5. Interacting threats and challenges in protecting danau sentarum.
Heri, Valentinus ; Yuliani, Elizabeth Linda ; Indriatmoko, Yayan 等
Danau Sentarum was declared a conservation area by the government
in 1981, was established as a Ramsar wetland conservation area in 1984
and became a 132,000 ha national park with a 65,000 ha buffer zone in
1999. But being named a wetland of international importance and having
national park status do not mean that Danau Sentarum receives more
attention and better management. Forest cover within and around the park
is declining rapidly. The fish stocks and water quality of the wetlands
and river network are threatened. Logging has left large tracts of open
land, destroyed wildlife habitat and reduced wildlife populations. The
Pulau Majang forest, formerly an orangutan habitat, is now devoid of
orangutans. Tree felling and land clearing have also triggered
human-animal conflict, apparently because forest food sources have
fallen drastically, forcing wild animals to seek food in human
settlements.
This paper aims to identify the interacting threats and underlying
causes of the ecosystem degradation and declining resources. The
research serves as a baseline study for a larger research project:
Promoting Good Governance of Protected Areas Management, being conducted
by CIFOR and Riak Bumi Foundation since early 2005.
Site Description
The Danau Sentarum wetlands comprise approximately 83 large and
small lakes interconnected by rivers, and partly covered by peat swamp
forest (Jeanes). Part of the region is surrounded by hill forest with
high-value tree species, including ramin (Gonystylus spp.), tengkawang
(Shorea spp.), meranti (dipterocarps), tembesu (Fagraea fragrans) and
other timber species (Giesen 2000). The hill and swamp forests in DSNP are habitat for endangered wildlife, including orangutans (Pongo
pygmaeus), proboscis monkeys (Nasalis larvatus), long-tailed macaques
(Macacafascicularis) and numerous rare bird and reptile species (Jeanes
and Meijaard 2000a; Sebastian 2000; van Balen and Dennis 2000; Russon et
al. 2001).
The Danau Sentarum wetlands are the largest contributor to the West
Kalimantan freshwater fish industry, accounting for 26.8 percent of
these products in 2006 (West Kalimantan Fisheries Office no date),
though the proportion has likely fallen in the past few decades. In
addition to being a source of freshwater fish for consumption, DSNP is
also home to ornamental fish such as the clown loach, and a center for
breeding super red Asian arowana as well as various other species of
ornamental fish for export. The park and its environs also have mineral
reserves, particularly gold, though on a small scale.
Most communities around the lakes are Malay, and the majority of
them are made up of fishing families. Historically, their ancestors came
only to catch fish during the dry season. The oldest settlement,
according to the locals, is Lupakmawang hamlet, where the founder of the
Selimbau Kingdom originated. Other inhabitants are Iban Dayaks, who
practice dryland cultivation but also fish for both food and extra
income.
The park now is formally managed by the Danau Sentarum National
Park Authority and is under the Ministry of Forestry, but the people
living inside the park come under subdistrict and district
administration. (1) Located in Kapuas Hulu district, the park is divided
among the four subdistricts of Selimbau, Embau, Batang Lupar and Badau.
The park's buffer zone is categorized as Area Peruntukan Lain (APL,
other land use), which also falls under the district government's
responsibilities and can be allocated by the district government for
development schemes.
As described by Wadley and Eilenberg (2006), natural resource
management in the borderland of West Kalimantan is influenced strongly
by vigilantes and gangsters. Martinez (1994) noted that the lban who
live in the borderland have the feeling of being pulled in several
directions at once, but that the strength of the pull depends on the
degree of interaction and relations on both sides.
Methodology
The study relies on primary data collected through in-depth
interviews, participatory rural appraisal (PRA), and direct observation
on the ground; as well as on secondary sources, including published
articles, unpublished field notes, and project reports. Informants
selected for the in-depth interviews were people identified as having a
deep understanding of the topics and issues. The research team visited
several hamlets and asked informants for their opinions and about their
experiences. PRA was conducted in five villages (Pulau Majang, Leboyan,
Semalah, Pelaik and Tekenang), chosen because the study team has had
good relations with them and therefore could expect openness.
Participants were asked to describe their village history per decade
since the 1960s. Important events, such as the reform movement and the
resignation of Suharto, served as points of reference to help community
members identify and remember the years. The
authors made direct observations on the ground, looking at the
condition of forests and waterways, and used these observations to
determine topics for interviews, supplement existing data and check the
reliability of information gathered from informants.
[FIGURE 1a OMITTED]
[FIGURE 1b OMITTED]
[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]
Results and Discussion
Our study shows that some major threats remain the same as were
reported by Jeanes (1997), Giesen and Aglionby (2000), Dudley (2000),
and Wadley (2000): large-scale oil palm plantations, commercial logging,
unsustainable fishing practices, human population growth, and permanent
human settlements. The underlying causes, the actors and power dynamics
behind the threats, however, are different. The threats to Danau
Sentarum ecosystems have been greatly influenced by complex and
interrelated factors: market-driven decision-making at all levels,
open-access resources, lack of law enforcement and contradictory and
incoherent policies. We also found new threats emerging from the
changing political situation, including regional fragmentation and local
elite politics. Those threats, underlying causes and the dynamics are
described below.
Commercial Logging
Here, we do not mean the cutting of trees to meet community needs
for houses, boats, and other necessities. The intensity of noncommercial
uses is far lower than that of commercial logging, and given the still
comparatively low population density, it appears to have an
insignificant impact on the forest, although increasing human
population, as reported by Indriatmoko (this volume), has to some extent
intensified noncommercial logging.
Our study reveals that for commercial logging, the intensity, the
actors involved, and the logging methods around DSNP have changed over
time. In general, commercial logging can be divided into three periods:
1980-1997, when logging was dominated by concession companies;
1997-2005, a period characterized by illegal logging; and 2005-2009,
when commercial timber harvesting has been officially stopped but
logging is still practiced, largely to clear land for monoculture plantations.
1980-1997. This was the golden era for giant timber concessions,
whose owners were powerful and often backed-up or even owned by the
army. Seven timber concession companies held hakpenguasaan hutan (HPHs,
timber concession permit) around DSNP: PT Rimba Ramin, PT Lanjak Deras,
PT Satya Djaya Raya, PT Bumi Raya, PT Kapuas Sakti Utama and PT Tawang
Meranti, all owned by Indonesian conglomerates; and PT Yamaker (PT
Yamaker or Yayasan Maju Kerja), a military-owned HPH. (2) Concession
areas included peat swamp forest in the Suhaid, Empanang, Badau,
Seriang, Tangit IV, Senunuk, Sumpak, Meliau, Manggin, Sungai Jaung,
Pengerak, Kepiat, Jongkong, Selimbau, and along Leboyan and Belitung
watersheds; and peat swamp forest around Bukit Telatap, Bukit Menyukung,
and Bukit Semujan; and the sacred forest, Hutan Nung (Jeanes 1997).
At the time, there was no demand for logs smaller than 40 cm in
diameter or for logs with holes. So, despite being cut, these were never
transported. The rest of the timber was transported to Pontianak via
lakes and rivers. Light species were transported by raft, while heavier
species were moved on pontoon boats. Laborers came from waterside
hamlets and used a relay system to transport wood downstream from one
hamlet to the next.
Some communities and local business people who also operated
commercial logging on a much smaller scale were considered thieves; some
were caught and tried under the law. Local communities who had lived
there for generations saw this as unjust.
1997-2005. The rapid political and institutional changes of this
period led to intensified commercial logging, both legal and illegal.
The Asian economic crisis hit Indonesia in 1997, and some logging
companies ceased operations completely. Others found their permits
revoked because their concession areas fell inside the new park's
expanded boundaries. The international demand for Indonesian wood
continued, however.
Malaysian brokers took advantage of the situation by exploiting
timber from Indonesian forests, including those in and around DSNP. The
situation was exacerbated with the fall of the Suharto regime in 1998
and the ensuing political turbulence. Reformasi, which originally meant
freedom from Suharto's dictatorial regime, was misinterpreted by
some as freedom to violate rules and break the law. Autonomy regulations
that went into effect in January 2001 spawned the traditional community
autonomy movement and to some extent facilitated "illegal"
logging (Wadley and Eilenberg 2005).
Legal logging also caused rapid forest degradation during this
period. At the end of 1999, the government issued 100 ha hak pemungutan
hasil hutan (HPHHs, forest product extraction concession), giving timber
businesses opportunities to form community cooperatives. Previously,
only companies with licenses were allowed to extract forest products,
while locals worked only as laborers. The community cooperative HPHH
concession areas were on the former Yarnaker timber company concession.
