LOCAL STRUGGLES AND NEWS

For many years, the mangrove forests were seen and actually often officially designated as wastelands, not fit for anything but mosquitoes and smelly swamp. Fortunately, this view of the tidal forests is changing, influenced by recent scientific studies and public awareness campaigns. Mangroves are now seen for their unique natural characteristics supporting high levels of biodiversity, immensely important for the health of wild fisheries and marine ecology. Mangroves are comprised of salt-tolerant trees and other plant species which thrive in inter-tidal zones of sheltered tropical shores, “overwash” islands, and estuaries which support an immense variety of marine, plant, and bird life. Not only hundreds of bird species utilize the mangrove wetlands as prime nesting and migratory sites, but also they serve local populations meet their needs.

These unique coastal tropical forests are among the most threatened habitats in the world. Urban expansion, oil development, the charcoal industry, roadways, and tourism have all taken their toll on large stretches of mangrove forests. Now these damaged ecosystems are facing further ruination due to shrimp aquaculture. And the threat goes beyond the continued loss of the forests to the related loss of associated tidal wetlands.

Unfortunately, very often the intricacies of this quite complex and interconnected ecosystem are not recognized, and the mangrove forests are viewed by some as somehow separate or isolated from their associate wetlands found on the tidal flats--the mud and salt flats, the salinas and salt marshes which are themselves really part of a greater, integrated tidal ecosystem. These are not really separate ecosystems, but are instead variations on a common theme--the tidal wetlands. Where there is now a mangrove forest, in the future there could be a salt marsh or salina, depending on changes in hydrology, sea level, or other factors. The mud flat of today may well become the mangrove forest of tomorrow. In fact, with the rising sea levels reportedly caused by global warming, existing mud flats and salinas may offer the only place of refuge for the natural progression of the mangroves. If the tidal wetland areas directly behind the mangrove are lost to development, this natural progression of mangrove forest will be thwarted or stymied.

The shrimp industry has increasingly taken the approach that the mud flats and salt flats are NOT valuable coastal wetlands, and in places such as Brazil, are rapidly converting these wetlands to shrimp aquaculture ponds with immunity from laws meant to protect the mangrove forest zones.

Brazil contains the second largest mangrove area in the world --more than one million hectares of mangrove forests are found along Brazil's long and curving coastline. Shrimp aquaculture has existed on a small scale in Brazil since the 1970s. Until recently, the industry has grown slowly, increasing production at a steady yet manageable pace. In 2000, there were approximately 5,000 hectares of shrimp ponds in Brazil, many of which were built directly in mangrove areas. Most of the ponds, however, were built in salinas, or salt flats, which were former mangrove lands cleared many years ago to establish shallow salt pans. Many of these salinas have since been abandoned, and were naturally returning to mangroves.

Now, entrepreneurs interested in shrimp farming ventures are targeting these areas. The industry is currently being primed for a rapid spurt of growth, possibly leading Brazil to take a place among the other aquaculture giants such as Thailand, Ecuador, and China. In 2000, the Brazilian government released an ambitious three-year plan to expand its shrimp aquaculture industry’s area of production six fold --from 5,000 ha to 30,000 ha. In 2002, Brazil had over 10,000 ha of shrimp farms that produced about 60,000 tons of farmed shrimp; ponds are expected to cover 25,000 ha of important coastal wetlands with a production anticipated to exceed 160,000 tons by 2005.

Brazil's shrimp industry would thus lead to the same environmental problems it has caused elsewhere, including overuse of pesticides and antibiotics in the shrimp ponds themselves, excessive water pollution, devastating viral disease spread between shrimp farms, loss of important coastal marine habitat such as mangroves, mudflats, and salt flats - all resulting in wild fish declines, loss of vital migratory bird habitat and loss of traditional livelihoods for coastal communities.

The shrimp aquaculture industry takes a great toll not only in terms of natural resource loss but in some cases even of violence and death. In April 2002, a fisherman in Piaui, state of Brazil, Sebastian Marques de Souza was murdered at his workplace by two men. According to the "pastoral of the Fishermen" (groups of fishermen working together and supported by the Catholic Church) the assassination was connected to the shrimp aquaculture industry. Marques de Souza was one of the main leaders that had been fighting against the uncontrolled expansion of shrimp aquaculture which had been buying, or appropriating, the lands within or surrounding mangrove forest zones in order to build there shrimp ponds. Those lands, in the majority of the cases, were public lands and local people had been using them for many years collecting all the products they needed to survive and to maintain local economies.

