffer zone around a reserve. I believe that this pilot project
    suggests that there are many opportunities in Central Africa to work
    effectively with logging companies to help control activities that have
    an impact on forests and wildlife.
        The scale of bushmeat consumption is threatening the survival of
    species such as elephants, gorillas and chimpanzees in Africa. While
    bushmeat provides animal protein and a source of income for many
    families, the bushmeat trade has recently increased dramatically.
    Concession logging is an important economic activity in many of these
    countries. However, it must be properly managed because concession
    logging results in construction of roads and the migration of
    population into previously undisturbed and remote forest areas. These
    factors, combined with the development of social and economic networks
    to support the bushmeat industry and an increasing demand
    internationally, have transformed bushmeat harvesting from a
    subsistence activity into a commercial enterprise.
        The United States recognizes the cultural and nutritional needs of
    many communities who use bushmeat for subsistence. Our concern is that
    the large-scale, unregulated and illegal trade in bushmeat could lead
    to extinction of many wildlife species and irreversible impacts on
    African ecosystems.
        The threat to wildlife from the bushmeat trade is intimately
    related to political, social and economic issues. In the Congo Basin,
    wildlife harvesting is occurring beyond sustainable levels. The illegal
    trade in wildlife often goes hand in hand with illegal logging and with
    lack of respect for the rule of law and good governance.
        The Department of State has taken a number of steps to address
    these concerns. The project which I visited in the Republic of Congo is
    supported by the Department of State, by the International Tropical
    Timber Organization (ITTO) and by the United States Agency for
    International Development through its Central African Regional Program
    for the Environment (CARPE). Nongovernmental (NGO) and private partners
    include the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS), the Columbus Zoo and
    the logging concessionaire itself, the Consortium Industrielle Des Bois
    (C.I.B.) This pilot project employs local people as ``eco-guards'' to
    protect against commercial-scale bushmeat hunting. It provides income
    for communities living on the edge of a national park and a means to
    enforce the forestry and wildlife laws.
        The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild
    Fauna and Flora (CITES) set up a Bushmeat Working Group to promote
    awareness of the issue of cross-border trade in bushmeat, which the
    Department of State supported. The United States has also supported the
    work of a coordinating NGO, the Bushmeat Crisis Task Force, which works
    with governments and concerned NGOs to address the bushmeat crisis in
    Africa. I understand that the Bushmeat Crisis Task Force has recently
    secured several grants from private foundations and from the U.S. Fish
    and Wildlife Service to assist six Central African governments in
    addressing the bushmeat crisis.
        At the Department of State, our Bureau of Oceans and International
    Environmental and Scientific Affairs (OES) has supported the Bushmeat
    Crisis Task Force's work in Central Africa in conjunction with the
    Central African Regional Program for the Environment (CARPE). We are
    also helping to sponsor a workshop on wildlife management and
    conservation in timber concessions in Central Africa in August 2002,
    focusing in particular on raising the awareness of government policy
    makers and regulators on the relevance of these issues to sustainable
    forest management.
        The Department of State considers commercial harvesting of bushmeat
    for widespread consumption a significant biodiversity issue and is
    committed to working with partners domestically and abroad to address
    the problems associated with it, including in the context of
    sustainable development. In general, further international
    collaboration on this issue could include:
          LEducating governments, forest concessionaires, and local people
    about the bushmeat problem and empowering them to understand the
    concept of sustainability in terms of wildlife harvest.

          LWorking through international agreements such as CITES, CBD and
    ITTO to further efforts to control the illegal commercial bushmeat
    trade.

          LEncouraging governments, forest concessionaires, and local
    communities to take responsibility and put programs in place for
    maintaining viable and sustainable wildlife populations.
          LEducating consumers internationally about the impacts of the
    bushmeat trade on wildlife populations.
        Mr. Chairman, effective solutions to the bushmeat problem require a
    multifaceted approach that addresses the fundamental social, political
    and economic causes of the problem. We all share the common goal of
    preserving biological diversity for future generations. Our ability to
    do so depends upon devising practical measures to move science and
    policy towards this end.
        Thank you very much. I would be happy to answer any questions that
    you may have.
                                     ______

        Mr. Gilchrest. Thank you, Mr. Burnam.
        Dr. Stansell?

         STATEMENT OF KENNETH STANSELL, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR
        INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS, FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, U.S.
                       DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

        Dr. Stansell. Good morning, Mr. Chairman. I, too,
    appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today to
    present the views of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on the
    growing crisis of illegal bushmeat consumption in Africa. We
    have provided our written testimony for the record, so today I
    would like to make a few brief remarks highlighting the causes,
    current Service activities, and additional measures that we
    feel may be needed.
        The illegal commercial killing of wildlife, particularly
    threatened and endangered species, is certainly not unique to
    Africa. However, it is in Central and West Africa that world
    attention has been focused on the serious threat to the
    survival of great apes throughout the region. The lives of
    humans and wildlife in Africa are intimately entwined. Many
    rural communities must utilize wildlife resources to satisfy
    their basic needs. Therefore, it is important to make clear a
    distinction between the legal harvest of wildlife on a
    sustainable basis and the unsustainable and illegal commercial
    exploitation that now exists in many parts of Africa.
        The underlying factors driving this exploitation include
    social and political unrest, lack of adequate protected areas
    for wildlife, inadequate law enforcement, lack of management
    capacity in range countries, and a staggering increase in
    demand.
        Roads are built for harvesting timber, penetrating
    previously inaccessible forests. Poachers have the increasing
    availability of technology: large-caliber automatic weapons and
    steel snares. The result is a greatly enhanced ability to kill,
    process, and transport large quantities of bushmeat to meet an
    ever-increasing demand.
        Dozens of species, both common and endangered, are being
    exploited at unsustainable rates. Long-lived and slow-
    reproducing species, such as the great apes and elephants, are
    among the hardest hit. Chimps and gorillas are particularly
    prized and often command the highest prices in faraway markets.
    Through our International Affairs Program, the Service actively
    participates in a number of activities with a wide range of
    partners, some that you will hear from today. These include
    other Federal agencies, governments of other countries, and
    national and international NGO's. Through our leadership role
    in the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species,
    we have supported efforts to bring this issue to a global
    forum, resulting in the establishment of a working group that
    very importantly includes the affected range countries to
    explore ways to address the illegal trade and bring attention
    to the conditions that foster it.
        Also, through our Multinational Species Conservation Funds
    particularly for African elephants and great apes, the Service
    is supporting a number of on-the-ground projects. Our focus is
    two-pronged: helping to foster local community awareness of the
    need to manage wildlife sustainably for the long run, and
    working with our counterpart agencies in range countries,
    helping to build law enforcement capacity and, where
    appropriate, to support development of effective systems for
    legal hunting and trade in the near term.
        Through the witnesses today, this Committee will hear a
    great deal about the crisis and what is being currently done.
    Regrettably, however, much more remains. We should sustain and
    enhance these ongoing collaborative efforts. They are making a
    difference. But we also must address more effectively the
    underlying causes of this crisis, such as the lack of adequate
    wildlife monitoring and sustainable management, inadequate
    systems of protected areas, and, importantly, the need for
    capacity building.
        Range states and local communities must be provided the
    tools to allow for greater enforcement of existing laws and
    technical assistance to support wildlife conservation that is
    sustainable, based both on science and the practical realities.
        Mr. Chairman, the Service appreciates your interest in this
    critical problem, and we look forward to working with you to
    find solutions to this growing crisis. I, too, would be pleased
    to respond to any questions that you might have. Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Dr. Stansell follows:]

      Statement of Kenneth Stansell, Assistant Director for International
      Affairs, Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior

        Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I am
    Kenneth Stansell, Assistant Director for International Affairs for the
    U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. I appreciate the opportunity to present
    testimony for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on the issue of
    illegal bushmeat consumption in Africa. My testimony will provide the
    Subcommittee with information regarding the causes of the problems, and
    the Service's role in wildlife conservation in Africa and how it helps
    reduce the bushmeat trade. I will also suggest additional measures to
    address the issue.

    Background
        Humans and wildlife in Africa share a long and intimately entwined
    relationship. Many rural communities utilize wildlife resources to
    satisfy nutritional, economic, and cultural needs. Some communities are
    almost entirely dependent on wildlife for their subsistence. Meat from
    domestic species, sometimes imported over long distances, is usually
    more expensive in remote areas. Livestock husbandry is extremely
    limited in the forest zone, and even when present, domestic animals are
    usually utilized as a living bank account (i.e. to be bought and sold)
    rather than as a sustained source of animal protein through
    consumption. Urban dwellers are reported to maintain a preference for
    meat from wild animals over available domestic meat such as beef, fish,
    and poultry, and indulge this preference if it is affordable. The
    contrast between the consumption of wildlife in urban centers and in
    rural areas, and between legal and illegal exploitation of wildlife,
    require careful qualification in the context of this discussion. The
    Service would like to make clear the distinction between the legal
    harvesting of wildlife on a sustainable basis and the unsustainable,
    illegal trade that exists in many parts of Africa on such an enormous
    scale.
        The conservation community refers to the problem under discussion
    as at the Illegal Commercial Trade in Bushmeat,@ to distinguish it from
    legal, small-scale hunting for subsistence and use by local populations
    in the areas of production. Dozens of species, from rodents to
    elephants, and including numerous endangered and threatened species,
    are utilized in the bushmeat trade. [A list of such species is
    attached.] Legally harvested bushmeat forms a major component of many
    rural household economies and is a vital source of protein,
    particularly in rural areas in the forest zone, where alternatives are
    few or expensive. However, the continued legal utilization of bushmeat
    by local populations is threatened by illegal commercial-scale
    exploitation.
        Outside traders export large quantities of illegally, and legally,
    taken bushmeat from areas of production using modern technology such as
    firearms, wire snares, and transport on motor vehicles. Local hunters
    are often stuck in a cycle of indebtedness to these traders who, along
    with market sellers, acquire the major share of profits from the
    bushmeat trade. It is important to note that some cultures, such as the
    numerous BaAka Pygmy groups indigenous to the Central Africa region,
    are at risk of extinction as a result of shifting economies and the
    advent of the commercial bushmeat trade. The underlying factors driving
    the bushmeat trade lack of adequate protected areas for wildlife, lack
    of protein and economic alternatives for rural people, lack of law
    enforcement capacity in regional governments, and increasing demand for
    bushmeat must be addressed if the current unsustainable and destructive
    practices are to be effectively managed. This requires an innovative
    collaborative effort not only by governments and conservation
    professionals, but also development experts from throughout the global
    community.
        The bushmeat problem is by no means unique to Africa; it is
    widespread throughout Asia and Latin America as well. However, it is in
    Central and West Africa that world attention has been focused on the
    illegal, commercial killing of wildlife for meat and its impacts on
    both faunal integrity and ecosystem functions. Due to the low
    productivity of tropical forest ecosystems, the impacts of poaching
    over a relatively short period are threatening many species with local
    extinction and some species, such as the Great Apes, with extinction in
    much of their range.
        An important question to consider is, what has changed in Africa to
    cause such a steep decline in wildlife populations? People have hunted
    and eaten wildlife throughout known history, but until recently, large
    areas still contained significant wildlife populations. However,
    economic, technological, and social conditions have changed in ways
    that make a once localized phenomenon widespread across the continent.
        Over history, it is likely there were periodic local increases and
    decreases of hunting pressure and wildlife population levels. Recent
    decades have seen a dramatic increase in human population growth rates
    in Africa and a corresponding increase in demand for meat. Wildlife
    populations may now be unable to reproduce sufficiently to keep up with
    this growing demand. They are being adversely affected by a combination
    of over harvest and reduced availability of undisturbed habitat.
        The introduction of modern cash economies and transport networks to
    once isolated, traditional communities puts a monetary value and trade
    mechanism on what had been only locally consumed and shared. This
    opportunity for earning income in areas where virtually no alternatives
    exist provides motivation for hunting that exceeds meeting the basic
    needs of family or community. Studies have clearly shown that in some
    places where economies are rapidly developing, there is an increase in
    available income. A increase in the demand for and the consumption of
    bushmeat usually follows.
        Another economic change in some areas of Central Africa that
    exacerbates the crisis is the collapse of commodity prices on the world
    market for crops such as cacao. Previously productive plantations now
    stand idle and overgrown in many places. Even crops such as oil palm
    nuts are now produced and shipped more efficiently in West Africa or
    Asia, thereby rendering these economic alternatives unattractive.
        Another cause of the problem is the ease of access to wildlife
    populations. Historically, access to distant tracts of forest was very
    difficult, and the ability of poachers to kill, process, and transport
    large quantities of bushmeat was limited. Today, roads penetrate into
    previously inaccessible forests. In addition, the technology used to
    kill wildlife has also changed dramatically in recent times.
        Underlying these changes in Africa is the political and social
    backdrop. Recent decades have seen abrupt and unpredictable, as well as
    chronic civil conflict. With the breakdown of law and the displacement
    of large numbers of people, hunting for bushmeat increases
    dramatically. This is well illustrated in recent years in the
    Democratic Republic of the Congo, formerly Zaire. National parks and
    protected areas are settled by refugees and rebel soldiers who turn to
    wildlife for money and sustenance. Enormous commercial operations in
    the eastern parts of that country even export bushmeat northward to
    countries that have already exterminated their wildlife.
        The effects of the over harvest of wildlife for the commercial
    bushmeat market may include species extinction over large areas or
    entire ecosystems. Some species are more vulnerable than others. Long-
    lived and slow-reproducing species such as elephants and apes are the
    hardest hit. Elephants are usually the first species to be taken when a
    new area is opened to bushmeat hunting. Until recently, elephants were
    poached primarily for ivory, with their meat being a by-product for
    local consumption or left in the forest. Now, because of the increased
    demand for bushmeat, and the ease with which it can be transported and
    sold often across international borders bushmeat commerce may be a
    greater threat to the remaining elephant herds than ivory trading.
        Gorillas, chimpanzees and bonobos are all illegally hunted for
    bushmeat, and they are particularly sensitive to disturbance. As
    species populations come under illegal hunting pressure, they often
    move into the territory of a neighboring population. This may provoke
    additional stress, including fighting, among individuals from the two
    groups. Because of the slow reproductive rate, the loss of even a few
    percent of a population of these species each year over long periods is
    sufficient to drive species such as the bonobo to local extinction.
    Chimpanzee and gorillas are prized by some bushmeat consumers and often
    fetch the highest price on the market. Some hunters specialize in
    hunting apes with devastating effects on local populations.
        Many more endangered or threatened species are also victims of
    over-exploitation, including numerous species of monkeys and three
    species of crocodiles. Thousands of dwarf crocodiles are captured each
    year in some areas and shipped live to markets in urban centers days or
    weeks away by riverboat. Our Congolese colleagues inform us that dwarf
    crocodile numbers are plummeting, and they now are absent from much of
    their range. This carries serious implications for the aquatic
    ecosystem.

    Role of the Fish and Wildlife Service
        The Service is an active participant in a variety of conservation
    activities with a range of partners in the governments of developing
    countries and with international and national non-governmental
    organizations. The Service is responsible for the implementation of the
    African Elephant Conservation Act of 1989 and the African Elephant
    Conservation Fund (AfECF) created by the Act, as well as the Great Ape
    Conservation Act of 2000 and Great Ape Conservation Fund (GACF) created
    by that Act. With authority under these and two additional
    Multinational Species Conservation Acts, the Service is forging
    effective working relationships with range country governments and non-
    governmental organizations (NGO) active throughout Africa and Asia. Our
    Division of International Conservation is also a partner in U.S. Agency
    for International Development (USAID)'s Central African Regional
    Program for the Environment (CARPE), a collaboration of US-based NGOs
    and government agencies working for conservation in the Central Africa
    forest zone. Our experience in working with partners to conserve and
    manage wildlife and their habitats in Africa continues to grow. Through
    our involvement on the ground and in developing networks, the Service
    has gained some valuable but alarming consciousness about serious
    wildlife conservation issues.

    The African Elephant Conservation Act
        Central Africa has been a major focus of technical and financial
    support through AfECF. One project developed and implemented in
    cooperation with the World Wildlife Fund and the government of the
    Central African Republic emphasizes conservation of elephants and their
    habitats in protected areas such as the Dzanga-Ndoki National Park.
    During the course of this project, an ecoguard force was trained and
    equipped, and thousands of wire snares and dozens of illegal firearms
    have been confiscated. Work with local communities has also led to a
    better understanding, and increased level of cooperation, among
    villagers and park personnel. The control of illegal bushmeat trade has
    been greatly improved through this project.
        AfECF funds two important bushmeat control projects in the Republic
    of Congo, both led by the Wildlife Conservation Society and the
    Congolese Ministry of Water and Forests. One is a seminal project to
    regulate bushmeat production and trade in a logging concession south of
    the Nouabale-Ndoki National Park in northern Congo. In addition to
    controlling bushmeat poaching and traffic, the project is making
    significant progress developing a model for the relationship among a
    logging company, local communities and hunters, and an international
    conservation NGO to minimize illegal trade in bushmeat. The model will
    play an important role in the re-examination of policies and
    regulations relating to logging concessions to address wildlife
    management and exploitation concerns.
        The other project is in the Lac Tele Community Forest Reserve in
    the northern Congo. Because there are few roads in this remote area,
    the river network is used to illegally transport large quantities of
    bushmeat northward to markets in the Central African Republic. The
    AfECF grant assists the reserves warden and his team from the Ministry
    of Water and Forests with controlling key points in the river system
    that traverses the reserve. In addition, the project has a community
    awareness component that seeks to inform villagers of the need to
    conserve wildlife for the long-term, rather than merely as a means for
    immediate reward.
        These three examples of joint projects pursued under AfECF
    demonstrate that there are ways to help build law enforcement capacity
    among African government agencies, and to support the development of
    effective legal hunting and trade regulation systems in the near term.
        In the longer term, the training and education provided by these
    projects will yield sustained benefits to conservation efforts. As the
    ability of the government to analyze and deal with emerging problems
    increases, more effective conservation will follow.

    The Great Ape Conservation Act
        The GACF currently supports 18 projects in 15 countries in Africa.
    An integral component of some of these projects is conservation
    education and bushmeat awareness programs. These programs inform local
    communities that the Great Apes are often targeted as bushmeat species,
    and are particularly hard-hit by poaching. The Cameroon Wildlife Aid
    Fund, a national NGO with a conservation education program at the
    Yaounde Zoo, runs a project that educated an urban audience about the
    bushmeat trade and its impact on apes and other wildlife. This project
    is particularly valuable because urban audiences have been largely
    neglected in most countries in Central Africa.
        Another important contribution to public awareness of the crisis is
    a wide-reaching project in partnership with the Bonobo Conservation
    Initiative (BCI). BCI a small international NGO that is working with
    the government of the Democratic Republic of Congo, local NGOs, and
    communities in the area to the north of Salonga National Park. The
    Salonga area and its surroundings comprise the entire range of the
    bonobo. Therefore, protection and management of the area is critical to
    the survival of the species. This BCI program studies bonobo
    distribution north of Salonga NP and has a major component to exchange
    information with communities about the threat posed to bonobos by
    poaching. The BCI also plans a major radio campaign to raise awareness
    at a national level and has established an excellent working
    relationship with Congolese governmental agencies.
        The Service's Division of International Conservation is a CARPE
    partner and is now in its second year of working with many partners
    from government agencies, NGOs and academia. Our broad range of
    partners include U.S. Department of Agriculture/Forest Service, Peace
    Corps, and the National Aeronautic and Space Administration (NASA);
    World Wildlife Fund, Wildlife Conservation Society, Conservation
    International, African Wildlife Foundation, World Resources Institute,
    and Innovative Resources Management; and, the University of Maryland.
    The focus of the Service's efforts under USAID's CARPE project is to
    support the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species
    (CITES) Bushmeat Working Group (CBWG). The CBWG was formed in response
    to an adopted proposal at the Eleventh CITES Conference of the Parties,
    April 2000. The proposal's mandate is to find ways to address the
    illegal trade in endangered and threatened species (CITES Appendices I
    and II) across international borders as bushmeat, and the conditions
    that foster illegal trade in the countries from which the animals
    originate.
        The CBWG is composed of representatives from six Central African
    countries including the Central African Republic, the Republic of Congo
    (Brazzaville), the Democratic Republic of the Congo (Kinshasa), Gabon,
    Cameroon, and Equatorial Guinea. The national representatives are the
    heads of the respective wildlife divisions, and each country has an
    appointed national bushmeat officer. A regional coordinator is planned
    for Yaounde, Cameroon, who will work with the member countries to
    develop and execute a series of priority actions to address this trade.
    In addition, the CBWG Regional Coordinator will work closely with the
    CITES-Monitoring of Illegally Killed Elephants Coordinator for Central
    Africa to assure a harmonization of effort regarding monitoring of
    elephant killing and law enforcement patrols.
        The Service is working with the governments of these six range
    countries, the United Kingdom, and international NGOs such as the
    Bushmeat Crisis Task Force, to support the CBWG and its work. Current
    efforts include: national wildlife policy reviews; understanding the
    nature and details of the production sites, transport routes and means,
    border crossing points, and other information that can be used to
    control the illegal trade; a study on the status of various regulatory
    mechanisms within forestry concessions, how they are designed and work,
    and how they can be improved; and, ways to improve information exchange
    and the harmonizing of laws among countries in the Central African sub-
    region. In addition, the CBWG will be responsible for developing and
    implementing a region-wide awareness campaign regarding the bushmeat
    trade, which has been identified as a critically important and
    effective mechanism for effecting beneficial change in behaviors with
    regard to wildlife use.

    Recommendations
        The Service recommends the following to address the bushmeat
    problem: (1) sustaining collaborative efforts such as the Multinational
    Species Conservation Acts and CARPE Partnership; (2) Central African
    wildlife policy review and revision, wildlife monitoring and
    sustainable management, and strengthening the protected areas system in
    Central Africa; and (3) licensing and regulation of hunting seasons and
    wildlife trade should be based on science and practicality.
        In Central Africa, as elsewhere on the continent, laws exist to
    regulate hunting and commercial exploitation of wildlife and other
    forest products. Certain species cannot be hunted, such as the great
    apes; and some areas are off limits to hunters, such as national parks
    and other protected areas. In some countries there are closed hunting
    seasons, and legal methods of hunting and quotas for some species are
    limited. In most areas, hunters must be licensed and their firearms
    registered by the authorities. In other places, hunters may only employ
    traditional means such as crossbows, spears, or nets made of natural
    fibers. Although the law regulates the commercialization of wildlife,
    the means to enforce laws and to regulate hunting and trade in wildlife
    products is very limited. Enforcement of existing laws is needed to
    regulate hunting and trade so that it is sustainable over the long
    term.
        The CBWG, in cooperation with the CARPE partnership, will conduct
    policy review and revision in the coming year. Within existing
    resources, the Service will examine ways to further support this work
    with technical advice and to assist the range states, when asked, to
    develop optimal wildlife policies that are harmonized across the sub-
    region.
        In order for wildlife to be sustainably used for food or
    recreation, monitoring of populations, including threats, health
    status, off-take, and habitat condition, must be carried out. The
    Service supports monitoring elephant populations in this area through
    the CITES Monitoring of the Illegal Killing of Elephants (MIKE)
    project. As part of this program, information acquisition,
    transmission, storage, analysis, and interpretation is being developed.
    This approach is an efficient way to monitor certain bushmeat species
    in key areas. Within existing resources, the Service could be of
    assistance in building these essential capacities among range states
    and local communities. Linking this effort and the CBWG mandate would
    enable a harmonization of efforts and efficient use of limited
    resources and personnel.
        Protected areas form the nucleus of wildlife management in Central
    Africa, and may play a vital role in a source and sink@ model. This
    model describes a system that allows protected areas to act as a
    sources@ of wildlife, that when reaching carrying capacity, could move
    outward into multi-use forests, where they could be sustainable
    harvested by local people. This model requires sound scientific
    information, including wildlife monitoring, socioeconomic information
    about local conditions and attitudes, and the ability to regulate
    hunting and trade.
        In some respects this situation is not unlike that which faced the
    United States prior to the institution of scientific wildlife
    management in the 1920s and 1930s. At that time market hunting and loss
    of habitat had eliminated or nearly eliminated many species here in the
    United States. Initiatives taken by American hunters and their
    organizations led to the Migratory Bird Treaty, creation of State fish
    and wildlife agencies, the Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration program,
    and establishment of National Wildlife Refuges and state wildlife
    management areas to protect habitat.
        With the resulting increase in knowledge of how to manage wildlife,
    dependable funding and continuing strong support from the hunting
    community, even once severely depleted species of game animals are now
    plentiful. Few Americans, even hunters, know that there were fewer than
    500,000 white-tailed deer in the entire United States in the 1920s, and
    that most States east of the Mississippi had no or very limited deer
    seasons. At that time, hunting of wood ducks was banned, and it was
    feared they would go extinct. They are now the most common breeding
    waterfowl in the East.
        While the American conservation experience cannot be transplanted
    wholesale to Africa, we have acquired a tremendous body of knowledge
    relating both to wildlife management and to fostering a conservation
    ethic among the hunting community which can serve as models to be
    adapted to local conditions elsewhere. Equally important, we know from
    our own experience that these measures can work.
        Finally, although anecdotal evidence identifies there is an
    existing problem concerning importation of bushmeat into the United
    States, there has yet to be a definitive review of the extent of the
    problem. It is important to work with partners internationally to
    identify how bushmeat is entering the United States and to develop
    training programs for customs agents in the countries of origin to
    control the export of bushmeat from the source.
        Mr. Chairman, the Service appreciates your interest in the critical
    problem of illegal bushmeat consumption and trade. We look forward to
    working with you and members of the Committee to seek ways to address
    this crisis. This concludes my testimony. I will be pleased to respond
    to any questions you may have.
                                     ______

        [Attachments to Mr. Stansell's statement follow:]

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.001

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.002

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.003

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.004

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.005

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.006

        Mr. Gilchrest. Thank you very much, Dr. Stansell.
        Mr. Graham?

     STATEMENT OF JAMES A. GRAHAM, PROJECT MANAGER, CENTRAL AFRICA
         REGIONAL PROGRAM FOR THE ENVIRONMENT, U.S. AGENCY FOR
                       INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

        Mr. Graham. Good morning, Mr. Chairman. I would like to
    thank you for inviting me to testify. If I could, I would like
    to have my written testimony submitted for the record and
    instead provide a brief summary of my statement.
        Mr. Gilchrest. Without objection.
        Mr. Graham. Thank you.
        As the project manager for USAID's Central Africa Regional
    Program for the Environment, I am quite familiar with the
    problem of commercial-scale bushmeat hunting in Sub-Saharan
    Africa. Among the rural population in the Congo River Basin,
    until recently, people made money growing and selling rice,
    cotton, cacao, coffee, and peanuts. With farming unprofitable
    and off-farm jobs difficult to come by, many rural people with
    access to the forest have resorted to commercial hunting and
    trading of bushmeat. The move toward bushmeat has occurred
    because high returns can be realized from a relatively small
    investment. Wildlife is a free good which is harvested when
    other alternatives to earn money are limited. Bushmeat is
    relatively inexpensive because hunters do not pay costs of
    producing wildlife, as do farmers who raise livestock.
        Moreover, logging companies have opened up once-isolated
    forests, providing hunters with easy access to abundant
    wildlife and traders with cheap transportation, which in turn
    reduces bushmeat production costs and increases supply to urban
    markets. Rampant availability of firearms as a spinoff from
    political insecurity in the region has made harvesting bushmeat
    easy.
        Though habitat loss is often cited as the primary cause of
    wildlife extinction, over the next 5 to 10 years commercial
    bushmeat hunting will constitute the most immediate threat to
    wildlife conservation in Central Africa. At current levels of
    exploitation, this will result in the progressive depletion and
    local extinction of most species of apes and other primates,
    large antelope, and elephant from hunted forests.
        Moreover, hunting indirectly impacts the forest by: first,
    threatening the survival of forest carnivores that rely on
    bushmeat species as prey; and, two, significantly reducing the
    number of seed-dispersing animals, thus changing tree species
    regeneration rates and forest structure and composition. The
    direct and indirect impacts of this unsustainable hunting will
    have both immediate and long-term adverse impacts on the
    structure and function of the forest.
        For example, while rates of deforestation in the region are
    currently low, it is estimated by CARPE that forest cover may
    decline by between 29 and 46 percent by the year 2050. The
    transmission of disease from animals to humans is also well
    documented. Bushmeat consumption may place people in increased
    jeopardy of contracting and transmitting animal-derived
    diseases or other emerging pathogens.
        USAID's CARPE program has supported preliminary initiatives
    in several areas to blunt the trend toward increased bushmeat
    consumption. CARPE partners, among whom you will hear from WWF,
    WCS, CI, and the Fish and Wildlife Service already, have
    recently worked to help CARPE in creating CITES, the Convention
    on International Trade in Endangered Species, Bushmeat Working
    Group, which attempts to exchange information on bushmeat
    activities among the Congo Basin states.
        USAID is also directly supporting gorilla conservation
    activities that include several efforts to ensure that primates
    are not hunted for bushmeat in locations in Central Africa. In
    addition, USAID conducts a number of health and nutrition
    programs in the Congo River Basin that have the effect of
    combating the spread of diseases stemming from practices such
    as the consumption of bushmeat.
        In conclusion, I would note that the bushmeat crisis is
    only a symptom of a much greater problem of the lack of
    sustained development in the Congo Basin. The solution to the
    bushmeat crisis will only be achieved by fully involving
    Africans in undertaking essential broad development actions,
    thus raising their overall standard of living to allow them to
    secure the alternative sources of protein.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would be happy to answer any
    questions.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Graham follows:]

    Statement of James A. Graham, Project Manager, Central Africa Regional
     Program for the Environment, U.S. Agency for International Development

        Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the Committee, I would
    like to thank you for inviting me to testify about the environmental
    problems confronting the Congo River Basin in light of the growing
    trend of bushmeat consumption in the region. As the project manager for
    the U.S. Agency for International Development's (USAID) Central Africa
    Regional Program for the Environment (CARPE), I am quite familiar with
    the problem of bushmeat consumption in sub-Saharan Africa.
        While wildlife has been hunted for food throughout the history of
    human existence, only in the last several years has bushmeat become
    commercialized [What does this mean, ``become monetized''? Can we say
    this more clearly?], and consequently, an important source of income in
    Central Africa. Among the rural population in this region, until
    recently, people made money growing and selling rice, cotton, cacao,
    coffee, and peanuts. Over the past 20 years, however, livelihoods have
    suffered as commodity prices have plummeted and increasingly poor road
    systems have made it more difficult and costly to transport goods to
    market. With farming unprofitable and off-farm jobs difficult to come
    by, many rural people with access to the forest have resorted to the
    commercial hunting and trading of bushmeat.
        The move toward bushmeat has occurred because high returns can be
    realized from a relatively small investment. Firearms, which have
    become abundant as a result of assorted civil conflicts, and other
    items, such as snares, are readily available for use in the hunting of
    game for bushmeat. Furthermore, wildlife is a free good. Increasing
    urban populations have fueled the demand for bushmeat and while these
    populations have grown, their buying power has declined with the
    weakening regional economy. Families that were once able to afford
    beef, chicken, and pork now have shifted to typically less expensive
    wildlife as their primary source of protein. Bushmeat is relatively
    inexpensive because hunters do not pay the costs of producing wildlife,
    as do farmers who raise livestock. Moreover, logging companies have
    opened up once-isolated forests, providing hunters with easy access to
    abundant wildlife and traders with cheap transportation, which in turn
    reduces bushmeat production costs and increases supply to urban
    markets.
        Though habitat loss is often cited as the primary cause of wildlife
    extinction, over the next 5 10 years, commercial bushmeat hunting
    constitutes the most immediate threat to wildlife conservation in
    Central Africa. The scale of commercial hunting required to supply
    large, rapidly growing urban populations with meat is now exceeding
    levels that can be tolerated by most large-bodied, slow-reproducing
    forest animals. At current levels of exploitation, this will result in
    the progressive depletion and local extinction of most species of apes
    and other primates, large antelope, and elephant from hunted forests.
    Only small, rapidly reproducing animals such as rodents and the
    smallest of antelope are likely to survive the pressure from commercial
    hunters.
        Moreover, hunting indirectly impacts the forest by (1) threatening
    the survival of forest carnivores such as leopards, golden cats,
    crowned eagles, and snakes that rely on bushmeat species as prey; and
    (2) significantly reducing the number of seed dispersing animals, thus
    changing tree species regeneration rates and forest structure and
    composition. The direct and indirect impacts of this unsustainable
    hunting will likely have both immediate and long-term adverse impacts
    on the structure and function of the forest. For example, while the
    rates of deforestation in the region are currently low, it is estimated
    by CARPE that forest cover may decline by between twenty-nine and forty
    six percent by 2050. In addition, bushmeat consumption may place people
    in increased jeopardy of contracting and transmitting animal-derived
    (epizootic) diseases or other emerging pathogens. For instance, by
    eating a partially cooked chimpanzee a bushmeat consumer could contract
    a fatal disease such as Ebola. This transmission of disease from
    animals to humans is well documented, with brucellosis and
    toxoplasmosis serving as two additional examples.
        Today, bushmeat continues to be an economically important food and
    trade item for as many as 30 million poor rural and urban people in the
    Congo Basin. In Central Africa, over 1 million metric tons of bushmeat
    are consumed each year the equivalent of almost 4 million cattle. A
    hunter can make the equivalent of $300 $1,000 per year more than the
    average household income for the region. This income figure is also
    comparable to the salaries paid to park officials, leaving them
    susceptible to graft. Traders, transporters, market sellers and
    restaurateurs also benefit from the commercial trade in bushmeat, and
    in combating this problem, the USG must acknowledge that all of these
    incomes would decline if laws against the trade were strictly enforced.
    As demand for bushmeat increases, more people will be encouraged to
    become involved in the trade, increasing the pressure on wildlife
    populations, threatening the survival of rare species, and jeopardizing
    access of future families to the nutritional and income benefits from
    non-endangered wildlife.
        Rising demand for bushmeat, lack of income-generating options for
    rural and urban communities, the absence of affordable and acceptable
    substitutes, the opening up of ``frontier'' forests by logging and
    mining companies, the complicity of government lawmakers and law
    enforcers, and the fact that almost anyone can go hunting anywhere
    without restriction are the most important factors driving commercial
    hunting and working against wildlife conservation. On top of all of
    this there is an emerging link between what is becoming known as
    ``illegal logging'' and the bushmeat trade. While ``illegality'' is at
    times a somewhat murky concept in the Congo Basin--in that the
    enforcement of many laws often serves more as an inducement to pay
    bribes than to benefit the state--much logging is done outside strict
    application of the laws. Bushmeat (including the meat of endangered
    species) is gathered as ``value added'' to logging activity. Increased
    attention devoted to ``illegal logging'' may in time, however, have a
    dampening effect on the worst excesses of the bushmeat trade.
        International awareness and support for control of the bushmeat
    trade was virtually non-existent until the late 1990s, and it is urgent
    that concerned individuals and conservation groups work with an
    expanded group of government personnel and other key decision makers to
    convince them of the significance of the bushmeat crisis. They also
    must cultivate the political will to ensure that adequate financial
    resources and professional capacity are provided to address the
    problem. Nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), governments, and
    industry are awakening to the challenge, and are currently seeking ways
    to address the bushmeat crisis at the local, national, and
    international level. Their pilot initiatives include working with
    logging companies to reduce or halt the flow of bushmeat from
    concessions and to minimize employee reliance on bushmeat as a source
    of food and supplementary income; convincing donors to increase their
    long-term support for protected area management; piloting projects to
    provide consumers with affordable and palatable alternatives to
    bushmeat; encouraging governments to develop legislation and law
    enforcement capacity appropriate to the local context; and facilitating
    collaboration among the numerous organizations and agencies working in
    the region.
        USAID's CARPE program has supported preliminary initiatives in
    several of these areas. CARPE partners have recently worked to create
    the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES)
    Bushmeat Working Group (CBWG), which attempts to exchange information
    on bushmeat activities among the Congo Basin states. The CBWG is
    composed of representatives from a half dozen Central African
    countries. The national representatives are the heads of the respective
    wildlife divisions of the individual countries and each nation has
    appointed a national bushmeat officer. The organization plans to set up
    a regional coordinator in Cameroon who will work with the member
    countries to develop and execute a series of actions to limit the
    bushmeat trade. Current efforts include: national wildlife policy
    reviews; improving local understanding of the details of production
    sites, transport routes, and border crossing points; a study of the
    status of various regulatory mechanisms within forestry concessions;
    and ways to improve information exchange and the harmonization of laws
    among the countries. The CBWG will also be responsible for developing
    and implementing a region-wide awareness campaign regarding the
    bushmeat trade. USAID is also directly supporting gorilla conservation
    activities that include efforts to ensure that these primates are not
    hunted for bushmeat in three locations in Central Africa. We are doing
    this by providing our U.S. private voluntary organization partners with
    $1.5 million in each of the two past fiscal years.
        USAID also conducts a number of health and nutrition programs in
    the Congo River Basin that have the effect of combating the spread of
    diseases stemming from practices such as the consumption of bushmeat.
    As I mentioned earlier in my testimony, wildlife, particularly wild
    primates, harbor viruses that can be transmitted between species. For
    example, outbreaks of diarrhea have been associated with the
    consumption of bushmeat. USAID supports a wide range of health and
    nutrition programs in the Congo River Basin aimed at reducing the
    morbidity and mortality of infectious diseases. These programs include
    diarrheal disease control, prevention of tuberculosis, polio
    eradication and routine immunization, integrated disease surveillance
    and epidemic preparedness and response.
        In conclusion, I would note that the bushmeat crisis is only a
    symptom of the much greater problem of the lack of sustained
    development in the Congo Basin. With burgeoning populations,
    deteriorating terms of trade for most primary products, insecurity, and
    dilapidated infrastructure, much of the Congo Basin has a lower
    standard of living than at independence more than 40 years ago. The
    ``solution'' to the bushmeat crisis will only be achieved by fully
    involving Africans in undertaking essential broad development actions,
    thus raising their overall standard of living to allow them to secure
    the alternative sources of protein.
        Thank you. I would happy to answer your questions.
                                     ______

        Mr. Gilchrest. Thank you, Mr. Graham.
        A couple of months ago, I was in Africa and we went to
    visit it, some for a couple of days, some for just a few hours,
    I believe close to 13 countries. And the statement by a petite
    German nun in an AIDS clinic in Ethiopia, Addis Ababa, she was
    a dentist in Germany and gave that up to find a much more
    satisfying way to find meaning in life, so she went to an AIDS
    clinic for children in Ethiopia. She said ``Africa goes through
    three cycles, and three cycles only: drought, war, and disease.
    And each one of those has their own devastating ramifications
    and causes.''
        So we are engaged in a very, very difficult enterprise
    that, unless we get the cooperation from vast numbers of
    people, including governments and nonprofits and the people who
    are looking to find some type of work, some type of food, some
    type of dignity, and those that invest in opportunities in
    Africa, which would be the miners, the loggers, essentially
    foreign governments, I guess we are going to have a tough road
    to hoe--not impossible but we just want to be as important a
    part of that strategy as humanly possible.
        Mr. Burnam, can you tell us about how many pilot projects
    there are in this arena dealing with the bushmeat problem?
        Mr. Burnam. No, I don't have an exact number. I think the
    witness from the World Wildlife Fund might be able to fill you
    in on their activities. This particular project has been going
    on for about 3 years, and it is sort of widely regarded as a
    potential model for the region. I know across the border in
    Cameroon and the Central African Republic, there are also eco-
    guards and there is cooperation between the eco-guards in this
    trinational area. But my impression is the pilot projects are
    just sort of getting off the ground.
        Mr. Gilchrest. So this particular pilot project that you
    went to--
        Mr. Burnam. Yes.
        Mr. Gilchrest. --there are eco-guards there as well?
        Mr. Burnam. There are 39 eco-guards.
        Mr. Gilchrest. How are they paid?
        Mr. Burnam. They are paid partly by the logging concession
    and also by the NGO's who are funded also by CARPE.
        Mr. Gilchrest. What is the logging concession? Is that
    locally owned? Is that foreign owned?
        Mr. Burnam. No, it is actually a Swiss holding company. It
    is one of the major logging companies in the area. Most of the
    logging companies are--
        Mr. Gilchrest. When you say one of the largest logging
    companies in the area, does that go beyond the Congo?
        Mr. Burnam. I'm not sure exactly what their holdings are.
    There are a number of major French and European logging
    companies that work--
        Mr. Gilchrest. But they are fairly substantial?
        Mr. Burnam. Oh, yes. There are also sort of fly by-night
    logging companies.
        Mr. Gilchrest. They are the fly by-night logging company?
        Mr. Burnam. There are some, yes.
        Mr. Gilchrest. Oh, there are some.
        Mr. Burnam. Yes. One of the problems is if a responsible
    company increases costs by 3 or 4 percent, can they compete
    with the fly by-night ones? And that is a problem. But I do
    think that having the concession there with the eco-guards and
    the controls they place on the wildlife harvesting is very
    important. It is encouraging, and I think more projects like
    this need to be started up.
        Mr. Gilchrest. What are the other sources of protein? I
    guess if the eco-guards are fairly well paid and there is a bit
    of an infrastructure there for employment for the loggers, but
    we don't want people to eat the bushmeat, and agriculture is
    not working very well or has disappeared, do they have a plan
    right now for sources of food for the people in this region?
        Mr. Burnam. Well, the plan really ensures that the local
    residents have adequate supplies of bushmeat. I mean, you don't
    need to cut them off entirely. There are hunting laws. They
    hunt in certain zones in certain seasons, just the way you
    would in the U.S.
        Mr. Gilchrest. Who enforces that?
        Mr. Burnam. The eco-guards and the logging company. And
    some of them--some of the people turn in their firearms outside
    hunting season so they won't be caught, they won't be tempted.
    So it is really--there are a lot of controls. The alternative
    sources of protein, vegetable gardens, they are trying to work,
    as you would know, more effectively on the poultry farms, which
    are a problem in Africa because of viruses, but they are trying
    to work on poultry farms. They are bringing in beef in small
    quantities. I was told anecdotally that the price of bushmeat
    on the market has doubled, which is a sign that, you know, the
    controls of bushmeat can raise the price. A lot of it is price.
    The bushmeat, as Mr. Graham pointed out, is pretty cheap. It is
    pretty cheap to harvest, and it is pretty cheap on the market.
    And so if you have got the price of chicken and the price of
    beef--they even have a snail project going on. You get those
    things to--
        Mr. Gilchrest. Peanuts, do peanuts grow there?
        Mr. Burnam. Pardon me?
        Mr. Gilchrest. Peanuts?
        Mr. Burnam. Peanuts, I don't know.
        Mr. Gilchrest. That wouldn't work there.
        Mr. Burnam. I am not sure. But they--a lot of it is price
    and education, and the people of the area, they love the
    wildlife. They really don't want to see--they don't want to
    lose their wildlife. So there is a lot of support for the
    program from the people in the area, once they are educated as
    to the nature of the problem. So I think it is a very promising
    concept.
        Mr. Gilchrest. Mr. Graham, are you familiar with the pilot
    project that Mr. Burnam is talking about?
        Mr. Graham. Yes, I am familiar with it because it is with
    one of our CARPE partners that it is being implemented.
        Mr. Gilchrest. Who is the partner?
        Mr. Graham. I believe it is WCS in this particular area, if
    it is the same project. This is a project that has basically
    brought--it was a very innovative project on the part of WCS,
    Wildlife Conservation Society of New York, bringing together
    what I would like to characterize as a reformed lumber baron
    who had his difficulties in court, et cetera, in Europe and has
    basically come around a long way to being antagonistic to
    national parks and to game preservation to now being very
    cooperative. And I think the WCS deserves--
        Mr. Gilchrest. How did that happen?
        Mr. Graham. I think WCS deserves high credit for inducing
    him to be a cooperator.
        Also, the Government of Congo has cooperated a great deal
    with the evolution of this project, as has a small eco-tourism
    organization called Safari International. The four of them got
    together and have basically created a large area in North Congo
    which can serve the multiple requirements that are necessary
    for the game to continue to exist. It is, as Mr. Burnam has
    pointed out, it is possible to continue to harvest a very
    moderate amount of bushmeat for the local needs. The biggest
    issue is what happens when that bushmeat starts to go into the
    urban areas where the demand is high, the price is high, and
    the production just skyrockets.
        Mr. Gilchrest. When you say bushmeat--I understand that we
    still hunt deer here. They trap fox, possum, et cetera, all
    over the country. And it makes sense to allow local people to
    continue to harvest moderate amounts of bushmeat for
    consumption. Would you include gorillas in that bushmeat?
        Mr. Graham. No, sir. I believe that in most--the range of
    the various different kinds of gorillas, the four major
    divisions within the gorilla community, there is only one where
    it isn't severely endangered, and that is in the area of
    western lowland. But even in that area, it is by no means a
    situation where it would be the kind of thing that you could go
    out and have your--like a deer hunt. There should not be an
    open season on gorillas under any circumstances.
        Mr. Gilchrest. In reading and preparing for the hearing
    today, it seemed that there was at least somewhere some
    evidence--and I mentioned it in the opening statement--about
    restaurants in various parts of the country that serve exotic
    meals and in some cases maybe even gorilla meat.
        What is done in those countries--Europe, Japan, or the
    United States--as far as enforcement is concerned in dealing
    with these international agreements to not deal in endangered
    species? Are you aware of any restaurant--or any effort to
    pursue the restaurants?
        Mr. Graham. No, sir, I am not aware of any; in this country
    I am not familiar. I have seen menus in Africa that include a
    number of animals that I don't choose to eat and I am not sure
    I would want to digest. But the issue that you bring up I would
    defer to Dr. Stansell because it really falls under the CITES;
    transportation of gorillas in any way, whether they are dead,
    in a diplomatic bag or whatever, is strictly against CITES. And
    I would defer--
        Mr. Gilchrest. Dr. Stansell, can you tell us what the Fish
    and Wildlife Service is doing in that area?
        Dr. Stansell. Yes, Mr. Chairman, thank you. As I said in my
    testimony, there are literally dozens of species that are
    utilized for bushmeat. Some of those are fairly common
    throughout the continent. Some of those are very rare and very
    limited. Through the Convention on International Trade in
    Endangered Species, we have identified those species that are
    particularly threatened or endangered as a result of
    international trade, which include species like gorillas,
    elephants, and some of the crocodile species. There is a
    complete commercial ban on the trade in their meat for any
    reason. And the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service aggressively
    enforces those kinds of imports into the United States.
        I would say the Convention, however, is made up of 158
    parties now, and the strength of that Convention is based on
    the ability of those individual parties to do the enforcement.
    You could very well see species that are technically listed on
    the Convention appear in a situation like in a restaurant, but
    hopefully not here in the United States. In fact, we have made
    a few cases in the United States on certain species that were
    illegally imported. So I think it is a problem and it is
    outside the United States. I think there are--
        Mr. Gilchrest. Has there ever been a restaurant cited or
    fined or closed down because they have served gorilla meat or
    some other type of endangered species?
        Dr. Stansell. Not in the United States, and I don't know
    about other countries and their enforcement. We have much
    stricter domestic measures under the Endangered Species Act
    that also cover a number of these species.
        Mr. Gilchrest. Is there any way to know whether the trade
    in bushmeat, especially to restaurants in foreign countries, is
    widespread, is a small part of the bushmeat trade problem?
        Dr. Stansell. I believe that it is a growing part of the
    bushmeat problem, even if it affects species that are fairly
    common and not gorillas. It feeds the demand and the desire for
    others to have access to those kinds of species. So I think
    that this is an example of how the process is growing now that
    we are actually seeing these kinds of products showing up in
    developed countries and in international markets far beyond the
    borders of Africa.
        We see this phenomenon in--not only Africa, but
    particularly Southeast Asia, where a number of turtle species
    are going into the food market. Our concern is that this is
    growing, and perhaps bushmeat in Latin America may be the next
    focal point. So it is leading the demand.
        Mr. Gilchrest. As we move to try to find solutions to this
    problem and create a strategy, the United States, I guess,
    works with various elements in the international community. How
    does State, Fish and Wildlife, and USAID collaborate in this
    arena?
        Dr. Stansell. I can certainly start to answer your
    question. Fish and Wildlife Service has, through at least the
    two grant programs that are directly related to conservation of
    elephants and great apes, we are able to provide actual--
        Mr. Gilchrest. Well, actually what I meant was do the three
    of you or your representatives collaborate on the U.S. end as
    you engage the international community? Mr. Burnam, Dr.
    Stansell, and Mr. Graham, do you three or your representatives
    discuss this issue in both the particulars and the big picture,
    maybe as far as you have a region in the Congo or you are
    dealing with Liberia or Sierra Leone or Guinea or some other
    place, in your strategy do you include the medical community
    for the problems of disease? Do you include the Department of
    Agriculture to create an agricultural corridor or an
    agricultural zone to tap the kinds of potentials that could be
    a food source? Do you collaborate with the enforcers, the eco-
    guards, you know, the full range--the nonprofits that are out
    there? Is there a fairly coordinated, united front from the
    U.S. perspective?
        Mr. Burnam. Well, Mr. Chairman, forest law enforcement has
    been a major diplomatic initiative of the U.S. Department of
    State. In fact, President Bush has offered to help developing
    nations combat illegal logging. And as we began to look at that
    issue, we realized that the illegal trade in wildlife is
    intimately related to illegal logging because of the connection
    I tried to bring out in my testimony. So we have been studying
    the issue on an interagency basis. Jim and I were in the Congo
    for a planning meeting on forest law enforcement. That is what
    we were there for. But as soon as you take up the issue of
    forest law enforcement, you realize logging is both sort of a
    problem and a solution. It is a problem because it opens up the
    roads, but it also offers the opportunity to do some of the
    things that the CARPE program and WCS and others have been
    working on.
        So there is a good deal of attention in the Administration
    to this problem, which has been heightened by your hearing,
    and--
        Mr. Gilchrest. Did you say ``tension'' in the
    Administration or ``attention''?
        Mr. Burnam. I am sorry. Attention to it.
        Mr. Gilchrest. Attention.
        [Laughter.]
        Mr. Burnam. Oh, there is no tension in this area. I am glad
    you corrected the record.
        Mr. Gilchrest. When we look at this issue--and I don't want
    to broaden it beyond the scope of the hearing, necessarily. But
    we are looking at an area of the world where there is
    difficulty because of the banking system. The economic
    infrastructure, in some cases, is totally absent. The cultural
    differences of private property versus no concept of private
    property, the investment potential, there is just a myriad of
    issues out there that make it very difficult to make a
    connection where there is very steady progress.
        When I go to my district, people are always saying, ``What
    are you doing to bring us jobs?'' Well, you know, they say that
    to every Member of Congress. But there are some aspects of
    economic growth in this country that are pretty standard and
    almost taken for granted. But if you move into an arena where
    you are working in West Africa and Central Africa, in much of
    Africa, it seems that you are starting at the very beginning.
    Each decade we start at the very beginning to try to develop
    something that will take hold.
        As you work with these governments--and I would assume
    probably there is a great deal being done. And I guess to bring
    the point home, when I was in Addis and in Mozambique and a
    number of other countries, and we sat down with members of
    parliament or the prime minister, there was an overwhelming
    sense of trials and the difficulties that lie ahead in
    stabilizing governments and countries where what we take for
    granted is absent almost in its entirety.
        So would State, would USAID, and the myriad of programs
    that you have throughout the continent, as you move through
    with these reborn logging folks and local people and create in
    some way a sense of a stable government based in the early
    stages on the rule of law, equal opportunity, representative
    democracy, the concept of private property, those kinds of
    things?
        Mr. Burnam. I think you have focused very eloquently on the
    factors that need to be addressed. You know, the Administration
    believes that sustainable development has three pillars: the
    environmental, the economic, and the social. And you really
    have to--all those three pillars have to be strong if you are
    going to have sustainable development. You cannot have--you
    cannot just draw a line on a map and create a park and say, OK,
    we have protected biodiversity. You have got to have the
    economic and the social component. As you pointed out, you have
    to provide a better livelihood for the people and a better
    income for the people.
        Some of the forests in Central Africa are still relatively
    untouched. The resources that are there, many people within the
    Congo Basin themselves are unaware of. There are waterfalls
    that were discovered last June. There is a vast area here of
    untouched moist forest, but riddled with logging concessions at
    the moment. And so the question is--
        Mr. Gilchrest. Where did the logging concessions come from?
        Mr. Burnam. From the government. The government will--this
    are national--
        Mr. Gilchrest. And this is a source of revenue for the
    government?
        Mr. Burnam. The government, in some cases, yes, it is
    viewed as a source of revenue, although the concessions are
    often simply given out with the expectation that the economic
    development, which--
        Mr. Gilchrest. Is there any criteria that the government
    uses to issue these concessions?
        Mr. Burnam. Yes, there are.
        Mr. Gilchrest. Such as conservation--
        Mr. Burnam. Yes, and most of the governments have within
    the past few years revised or are in the process of revising
    their forestry laws.
        I guess the point I am trying to make, in the Congo we are
    kind of--we are at the fork in the road, and the question is
    which way do we go. Do we move toward a system of sustainable
    forestry with controls on wildlife harvesting? Or do we keep
    going down the road of basically, you know, unregulated
    activity? So I think it is a very--and the game isn't over yet.
    There are a lot of opportunities to build on what the CARPE
    program has already done. And so I think it is a place where we
    should be focusing our attention and where the kind of focused
    effort that you are calling for is, in fact, needed.
        Mr. Gilchrest. Do you have any recommendations for the
    Congress in this regard?
        Mr. Burnam. Well, we will come back here with
    recommendations if we develop some.
        Mr. Gilchrest. Dr. Stansell? Mr. Graham?
        Mr. Graham. I didn't have recommendations for the Congress.
    I just wanted to underline the partnership among the three of
    us, our institutions. I would bring to your attention a book
    that the CARPE project has put down lessons learned over the
    last 5 years, and I believe that this supports what Mr. Burnam
    has indicated, that we are at a fork in the road. We have
    learned a lot about the kinds of issues that are taking place
    in the Congo Basin, broadly put, and also in detail on the
    bushmeat crisis. And I believe that the partnership, the three
    institutions that are sitting here are collaborating formally
    and informally to try to address these. And I just wish for you
    to realize that this is a process that is going ahead.
        Mr. Gilchrest. Thank you very much.
        Dr. Stansell?
        Dr. Stansell. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would only
    add that this is an extensive problem, as you have indicated,
    that really gets at the heart of the social structure on the
    continent.
        That said, I would hope that we didn't lose sight of the
    fact that there is an awful lot that we are doing, there is an
    awful lot that we can continue to do, while we are trying to
    sort out all of the bigger issues, the bigger social issues
    that underlie this crisis. So I would just ask that we continue
    to support, to the extent that we can, the collaborative
    efforts that we have got going. We have participated in a dozen
    or so projects through our various grant programs that really
    have provided--
        Mr. Gilchrest. How much money is in the grant programs?
        Dr. Stansell. Right now we have $1 million in our elephant
    grant program, $1 million in our great apes program, and--
        Mr. Gilchrest. These grants go to--
        Dr. Stansell. These grants go to on-the-ground projects,
    either through participating nongovernmental organizations or
    working directly with the African governments. And they really
    do bring--it is a small focus, but they bring a focus to the
    kinds of solutions that we have talked about today. A perfect
    example is through CARPE we have collaborated in providing
    additional funds for game guards, some very specific things
    that can be done today to achieve a solution to those problems.
        Mr. Gilchrest. Would you say a country like Liberia is lost
    or is there anybody working in Liberia right now? Can that
    country and its wildlife be saved?
        Dr. Stansell. I don't know specifically about activities in
    Liberia, but I do know enough about the country to know that
    the answer is yes. Habitat is still there. If you look back at
    the turn of the century in the United States and count the
    number of wild turkeys or white-tail deer or wood ducks, with
    all the market-based hunting that was going on at that point in
    time. So I do believe that we still have time, but it is
    running out, and the kinds of activities that we can move
    forward are going to be critical.
        Mr. Gilchrest. Is USAID in Liberia right now? Are they back
    in Liberia? Anybody in Liberia?
        Mr. Graham. I believe that USAID still has a presence
    associated with Liberia. I am not sure whether it is in
    Monrovia or in a separate city serving the interests of trying
    to keep a presence in Liberia. Exactly what it is doing in
    regard to the environment, I am sorry, Mr. Chairman, I am not
    privy. I just simply don't know.
        Mr. Gilchrest. Sierra Leone?
        Mr. Graham. The same would be true in Sierra Leone. I do
    know that USAID has activities that are associated with Sierra
    Leone, but, again, I believe it is being managed out of another
    city.
        Mr. Gilchrest. I see. So you get some brave souls to go in
    there. So your sense of the crisis is it is truly solvable, it
    can get better? Is there some hope that the world's great
    species will survive through this century?
        Mr. Burnam. Oh, yes. I think we are at a fork in the road,
    as I said. You know, there are a lot more elephants in Africa
    than we thought. When they first went into Gabon to survey the
    forests there in the 1980's, they thought there were only 5,000
    elephants in Africa. Well, there are about 100,000 elephants in
    Gabon. These areas are--I was at one clearing where I saw 87
    elephants in one clearing. I mean, this Congo has enormous
    natural resources that are there, and the whole question is:
    Are the governments and the NGO's and the other countries other
    than the United States, such as Germany and France and Great
    Britain, are we going--the European Union has some programs in
    the area. Are we going to really focus our efforts now and try
    to build on what has been done in the past 5 years? That is
    really the issue.
        Mr. Gilchrest. The last question. I know there is just a
    myriad of things to do and ways to approach this and dollars
    that need to be spent and so on and so forth. Would you say--
    with all the things that need to be done, what is the most
    difficult problem in an ongoing solution? Is it competent,
    stable governments?
        Mr. Burnam. From my perspective, I think I would just cite
    one factor as--I think competent, stable governments, respect
    for the rule of law, are the heart of the problem. But, you
    know, simply sending out eco-guards to catch poachers isn't by
    itself going to do the trick. So I think the political and the
    economic and the social aspects have to be addressed in an
    integrated manner.
        Mr. Gilchrest. Very good.
        Dr. Stansell. I think I would only add to that that, of
    course, you have to have stability, at least to a degree,
    within the governments, but I think that the longer-term issue
    is developing a long-term land-use strategy and forest
    development strategy that would address many of these kinds of
    issues, and then moving forward in a collective global approach
    to try to get that kind of strategy implemented on a country-
    by-country basis where the stability would allow it. We are
    talking about a vast area that has geopolitical boundaries that
    are just that. We can almost pick and choose in those areas
    where it is stable enough to work. So if we could collectively
    move forward, I would think that would probably be the most
    important thing that we could do to achieve this.
        Mr. Graham. I would like to simply make a complementary
    addition to the previous two speakers, but also to add that one
    of the real resources in Africa are the people. And the level
    of human resources there varies from very, very, very sound,
    professional, accomplished individuals to people who really are
    out in the bush, literally and figuratively. And we need to
    invest in those people.
        One of the great things that is harming the investment in
    those people, of course, is the diseases that are taking so
    many of them away. But the human resource capacity building is
    an extremely important complement to what the previous speakers
    have already indicated.
        Thank you, sir.
        Mr. Gilchrest. Thank you very much. Gentlemen, this has
    been very helpful and inspiring. We would like to stay engaged
    with each of you as the process moves along over the coming
    decades.
        Mr. Burnam, Dr. Stansell, and Mr. Graham, thank you very
    much, gentlemen.
        Mr. Burnam. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Dr. Stansell. Thank you.
        Mr. Graham. Thank you.
        Mr. Gilchrest. Our next panel will be: Mr. Marcellin
    Agnagna, Chairman, CITES Bushmeat Working Group; Dr. Michael
    Hutchins, Director of the Department of Conservation and
    Science, American Zoo and Aquarium Association, and Co-
    Chairman, Bushmeat Crisis Task Force; Dr. Richard Carroll,
    Endangered Species West and Central Africa Programs, World
    Wildlife Fund; Dr. John Robinson, Vice President and Director
    of Wildlife Conservation Society; Dr. Mohamed Bakarr, Senior
    Technical Director, Center for Applied Biodiversity Science at
    Conservation International.
        I think there are more seats, if everybody wants to sit
    down.
        I want to thank the witnesses for traveling here now this
    afternoon. We look forward to engaging you in your testimony,
    and, Mr. Agnagna, you may begin, sir.