Both legal and illegal timber was bought from local communities,
processed in mini-sawmills, and then exported through Malaysia by
Malaysian businesspeople without legitimate Indonesian government
documentation. Some local people were also involved by handing over
their timber concessions or working for companies to facilitate
shipments. Wood from in and around DSNP was transported via Lanjak and
Badau in the northern part of the national park to Lubok Antu, across
the border. On arrival in Batu Kaya, Malaysia, not far across the
border, the wood was "legalized" with Malaysian government
stamps to meet the export requirements of other countries. Timber
transport via this route reached its peak in 2004 with 300 trucks
passing daily. One truck could carry 1.4 to 3 tan (2.5 to 5.5 [m.sup.3],
1 tan = 1.8 [m.sup.3]), and thus approximately 750 to 1,650 [m.sup.3] of
timber crossed the border every day.
Malaysian brokers set price classifications based on wood type
(Table 1).
As the most valuable timber species became scarce, buyers shifted
to less valuable species. In 1997, Malaysian brokers sought red meranti,
meranti, ramin and jelutung. By 1999, these species were also becoming
harder to find in forests, so buyers began asking for red wood species.
By 2002, they were requesting almost all timber species. Such timber
scarcity has led to exploitation of almost all types of timber, even
lower quality species.
Only trees with a basal diameter of more than 25 cm were felled.
These were sold in various dimensions, from 4 by 6 inches to 12 by 12
inches, in lengths of 10, 12 and 14 feet. Brokers asked for an
additional 1.5 by 1.5 inches to avoid damage when the boles were cut by
chainsaw, usually not far from where the trees were felled. Wood was
then transported by bicycles along narrow, planked trails. One bicyclist
could carry two lengths of these sizes. The laborers usually came from
the Kalimantan District of Sambas and were well-known for their skill
and strength. Some timber brokers set up mini-sawmills close to hamlets.
Wood was carried to these sawmills on large trailers and cut into
lengths of various measurements. Sawmill workers usually lived in nearby
hamlets.
Local communities used the opportunities afforded by the timber
trade, and they themselves were used by brokers: some sold timber from
forests around their settlements with support from Malaysian investors,
and some sold their forests directly to the Malaysians for certain
compensations. People in one hamlet received one-time
contributions--called sagu hati--of US$ 263 per family (a tidy sum, in
this context). Each hamlet received RM 8 per tan of wood, and sawmill
workers received a salary of RM 8 per person per day. In addition, the
roads built to transport wood also served the hamlets.
The logging businesses were led by tauke (large-scale traders)
based in Malaysia, who appointed field managers, also from Malaysia. The
tasks of organizing employees and sharing premiums were delegated to
people trusted by field managers, commonly local inhabitants who were
lent certain amounts of Malaysian ringgit to supply wood to the tauke.
It was these trusted employees who determined the logging and sawing
operations and recruitment.
A typical answer, when people were asked why they had become
involved in these logging activities, is given here:
We never used to get anything or any share of the profits from the
companies felling timber in our forest. Government officials would
even say the wood around us belonged to the state, so the ones
entitled to extract wood for commercial purposes were the timber
companies with their government concessions.
In June 2005, the district government stopped tree cutting and wood
sales. Logs that had been felled were later auctioned and could be
transported and sold to Malaysia through September 2005. In October
2005, logs were still seen on roadsides, but the government strictly
prohibited their transportation and sale to Malaysia.
Despite the government's strict stance, illicit small-scale
logging continues. Local people, who had become used to having
relatively large sums of money from timber, have had to readjust to
being forest farmers and gatherers, only now their forests were degraded
and it was difficult to find food and other non-timber forest products.
2005-2009. The most recent period has been marked by a decline in
illegal logging; however, this has not meant a significant decline in
the rate of deforestation. Logging continues, in new guises. In Suhaid
and Selimbau Subdistricts, for example, large trees in community
protected forests and old secondary forests have been cut, ostensibly to
clear land. The wood was transported out of the area, without
permission, and the case was reported by local people to the police and
local government.
The region's natural resources have been overexploited by
large businesses meeting market demand. Logging has opened large areas
around Pulau Majang and Meliau hamlets and in the Kiren Nung protection
forest. In Kapar, a hamlet in the buffer zone north of DSNP, many wild
animals, including proboscis monkeys (Nasalis larvatus) and long-tailed
macaques (Macaca fascicularis), which prior to 2004 had not been a
problem, are now considered pests that attack rice, corn, and fruit
crops near the hamlet. This suggests that forest food sources have
fallen drastically, forcing wild animals to seek food in human
settlements. Some suspect these animals have moved closer to human
habitation because they are afraid of the sound of chainsaws in the
forest.
The political and policy changes from dictatorship to reform and
decentralization have not yet led to better management of the forest.
Lack of law enforcement has worsened the situation. The communities are
left with feelings of injustice and inequity; they have struggled for
their rights through involvement in illegal logging.
Illegal Trade and Gangster Practices
Cross-border trading, which is now illegal, has been going on for
centuries and includes trade in timber, wildlife, and animal body parts
(Jeanes 1997; Wadley et al. 2000). The illegal orangutan trade in DSNP
was first noted in 1992, when two orangutans from Seriang Village were
sold to the Batang Ai' Recreation Park in Sarawak (Erman 2005).
That same year, Colfer (pers. commun.) saw some orangutans being sold in
Putussibau. The orangutan trade increased along with the widespread
timber sales to Sarawak, Malaysia.
In the past decade, live animal trade has been increasing and is
associated with illegal logging. Timber brokers deal not only in wood
but also in wildlife. The most frequently requested animals were
orangutans, gibbons (Hylobates mulleri), deer (Cervus spp.), and myna
birds (Gracula religiosa). From 2002 to 2005, approximately 100 to 200
young orangutans from in and around DSNP were held temporarily in
illegal logging camps and eventually sold to zoological gardens in
Sarawak. In addition, an estimated 100 to 150 orangutans were killed for
food by timber company employees, particularly in Tangit IV, Tangit 11
and Sering (north); Piyam, Semanyus and Batu Pansap (west); and
Semangit, Sei Luar and Lubuk Bandung (east).
A lack of government control over the use of natural resources,
particularly during 1997-2005, has afforded huge opportunities for
gangster practices (Wadley & Eilenberg 2006) and illegal trading of
the park's natural resources to Malaysia. Rare and protected
wildlife was easily traded in the border region, without supporting
permits or official documents. The closest border towns, Badau in
Indonesia and Lubok Antu in Malaysia, still have no legal
border-crossing post. NGOs have worked in collaboration with police and
the government to minimize illegal cross-border trading activities and
have been successful in stopping illegal timber, but not yet trade in
other natural resources.
Monoculture Plantations and Farming
Oil palm plantations. Large-scale oil palm (Elaeis guineensis)
plantations belonging to about 20 companies and covering an area of
259,500 to 366,823 ha are currently the number one threat to Danau
Sentarum's wetland ecosystems. All the pollutants from oil palm
estates around DSNP are likely to flow into the wetland waterways,
harming local people's livelihoods. In addition, conversion of
forests and peat-swamp forests are likely to harm biodiversity and
release carbon dioxide.
Oil palm plantations are not a new threat and were described by
Wadley (2000). Several oil palm companies were granted permits in the
1990s and early 2000s. These companies built roads and cleared the
forests, destroying habitat for hundreds of orangutans. Wood extracted
from these forests was brought profitably to Malaysia, but the planned
oil palm estates never materialized.
Aside from being a threat to biodiversity, establishment of the new
oil palm plantations has raised questions about why more land should be
allocated and cleared for oil palm when only a small number of oil palm
estates have actually begun operations. By 2005, oil palm estate permits
covering 5.8 million hectares had been granted across Kalimantan, but
only 1.5 million hectares had been planted. In West Kalimantan, only
427,000 ha (28.47 percent) of the 1.5 million ha targeted for oil palm
development had been planted. Nevertheless, by 2008 the government had
issued permits covering 4.6 million ha (Kompas 2008).