Meanwhile, a multitude of national and multinational investors is vying for space along the Brazilian coast to establish new shrimp ventures. Shrimp farmers from Ecuador's and Taiwan's own beleaguered coasts are coming to Brazil to restart their once-lucrative ventures anew. As is so often the case, the enticement of enormous capital gains is unfortunately blinkering the Brazilian government and citizens to the dangers shrimp farming will pose.

Article based on information from: “Brazil's Shrimp Farm Industry: Not For The Birds”, Alfredo Quarto, MAP, sent by the author, E-mail: mangroveap@olympus.net , “Protest Assassination of Anti-Aquaculture Activist in Brazil”, http://www.earthisland.org/takeaction/new_action.cfm?aaID=114

---

top

- Colombia: Forestry as a business

It seems important to learn why for the past few years the issue of forestry in Colombia has been at the hub of the main debates and the government agenda. This article endeavours to reply to this question and to show some political elements that allow us to affirm that the issue of forestry and its environmental services are just another business, not only at national level but also at a global level.

The present Government’s National Forestry Development Plan (Plan Nacional de Desarrollo Forestal – PNDF), conceived for the next 25 years, seeks to establish 4 million hectares of monoculture tree plantations. This year the plan is to plant 17,000 hectares, mainly of oil palm. In spite of the fact that these are clearly monoculture plantations, they are presented as “reforestation”. However, it is interesting to point out that the forestry development plan does not mention the real figures for deforestation, that are much higher than the data supplied by the government on this matter.

Among the reasons given to promote monoculture tree plantations is the fact that the country’s geographical and environmental characteristics are extremely suitable for the development of productive plantations with a high production of timber, due to the short felling cycles (7 – 15 – 20 years) among other advantages.

The Government is promoting commercial tree plantations through the so-called “Productive Chains” which have been promoted since 1995, seeking to sign Competitiveness Agreements with the private sector, represented by producer organizations and entrepreneurs. In this context, the Government encourages various policies, plans and projects aiming at improving the competitive environment of the various links in the chains and the companies' own conditions of competitiveness.

With the development of these Chains, it is expected that “forestry development” cores will be identified and consolidated, making it possible to reactivate investment in new productive projects under conditions of competitiveness, promoting regional agreements and establishing strategic partnerships between the public and private sector and with the community in general. Thus the base of timber resources will be widened, consolidating the productive chain scheme and placing forestry products and services on national and international markets.

This seems to us to be a matter for extreme concern as the reorganization under way in Colombia, not only at institutional level but also at the territorial level, involves these Productive Chains. That is to say, national production is conditioned to the demands of external markets and therefore, of the transnational companies that are the buyers. In other words, Productive Chains are linked to international trade, which in turn dictates what each country should produce. This explains the reason for monoculture palm, palmetto, eucalyptus, pine, etc. plantations. The Chain thus becomes the way of producing, and it should be noted that small producers are left out of it, as the interest is on large-scale production.

This means, among other things, insecurity and loss of food sovereignty, as land use and production are not based on the needs of the population, but on the contrary, are aimed at ensuring the business of transnational companies promoting these Chains. From our point of view, there is no doubt that land use must in the first place benefit the population and not be considered as simply another business.

Hence the inadvisability of monoculture tree plantations, as their profitability is directly associated with the commercial and extensive nature of the plantations, without any concern for eviction from and expropriation of collective lands, traditionally inhabited by peasants and Indigenous and Afro-Colombian communities.

It should be noted that President Uribe himself has been one of the most enthusiastic supporters of the forestry sector, as a pillar of the new “development” in rural areas, promoting tree plantations. Thus one of the National Development Plan’s major programmes, known as “Forestry Warden Families” receives strong economic support from International Cooperation to carry out projects related with land planning and conservation and restoration of forest ecosystems, promotion of productive forestry chains and institutional development.