               STATEMENT OF MARCELLIN AGNAGNA, CHAIRMAN,
                      CITES BUSHMEAT WORKING GROUP

        Mr. Agnagna. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity
    to speak to this Committee concerning a very important
    challenge facing all Central Africans--the bushmeat crisis. But
    first I would like you to excuse me because of my English. I
    usually speak French, but I am going to try to express myself
    in English.
        Mr. Gilchrest. If it becomes difficult, you can speak
    French. Someone will interpret. But you are doing just fine,
    sir.
        Mr. Agnagna. Thank you. I was going to say that the massive
    African equatorial forest is the second largest humid tropical
    forest in the world after the Amazon, both in size and its
    biological wealth. It is an unequaled refuge for a number of
    species of fauna and flora, some of which remain to be
    discovered, while others are threatened with disappearance.
        This immense natural resource heritage continues to be the
    principal source of meeting the vital needs of the peoples of
    the Central African forest. The subsistence needs of yesterday
    have yielded to an improper lucrative exploitation of natural
    resources beyond reasonable limits and, most notably, the
    commerce of bushmeat.
        The situation is complicated and enhanced by the armed
    conflicts and logging activity in the region and the
    accompanying proliferation of weapons that are now used for
    poaching. Networks of well-equipped and well-organized poachers
    empty the forests using Kalashnikov rifles to feed the urban
    centers, penalizing the village populations that essentially
    depend on bushmeat for their survival. Suddenly there is a food
    security problem at the village level, and it is necessary that
    the new management strategies take into account traditional and
    long-forgotten knowledge.
        The use of natural resources was essentially for
    subsistence. Vital activities such as hunting, fishing, and
    cutting large trees in the forest were well regulated and often
    subjected to rituals.
        Species such as the leopard, bongo antelope, Nile
    crocodile, elephant, and the hippopotamus, to name a few, were
    revered by most of the tribes in Central Africa, and often were
    animals totemic or emblematic in the Bantu culture.
        Although prized by most of the Africans, bushmeat is a
    commodity that was not consumed daily It constituted an
    exceptional meal and was often reserved for special occasions.
    Even after the advent of firearms at independence, the
    tradition always was respected. Every weapon that entered the
    forest was only authorized to take a quota established by the
    chief. Bushmeat was not marketed but was consumed only inside
    the hunting territory.
        Unfortunately, this effective type of management, adapted
    to the African context, was rejected under the pretense of
    modernity or economic development.
        The economies of most countries of the region are supported
    either by oil or forest exploration. Logging constitutes the
    first or the second source of income to most of the countries
    of the region.
        Logging plays a very important role in growth of the
    illegal bushmeat trade and constitutes a serious threat to
    wildlife. The present situation is catastrophic in all the
    countries of Central Africa. At the start, it was simply a
    matter of small quantities for family usage, but this new type
    of city dwellers whose purchasing power was growing with
    employment found in the city began passing larger orders. The
    existing market and the increased requests provoked an
    unprecedented explosion of commerce of wild products, bushmeat
    in particular. It was more or less in the same manner that
    bushmeat found its place in the exotic restaurants of Western
    cities, such as Paris, London, Brussels, New York, and
    Washington.
        Some important efforts are underway in the region at the
    political level to mitigate the crisis, including establishment
    of consultative frameworks. The CEFDHAC, the COMIFAC, and the
    success of the Yaounde Declaration are illustrations of
    regional political will.
        One action which is taking place is the CITES Bushmeat
    Working Group. Approved by the CITES Secretariat in April 2000,
    this group has developed a five-point action plan and has
    secured the basic funds to operate a central office with
    support from National Bushmeat Officers. The five priority
    actions are: to review policy and legislation in the region
    with reference to bushmeat and establish a harmonization of
    this legislation for the region; create a regionwide public
    awareness campaign regarding the impacts of the illegal,
    commercial bushmeat trade and impacts on cultural heritage;
    develop a bushmeat trade monitoring system in conjunction with
    the CITES/MIKE; establish a regional approach to wildlife
    management and bushmeat control in logging concessions; and
    provide training and capacity building to bushmeat officers,
    ministry personnel, and law enforcement agents regarding the
    bushmeat trade.
        It is important to note that the approach taken by this
    group is not to forbid the consumption of bushmeat for those
    who actually need it but, rather, to increase strategies of
    sustainable use while developing alternative protein and income
    sources for local populations.
        To attain this objective, there are needs for more time and
    resources than the CITES Bushmeat Working Group alone has
    available. The international community is being summoned, and
    the Central African countries need international support to
    fight against this scourge that not only is decimating the
    wildlife habitat but is also a dangerous threat to the wildlife
    of the forest people--threat to the life of the forest people,
    notably the Pygmies.
        And to finish, I would say that the bushmeat trade kills
    the wildlife, but is also killing the village.
        Thank you very much.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Agnagna follows:]

      Statement of Marcellin Agnagna, Chair, CITES Bushmeat Working Group

        The massive African equatorial forest, whose inhabitants are of
    Bantu Pygmy origin, dominates the Central Africa region. This humid
    tropical forest contains portions of six countries: Cameroon, Gabon,
    Equatorial Guinea, the Republic of Congo, the Central African Republic,
    and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. This forest is the second
    largest humid tropical forest in the world after the Amazon, both in
    size and its biological wealth. Various expeditions, scientific and
    other, conducted in the region during the last decade, made apparent
    the immensity of the biological, ecological and cultural potential of
    this forest of Central Africa. It is an unequaled refuge for a number
    of species of fauna and flora, some of which remain to be discovered,
    while others are threatened with disappearance. In Democratic Republic
    of the Congo, for example, more than 4,009 species of mammals, 1,086
    species of birds, and 1,060 species of fishes have been identified. In
    the Republic of Congo (Brazzaville), 45 species of reptiles, more than
    450 species of mammals, and 600 species have been identified.
        This immense natural resource heritage continues to be the
    principal source of meeting the vital needs of the peoples of the
    Central African forest. With no pastoral tradition, generations of
    forest dwellers through myths, beliefs and customs, established sacred
    rules of management of the resources that are essential to their
    survival. The rational or sustainable management notion, therefore, is
    not a new concept for these peoples, who already by tradition were
    involved in the management and monitoring of such vital activities as
    fishing, hunting and gathering (i.e. mushrooms, caterpillars, and wild
    fruit). Nevertheless today, all these sacred rules are trampled under
    foot, on the pretense of modernism and economic development. The
    subsistence needs of yesterday have yielded to an improper lucrative
    exploitation of natural resources beyond reasonable limits and most
    notably, the commerce of bushmeat.
        In Central Africa, the bushmeat trade is currently one of the
    sources of income for many of the inhabitants of forested areas. The
    development of logging has brought relatively large amounts of money to
    formerly isolated areas and human populations that were once exempt of
    excessive consumption habits. Poachers and game traders now use logging
    roads and other transportation means to bring illegally captured meat
    to market in the cities. The thousands of workers and their families,
    employed by the forestry companies, constitute a potential market for
    bushmeat, especially as logging companies usually prefer to ignore
    their employees' protein needs. This situation is complicated and
    enhanced by the armed conflicts of the region and the accompanying
    proliferation of weapons that are now used for poaching.
        The commerce of bushmeat is suddenly the principal income source
    for a good number of the inhabitants in areas that still hold wildlife.
    The conditions that favor the development of this activity are
    numerous, among which are unemployment, poverty, growing demand for the
    meat of wild animals (and thus, the existence of the market),
    demographic growth, development of logging on a large scale and
    ignorance, among others.
        The bushmeat trade takes on enormous proportions throughout all
    Central Africa. In all the markets of the large urban centers such as
    Libreville, Yaounde, Bata, Bangui, Kinshasa, Brazzaville, Pointe Noire,
    Malabo, or Douala, bushmeat is openly and consistently sold, whatever
    the season, despite its illegality. The quantities are disturbing and
    sufficiently illustrate the problem. In Pointe Noire, second largest
    city and economical capital of the Congo, a study carried out in 1996
    (PROGECAP) estimated that 150,000 metric tons of bushmeat is consumed
    annually. It is certain that the current rate is now double.
    Libreville, capital of Gabon, receives daily shipments of bushmeat by
    railway. About 1,200 metric tons of bushmeat flows into the markets of
    Libreville daily. Bangui consumes about 120,000 metric tons of bushmeat
    yearly; Bata, second largest city of Equatorial Guinea, daily offers a
    gruesome spectacle in its central market where transport vehicles bring
    piles of the whole animal carcasses of all species. All the species are
    impacted and some are threatened with extinction, notably the large
    animals such as duikers, gorillas, chimpanzees, and elephants.
        Everywhere in Central Africa, the bushmeat trade has become a true
    scourge that threatens the survival of several wildlife species and is
    of greatest conservation concern. The scarcity of game around some
    forest towns forces the inhabitants to leave. Networks of well equipped
    and well organized poachers empty the forests using Kalashnikov rifles
    to feed the urban centers, penalizing the village populations that
    essentially depend on bushmeat for their survival. Suddenly there is a
    food security problem at the village level, necessitating the use of
    more costly hunting methods that most villagers cannot afford. Some
    villagers are obliged to constantly roam in search of a better life in
    urban areas or forestry concessions. Although illegal in most countries
    of the region, the bushmeat trade is expanding, with the governments
    lacking the capacity to enforce the laws. The international community
    is being summoned. The Central African countries need international
    support to fight against this scourge that not only is decimating their
    wildlife heritage, but is also dangerous threat to the life of the
    forest peoples, notably the Pygmies. The bushmeat trade kills the
    wildlife and the village.
        The problem is complex, and the solutions cannot be found solely in
    classic conservation approaches. It is necessary, therefore, that new
    management strategies take into account traditional and long-forgotten
    knowledge; a return to traditional management seems inevitable. The
    participative management concept could be improved while taking into
    account the traditional values of forest peoples.
        Important efforts are underway in the region at the political
    level, including the establishment of consultative frameworks. The
    CEFDHAC (Conference on the Ecosystems of Dense and Humid Forests of
    Central Africa), COMIFAC (the Conference of the Ministers in charge of
    the Forests of Central Africa), and the success of the Yaounde
    Declaration are illustrations of regional political will. Nevertheless,
    the governments of the countries of this region do not have the means
    to deal with this scourge. International support would be most welcome.
        This political will is now augmented by the CITES Bushmeat Working
    Group [Appendix A] (CITES BWG), set up by Decision 11.166 of the
    Conference of the Parties to CITES in Nairobi Kenya in April 2000. The
    CITES BWG brings together all the Directors of the Central African
    Region, and their support staff, who are in charge of wildlife
    management and protected areas. Since its inception, this group has met
    several times with assistance of the international community, notably
    the Government of the United Kingdom, the United States, thought the
    U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and the Bushmeat Crisis Task
    Force (BCTF). An action plan was developed and is being executed with
    funding of $135,000, obtained by the BCTF from the John D. and
    Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation. This financing, along with support
    from USAID's Central Africa Regional Program for the Environment
    (CARPE), is being used to execute the action plan and also permits the
    installation of a Regional Coordinator based in Yaounde, Cameroon.
        The BCTF closely collaborates with the CITES BWG and is helping to
    find additional funds from international sources, as it is now an
    international problem. It is not unusual to find African bushmeat in
    the restaurants of certain capitals such as London, Brussels, New York,
    and Washington. Well organized distribution networks allow the feeding
    of far-flung international markets The airlines that link Africa to the
    West play a very important role in this traffic. Just some months ago,
    I flew on an Air France flight from Brazzaville to Paris. To my
    surprise, I saw some passengers hurrying to embark with their
    accompanied luggage: suitcases full of bushmeat and of smoked
    freshwater fish, within the full view and knowledge of the customs
    officers that gladly helped to close the suitcases after their
    ``inspection.'' The practice takes place in almost all the airports of
    Central Africa. The domestic airlines that connect large urban centers
    to the internal cities carry large quantities of bushmeat, as do other
    means of transport such as trains and boats. This situation is serious
    and demands the special attention of the international community.
    TRADITIONAL MANAGEMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES.
        To make a shift from classic conservation theory, we want here to
    focus on traditional management of the natural resources. In fact
    before and during the colonial period, the people of Africa had
    established natural resource management systems based on the respect of
    mythological beliefs. Every activity linked to the use of natural
    resources followed precise rules. It was not anarchical, but instead
    disciplined and respectful of established order. The system worked
    well, it did not need law enforcement agents to assure respect for the
    rules because they were inviolable. Mankind treated nature with care
    because we were conscious that our survival depended on it. The use of
    natural resources was essentially for subsistence. Vital activities
    such as hunting, fishing, and cutting large trees in the forest were
    well regulated and often subjected to rituals.
        Traditional Hunting and Fishing: Traditional hunting was practiced
    for a long time for subsistence and was subject to rules that varied
    from one ethnic group to another. With the Bantu-speaking peoples of
    Central Africa, for example, every clan or ethnic group had a territory
    or well delimited zone used for hunting. Access and hunting could not
    take place without the authorization of the traditional chief. A quota
    system existed by species and included some forbidden prey species. The
    belief was that spirits protected certain forbidden species, the taboos
    and other myths created beliefs surrounding them were inviolable
    barriers.
        Respect for tradition was severe. Species such as the leopard,
    bongo antelope, Nile crocodile, elephant, and the hippopotamus, to name
    a few, were revered by most of the tribes in Central Africa, and often
    were animals totemic or emblematic in the Bantu culture. Also, big game
    hunts were only practiced for special occasions. Killing an elephant,
    for example, took place with an agreement between neighboring villages
    or clans. With the tribe of the ``Kouyous'' in the north of the
    Republic of the Congo (Brazzaville), one organized a festival of folk
    dances and demonstrations of strength during a week before the elephant
    hunting party. The hunters were chosen among the elite of the town and
    then were prepared. For a full week they received spiritual blessings
    that protected them against the forces of the evil. Only after all
    these formalities did the hunters enter the forest to confront an
    elephant. The clan chiefs accompanied them at the end of the hunt to
    give them some final blessings. Every hunter carried with him a full
    measure of provisions and protection of amulets (talismans) and three
    to four previously-prepared and blessed spears of mystical strength. It
    was then that hunters began the long march tracking elephants. A large
    bull elephant ``Kamba'' was sought. Once the tracks were found, he was
    followed to the end. The endowed hunters were able to make themselves
    invisible ``Indzombi'' and approached the beast and finally pierced him
    in vital areas with their well sharpened spears, before disappearing
    into the forest and again reappearing in a place that was identified in
    advance. After reappearing, they returned to the assault by following
    the blood tracks and killing the animal if it has withstood the first
    attack. This process could repeat itself as much as necessary.
        The parties hunting small game were organized in forms of a
    collective between the inhabitants of a village or of neighbors, who
    used nets, traditional weapons such as spears, lances, harpoons, and
    hunting dogs. The meat was distributed freely among the inhabitants of
    the town, with every family receiving its share, however small is was.
        Although prized by most of the Africans, bushmeat is a commodity
    that was not consumed daily. It constituted an exceptional meal and was
    often reserved for special occasions (family gatherings, initiation
    ceremonies, festivals of traditional dances, etc.). Twenty years ago,
    this was practiced in most villages of the region. Even after advent of
    firearms at Independence, the tradition always was respected. The names
    of the possessors of firearms was known in every town. The use of these
    weapons was verified and monitored. Every weapon that entered the
    forest was only authorized to take a quota established by the chief.
    The arm owner could only sell the part that was surplus to his need.
    Bushmeat was not marketed but was consumed only inside the hunting
    territory.
        I remember during my youth in northern Congo, that my grandfather,
    with the name of notable Agnagna, was customary chief of the region of
    ``Loko'' in the area of Owando (Fort Rousset). The notable Agnagna was
    a powerful and respected traditional chief that embodied the life of
    the inhabitants of Loko. It was he who gave the order to hunt, and it
    was to him that all hunters had to present the rewards of the hunt
    before any meat was eaten. He received the right hind leg and the
    trophy (horns, skins or head). The trophies were collected and kept in
    a sacred place where access was uniquely reserved to the initiated. A
    fire was lit there in permanence for the conservation of the trophies.
    The trophies were exposed during period ceremonies and served to
    inventory the number of game hunted during a given period. It was also
    a customary heritage and symbol of strength.
        The largest collection of trophies that I saw in my youth belonged
    to a big chief of the tribe of the ``Kouyous'' by the name of
    ``Etoumbakoundou''. He lived in a village called Kouyougandza situated
    downstream of the city of Owando (former Fort Rousset) on the river
    Kouyou. This collection included pieces of very big value of which the
    dimensions were almost always records: antelope horns, leopard skins
    and those of other animals, hippo teeth, cranes and cane cats, feathers
    of rare bird, and elephant tusks. The notable Etoumbakoundou uniformly
    received visits from white settlers (colonial administrators) and a few
    tourists. The visitors' interest in the trophies led them to take one
    or more before leaving. I remember in 1963, when one of the last
    colonial administrators, whose name escapes me, the Commander of the
    Prefecture of Likouala-Mossaka, visited Kouyougandza. He left with a
    gigantic pair of elephant tusks. Six men were necessary to lift each
    tusk, whose weight may have reached 120 kilograms. The boat used by the
    Commander could not bear the weight of the tusks, and some passengers
    had to be left out and later transported on a second trip.
        I was greatly disappointed to note that at the time of my passage
    to Kouyougandza in 1986, that all of the trophies had disappeared after
    the death of the Chief Etoumbakoundou in 1974. An entire culture had
    disappeared.
        Fishing in freshwater was also seasonal. For example, the draining
    of ponds for fish followed a ritual. During the dry season of 1965, I
    witnessed the draining of a pond called ``Etsibi'' in the zone of
    ``Loko'' under the authority of the notable Agnagna. In fact, the
    Etsibi Pond had a diameter of approximately 50 meters, and it
    articulated with the Kouyou River through a small canal that dried in
    dry season. ``Etsibi'' was forbidden to visit in period of the high
    waters. In it lived a large Nile crocodile that only the Chief Agnagna
    could observe.
        Baskets were used to drain the pond, and men, women, and children
    of the villages surrounding ``Ossambou'' camped around Etsibi during
    the event. Before the draining of the pond, a ritual was conducted in
    which Chief Agnagna struck the surface of the water with a stick and
    ordered the gigantic crocodile to leave. One could see this 6-meter
    long monster leave the pond and head toward the Kouyou River using the
    canal. After this, the spectacle began. The quantity of fish collected
    was enormous. The fish was smoked to conserve it for future needs. This
    is an example of the manner used by one tribe to manage their natural
    heritage. The efficiency of this traditional form of management was
    clearly established.
        Unfortunately this effective type of management, adapted to the
    African context, was rejected under the pretense of modernity or
    economic development. Now modern conservation laws have shown their
    limits and cannot alone solve the problem of the management of natural
    resources in Central Africa. The customary knowledge that has been long
    forgotten merits revival.

    CURRENT SITUATION
        The problem of managing forest resources in Central Africa gives
    rise today to several questions. The economies of most countries of the
    region are supported either by oil or forest exploitation. Logging
    constitutes the first or second source of income to most of the
    countries of the region. For example, in Gabon, where oil reserves are
    being exhausted, the plan is to then exploit the forest resources for
    wood. The policy is to develop a logging industry, which is considered
    a means of development. Nevertheless, questions can be posed about the
    effect this policy will have upon gross national product and on local
    human populations who are dependent on the forest.
        In Central Africa almost all the logging companies are foreign
    owned. They cut and sell the wood on the international market while
    paying derisory taxes to the national government. Wood is given up
    almost free of charge, while logging companies do not conduct
    reforestation procedures. The logging methods are devastating. Some
    speak of selective cutting that consists of exploiting only the largest
    trees with the highest commercial value. In the northern Congo for
    example, the most sought-after species is of the genus Entandophragma
    (Sipo and Sapeli). It is not unusual to see a road of several
    kilometers cut for a single sapeli tree. In the process, dozens of
    other trees may be destroyed. The damage to the flora and fauna are
    huge. As for the village communities, they seem to enjoy a short-lived
    well being as long as there are desirable trees to cut. After that,
    they are left alone in a state of abject poverty.
        We can include some other negative effects of logging. The
    prospection teams and other workers essentially nourish themselves with
    bushmeat. The forest roads and the wood transport vehicles carry all
    sorts of forest products including elephant ivory, animal skins and
    bushmeat. The logging work sites are transformed into immense cities
    wherein thousands of people reside. Merchants of all kinds spring up
    because of the workers' salaries. Basic goods are sold in small shops.
    But behind the counters, merchants disregard the law and traffic in
    wildlife products such as ivory and leopard skins.
        In Pokola, northern Congo, for example, in a worksite created by
    the logging company CIB (Industrial Congolese Wood), the bushmeat trade
    is very well developed. Despite the strong local demand, large
    quantities of bushmeat are transported out of the country, notably to
    the neighboring Cameroon. Professional poachers install themselves
    alongside the forest roads and quietly operate with the complicity of
    the drivers of logging vehicles, who bring the illegal bushmeat to
    distant markets. All the species are slaughtered without restriction,
    the large game is preferred as it yields more profit. Even the species
    once protected by local taboos and beliefs such as the Bongo antelope,
    are poached. In the Pokola bushmeat market, one can daily find meat of
    almost all species of forest animals. The taboo myth was shattered with
    the intermingling of cultures among people who arrived in the area to
    work for the loggers.
        Logging plays a very important role in growth of the illegal
    bushmeat trade and constitutes a serious threat to wildlife. The forest
    roads open for removal of logs are used by the poachers to reach game-
    rich areas that were previously inaccessible. In northern Congo near
    the border with the Central African Republic in the zone Enyele, where
    the logging company called ITBL operates, large camps of Central
    African poachers are installed in permanent camps. They illegally hunt
    and traffic bushmeat to feed the markets of Mbaiki and Bangui in the
    Central African Republic. It should be noted that the CAR once had
    forests rich in wildlife, but it has apparently been destroyed by the
    bushmeat trade. Central African hunters now focus on Congo as a source
    of game.
        Former soldiers of the army of former Zairean President Mobutu Sese
    Seko have hidden arms in the villages downstream of Bangui and of
    Nzongo (in the DRC). These stocks of munitions and arms are now used
    for poaching. These ex-soldiers have become professional poachers and
    operate on well organized circuits, and in certain cases, supported by
    the Central African Waters and Forests agents. Elephant poaching is
    very common in this zone, and their meat is sold in the CAR or
    elsewhere. The Central African Waters and Forests agents extract an
    unofficial tax that varies between 1,000 to 2,000 French CFA ($2 to 3$
    US) on every 50 kg bag of elephant meat that is then freely sold in the
    markets of Bangui, despite the elephant's protected legal status.
        The present situation is catastrophic in all the countries of the
    Central African region. Tons of bushmeat are sold daily on the markets
    of the big urban centers. In Bata, Equatorial Guinea for example, the
    daily bushmeat market contains hundreds of baboons piled up for sale.
    It is estimated that residents of neighboring Libreville, Gabon consume
    more than 350,000 metric tons of bushmeat each year.
        In witnessing this, one wonders if the Central African countries
    have game laws. In fact, some of them have very good laws on paper,
    although other countries need considerable revisions. However, none of
    them effectively regulate the commerce of bushmeat, and it is sold
    openly under the eyes of the authorities whose job it is to control the
    illegal trade.

    WHY THE FOREST INHABITANTS OF CENTRAL AFRICA CONSUME BUSHMEAT
        As previously noted, the climatic and ecological conditions of the
    humid tropical forest are hostile to raising cattle, and native people
    are obligated to rely on protein from the forests and rivers. Over
    several generations, myths, traditions, and a cultural preference for
    bushmeat grew among the inhabitants of the forest. These days, almost
    every family has some chickens. But poultry is used for the reception
    of special guests or saved for special ceremonies. Families prefer
    eating bushmeat.
        Therefore, there is a problem caused by people's food preference.
    Bushmeat often is considered as of better quality by its consumers, and
    this seems justified if one considers the low fat content of game meat.
    Still, the recent epidemics of Ebola or HIV/AIDS may originate from the
    contact between humans and hunted animals. This situation raises many
    questions: When did the bushmeat problem first appear? Was it not the
    appearance of modernization? Did not the ancestors live in harmony with
    nature? What does one say to the pygmies who have always lived in the
    forest? Did they know of the problems of HIV and other pathologies of
    the modern world? And what of the forest, wasn't it a holy place before
    the penetration of machines and other arsenals used to exploit her
    resources? Will bushmeat have to be forbidden for consumption? What
    alternatives are there for the people of the forest to eat? The answers
    to these questions will edify the approach to developing solutions to
    the bushmeat problem.
        The peoples of the forest always kept their food habits even when
    they migrated far from their region of origin. Most of the urban
    centers of the region are populated by rural migrants who have not
    abandoned their habits. Even in the city they have a tendency to keep
    their original food preferences such as bushmeat in the forest zone,
    and grasshoppers, caterpillars and other in savannah zones). Suddenly
    illegal dealings in forest products began developing (bushmeat, fruit
    and wild vegetables, palm wine etc.) from the country towards the city.
    At the start it was simply a matter of small quantities for family
    usage, but this new type of city-dwellers whose purchasing power was
    growing with employment found in the city began passing larger orders.
    The existing market and the increased requests provoked an
    unprecedented explosion of commerce of wild products, bushmeat in
    particular. It was more or less in the same manner that bushmeat found
    its place in the exotic restaurants of western cities.

    THE SOLUTIONS
        The bushmeat crisis in Central Africa is a daily preoccupation
    regarding management and conservation of the forest resources in the
    region. All the actors, at the political level, administrative,
    scientific and private became aware of the seriousness of the problem
    and are working hard to look for solutions which will minimize impacts.
    In all the regional forums treating biodiversity conservation questions
    bushmeat is always central to the discussion. As was expressed,
    political will to find solutions to the management problems of the
    forest resources is evident in the region. Some encouraging regional
    initiatives include CEFDHAC, the COMIFAC and the reformation of OCFSA
    (Organization for the Conservation of the Wildlife in Africa).
    Nevertheless this political will is far from realizing its financial
    and equipment needs. The recommendations and other suggestions for
    solutions resulting from these discussions have barely begun to be
    implemented.
        One action which is taking place as was mentioned previously is the
    CITES Bushmeat Working Group. Approved by the CITES Secretariat in
    April 2000 this group has developed a five point action plan and has
    secured the basic funds to operate a central office with support from
    National Bushmeat Officers. The five priority actions of this group,
    represented by the directors of wildlife and protected areas from all
    Central Africa are: to review policy and legislation in the region with
    reference to bushmeat and establish a harmonization of this legislation
    for the region; create a region-wide public awareness campaign
    regarding the impacts of the illegal, commercial bushmeat trade and
    impacts on cultural heritage; develop a bushmeat trade monitoring
    system in conjunction with the CITES/MIKE (Monitoring Illegal Killing
    of Elephants); establish a regional approach to wildlife management and
    bushmeat control in logging concessions; and provide training and
    capacity building to bushmeat officers, ministry personnel, and law
    enforcement agents regarding the bushmeat trade. Base funding for this
    initiative has been secured and a reauthorization of the group will be
    submitted at the next Conference of the Parties in Santiago, Chile,
    November 2002.
        It is important to note that the approach taken by this group is
    not to forbid the consumption of bushmeat for those who actually need
    it but rather to increase strategies of sustainable use while
    developing alternate protein and income sources for local populations.
    It will be important to eliminate the commercial aspect of this trade
    and its impacts on wildlife populations.
        To attain this objective, there are needs for more time and
    resources than the CITES Bushmeat Working Group alone has available;
    the international community is called upon to collaborate with African
    nations to address this crisis. The current dimension of the bushmeat
    crisis surpasses the regional context and is indeed continental, the
    solutions to the problem cannot be found without a collaborative effort
    of the international community.
    APPENDIX A: CITES BUSHMEAT WORKING GROUP SUMMARY INFORMATION
        The CITES Bushmeat Working Group was recommended in Document 11.44
    and approved [Decision 11.166*] in Nairobi, Kenya in April 2000 at the
    11th Conference of the Parties (COP) for the Convention on
    International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora
    (CITES).
        The Working Group includes Cameroon, Central African Republic,
    Democratic Republic of Congo, Republic of Congo (Brazzaville),
    Equatorial Guinea and Gabon and incorporates these countries as the
    case study region for underpinning the scope of work and possible
    solutions for the bushmeat crisis. It also includes a wider range of
    dissemination group countries, including: Benin, Cote d'Ivoire, Ghana,
    Republic of Guinea (Conakry), Kenya, Liberia, Mali, Niger, Sierra
    Leone, Togo, Zambia.
        The primary objectives of the CITES BWG are to:
         Set the scope of problems relating to bringing national
    and cross-border bushmeat issues into the context of a sustainable and
    legal process;
         Work on identifying solutions that address the scope of
    problems;
         Facilitating the implementation process in achieving the
    solutions.
        The CITES BWG held its first meeting in Douala, Cameroon in January
    2001 where they set forth a scope of work and identified priority
    actions for the group. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service supported a
    meeting of the members of the core working group along with
    representatives from dissemination group and donor countries during a
    special session of the BCTF Collaborative Action Planning Meeting in
    May 2001 where opportunities for collaboration between BCTF and the
    CITES BWG were identified.
        The CITES BWG held a second formal meeting in Cameroon in July 2001
    where they established a framework for their priority actions, which
    formed the basis of a joint BCTF CITES BWG funding proposal approved by
    the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation. With support from a
    USAID grant, the BCTF will again be providing an opportunity for the
    CITES BWG members to meet at the Ecole de Faune de Garoua [Garoua
    Wildlife College] in March 2002 during the bushmeat curriculum
    development workshop co-organized by the college and BCTF. During this
    meeting the CITES BWG will set forth the framework for a three-year
    implementation plan for the joint proposal funded by the MacArthur
    Foundation to include planning for: policy and legislation review,
    training for bushmeat monitoring and database development, review of
    wildlife management authority structures, public awareness campaigns in
    Central Africa, and developing wildlife management guidelines within
    logging concessions. As a result of the funding from the MacArthur
    Foundation bushmeat officers in each of the six core countries and a
    regional coordinator will be supported for the next three years.
    Matching funds to fulfill the CITES BWG efforts are being supplied by
    the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service through a grant from CARPE [Central
    African Regional Programme for the Environment, USAID] and the UK
    Wildlife Management Authority.
        The CITES BWG has made excellent progress toward developing regular
    communication among wildlife and protected area directors from the six
    core countries of the Central Africa region. Having secured funding for
    priority activities they will be able to develop databases regarding
    trade in bushmeat, harmonize legislation related to wildlife
    exploitation and trade, collate information for a regional perspective
    on bushmeat trade, and raise awareness among the general public in
    Africa regarding the consumption and exploitation of wildlife. These
    steps will culminate in a set of recommended solutions that can be
    `willingly implemented by range states'.
        Decision 11.166 Available from: [http://www.cites.org/eng/decis/11/
    166.shtml]
                                     ______

        Mr. Gilchrest. Thank you, sir.
        Dr. Hutchins?

