Report On: Conservation of
Participatory Action Plan for Musk deer Conservation in Marpha Village of Mustang District, Nepal
Yüklə 0,83 Mb.
|
|
Participatory Action Plan for Musk deer Conservation in Marpha Village of Mustang District, Nepal
Introduction of Area: Marpha is located in the southern part of district and adjoining with the district head quarter. It is surrounded by Jomsom, Kangbeni and Kowang VDCs. Marpha VDC Land Cover Land cover Area sq. meters Cutting/Cliff 823841.80 Agriculture 3049368.56 Forest/ potential musk deer habitat 59055512.42 Orchard 239248.98 Grass land 142661636.22 Shrub land 11877872.64 Sand/Gravel 6913742.69 Bare land 514890452.80 River 3638420.00 Glacier 2375790.00
Total population of Marpha VDC is 986, (Male: 510 and Female: 476) and there are total 216 house hold, about 98% of house hold are depended on fire wood for cooking and heating. Remaining 2% percent house hold are using gas, kerosene stove for coking, heating purpose, this is specially in hotels
Main occupations of the local people are agriculture and tourism. 40% of people of VDC are poor, they have less than 1 ha, land, they have to do agricultural work, or labour work for their subsistence. 50% of people area medium, they have 5-7 ha land. 10% people are in rich and them main occupation is tourism, hotel business.
F 
uel wood collection and cooking Pattern directly affects to habitat of Musk deer as well as other wildlife of the area. There are high pressure of fire wood in the forest of the Marpha VDC, about 77.9% houses hold depend on the fuel wood for the cooking which 90% fuel wood come from forest area which provide potential habitat for Musk deer and other wildlife of area. This data show that there is high pressure in Musk deer habitat for the fuel wood collection. Forest degradation and Habitat loss in Marpha : Excessive degradation and fragmentation eventually leads to habitat loss. Potential habitat of Musk deer has already been lost due to high deforestation in Miprakiu forest and Napang Danda area of Marpha VDC. Local people of the Marpha are highly dependent on Musk deer habitat for habitat for sensitive Musk deer. Forest fire Marph: A main threat of musk deer habitat in Marpha VDC is Forest fire, almost every year forest fire was occurred in musk deer habitat, and it is serious threat of musk deer habitat. Forest fire in last year occurred in 2 sq.km area of musk deer habitat of Marpha forest. Grazing pattern in Marpha village: Owing to high seasonality and low primary productivity, the Himalayan region supports relatively low ungulate / herbivore biomass (Aryal, 2005). It is therefore obvious that with the increase in the biomass of domestic livestock in many areas, wild ungulates such as Musk deer have suffered competitive exclusion. Sathyakumar et. al. (1993) have reported that increased livestock grazing and associated impacts have led to low Musk deer densities in many areas in Kedarnath Wildlife Sanctuary, India. In 68% of Musk deer habitat was seen livestock dung that mean there is high grazing pressure in musk deer habitat. In Marpha VDCs total 600 sheep/goat were domesticated by local people and they use the grass land of pasture area of the village, that directly reduce the feeding material of the musk deer and other wild grazing species like Goral, Blue sheep etc. Poachng: Poaching is another main threat for the population of Musk deer in the study area. In 1993 the local villagers of Marpha had caught three poacher with trophies of musk deer and several snares in forest and handover to ACAP office for legal action and the legal unit of ACAP pokhara finalize the case and penalize the victims sending to prison seven year for one and five years for two others(ACAP,1999). Every year large number of snare was recorded by Patrolling team of CAMC, Marpha. 400 number of snare recorded in 2001, 287 number in 2002, 87 number in 2003 (per.com with Chairman of Marpha CAMC, 2006).
Presently, there was no any specific Musk deer conservation programme in the Marpha VDC or whole Annapurna conservation area, but indirect some livelihood and natural resource focus conservation activities were carried out in the area.