The district government, the district legislative assembly, and
several government officials supported the companies, which they hoped
could contribute to economic progress and local development. Where law
enforcement is weak and decisions are made for the benefit of
corporations rather than local people and conservation, however, the
actual contributions of the oil palm business to the economic progress
and local development should be scrutinized. Pollutants from chemical
fertilizers and pesticides from the plantations, and waste from oil palm
processing plants will undoubtedly enter the waterways of Danau
Sentarum's wetlands, causing the economic collapse of affected
communities and irreversible damage to Indonesia's largest inland
wetland. Effective environmental impact management is unlikely to be
implemented by the companies, which have a history of illegal activities
and corruption (see Yuliani et al., this volume).
Rubber and rice. Drastic declines in fish catches in recent years,
coupled with the end of illegal logging in 2005 and a doubling of rubber
prices in 2007 (from US$ .54 to US$1-1.14 per kg), have encouraged local
people and the government to expand rubber plantations. As part of the
district's rubber development scheme, the government provides
hybrid varieties, which, unlike local rubber, die if planted on
seasonally flooded land. Because people must plant these trees on higher
ground, they clear lowland and hill forests. The hybrid varieties were
developed for intensive monocultures; planting sites must be cleared of
all other vegetation and given high applications of fertilizers and
pesticides. The resulting monoculture rubber estates disrupt ecosystem
balance and threaten biodiversity.
Based on our observations in the field, 155 households in the
hamlets of Terunis and Pegah (3) in the Kiren Lintang region have
cleared a total area of 70 by 100 meters. Larger areas have been cleared
for planting rubber in Leboyan, Sekulat watersheds, Kiren Meresak and
the foot of Semujan Hill. Various types of land have been cleared:
former farmland, secondary forest (terrestrial and peat swamp), and old
timber concession areas where regeneration and forest succession were
underway. The land is frequently cleared using fire; some people say
burning eradicates ants and other insect pests, enabling rubber to grow
unimpeded.
The decision to plant rubber has been significantly driven by the
market, without consideration of how to maintain the farmers'
selling price and minimize the negative consequences to the environment.
Fluctuating prices at the global level could cause big losses to the
farmers and ecosystem. As a result of the global economic crisis, rubber
prices fell in mid-2008 to US$ 0.5 per kg and had yet to rise by the end
of 2009. Some farmers have started to look for substitutes, which could
lead to another ecosystem damaged.
Another crop promoted by the district government is hybrid rice,
which also requires high inputs to ensure growth and eliminate
vegetative competition. The hybrid variety is provided by the Kapuas
Hulu District Agriculture and Estate Crops Office in a package with
chemical fertilizer, chemical pesticides, and simple farming tools, such
as hoes and machetes. The first packages were delivered to 45 households
from Pegah
and Terunis. Each household cleared roughly one hectare of forest.
Since then, more and more villagers from Semalah, Semangit,
Nangaleboyan, Pegah, Terunis and Sekulat hamlets have cleared land for
rice farming as far away as Bukit Melingkung and the foot of Bukit
Semujan.
One potential consequence of planting hybrid rubber and rice is the
contamination of river and lake water from agricultural fertilizers and
pesticides, many of which are deadly to fish, other aquatic life, birds,
and insects, including wild honeybees (Apis dorsata). Because fish and
honey are livelihood sources for communities in DSNP, such contamination
will further reduce their income.
Road Construction
Road construction is beneficial, since it helps communities to
transport their products and sell them in urban areas, but it also
encourages exploitation of natural resources (Sunderlin and Resosudarmo
1996) and can directly harm the ecosystem if the work is not properly
executed.
Roads have been built both by logging companies, often illegally,
to carry logs out of the forests to the main road north of the park, and
by the district government, to facilitate communities' mobility.
Some roads were constructed through rivers, with no effort to minimize
the negative impact on hydrology and water quality, even blocking the
rivers entirely. Recent road-building projects are summarized in Table
3.
The table reveals an interesting feature: in a typical border area,
the illegal activities that can be carried out with great freedom
include large-scale construction projects like roads. One road that was
built illegally was even extended and improved by the district
government. This shows a serious lack of integrated land-use planning
and long-term development vision in line with conservation priorities.
Unsustainable Fishery Practices
The DSNP wetlands are the most valuable freshwater fish habitat in
West Kalimantan, where fish reproduce and grow naturally. This remote
area also has endemic fish species rarely or never found in other
places. Now, however, stocks and yields are in steady decline. Based on
interviews with local informants, we found that between 1999 and 2006,
catches fell by around 40 percent compared to the 1990-1999 period. As
an illustration, 100 to 150 kg (4) of smoked fish was produced between
1990 and 1999, but by 2005-2006 the amount had fallen to 25 to 50 kg.
The most drastic decline occurred in 2002, when the catch was only 35
percent of the previous year's. Suspected causes of declining fish
stocks in DSNP are the use of fishing gear, cage culture of the giant
snakehead fish, and declining natural habitats.
Our research shows that exploitative fishing practices (described
below) have led to declines in fish stocks. Ironically (and
predictably), the increasing difficulty of catching fish has pushed
local people to use even more exploitative means. Unsustainable
fisheries are one challenge requiring immediate resolution for fish
stocks to recover naturally (with minimal inputs) and generate
meaningful income for communities.
Destructive equipment and techniques. Many experts, including
Dudley (2000) and community figures, had warned that using nylon warin
nets would become serious threats to fish resources in DSNR Fishing
equipment used regularly by communities in DSNP includejermal warin (a
pocket net) and bubu warin (a kind of trap), empang putus (gill nets
that block main rivers), poison, electricity, andjermal karam kemarau.
Warin are fine-mesh nylon nets with a mesh spacing of less than 0.5 cm;
these nets are responsible for dwindling fish numbers in lakes because
they can catch up to 100 kg at a time and do not discriminate between
adults and juveniles. Villagers frequently use warin not only for
catching fish for their own consumption and for sale, but also for
catching food for the giant snakehead fish, a voracious carnivore.
Unsurprisingly, fishing communities in Tekenang, Semangit, Genting and
Pulau Majang hamlets blame current diminishing fish catches on people
rearing giant snakehead fish in cages.
Other problematic ways of catching fish are empang putus andjermal
karam kemarau (funnel nets). Both are installed at the end of the dry
season, to catch fish that come from upstream to their spawning grounds
in lakes and rivers as they begin to flood. These nets reduce
populations by preventing fish from reaching their spawning grounds.
Fish trapped include large, high-value species, such as kelabau
(Osteochilus melanopleura), lais bangah (Micronema micronemus), tapah
(Wallago leeri) and tengalan (Puntioplites bulu).
Fish reproduction is also hindered by increasing areas of swamp
forest clearing. The roots of swamp trees constitute hatcheries and
shelter for such high-value species as belida (Chitala hypselonotus),
arowana (Schleropages formosus (5)) and patik (Hemibagrus olyroides).
Chemical poisons and electric current. Before chemical poisons were
introduced, there were no reports offish kills. Communities in and
around DSNP traditionally used natural poisons made of sap from the
roots or stems of plants such as tubal rabut, tubal benang, tubal dilah
bayak, and tubal buah. These substances were originally used by ethnic
Iban Dayaks to deter plant pests in their shifting cultivation systems
but have also been used periodically to catch fish for home consumption.
Natural poisons would be applied on a single day when the water in
rivers and lakes began to dry, usually around June. Poisons were applied
by groups and involved customary rituals passed down from generation to
generation. All families in the longhouse as well as people from other
hamlets would be invited. Catches were used for family food needs and
not for sale. Natural poisons were effective for only 4 km downstream.
The fish would not die but be stupefied or have blurred vision. If not
caught, fish would generally recover within 10 to 12 hours, though a
small number would die.
The chemical poison often used today is potassium cyanide, which is
far more potent and kills all fish. A number of cases offish kills are
also thought to have resulted from wood preservation chemical compounds
used on ramin wood transported along waterways. The effects last for
years, since fish avoid places affected by chemical poisons, which may
settle in the mud at the bottom of the water. The fish killed by
chemical poisons are quick to rot, with pale gills and a strong
smell.
One of the most serious chemical poisonings in DSNP occurred in
1990, when the chemical endrin was used in the Seriang watershed,
causing the death of 23 arowana parent stock fish whose value at that
time was US$ 570 each. The poison was purchased in shops in Lubuk Antu.
(6) Costly losses occurred again in 1994, when villagers poisoned the
Seriang, Lawah, Sentarum and Tawang watersheds with potassium cyanide.