     STATEMENT OF MICHAEL HUTCHINS, DIRECTOR/WILLIAM CONWAY CHAIR,
       DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND SCIENCE, AMERICAN ZOO AND
      AQUARIUM ASSOCIATION, AND CO-CHAIRMAN, BUSHMEAT CRISIS TASK
                                 FORCE

        Mr. Hutchins. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the
    opportunity to testify today on the bushmeat crisis in Africa.
    I am here today representing the Bushmeat Crisis Task Force, or
    BCTF. BCTF is a coalition of 34 U.S.-based nongovernmental
    organizations and hundreds of individual experts all committed
    to resolving the bushmeat crisis. While Africans have hunted
    and consumed wildlife for millennia, it is only recently that
    hunting and trading of wildlife has exploded into a
    multimillion-dollar industry. Millions of tons of animals are
    being killed and consumed annually, including gorillas,
    chimpanzees, and elephants. This unsustainable commerce has the
    potential to empty African landscapes of wildlife in less than
    a generation.
        The African bushmeat crisis is symptomatic of much deeper
    socioeconomic problems that are affecting the entire continent.
    The complex causes of the bushmeat crisis, some of which you
    have heard about today, are interrelated and include growing
    human populations, widespread poverty, social and political
    instability, lack of economic or protein alternatives, lack of
    law enforcement capacity, modernized hunting technologies, and
    new transportation systems that facilitate the movement of
    bushmeat from rural areas into urban markets.
        The effects of the bushmeat trade will certainly be
    catastrophic for both people and wildlife. First, the
    commercial bushmeat trade removes this important resource from
    the communities that are most dependent upon it. Second,
    unsustainable hunting risks the irreversible extinction of
    species across Africa. And, third, the loss of keystone species
    could alter the structure and function of African ecological
    systems.
        Finally, as, again, you have heard before, butchering and
    eating wildlife, particularly great apes and other primates,
    increases the risk that people may contract and spread deadly
    diseases such as Ebola. And bushmeat has also been implicated
    in the emergence of HIV/AIDS.
        BCTF recently hosted a meeting of African conservation
    experts to identify priority solutions, and as a result, we are
    focusing our collective attention on the following actions:
    building local capacity to enforce existing wildlife laws;
    securing long-term funding to maintain a system of well-managed
    parks and reserves; increasing public awareness of the problem,
    both in Africa and the United States; regulating hunting and
    transportation of bushmeat used for commercial purposes;
    improving agricultural production and consumer access to
    bushmeat substitutes; building local capacity by training
    wildlife managers, law enforcement officers, and forestry
    personnel.
        BCTF members are working actively on all these solutions,
    but we recognize that the scale of the problem is so large that
    it cannot be effectively addressed without increased government
    involvement. We, therefore, make the following specific
    recommendations to the Subcommittee:
        First, recognize that unsustainable hunting for bushmeat is
    the most immediate threat to African wildlife today and that it
    threatens the livelihood of rural Africans, driving them
    further into poverty.
        Second, identify a Congressional Bushmeat Caucus to
    collaborate with NGO's and African governments on actions to
    address the bushmeat crisis.
        Third, expand U.S. efforts to improve natural resource
    management in Africa and, more specifically, help to develop an
    effective system of protected areas.
        And, last, expand U.S. support for sustainable economic
    development in Africa, including agricultural development.
        The bushmeat crisis is a wake-up call to longstanding
    problems across the continent. We hope that this hearing will
    put into motion a collaborative global effort to address the
    significant threat to human welfare and biological diversity.
    Time is of the essence, however, as our options for
    intervention will become more limited with every passing year.
        Thank you for your interest and attention.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Hutchins follows:]

       Statement of Dr. Michael Hutchins, Director/William Conway Chair,
       Department of Conservation and Science, American Zoo and Aquarium
             Association, and Co-Chair, Bushmeat Crisis Task Force

        Thank you Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee for
    providing us an opportunity to testify this morning on a looming
    biodiversity conservation and human welfare crisis in Africa the
    illegal, commercial exploitation of wild animals for food, commonly
    referred to as the bushmeat crisis.
        My name is Dr. Michael Hutchins, Director/William Conway Chair,
    Department of Conservation and Science at the American Zoo and Aquarium
    Association or AZA. I also serve as Co-Chair of the Bushmeat Crisis
    Task Force Steering Committee.
        Established in 1999, BCTF represents over 30 US-based institutions
    and hundreds of professionals from around the globe, all of whom are
    committed to working with our partners in Africa, Europe and the U.S.
    to address the bushmeat crisis.
        On behalf of BCTF we would like to commend the Subcommittee and
    specifically Chairman Gilchrest for the leadership you have shown in
    identifying the bushmeat crisis as a priority for consideration by the
    107th United States Congress.
        Increasing demand and the commercialization of bushmeat hunting has
    eradicated almost all large mammals from unprotected areas in West
    Africa and threatens to do the same over the next 20 years in Central
    Africa. East and Southern Africa are also currently experiencing
    dramatic increases in illegal, commercial hunting and the data are just
    beginning to emerge regarding its impacts.
        The causes of the current African bushmeat crisis are many
    including: widespread poverty; increasing consumer demand for meat;
    development of roads by extractive industries, such as logging, mining
    and petroleum which have opened up areas that were previously
    inaccessible; increasing human populations; lack of economic or protein
    alternatives; social and political instability; lack of capacity to
    enforce existing laws; and modernization of hunting technologies (guns
    and wire snares). Due to the complexities associated with the bushmeat
    trade, any solutions will require a global partnership for long-term
    success to be achieved.
        The problem is really one of scale. To provide a sense of the
    enormous impact of the bushmeat trade, Central Africans eat
    approximately the same amount of meat as many Europeans and North
    Americans, yet over 60% of this comes from indigenous wildlife. In
    fact, over 1 million metric tons of antelope, primates, elephants and
    rodents the equivalent of 4 million cattle are killed each year to
    supply Central African families with what is either their primary
    source of protein, or a desired luxury. Consumption of bushmeat by
    large, growing, urban populations, that often view eating bushmeat as a
    way to reconnect with their cultural traditions is one of many factors
    fueling the commercial wildlife trade.
        Although there is a significant bushmeat trade in Asia and Latin
    America, BCTF has focused its attention on Africa where the problem is
    most acute. We are particularly concerned about the Central African
    rainforests as their productivity is dramatically lower than the
    savanna ecosystems of East Africa and, as a result, the impacts of even
    limited commercial hunting are more severe. Except in isolated regions,
    commercial hunting of large, slow-growing wildlife species such as
    elephants, gorillas, and chimpanzees already exceeds their replacement
    rates. Forests are rapidly being emptied of animal life.
    Why are we concerned about the bushmeat crisis?
        Economics: The bushmeat crisis is not simply a wildlife crisis.
    Rather, it is a symptom of much deeper socio-economic problems that
    must be addressed immediately for global security, health, socio-
    cultural, economic and environmental reasons. Economics is one of the
    primary driving forces of the bushmeat trade. Much of the African
    continent lives in a dire state of poverty. The commercial bushmeat
    trade has emerged as a response to meet the basic needs for food and
    income resulting from such poverty.
        Logging, mining, petroleum and other large-scale extractive
    industries have facilitated the bushmeat crisis by providing a means to
    transport meat from the forest to large cities via newly constructed
    roads. In addition, many companies do not provide food for their
    employees who often become dependent on bushmeat for their protein
    needs. For example, BCTF member, the Wildlife Conservation Society, is
    working with a logging company and the Government of the Republic of
    Congo to prevent illegal bushmeat hunting inside the logging
    concession.
        The primary source of foreign currency in many African countries is
    wildlife tourism. Loss of charismatic species could result in less
    tourism.
        Human Health: Consumption of bushmeat also has critical public
    health implications. Butchering and eating wildlife, particularly apes
    and other primates, increases the risk that people may contract deadly
    diseases such as Ebola, and has been suggested as one of the potential
    vectors for the emergence of HIV/AIDS.
        Furthermore, if people cannot meet their basic nutritional needs,
    they are likely to become more susceptible to disease because of their
    depressed immune systems. There are numerous communities throughout
    Africa that are truly dependent on wildlife as a protein source. The
    commercial bushmeat trade removes this important resource from the
    communities most dependent upon it.
        Ecological/Conservation: Unsustainable hunting risks the
    irreversible extinction of species unique to Africa and the
    irreversible loss of value they confer to communities and to the world.
    These species include bonobos, chimpanzees, gorillas and forest
    dwelling elephants. Loss of key species could result in irreversible
    ecological change that could affect the entire forest ecosystem. For
    example, loss of fruit eaters will alter the seed dispersal patterns of
    up to 80% of the region's tree species. This could change forest
    composition and potentially alter rates of carbon sequestration. Loss
    of grazers could have an equivalent impact on savannah ecosystem
    structure and function.
        Cultural: Certain human communities are at risk of extinction. One
    example is the Pygmy populations of Central Africa that are losing
    their traditional hunting and gathering lifestyle. The loss of wildlife
    from their forest home threatens the very basis of their culture.
    What is the BCTF doing to address this crisis?
        Collaboration among diverse groups is the primary way to mobilize
    expertise and resources towards solving the bushmeat crisis. The
    Bushmeat Crisis Task Force was formed as a result of a growing
    awareness among conservation professionals working in Africa regarding
    the dramatic impacts of the illegal, commercial bushmeat trade. BCTF's
    objectives are to: a) work with the general members of the BCTF to
    focus attention on the bushmeat crisis in Africa; b) establish an
    information database and mechanisms for information sharing regarding
    the bushmeat issue; c) facilitate engagement of African partners and
    stakeholders in addressing the bushmeat issue; and d) promoting
    collaborative decision-making, fund-raising and actions among the
    members and associates of the BCTF.
        BCTF recently hosted a meeting of the world's leading experts on
    the bushmeat issue to identify the priority solutions for the immediate
    and longer term. They are: policy development, sustainable financing of
    conservation activities, development of effective protected areas,
    increasing public awareness, facilitating public-private partnerships,
    development of economic and protein alternatives, organization of
    market seller and hunter associations and professional training. BCTF
    is actively working with its members to assure action is taking place
    in all these areas.
        Policy Development: Appropriate policy development for the long-
    term, including legislating and enforcing environmental standards is
    likely to be the most effective way of ensuring that business practices
    do not have unnecessary detrimental environmental impacts. BCTF has
    made dramatic progress in policy development in its first two and a
    half years of operation. First, we have supported the formation and
    implementation of the CITES Bushmeat Working Group that consists of the
    heads of the Central African nations' wildlife departments. Second, we
    prepared the draft IUCN Resolution on Bushmeat that was adopted with
    modifications. Third, we have supported recent efforts at the
    Convention on Biological Diversity to enable the formation of a
    Bushmeat Liaison Group.
        Sustainable Financing of Conservation Activities: Securing long-
    term funding to maintain a network of well-managed parks and resources
    is essential if we are to protect plants and animals representative of
    the region's unique biological heritage for future generations. BCTF
    has been involved in discussions with other organizations exploring
    mechanisms to fund a sustainable system of protected areas in Africa.
    BCTF has also assisted its members in seeking grants to implement on-
    the-ground actions to address the bushmeat issue and also encouraged
    partnerships between and collective action by members.
        Development of Effective Protected Areas: Protected areas are
    critical because they are the only locations on the planet where
    biodiversity conservation is valued more than economics, and wildlife
    can be safe from the hunter's gun and the trapper's snare. As an
    organization BCTF has emphasized the need for long-term support of
    African protected areas. Many BCTF members such as World Wildlife Fund,
    Conservation International and the Wildlife Conservation Society have
    been extremely active in assisting African nations in the development
    of national parks and equivalent reserves.
        Increasing Public Awareness: Awareness campaigns across Africa are
    essential in the short term. Several efforts have begun to emerge which
    link cultural heritage with the information regarding the dramatic
    losses of wildlife. These efforts are reporting dramatic and immediate
    impacts with bushmeat sellers choosing to switch to alternative forms
    of meat. In the US, we are developing educational outreach materials to
    be used by BCTF supporting members and partners in educating the
    American public. We are also developing a longer-term effort to support
    public awareness campaigns across Africa with our many partners on the
    ground.
        We have established a Web site (www.bushmeat.org) and a global
    information network of experts, compiled detailed databases of bushmeat
    publications and projects, and provided connections among bushmeat
    working groups around the globe. We work closely with international
    NGOs, African governments and our colleagues in numerous U.S.
    government agencies. We provide resources and contacts to international
    media for bushmeat related stories including major media sources.
        Facilitating Public-private Partnership: Public-private
    partnerships enable improved regulation of the logging industry.
    Partnerships have the potential to generate significant conservation
    payoffs at relatively low cost. Innovative pilot projects are beginning
    to realize significant conservation payoffs from the greening of
    private sector business practices. BCTF and its members, particularly
    the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS), have stressed the importance
    of working closely with extractive industries to develop effective
    wildlife management strategies in concessions. In addition, WCS has
    encouraged logging companies to enforce existing wildlife laws in areas
    under their control.
        Development of Economic and Protein Alternatives: Revitalizing
    agricultural production through strategic transportation planning and
    domestic agricultural research and extension will increase food
    production and consumer access to substitutes for bushmeat.
    Alternatives would also provide income-generating options to farmers
    turned hunters. BCTF has collected information on current efforts to
    provide economic and protein alternatives.
        Organization of Market Seller and Hunter Associations: Development
    of market seller and hunter associations could be a component of a
    highly effective bushmeat trade control system. Bushmeat sellers,
    mostly women, represent potential partners in controlling the amount
    and types of animals (non-endangered species) sold. BCTF has collected
    information on the importance of such associations to the bushmeat
    trade but has made little progress to date on this issue.
        Professional Training: With Africa's three regional wildlife
    colleges and support from USAID and the World Wildlife Fund US, we are
    currently organizing and conducting a series of workshops intended to
    develop bushmeat curriculum to be used in training wildlife and
    protected area managers.
        In summary, the BCTF model is showing promise as a new opportunity
    for addressing critical wildlife conservation issues. The very
    existence of BCTF has encouraged organizations and governments to view
    the bushmeat issue in a different light. With the full support of the
    U.S. government and international partners, we believe it is possible
    to effectively address the bushmeat crisis.
    Recommendations
        BCTF makes the following recommendations for U.S. government
    involvement in seeking solutions to the bushmeat crisis:
        1. Recognize that uncontrolled hunting and consumption of wildlife
    is the most immediate threat to tropical forest biodiversity and that
    it increases the risk of deadly viral disease outbreaks, and further
    compromises the livelihood of poor rural families in Africa;
        2. Identify a Congressional Bushmeat Caucus to collaborate with
    NGOs and affected governments on specific mechanisms to address the
    bushmeat crisis;
        3. Encourage Congress to support efforts to improve African
    natural resource management and develop a system of effective protected
    areas; and
        4. Support Administration efforts to encourage alliances to
    promote sustainable economic development in Africa through better
    governance, improved agricultural practices, enhanced public health,
    and open trade.
        We applaud the efforts of Chairman Gilchrest and members of the
    Subcommittee to raise the profile of this issue, and we are hopeful
    that this hearing will put in motion a collaborative global effort to
    address this complex threat to biodiversity conservation and human
    health.
        Included for your reference are fact sheets BCTF has developed on
    various specific issues related to the bushmeat crisis:
        Bushmeat and International Collaboration
        Species Affected by the Bushmeat Trade in Africa
        Bushmeat and Economic Development
        The Role of the Logging Industry
        Coltan Mining in the Democratic Republic of Congo and Its Impact on
    Illegal Bushmeat Hunting
        Bushmeat and Global Human Health
        Bushmeat and Ecology
        Culture and Bushmeat
        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.007

    Bushmeat and International Collaboration
        Species Involved: All Bushmeat Species Rodents to Elephants
        Stakeholders Involved: Rural Communities, Heads of State, National
    and International Conservation Organizations, Zoological Parks, Animal
    Welfare Organizations, Human Welfare Organizations, Tropical Forest
    Conservation Agencies, Local and National Governments, and
    International Treaty Organizations
    Key Concepts:
         The bushmeat crisis is the most significant immediate
    threat to the future of wildlife populations in Africa.
         Increased demand resulting from high population growth
    trends, modernized hunting methods (guns and snares), and road
    development, all contribute to the growth of the illegal commercial
    bushmeat trade.
         Tropical forests and other ecosystems are being emptied
    of their wildlife for this unsustainable trade, which is leading to
    severe ecological damage and human tragedy.
         Solutions to the bushmeat crisis require international
    collaboration on: policy reform, sustainable financing, long-term
    support for protected areas, developing protein and income
    alternatives, awareness and education campaigns.
    Summary:
        Approximately 30 million people live within the forested regions of
    Central Africa, 40-60% live in cities and towns, and most rely on the
    meat of wildlife as a primary source of animal protein. Forest antelope
    (duikers), wild species of pig, and primates are most often eaten, and
    as much as 1 million metric tons of wildlife is killed for food in the
    region each year. In West African nations human population densities
    are high (25-78 persons per square kilometer) compared to countries in
    the Congo Basin (5-20 persons per square kilometer). West African
    wildlife populations have been so depleted by years of unsustainable
    hunting for meat, that bushmeat is no longer the most important source
    of protein in families' diets. When bushmeat is eaten in West Africa,
    rodents have replaced the over-hunted and now scarce antelopes and
    primates as the most commonly eaten wild animals. East and Southern
    Africa are facing a serious decline of many wildlife populations
    outside of protected areas the bushmeat trade is believed to be largely
    responsible for this decline with increasing human populations and
    demand for meat driving the trade.
    Background:
        Wildlife has been hunted for food ever since humans first evolved,
    and wildlife is still viewed as a resource `free' for the taking in
    many areas. Today in Africa, bushmeat continues to be an economically
    important food and trade item for thousands of poor rural and urban
    families. Animal parts are also important for their role in ritual, and
    bushmeat has become a status symbol for urban elites trying to retain
    links to `the village'--often commanding high prices in city
    restaurants. The immediate loss of wildlife and the secondary loss of
    many plant species jeopardizes the function and stability of natural
    habitats--including both forests and savannas threatening the long-term
    survival of ecosystems and the people dependent upon them.
    Current Understanding and Activities:
        Hunting of wildlife to meet human demand for protein may still be
    sustainable in the few remaining areas where population densities are
    less than 2 people/km2, trade routes are poorly established, and human
    population growth rates are low. Markets, however, drive the scale of
    the commercial bushmeat trade now occurring in West and Central Africa,
    with their large, rapidly growing populations of consumers. This
    commercial-scale trade threatens the survival of many species,
    including several unique to the dense forested regions of Africa.
    Though deforestation has an obvious impact on wildlife dependent on
    these habitats, over-hunting for the commercial bushmeat trade
    constitutes a comparable threat to the ecosystem itself. It often
    results in the Empty Forest Syndrome: a forest filled with trees, but
    with few if any large animals. Such forests will, over the long term,
    suffer dramatic changes in structure and composition as the wildlife
    responsible for dispersing seeds are lost through over hunting. The
    immediate loss of wildlife and the secondary loss of many plant species
    jeopardize the function and stability of the forests' complex web of
    life, threatening the long-term survival of the forests themselves.
    Solutions:
        Possible solutions include: implementation of wildlife management
    efforts in logging and mining concessions; maintenance of a network of
    protected areas; regulation of hunting and trade; increasing consumer
    access to affordable and palatable protein substitutes; development of
    alternative income-generating activities; enhancing national and local
    resource management capacity; and, widespread awareness-raising and
    education. These actions are all important components of comprehensive
    action to resolve the unsustainable bushmeat trade. For these steps to
    be taken, it is essential that conservation organizations, government
    agencies, donors, and interested individuals collaborate to share
    information and facilitate action. The Bushmeat Crisis Task Force was
    formed with these goals in mind.
    BCTF Summary:
        Founded in 1999, the BCTF is a consortium of conservation
    organizations and scientists dedicated to the conservation of wildlife
    populations threatened by commercial hunting of wildlife for sale as
    meat. The BCTF operates under the direction of an elected Steering
    Committee and is funded by Supporting and Contributing Members.
        BCTF goals are to: a) work with the general members of the BCTF to
    focus attention on the bushmeat crisis in Africa; b) establish an
    information database and mechanisms for information sharing regarding
    the bushmeat issue; c) facilitate engagement of African partners and
    stakeholders in addressing the bushmeat issue; and d) promote
    collaborative decision-making, fund-raising and actions among the
    members and associates of the BCTF.Species Affected by the Bushmeat
    Trade in Africa: This is a summary of the major taxonomic groups
    affected by the bushmeat trade in Africa. For a complete species list
    please visit the BCTF Website: [http://www.bushmeat.org/html/
    SpeciesAffected.htm]
        ANTELOPE: Duikers (Cephalophus spp.) are one of the primary targets
    for both subsistence and commercial hunting activities in many regions
    of Africa. With a limited understanding of duiker life histories in
    natural habitats and the difficulties of conducting monitoring
    activities, conservationists are challenged to determine the ecological
    effects of commercial bushmeat hunting on both duiker populations and
    the ecosystems in which they live. Current research indicates that
    duikers typically supply 40-80% of the meat available in bushmeat
    markets across Central Africa. In West Africa, years of commercial-
    level exploitation coupled with habitat loss have resulted in
    considerably reduced duiker populations in many areas. Projections for
    duiker populations in the long-term suggest dramatically decreasing
    trends for the majority of species. Addressing the bushmeat trade
    should involve approaches that include all species effected from
    rodents to elephants, and should pay particular attention to Africa's
    duikers as a group of primary importance to both present and future
    generations of Africans.
        ELEPHANTS: African elephants are considered keystone species
    because of the pivotal role that they play in structuring the plant and
    animal communities where they reside. The continental decline of the
    African elephant and the contraction of its range have historically
    been associated with the ivory trade as well as habitat fragmentation
    due to human population expansion, and desertification. However,
    elephants are increasingly targets of the illegal market in bushmeat.
    Currently the majority of the elephants' range in Africa is outside of
    protected areas, particularly in Central Africa, where elephants are
    increasingly vulnerable to human encroachment and illegal hunting.
    Despite the growing consensus and recognition that elephants are being
    killed illegally not only for ivory, but also for their meat, there is
    a lag in the research focus on this issue. Most likely this is because
    illegal poaching for ivory has overshadowed investigations of the
    poaching of elephants for bushmeat. It is important to delineate this
    gap in the bushmeat research knowledge base in order to identify and
    prioritize critical habitat, threatened elephant populations within
    these regions, and the still un-asked research questions before it is
    too late. By defining the gap in the current knowledge conservation
    organizations will be better able to direct future field research and
    conservation projects, and to help potential funders of these projects
    to prioritize and allocate scarce research monies.
        PRIMATES: The effects of the bushmeat trade are particularly
    devastating to primate communities. Primates often become key targets
    when populations of antelope and other higher-return species become
    depleted due to over hunting. Currently there are more than 26 species
    of primates being harvested for the bushmeat trade including all
    species of great apes. The impacts of the bushmeat trade on primates is
    well-outlined in the 1998 Ape Alliance bushmeat report, which suggests:
    both local and complete extinctions of endangered and threatened
    species, expansion of live trade in apes [aka bushmeat orphans],
    destruction of subsistence-based human communities [due to loss of
    their resource base], and increased risk of disease transmission
    resulting from contact with primates. This final point is beginning to
    emerge as a significantly important research topic. New studies are
    identifying an increasing number of potential linkages between emerging
    infectious diseases and primates through the bushmeat trade, including
    HIV, Ebola, and others. The impacts of bushmeat hunting on both primate
    and human communities threatens the future of all primate populations
    locally and the human population globally.
        CARNIVORES: In contrast to their savanna counterparts, carnivores
    in rainforest habitats are inconspicuous (many are solitary and
    nocturnal), yet they are numerically important members of forest mammal
    communities throughout Central and West Africa. African forest
    carnivores are difficult to census using traditional transect methods
    and thus ecological information is rudimentary and the status of most
    species in African forests remains largely unknown. Carnivores are not
    `traditional' bushmeat species and are generally captured on an
    opportunistic basis. When they can afford to be selective, African
    forest hunters generally prefer duikers and primates. In some locales,
    however, carnivores are targeted and the trade in carnivore skins (such
    as leopard) can be significant. Cable snares are notoriously non-
    selective and carnivores can be caught in such traps. They are better
    equipped than most mammals to escape by chewing their way out; however,
    the ``collateral mortality'' due to injuries incurred is unknown. While
    all forest carnivores may not be directly threatened by over-hunting,
    they are likely to be indirectly impacted due to competition with
    humans for the hunting of their most important prey species.
        Impacts of the escalating bushmeat crisis on forest carnivore
    populations are not known. The extent to which carnivores fall prey to
    humans is difficult to quantify or monitor over the long-term because
    these animals are not highly marketable and are usually consumed rather
    than sold. Evaluating the selectivity of hunters is impossible without
    information on the availability (i.e. relative densities) of target
    species, however, a given number of individuals extracted from an area
    may have more impact ecologically than other mammal groups because of
    their naturally low densities, low intrinsic rates of increase, and
    position on the food chain. Presumably, hunting poses the most serious
    threat to forest carnivore populations where they are already exposed
    to the adverse effects of forest fragmentation, such as in the Upper
    Guinea rainforests, considered a core area for the conservation of
    small carnivores. The IUCN Small Carnivore Specialist Group listed
    habitat destruction and hunting as the main threats facing small
    carnivores.
        RODENTS: Due to the difficulty of raising domestic hoof stock in
    Africa, various sources of wild animal protein, including rodents, have
    traditionally been used. As rodents are relatively abundant, easy to
    capture, and are preferred by consumers, they have been proposed by
    some as a potential alternate source of protein and income through game
    ranching and micro-livestock domestication. However, other viewpoints
    hold that rodent farming is an inefficient way to generate protein.
    Human consumption of rodents does have associated health risks however.
    In parts of tropical Africa, Lassa fever, an acute viral illness, has
    become a serious problem in recent decades. The reservoir of the Lassa
    virus is the multi-mammate rat of the genus Mastomys. Only a few of the
    349 African rodent species appear with regularity in the commercial
    bushmeat trade with the most commonly hunted rodent species including
    grasscutters or cane rats (Thryonomys swinderianus and T. gregorianus),
    giant pouched rats (Cricetomys gambianus and C. emini) and porcupines
    (Atherurus africaphus ssp). But while the range of rodent species
    directly affected by the bushmeat trade is not great, the numbers of
    animals consumed can be considerable. The species that have been
    documented by bushmeat market studies tend to be among the most
    abundant, as they are easier to locate and capture, and because
    ungulates, such as duikers, are still plentiful enough to make up the
    bulk of the bushmeat trade affording hunters more meat for their
    efforts than most rodents. However in some cases rodent species have
    been locally exterminated as in the case of the giant pouched rat in
    eastern Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), where the human population
    is dense, the land fully cultivated, and other wildlife species
    overhunted. Similarly, some populations of grasscutter rats are well
    below carrying capacity, or have become extinct due to local
    overexploitation (NRC 1991). Most African governments have laws
    requiring that hunters have a license to take unprotected rodents.
    These types of measures could help to protect rodent species from
    overhunting, but are infrequently enforced (IUCN 1996).

    Bushmeat and Economic Development
        Bushmeat Focal Issue: Eco-Economics
        Species Involved: Rodents to Elephants
        Stakeholders Involved: Rural Communities, Urban Communities,
    Hunters,
        Traders, Market Sellers, Logging Companies, Development Agencies
    and Donors
    Key Concepts
        1. Lack of economic options and the value of bushmeat relative to
    its production and transportation costs make participation in the
    commercial bushmeat trade attractive to poor rural and urban people.
    Moreover, profits from the bushmeat trade attract non-local, commercial
    hunters who are less likely to practice restraint when hunting.
        2. In Africa, as in much of the rest of the world, growing urban
    populations and rising household incomes drive the increasing demand
    for meat. With wildlife ``free for the taking,'' and inadequate
    production and marketing of alternative protein sources, bushmeat will
    continue to fill this growing consumer demand for meat.
        3. Most people eat bushmeat because it is the cheapest and most
    readily available source of meat. Some are willing to use scarce
    financial resources to eat a bushmeat meal. In other parts of the world
    people shift away from eating bushmeat as soon as other sources of
    protein become both reliably available and cheaper.

    Summary
        Economics drives the bushmeat crisis, although cultural attachment
    may also play a role. Growing demand for meat in most cities provides
    new economic opportunities for people whose traditional sources of
    income have withered as agricultural prices have fallen and jobs have
    become increasingly scarce. Although wealthier people will pay high
    prices for gorilla, snake, and porcupine in the capital cities, most
    bushmeat is eaten by families who cannot afford the more costly beef,
    chicken and pork. Economics can also be a key component to developing
    solutions to the bushmeat crisis. Cooperative efforts could help to
    increase law enforcement and to tax commercial trade in wildlife will
    contribute to solving the bushmeat crisis. Such activities would reduce
    the supply and increase the price of bushmeat. This would encourage
    consumers to seek alternatives, and thus help protect wildlife
    populations. Local production of economically affordable alternatives
    is vital, but may need to be subsidized initially to encourage
    production and keep alternative protein prices significantly lower than
    bushmeat. Reducing supply and shifting demand to locally produced
    alternatives are the keys to curbing the commercial trade in bushmeat
    without jeopardizing the health and welfare of Central Africans.

    Background
        Evidence from other parts of the world suggests that poor families
    initially consume more bushmeat as their incomes rise. Consumption only
    begins to drop when families become wealthy enough to switch to eating
    more expensive cultivated sources of protein. Bushmeat consumption,
    therefore, appears to follow an inverted U pattern with income. If this
    pattern is also true for Central and West Africa, then changes in
    livelihoods of rural and urban families may increase or decrease
    consumption of bushmeat, depending on where they are on the income
    axis.
        Though people have eaten bushmeat on a subsistence basis for
    millennia, only recently has it become such an important source of
    income for so many people. In rural areas, people once made money
    growing and selling a variety of products, including: rice, cotton,
    cacao, coffee and peanuts. Over the past 20 years livelihoods have
    collapsed as infrastructures have decayed, prices fluctuated and the
    currency devalued. With farming unprofitable and limited off-farm jobs
    available, many rural people have turned to commercial hunting and
    trading of bushmeat. This is an attractive alternative because high
    returns can be made from a relatively small investment, there are only
    limited controls on hunting and trading of bushmeat, and logging
    companies provide hunters with access to once isolated regions of the
    forest, and traders with the means to transport bushmeat to markets.
    Urban populations fuel the demand for bushmeat. These communities have
    grown substantially since the 1960s and their buying power has
    fluctuated with the unstable economy. Bushmeat is meeting urban demand
    for meat because it is relatively cheap and available, particularly
    since logging roads and vehicles have increased hunters' access to once
    isolated forests and their wildlife populations.