Conservation of Musk deer surrounding the Marpha VDC Regular monitoring of Musk deer habitat and patrolling Maintain ecological process Restoration of degradation area Promote tourism through wildlife Involve local people in wildlife tourism Support to local people for their livelihoods. 2. Problem in achieving objective: Poaching, Overgrazing, Lack of awareness for the Conservation of wildlife Poor economic condition Lack of sufficient fuel wood/ timber 3. The Strategies: 3.1 Zonation and Zone plan : Core zone should be demarcated for the free movement of musk deer in it natural habitat without the disturbance of human activities, this zone is totally protected for the musk deer above 3600m altitude area. Below that area will be use by local people for their day need such as fuel wood collection, grazing. Domestic grazing is totally restricted in core area. Restricted activities within core zone are: To collect fuel wood, NTFPs, and other forest product. Forest fire Domestic livestock grazing Poaching/hunting of wildlife with in core area and other parts of CAMC area. 3.2 Theme plan: 3.2.1 Activities: Without the local people participation, it is difficult to conserve musk deer in their surrounding area, so local people basic need and alternative source of income should be provided for the conservation of musk deer. This action plan is prepared on the basis of this theory. Local people were highly interested to involve in the conservation of Musk deer so that they can attract tourist in their area and that directly benefited to local economy. Through the series of the workshop and local people interaction, different activities were design which directly and indirectly related to musk deer and other wildlife conservation. Local people need alternative sources for the conservation of musk deer and its habitat. If we are prohibited to collected forest products from the musk deer habitat, we should provide alternative source of that products. Following activities are suggested to implement for the conservation of musk deer and other wildlife species of the area as well as up liftment of local people living standard. 3.2.1 Institutional Coordination/Local body: In ACAP area there are existing responsible body whose responsibilities are to conserve natural resource in their area through the local participation, that body is called Conservation Area Management Committee (CAMC). We tried to make different subcommittee for the musk deer conservation like in manage district but CAMC disagree to make new committee and CAMC itself is working for musk deer conservation through the people participation. CAMC will regularly monitor the musk deer habitat, regular patrolling in musk deer habitat, and conducts different programme and activities for the musk deer conservation in their area. If the CAMC get financial supports then it is interested to conduct following activities. 3.2.2. Institutional Coordination / Capacity Building: CAMC should coordinate with different stakeholders for the conservation of Musk deer with help of ACAP. Formal or informal training such as Nature guide training, cooking-baking training, handicraft training, and other wildlife Conservation training should be given to local people and committee member who express interest. Especially institutional capacity building training should be provided for committee members and strengthening the committee by training etc. ACAP should provide capacity development training for local people especially for those who have poor economic condition. These activities help to strength the capacity of local people and thus reduce the pressure on Musk deer habitat. 3.2.2. Alternative Energy Development: Local people have highly demand in alternative source of energy. Local people are depended on forest for Fuel wood/Timber collection which directly affects the musk deer habitat. So that alternative source of fuel wood such as, improve fuel wood stove (Sudhariyako Chulo), Solar cooking stove, gas stove should be promoted in the area. ACAP and other donor agency should support to such activities. Target group: Marpha VDC people. Number of benefit house hold: By whom: ACAP and other donor agency Means of alternative energy Cooking Gas Support: local people are demanding one gas depot in center of village, local people especially hotels owners are interested to use cooking gas so that the pressure of firewood in musk deer habitat will be reduced. Solar Cooking Stove support Solar light support Estimate cost for support: $ 10,000 3.2.3. Restoration of Degrade land by apple plantation (Alternative source of income): There is large open area in above the village and in also in forest area. So ACAP/CAMC should planted indigenous plant i.e. Apple in that area, total approximately area is near about 90 hector which will be one of the alternative source of income for the local people. Apple plantation is most suitable in 40 hector area so that it become one of the potential sources of income. Local people are so interested for community apple farming which is one of the main existing income sources of local people; the committee will handle the programme. For this Preliminary step: Apple nursery and irrigation canal should be extended in the apple farming area or proposed site. By whom: CAMC/ACAP/MDCC. Place or site: Tenjelo Blaa, Lechch, Tanlas, Tengla site of Marpha VDC Cost: $15,000
Lack of awareness, Villagers does not know the importance of wildlife. Therefore, Awareness programme should be carried out for the school students, youth club, and local people for the conservation of Blue bull and wildlife tourism. Target group: Marpha village people. Number of benefit house hold: all house hold of Marpha VDC What activities: schools quiz/Art competition, Street drama, Awareness Camps, Cost: $3,000
Formal or informal training such as wildlife Conservation, Wildlife management training should be given to local people, committee member, and CAMC members. Target group: committee members (50 persons) By whom: ACAP/ other donor agency Cost: $5,000
Source of incomes of local people of Marpha area agriculture, tourism, business. The local people surrounding the Marpha VDCs are mostly involve in hotel business, most of the farmer change their income source from agricultural to hotel business. Other sources of income of the area are sheep/Chauri rising in forest area, apple farming medicinal plants collection/sell. Sheep/Chauri/yak raising in the forest area are directly effect in musk deer habitat they are sharing food with musk deer, these activities are also disturbing the musk deer habitat, so that we should develop musk deer zone and should restricted to sheep/chauri and other human activities. Local people are directly depended in forest for the fuel wood also. Therefore we should launch Income Generation Activities (IGAs) as the incentive programme. Hunger and poor economic status enforce people to involve in illegal activities such as musk deer poaching, So employment opportunity should create for those people who have poor economic condition so that they can motivate to the conservation. Following IGAs are design to local people surrounded Marpha VDC (forest and private land). NTFPs Farming: Non-Timber Forest Product (NTFPs) i.e. medicinal plant cultivation in farm land or forest land or community land is one the most potential income generation activities, because the area hold unique ecological character and favour for the high valuable medicinal plant, Such as Kutki, Padamchhal, Akarkara, Chichi, ACAP should start this works by providing initial support such as seeds of NTFPs, cultivation technique.