Although this may seem positive, what is hidden behind it is that by means of economic incentives, these families become incorporated into the large-scale extraction chains. These finally favour the multinational company owning the plantation while additionally, the national Government endorses and creates the right conditions for the application of this policy, channelling resources directly from International Cooperation to these Productive Chains and to the business.

Simultaneously, through this model of forest warden families, the establishment of a relationship of salaried workers with the local people is sought and it is expected that the communities will cease to relate with the forest as in the past, and more particularly the Indigenous and Afro-Colombian communities. Furthermore, the Government strategy aims at appropriating community territories that will end up in the hands of forestry companies.

All this is hidden behind nice-sounding words, such as “reforestation” “land planning” “conservation” and “restoration” when in fact what is really happening is the substitution of diverse ecosystems and communities by homogeneous plantations and societies, tied to the interests of the large companies.

By: Paula Alvarez Roa, CENSAT Agua-Viva, Friends of the Earth – Colombia, e-mail: agua@censat.org

---

top

- Ecuador: Certified shrimps

The certification process for organic shrimps in Ecuador is promoted by Naturland, a German certifying company that launched processes in 1996 to certify shrimp farming companies in the country and to achieve accreditation of a green seal enabling exporting companies to enter markets with better prices and standards of quality. The main markets for organic shrimps are Germany, Switzerland, France and the United Kingdom.

In Ecuador, approximately 1,000 hectares of shrimp farm ponds have been certified. Part of the certification process requires compliance with Naturland standards -prepared with the support of the German cooperation agency GTZ– with national legislation and the obtaining of social benefits derived from this activity.

Certification is viewed by some environmental sectors as a way of promoting multi-sectoral participation –NGOs, the private sector and the governmental sector– although the participation of communities involved in the process appears as a secondary consideration. The potential benefits of environmental certification in Ecuador are seen as follows: market access, reduced costs, social benefits and increased employment.

* Market access: “They hope to attract green consumers who pay higher prices for products guaranteeing lower environmental impacts in their production process.” However, most of the German consumers of the Deutsche See company, the largest fish supplier in Germany, which has been selling “ecological” shrimps since 2003 from shrimp farms certified by Naturland, do not know that 40 per cent come from aquiculture. The consumers believe they are buying fish from the wild, and also suppose that there is respect for the environment, the communities and the laws of the country of origin of the product. However, in practice this is not the case.

* Reduced costs due to savings in the purchase of agrochemical products and benefits to the companies, among which “less conflictive relations with the workers, local communities and environmental groups, reduction of erosion and other environmental and economic benefits.” The comparative advantages of producing in the South also cut costs: fewer environmental regulations, cheap labour, and the environmental cost of the destruction of mangroves is not considered, resulting in a much higher ecological debt generated by this export activity.

* Social benefits: “The reduction of toxic chemicals, provision of basic working equipment for the workers, construction of basic sanitary facilities and provision of recreation areas and social services have improved the welfare and productivity of the workers. These benefits are enjoyed by local communities.” In the case of shrimp farms, there is no evidence of improvement for the local communities that continue to face restrictions in land available for agriculture, loss of free access to the remaining mangroves, loss of water resources, implying a reduction in their income and loss in their quality of life.

* Increased employment: “The growth of exports has generated more employment.” This statement, in the case of shrimp farming does not coincide with the true situation. Because of the crisis in the sector, the number of workers has dropped and the level of employment in shrimp farms is fairly low, in addition to the fact that employment is temporary. In general, workers are not hired from the same area and working conditions are not among the best. If we compare this statement with the number of jobs lost because of mangrove destruction and the effects on traditional fishing, activities that used to be carried out by families, the balance is negative for the shrimp industry.

This vision of the potential benefits of certification does not consider that the promotion of these export activities and their endorsement as a model has been done to the detriment of food sovereignty and that export activities such as shrimp farms, palm tree and banana tree plantations and flower growing, have shown their negative effects in the country.

The certification of shrimp farms has not brought with it either social or environmental benefits, reforested mangrove areas have not been returned to the ecosystem and problems still subsist with neighbouring communities that no longer have free access to the remaining mangrove areas and furthermore, have not been consulted.

The standards and procedures used in certification processes are not transparent, the information is not made public, the community has not been consulted and they do not comply with national legislation.