    Current Understanding and Activities
        Central Africans typically eat as much meat as many Europeans and
    North Americans (30-70 kg/person/year). Most of this meat comes from
    wildlife. Approximately 30 million people live in the forests of
    Central Africa, and they eat an estimated total of 1.1 million metric
    tons of wildlife each year the equivalent of almost 4 million cattle.
    The estimated annual value of this bushmeat trade in West and Central
    Africa could exceed 1 billion U.S. dollars. A hunter can make $300-1000
    per year from commercial hunting. This is more than the average annual
    household income for the region and is comparable to the salaries of
    those responsible for controlling the bushmeat trade. Hunters regularly
    reinvest their profits on improved technologies, which makes killing
    wildlife easier, more profitable, and less sustainable. The difference
    between subsistence and commercial hunting are becoming less clear as
    marketing opportunities increase. Traders, transporters, market
    sellers, restaurateurs, and their families also benefit from the
    commercial trade in bushmeat and we must recognize that all of their
    incomes would be affected if laws against the trade were strictly
    enforced. As demand for bushmeat increases, more people will be
    encouraged to become involved in the trade, increasing the pressure on
    wildlife populations, threatening the survival of rare species, and
    jeopardizing future access to ecological, nutritional and income
    benefits from wildlife. A few pilot projects have begun in West and
    Central Africa to assess the extent and impacts of the bushmeat trade,
    to place controls on the commercial bushmeat trade, and to develop
    alternative sources of protein. Widespread collaborative efforts are
    necessary to develop and implement bushmeat control and wildlife
    management activities and to share the lessons learned from such
    activities.

    Recommended Solutions
        Efforts to constrain the supply of bushmeat and enforce laws that
    prohibit the commercial trade in bushmeat will, in the short-term,
    decrease the amount of bushmeat available in markets. However, if
    demand for bushmeat is strong and substitutes do not exist, bushmeat
    prices will likely increase, providing incentives for people to enter
    the trade and find ways to circumvent controls. Consequently, solutions
    to the bushmeat crisis must include ensuring that consumers have access
    to alternative protein sources that are both palatable and priced
    competitively with bushmeat. Unless consumers have economically viable
    alternatives they will continue, not surprisingly, to demand wildlife
    as an affordable and tasty source of meat.

    The Role of the Logging Industry
        Species Involved: All Flora and Fauna--Entire Ecosystem
        Stakeholders Involved: Local communities, international timber
    producers, timber product traders and consumers, producer and consumer
    country governments, World Bank, Multilateral Development Banks,
    International Monetary Fund, Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO),
    African Timber Organization, International Tropical Timber Organization
    (ITTO)

    Key Concepts:
         After oil and minerals, logging typically provides the
    next most significant source of national revenue for the densely
    forested countries of West and Central Africa, and will continue to do
    so for at least the next 25-50 years.
         Road construction associated with selective logging
    dramatically increases hunter access to isolated sectors of the forest,
    and decreases the cost of transporting bushmeat to urban markets,
    effectively increasing the supply to, and profitability of the bushmeat
    trade.
         Per capita bushmeat consumption is highest in logging
    concessions, because the large numbers of company workers can afford to
    eat more meat than poorer unemployed families, they have the money to
    purchase guns and ammunition, and they have motorized access to the
    forest to hunt.
         Logging companies are the de facto managers of most of
    the remaining relatively intact blocks of forest outside of protected
    areas and have a key role to play in ensuring that logging practices do
    not jeopardize the survival of wildlife populations within concessions.
         Public advocacy has encouraged several logging companies
    to partner with conservation organizations. Such companies are
    developing and testing approaches to curb the export of bushmeat from
    concessions and to decrease bushmeat consumption by loggers and their
    families.

    Summary
        Logging is an economically important land-use throughout West and
    Central Africa, and a major threat to wildlife. Present selective
    logging practices not only result in increased consumption of bushmeat
    within concession areas, but also facilitate the supply of bushmeat to
    urban markets and enhance the profitability of the trade. With
    assistance from governments and conservation NGOs, logging companies
    are beginning to alter their practices so that they no longer directly
    or indirectly promote the unsustainable consumption of bushmeat,
    thereby minimizing the impact of logging on forest wildlife. Widespread
    adoption and enforcement of appropriate forest and wildlife management
    policies and practices is essential to effective control of the
    commercial bushmeat trade.

    Background
        The tropical forests of West and Central Africa cover an area of
    over 2 million km2 almost four times the size of France. Although as
    many as 80 species of trees are logged commercially in these regions,
    less than 5 account for the majority of wood exports. In Cameroon,
    Sapelli (Entandrophragma cylindricum) and Ayous (Triplochiton
    scleroxylon) comprise over 1/3rd of all log exports. In Gabon, Okoume
    (Aucoumea klaineana) accounts for over 70% of exports. Logging
    progresses like a wave over the landscape as timber companies enter
    into unlogged areas in search of the few valuable trees that are
    scattered in low density throughout the forest. Once these are logged
    the company quickly moves on to the next area. To find and harvest
    these individual trees, loggers must construct numerous survey trails
    and roads. This road-building both heavily fragments the forest, and
    opens it up to hunters. A hunting trip that might have taken days to
    complete before the arrival of logging may be reduced to a few hours
    when the hunter can hitch a ride on a logging vehicle. Moreover, with
    the help of the logging company transport, hunters no longer have to
    carry the dead animal(s) for long distances and therefore tend to kill
    many more animals on each trip. Logging companies not only directly
    increase demand for meat by hiring a large workforce, they also greatly
    facilitate their workers entry into the commercial trade to supply
    bushmeat to urban markets. This same scenario existed in West Africa in
    the 1950s and 1960s, and contributed to the widespread and dramatic
    declines in wildlife populations evidenced in West African forests
    today.

    Current Understanding and Activities
        Decades of research and subsidies have convincingly demonstrated
    that natural forest management for timber is both economically and
    ecologically untenable. Yet, it may be possible to manage timber
    harvesting to generate a relatively constant, and economically viable
    stream of marketable wood, accepting that tree species composition will
    change within the logged forest, but ensuring that logging practices do
    not result in significant impacts on wildlife populations. The majority
    of large, relatively intact blocks of forest outside of protected
    areas, that comprise less than 6% of the landscape in Central Africa,
    are currently being logged or are earmarked for logging. It is critical
    that logging companies modify their practices to minimize the impact on
    wildlife, and that protected areas are provided with funding sufficient
    to ensure the long-term persistence of forest plants and animals. The
    role of protected areas in conserving forest biodiversity is
    particularly important in West Africa where less than 8% of the post-
    Pleistocene forest remains, and protected areas constitute the last
    bastions for forest dependent species. Advocacy and media attention at
    the international level recently has encouraged several multinational
    logging companies to develop partnerships with conservation NGOs to
    design and implement pilot activities to curb the flow of bushmeat from
    concessions, and to provide logging company workers and their families
    with alternatives to bushmeat. Governments and donors are also working
    with trade associations to develop a `code of good conduct' for all
    logging companies active in the region.

    Recommended Solutions:
        Logging companies provide revenues and employment essential to the
    economies of West and Central Africa, and have a major role to play in
    determining the future state of forests and wildlife management in the
    region. Providing logging companies with incentives to minimize impacts
    on plant and animal communities within concessions, to establish long-
    term wildlife management plans, to set aside unlogged refuges for rare
    or threatened species, to halt the transportation of hunters and
    bushmeat on logging vehicles, to deny hunters road access to logged
    forests, and to seek ways to provide company employees with alternative
    sources of protein, are all important steps in mitigating the adverse
    impacts of logging on wildlife.
    Coltan mining in the Democratic Republic of Congo and its impact on
            illegal bushmeat hunting
         Tantalum is a rare, valuable, metallic element which is
    twice as dense as steel and highly resistant to heat and corrosion. It
    can store and slowly release an electrical charge, a property that has
    made it a vital material for capacitors in portable electronic
    equipment including laptops, digital cameras, playstations and mobile
    phones. Other applications include surgical equipment, turbine blades
    for jet engines and lining chemical reactors.
         It is mined in several countries with Australia
    responsible for over 60% of world production. All of the production of
    the largest mines is sold, in advance, on fixed price contracts to key
    tantalum processors. There is no central market for tantalum and, other
    than the major mine-processor contracts, prices are determined by
    dealers on an individual transaction basis.
         In 2000, increased anticipated demand for electronic
    products caused a tantalum supply shortfall, precipitating a rush of
    panic buying and a massive price increase. In the Democratic Republic
    of Congo (DRC) this became a Klondike-style rush into the World
    Heritage Site National Parks where `coltan', a tantalum-bearing gravel
    ore, can be easily surface-mined with shovels and sieves. The mines are
    in rebel-held areas of the war-torn, impoverished DRC where warring
    factions are responsible for humanitarian atrocities and neighboring
    countries are accused of perpetuating the war as a cover for systematic
    exploitation of minerals.
         The mining camps had a massive impact on local wildlife
    through commercial hunting for food, including the wholesale killing of
    endangered species such as the eastern lowland or Grauer's gorilla.
    This species occurs only in DRC and it is estimated that over 85% of
    the world's population occurred in Kahuzi Biega National Park prior to
    the arrival of 10,000 miners and 300 professional hunters. The
    population has likely been decimated.
         The United Nations Security Council published two reports
    in 2001 which clearly stated that the private sector must accept some
    responsibility for contributing to this resource-based conflict through
    the purchase of illegally mined material the spoils of war
         The panic-buying coltan boom was followed by a tantalum
    market slump in 2001. The plummeting prices were not, as widely
    reported, due to international pressure to boycott Congolese coltan nor
    to the development of alternatives to tantalum, but rather due to
    companies working off their expensive inventories they simply didn't
    need to buy it. Despite significant planned expansions of Australian
    mining capacity, demand for tantalum is likely to continue to grow at a
    steady rate that may again outstrip supply. Hence, sources such as DRC
    will remain strategically important.
         There has been international call for companies to
    boycott Central African tantalum, which is the easiest and safest
    corporate option, particularly in terms of public relations. There is
    no need to purchase Congolese coltan at present due to large
    inventories still being used up after the panic-buying phase. However,
    due to smuggling and the nature of the world market, it is almost
    impossible to guarantee that shipments of ore purchased on the `spot'
    market are free of this `conflict coltan'. Sanctions may impact
    negatively on the poverty stricken region, which is so desperately in
    need of investment and may in fact increase dependence on bushmeat.
         Food security for the Congolese people has been
    profoundly compromised by the long-standing conflict that has ravaged
    the country. Theft and destruction of crops and livestock has combined
    with voluntary and forced desertion of agriculture for more lucrative
    mining operations, and thereby to create growing dependence on food aid
    and imports. Under such conditions of stress, dependence on bushmeat
    has increased with sustainable wild harvest off-take hugely exceeded by
    the desperate population.
         A regulated, Congolese, coltan industry based on long-
    term, transparently negotiated business arrangements with legitimate
    Congolese coltan producers, under the terms of the DRC peace process,
    should be explored. Payment of a fair market price for an ethically
    sourced product could contribute significantly to the peace process in
    the region, as business intervention may be a viable route to stability
    in a conflict that is predicated on economics. This option is far more
    complex, not least as it raises significant questions about the
    acceptability and risk of doing business in a war zone. Paradoxically,
    however, this route could demonstrate greater environmental and social
    responsibility.
         Fauna & Flora International (FFI) is global conservation
    organization that builds the capacity of partner organizations to find
    sustainable and innovative solutions to conservation issues in some of
    the most politically complex and most important reservoirs of
    biodiversity in the world. FFI is working with tantalum consuming
    industries to identify their role and responsibilities with regard to
    management of the coltan supply chain, and to find economically,
    politically, socially and environmentally viable solutions to the
    crisis.
         FFI is working with corporations and industry bodies,
    governments, conservation organizations, humanitarian NGOs and aid
    agencies, inter-governmental bodies and financial institutions to
    identify possible routes in which coltan can generate long term
    benefits to DRC rather than fueling a war which has resulted in over 3m
    `excess deaths' in 3 years.
    Karen T. Hayes, B.A. Mod. Zoo, M.B.A. Cantab.
    Corporate Affairs, Fauna & Flora International
    Great Eastern House, Tenison Road, Cambridge, CB1 2TT, UK
    tel: +44 (0)1223 571000 mobile: +44 (0)7968 179951 fax: +44 (0)1223
    461481
    www.fauna-flora.org
    4 July 2002
    Bushmeat and Global Human Health
        Species Involved: Non-human Primates, Humans, Potential other
    vector/reservoir species.
        Stakeholders Involved: Rural and urban communities in Africa, World
    Population, Centers for Disease Control, National Institutes of Health
    (USA), University and Government Health Researchers around the Globe,
    Private Companies engaging in extractive and/or construction-transport
    activity in tropical forest areas,
    Key Concepts:
         Wildlife, particularly primates, harbor diseases that can
    jump to humans and cause new and typically lethal diseases such as AIDS
    and Ebola
         Hunting, butchering, and consumption of bushmeat places
    people at increased risk of contracting virulent animal borne diseases
         Logging, Mining, and Hydroelectric or Fossil Fuel
    Transport projects have opened up new areas of forest to commercial
    hunting, increasing the risk that humans will be exposed to new animal
    borne diseases
         Bushmeat is an important source of dietary protein for
    most Central Africans, and they are unlikely to stop eating bushmeat
    unless they fully understand the risks to their health, and to the
    continued presence of these animal populations, and possibly unless
    other cheaper substitutes are available
         Increasing our understanding of the factors likely to
    promote transmission of diseases from wildlife to humans is critical to
    evaluating the public health risks associated with the commercial trade
    in bushmeat
         Capacity building at local, national, and international
    levels for disease monitoring, surveillance, and care provision among
    forest populations not only provides better information in the medium
    to long term, but also valorizes local knowledge, provides educational
    opportunities, and offers economic alternatives to commercial hunting
    for forest populations in the immediate term.

    Summary:
        Though bushmeat is often cited as essential to meeting the basic
    nutritional needs of rural African communities, studies are beginning
    to indicate considerable negative health implications connected with
    the processing and consumption of wildlife. Reports are beginning to
    emerge connecting non-human primates with Ebola virus in a variety of
    African outbreak sites. Deaths have also resulted from outbreaks of
    diarrhea linked with the consumption of bushmeat. Evidence of simian
    immunodeficiency virus (SIV) infection has been reported for 26
    different species of African non-human primates, many of which are
    regularly hunted and sold as bushmeat. Two of these viruses, SIVcpz
    from chimpanzees and SIVsm from sooty mangabeys, are the original cause
    of AIDS in humans. Together, they have been transmitted to humans on at
    least seven occasions. New research suggests that HIV recombinants are
    also appearing in forest sites where commercial hunting and in-
    migration of human populations has affected the distribution and
    circulation of viruses. This has scientific as well as public health
    implications, locally and globally.

    Background:
        Emerging infectious diseases are a major threat to global human
    health. While dramatic outbreaks of Ebola virus or Sin Nombre (hanta)
    virus have attracted widespread media attention, the disease with the
    greatest global impact to have emerged recently is the acquired
    immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS). First recognized in 1981, AIDS
    represents the endstage of infection with one of two lentiviruses
    (human immunodeficiency virus types 1 or 2) of zoonotic origin. HIV-1
    has spread to most parts of the world, while HIV-2 has remained largely
    restricted to West Africa. On a global scale, HIV/AIDS represents the
    most important public health threat of the new millennium. These recent
    research results emerge at a time when human populations are increasing
    while availability of resources to meet basic nutritional needs are
    decreasing. Finding ways to reduce human health threats potentially
    caused by the bushmeat trade while addressing protein needs for
    millions of people is a global imperative. Bushmeat in Central Africa
    constitutes 80% of all meat consumed and provides poor rural and urban
    families with as much as 50% of daily protein requirements. Forest
    antelope (duikers) are the most popular species to hunt because they
    are relatively large and abundant, and are easily trapped at little
    cost using wire snares. As antelope numbers decline, hunters shift to
    primates, which are easy but more expensive to hunt, as each animal
    costs a shotgun shell. Eventually, as all large animals are depleted,
    people resort to hunting and selling rodents. Given the greater genetic
    proximity of apes and monkeys to humans, people are most at risk of
    contracting animal borne diseases when bushmeat markets have a high
    ratio of primates.

    Current Understanding and Activities:
        Commercial logging of tropical forests represents an important
    economic activity for several African countries. Logging operations
    facilitate the intensification of commercial hunting by building roads
    into once relatively inaccessible areas of forest with abundant
    wildlife, and by allowing hunters to travel on logging vehicles and to
    transport their bushmeat to urban markets. This increased penetration
    of tropical forest has the potential to increase human exposure to new
    infectious agents. In west central Africa alone, numerous primate
    species known to harbor SIV, including colobus, sun-tailed and DeBrazza
    monkeys as well as mandrills, drills, chimpanzees, and red-capped
    mangabeys, are regularly hunted and sold at local bushmeat markets.
    Certain of the simian viruses have properties that render them at least
    candidates for natural transmission. Thus, although there is no
    evidence that zoonotic transmissions have occurred as a direct result
    of this commercialized bushmeat trade, the potential for human exposure
    has increased, as have the conditions that might support the emergence
    of new zoonotic infections. A number of studies are currently being
    undertaken to investigate the linkages between wildlife diseases and
    human health. Such research is essential in addressing many important
    questions concerning wildlife human interactions. Equally important are
    projects to explore alternative models for economic development that do
    not entail large scale ecological disturbance, and to develop and test
    approaches to meeting Central Africans' basic nutritional and protein
    needs, whilst shifting consumer preferences away from eating bushmeat.
        The events that brought about the HIV-1 pandemic may never be fully
    elucidated, though their connection to emergence mechanisms for other
    pathogens, such as Ebola or Hepatitis, merits serious attention. Recent
    research suggests that initial emergence of SIV into human populations
    as HIV-1occurred during the first wave of extractive activity in
    African forests, during the rubber boom of the 1920s and 1930s.
    Regardless of what ultimately caused its explosive spread, conditions
    that promote and sustain zoonotic disease emergence have likely
    increased rather than decreased in the past two decades. Studies
    underway seek to confirm and track continued transmission of SIVs to
    humans at present, and to determine the prevalence of infection and
    associated risk factors. Researchers are also developing and testing
    diagnostic assays capable of recognizing a wide range of lentiviral
    infections in both humans and primates, including the development and
    application of non-invasive approaches to screen primate populations in
    the wild for evidence of SIV infection. Related work trains local
    forest residents to monitor and report on the health of gorillas and
    other non-human primates, and has been instrumental in documenting and
    responding to recent Ebola outbreaks. Addressing the origins and future
    of HIV and other pathogens entails attention to the convergence of
    issues such as environmental change, conservation of endangered primate
    species, economic development, public health, environmental governance,
    and corporate environmental leadership. Such work will increasingly
    require interdisciplinary collaboration of scientists with expertise in
    anthropology, history, ecology, political science, economics,
    primatology, epidemiology, virology and conservation biology. It will
    demand an emphasis on infrastructure development and training in the
    areas concerned, sensitivity to feelings of stigma, and respect for
    distinct culturally based attitudes to some of these issues. It will
    foster discussions concerning resource allocations based on scientific
    and public health priorities as well as the changing definitions and
    perpetual demands of economic development.

    Recommended Solutions:
        An interdisciplinary working group of international researchers
    studying emergent viral disease in tropical forest sites all over the
    world met under the auspices of the International Society for Ecosystem
    Health in June, 2002 in Washington D.C.; they will meet again at
    Harvard University, under the auspices of the Harvard Academy for
    International and Area Studies, and the Harvard AIDS Institute, in
    November 2002 (for more information, write rhardin@wcfia.harvard.edu).
    During the final roundtable session in June, with representatives from
    Department of State, Department of Interior, Department of Agriculture,
    and other government agencies as well as non-governmental
    organizations, the following recommendations emerged:

    Governments and donors:
        1. Recognize that previous distinctions between domestic and
    international health concerns are no longer necessarily accurate;
    Pathogens in a tropical forest today could eventually reach Arizona or
    Michigan.
        Example: HIV history, above.
        Recommendation: Institute internal training modules for government
    agencies and policy makers, demonstrating and discussing links between
    human health, ecosystem health, good governance, strong economic
    performance, stability, and U.S. national interests/security concerns.
        2. Consider a Relative Risk Framework: Place known risks (spread of
    existing HIV strains, emergence of new HIV strains, and spread of
    Ebola) on a continuum from high to low risk. Examples: Such an approach
    has worked well for Food Safety in North America. Recommendations: In
    the processes that make up the bushmeat trade (opening of forest areas,
    in-migration, meat demand, market development, hunting intensification,
    ecological change, market response, etc.) determine via hazard analysis
    where are critical control points. Identify the risk reduction points
    and develop a plan and standards for each point. Research can inform
    that process, creating better management programs and training
    programs.
        3. Build better funding support for multidisciplinary research
    initiatives with explicit health and ecology focus.
        Examples: recent NIH initiatives under Fogarty auspices, and others
    just taking shape.
        Recommendations: strong research protocols protecting animal and
    human health, and encouraging teams to share and archive their samples;
    engage in old-fashioned, omnivorous survey work with open minds to
    identify not only known but also as yet unknown pathogens.
        4. Foster participation in training opportunities at research and
    health career levels.
        Examples: WCS training for local residents in Africa on Primate
    Health, supported by USFWS; training for international researchers at
    the Biology of Disease Vectors Program, Colorado State University,
    supported by MacArthur Foundation.
        Recommendation: Earmark funds for local capacity building in any
    conservation or environmental protection initiative; create and/or
    strengthen scholarship and fellowship initiatives in these fields for
    international research training.
        5. Senior Government leadership is needed in multilateral
    negotiations and recently advancing initiatives related to forests and
    trade where the U.S. has interest.
        Examples: We are entering a new institutional era on forest
    management: CBD has adopted a forest action program; G8 interest; Rio +
    10 with clear forest-related deliverables.
        Recommendation: While no one institution or organization has total
    control over such issues as cross sectoral collaboration for
    sustainable forest management, the U.S. can and should be aggressive on
    public-private partnerships, as those emerging in Congo basin
    countries.
        6. Ensure the viability and perpetuity of protected areas in
    tropical forests.
        Examples: slow building of a transborder initiative in the western
    Congo basin, where core areas are surrounded by public/private and
    trinational government efforts at joint management of mixed-use zones.
    Recent research suggests that core protected areas, more than buffer
    zones or management areas, are the best chance for continued densities
    of forest fauna, with viable population numbers, while experiments in
    effective management play themselves out in adjoining areas. As
    wildlife repositories, such core areas have clear value for the
    education of international publics as well as local residents.
        Recommendation: Maintain or increase funding levels for
    establishment and management of protected areas. Earmark funds for
    capacity building programs in core areas that value and reward local
    forest and health knowledge, while expanding skills bases and providing
    new economic opportunities in research, tourism, and health related
    fields for local residents.

    Private sector:
        1. Identify appropriate protein alternatives to bushmeat and
    mechanisms for making these resources available and affordable to rural
    and urban communities.
        Example: recent trials with imported chicken and fish in
    Cameroonian logging concessions.
        Recommendation: exploring protein alternatives must be done with an
    eye open for the introduction of new pathogens to wildlife communities
    via the domesticated animals introduced. However, care in the
    distribution and marketing of alternatives can reduce such risks, while
    also reducing consumption of wild animals.
        2. Integrate research-based monitoring of disease processes into
    development projects and for-profit activities in tropical forests.
        Examples: PRESICA project in Cameroon, working with logging
    companies and local populations to conduct blood tests of humans and
    wildlife in logged areas, while increasing awareness and dialogue about
    SIV/HIV among stakeholders; Brazilian example of Power Company funding
    pre- and post- dam construction monitoring of arbovirus levels, and
    offering treatment to local populations where levels have increased.
        Recommendation: Partner with existing research projects, or create
    an internal agency/service for research and monitoring, focusing on
    links between human health and the bushmeat trade including mechanisms
    of disease transmission, monitoring prevalence patterns, and
    documenting and supporting human nutritional needs.

    Environmental NGOs:
        1. Work to develop health indicators, for use across ecosystems.
        Example: Biodiversity indicators exist at various degrees of
    specificity. How is that addressed and how we can combine the health
    with the biodiversity? Also, robust (non-normative) indicators/criteria
    are being implemented since the September 11 scare, in various sites
    around the world.
        Recommendation: Use current WCS wildlife health program as a model,
    or starting point. Also, return to original Hotspots Monitoring plan
    for Conservation International: biomedical issues were a part of the
    plan. Let us pick those aspects up; work with medical and public health
    resources in hotspots, and try to systematize our information gathering
    and training on these topics.
        2. Develop awareness raising activities, at various levels.
        Example: The Bushmeat Crisis Task Force has effectively generated
    interest in U.S. based zoo-going publics, and in the North American
    media. Project PRESICA is developing and testing brochures and other
    educational materials in Cameroon. Conservation International is doing
    awareness raising work in Ghana.
        Recommendation: weak spots on such work include reaching the outer
    edges of the stakeholder spectrum: local residents of tropical forest
    areas, and corporate leaders at the international level. Bolster
    funding and collaboration across organizations on effective awareness
    raising at these levels, learning from the successful experiences
    mentioned above.
    Bushmeat and Ecology
        Bushmeat Focal Issue: Ecological Processes and Bushmeat
        Species Involved: Seed-dispersing animals, including duikers,
    monkeys, apes and elephants
        Stakeholders Involved: Rural Communities, Hunters, Traders,
    Protected Area Managers, Logging Companies, Development Agencies and
    Donors, Future Generations
    Key Concepts:
         Hunting Wildlife for meat is a greater immediate threat
    to biodiversity conservation than is deforestation.
         People in the Congo Basin eat as much meat as do
    Europeans and Americans; 60%-80% of animal protein is derived from
    wildlife. As much as 1 million metric tons of bushmeat is eaten each
    year in the Congo Basin.
         Primates and antelopes that are commonly hunted for meat,
    play an important role in the forest by spreading the seeds of trees,
    vines and shrubs.
         Forest wildlife productivity is very low compared to
    savanna populations and cannot sustainably supply protein demands for
    growing human populations in West and Central Africa.
         Legitimizing and helping countries enforce existing
    wildlife laws is central to effective wildlife conservation.
         Securing long-term support for protected areas and buffer
    zones will be the only solution for many species' survival.
         A significant percentage of the animals being hunted are
    classified as threatened or endangered and are protected by
    international laws (e.g. CITES).

    Summary
        Though deforestation and habitat loss is often cited as the primary
    cause of local wildlife extinction, hunting for both local consumption
    and large commercial markets has become the most immediate factor that
    threatens the future of wildlife in the Congo Basin in the next 5-15
    years and has already resulted in widespread local extinctions
    throughout the Upper Guinea Forest Ecosystem of West Africa. Empty
    Forest Syndrome describes a forest that has been emptied of its
    wildlife structurally, it appears normal, but no large-bodied animals
    are present. As wildlife are being hunted out of forests, those
    ecosystems lose important seed dispersers, thus affecting the ecology
    of the entire ecosystem.
        The short-term economic benefits derived from the commercial
    bushmeat trade, though expedient for poor families today, may
    jeopardize long-term economic opportunities for future generations. And
    worse may place people in increased jeopardy of contracting and
    transmitting animal-derived diseases such as Ebola or HIV (See BCTF
    Fact Sheet on Health).

    Background
        If only one species of animal existed in the forest, hunters would
    continue to hunt that species until it became so scarce, from over
    hunting, that profits from hunting declined below that which the hunter
    could make doing something else, such as farming or fishing.
    Unfortunately for rare and endangered species, the forests of West and
    Central Africa are home to numerous wildlife species that are hunted
    for food. In this case, when hunters go hunting they are not targeting
    single species, but are roaming the forest in search of any animal
    worth (in economic terms) killing. A bushmeat hunter with a shotgun is
    inclined to shoot the largest animal he can be assured of killing
    because this will generate the most profit per cartridge. So although
    an animal may become scarce, even to the point of almost going locally
    extinct, a hunter will shoot it if he encounters it, and it is large
    enough to warrant using up an expensive shotgun cartridge. Given this
    fact, rare and endangered species are likely to be driven to extinction
    by hunters when other more abundant animals continue to make hunting
    profitable.
        Moreover, even when over hunting and bushmeat scarcity causes
    prices to rise and substitutes to be more competitive, hunting will
    continue in areas where bushmeat capture and transport costs remain
    comparable to the costs of livestock rearing.
        Bushmeat is often a primary source of protein for local
    communities, as other alternatives are frequently not viable. In
    Central Africa, domestic animals such as cattle, goats, pigs, chickens
    and ducks are raised by rural and urban households, but they are
    primarily viewed as savings and insurance rather than as sources of
    protein. This traditional value of livestock remains important to
    households in the region today because inflation is high and access to
    banks and formal credit is limited or absent. Furthermore, tsetse flies
    and trypanosomiasis severely limit cattle raising in the forested and
    scrubby savannah landscapes typical of the region. As a result, the
    meat of domestic livestock tends only to appear in rural or urban
    markets that are located relatively close to savannahs and ethnic
    groups with a tradition of pastoralism.

    Current Understanding and Activities
        Hunting of wildlife to meet people's demand for protein may still
    be sustainable in the few remaining areas where population densities
    are less than 2 people/km2, trade routes are poorly established, and
    human population growth rates are low or negative. The scale of the
    commercial bushmeat trade now occurring in West and Central Africa,
    however, is driven by markets with high human densities and growth
    rates. This industrial-level market threatens the survival of many
    species, including several unique to the dense forested regions of
    Africa. While deforestation is an obvious menace to wildlife dependent
    on these habitats, hunting constitutes an even greater threat to the
    ecosystem. Even where tree cover is relatively intact, we find forests
    without wildlife this is known as Empty Forest Syndrome. Such forests
    suffer dramatic effects in structure and composition as the wildlife
    necessary to disperse seeds and enable regeneration are gone. This may
    result in loss of many plant species as well as considerable effects on
    water flow, including streams and major rivers.
        Loss of wildlife from hunting, means loss of seed dispersing
    animals that play a key role in determining tree composition and
    distribution, altering both the structure and function of the forest
    and potentially causing irreversible ecological effects (e.g., carbon
    sequestration) with global consequences.
        Wildlife populations, though highly diverse in these forests, are
    not as productive when compared with savanna-based wildlife
    populations. In general, there is an order of magnitude difference
    between the biomass available for hunting within the same amount of
    space when we compare forests (2,500 kg per square kilometer) and
    savannas (25,000 kilograms per square kilometer) (Robinson and Bennett
    2000). Thus, animal husbandry programs such as the game ranching
    efforts (commercial management of wildlife for meat and skins) found in
    East and Southern Africa are not a viable alternative in West and
    Central Africa.