For the NTFPs farming following steps should take: Awareness: First of all we should make aware local people about NTFPs and their market value, therefore, we should encourage them to cultivate NTFPs in community of private land of the area. Group/person selection: Interested group formation and should be given priorities to poor/local people who directly involve in forest destruction, poaching. NTFPs cultivation and management training: Before the activities carried out, training should be given to those selected persons and training should cover identification, cultivation, propagation, processing grading, storage, nursery practice, market, NTFP related organization. Seed and seedling distribution: Seed and seeding should provide by Donor/ ACAP and farmer should agree to invest labour works. Protection and management: Protection of the NTFPs cultivation areas should be by farmer themselves and required technical supports should be provided by ACAP. Market: Siddhartha Seed Store is ready to collect that product by paying appropriate cost to farmers. Target group: local people surround the Marpha area. Training Name: NTFPs farming and management (5 days). Cost: $7,000 Sheep/Chauri (Yak) Farming: Next priorities of local people of Marpha are to farming sheep/Chauri. Sheep/Chauri keeping was found very popular in the area due to cheap and easy to rise and traditional practice and these are main source of meat and milk of the area. Poor and less land people were even attempted for increase in number of goat by using community/forest land. There is traditional farming practice of Sheep/chauri in the area. This farming is more feasible in those areas where forage was easily available. Target group: Local of people of the area. Support by whom: Donor agency. Training Name: First training should be provided to local who raise sheep/chauri specially focus to header. Training cost: $1,500 Natural Zoo or breeding center establishment: Marpha is one of the most potential sites for the establishment of a Musk deer Breeding Centre. In future it could be expanded as a Musk deer Farming Centre. Ecotourism: Developing opportunities for ecotourism – so that tourists can pay for guided trips to see musk deer –thereby contributing to the local economy. Musk deer Farming: The Government of Nepal has funded a musk deer research facility at Godavari, outside Kathmandu since 1996. Although several male and female musk deer were transported to the facility, the male deer have since died so that no breeding program has been possible. The main reason was climatic and physical factor. They are different the original musk deer habitat and lack of musk deer feeding species. Musk deer farming is a good income source which can be seen from experience in China. It is also possible in Nepal. There are some legal constraints in this regard and the need for knowledgeable manpower, funding, etc. In order to develop this concept, good coordination with relevant government ministries and departments and with ACAP will be essential. For this, a feasibility study is essential before the programme implementation. Need of Musk deer Harvesting programme and Community benefit: The benefits to be accrued from the management, that includes a harvesting scheme of Musk deer, are manifold. ACAP is protecting a highly vulnerable species together with its habitat from further degeneration. Local people would profit immensely from the harvesting scheme. It would be an alternative means of income and an opportunity to manage their natural resources. It must be remembered that the Mustang people are migrating in large numbers to Kathmandu and other urban areas, due to the harshness of the mountainous terrain they inhabit. The landscape is incredibly beautiful but the poor quality of soil does allow much scope for agriculture. Such migration could very well lead to degradation of the Mustang culture. A sound means of income through the Musk deer pod harvesting scheme would be instrumental in encouraging the local people to stay. A well designed “special project” for managing /harvesting the species in its natural habitat is needed. Total cost for Musk deer breeding farm established: $40,000 3.2.7. Musk deer habitat conservation: For the conservation of Musk deer, there should be fixed a core region for the conservation of Musk deer their habitat. The area should be protected with prohibition on collection of forest product, domestic livestock grazing, forest firing, and other human activities which directly disturb Musk deer and their habitat. 3.2.8. Nature Guide/Eco-trekking Training: Select local people who are interested and capable for Natural guide training. Target group: youth and educated Support by whom: Donor agency Training Name: Natural Guide training. Cost: $ 1000 3.2.9. Research and regular monitoring of Musk deer population: Regular research should be done regarding its population, ecology, habitat structure etc. Population should be regularly monitored through silent drive count method or pellet group count methods, Action research should be carryout by ACAP through the participation of Local people and CAMC. Cost of activities: $ 4000