All the toman (giant snakehead fish, Channa micropeltes), betutu (marble
goby, Oxyeleotris marmorata) and jelawat (mad barb fish, Leptobarbus
hoevenii) in cages in Pulau Majang, Lawah, Bukit Tekenang and Pengembung
died. In 2006, the Seriang watershed was poisoned again, causing the
deaths of caged giant snakehead and mad barb fish in Pulau Majang,
incurring total losses of US$ 21,700-32,600.
Giant snakehead fish cage culture. The environmental implications
of culturing this food fish in wooden cages have been recognized for
many years (e.g., Dudley 2000; Wadley et al. 2000). The species is
camivorous and can be quite fierce; the cage owners feed them with small
fish freshly caught from the lake. One 1.5-by-l.5-by-2-m cage usually
holds around 100 giant snakehead fish, which require 30 to 100 kg of
food per day. If given insufficient food, the fish inside the cage will
cannibalize each other.
Although expensive to rear, giant snakehead fish are still the most
popular species raised in cages because they are a tolerant species and
can adapt to low oxygen levels in water by taking oxygen from the air;
mad barb fish would die. They also grow quickly and can reach marketable
size in 10 to 12 months, as opposed to three years for mad barb fish.
Rearing giant snakehead fish in cages is a sort of savings account and a
hope for survival in DSNP as these fish are ready to sell after they
reach around 1 kg in weight. (7)
The giant snakehead fish's huge food requirements push fishing
communities to use jermal warin fishing platforms, which can catch fish
of all sizes; large and small. With increasing numbers of villagers
rearing giant snakehead fish, the population of wild fish has declined
significantly. According to communities in DSNP, fish catches from the
lakes have already fallen drastically and are now only just enough to
meet daily needs.
Exploitation of high-value fish species. High-value fish include
kujam merah (signal barb, Labiobarbus festivus), ketutung (shark minnow,
Balantiocheilos melanopterus), ringau (tiger fish, Datnioides
microlepis), ulang uli (clown loach, Botia macracantha) and arowana
(Asian bonytongue, Schleropagesformosus). The arowana commands the
highest prices. Based on observations by fishers and local villagers,
some high-value species have become very rare or even extinct in the
wild in a short time; high prices without prudent harvest systems or
breeding techniques can be serious threats to fish and other natural
resources.
The signal barb, for instance, first sought in 1972 at a price of
IDR 5-10 per fish (equivalent to IDR 1,800-3,600 in 2007), had become
extremely rare by 1987 and was no longer fished. The shark minnow was
valued at IDR 20-50 per fish (equivalent to IDR 3,600-8,900 in 2007) and
became rare within approximately 20 years. Now, shark minnow are no
longer seen in the park.
The arowana is more valuable than other fish, and the super red
strain in DSNP is the most valuable of all, because according to Chinese
belief, they can bring luck and good fortune to their owners.
Unsurprisingly, the main export destinations for this fish are China and
other Far East countries. Arowana fishing began in 1982 and caused a
drastic fall in the population in only 10 years. Meanwhile, demand
continues to rise, causing prices to increase steadily year by year
(Table 4).
Super red arowana are rare and nearly endangered in their natural
habitat in DSNP, and are now found only around Meliau and Kenelang
hamlets. Increasing scarcity in the wild and relatively stable high
prices have motivated many villagers, particularly those in Suhaid and
Selimbau, as well as people in large cities outside DSNP, to learn super
red arowana breeding techniques. Since then, distributors and importers
have bought super red arowana from breeders at current prices of around
IDR 3 million to 5 million for one 4-5-cm fingerling, and more than IDR
30 million each for mother fish. Prices are determined by shape, color,
scales, body shape and flawless eyeballs.
Another high-value fish is the clown loach, an ornamental fish that
became popular in the aquarium trade in 1993. Prices per fish were IDR
50-200 from 1993 to 1997, 1DR 400-800 in 1997-2001, and IDR 800-1,200 in
2008-2009. Though not particularly expensive, it is caught in huge
quantities in season - around 100 fish per day per household. In
contrast to other fish species, the clown loach has not experienced a
significant fall in catch, and harvest levels remain relatively stable.
The clown loach lives in Kapuas River and enters the park only to
spawn, then returns to the river. The fish is usually caught when it
enters the park during the seasonal flood or in the change from flood to
dry season between December and April. The fact that they are caught for
only several months of the year is presumed to help, but if prices do
rise sharply, it is not inconceivable that the clown loach will decline.
Marble goby, tiger fish, tapah catfish, belida, and mad barb fish
are regularly sold illegally to Malaysia through the Badau-Lubok Antu
border crossing. Selling prices are higher in Malaysia than Indonesia,
and transport is relatively easy, thus encouraging illegal trade.
Tiger fish have been traded for many years but the price was never
high. They were an incidental by-catch when people caught clown loach,
and the number of tiger fish caught was only 20 to 30 per catch.
However, in late 2009, the price increased six times, from US$ .05 to
US$ .35 per fingerling, and the number in each night's catch
increased to 50 and as many as 300 fingerlings. This encouraged people
to target tiger fish specifically, even by using warin nets. Some people
were able to earn US$100 per night from catching and selling tiger fish.
As with other natural resources in the park region, many valuable
fish species have become endangered or even extinct in the wild because
of overexploitation. Decisions and management of natural resources are
largely driven by market prices and competition over the open-access
resources. The government and local people have made few, if any,
attempts to protect the resources in the wild or cultivate them.
Introduction of nonnative fish species. The shrinking catches in
DSNP have encouraged villagers to develop fish aquaculture, sometimes
rearing nonnative species. The introduction of nonnative species,
particularly those that could be invasive, may lead to the extinction of
DSNP's native and endemic species.
White and yellow silver catfish (8) were reared by residents in the
hamlets of Piasak, Nibung, Lupakmawang, Mawan, Bekuwan and Genting from
1999 to 2001. Fingerlings were brought from Pontianak by local
businesspeople in Suhaid and sold to residents for US$ .05-.07 (IDR
800-1,000) each. In 2000, several people in Pungau, Pegah, Genting and
Sekulat began rearing African catfish (Clarias gariepinus). Local
fishers obtained fingerlings from fish traders who came to DSNP to buy
giant snakehead fish, which they would take from Danau Sentarum to sell
in the cities of Sintang and Pontianak. However, most African catfish in
cages failed to survive. In 2003, a businessman from Suhaid brought more
African catfish fingerlings from Pontianak and sold them for IDR 500
each. At first they were reared by people in Genting, and later in
Sekulat, Semangit and other villages. Now only Semangit continues to
rear this fish.
Beginning in 2006, people in Suhaid bred red-bellied pacu fish
(Colossoma macropomum), a nonnative species, fingerlings of which were
bought from the Fry Production Hatchery (BBI) in Anjungan, a small town
near Pontianak. In the same year, the governor visited DSNP and
distributed silver catfish fingerlings free to people in Tekenang; after
several weeks all the fish had died. But villagers in Sekulat succeeded
in rearing silver catfish and selling them in Lanjak. According to
villagers, the silver catfish handed out by the governor in Tekenang
were nonnative species, whereas those reared in Sekulat were the local
yellow silver catfish species.
The dangers of introducing nonnative species to DSN P have yet to
be researched, but we can learn from studies in other locations and
other countries. Released into the wild, the African catfish can be an
invasive species that threatens local species with its feeding habits,
rapid reproduction, and ability to live in dirty water (Barua et al.
2000; Vitule et al. 2006). In Bangladesh, for example, the African
catfish is one of the most disastrous invasive species because it has
crowded out so many local species.
In late 2009, we found the South American apple-snail (Pomacea
canaliculata) in Sekawi lake and Lupakmawang village. The snail lays its
eggs on aquatic plants and the hulls of boats, and in this way spreads
to other places quickly. It is one of worst pests to paddy and other
crops in many places in Indonesia and therefore could threaten paddy and
crop gardens in the DSNP area. The people of Lupakmawang said that the
first specimen was brought by a Javanese Sintang resident who married a
local woman. We also found that some people in this hamlet rear
apple-snails in nets, for food.
The introduction and keeping of nonnative species is prohibited in
conservation areas under Act No. 68/1998 Article 44, and violators can
be charged under the law. However, law enforcement has risks and can be
construed as violating a community's rights to make a living.
Even though DSNP and the Kapuas River have native fish species in
addition to giant snakehead fish with high economic development
potential, we found three underlying reasons for the introduction of
nonnative species. First, the government and local people (like some
international agencies) do not fully understand the risks of introducing
nonnative species. Second, the government's fishery development
program, including the fish fingerling subsidies, like many other
agricultural and fishery programs in the country, is determined by the
central government and therefore uses species common in Java. The
selection of species is also often driven by the supplier companies that
successfully lobby the government or win contracts. Third, many local
people consider imported species more modern and developed. These
reasons are linked and continuously happen.