    Recommended Solutions
         Long-term support for protected areas including provision
    of well-equipped and trained anti-poaching units is a clear priority
    for mitigating the commercial bushmeat trade. This is particularly true
    for West Africa where much of the original forest cover has been
    removed and protected areas provide some of the only land available for
    many wildlife populations.
         Target extractive industries to manage wildlife resources
    in partnership with governments and conservation NGOs.
         Increase support for national and transborder protected
    area networks and for developing wildlife management capacity at local,
    national, and regional levels.
         Provide support for stabilization of conflicts throughout
    the region an important link with dramatic losses of wildlife that
    removes potential economic development and ecological importance from
    future generations of Africans.
         Support environmentally sound economic development
    throughout West Africa and the Congo Basin. Influence broader
    environmental strategy implementation (e.g. through National Bushmeat
    Action Plans) and increase capacity for international cooperative
    efforts.
         Development of multi-level research and education
    programs including: fundamental and applied research to increase
    understanding of tropical forest ecosystems; to improve methods for
    harnessing sustainable, renewable natural resources; to develop
    alternative sources of income and protein; to adapt school and
    university curricula to include an improved understanding of
    biodiversity; to introduce new technology such as interpretation of
    satellite imagery, communications and tools such as GIS and molecular
    biology.
         Support public awareness campaigns designed to reach out
    to range states to raise awareness of the bushmeat crisis and their
    role in implementing solutions.

    Culture and Bushmeat
        Bushmeat Focus Issue: Social Ecology
        Species Involved: All bushmeat species: rodents, giant pangolins,
    brush-tailed porcupine, duikers (forest antelope), monkeys,
    chimpanzees, gorillas, elephants, and humans
        Stakeholders Involved: Rural and urban communities, indigenous
    groups, conservation and development organizations
    Key Concepts:
         Bushmeat is an important source of protein for poor rural
    and urban families in West and Central Africa.
         Many communities will continue to hunt even where
    alternatives exist as bushmeat and hunting are culturally and socially
    important.
         When people do not have stable land tenure or livelihood
    security, they are less likely to care for the resources in the areas
    where they reside.
         Population growth has a major effect on the demand for
    bushmeat. Even if per capita consumption remains stable, increasing
    population can have a devastating effect on wildlife and natural
    resources. More land must be cleared for housing and agriculture, and
    more forest resources must be extracted to meet basic needs.

    Summary
        Local communities are inextricably tied to the current bushmeat
    crisis in West and Central Africa. They form the network of hunters,
    traders, truck drivers, market-resellers, restaurateurs and consumers
    that moves wildlife from the forest to the urban cooking pot. All
    participants in their trade network rely on bushmeat for some of their
    livelihoods. Wildlife provides protein, cultural and religious
    linkages, and a source of income many rural families. People do not
    typically view bushmeat hunting as a problem. Rather, wildlife is
    viewed more as crop pests, threats to their lives and livelihoods, an
    inexhaustible resource free for the taking, and a new source of income.
    However, growing human population and changing economic conditions are
    driving demand for bushmeat that now exceeds the rate that hunted
    wildlife are replaced within the forest. Unsustainable hunting for meat
    will mean the loss of a valuable source of food and income for the huge
    number of families involved in bushmeat trade networks. Finding ways to
    conserve threatened and endangered wildlife species, without
    compromising the health and welfare of poor rural and urban families is
    a challenge. Shifting demand to locally produced alternatives to
    bushmeat and revitalizing the traditional agricultural economies of
    recent entrants into the bushmeat trade, are the keys to curbing the
    commercial trade in bushmeat without jeopardizing the health and
    security of West and Central Africans.

    Background
        Wildlife species have held great importance for forest-dwelling
    peoples for millennia. Duikers (forest antelopes), monkeys, rodents and
    bushpigs all serve human communities as sources of protein, cultural
    and social artifacts and now, as sources of cash when sold to bushmeat
    markets. Hunting is vital to communities without access to agricultural
    markets, or to those who are too poor to purchase other sources of
    meat. Hunting is inextricably woven into many societies. Animal parts,
    such as horns, feathers or bones are a crucial part of many cultural
    and religious ceremonies. In areas where people live at low densities
    and can rotate their usage of forest resources, wildlife populations do
    not seem to suffer much damage. However, increasing population
    densities and unstable land tenure risks depleting the wildlife upon
    which many communities depend for their way-of-life and cultural
    identity. Halting unsustainable hunting and helping to retain the
    cultural value of wildlife is a challenge when many people involved in
    the commercial trade in bushmeat view wildlife as abundant,
    inexhaustible, and free to be used.

    Current Understanding and Activities
        Livelihood insecurity, and absence of land tenure facilitate the
    unsustainable commercial trade of bushmeat. Poor people with few job
    opportunities see hunting or trading or re-selling bushmeat as a source
    of income to meet today's critical needs, and, not surprisingly, are
    less concerned that their actions risk forfeiting their livelihood in
    the future. Similarly, families without the legal or practical ability
    to restrict who hunts how much in their forest, are encouraged to hunt
    all the wildlife they can as quickly as possible, before others do.
        Conservation and development organizations (both governmental and
    nongovernmental) must tread carefully when working with local people on
    the bushmeat issue. All of us resent ``outsiders'' imposing
    restrictions on our behavior that seem artificial and unconnected to
    our personal situations, needs and realities. Building relationships
    and capacity among all key stakeholder groups enables the development
    of appropriate solutions that can link resource use regulations and
    activities that offer alternative sources of protein and economic
    opportunities.

    Recommended Solutions
        Working with all participants in the commercial bushmeat trade to
    increase livelihood and resource access security will increase the
    success of any projects that seek to decrease the quantity of wildlife
    hunted for food. Targeting development activities to draw population
    pressure away from fragile areas, and promoting the use of family
    planning can help secure access to forest resources over the long term.
    People must have access to alternative, economically competitive, and
    palatable protein sources, for bushmeat consumption to decrease.
                                     ______

        Mr. Gilchrest. Thank you, sir.
        Dr. Richard Carroll?

      STATEMENT OF RICHARD W. CARROLL, DIRECTOR, WEST AND CENTRAL
          AFRICA AND MADAGASCAR PROGRAMS, WORLD WILDLIFE FUND

        Mr. Carroll. Yes, Mr. Chairman, thank you for the
    opportunity to testify today on the devastating impact of the
    bushmeat trade in Africa and to offer some solutions.
        I am Dr. Richard Carroll, Director of the West and Central
    Africa and Madagascar Program at the World Wildlife Fund. WWF
    and its 5 million members worldwide is the largest private
    conservation organization working internationally to protect
    wildlife and wildlife habitats, and we currently sponsor
    conservation programs in more than 100 countries.
        Many of the issues have been raised by my colleagues, and I
    will focus my comments on protected areas and logging
    concession controls and the political process of the Yaounde
    summit as three viable, concrete, and interrelated solutions to
    the bushmeat trade in Central Africa.
        Protected areas are the only land-use form fully dedicated
    to biodiversity conservation where wildlife should be safe from
    gun and snare. In the corridors between these protected areas
    and in other forests where logging concessions operate, illegal
    and uncontrolled logging and hunting must be stopped, and
    transportation routes--roads, railways, and airplanes for the
    international transport--must be controlled.
        As a muddy-boot gorilla researcher who reached silverback
    or gray-beard status in the forests of Central Africa, let me
    take you to the ground level for a little run through the
    jungle, if I may, to show you how one protected area, Dzanga-
    Sangha in the Central African Republic, got started and its
    impact on conservation.
        In 1976, as a Peace Corps volunteer, I was asked by the
    Minister of the Environment in the Central African Republic to
    check out the wildlife conservation potential in the forests of
    the southwest CAR. I arrived at the remote town of Bayanga, and
    the next day I was in the forest with my new-found BaAka Pygmy
    friends, Mekma and Mevanda. It was clear from the tracks,
    nests, signs, and sightings that this was indeed a rich forest
    and wildlife punctuated by beautiful forest glades called
    ``byes'' in the BaAka language, where wildlife congregates.
    However, hunting camps were on every stream, and snare trails
    crisscrossed the animal trails.
        We walked over 2,000 kilometers of transsects and confirmed
    the importance of the forest and the degree of threat to this
    forest. Mike Fay joined me and completed the surveys in the
    southern tip of the country. The network of logging roads
    allowed access to migrant workers from the logging company even
    to the deepest reaches of the forest, formerly the realm only
    of the BaAka Pygmies. Company workers check their snares, and
    the meat returns on the logging vehicles in the evening. The
    forests is being emptied by outsiders with no long commitment
    to the region, leaving little for the people that need it most.
        For forest people like the BaAka Pygmies whose cultural,
    physical, and spiritual life depends on an intact forest,
    forest and wildlife depletion means cultural extinction for
    these forest people. Where the forest is going and the wildlife
    is gone, the Jengi, or the forest spirit, is no longer there.
        The BaAka said to me that they wanted an intact forest and
    wildlife and the continued use of these resources, but also the
    skills to adapt to a changing way of life in this forest. That
    required literacy, numeracy, and health care. So we set out to
    try to establish a protected area system that will preserve the
    forest and the wildlife with a management program that will
    allow for the continued traditional uses of these resources and
    provide health care and education that is so necessary.
        We named it Dzanga-Sangha and the program was funded by the
    WWF/USAID Wildlands and Human Needs Program, and continued
    support has come from CARPE over many years. Additional support
    came from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Elephant
    Conservation Act that supported anti-poaching efforts. Former
    poachers from the local population were trained as protectors,
    and bushmeat camps and major elephant poachers were quickly
    reduced.
        A training camp was established to train eco-guards for
    Dzanga-Sangha and other protected areas within the region.
    Before this protection program began, you were lucky to see one
    elephant at the now famous Dzanga bye. Today, at any time of
    the day a visitor may encounter 50 to 200 elephants using this
    clearing. Research at this bye has identified over 3,000
    individual elephants using this clearing alone. I invite you
    all to come and see this amazing place any time you would like.
        By 1990, the Dzanga-Ndoki National Park and the Dzanga-
    Sangha Dense Forest Reserve were officially created. The
    interior regulations for the park and reserve called for 90
    percent of the tourism revenues to be disbursed locally, and
    close to 200 people found employment. As local people began to
    receive the conservation dividend, they began to realize that
    live elephants at the Dzanga bye were more valuable than dead
    elephants. Conservation began to be seen as a viable
    development tool, and the wildlife began to rebound.
        We are also working with the logging companies in the
    region, getting them to take their responsibilities, to close
    off roads to poachers, to provide alternatives to poaching, and
    to sanction the transport of meat on their logging vehicles.
        We recognize, though, that elephants don't carry passports,
    and this forest is contiguous across the borders into the Congo
    and southeastern Cameroon, and the development of a trinational
    protected area complex is proposed. Three national parks were
    developed and officially joined into the Dzanga River
    Trinational in December 2000, allowing trans-border anti-
    poaching patrols. Now a poacher apprehended in Dzanga-Sangha
    can no longer flee into Cameroon or the Congo. The result is a
    trinational protected area system covering over 7 million
    acres. This trinational program is a direct result of the
    unprecedented political commitment expressed in the Yaounde
    Declaration on Conservation and Sustainable Management of the
    Forests, signed by the heads of state of six Central African
    countries in March 1999 and has resulted in the creation of
    additional forest protected areas totaling approximately 15,000
    square miles. And they have a plan for 12 additional trans-
    border programs like the Dzanga River Trinational which they
    would like to implement in the next 5 years.
        In order to stem the bushmeat crisis in Central Africa, we
    are requesting the leadership of the U.S. Government to support
    these Yaounde Summit commitments. The key to conservation of
    the forests in the Congo Basin is the development of an
    ecologically representative, financial viable protected area
    network spanning the entire basin from the Mountains of the
    Moon to the Gulf of Guinea, connected by conservation corridors
    of sustainably managed forests.
        Over the next few weeks, WWF, WCS, and CI will submit a
    joint proposal to the U.S. Government requesting $15 million a
    year for 10 years, likely to be administered through CARPE or
    Fish and Wildlife Service, that we hope will result in over 30
    million acres of functional national parks, over 60 million
    acres of managed logging concessions in the surrounding areas,
    and a vast reduction in the biodiversity loss through the
    bushmeat trade.
        Mr. Chairman, it is a time of great conservation
    convergence in the Congo Basin. The stars are truly aligned for
    the first time in the history where the political will of the
    region's governments is at an all-time high. Key conservation
    organizations are taking a common path to support a protected
    area network spanning the basis. And the U.S. Government has
    taken leadership in the Congo Basin Initiative, forming a
    conservation constellation which bodes well for timely efforts
    in this region.
        I have also submitted for the record a report made by the
    Traffic Bureau on the bushmeat trade in East and Southern
    Africa that is not included in my oral testimony.
        Thank you very much, and I would be happy to answer any
    questions, and also happy to take you out in the field any time
    you would like to.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Carroll follows:]

    Statement of Dr. Richard W. Carroll, Director, West and Central Africa
                  and Madagascar Program, World Wildlife Fund

        Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the
    opportunity to testify today. I am Dr. Richard Carroll, Director for
    West and Central Africa and Madagascar at the World Wildlife Fund. WWF
    is the largest private conservation organization working
    internationally to protect wildlife and wildlife habitats. We currently
    sponsor conservation programs in more than 100 countries, thanks to
    support of 1.2 million members in the United States and more than 5
    million members worldwide.
        We are here today to discuss the devastating impact of the bushmeat
    trade in Africa and some solutions to protect the many species affected
    by this trade. We are also here to discuss the future of millions of
    Africans who depend on forest products for their livelihoods. The
    United States, primarily through programs administered by the Fish and
    Wildlife Service and USAID--in particular, CARPE--has played a critical
    role in the protection and conservation of the forest and its wildlife.
    World Wildlife Fund strongly urges that these programs be increased and
    expanded to firmly establish a network of ecologically representative
    protected areas spanning the Congo Basin.

    The Bushmeat Crisis in the Congo Basin
         The Bushmeat Crisis in the Congo Basin is a human health
    and food security issue, an economic and political issue as well as an
    urgent ecological issue. The bushmeat trade is the leading cause of
    biodiversity loss in the Congo Basin and is driven by an accelerating
    logging industry and growing human population.
         Approximately 20 million people depend on the resources
    of the forest for food, materials and shelter. Consumption of bushmeat
    is estimated to be about one million metric tonnes per year. As human
    populations are expected to double in the next 25 years, if no
    alternatives are found to the bushmeat crisis, it will spell extinction
    of most wildlife species and result in a massive food disaster.
         If the demand for bushmeat continues to grow as expected,
    and consumers do not switch to the meat of domestic animals, we can
    expect that apes and most large bodied forest mammals will be
    eradicated from the forest, throughout much of the region.
         The bushmeat problem covers both subsistence hunting and
    commercial hunting. Commercial hunting supplies urban markets in the
    African countries themselves, and even serves consumption needs abroad
    where there are large expatriate populations of Africans.
         Projections of future logging trends suggest that an
    estimated 70 percent of the region's forests could be lost by 2040
    unless large-scale changes aimed at conserving the forest and the
    livelihoods of its native people are taken now.
         At the local level, bushmeat is a survival issue. Simple
    subsistence is no longer possible. All communities and all families are
    part of the cash economy, however modestly. Families must pay school
    fees, buy medicines, purchase salt, sugar, soap and kerosene.
         Civil conflict both stems from and creates resource
    degradation. Increasingly, military weapons are used by commercial
    poachers, especially for large animals such as elephants. Most illegal
    shooting of bushmeat still takes place with shotguns using shells
    manufactured in Congo or Nigeria. Pressure should be brought to close
    these factories and limit the availability of hunting apparatus such as
    steel cable used for snares.
         Logging companies are showing an increasing willingness
    to collaborate, especially on reduction of bushmeat hunting on their
    concessions. Examples are the work of WCS in Congo and of WWF with a
    Malaysian company near the Minkebe reserve in Gabon. These methods hold
    promise for replication throughout the priority regions.
         The chimpanzee and other primates have been suggested as
    potential vectors for the emerging diseases related to HIV/AIDs and the
    recent outbreaks of Ebola have been linked to the handling and eating
    of wildlife.
         For forest people like the BaAka pygmies, whose cultural,
    physical and spiritual life depends on an intact forest, forest and
    wildlife depletion means cultural extinction of these forest peoples.
         WWF is working with governments and private railway
    companies in Cameroon and Gabon to reduce transport of bushmeat.
         In terms of GDP, all sub-Saharan countries allocate a
    relatively larger percentage of their budgets to national protected
    area systems than do either the United States or Canada.
         The Yaounde Heads of State Summit and Declaration have
    raised the political commitment to conservation in the Congo Basin by a
    quantum leap and has presented a unique opportunity to establish a
    coherent conservation plan for the Congo Basin. This plan calls for a
    regional network of transborder and other protected areas, a halt to
    uncontrolled and illegal logging, and hunting and greater integration
    of local populations and the private sector in forest management.

    WHY IT IS IMPORTANT: BIODIVERSITY AND RESOURCES IN THE FORESTS OF
            CENTRAL AFRICA
        Stretching from the Mountains of the Moon in eastern Democratic
    Republic of the Congo to the coast of the Gulf of Guinea, the Congo
    Basin contains a quarter of the world's tropical forests, covering 2.8
    million square kilometers. Forest covers almost 50 percent of the
    landmass spanning the political boundaries of Cameroon, Equatorial
    Guinea, the Central African Republic, the Republic of Congo
    (Brazzaville) and the Democratic Republic of Congo. The Congo Basin is
    exceeded in size only by the Amazon Basin. The tropical forest block
    also contains some of the richest biodiversity in Africa, which
    includes countless plant, animal, and insect species. The region
    harbors the most diverse assemblage of plants and animals in Africa,
    with more than 1,000 species of birds and over 10,000 plant species of
    which about 3,000 are endemic to the region. The forests are home to
    about 400 mammal species, including intact populations of large
    mammals, such as forest elephants, gorillas, bongos and buffaloes. They
    are also important as a source of food, materials and shelter for over
    20 million people.
        The Central African forests are home to some of the most
    spectacular and endangered wildlife species in Africa, including one
    half of the remaining elephants on the continent. A keystone species of
    these forests are the forest elephants, which create habitat for other
    wildlife and disperse seeds. Also making their home in this region are
    the three subspecies of gorilla: the endangered mountain gorilla, the
    eastern lowland gorilla and the more numerous western lowland gorilla.
    Other terrestrial wildlife found in the Congo Basin are chimpanzees,
    bonobo, okapi, and bongo. The rivers of Central Africa harbor some of
    the richest concentrations of the world's aquatic biodiversity, most of
    which is endemic. Plant species in the Congo Basin, many with medicinal
    properties, are numerous and continue to be discovered.
        In addition to the myriad species of flora and fauna, the Congo
    Basin is home to people representing a range of ethnic groups,
    including the many different groups of indigenous hunter-gatherer
    people. The BaAka are one such group whose lives and well-being--
    physical, cultural, and spiritual--are intimately linked with the
    forests. The forest also represents great economic importance and
    promise to these people and their countries.
        The Congo Basin is also extremely rich in natural resources. The
    region's crude oil production surpassed four million barrels a day in
    2000, more than Iran, Venezuela or Mexico. The United States gets 16
    percent of its oil from sub-Saharan Africa--almost equaling imports
    from Saudi Arabia. By 2015, it is expected that the region will supply
    the United States with 25 percent of its oil--surpassing the Persian
    Gulf. The vast majority of this oil will come from the Gulf of Guinea,
    in the Congo Basin.
        Development of this strategic resource area is vital to America's
    national security. However, unless conservation of the rainforest is
    expanded now, one resource will simply be traded for another. Both can
    be used; one can be saved.

    WHY IT IS THREATENED: BUSHMEAT, LOGGING, POPULATION GROWTH AND RESOURCE
            EXTRACTION
        Central African forests are under threat by a multitude of factors.
    Almost four million hectares of Africa's forests are destroyed each
    year as a result of forest clearance for agriculture to feed the
    growing number of people in the region. Mineral and oil extraction,
    unsustainable logging and pervasive political instability are other
    factors. Road building by logging companies penetrates into the heart
    of previously remote forests and gives easy access to commercial
    hunters and buyers of bush meat. This, combined with a lack of
    surveillance, has led to extreme over-hunting in Central Africa's
    forests of such vulnerable species as the western lowland gorilla,
    elephant and leopard. The chimpanzee--recently disclosed as the
    potential source of the HIV 1 virus in humans and vital to medical
    research--is also severely endangered; its forest home is being logged
    and it continues to be hunted and sold as food in Central Africa. With
    human populations growing at 2-3percent and subsistence level
    agriculture still the predominant source of food and income for the
    majority of Central Africans, habitat loss as a result of forest
    conversion to agriculture, and climate change are likely to be the most
    significant long term threats to biodiversity. The immediate threats
    are illegal logging and commercial hunting and trading of wildlife for
    meat and ivory facilitated by logging operations.
        Logging is an economically important land-use throughout Central
    Africa. All nations within the region are dependent on extractive
    industries for a large percentage of their Gross Domestic Product,
    almost all foreign exchange, and much of the tax revenues that finance
    government expenses. Logging companies have control over 50-80 percent
    of the forests outside protected areas. In many cases, poor management
    practices and technical shortcomings cause needless damage and
    degradation in and around logging concessions, while many operations
    are carried out in violation of forestry regulations. Although it
    contributes significantly to national economies and, to some extent, to
    local needs, illegal logging has a particularly devastating impact on
    biodiversity. Illegal logging deliberately targets the remaining
    pristine forests, including protected areas. Available data indicate
    that deforestation rates were relatively low until the 1980s, but
    increased rapidly during the 1990s. This rate is still increasing.
        Logging industries directly and indirectly facilitate a large
    increase in commercial bushmeat hunting. While the hunting of bushmeat
    has been a traditional livelihood for forest indigenous people, in
    particular pygmies, the development of a large-scale commercial trade
    in bushmeat is relatively recent and has been facilitated by the
    development of logging roads deep into the forest. Current logging
    practices not only result in increased consumption of bushmeat within
    concession areas but also facilitate the supply of bushmeat to urban
    markets and enhance the profitability of the trade.
        This alarming level of threat is caused by many inter-linked
    factors. In general, national governments have continued the forest
    exploitation policies introduced last century by the colonial powers.
    They are supported and encouraged in this by multilateral and bilateral
    institutions, to which they are heavily indebted, as part of the
    structural adjustment polices and economic liberalization programs
    imposed as a condition of further lending. Thus, the primary goal of
    forest policies in the region is to promote industrial timber
    production for export by allocating most of the forest as logging
    concessions. Unfortunately, the policy, institutional and legal
    frameworks for controlling private sector interests and enforcing
    conservation regulations are extremely weak. As a result, illegal
    logging practices have flourished throughout the Congo Basin, combined
    with unsustainable use of other wild resources by a growing population
    with few economic alternatives to face rising poverty. Other root
    causes include the lack of technical, scientific and financial
    resources and, in some countries, political instability and recent
    wars.
        Neglecting the threats from unsustainable forestry operations in
    the short and medium term will not only undermine the efforts to reduce
    poverty but will create more poverty. The result of this will be more
    instability in the Congo Basin. The costs for mitigating the impacts of
    forestry operations will be much cheaper now than later within the next
    10 or 20 years deforestation is likely to be at the maximum. It is
    critical to urgently mobilize resources to implement a comprehensive
    strategy to protect the invaluable forests and associated resources
    within the Congo Basin.

    WHAT CAN BE DONE: CROSS-BORDER COOPERATION, PROTECTED AREAS AND
            SUSTAINABLE LOGGING
    The Yaounde Summit
        The Congo Basin is a challenging environment for forest
    conservation. Political instability, high levels of government debt, a
    decline in export commodity prices and a long history of poor resource
    management have led some analysts to wonder if conservation can
    actually happen. However, the good news is that low population
    densities and large areas of intact forests provide an excellent
    starting point for forest protection.
        One of the most encouraging signs is the growing support among
    governments and communities in Central Africa for region-wide,
    collaborative forest conservation. A promising first step was taken in
    1996 when the Ministers of Forestry, NGOs and international
    organizations signed an international declaration for forest
    conservation--The Brazzaville Process. Coordinated by the World
    Conservation Union (IUCN), this provides a forum for governments and
    other stakeholders to work together on forest conservation in the
    region. What was urgently needed, however, was higher level commitments
    to forest conservation that could be turned into practical action on
    the ground.
        The Yaounde Forest Summit held on March 17, 1999, hosted by
    President Paul Biya of Cameroon and chaired by HRH The Duke of
    Edinburgh, was the first public expression of the high level political
    will to conserve the forests of Central Africa. The Summit created a
    unique opportunity for the governments of countries of the Congo Basin
    to make commitments to forest conservation. Bringing together six
    African Heads of state and representatives from the international
    community including the World Bank, the United Nations and European
    Commission, the summit's aim was: To discuss and conclude new trans-
    national protected areas in the Congo Basin and agree upon a shared,
    long-term vision for these forests.
        The Yaounde Summit marked a watershed in forest conservation in
    Central Africa. The summit opened a new era of `conservation
    convergence' in Central Africa and was the first time that regional
    Heads of State came together to develop a coherent plan for the
    conservation of the second largest contiguous forest in the world.
    World Wildlife Fund helped organize the summit and the resulting
    Yaounde Declaration contained plans to protect vast tracts of forest in
    the Congo Basin. The summit marked a turning point in the political
    commitment to the region's environment. A key element is that Central
    African Governments have set aside areas of great economic value to
    themselves that are of global biodiversity significance.
        Far from being ``a series of empty promises,'' the Yaounde
    Declaration has resulted in solid conservation achievements in Central
    Africa. The total amount of additional forest protected areas created,
    confirmed or in the final stages of gazettement since March 1999 totals
    13,866 square miles! In Cameroon alone three new national parks and a
    gorilla sanctuary have been created. Two other national parks are in
    the final stages of gazettement. Six new protected areas have been
    created, covering an area of 5,759 square miles (or 3 percent of the
    national territory). Furthermore, these areas represent economic
    forests that have been set aside for conservation in an area where
    public auction of logging concessions yields offers of the equivalent
    of $21 per hectare, representing foregone income to the Cameroon
    Government of over $30 million. In a further indication of political
    will, the government has recently withdrawn eight logging concessions
    in an ecologically sensitive area and is negotiating with conservation
    agencies to find ecologically acceptable alternatives to logging.
        Other countries in the region (Gabon, Congo, Equatorial Guinea)
    have also increased their protected areas in response to the Yaounde
    Declaration. In the Congo Republic in December 2000, the government
    announced that it would quadruple the size of the Odzala National Park
    to over one million hectares, thereby creating one of the largest
    national parks in Central Africa.
        Regional officials took another major step forward in December
    2000. A collaborative management agreement between the governments of
    Cameroon, Central African Republic and Congo has been signed, creating
    the Sangha River Trinational, which links three contiguous national
    parks (Lobeke in Cameroon, Dzanga-Ndoki in Central African Republic and
    Nouabale-Ndoki in the Congo Republic) protecting 2.8 million hectares
    extending into all three countries. A similar transborder conservation
    program covering 15,000 square miles in the boundary region of
    Cameroon, Gabon and Congo is currently being negotiated. Africa already
    spends a greater relative proportion of its GNP on its protected areas
    than does Europe and the United States combined.
        Tropical forests represent not only reservoirs of biodiversity but
    are also important economic resources. Forest exploitation will
    continue. Recent experiences in Congo (Nouabale-Ndoki) and Gabon
    (Minkebe) show that logging companies are increasingly willing to
    collaborate with conservationists and that when agreements are
    established, they can effectively control the level of bushmeat
    hunting.
        While Africa has shown considerable political will in creating this
    protected area network, it is clear that demographic trends and the
    need for agricultural land are unlikely to result in more than 10
    percent of the African territory being set aside for protected areas in
    the long term.
        Conservation in Central Africa should concentrate on securing
    protected areas and in ensuring that they are well-managed and
    effectively protected. Central Africa is one of the last remaining
    areas in the world where vast, fairly intact forest still exist. We
    have the unique opportunity and political momentum to support the
    positive efforts fostered within the region to create a world class
    network of protected areas spanning much of the central African
    forests, linked by corridors of sustainable managed forests. The
    potential represented by the Yaounde Summit may be the last window of
    opportunity for conservation in central Africa and writing it off as
    `empty promises' will certainly result in an empty forest.
        We live in a world filled with bad news, especially the news which
    comes from much of Central Africa. It is easy to write these countries
    off as a loss. I submit that the results demonstrated from the Yaounde
    Summit represent a great glimmer of hope for the forest, wildlife and
    people of the region and the world should come to their aid. Failure to
    substantively act now will be a failure for the international community
    and an irretrievable loss for humanity.
        WWF and its partners recognize that protected areas alone are not
    sufficient to conserve biodiversity or to ensure the continued
    provision of vital goods and services from the forest. For this reason,
    WWF seeks to promote more sustainable management of the vast majority
    of the world's forest that remain outside of protected areas.