In practice, large companies are benefiting from a green discourse that does not correspond to what is happening in the sector, and are not even complying with the standards they are obliged to conform with to obtain certification. They are more concerned over cleansing their image.

Certification responds exclusively to an issue of Northern consumers -ensuring “cleaner” food- rather than improving conditions in the mangroves and local communities.

The development model in which certification is framed privileges the exportation of products to satisfy consumers from industrialised countries before improving production for national markets, even at the cost of destroying ecosystems, displacing the population and placing at risk the ancestral users of coastal ecosystems.

By: Ricardo Buitrón C., E-mail: manglares@accionecologica.org
Abridged version of the article "Certification of organic shrimps. A Green Seal to impunity" available (in Spanish) at: http://www.wrm.org.uy/paises/Ecuador/camaron.html

---

top

- Ecuador: Letter of thanks from Floresmilo Villalta

Dear Friends,

I am Floresmilo Villalta, President of the Free Ecuador Poultry Association and I wish to thank you –all the organizations and people who have given me their moral and spiritual support. This has been a great encouragement to the continuation of our struggle and I also know that you too have felt very encouraged and this makes me feel very proud.

It is because of your public and written support that I am presently a free man. However, the lawsuits and accusations against me and other members of the Free Ecuador Poultry Association continue. With even more reason, I will continuously struggle until we achieve the goal our association has set itself. The goal of defending our forests, the last ones remaining in the province of Esmeraldas, the source of many rivers that form the basins of such rivers as the Santiago, the Cayapas, the Rio Verde, the La Desgraciada river, a source of life to our peasant companions.

At the same time, we want to recover our lands that have been seized by the Borrosa, Setrafor and Endesa logging companies, the most powerful ones that fell thousands of trees a day as there is no authority in our country that can halt their ambition and greed. We also defend our positions because we have been vigilant and have taken up our position against the powers of these predators, this is our motive and I hope to continue with the support of all of you.

I wish to thank in anticipation all the noble institutions and people who unconditionally support us in defence of the last forests remaining in the north of the Province of Esmeraldas in Ecuador.

Yours sincerely,
Floresmilo Villalta, President of the Free Ecuador Poultry Association

---

top

- Venezuela: The population of Aguide on the alert to face damages caused by shrimp farms

Aguide is located in the coastal zone between the Zamuro and Uvero Points, and is part of the Parish of La Pastora, Acosta Municipality, in the northeast of the State of Falcon.

The population of Aguide is on the alert. A representative of a shrimp farm project is amongst them, gathering signatures to request a meeting where the “advantages” of the project for the locality will be announced. To face this, various neighbours have gathered to consider the effects the installation of a shrimp farm will have on the population and on the locality, basing themselves on other similar projects carried out in other localities of the State of Falcon and in the rest of the country, such as:

* Larvae nurseries: there is information on 5 of these, one installed in the Adicora zone (Municipality of Falcon) in the Paraguana peninsula in the State of Falcon;

* Shrimp farms to fatten up shrimps and process them. It is estimated that there are no less than 20 in the whole country, covering extensions of between 600 ha and 4,000 ha. The majority are found in the State of Zulia, followed by the State of Falcon, where an aggressive plan for their expansion in number and extension is in force. This is seen through the experience of RICOA (Municipality of Tocopero) that is presently under expansion, the shrimp farms in Mitare and the one proposed in Rio Seco (Municipality of Miranda); the plans in Casigua (Mene de Mauroa Municipality) to occupy some 4,000 hectares and the threat to the peninsular zone of the State caused by the projected installation of 10 shrimp farms in the zone of Cumaraguas (Municipality of Falcon), where, according to the neighbours, the population is protesting against “such a rash action.” There is also the experience of the shrimp farm in the Piritu-Anzoategui Lagoon (www.unare.org ), trying to demonstrate that this is a sustainable experience after almost 17 years, in the belief that all the impacts generated by its installation and expansion have been forgotten. Other smaller shrimp farms are also known, together with their impacts in other areas of the country (Coche-Nueva Esparta Islands) and plans for the Orinoco Delta zone.