Gold Mining
Gold mining in the protected area is often categorized as
pertambangan emas tanpa ijin (PETI, illegal gold mining). In our view,
however, whether it is legal or illegal, mining threatens the ecosystem
and the health of local people. Two major factors make gold mining
possible: investors and buyers, and permits from local government
(which, in fact, does not have authority to grant mining permits).
Gold mining in Pengerak hamlet, in the Jongkong subdistrict, began
in 1995 with a 200 [m.sup.2] area approximately 18 m deep at the foot of
Semujan Hill, operated by an investor from Sarawak who had secured a
permit from the Kapuas Hulu district head. The mining site is 2 km from
the shore of the lake. The owner of the area, an elderly woman, received
a monthly royalty of US$ 300 from the investor, whether or not any gold
was found. Conflict between the villagers and the project stopped the
operation, but in 2004, people began mining in the same location with an
investor from Sintang district.
Gold mining ceased in July 2005 and resumed in May 2006, stopping
temporarily during the dry season. The miners had no license from the
Kapuas Hulu District Mining and Environment Office, only a permit from
the head of the village and head of the fisher association.
Gold miners also operated in the Kantukasam and Sungaikantuk
regions in 1998-1999 and dumped the tailings into the Empanang and
Batang Tawang rivers. In 2006, miners operated in the Sungai Sedampak,
Sungaitelian, and Martanjung regions (which had been mined in Dutch
colonial times), and the tailings flowed into the Telian River and then
on to the Majang River. Though the community tried to prevent tailings
from entering the waterways, damage still occurred. Trees within a 500 m
radius of the mining site died, presumably from mercury. Other hamlets
with waterways connected to the mining site also became worried about
the effect on fish and people if the lakes were contaminated with
mercury. Despite the well-known danger of mercury contamination and
other environmental consequences of gold mining, no significant action
to stop the activities has been undertaken either by the DSNP authority
or the district government.
Forest Fires
Forest fires break out almost every dry season in Danau Sentarum.
People use fire for various purposes: clearing land before planting
rice, vegetables and rubber; clearing water hyacinth from rivers;
clearing plants from river shortcuts; and cooking in the forest. In some
hamlets that have disputes over boundaries, the people use fire for
burning tikung (artificial bee hives) placed in their forest by
trespassers. Fires also ignite from discarded cigarette butts and
lightning strikes. When winds fan the flames in hot, dry conditions, the
fire can spread out of control. The most serious wildfire occurred in
1997, when the El Nino cycle lengthened the usual three-month dry season
to seven months. The most difficult fires to extinguish are in peatland,
which burn below the surface; the fire can spread easily to surrounding
trees and peat fields when the wind blows.
One consequence of the 1997 forest fire was the loss of wild bee honey production, which resumed only in early 2000. Annual production of
wild bee honey in DSNP was around 20-25 tons per group of gatherers, at
an average price of IDR 15,000 (US$ 1-2) per kg. Consequently, losing
honey production in 1998-1999 has caused losses of US$ 67,000 to $84,000
(9) per group. These losses do not include unquantifiable damage to
ecosystems and other intangibles. (10)
Population Growth
DSNP has both permanent and seasonal populations. In 10 years, the
total population increased by 55 percent, from around 6,500 in 1997
(Aglionby 1997) to 10,104 in 2007 (Indriatmoko, this volume), as
detailed in Table 6.
This growth comes primarily from the increasing number of seasonal
migrants, some arriving on their own initiative, others invited by
relatives in DSNP; in addition, more seasonal migrants are becoming
permanent settlers. Between 2005 and 2009, the annual population
increase in several villages was 1.99 to 19.06 percent (Selimbau
Subdistrict Office 2009).
The migrants come from the larger, surrounding villages of
Selimbau, Lanjak, Suhaid, Semitau, Jongkong and Badau during the dry
season to catch fish, stay in several smaller hamlets, then return to
their homes at the beginning of the flood season. Permanent settlement
began with the onset of fish trading in Saka Jongkong in 1992. Beginning
in 1998-1999, immigrants settled to tend their fish cages, which need
daily feeding. As temporary shelters become permanent settlements, the
number of inhabitants continues to grow. In the last few years, seasonal
fishing families have come not only from neighboring subdistricts, but
also from Sintang, Sambas and other regions. If they marry locals, their
families often visit, and some of them become permanent residents as
well.
The growing number of people entering and settling in DSNP is one
of the main causes of declining availability of the resources, and one
of the greatest threats to the sustainability of its ecosystems through
reciprocal means. The growing population has increased pressure on
natural resources and space for living. Traditional resource management
cannot meet the needs of the park's ever-growing population, or
people's
desire for modemization and development, even though Western
lifestyles are not entirely replicable in this rural context. Many
immigrants ignore traditional values or do not recognize or acknowledge
customary rules; they come into the park looking for income and may
exploit resources for personal gain.
Unintended Consequences and Contradictory Policies
Government policies and programs have constantly bedeviled DSNP
management. Some examples of the policy and program, including direct
and indirect relation with ecosystem degradation are described below.
Fertilizer and pesticide aid. Government policy to support
community economic development through agriculture frequently fails to
consider the environmental consequences. It is not clear whether
government officials are unaware of the effects or simply do not want to
know. For example, in 2007, the Kapuas Hulu District Agriculture Office
provided aid packets in the form of hybrid plant varieties (bibit
unggul), chemical fertilizers, and pesticides to communities at the foot
of Bukit Semujan. According to staff from the district agriculture
office, the aid packets came from the central government and had to be
distributed, even though hybrid varieties, chemical fertilizers, and
pesticides could conflict with the aims of conservation.
Dam construction plans. Government officials have often put forward
plans to dam Danan Sentarum. In January 1995, during a workshop on
development of Danau Sentarum Nature Reserve, the Ministry of Public
Works announced its desire to dam Danau Sentarum with funding support
from the Japanese government. Later, in 2003, during the West Kalimantan
World Environment Day celebrations in Lanjak, the governor of West
Kalimantan reiterated the idea to dam Danau Sentarum, "...so it
doesn't dry out, and fish can continue to reproduce." This
environmentally detrimental development plan was actually proposed
during the ceremony to formalize Kapuas Hulu District's status as a
conservation district, in front of the Deputy Minister of the
Environment. The proposal's backers did not realize that Danau
Sentarum, like many wetlands, naturally dries during the dry season and
that the local plants, animals and people are adapted to the phenomenon.
In long dry seasons, the lakes in the park can dry out completely.
Damming Danau Sentarum could have drastic detrimental effects on water
quality, hydrology functions, fish populations and local people's
income and health (Yuliani et al. 2007).
Lack of consideration for social impacts. Some well-intended
programs have backfired because they failed to consider the social
aspects. For example, government and NGO reforestation and
rehabilitation programs that focused on hamlets with burned or degraded
forests created an incentive for hamlets with intact forests to cut and
burn their forests so that they could get help, too (Box 1). Such
reactions were also reported by Prasetyo (2008). Programs that are
intended to fix a problem end up causing more damage because of envy and
misinterpretation. Just as when the government provided rubber hybrid
varieties, many people cut trees and burned their land to become
eligible for the assistance. These examples suggest a need for better
understanding of local people's perceptions and better
communication between agencies.
Another example of community resistance to ecosystem protection
efforts involves conservation projects, rules, and research that have no
benefits (or appear to have no benefits) for local communities. As a
region with extremely high levels of biodiversity, the park was
designated a Ramsar site, making it important on the international level
and attracting many researchers from Indonesia and overseas. Many people
living in the park, however, do not know why there are so many
conservation projects or see any benefit in the research. Some believe
that making the park a conservation area limits their activities.
Many community members are unclear about the different roles played
by NGOs and government and frequently confuse them. On one occasion,
villagers vented their anger on a team of NGO researchers, thinking they
represented the government after an official had let them down.
