Identification of a possible hunting area and types of game resources during the meeting of local hunters (Almaz Musaev (Bishkek, Manas St.,155, Wildlife Department))

Joint Wildlife Management in the mountain ecosystem of the Naryn region in Kyrgyzstan (Kyrgyzstan)

Нарын областында тоолуу экосистемаларынын табигый анчылык ресурстарын жергиликтуу жамааттардын негизинде колдонуу

Description

Joint Wildlife Management based on economic empowerment and assigning hunting (wildlife) grounds to the Association of local hunters and providing her with user rights for game resources leads to a sustainable use of natural resources and biodiversity and wildlife conservation (in the frame of CACILM).

Aims / objectives: Wildlife in Kyrgyzstan, especially mountain ungulates, is threatened because these resources can be easily accessed due to an inadequate state supervision and regulation as well as due to lack of knowledge among the local population and mechanism for integrated land use (considering different coordinated types of resource use) and resource conservation. Decrease in the natural habitat (caused by the expansion of pasture and arable land) and illegal hunting lead to a decrease in wildlife populations. In Kyrgyzstan, the fauna is exclusively owned by the state. User rights for wildlife are separated from land use ones. The approach aims at the conservation and sustainable use of wildlife based on providing representatives of the local community, organized in an Association of local hunters (ALH), with legal user rights for wildlife resources.

Methods: (1) supporting local hunters in organizing an Association of local hunters (ALH) with the help of facilitators; (2) transferring wildlife management functions from the Wildlife Department to the ALH based on assigning hunting grounds to them and providing them with user rights according to jointly developed management plans; (3) building trust in partnership relations between the ALH and the Wildlife Department of State Agency for Environmental Protection and Forestry (SAEPF) based on joint registration and monitoring and determination of the resource status (see Annex 3); (4) capacity building of the ALH with the help of independent experts and advising activities provided by the Wildlife Department; (5) developing an atmosphere of trust by establishing links between the Wildlife Department, local hunters (ALH), the local community (Aiylokmotu) and rural organizations (Pasture User Association, PUA) based on joint planning and information sharing.

Stages of implementation: (1) setting up groups of well-trained (sensitive) facilitators and training them on the principles of facilitation, conflict management and sustainable management of natural resources; (2) identifying reliable active hunters with the help of facilitators and managers by interviewing neutral people; (3) organizing a meeting at the field level to analyze the situation and identify interests in establishing of the ALH; (4) raising awareness of local hunters on wildlife resources, existing problems and possible solutions offered by sustainable management; (5) establishing an ALH in the pilot area as a legal entity; (6) assigning areas to the ALH and advising activities on methods for wildlife management provided by the Wildlife Department and the specialized NGO 'Ak-Terek'; (7) organizing expeditions with specialists from the Wildlife Department to register and monitor the resource status; (8) developing a management plan with the support of experts from the Wildlife Department and independent experts, plan approval and implementation.

Location

Location: Kochkor district, Toloksky Aiylokmotu (villages Tolok and Kok-Jar), Kyrgyzstan, Naryn oblast, Kyrgyzstan

Geo-reference of selected sites
  • 75.682, 41.966

Initiation date: 2010

Year of termination: 2014

Type of Approach
Identification of a possible hunting area and types of game resources during the meeting of local hunters (Almaz Musaev (Bishkek, Manas St.,155, Wildlife Department))
Wild mountain goats are one of the species at risk of extinction; it is included into the list of wild animals, of which management rights will be transferred in the hands of the local community (Almaz Musaev (Bishkek, Manas St., 155, Wildlife Department))

Approach aims and enabling environment

Main aims / objectives of the approach
The Approach focused mainly on other activities than SLM (Transferring responsibilities of wildlife management to the local population, assigning hunting grounds to the Association of local Hunters and providing her with legal user rights for game resources, sustainable management of wildlife and joint planning)

The approach aims at conservation and sustainable use of wildlife based on economic empowerment and transfer of legal use rights for wildlife resources to representatives of the local community, organized in the Association of local hunters according to jointly developed management plans.