Regular patrolling will be done in Musk deer habitat. Patrolling will be done once a week by committee. Cost for patrolling/year: $1000
Core area will be fully protected for musk deer habitat, there is strictly prohibited to do any work like collection of forest product, grazing, forest firing, and other human activities which directly disturbance to musk deer and their habitat. Require action will be taken for the musk deer habitat conservation through coordination with ACAP. 4. Role and Responsibility of Conservation Area Management Committee: Regular patrolling Musk deer habitat every week. Raise conservation awareness for conservation of wildlife surrounding Marpha Forest. Support to ACAP during the research and monitoring of wildlife. Punish those who work against the rule and regulation of Committee and who work against the welfare of wildlife. Mobilized fund for the conservation of wildlife and community development.
Conservation area management communities set special rules and regulation for fine and penalties for those people who involve in the illegal activities regarding musk deer. Rules were followed: I. Who collect any forest products in core area they will fine Nrs 100 first time, Nrs 200 in second time, and Nrs 5000 for third time, if anybody do more than third time, legal action will be started and forward to ACAP. II. Who killing musk deer they should be paid as fine Nrs 10,000 first time 20,000 time and 30,000 third time after that if they will forward to ACAP for legal action. III. Who support poacher or musk deer and other wildlife hunting activities he/she should fine Nrs 2000. IV. If anyone involve in putting snare in musk deer habitat, they should be paid Nrs 5000 first time and increasing as double after that. V. Who do illegal forest fire in musk deer habitat they have to pay more than Nrs 5000 according to fire site situation if the fire burnt area is more than 1hactore, they have to pay Nrs 5000, and if burnt area is 2 hectare they have to 10,000 so no.
The person who helps to curb poacher, CAMC will give price/awards Nrs 5000 to those person. The person who provide information about illegal activities in musk deer habitat, CAMC will give him Awards according to activities and their impact in musk deer and its habitat.
Donor agency, fine/penalty, donation. 8. Total cost for implementation of action plan: It is estimated that total $ 82,500.00 require for the implementation of this action plan. Chapter: Third Conservation Education Part Poster and Brochure Publication: Under this project I have published poster on Musk deer with title of Save the Himalayan Musk deer. I have published poster as 2000 copies, having size of 20’’X 18’’ (appendix-1). I have distributed 200 copies in schools of study area and 900 copies have provide to Annapurna Conservation Area Project and Pokhara Natural Museum for the distribution in other potential Musk deer distribution area (for schools, schools students, local youths, local stakeholders, etcs). 500 copies are providing to IUCN Nepal for the further distribution in concern organization and Musk deer distribution area of Nepal.
Two days conservation awareness class was carried out in 15-16, August, 2006. Training participants were 8, 9, 10 class student and school teacher. Training was covered, introduction on musk deer, distribution range, status of Musk deer in Nepal, and ACA, threats on it habitat, our role and responsibility in Musk deer conservation. Before the training Art and Essay competition was carried out among the students. Four session training/class has taken general information on Musk deer and it threats. Activities: Essay and Art competition 1 0 th August,2006 Essay competition: Essay writing Competition was organized in 10th of August; 2006.The essay with its topic “Himalayan Musk deer” was conducted in Janagal higher secondary schools, Marpha. In this competition altogether 21 students participated. Although the time was of only one hour and there was no word limit, the participants came up with some really good essays and judge by the team member of the project. The language of written was Nepali for their essay. The result of the Essay Competition and prizes they won are as follows: 1st – Winner- Depek Lalchan- Class 10 Prize – Rs 3,000 2nd - Winner- Asha Maya Pariyar- Class 9 Prize- Rs 2,000 3rd – Winner- Prakhas Subedi- Class 10 Prize- Rs 1,000 See appendix-1 for tops 3 Essays: conversion from Nepali language to English.