Communities rarely understand what NGOs actually do. They are unsure why
community facilitation takes place in some hamlets but not in others,
leading to social resentment. Confusion over the projects and roles of
different organizations and their impact on communities makes them
suspicious and reluctant to participate. This is a significant
constraint to the success of conservation programs designed for
collaborative management with communities as major actors. (11)
Box 1. Perverse Incentives
In 2001 2002, Riak Bumi, a local NGO working with the Kapuas
Watershed Management Agency, and local communities planted trees
that are important food for bees in areas that had been affected by
forest fires. Plants that provide sources of nectar and pollen for
honeybees had become scarce, reducing harvests of forest honey. The
aim was to reforest bare areas with putat and masung trees, two
species that increase forest honey production and benefit local
communities, for whom honey is the second most important source of
income, after fish.
Similar reforestation projects were undertaken in some hamlets in
Danau Sentarum under a national program. Called GERHAN, this
Ministry of Forestry program aimed at rehabilitating critical land
and degraded forest. In April 2006, 250 families in each of two
villages were given 125,000 omat (grafted) rubber seedlings, 18,000
stink bean (Parkia speciosa) seedlings, 30,000 jack (Peronema
canescens) seedlings and 12,000 agarwood (Aquilaria spp.)
seedlings. The government provided hybrid varieties especially for
villages whose land was categorized as burned over, degraded, or
non-forested. During in-depth informal discussions, we discovered
that most villagers had burned their forests just to secure
seedlings from the district government.
Regional fragmentation and "development" policies. Since
2006, several fishing hamlets have been granted permanent village
administrative status, and there are plans for establishing a new
subdistrict in the region. This is part of a government decentralization
policy called pemekaran (establishment of new provinces, districts,
subdistricts, and villages). As a consequence, some temporary fishing
settlements inside the park have formal status as permanent settlements.
The communities hope the provision of village and subdistrict
status within the park will improve their welfare, and expect the
government will build public facilities such as schools, community
health centers, and administrative offices. Interviewing local elites,
we also found that the new village and subdistrict status was also
motivated by their personal interests: they expect to become heads of
villages or subdistricts, or members of a local legislative assembly,
which will increase their social status and entitle them to some
financial benefits.
In most cases in Indonesia, regional fragmentation has led to
overexploitation of natural resources, with less evidence of any
improvement in local people's welfare, except for the elites. On
the one hand, development of public facilities, especially inside
protected areas, could help improve well-being. On the other hand, it
would spur rapid growth in the number of park residents and associated
demand for space and natural resources. Conservation NGOs, scientists
and other external actors who would encourage prohibition of the
establishment of villages and a subdistrict inside the park should
reconsider and communicate carefully to avoid giving the impression that
human interests come second to conservation.
Rising fuel prices. Rising and highly inflated global fuel prices
have had a huge impact on community economies in many rural places in
Indonesia, including in DSNP, and become an indirect cause of
deforestation and natural resource overexploitation. In DSNP, the main
fuel requirement is for river transport, consisting of outboard motors,
speedboats, and motor boats for fishing and for traveling between
hamlets, to school and to surrounding towns. Community members also need
fuel to run household electricity generators.
Fuel prices in and around DSNP, as in other remote areas in
Indonesia, are higher than the government standard. In places that rely
on water transport, access becomes even more difficult during the dry
season, and causes fuel prices to rise higher than in the rainy season.
The Government of Indonesia raised fuel prices three times between
1 March 2005 and 24 May 2008. When prices fell again, retail prices in
DSNP remained at their peak levels (Table 7).
Fuel prices rose dramatically on 1 October 2005. By 2007, the
average family in Sungai Pelaik was spending IDR 51,300 a day, or IDR
1,540,000 a month--68 percent of their income--on fuel (Table 8), which
left only 32% for food and other needs, such as education and health.
This figure does not include fuel for cooking because park inhabitants
have switched from kerosene to firewood.
To balance the rising expenditures on fuel, local people are
developing community rubber estates and increasing their fish catches,
both of which have a negative effect on the park's ecosystems, as
explained earlier. The high price of kerosene has also intensified
demand for firewood, which often means cutting trees. In these ways, the
increasing global and national fuel prices have led to deforestation and
overexploitation of the fishery.
Institutional and bureaucratic challenges. A number of
institutional and bureaucratic challenges contribute to ecosystem
degradation and resource overexploitation in DSNP and surrounding areas.
From 1999 to early 2007, the park was managed minimally by the West
Kalimantan Natural Resources Conservation Agency (BKSDA). There were
only three forest rangers, who worked without an adequate operational
budget--they had a speedboat for patrols, for instance, but no budget
for fuel. Consequently, illicit activities in the park, such as
commercial logging, wildlife hunting, use of exploitative fishing
equipment, and environmental damage, often went unnoticed. Moreover, the
rangers' salary payments were often delayed up to 10 months.
According to the agency, the staffing and budgets were all organized by
the central government. The inadequate staffing and support may indicate
the central government's level of priority for the conservation of
DSNP.
Establishment of the park authority's Technical Implementation
Unit (UPT) in February 2007 (Minister of Forestry Regulation No.
P.03/Menhut-II/2007) did not immediately mean better protection of the
DSNP ecosystem. In 2008, the operational budget for the park authority,
as well as many other government offices, was reallocated by the central
government for fuel price subsidies. Another problem associated with the
national bureaucracy system is the recruitment and placement system. The
well-intended effort to devolve and decentralize responsibilities and
develop collaboration with stakeholders, including local communities,
faltered because the staff was not sufficiently trained and
knowledgeable. Of the 38 staff appointed to work in the DSNP authority,
only two come from the area and know its biophysical and social
conditions. In addition, internal power struggles among midlevel staff
have often hampered the progress of park programs and the effectiveness
of its management.
Conclusions and Recommendations
Even though its surrounding areas are highly degraded, Danau
Sentarum National Park and its buffer zones still have many natural
riches--resources that many people want to use and exploit.
Community-level decisions on land use and natural resource management
systems are often based on traditional and customary rules or
community-based income-generating activities, particularly in
communities that have lived in DSNP for decades. However, many people
are now attracted by the opportunities that regional fragmentation and
illegal logging represent. Some others, particularly immigrants, base
their decisions on short-term economic considerations, since they have
come to DSNP to make a living.
Things are not so different at the district and central government
levels. Power, short-term economics and the interests of investors are
the main considerations in policy making. Spatial planning at the
national, provincial and district levels generally ignores the functions
and long-term benefits provided by ecosystems. The conservation and
preservation of forest, wetland, and other ecosystems are never
priorities.
Conservation programs, be they action or research, should be
designed to provide real benefits for communities who have protected
their forests. Methods and approaches should be designed to build
self-motivation and self-organization among communities and other
stakeholders so that the programs can continue without depending on
external input or intervention. Another urgent need is local
income-generating activities compatible with the principles of
conservation. Programs appropriate for DSNP include ecotourism and
community arowana development. Local communities should be made aware
that introducing nonnative species can endanger their resources and that
culturing nonnative carnivorous species, such as the African catfish,
will cause the same problems as keeping giant snakeheads. Production of
local species should be encouraged.
Communication and relations between the park authority and the
Kapuas Hulu district government need to improve so that the
former's collaborative management concept and the latter's
conservation district designation can be mutually supportive. For
conservation and community welfare to coexist and be mutually
reinforcing, key stakeholders must develop their knowledge and capacity
to understand and carry out conservation efforts, collaborative
management and proconservation income-generating activities. Other
important issues are law enforcement and sanctions for violations,
integration of customary law and local rules in formal regulations, and
a larger role for communities in park supervision and law enforcement.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank the donors, the Ford Foundation and the
EU-funded Gemconbio Project for their funding support, and our home
institutions, Riak Bumi Foundation and C1FOR for their co-financing,
technical and conceptual support. The views expressed in this article
remain our personal views and do not necessarily reflect either the
donors' or our home institutions' views. We also thank the
local communities in and around DSNP, the Ministry of Forestry, Danau
Sentarum National Park Authority, Kapuas Hulu District Government,
Titian Foundation, WWF, Sawit Watch, Carol J. Pierce Colfer, Richard G.
Dudley, Moira Moeliono, Terry Sunderland, Bruce Campbell, Doris
Capistrano, Mohammad Agus Salim, Bagus Hargo Utomo, Yuan Oktafian,
Sufiet Erlita, Fitri Heryani, Wiwit Siswarini, Rahayu Koesnadi, Dina
Hubudin, Charlotte Soeria, Titin Suhartini, Suci Ningsih, Hari Sukmara,
Henny Linawati, lr. Soewignyo, Budi Suriansyah, Bambang Dahat, Jefri
Irwanto, Yuyun Kurniawan, Seselia Ernawati, Jim Sammy, Zul MS, Andi
Erman, Ade Mohammad Abas, Ade Mahadeli, Ade Bujani, Abdul Mu'in and
all anonymous reviewers of this article.