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: Decrease in wildlife populations due to an unregulated unsustainable use of resources by the local population and due to lack of participatory mechanisms for the population to manage these resources, inadequate state regulation and supervision, aggravated by a conflict of interest among users over other natural resources with different intentions (pasture, forest, mineral resources, tourism).
Conditions enabling the implementation of the Technology/ ies applied under the Approach
Conditions hindering the implementation of the Technology/ ies applied under the Approach
  • Social/ cultural/ religious norms and values: Hunting is basically illegal. Local hunters do not trust the new approach of wildlife management and have no capacity for self-organization and no experience of joint decision making. Treatment through the SLM Approach: Providing necessary information to the local population by holding meetings and seminars with representatives of the Wildlife Department. Trainings on capacity building for self-organization.
  • Availability/ access to financial resources and services: There is a need for initial investment to get the ALH started and deferred revenues are expected. The ALH is not expected to extract big financial revenues from wildlife management and wildlife use. Treatment through the SLM Approach: Explanation of financial expectations (exclusive right of first access to game resources and authority of access right distribution, patriotism)
  • Institutional setting: There is a lack of joint organizations at the field level which manage wildlife resources sustainably. Treatment through the SLM Approach: Establishing an Association of local hunters to manage wildlife resources sustainably
  • Legal framework (land tenure, land and water use rights): There is a lack of policy promoting Joint Wildlife Management Treatment through the SLM Approach: Order of the Wildlife Department, Concept of Reform for wildlife sector prohibiting state agencies to manage wildlife economically, promoting the assignment of wildlife areas to the ALH The existing land ownership, land use rights / water rights greatly hindered the approach implementation Existing legislation does not comply with the principles of sustainable use and wildlife management and does not promote Joint Wildlife Management. There is a lack of regulation and integration of land users.
  • Knowledge about SLM, access to technical support: The local population has no necessary capacities (environmental awareness, knowledge of sustainable wildlife management). Treatment through the SLM Approach: Trainings

Participation and roles of stakeholders involved

Stakeholders involved in the Approach and their roles
What stakeholders / implementing bodies were involved in the Approach? Specify stakeholders Describe roles of stakeholders
local land users/ local communities Hunters from the villages Kok-Djar and Tolel in the Naryn region Hunting is a traditionally male-dominated activity Pasture user committees
community-based organizations
NGO Public Foundation “Ak-Terek”
national government (planners, decision-makers) Wildlife Department of SAEPF
international organization GIZ Regional Program on Sustainable Use of Natural Resources via the Project “Sustainable use of the mountain ungulate species in Kyrgyzstan”
Involvement of local land users/ local communities in the different phases of the Approach
none
passive
external support
interactive
self-mobilization
initiation/ motivation
x
Consulting with the Wildlife Department
planning
x
Participation at discussing the approach design and determining the form and specifics of self-organization
implementation
x
Local hunters implement the approach through their representatives in the ALH
monitoring/ evaluation
x
Monitoring and evaluation are conducted on base of questionnaires and interviews with key actors supported by the Wildlife Department and GIZ Project and on base of annual progress assessment in reports prepared for the Wildlife Department (increase in wildlife population, reducing conflicts among resource users).
Research
x
Flow chart

The approach has been implemented by the GIZ project 'Sustainable management of the mountain ungulate species' under the Regional Program on Sustainable Use of Natural Resources in Central Asia which initiated and implemented establishment of the ALH in conjunction with the Wildlife Department and the NGO 'Ak-Terek'. The Wildlife Department has developed new methods for monitoring and determining wildlife quotas. The NGO 'Ak-Terek' promotes and facilitates self-organization of hunters in the ALH, mitigate possible conflicts arising in the integrated land use. Local hunters are organized into the ALH, defining her structure and principles of organization (legal status, functions, membership), as well as monitoring and developing management plan, etc. The Wildlife Department confirms the legal assignment of wildlife areas to the ALH and provides advice to them on game management.

Author: Nazgul Esengulova (720001, Logvinenko St., 26а, Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan )
Decision-making on the selection of SLM Technology

Decisions were taken by

  • land users alone (self-initiative)
  • mainly land users, supported by SLM specialists
  • all relevant actors, as part of a participatory approach
  • mainly SLM specialists, following consultation with land users
  • SLM specialists alone
  • politicians/ leaders
  • Experts from the Wildlife Department

Decisions were made based on

  • evaluation of well-documented SLM knowledge (evidence-based decision-making)
  • research findings
  • personal experience and opinions (undocumented)

Technical support, capacity building, and knowledge management

The following activities or services have been part of the approach
Capacity building/ training
Training was provided to the following stakeholders
  • land users
  • field staff/ advisers
  • Wildlife Department
Form of training
  • on-the-job
  • farmer-to-farmer
  • demonstration areas
  • public meetings
  • courses
  • 2 day seminars on the spot
Subjects covered

1. Raising awareness of actual problems and possible solutions; joint mapping of resources and discussion of scenarios for development of hunting grounds;
2. Principles of sustainable wildlife use;
3. Methods for monitoring and registering the number of wild animals;
4. Planning economic activities of game management for an assigned area;
5. Professional ethics of game users;
6. Programs for employees of environmental, law enforcement and customs authorities.