    Sustainable Forest Management
        The forests of Central Africa are currently under threat from
    logging as a result of demand for timber from transnational logging
    companies in Asia and Europe. In 1990, the volume of timber exported
    from the Congo Basin to Asia was less than 200,000 cubic meters. In
    1997, this has risen to over two million cubic meters. Today, in Gabon,
    800,000 hectares of forests are allocated to logging concessions and
    this is likely to increase to more than two million hectares under
    current pressures. In neighboring Equatorial Guinea, exports have
    tripled since 1994. A growing demand for timber in China and other
    emerging economies has led to exploitation of forests in West Africa's
    coastal states--where traditionally there have been weak controls and
    legislation--mobilizing major capital resources with unprecedented
    speed and flexibility, and exploiting greater proportions of timber
    resources than ever before. Conservationists predict that most forests
    which are not currently designated as protected areas will be subject
    to some logging activity within the next five years.
        WWF is promoting sustainable forest management in Cameroon, CAR and
    Gabon through a collaborative program between WWF Belgium, the WWF-
    Cameroon Program Office and the WWF-Central Africa Regional Program
    Office funded by the European Union. In each country, national working
    groups have been established to develop regional certification
    standards under the auspices of the Forest Stewardship Council. In
    addition, WWF is providing support to one private logging company in
    Gabon to design a sustainable forest management plan which takes into
    account the impact of the logging activity on biodiversity and the
    local population.
        In CAR, WWF, in partnership with the government, is working to
    promote sustainable management of the Societe de Bois de Bayanga
    logging concession within the Dzanga-Sangha Dense Forest Special
    Reserve. The Dzanga-Sangha Project is charged with assisting in the
    control of logging operations to ensure that the practices are
    consistent with the Forestry Code and with assisting in the development
    of a sustainable forest management plan for this concession.
        In Cameroon, WWF is implementing the Jengi initiative, a pilot
    project to establish sustainable forest management and a protected
    areas system in the forests of south-eastern Cameroon. Although the
    Lake Lobeke Reserve (part of the Sangha River Trinational Protected
    Areas complex) and Boumba-Bek-Nki Complex (a component of the trans
    border initiative) will preserve part of this forest and help ensure a
    homeland for the BaAka pygmies, the speed and nature of current
    commercial logging, if unchecked, will result in three forest islands
    in a sea of devastation.
        Jengi to the BaAka is the spirit of the forest. Jengi presides over
    the initiation ceremonies of youth and provides guidance for these
    forest people whose cultural, physical and spiritual live depends on an
    intact forest. The BaAka have lived in harmony with the forest for
    centuries and now their songs are being drowned by the noise of
    bulldozers and chainsaws. Poaching camps follow the bulldozers, the
    wildlife disappears, and in many villages, the Jengi has not come for
    years. The Jengi project aims to halt and reverse forest mining, to
    achieve large-scale sustainable forest management and timber
    production, to develop alternative sources of income for local
    communities and to develop a conservation trust fund to support the
    three protected areas. The aim is to restore the Jengi as the guardian
    of the forest.
        Most of the protected areas in Central Africa are surrounded or
    impacted in some way by logging concessions. Logging operations often
    bring in a significant immigrant labor force and become a pole of
    attraction for others seeking economic opportunities with these
    companies. Those that find work have money to buy food and clothes, and
    those that don't have time to kill literally--by becoming bush meat
    hunters to supply the concession work force. In many concessions, bush
    meat is the only source of protein available and is sanctioned by the
    companies, who are responsible to ensure adequate food and supplies to
    their laborers.
        Although to date, the forest certification process has had limited
    success in Central Africa due to a reluctance by companies to adopt
    logging practices that may be more costly and where there is limited
    market demand for certified products, we have found a willingness by
    companies to try to limit bush meat hunting and transportation on their
    concessions. Concessions bordering the Minkebe Forest Reserve in Gabon,
    the Dzanga-Sangha Reserve in CAR, Lake Lobeke in Cameroon and Nouabale-
    Ndoki in Congo-Brazzaville have all put in place measures to control
    bush meat exploitation, including sanctions of employees and drivers
    involved in hunting or transportation, closing roads to prevent access,
    providing alternative food sources, and closer collaboration with
    international NGOs and government authorities.

    Congo Basin Initiative
        Overall, the key to conservation of the forests of the Congo Basin
    is the development of a network of ecologically representative,
    financially viable, protected areas spanning the basin, from the
    Mountains of the Moon to the Gulf of Guinea, connected by conservation
    corridors of sustainable managed forests. Over the next month, WWF, WCS
    and CI will submit a joint proposal to the U.S. government and to
    private sector donors to co-fund this program. If funded, this program
    will have a profoundly beneficial impact on the environmental and
    economic welfare of the Congo Basin.
        WWF, WCS and CI believe that expanded U.S. support for the Congo
    Basin Initiative will demonstrate the leadership role that the United
    States can and is playing in environmental conservation. U.S. support
    of this initiative will have a prominent impact at the upcoming World
    Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg later this year.
        The tangible benefits of this project will be:
         Over 30 million acres of functioning national park land
    in five Congo Basin countries.
         Over 60 million acres of managed logging concessions in
    surrounding areas.
         Increased number of host governments in natural resource
    management.
         Significant shift in land-use management practices in
    host countries.
         Significant and vibrant eco-tourism industry established.
         Increased sustainability from tourism revenue.
        The more intangible benefits of this project will be:
         Reduced rates of deforestation.
         Vast reduction in biodiversity loss.
         Increased U.S. presence and economic opportunities.
         Better governance and transparency.
         Significantly increased security over vast areas of
    forest.
         Reduction of increase in levels of communicable diseases.
         Sustainable development based on renewable outputs.
        In 1995, a USAID program called CARPE was created for Central
    Africa. This program was designed to increase forest management in the
    Congo Basin and its extreme success has been documented. WWF, WCS and
    CI believe that this program should be expanded and extended to
    coincide with the pressures being put on the Congo Basin from
    development and other human factors. WWF and other organizations are
    also seeking vastly increased funding for the African Elephant and
    Great Ape Conservation Acts. These programs managed through the U.S.
    Fish and Wildlife service have been extremely instrumental in
    protection of these keystone species and helping to stem the bushmeat
    tide.
        In closing, Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, WWF
    wishes to express our gratitude for your active interest in helping
    governments in the Congo Basin region to address the bushmeat crisis.
    We stand ready to assist the Committee in providing constructive
    solutions to this serious problem.
                                     ______

        [Attachments to Mr. Carroll's statement follow:]

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.008

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.009

        Mr. Gilchrest. I think we will have to pay a visit maybe
    sometime this fall.
        Dr. Robinson?

       STATEMENT OF JOHN G. ROBINSON, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT AND
      DIRECTOR, INTERNATIONAL CONSERVATION, WILDLIFE CONSERVATION
                                SOCIETY

        Dr. Robinson. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for the
    opportunity to comment on this issue. I am here to represent
    the experiences of Wildlife Conservation Society, WCS, which
    conserves wildlife and wildlands throughout the world.
        Fifteen years ago, our field conservationists began to
    describe a mounting wave of hunting that was affecting wildlife
    around the world. The wave first passed through Asia,
    extirpating wildlife in the forests of Southeast Asia. It is
    now cresting in Africa, and we anticipate that hunting at a
    similar scale will well in Latin America within the next 5 to
    10 years.
        The present magnitude of the problem in Africa has captured
    all of our attention, and our testimony will focus on this part
    of the world, but recognize that this is a global phenomenon.
    The phenomenon has been called the ``bushmeat'' or ``wild meat
    crisis'' because hunting is being driven by the demand for wild
    meat for human consumption.
        The Wildlife Conservation Society would like to thank the
    Subcommittee, and particularly you, Mr. Chairman, for
    recognizing the importance of this issue.
        The recent explosion of hunting in Africa, like the
    situation in Southeast Asia 20 years ago, has been stimulated
    by road construction associated with logging and petroleum
    development. The network of roads reaches into the most remote
    areas and allows commercial hunters entry into the forest and
    provides hunters with access to urban markets. It has been open
    season on all wild species.
        The scale of hunting in Africa right now is really truly
    vast, and you have heard a lot of testimony to that effect. In
    Central Africa alone, consumption of meat from wild animals is
    at least one million metric tons, and estimates go as high as
    five. One million metric tons is equivalent to 9 billion
    quarter-pound hamburgers of wild meat a year, enough to give
    even McDonald's pause. There are 33 million people living in
    Central Africa, and on average, every man, woman, and child
    eats the equivalent of one bushmeat hamburger each and every
    day of the year. Central African families eat as much meat as
    most families in Europe and the U.S., but most of the meat,
    unlike in Europe and U.S., comes from wildlife.
        This level of harvest is not sustainable. Harvest threatens
    the survival of many wildlife species and is especially
    pernicious to those large-bodied, slow-breeding species, a
    special conservation concern, such as great apes, large
    carnivores, and elephants--all species recognized by the U.S.
    Congress as needing special attention. And as Mr. Graham said
    earlier, the loss of wild species affects the functionality and
    integrity of forests as a whole.
        In addition to the forests and the species themselves, it
    is the millions of rural poor living at the ecological frontier
    who suffer the most from the loss of wild species. While they
    themselves hunt and sell bushmeat, they are losing their food
    resources. These are the people identified as the focus for the
    New Partnership for Africa's Development, NEPAD, which was
    supported at last month's G-8 meeting, who live on less than
    US$1 a day.
        Addressing the bushmeat problem is difficult. In our
    programs and in the programs of many of our collaborators, we
    have found some approaches which offer a way forward.
        First and foremost, establishing refuges for wildlife
    populations is essential. A network of well-managed protected
    areas will both support diverse populations of wildlife and
    provide reservoirs for wildlife that are being hunted
    elsewhere.
        Second, the commercial trade in bushmeat needs to be
    regulated and phased out as quickly as possible, and the
    distinction has been made often between subsistence and
    commercial trade. Often this can be accomplished by working
    with the logging companies themselves. As you heard from Mr.
    Burnam, the Wildlife Conservation Society has been working with
    a private timber company, Congolaise Industrielle des Bois, and
    the Ministry of Forest Economy in northern Congo since 1998 to
    reduce hunting and transport of bushmeat in 4.5 million acres
    of its concession.
        Third, ways to provide alternative sources of animal
    protein to rural communities and to workers in companies that
    are exploiting those natural resources must be developed.
        The U.S. has several immediate opportunities to help stem
    the tide of bushmeat hunting. The G-8 Africa Action Plan in
    support of the New Partnership for Africa's Development, for
    example, identifies a very general strategy that is of
    relevance to the bushmeat problem.
        We would specifically urge the Subcommittee to: recognize
    the enormity of the bushmeat crisis, both for wild species and
    for the ecosystems where they occur, and for the rural poor who
    have traditionally depended and will depend on wildlife
    resources; recognize also that the bushmeat crisis is not just
    about driving some species to extinction, it is not just about
    great apes and elephants, it is about the destruction of the
    very fabric of tropical forests and the lives of the people who
    are supported by those forests.
        We also urge that we support the Administration efforts to
    establish partnerships with African countries and provide
    support through mechanisms like NEPAD that will strengthen good
    governance, encourage peace and security, build institutional
    capacity, and provide the hunting to accomplish these tasks.
        And, finally, we encourage Congress to increase funding for
    the Central Africa Regional Program for the Environment, CARPE,
    which you heard about earlier, the Multinational Species
    Conservation Fund, and the Global Environment Facility, GEF. To
    varying degrees, these underfunded programs support critical
    conservation activities, including protected areas
    establishment and management, anti-poaching enforcement, local
    and institutional capacity building, and monitoring.
        I thank you for the opportunity to comment on these issues,
    and I would be pleased to answer any questions.
        [The prepared statement of Dr. Robinson follows:]

    Statement of Dr. John G. Robinson, Senior Vice President and Director,
           International Conservation, Wildlife Conservation Society

        Mr. Chairman, Members of the Subcommittee: Thank you very much for
    the opportunity to comment on the growing problem of bushmeat
    consumption. I am here today to represent the views of the Wildlife
    Conservation Society, founded in 1895 as the New York Zoological
    Society, a 107-year old US-based membership organization. The Wildlife
    Conservation Society conserves wildlife and wild lands throughout the
    world, as well as managing animal collections at the Bronx Zoo and
    other ``Living Institutions'' in the New York area.
        Fifteen years ago, our researchers and conservationists in the
    field began to describe a mounting wave of hunting that was affecting
    wildlife living in the forests and grasslands around the world. Since
    humans evolved we have hunted and eaten wildlife. Today it is only the
    poorest families that rely on meat from wild species as an important
    source of protein. This is true even in the United States where
    families in poor rural districts still hunt for the freezer. When
    hunting becomes commercial to satisfy demand from urban populations, it
    quickly becomes unsustainable, as we found in this country at the turn
    of the last century. Now it is the tropical regions that face a
    bushmeat crisis. The wave first passed through Asia, extirpating
    wildlife in the forests of South-east Asia and Indochina. It is now
    cresting in Africa, and we anticipate that hunting at a similar scale
    will swell in Latin America within the next five to ten years. The
    present magnitude of the problem in Africa has captured all of our
    attention, and our testimony will focus on this part of the world, but
    recognize that it is a global phenomenon. The phenomenon has been
    called the ``bushmeat'' or ``wild meat crisis'' because the hunting is
    being driven by a demand for wild meat for human consumption.
        The Wildlife Conservation Society would like to thank the
    Subcommittee, and especially Chairman Gilchrest, for recognizing the
    importance of this issue. Unrestrained wildlife harvest threatens the
    survival of many wildlife species, especially those living in the
    tropical forests of the world. Hunting is especially pernicious for
    those large-bodied, slow breeding species of special conservation
    concern such as the great apes, large carnivores, and elephants all
    species recognized by the U.S. Congress as needing special attention.
    The local extinction and loss of wild species has cascading effects on
    the functionality and integrity of forests as a whole, and endangers
    efforts to both protect and manage those forests in a sustainable
    fashion. And the loss of wildlife resources threatens people's health
    and well-being and affects their cultural integrity.
        The recent explosion of hunting in Africa, like the situation in
    South-east Asia and Indochina twenty years ago, has been stimulated by
    the opening up of previously inaccessible regions. Road construction
    often associated with logging and petroleum development has created a
    network of roads that reach into the most remote areas. This network
    allows commercial hunters entry into the forest, and provides hunters
    with access to urban markets. Moreover, much of forested Africa has
    experienced in recent years the additional challenge of civil unrest
    and conflict. The resulting breakdown of national and local authority
    has left a governance void in many places and precluded most attempts
    to manage and control the hunting. It has been open season on all wild
    species.
        The scale of hunting in forested Africa is vast. In central Africa
    alone, consumption of meat from wild animals is estimated at between
    one and five million metric tons a year. If we take the most
    conservative figure of one million metric tons, this is equivalent to 9
    billion quarter-pound hamburgers of wild meat a year enough to give
    even McDonalds pause. Who eats all those hamburger-equivalents? There
    are 33 million people living in Central Africa, and, on average, every
    man, woman and child eats the equivalent of on bushmeat ``hamburger''
    each and every day of the year. Central Africa families eat as much
    meat as do many families in Europe and the United States, with one
    difference most of the meat eaten in rural Central Africa comes from
    wildlife.
        This level of harvest is not sustainable. We estimate that today's
    harvest rate in Central African forest is at least five times what
    could be produced sustainably under even optimal conditions. The
    consequence of this overexploitation is that wildlife is being strip-
    mined out of tropical forests, resulting in what has been called the
    ``Empty Forest'' a forest without wildlife, unnaturally quiet. Across
    Central Africa, we are estimating that, except in adequately protected
    or inaccessible areas, ungulate populations have been already reduced
    by 50%, primate populations perhaps as much as 90%. Elephants, so long
    pursued for their ivory, are now also hunted for their meat. Hunters
    rarely target particular wildlife species because they are simply
    hunting for meat. So almost all animals from mammals, to birds, to
    replies are affected by hunting. Constant heavy hunting is destroying
    local populations of the most vulnerable species, especially those that
    large-bodied and breed slowly: gorillas, chimpanzees, bonobos, many
    monkey species, the large carnivores, and elephants. As species are
    extirpated from one area, hunters move into new areas.
        The loss of wildlife species has wider implications on the forests
    themselves. The species preferred by hunters generally are large-
    bodied, typically fruit eaters and herbivorous browsers. These species
    frequently play keystone roles in forest ecology as pollinators, seed
    dispersers, and seed predators, as well as comprising the majority of
    the vertebrate biomass. Their reduction or extirpation produces
    cascading effects through the biological community, causing other
    species to disappear, and the ability of the forest to recover from
    disturbance to diminish.
        In addition to the forest and the species themselves, it is the
    rural poor who suffer the most from the loss of wildlife species. The
    commercial trade in bushmeat provides only a transitory benefit and a
    long-term cost to these people. It is the millions of people at the
    margins of the cash economy, who are at the ecological frontier, and
    whose lives are intertwined with the wildlife, plants and wider
    functioning of the forest. It is they who experience drops in daily
    protein consumption as forests are opened up to outsiders. It is the
    people identified as the focus on the New Partnership for Africa's
    Development (NEPAD), launched at last month's G8 meeting, who live on
    less than US$1 per day. They lack the education, skills and cultural
    context to take advantage of cash-earning jobs from plantations and
    industry, and as their wildlife resources disappear, their backs are
    against the wall. Lacking capital and access to markets, they cannot
    switch to alternative sources of animal protein.
        Addressing the bushmeat problem is difficult. How to impose
    regulation on a human activity too variable and dispersed to be
    considered a true industry? How to draw the line between subsistence
    hunting by local people and commercial exploitation by outsiders, when
    there are so many examples that fall between the two extremes? How do
    we tackle a problem that is but an indirect effect of national
    expansion into the frontier? In our programs we have found some
    approaches that offer a way forward.
        First and foremost, establishing refuges for wildlife populations
    is essential. A network of well-managed protected areas will both
    support more diverse and abundant populations of wildlife and provide
    ``reservoirs'' for wildlife that are being hunted elsewhere.
    Establishment of such reserves is thus crucial to steward the resources
    essential to the nutritional, social and cultural well-being of the
    rural poor living in forest environments. The Wildlife Conservation
    Society, and our collaborators WWF and CI, are active in establishing
    and managing parks throughout the Congo Basin. Proposed and existing
    parks in the five countries of the Basin might cover some 30 million
    acres. The key to better management of protected areas is expanding and
    strengthening staff capacity to regulate access to and use of protected
    forest resources.
        Second, the commercial trade in bushmeat needs to be regulated and
    phased out as quickly as possible. Many tropical countries lack the
    government institutions needed to accomplish this. Often the only
    effective institutions to be found in remote forest areas are the
    timber companies themselves. The Wildlife Conservation Society, for
    instance, has been working with a private timber company, Congolaise
    Industrielle des Bois (CIB), and the Ministry of Forestry Economy in
    northern Congo since 1998 to reduce hunting and transport of bushmeat
    in 4.5 million acres of its concession. The effort is a four-pronged
    one of education, enforcement, provision of alternative sources of
    animal protein, and monitoring. So it involves the local communities in
    managing and protecting wildlife populations, and monitors markets in
    logging camps and villages. It has established an ``ecoguard'' brigade
    to close down the commercial trade through the control of vehicle
    traffic on logging roads, and by preventing wild meat being carried out
    of the area on flights down to the cities.
        Third, ways to provide alternative sources of animal protein to
    rural communities and to workers in companies exploiting natural
    resources must be developed. The Wildlife Conservation Society, for
    instance, is working with the CIB logging company to establish other
    economically-feasible sources of animal protein for people living
    within their concessions.
        The U.S. has several immediate opportunities to help stem the tide
    of bushmeat hunting: making nonconcessional debt eligible under the
    Tropical Forest Management Act; encouraging USAID programs and the UN
    Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) efforts that focus on the
    development of alternative protein sources and livelihoods; and playing
    a leadership role in establishing an African forest certification
    program for logging companies that practice wildlife management and
    help prevent bushmeat hunting and trade. In addition, the G8 Africa
    Action Plan in support of the New Partnership for Africa's Development
    (NEPAD) identifies a general strategy for Africa that is highly
    relevant to the bushmeat problem. NEPAD calls for:
         Resource mobilization. In the context of the bushmeat
    problem, there is a need to establish funding mechanisms to support the
    establishment and sound management of protected areas. Even in the
    United States, the National Park Service is not economically self-
    sufficient. Economic incentives are also needed to encourage the timber
    industry to manage forest resources more sustainably including forest
    wildlife. Further funds are needed to develop alternative animal
    protein sources for the rural poor living in the forest frontier.
         Peace and security. This almost goes without saying. The
    protection of wild areas and the sustainable use of natural resources
    requires good governance and appropriate management. And this requires
    political, social and economic stability.
         Governance. In this context there is a need to ensure
    that national governments have the capacity to engage with the natural
    resource extraction companies in ways that are transparent and promote
    long-term, sustainable management of all forest resources. In addition,
    the responsibility for many management decisions still remain with
    local governments, and it is important that their authority derives
    from well-informed, transparent, democratic processes.
         Human resources. To ensure that the capacity to manage
    Central Africa's wild forests develops to address the threats from
    unsustainable hunting, we must reinforce and scale up ongoing training
    mechanisms and launch new avenues for learning and in so doing help
    educate the next generation of conservation leaders. We need to ensure
    that the region's resource management agencies have the capacity to
    protect and manage the region's natural resources.
        We would therefore urge the Subcommittee to:
         Recognize the enormity of the bushmeat crisis, both for
    wild species and the ecosystems where they occur, and for the rural
    poor who have traditionally depended and will need to depend on
    wildlife resources and forest biodiversity in the future. Recognize
    that the bushmeat crisis is not just driving some species to
    extinction, it is not just about threats to the Great Apes and
    elephants, it is about the destruction of the very fabric of tropical
    forests and the lives of the people who are supported by those forests.
         Understand that consumption of bushmeat also has severe
    public health implications. Handling and eating wildlife, especially
    apes and other primates, increases the risk that people will contract
    deadly hemorrhagic diseases such as Ebola, and has facilitated the
    emergence of new diseases like HIV/AIDS.
         Support Administration efforts to establish partnerships
    with African countries and provide the support through the NEPAD
    process and the other identified opportunities for the establishment of
    protected areas, efforts to curtail the commercial bushmeat trade, and
    ways to provide alternative sources of animal protein for the rural
    poor of Africa.
         Encourage Congress to increase funding for the Central
    Africa Regional Program for the Environment (CARPE), the Multinational
    Species Conservation Fund and the Global Environment Facility (GEF). To
    varying degrees, these underfunded programs support critical
    conservation activities including protected areas establishment and
    management, anti-poaching enforcement, local and institutional capacity
    building, and monitoring.
        I thank you again for the opportunity to comment on these issues. I
    would be happy to answer any questions.
                                     ______

        Mr. Gilchrest. Thank you, Dr. Robinson.
        Dr. Bakarr?

       STATEMENT OF MOHAMED I BAKARR, SENIOR TECHNICAL DIRECTOR,
         CENTER FOR APPLIED BIODIVERSITY SCIENCE, CONSERVATION
                             INTERNATIONAL

        Dr. Bakarr. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I have
    already submitted my written testimony for the record and will,
    therefore, focus on specific aspects with your permission, sir.
        Mr. Gilchrest. Yes, sir.
        Dr. Bakarr. I am here to represent the views of
    Conservation International in my capacity as senior technical
    director in the Center for Applied Biodiversity Science, which
    is leading CI's strategy for addressing the bushmeat issue in
    Africa. Thank you very much for the opportunity to testify on
    this issue.
        CI is a nonprofit organization dedicated to conservation of
    biodiversity, focusing specifically on the world's biologically
    richest and most threatened ecosystems where the risk of
    extinction is so very real, as well as on tropical wilderness
    areas where opportunities for protecting large tracts of
    natural habitats still remain. With programs in more than 30
    countries around the world, CI's work focuses on demonstrating
    that human societies are able to live harmoniously with nature.
    Wildlife utilization in general and the bushmeat issue in
    particular are, therefore, at the very crux of our conservation
    efforts and actions around the world.
        For more than 10 years now, we have been working with local
    communities, government agencies, scientists and other
    conservation professionals to analyze and understand the global
    implications of wildlife utilization and consumption. From the
    extensive commercial trade of turtles in Southeast Asia to the
    subsistence hunting practices of Pygmies in Central Africa, it
    has become clear to us that the issues at stake are indeed
    very, very complex.
        Mr. Chairman, the bushmeat issue and its consequences for
    African wildlife and people has been eloquently outlined in the
    testimony of my colleagues on this panel. Therefore, I do not
    wish to reiterate the same points but, rather, specifically
    highlight the concerns that we bring forward as an institution.
    And I will specifically ask that you allow me to draw one very
    significant conclusion about the current status quo, and that
    is, whereas wildlife is still very much an important resource
    for human livelihoods in Africa, bushmeat utilization is no
    longer sustainable because populations of most of the species
    involved are being greatly impacts and some locally extirpated
    throughout their range. And as you can rightly surmise, this
    implies a double-edged sword with respect to the bushmeat
    problem in Africa. On the one hand, populations are being
    extirpated; on the other hand, the livelihood of a great
    majority of people is increasingly at risk from the loss of
    wildlife. It is this complex challenge we are confronted with
    for achieving conservation on the continent.
        As a conservation organization that cares about people and
    wildlife, CI has been very keen on exploring and implementing
    solutions that accommodate this concern. We are committed to
    pursuing an integrated approach that accommodates diverse
    perspectives and involves multiple stakeholders and partners to
    maximize success in mitigating the threat. In this regard, we
    have helped organize regional workshops in West and Central
    Africa where major stakeholders have analyzed and discussed the
    social, cultural, economic, and biological contexts, and have
    helped establish frameworks for developing and implementing
    solutions. Our involvement in the BCTF also reflects our
    commitment toward a broader alliance to tackle this complex and
    large-scale problem.
        More specifically, our country programs are confronting the
    problem head on in the field by targeting all major
    stakeholders at the national level. In Ghana, for example, the
    focus has been on mobilizing the public through a massive
    awareness and sensitization campaign based on cultural and
    traditional practices, known as totems. Totems are wildlife
    entities, mostly animals, that symbolize cultural values and
    beliefs to people. Although success is yet to be translated in
    terms of actual reductions in bushmeat hunting and threats to
    wildlife, the effort to link bushmeat problem to totems has
    garnered the attention of all Ghanaians. We are pursuing
    similar approaches in Liberia with our partners, in Cote
    d'Ivoire and Sierra Leone, in order to find locally appropriate
    solutions to the problem.
        Mr. Chairman, the scale of the bushmeat problem in Africa
    is enormous. Long-term success, therefore, requires solutions
    that are scaled up proportionally to ensure a balance between
    human livelihood needs and biodiversity. The piecemeal approach
    simply has not worked, and even when it does, we are only
    prolonging the inevitable. We need landscape approaches that
    allow integration of social, economic, and biological
    priorities. This is no doubt a daunting task for African
    countries and conservation organizations, and one that will
    require major investment and commitments by governments and
    funding agencies.
        The leadership of U.S. Government agencies in supporting
    bilateral initiatives on biodiversity conservation across
    Africa has been formidable, as we heard this morning. The
    bushmeat crisis cannot be separated from all other conservation
    challenges on the continent, which means that the U.S.
    Government assistance through the USAID and international
    programs of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife and the USDA Forest
    Service has already made crucial contributions in one way or
    another toward addressing the problem. Therefore, I propose
    here that considerations be given to the following specific
    strategies for increased funding from the U.S. Government,
    possibly through an especially targeted mechanism:
        The expansion and effective management of protected areas
    is absolutely crucial. As we heard this morning from my
    colleagues, it is the only way we can guarantee the survival of
    viable populations of wildlife on the continent. Protected
    areas are for people. They are not against people. That message
    will be made clear.
        We need to promote alternative sources of protein. Africans
    are very good at adapting. All of the wildlife can be hunted to
    extinction, and people will still have protein to feed on. So
    what is stopping us from raising the profile of those
    alternative sources right now when we have a chance to save
    wildlife from extinction?
        We need to be very, very strong and efficient at monitoring
    activities of extractive industries. Many of these countries
    depend on extractive industries as a major source of income. If
    we cannot stop those industries, we need to make their
    practices much more efficient.
        We need to raise public awareness and engage wider
    involvement of people across the continent. There are
    traditional and cultural implications for using bushmeat. We
    cannot work against people. We have to understand their
    perspective and build it into our strategies in order to
    succeed at the bigger scale.
        And, of course, we still need to promote more research and
    enhance our understanding of the species at hand.
        I thank you very much once again, Mr. Chairman, and applaud
    the efforts of this House Subcommittee in its attempt to
    understand the ramifications of this critically important
    challenge in Africa. We look forward to working with you on any
    initiative that will emerge from this hearing.
        Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Dr. Bakarr follows:]

         Statement of Dr. Mohamed I Bakarr, Senior Technical Director,
      Center for Applied Biodiversity Science, Conservation International