On 11th August, 2006, The Project was organized an art competition where the students with their exceptional artistic talent competed for an attractive first prize of Rs 3000 on the theme “Conservation of Himalayan Musk deer”. Altogether we had 23 students participating from school. The result of the Art Competition and prizes they won are as follows: 1st – Bisnu Pariyar Class 7, Janawal H.S. School prize Rs 3,000 2nd - Krishna Gurung, Class 7, Janawal H.S. School prize Rs 2,000 3rd -Nanda Pun Class 7, Janawal H.S. School prize Rs 1,000 See some selective tops three arts in appendix-2
On the Third Day, August 13th 2006 the project was organized an Awareness class with its message for the conservation of Musk deer and its biodiversity. The class included more than 40 participants. The Class was taken by BRTF members. The class was focus lecture and participatory discussion methods. The class focus following parts 1. Introduction about Musk deer 2. Must deer Status in Nepal 3. Threats on Musk deer population in musk deer and its importance 4. Our role in Musk deer
On the fourth days of the project, was organized the group discussion with the local people as all together it was carried out in the three time in different people and interact and discussed about Musk deer, it distribution area and its threats. And discussed about the musk deer participatory conservation action plan. Financial statement:
Chapter: Four Overall Conclusion and Recommendations Conclusion:
Recommendation:
References: 1. ACAP, 1996; Annual report. KMTNC/ACAP 2. ACAP, 1999; Annual report. KMTNC/ACAP 3. Aryal, A (2005): Status and Distribution of Musk deer in Manage district of Nepal. A Report submitted to ITNC, UK. 4. CITES, 2002;. Conservation of and trade in Musk deer, CITES. 5. Green, M J B. 1987; Diet composition and quality in Himalayan Musk deer based on faecal analysis. JOURNAL OF WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT 51:"880-892". 6. Green, M J B. 1987; Some ecological Aspects of a Himalayan Population of Musk deer. Research Symposia of the National Zoological Park 307-319. 7. Green, M.J.B. (1985). Aspects of the ecology of the Himalayan Musk deer. Ph.D. thesis, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. 280 pp. 8. Green, M.J.B. 1978; Himalayan Musk deer (Moschus moschiferus moschiferus). In: IUCN (Ed.) Threatened deer. IUCN, Morges, Switzerland. 434 pp. 9. Green, M.J.B. 1986; The distribution, status and conservation of the Himalayan Musk deer (Moschus chrysogaster). Biological Conservation 35: 347-375. 10. Green, M.J.B. 1987a; Some ecological aspects of a Himalayan population of Musk deer. In: 11. Green, M.J.B. 1987b; Diet composition and quality in Himalayan Musk deer based on faecal analysis. Journal of Wildlife Management 51: 880- 892. 12. Green, M.J.B. 1987c; Scent-marking in the Himalayan Musk deer (Moschus chrysogaster). Journal of Zoology, London (B) 1: 721-737. 13. Green, M.J.B. 1989;. Musk production from Musk deer. In: Hudson, R.J., Drew, K.R. and Baskin, L.M. (Eds.). Wildlife Production System. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. 14. Green, M.J.B. and Kattel, B. 1998; Musk deer: little understood, even its scent. In: Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Endangered Species Used in Traditional East Asian Medicine: Substitutes for Tiger Bone and Musk. Hong Kong, December 1997. (In press). 15. Green, M.J.B. et. al. 1987; Diet composition and Quality in Himalayan Musk deer Based on faecal analysis. J. of Wildlife manangement.51 (4): UK. 16.HMG/Nepal, 2002;. Nepal Biodiversity Strategy (NBS), His Majesty’s Government of Nepal, Supported by GEF and UNDP. 17. Homes, V. ;1999;. On the Scent: Conserving Musk deer – the Uses of Musk and Europe’s Role in its Trade. TRAFFIC Europe 18. IUCN 2004; 2004 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Yüklə 0,83 Mb. Dostları ilə paylaş:
|