Advisory service
Advisory service was provided
  • on land users' fields
  • at permanent centres
Name of method used for advisory service: situation analysis; Key elements: on-site visit, group consultation during workshop, preparation of resource map

Advisory service is quite adequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities; Department with its local staff and the NGO 'Ak-Terek' are capable to continue providing advisory services after the project finishes.
Monitoring and evaluation
Bio-physical aspects were regular monitored by project staff, land users through observations; indicators: expeditions, field researches, surveys Bio-physical aspects were regular monitored by project staff, land users through measurements; indicators: number of wild animals Economic / production aspects were regular monitored by project staff through measurements; indicators: benefit from selling hunting tours and ecotourism No. of land users involved aspects were regular monitored by project staff through measurements; indicators: Number of hunters and associations Management of Approach aspects were regular monitored by project staff, government through observations; indicators: annual planning, monitoring of achievement and difficulties, adaptation of the approach if necessary There were no changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation There were no changes in the Technology as a result of monitoring and evaluation

Financing and external material support

Annual budget in USD for the SLM component
  • < 2,000
  • 2,000-10,000
  • 10,000-100,000
  • 100,000-1,000,000
  • > 1,000,000
Precise annual budget: n.a.
Approach costs were met by the following donors: international (GIZ, via “Sustainable use of the mountain ungulate species in Kyrgyzstan” ): 95.0%; government (Wildlife Department of SAEPF): 5.0%; national non-government (PF “Ak-Terek” ); local community / land user(s) (local resource users )
The following services or incentives have been provided to land users
  • Financial/ material support provided to land users
  • Subsidies for specific inputs
  • Credit
  • Other incentives or instruments
partly financed
fully financed
Tools, binoculars, GPS navigators, tents

x

Labour by land users was

Impact analysis and concluding statements

Impacts of the Approach
No
Yes, little
Yes, moderately
Yes, greatly
Did the Approach help land users to implement and maintain SLM Technologies?

With establishing the Association of local hunters and involving the latter into wildlife management, stabilization and even an increasing tendency of wildlife populations according to ecosystem's carrying capacity have been made possible. Joint planning and activities in the assigned areas decreased the number of conflicts over resources. Diversification of land use and a better integration of land users are present.

x
Did the Approach empower socially and economically disadvantaged groups?

x
Did the Approach improve issues of land tenure/ user rights that hindered implementation of SLM Technologies?

Integrating approaches of wildlife management (a relevant order of the Hunting Department) before a new law 'On Hunting' is adopted. Economic empowerment of the LAH and political will for the issue. Increase in sensibility of the main resource users concerning the conservation of biodiversity.

x
Did other land users / projects adopt the Approach?

The project is extended over other areas in Kyrgyzstan (Kemin, Ak-Suu and Talas regions) and in Khatlon and Gorno-Badakhshan oblasts of Tajikistan (Shurabad, Darvaz, Rushan, Ishkakshim, Murghab regions).

x
Main motivation of land users to implement SLM
Sustainability of Approach activities
Can the land users sustain what hat been implemented through the Approach (without external support)?

5 years later, after the number of wild animals in the assigned area is increased. During this period, members of the Association would realize the obvious long-term benefits resulting from the new approach (increasing wildlife population would lead to an increase in hunting licenses issued) and would become experienced in sustainable game management.

Conclusions and lessons learnt

Strengths: land user's view
  • Opportunity to lobby for own interests through Hunters’ Association in the local community (Aiylokmotu).
  • Opportunity to extract revenue from hunting tours.
  • Opportunity to legalize hunting.
  • Opportunity to manage resources in the assigned area and to plan how to use them. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Trainings and expert advice from the Wildlife Department and the Academy of Sciences of KR.)
Strengths: compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
  • Users of various natural resources (pasture, beekeepers, hunters) jointly plan their activities and use resources. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Increasing awareness of the local population on degradation of natural resources and the need for their careful use.)
  • Resource use and management are transferred in the hands of resource users. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Adoption of necessary legislation to establish wildlife user associations.)
  • Positive impact on the local ecosystem: stabilization of the wildlife population resulting from of protection of the assigned area and limited shooting. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Trainings for hunters on a new method of registration and monitoring of wild animals in order to determine the status of wildlife populations.)
  • Active and regular participation and support of the Wildlife Department in planning and implementing approach and creating an atmosphere of trust.
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: land user's viewhow to overcome
  • Deferred minor revenue over the first years of implementation related to an increase in wildlife populations. Development of ecotourism as a primary source of income. In the future, ecotourism can be practiced along with hunting tourism, providing additional income.
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: compiler’s or other key resource person’s viewhow to overcome
  • Resource users have poor capacities for self-organization and are incapable of coherent collective actions. Consultancy, meetings, involvement of conflict managers and facilitators.

References

Compiler
  • Nazgul Esengulova
Editors
Reviewer
  • Alexandra Gavilano
  • David Streiff
Date of documentation: Nov. 16, 2011
Last update: Aug. 17, 2017
Resource persons
Full description in the WOCAT database
Linked SLM data
Documentation was faciliated by
Institution Project
Key references
  • Final Report for GIZ 'Analysis and Preliminary Results of the Joint Wildlife Management Component of the Project: Pesch Markus
This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareaAlike 4.0 International