        Mr. Chairman, members of the Subcommittee, and colleagues on this
    panel good morning. I thank you all very much for the opportunity to
    testify before you on the growing problem of bushmeat consumption in
    Africa. I am here to represent the views of Conservation International,
    in my capacity as Senior Technical Director in the Center for Applied
    Biodiversity Science, which is leading CI's strategy for addressing the
    bushmeat issue in Africa. CI is a non-profit organization dedicated to
    the conservation of biodiversity, focusing specifically on the world's
    biologically richest and most threatened ecosystems where the risk of
    extinction is ever so real, as well as on tropical wilderness areas
    where opportunities for protecting large tracts of natural habitats
    still remain. With programs in more than 30 countries around the world,
    CI's work focuses on demonstrating that human societies are able to
    live harmoniously with nature. Wildlife utilization in general and the
    bushmeat issue in particular are, therefore, at the very crux of our
    conservation efforts and actions around the world.
        For more than 10 years now, CI has been working with local
    communities, government agencies, scientists and other conservation
    professionals to analyze and understand the global implications of
    wildlife utilization and consumption. From the extensive commercial
    trade of turtles in Southeast Asia to the subsistence hunting practices
    of pygmies in Central Africa, it has become clear to us that the issues
    at stake are indeed very complex. Although bushmeat utilization has
    been flagged since the early 1960s as a potential long-term threat to
    wildlife populations in Africa, it is the same practice that has
    sustained the livelihoods of many generations of Africans. For the most
    part, people in Africa still hunt wildlife and consume bushmeat for the
    same reason their forefathers before them did. Bushmeat hunting has
    been a tradition and a way of life in Africa for eons, and all animal
    species (from rodents to great apes) are hunted for consumptive use.
        But like for many other facets of life on the continent, the ethics
    of wildlife exploitation has undergone dramatic changes in recent
    years. Human populations have grown rapidly on the continent, and more
    people are now engaged in the exploitation of wildlife than ever
    before. More importantly, use of low-tech hunting tools such as traps
    have been replaced by easily accessible guns and rifles that facilitate
    rapid extirpation of large numbers of animals. With access to more
    powerful and highly effective weapons, large mammals such as elephants
    and great apes that were once hunted by only the most experienced and
    traditionally revered hunters, have become easy prey for the
    commercially minded hunters. These itinerant commercial hunters are in
    turn being aided by gradual transformations of the African landscape
    through the activities of extractive industries (logging and mining),
    which are opening up previously remote areas and creating transient
    settlements.
        Mr. Chairman, members of the Subcommittee and fellow panelists, I
    do not need to reiterate the consequences of these transformations for
    Africa's wildlife and biodiversity, because the media has done an
    excellent job bringing it to the global community. Please allow me,
    however, to just draw one very significant conclusion about the current
    status-quo. And that is, whereas wildlife is still very much an
    important resource for human livelihoods in West Africa, bushmeat
    utilization is no longer sustainable because populations of most of the
    species involved are being greatly impacted, and some locally
    extirpated throughout their range. As you can rightly surmise, the
    bushmeat problem in Africa has emerged as a double-edge on the one
    hand, wildlife populations are being extirpated, and on the other, the
    livelihood of a great majority of people is increasingly at risk from
    the loss of wildlife. It is this complex challenge we are confronted
    with for achieving biodiversity conservation on the continent.
        As a conservation organization that cares about people and
    wildlife, Conservation International has been very keen on exploring
    and implementing conservation solutions that accommodate this concern.
    We are committed to pursuing an integrated approach that accommodates
    diverse perspectives and involves multiple stakeholders and partners to
    maximize success in mitigating the threat. In this regard, we have
    helped organize regional workshops in West and Central Africa where
    major stakeholders discuss and analyze the social, cultural, economic
    and biological contexts, and establish frameworks for developing and
    implementing solutions. Our involvement in the Bushmeat Crisis Task
    Force (BCTF) also reflects our commitment toward a broader alliance to
    tackle this complex and large-scale problem. Through BCTF, CI and other
    organizations committed to saving biological diversity around the world
    have been able to reach decision-makers and the general public, with
    the strongest possible messages that reflect our collective concern on
    this crucial issue.
        More specifically, CI country programs are confronting the problem
    head on in the field by targeting all major stakeholders at the
    national level. In Ghana for example, the focus has been on mobilizing
    the public through a massive awareness and sensitization campaign based
    on cultural and traditional priorities, such as totems. Totems are
    wildlife entities (animal species) that symbolize cultural values and
    beliefs. Although success is yet to be translated in terms of actual
    reductions in bushmeat hunting and threats to wildlife, the effort to
    link bushmeat problem to totems has garnered the attention of all
    Ghanaians. To put this into an even better perspective, let me quote a
    recent message from the Director of CI's Ghana Program, Okyeame Ampadu-
    Agyei: ``The bushmeat crisis is now receiving national attention. This
    is mainly due to our sustained awareness campaign based on the
    conservation of totems in Ghana. The new concept has galvanized the
    entire citizenry to address the problem by involving politicians,
    traditional rulers, hunters, market women and the general public. The
    attached paper presents the novelty approach. It shows how our culture
    is inextricably linked with animals. This could be the final key to
    address the bushmeat crisis in many parts of Africa.''
        Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, the scale of the
    bushmeat crisis in Africa is enormous. Long-term success therefore
    requires that solutions such as those emerging in Ghana be scaled-up
    proportionally to ensure a balance between human livelihood needs and
    biodiversity conservation goals. Additional approaches are needed to
    ensure effective protection of species already threatened by the
    commercial trade. This is in no doubt a daunting task for African
    countries and conservation organizations, and one that would require
    major investment by governments and funding agencies. So what role
    should the U.S. Government play? The leadership of U.S. Government
    Agencies in supporting bilateral initiatives on biodiversity
    conservation across Africa has been formidable. The bushmeat crisis
    cannot be separated from all other conservation challenges on the
    continent, which means that U.S. Government assistance through the
    Agency for International Development (USAID), and International
    Programs of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife and the U.S.D.A. Forest Service
    has already made crucial contributions in one way or another toward
    addressing the bushmeat problem. Therefore, I propose here that
    considerations be given to the following specific strategies for
    increased funding from the U.S. government, possibly through an
    especially targeted mechanism:
         Creation, expansion and effective management of forests
    parks and protected areas: The creation, expansion and effective
    management of forest parks and protected areas that maintain a safe
    haven for forest animals is the only way of guaranteeing viable
    populations of many wildlife species on the long-term. It is from these
    last remaining natural areas that repopulation of depleted landscapes
    can occur, to give future generations of Africans a chance at
    sustaining traditional livelihood practices.
         Promotion of alternative sources of protein: As long as
    people depend on wildlife as a source of protein, bushmeat hunting will
    remain a major factor in sustaining rural livelihoods. But the
    commercial trade can be greatly reduced by promoting stable,
    competitively priced supplies of animal protein other than bushmeat,
    particularly in urban areas across the region, where bushmeat is more
    of a luxury food item.
         Monitoring and influencing activities of extractive
    industries: By working closely with extractive industries such as
    logging and mining, government agencies and conservation organizations
    can ensure that activities associated with resource extraction (i.e.
    the creation of roads etc.) do not lead to the widespread slaughter of
    wildlife for commercial purposes.
         Promotion of public awareness raising and public
    education on risks of bushmeat consumption: The traditional, cultural
    and livelihood implications of impending wildlife extinctions are still
    not effectively understood by most Africans. With recent reports of
    potential links between bushmeat consumption and HIV (the virus that
    causes AIDS in humans), there is need to use this critical message as
    part of a large-scale effort to change attitudes towards bushmeat
    hunting and consumption.
         Promotion of research on sustainable hunting: There is
    need to continuously increase understanding of wildlife population
    dynamics by conducting research and monitoring to determine the
    practicality of sustainable hunting for long-term survivability of
    animal populations.
        I thank you very much once again, Mr. Chairman, and applaud the
    efforts of this House Subcommittee in its attempt to understand the
    ramifications of this critically important conservation challenge in
    Africa. We look forward to working with you on any initiative that will
    emerge from this oversight hearing.
                                     ______

        Mr. Gilchrest. Thank you very much, Dr. Bakarr.
        Each of the witnesses today at one point or another made
    reference to more resources, and some of you have mentioned
    specifically the United States and have given us actual figures
    for those resources, which is always helpful.
        Dr. Bakarr, you mentioned a number of things that you would
    like this Committee and the Congress and the United States to
    consider with our participation in preserving and restoring
    much of the beauty and the magnificence of the forests in
    Africa. You suggested that we participate more in the expansion
    of protected areas, alternative sources of protein, monitor
    extractive industries, more public awareness, and so on.
        What would be helpful for us to pursue those goals, along
    with a number of other goals that you have all suggested and
    made some specific dollar amounts available, would be to give
    us in our deliberation with our colleagues to win their heart
    and mind to vote for these issues. Apparently the road to
    Damascus enlightened Paul and enlightened apparently this
    logging company from Europe. It doesn't always work in the
    bowels of the House of Representatives.
        But what makes it easier is for us to be as specific and as
    targeted as possible with these issues, so what would be
    helpful, Dr. Bakarr--and I am not sure if you are prepared to
    do it here, but if you gave us a map of Africa, Central Africa,
    West Africa, and you said here is where the--here are the areas
    that are benefiting from this type of attention. This is where
    the people are finding alternative sources of protein. These
    are the protected areas that we need to expand, and this is why
    we have to expand them, because of the hydrology, because of
    the species that are there, because of the stability of the
    community. Here is the local community that we can get into in
    Liberia. When we mention Liberia in the Congress, we see
    instability, we see tragedy, we see horrific acts; Sierra
    Leone, to some extent as well.
        So if you could be--and your colleagues this afternoon, you
    can educate us, and I think it is a good idea. I am not sure
    who mentioned the Bushmeat Congressional Caucus. We wouldn't
    serve any endangered species. We might serve some invasive
    species that we have here in this country. And I also think
    that is a good idea to have a Bushmeat Caucus to connect us
    with your issues.
        But, Dr. Bakarr, just two questions. Can you give us some
    specific areas that need to be protected and how would they be
    protected? And what would the acreage be? Do you have any idea
    as to the alternative sources of protein which would involve
    local agriculture that would be beneficial? Some ideas on how
    to monitor the extractive industries. It is hard for us to
    monitor our extractive industries in this country with all our
    capabilities. And one last question: Is there a future for
    subsistence consumption in Africa?
        Dr. Bakarr. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. That is a
    very excellent question.
        With respect to protected areas, I think I can reiterate
    that the efforts on the ground currently have been site-based.
    They need to be scaled up at the regional level, and those
    sites where investments have been making tremendous
    achievements can then become core areas that we can build upon
    to expand across the larger landscape that we are discussing.
    Such a proposal is already coming forward, as you heard from
    one of my colleagues here, through a partnership involving all
    the major international NGO's and the U.S. for Central Africa.
    We don't have yet such a large-scale partnership for West
    Africa, and we need that in order for protected areas to be
    scaled up to that level.
        The approach here is that various institutions usually
    focus on holding onto sites where they believe viable
    populations of species exist. But if you can integrate those
    sites into bigger sites, bigger areas, then you have a chance
    of building stronger and more efficient landscapes for longer
    success in conservation, and that is the approach we hope to
    take in West Africa as well.
        In West Africa, Liberia and Ivory Coast represent the best
    hope for safeguarding biodiversity, not only just wildlife but
    also the forest ecosystem itself because they have the best
    tracts of forest left at the moment. There are still
    significant tracts in Sierra Leone, but they are becoming
    increasingly isolated from the rest of the forest block, and
    efforts need to be made to make those links as well. But as you
    correctly pointed out, the issue of stability is a big one
    right now, and it is probably going to take us a few more years
    before we can get to that level.
        With respect to alternative protein, the forest ecosystem
    in West and Central Africa is very difficult to raise
    domesticated animals. It is not an easy thing. And so the
    majority of the people have relied on fish resources and
    occasionally some vegetable crops as well for alternative
    sources of protein. Now, if wildlife were to disappear
    completely, Africans are so adaptive that they will find
    something else to focus on as a priority, and I will not be
    surprised if fish, both freshwater and marine, don't play a
    major role in that. There is a lot of fish--in fact, there are
    graphics to show that many of the countries where bushmeat is a
    problem produce the largest tonnage of fish that is consumed
    domestically.
        Mr. Gilchrest. Is this fish farming? Is this aquaculture?
        Dr. Bakarr. Aquaculture, collection from freshwater
    sources, as well as marine fisheries. So there is no shortage
    of alternative sources of protein. The real dilemma we have is
    being able to sensitize the public to understand that wildlife
    is not as sustainable as they might think. And what we are
    ending up with is smaller and smaller bodied animals, which
    people are fine with. They will eat them. They will live on
    cane rats. That is no problem at all. So to them, all this
    noise about bushmeat is not real because they get hundreds of
    ken rats every day. But the reality is the large mammals are
    disappearing because they are the ones that are easy targets,
    they are the ones that are easy prey. They bring more money.
    They are more cost-effective for the hunter.
        So our problem is not a shortage of protein. It is being
    able to raise the profile of those that are more sustainable so
    that the pressure on those that are not can be reduced and
    eliminated in the long term.
        With respect to monitoring extractive industries, I think
    there are very good lessons already from programs in Central
    Africa, but they will not succeed without good backing and
    support from the government. And I think that is the dilemma we
    have in Liberia, unfortunately. With the good support of
    government agencies, logging companies can be monitored
    effectively by NGO's and local partners. Not a problem.
        Mr. Gilchrest. Does anyone else want to comment? Dr.
    Robinson?
        Dr. Robinson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman--
        Mr. Gilchrest. Just to interrupt just for a second, you can
    also comment on this. I know I fired a lot of questions out at
    you, Dr. Bakarr. And all of you, I would like your input on
    those questions, and also the question of is there a future for
    subsistence living, farming in this part of Africa.
        Dr. Robinson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Dr. Bakarr actually
    addressed, I think, these questions extremely well, but let me
    elaborate on a couple of these ideas.
        One, let me reiterate that certainly in Central Africa
    right now we are seeing this constellation of stars coming
    together that Dr. Carroll talked about, that the conservation
    community is developing a very systematic consensus on really
    what is needed, and that consensus involves the establishment
    of protected areas. And we are talking about 30 million acres
    of land which could be under protection, double that under some
    kind of management, forest management.
        Mr. Gilchrest. So we are talking about 60 million acres.
        Dr. Robinson. There are about 30 million acres in protected
    areas and about 60 million acres in managed forests.
        Mr. Gilchrest. There are 30 million acres right now in
    protected areas?
        Dr. Robinson. About 8 right now.
        Mr. Gilchrest. Eight.
        Dr. Robinson. Yes, but there is the potential of basically
    getting up to about 30. There are discussions going on with
    African governments and within the community to establish those
    areas at the present time.
        Mr. Gilchrest. This would be in Central and West Africa?
        Dr. Robinson. This is primarily Central Africa.
        Mr. Gilchrest. Central Africa.
        Dr. Robinson. That is correct. At the present time, funding
    going into Central Africa for environmental and conservation
    reasons probably doesn't exceed more than about $12 million a
    year, and that is from bilateral, multilateral, and all
    conservation organizations. The amount of funding going into
    Central African conservation is insignificant.
        Mr. Gilchrest. It is $12 million.
        Dr. Robinson. Yes, $12 million.
        Mr. Gilchrest. From all sources?
        Dr. Robinson. From all sources. And so the potential, there
    is a political will in Africa which is really exciting right
    now. There is a consensus among the conservation organizations
    within--
        Mr. Gilchrest. Where did the $12 million come from?
        Dr. Robinson. Pardon?,
        Mr. Gilchrest. That is everybody?,
        Dr. Robinson. That is everybody. It is actually shocking
    when you add it up. And, clearly, there is an opportunity to
    make a huge difference with not very much more of an increment.
        And so when you hear calls for additional funding through
    mechanisms like CARPE, through the multi-species funds, we have
    mechanisms in the U.S. to provide that kind of funding.
        I think there is also the potential to work very
    systematically with logging companies who are increasingly
    under pressure to say that they are producing wood in a more
    sustainable way and having less of an impact on the forest
    landscape, especially with respect to wildlife.
        Mr. Gilchrest. Is one of the criteria for the logging
    companies to replant after they log? Can you replant that type
    of forest?
        Dr. Robinson. At the present time, few, if any, companies
    are doing any replanting. At the minute they are very much high
    grading, just taking off a few trees, a few high-value trees
    over very, very extensive areas. So the impact on the forest,
    if you look at the forest, sometimes it is not that great. But
    as the logging companies move through the forest, they hunt,
    and the forest is just being stripped out. But those companies
    are interested in working with conservation communities, with
    certification agencies, and I think there is a real potential
    to have an impact there.
        Let me just sort of say something very quickly about the
    future of subsistence hunting in Africa. Even in the United
    States, people still hunt for the freezer. And those are people
    for the most part who have the opportunity and who frequently
    have their backs against the walls in other contexts.
        In the long term, subsistence hunting in Africa will have
    to dwindle. But I think the major thrust at the minute is not
    focusing so much on stopping the subsistence hunting because we
    don't have the alternative sources of protein to replace in
    much of Africa at the present time. The real thrust from a
    conservation standpoint and from a sustainability standpoint is
    to really focus on that commercial hunting, because it is the
    commercial hunting which is having the impact.
        Mr. Gilchrest. So you would say, Dr. Robinson, that the
    local consumption compared to the lucrative cash markets is
    small?
        Dr. Robinson. The amount of meat which is actually being
    consumed for subsistence may be actually as high as about
    three-quarters of all the meat which is being hunted. But it is
    that quarter which goes to the commerce which is hitting the
    large species, hitting those species which people want to eat,
    and is basically pushing the whole system over the top.
        Mr. Gilchrest. That is a vote, but I think we can finish.
        Dr. Carroll?
        Mr. Carroll. Yes, thank you very much. You asked about
    specific targets for the development of protected areas across
    the Congo Basin, and in my written testimony I have included a
    map of conservation priorities that were developed in a
    workshop facilitated by WWF, but it included 160 experts on
    biodiversity and biogeography in the Congo Basin. And this was
    produced really at the request of the Yaounde Summit
    governments as they were trying to develop a coherent plan for
    the Congo Basin conservation.
        So we got together; you know, all these experts developed a
    map of conservation priorities with the key overlap areas of
    species diversity, species richness, and opportunity for
    conservation. And that map has been adopted, as well as the
    blueprint for the conservation by the Yaounde Summit. And their
    plans that they are trying to put in place in the next 5 years
    are based on the landscapes identified in this map.
        Now, WWF and WCS are working with these countries to try to
    refine those big priority blobs on the map into really specific
    areas defined with limits that could be potential protected
    areas.
        For instance, in the country of Gabon right now, the
    Government of Gabon is very interested in very quickly putting
    in place 12 new national parks that are being proposed by the
    joint work of WWF and WCS. And we are very optimistic that will
    be put in place, but that is a result of this priority-setting
    exercise, the Yaounde Summit commitment to putting 10 percent
    of each national country's forest into protected area
    management--into protected areas. And when we talk about the
    cost, that map that you see in front of us, our estimates--just
    to put in place protected areas to cover only 10 percent of the
    Congo Basin in protected areas, our estimates are that that
    could range up to $100 million a year in cost to do that.
        So when we are making--as Dr. Robinson pointed out,
    currently our levels are so far below that, you know, $12
    million, that we have a major gap, and we are hoping for
    leadership from the U.S. Government to try to help fill those
    gaps and help--
        Mr. Gilchrest. Your recommendation was $15 million.
        Dr. Robinson. Yes.
        Mr. Gilchrest. A year, for 10 years.
        Dr. Robinson. Yes, sir. To go through, probably through
    CARPE, because CARPE we look at as a mechanism to bring
    together--that brings together the--
        Mr. Gilchrest. Is there a commitment--some of us will try
    to reach that commitment. Are you asking--it would be actually
    a little bit easier for us to do it if we knew that Japan,
    England, France, Germany, Italy, whoever, they were also making
    a commitment.
        Dr. Robinson. Yes, and we hope that happens as well. We
    hope that the leadership of the U.S. Government will push those
    other countries to make that commitment. The European Union has
    been a major supporter of protected areas through a program
    called ECOFAC that has been managing six protected areas across
    the Congo Basin. And we are going to urge them, based on the
    leverage that we hope will come from the U.S. Government Congo
    Basin Initiative to continue their funding for the same period
    of time for those protected areas so that it nestles together
    very well.
        Now, the governments are also making commitments to put
    these in place through the Yaounde process. They are putting
    their own money on the table to get these areas in place. You
    know, there have been many declarations by heads of state, but
    this one really seems to be taking hold because of the
    international spotlight that is being put on it.
        Like I said, since 1999 there have been 15,000 square
    kilometers of new protected areas put in place through this
    process, and they have committed to 12 major landscapes in
    protected areas. And if we can only keep that encouragement
    going by providing the funding for that--
        Mr. Gilchrest. We will do our best. I don't want to
    interrupt, but I think there is a vote going on. There is more
    than one vote, apparently, so I am going to have to wrap this
    up in just about 2 minutes, and I apologize for that. Here
    comes the buzzers again.
        Just a couple more questions before I leave, though, and
    you have all been very, very helpful. Dr. Hutchins and all of
    you mentioned in various ways the bushmeat trade. is there any
    way to know where the more expensive markets of the bushmeat
    trade are, that 25 percent?
        Mr. Hutchins. I might just address that. Actually, BCTF has
    been working on a project that is intended to try to identify
    not only where the major markets are but the important trade
    routes, where is the bushmeat being transported to and from,
    because we do feel that these are important places where
    control could be effected. And this is called the Bushmeat Hot
    Spots Map Project, and we are working with our members, which
    are, in fact, represented by all the organizations that are at
    this table, and with the CITES/MIKE people who have been for
    several years monitoring the trade in elephants, illegal trade
    in elephants and the taking of elephants throughout Africa.
        We are hoping to try to bring those processes together
    because they do collect a lot of information on bushmeat as
    well. So the monitoring, I think, will be very important for
    developing a strategy to address the bushmeat issue.
        Mr. Gilchrest. Bring a big light and a camera, show
    somebody eating gorilla meat in a restaurant in Paris or
    Washington, D.C., God forbid.
        Mr. Agnagna, you stated very eloquently some of the ancient
    traditions and sacred rules of the various peoples of the
    continent of Africa. And we talked about subsistence farming
    and the future of it. Can some of those ancient traditions and
    sacred rules of managing resources be retained and passed along
    to succeeding generations?
        Mr. Agnagna. I didn't get the last part of the question.
        Mr. Gilchrest. Can the traditions, the ancient traditions
    of subsistence farming, with their sacred rules, are they still
    alive in the hearts of people in Africa? And are they being
    passed down to the children?
        Mr. Agnagna. I will say that in the deep Africa--I am
    talking about a village.
        Mr. Gilchrest. Yes.
        Mr. Agnagna. I think the villager or the local population,
    the rural population, they still have those traditions. The
    problem is that, as I said, you know, the modernization, the
    technology, but people in the deep village, they still have
    this tradition. The problem is that our laws are modern laws.
    They didn't take really in consideration the rules, the
    traditional rules.
        What I am--you know, I wanted to say that now there is a
    process in Central Africa, a big process of revising wildlife
    laws, and we want to include--we want to take some of the
    values, traditional values and put them in the laws, because I
    think that that was really the best way. I don't think that the
    population or the local population--they don't have some more
    to learn from modern conservation because they know, they know
    how to manage, how to manage the natural resources.
        Mr. Gilchrest. Maybe we can blend the two together. I hope
    the spirit of the forest stays in the forest.
        Thank you all very much. I appreciate it. We will stay
    engaged.
        The hearing is adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 1:05 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]

        [Additional material submitted for the record follows:]

        [The article ``Bushmeat and the Origin of HIV/AIDS''
    submitted for the record follows:]

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.015

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.016

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.017

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.018

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.019

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.020

            [The article ``Warfare on gorillas poses threat to
            survival'' submitted for the record follows:]
            [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.011

            [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.012

            [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.013

            [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.014

        [A statement submitted for the record by Reginald Hoyt,
    Senior Vice President, Conservation and Science, Philadelphia
    Zoo, follows:]

              Statement of Reginald Hoyt, Senior Vice President,
                    Conservation & Science, Philadelphia Zoo

    Introduction:
        This testimony was prepared to respond to the questions of the
    Chairman that were directed to panelists on 11 July, concerning
    conservation activities in Liberia, West Africa. Liberia has been
    recognized as a global conservation priority as it retains nearly 40%
    of its lowland tropical rainforest intact. These forests represent the
    largest remaining tracts of the Upper Guinea Forest block that once
    covered much of West Africa (Togo to Sierra Leone). Home to forest
    elephants, the pygmy hippopotamus, a host of primates (including the
    chimpanzee, Diana monkey, red colobus and black and white colobus), and
    seven species of antelope (including the Jentink's and zebra duikers,
    which are unique to West Africa) Liberia represents the best chance for
    the long-term survival of many species of conservation concern.
        Unfortunately, Liberia was embroiled in a violent civil war that
    lasted from 1989 to 1997. This war resulted in 40% of the population
    being either killed or made refugees before it was to end. To this day,
    political and economic instability plague conservation efforts in
    Liberia.
        The Philadelphia Zoo's One With Nature conservation program has
    been working with Liberia partners since 1992. Given that the civil
    conflict in Liberia did not subside until 1997, our earlier efforts
    focused on maintaining the capacity to conduct conservation activities
    within the country via stipend support to professional staff within the
    Forestry Development Authority and the Society for the Conservation of
    Nature of Liberia. In addition, in-kind donations of uniforms, office
    equipment and a used vehicle were made. From 1997-1999 the Zoo focused
    its attention on assessments that evaluated the condition of Sapo
    National Park or data collection concerning species of conservation
    concern. It was not until 2000, that our efforts came to focus on the
    harvest and commercial use of wildlife.

    Problem Outline and the Philadelphia zoo's work in Liberia:
        A conservation assessment conducted in 1997 via a grant from the
    Philadelphia Zoo found that Liberia's only national park, Sapo National
    Park, had survived the civil conflict intact and that it appeared that
    wildlife populations had actually thrived during the war. While
    bushmeat harvest has been a long-term problem in Liberia, with an
    estimated value of $47,000,000 prior to the war, the ferocity of the
    fighting within the region adjacent to Sapo National Park had resulted
    in much of the population becoming refugees. Those that remained lacked
    the equipment (guns or shot) or materials (wire for cable snares) to
    continue to harvest wildlife with any efficiency, so during the
    conflict wildlife populations rebounded. But with much of post-war
    Liberia, things were to change rapidly.
        In economic collapse and led by Charles Taylor, the former warlord
    who began the conflict in 1989, Liberia is currently listed among the
    poorest countries in the world. The desire for economic growth have led
    to a ``gold rush'' like approach to resource utilization in Liberia,
    with timber extraction being among the most obvious. With the arrival
    of Oriental Timber Company in Liberia in 1999 the destruction of
    Liberia's forest reserves has proceeded at an alarming rate.
        The construction of logging roads has fragmented the Krahn-Bassa
    National Forest, providing access for settlers, who practice slash and
    burn agriculture, and hunters. While the road networks continue to
    expand, impacting nearly all of the remaining forest blocks in Liberia,
    people in need of work (unemployment estimated at 85%) turn to the only
    sources of income they know. Those who returned from refugee camps to
    their homes in Liberia's towns and cities found no work. Over the years
    many of them have turned to Liberia's natural resources as a source of
    income. Some have found work in logging or mining, while a growing
    number have turned to the harvest of wildlife.
        In 1997, we found very little commercial bushmeat hunting in those
    areas adjacent to Liberia's forest reserves in Sinoe County. However,
    during a survey of the Cestos River in 1999, our team discovered a
    nearly ``empty forest'' where we found few antelope. We discovered that
    hunters from a near-by logging camp were setting between 150 and 300
    wire snares each per night. With much of the meat rotting in the
    forest, since 150 snares are far too many to efficiently manage, local
    villagers were angry and routinely destroyed the snares of the loggers.
    But every night we heard gunfire as hunters ``called'' in duikers to be
    shot.
        Unlike the testimonies presented by our colleagues representing the
    situation in Central Africa, primates were not the primary targets of
    hunters in 1999. At the time antelope were plentiful, having been given
    a reprieve from hunting during the war years. With gun shot costing
    nearly $2 per cartridge, and antelope representing a larger and easier
    killed prey, primates were not heavily hunted. However, should antelope
    populations decline, a switch to primates could be expected.
        In 2000, the Philadelphia Zoo working with its Liberian partners
    conducted a hunter survey to better understand the distribution of
    selected animals of concern. During that survey hunters requested
    posters that would show them which species were protected by law, and
    complained that the government was not doing enough to protect the
    forest or the wildlife resources of Liberia. During that same year, to
    improve communications between conservationists and communities, the
    Zoo founded its ``Community Relations Officer'' program in the area
    adjacent to Sapo National Park. In addition to public awareness and the
    facilitation of communications, the duties of the position included the
    collection of data on bushmeat activities in the region.
        Since the founding of this program we have seen dramatic shifts in
    the pressure on wildlife. In 2000, to meet financial needs, villagers
    were selling one half of all large animals killed by the handful of
    snares set by a hunter. By 2002 hunters were only retaining the heads
    and entrails for their family's protein needs. Everything else is being
    sold to merchants who transport the meat to Monrovia. Becoming more and
    more organized, traders are now requesting large antelope, as it will
    bring them greater profit. In addition, villagers complain that
    ``outsiders'' from the cities have begun hunting within their tribal
    lands. While local hunters typically use 25-35 wire snares, these
    ``commercial hunters'' often set more than 150 snares. Data shows that
    when these large-scale hunting operations begin, everyone's hunting
    success per unit effort declines.
        In an effort to better understand the bushmeat trade in Liberia,
    the Philadelphia Zoo developed an Urban Public Opinion and Bushmeat
    Survey that was conducted earlier this year in eight communities
    throughout Liberia with funding from the Conservation Endowment Fund of
    the American Zoo and Aquarium Association. The survey engaged 20
    Liberian students in the effort, and was coordinated through several
    partner organizations in Liberia. The more than 2,300 interviews that
    were conducted are providing insights into the beliefs of the Liberian
    public, and the bushmeat market. Data analysis continues, as does work
    on the next phase of our bushmeat initiative. In 2003, the Zoo will
    again partner with Liberians to conduct a Rural Public Opinion and
    Bushmeat Survey (funded by the Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund
    managed by Conservation International) in five forested regions of the
    country so that we can better understand the viewpoint of rural
    villagers.
        To address the requests of hunters surveyed in 2000, the Zoo has
    produced a poster of ``Liberia's Protected Wildlife'' and distributed
    5,000 during the Urban Public Opinion and Bushmeat Survey. Currently,
    our partners in Liberia are conducting a Pilot Public Awareness
    Campaign, so that we may evaluate various media and its effectiveness
    in transmitting conservation messages to the public. In 2003, a
    National Public Awareness Campaign will take advantage of what we will
    have learned from the Pilot Campaign, and will focus efforts on
    addressing Liberia's pressing environmental issues. This Campaign will
    also be funded by a grant from the Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund.
        Today the Philadelphia Zoo is taking the lead role in addressing
    the bushmeat crisis in Liberia, by conducting research and coordinating
    the activities of our Liberian partners. The goal of our work in
    Liberia is to identify the causes and aggravating activities that drive
    the bushmeat market. While we do not have figures on how many animals
    are killed annually, nor on how much money this extractive industry
    produces each year, it is clear that the bushmeat trade in Liberia is
    growing rapidly and that numerous species are already being harvested
    unsustainably. Further, it is clear that Liberia's bushmeat industry is
    not restricted to its boundaries, and that this environmental crisis
    must be addressed on at least a regional if not global level.
        Finally, I must point out that the ``Bushmeat Crisis'' is not the
    creation of international conservation organizations. Our work
    demonstrates that Liberians recognize the need for the management of
    their natural resources. Some communities have even attempted to stop
    bushmeat hunting as they see it as a serious threat to their wildlife
    resources, but there is a lack of capacity at all levels of society to
    deal with the challenges.

    Financial commitment to conservation in Liberia
        During the decade that the Philadelphia Zoo has worked in Liberia
    our efforts have been primarily funded by donations from our
    membership. Grants have been difficult to acquire due to the political
    instability of the region, but we have remained committed. While the
    Zoo has received funding recently from the American Zoo and Aquarium
    Association and from the Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund, and our
    colleagues have received support from the World Bank and a handful of
    European organizations, funding has been lacking for conservation in
    West Africa. While testimony given on 11 July indicated that
    $12,000,000 a year was being spent on conservation in Central Africa,
    all of West Africa receives considerably less than $1,000,000 in
    financial support annually. As a global conservation priority, West
    Africa should be given greater financial support to meet the threat of
    habitat loss and the bushmeat crisis. This support can also be used to
    leverage development and good governance efforts in the region.

    Recommendations
        1. USAID, USFWS, and the State Department work together with US-
    based conservation organizations to support conservation priorities in
    Liberia and West Africa
        2. USAID funds currently being withheld in Liberia be released to
    address projects that meet both development and conservation goals
        3. US work with the EU and others to develop stronger financial
    support to address the bushmeat crisis in West Africa
        4. Congress support efforts of US-based organizations to improve
    forest and wildlife management and conservation in West Africa
        5. Recognize that development and conservation are not mutually
    exclusive, and support partnerships that promote sustainable economic
    development that is also compatible with the conservation of natural
    resources for the betterment of future generations of West Africans
        We appreciate the Committee's attention to this issue, and hope
    that our testimony will be of service. Additional information is
    available upon request.
        [An attachment to Mr. Hoyt's statement follows

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0615.010

                                       -