References
Aglionby, J. 1997 Database of social economic survey of Wetlands
International project.
Barua, S.P., M.M.H. Kha and A.H.M. All Reza 2000 The Status of
Alien Invasive Species in Bangladesh and Their Impact on the Ecosystems.
Bangladesh: IUCN, World Conservation Union.
Dennis, R.A. and I. Kurniawan 2000 Tropical Forest Cover Monitoring
in Indonesia. TREES II Project. Joint Research Centre and CIFOR.
Dudley, R.G. 2000 The Fishery of Danau Sentarum. Borneo Research
Bulletin 31:261-306.
Erman, A. 2005 Investigation Report on Wildlife Trading; Orangutan
and Lempiau (Hylobates sp.) in the Border of Kapuas Hulu District,
Indonesia and Sarawak Malaysia. Unpublished report. Pontianak: Yayasan
Titian and Yayasan Riak Bumi.
Giesen, W. 2000 Flora and Vegetation of Danau Sentarum: Unique Lake
and Swamp Forest Ecosystem of West Kalimantan. Borneo Research Bulletin
31:89-122.
Giesen, W. and J. Aglionby 2000 Introduction to Danau Sentarum
National Park, West Kalimantan. Borneo Research Bulletin 31:5-28.
Hardin, G. 1968 The Tragedy of the Commons. Science 13 162
(3859):1243-1248.
Jeanes, K. 1997 Guidelines for Conservation Management: Danau
Sentarum Wildlife Reserve, West Kalimantan. Pontianak: Directorate
General of Forest Protection and Nature Conservation of Indonesia
Ministry of Forestry, Overseas Development Administration (ODA),
Wetlands international Indonesia Programme (WIIP).
Jeanes, K. and E. Meijaard 2000a Danau Sentarum's Wildlife
Part l: Biodiversity Value and Global Importance. Borneo Research
Bulletin 31 : 150-229.
2000b Danau Sentarum's Wildlife Part 2: Habitat
Characteristics and Biodiversity Contribution. Borneo Research Bulletin
31:230-245.
Kompas 2008 Produksi CPO Kalbar Turun (CPO Production from West
Kalimantan is Declining). 24 November.
Martinez, 0.J. 1994 The Dynamics of Border Interaction: New
Approaches to Border Analysis. In: C.H. Schofield, Global Boundaries,
World Boundaries, Vol. I. London: Routledge.
Pouyand, L., [N]. Sudarto and G.G. Teugels 2003 The Different
Colour Varieties of the Asian Arowana Scleropages formosus
(Osteoglossidae) are Distinct Species: Morphological and Genetic
Evidences. Cybium 27 (4):287-305.
Prasetyo, L.B. 2008 Is Funding for Conservation on the Right
Track? Some Ideas for Improvement. Paper presented at International
Association for the Study of the Commons conference, Cheltenham, UK,
14-18 July.
Russon, A.E., A. Erman and R. Dennis 2001 The Population and
Distribution of Orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus pygmaeus) in and around the
Danau Sentarum Wildlife Reserve, West Kalimantan, Indonesia. Biological
Conservation 97:21-28.
Sawit Watch 2005 4,3 juta ha lahan untuk sawit terlantar (4.3
Million Hectares for Abandoned Oil Palm Estate). Bogor: Sawit Watch.
Sebastian, A.C. 2000 Proboscis Monkeys in Danau Sentarum National
Park. Borneo Research Bulletin 31:359-371.
Selimbau Subdistrict Office 2009 Selimbau demography data. Selimbau
Subdistrict Office.
Sunderlin, W.D. and I.A.P. Resosudarmo 1996 Rates and causes of
deforestation in Indonesia: towards a resolution of the ambiguities.
CIFOR Occasional Paper 9 (E). Bogor: CIFOR.
van Balen, S. and R.H. Dennis 2000 Birds of Danau Sentarum. Borneo
Research Bulletin 31:336-358.
Vitule, J.R.S., S.C. Umbria and J.M.R. Aranh 2006 Introduction of
the African catfish Clarias gariepinus (Burchell, 1822) into Southern
Brazil. Biological Invasions 8:677-681.
Wadley, R.L. and M. Eilenberg 2005 Autonomy, Identity, and
"Illegal" Logging in the Borderland of West Kalimantan,
Indonesia. Asia Pacific Journal of Anthropology 6 (1): 1934.
2006 Vigilantes and Gangsters in the Borderland of West Kalimantan,
Indonesia. In: A. Horstmann (ed.), State, People and Borders in
Southeast Asia. Special Issue of Kyoto Review of Southeast Asia 7.
Wadley, R.L., R.A. Dennis, E. Meijaard, A. Erman, V. Heri and W.
Giesen 2000 After the Conservation Project: Danau Sentarum National Park
and its Vicinity--Conditions and Prospects. Borneo Research Bulletin
31:385401.
West Kalimantan Fisheries Office no date 2006 West Kalimantan
Fisheries Data. In: West Kalimantan Online Statistics.
http://kaibar.bps.go.id/tabel/Tabel%206%20ikan.htm.
Yuliani, E.L., Y. Indriatmoko and V. Heri 2007 Apa yang Terjadi
Jika Danau Sentarum Dibendung? (What Is Likely to Happen If Danau
Sentarum Is Dammed?). CIFOR-Riak Bumi Newsletter 1(2).
Valentinus Heri
Riak Bumi Foundation
dl. Putri Data Itam, Gy. Tani No. 1
Pontianak, West Kalimantan, Indonesia
herivalens@yahoo.com
Elizabeth Linda Yuliani
Center for International Forestry Research
JL. CIFOR, Sindang Barang
Bogor, West Java, Indonesia
Email: L.yuliani@cgiar.org
Yayan Indriatmoko
Center for International Forestry Research
JL. CIFOR, Sindang Barang
Bogor, West Java, Indonesia
y.indriatmoko@cgiar.org
(1) Subdistrict towns are located outside DSNP. This is obvious at
election time, when people from the park have to travel to the
subdistrict towns to register as subdistrict residents, rather than as
residents of fishing settlements inside DSNP where they live and fish.
(2) PT. Yamaker was a military-owned HPH, founded through Surat
Menteri Pertahanan No. 79/11-1967, I November 1967; it started operation
in 1969. Yamaker was located along the border between Indonesia and
Malaysia in Borneo and covered 265,000 ha. According to the decree,
Yamaker aimed to "improve the protection of Indonesia's
territory, and empower communities economically and socially." Its
concession was handed over to the Minister of Defense through
Presidential Decree 44/1994, then to the Ministry of Forestry through
Presidential Decree 63/1999. PT Yamaker is now managed by the
State's Concession (Perum Perhutani).
(3) Pegah is also written as "Pega" or "Vega."
(4) Cooked weight for smoked fish.
(5) There is taxonomic dispute over the name of this species. Some
refer to it as Scleropages legendrei, a new name proposed by Pouyaud et
al. (2003).
(6) Endrin is illegally traded in Lanjak and can be bought for US$
5/litre.
(7) Giant snakehead fish growth depends on the species and amount
of food. With enough food, giant snakehead fish grow to a weight of 1.2
kg in 10 to 12 months. With less food, it can take two years for a fish
to weigh 1 kg.
(8) The scientific names for these catfish could not be determined
because no individuals survived.
(9) During 1998-1999 the exchange rate fluctuated abruptly, with
US$1 ranging between IDR 7,800 and 10,200.
(10) There are more than 30 groups of wild bee honey gatherers in
Danau Sentarum. Annual production per group varies widely.
(11) The Danau Sentarum National Park Management Plan (RPTN-DS) was
prepared in 2006-2007 with the participation of local communities, NGOs
and research organizations. The West Kalimantan Natural Resources
Conservation Agency (BKSDA) was originally responsible for preparing the
management plan, but later delegated the task to the park authority.
Participatory preparation methods were designed by Riak Bumi, Yayasan
Titian, Unit Koordinasi Kalbar (UKK), CIFOR and Tropenbos. The park
authority has a commitment to apply a collaborative management model.
Table 1. Price classification, by wood type
Price per
Classification Species tan (USD)
1 Ramin Ramin (Gonystylus spp.) 329
2 Jelutung Jelutung (Dyera spp.) 211
3 Red meranti Pukul kawi (Cotylelobium burkii) 158-184
Tekam (Shorea sp.)