The inhabitants of Aguide believe that they are still in time to prevent problems and conflicts such as those occurring in other places because of shrimp farming. Although this type of project usually promises job opportunities, the truth is that they are mostly seasonal jobs during the building phase (only while installation lasts) and then during operation at the time of the shrimp harvest and processing. Permanent jobs are few and are mainly for surveillance, shrimp feeding and maintenance of the ponds. The rest of the staff is technically specialized, brought in by the company from other countries or regions.

Furthermore, the population and the natural physical environment will be subject to a series of negative impacts, both during the phase of construction and operation of the shrimp farms and also when these are abandoned. In fact, it is a habit of the companies to abandon the site when activities become unproductive, leaving behind a whole series of environmental and socioeconomic damage. The neighbours have identified the following foreseeable impacts, among others:

* During the construction phase, the elimination of flora, fauna, soil and wetlands in the zone under intervention; the danger of zones protecting water courses disappearing; the effects on the Ostion channel where the population fish for crabs, shrimps, bass, shad, and others; deforestation and/or impacts on mangroves located along the coast and at the mouth of the El Cristo River and the Ostion channel; substitution of the present coastal landscape by extensions of land covered with nursery and fattening ponds, reducing the natural and cultural diversity of the location.

* During the stage of operation and maintenance: alteration of the beaches (erosion and siltation) because of changes in the movement of sea water due to its extraction by channels, breakwaters, and/or pumping and the discharge of waste water; contamination of water in the bay due to the quantity of nutrients, heavy metals and other chemicals (agro-chemicals, antibiotics, fungicides, conservation additives, disinfectants and others) used to clean the ponds and in the prevention and control of possible viral, bacterial or fungal infections, substances which in the medium and long term may generate unforeseeable impacts (the problem of eutrophication) on the coastal marine environment; competition for drinking water from the springs that supply the population of Aguide and/or the El Cristo reservoir supplying Mirimire (Municipality of San Francisco) and other populated centres; restriction on free access by the population to the whole coastal zone as the area where the project will be installed will become a totally private zone; the killing of birds and alteration of their flight dynamics to prevent them from approaching the ponds; alteration of the local climate on substituting a terrestrial system by an aquatic one affecting the surrounding flora and fauna; alteration of the water table level and salinization of soils in the zones under the influence of the shrimp farm, making them unsuitable for cultivation; soil subsidence due to the extraction of underground water; removal of larvae and juvenile fish and shell-fish due to sea water being pumped towards the ponds; increase in the disposal of solid waste in the zones surrounding the facilities; breeding of mosquitoes in the ponds or the waters retained around the ponds on changing the water flow; danger from the transmission of pathogens resistant to medication due to cultivated shrimps escaping to the sea or the estuary; danger of local species being displaced due to the aggressiveness of cultivated species (exotic species) that may escape; the local consumption of shrimps would be prevented as most of them would be exported.

* During the closure phase: abandoning of the facilities, causing persistence of some of the above-mentioned impacts. This usually happens when for various reasons the shrimp farms are no longer profitable, such as the impossibility of controlling a virus, the lack of demand for shrimps on the international market, the lack of funding from world banking, or social pressure. An example of this latter case is that of the shrimp farm abandoned in the Unare delta, in the State of Anzoategui. So far, no model is known in which a shrimp company has carried out remedial action following its closure to reduce environmental damage and enable the improvement of conditions in the area so that other sustainable projects can be carried out there, or that has reconditioned a zone to transform it into another ecosystem by means of ecological succession.

The degree of awareness and clarity of those attending the meeting regarding the problems set by the installation of a shrimp farm in the locality led to an engagement to: 1) continue to be alerted to the movements of the shrimp farm project; 2) find out about the existence of the project and demand the Ministry of the Environment to make available the environmental impact assessments that the company may have carried out; 3) call on the scientific community that has carried out or is carrying out research on the environmental characterization of the zone to make these studies available to the community of Aguide to enable them to better evaluate the environmental components of the location and to request the assessment of the project with the aim of scaling the magnitude of the environmental impacts, making them known on a local, regional and national level; 4) gain knowledge of community shrimp management as a strategy to reduce social pressure.

Article based on a report by: José L. Rodriguez R and Dolores I. Gonzalez A “Agüide alerta ante avance de la camaronicultura en Falcón", July 2004, http://www.elistas.net/lista/lea/archivo/msg/5190/