Keladan (Dryobalanops sp.)
4 Meranti Perawan (Shorea sp.) 132
Pukul perawan baya or pengerawan
buaya (Shorea uliginosa)
Merkunyit (Garcinia sp.)
5 Tengkawang Enkabang (Shorea smithiana) 132
6 Red wood Kelansau (Dryobalanops sp.) 118
Penyau (Upuna borneensis)
7 Kapur wood Keruin or Keruing (Dipterocarpus sp.) 84-100
Resak (Vatica oblongifolia)
8 M-less Kayu medang (Lauraceae, e.g. Litsea 74-90
sp., Alseodaphne coreacea)
Gerunggang (Cratoxylum arborescens)
Sempetir (Sindora leiocarpa)
Merbau (lntsia spp.)
Rengas (Gluta renghas or Swintonia
spp.)
Pitoh (Swintonia spp.)
Entangor or Mentangur (Calophyllum
sp.)
Ketuntum or Maripat (Combretocarpus
rotundifolius)
Table 2. Oil palm allocations and plantings in Kalimantan
Province Area allocated (ha) Area planted (ha)
West Kalimantan 1,500,000 ** 427,000 *
East Kalimantan 2,000,000 ** 303,000 **
Central Kalimantan 1,800,000 ** 438,000 **
South Kalimantan 500,000 ** 391,000 **
Province Percentage planted
West Kalimantan 25.47
East Kalimantan 15.15
Central Kalimantan 24.33
South Kalimantan 78.20
Sources: * Kompas (2008), ** Sawit Watch (2005)
Table 3. Road construction in and around DSNP, 2000-2007
Year Location Builder
2000-2002 From Piyam to Kenelang hamlet Illegal logging
business people
2002-2003 From Kekurak and Illegal logging
Sungaitelian to Seriang business people
2002-2003 From Empaik to Seriang Illegal logging
business people
2002-2003 From Guntul hamlet to Illegal logging
Perayung hill business people
2002-2003 From Indonesia's Libung, Indonesia, Illegal logging
to Sungai Sebabai and Wong Kapit, business people
Malaysia, passing Kibung, Sumpak
Layang, Bakul I, II dan III, Kelum,
Kelawik, and Nanga Entebuluh
hamlets
2003 Former logging road from Empaik to Illegal logging
lake area, widened business people,
and improved based on
community of
Empaik requests
2003 From Libung intersection to Sungai Illegal logging
Sebabai business people
2003-2004 From Tangit II and Tangit IV PT Plantana
to Sungai Senunuk, to illegal Razindo
logging port in Geraji Lake
2003-2004 From Seriang to Wong Panjai an Illegal logging
Batu Kaya, Malaysia business people
2004 From sawmill at Guntul Illegal logging
down Guntul watershed, Nanga business people
Jabang, Senunuk watershed, to
Tembawai Galang (also known as
Padang Bilun)
2004 Road intersection before First built by PT
Payak Encawit to Sungai Luar, Yamaker up to
Peninjau I and II hamlets Sungai Luar, and
continued by
illegal logging
business people
up to Peninjau I
and II
2004 From Lanjak to Tekalong and Kapuas Hulu
Bejabang government
2004 From Sungai Santak in Manggin Kapuas Hulu
hamlet, crossing over Leboyan River government
2005 From Kelawik stretching into Batu Illegal logging
Peti hill forest to edge of BKNP business people
2005 From Sumpak Layang north, Illegal logging
crossing hills that border business people
Indonesia and Malaysia
2007 From Empaik to Sungaitembaga Kapuas Hulu
government
2007 From Bejabang to Kedungkang Kapuas Hulu
government
2002-2007 Lorry trails and bicycle trails, from Illegal logging
logging camps in hamlets business people
to main roads
Year Land type
2000-2002 Peat swamp forest
2002-2003 Peat swamp forest
2002-2003 Peat swamp
forests of
Sebadin
2002-2003 Hill and lowland
forests
2002-2003 Hill and lowland
forests
2003 Lowland and
swamp forests
2003 Small rivers
(blocked),
pristine forests
of Betung Kerihun
National Park, 6
km into park
2003-2004 Lowland and
swamp forests
2003-2004 Hill forests
2004 Hill and lowland
forests
2004 Hill and lowland
forests
2004 Hill and lowland
forests
2004 Hill and lowland
forests
2005 Hill forests
2005 Hill and lowland
forests
2007 Lowland and swamp
forests
2007 Lowland and swamp
forests
2002-2007
Table 4. Prices for arowana hatchlings from DSNP
Price per hatchling (S cm)
Year Minimum Maximum Minimum Maximum
1982-1985 (i) IDR 3,000 IDR 25,000 US$ 2 US$ 14
1986-1989 (i) 40,000 175,000 22 97
1990-1991 (ii) 300,000 1,250,000 136 568
1991-1992 (ii) 1,250,000 2,500,000 568 1,136
004-2005 (iii) 4,800,000 (v) 5,000,000 (v) 516 538
006-2007 (iv) 1,500,000 1,600,000 150 160
008-2009 (iv) 1,700,000 2,000,000 190 200
Dec 2009 (iv) 2,200,000 2,200,000 220 220
Source: Interviews with arowana farmers.
(i) US$1 = IDR 1,800
(ii) US$1 = IDR 2,200
(iii) US$1 = IDR 9,300
(iv) US$1 = IDR 10,000
(v) Using Indonesian rupiah, the highest price was in 2004-2005. But
converted into U.S. dollars, the highest price was in 1991-1992. The
high 2004-2005 price was caused by high demand, disappearing stock
from the wild and only a small number of arowana farmers.
Table 5. Large dry-season wildfires in DSNP
Year Area (ha)
July 1973 5,483
August 1990 9,045
January 1994 11,105
May-June 1997 18,905
Source: Dennis & Kurniawan (2000).
Table 6. Permanent and seasonal settlements and population in DSNP,
1997-2007
Settlements Population
Year Permanent Seasonal Total Permanent Seasonal Total
1997 33 6 39 -- -- 6,500
2007 37 6 43 9,478 626 10,104
Table 7. Government standard and prevailing DSNP prices for fuel
(in IDR)
Premium petrol *
Government Average in
standard DSNP
Before 28 Feb 05 1810 2500
1 Mar-30 Sep 05 2400 5000
1 Oct 05-23 May 08 4500 7500
24 May 08-29 Nov 08 6000 8000
1-14 Dec 08 5500 7500
15 Dec 08-14 Jan 09 5000 8000
15 Jan 2009-Aug 09 4500 8000
Kerosene
Government Average in
standard DSNP
Before 28 Feb 05 1800 2000
1 Mar-30 Sep 05 2200 3500
1 Oct 05-23 May 08 2000 5000
24 May 08-29 Nov 08 2500 6000
1-14 Dec 08 2500 6000
15 Dec 08-14 Jan 09 2500 6000
15 Jan 2009-Aug 09 2500 6000
Diesel oil
Government Average in
standard DSNP
Before 28 Feb 05 1650 2500
1 Mar-30 Sep 05 2100 5000
1 Oct 05-23 May 08 4300 6500
24 May 08-29 Nov 08 5500 8000
1-14 Dec 08 5500 7500
15 Dec 08-14 Jan 09 4800 7500
15 Jan 2009-Aug 09 4500 8000
* In DSNP, petrol is mixed with oil.
Table 8. Household fuel requirements in Pelaik hamlet
Fuel Price per
liter (IDR)
Buying everyday needs, selling fish 5 litres of 8,000
and rubber in Semalah petrol a day
Lighting (kerosene lamps) 1 litre of 6,000
kerosene a
night
Traveling to Lanjak to visit children 20 litres of 8,000
at school, deposit money, go petrol a month
shopping, receive health care
Total per household *
Cost (IDR)
Buying everyday needs, selling fish 40,000 a day
and rubber in Semalah 1,200,000 a month
Lighting (kerosene lamps) 6,000 a day
180,000 a month
Traveling to Lanjak to visit children 5,300 a day
at school, deposit money, go 160,000 a month
shopping, receive health care
Total per household * 51,300 a day
1,540,000 a month
68% of average income **
* Sometimes several members of different families travel together and
share costs, so it is difficult to determine exactly how many people
travel, their destinations and the amount of fuel used. The main
sources of these comparatively high incomes are rubber and fish.
** Source of average income data: Indriatmoko (this volume).