In many countries, the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic have seen a large increase in visits to national parks and other protected areas as people try to escape urban areas for some fresh air and exercise. This has often then resulted in closure of facilities to limit crowding. At the peak of the epidemic, all human movement is usually restricted, with only key workers - medical, police, food etc. - able to move around freely. What happens to protected area staff then? In some countries, such as India, they are able to continue working, but there does not seem to be a general pattern. There is potentially a risk that locking out protected area staff would leave these sites unprotected, against vandalism, poaching, fires etc. Is there any evidence that this has happened in any country? This may seem a fairly minor concern at a time of widespread human tragedy, but we are going to need these areas when we get out of this and I would find it comforting to know that they and their protectors are getting the support they need. Keep safe!
In India, people are working in alternate working days in protected areas presently and it is likely to remain so.
In Brazil protected areas are closed to visitants, and the staff is in home office. I am arguing that it is interesting perform some monitoring now, only with staff that resides inside the protected areas.
Hello Richard, I will bring a perspective from another part of Brazil (countryside of Sao Paulo in southeastern Brazil). The National Parks are closed to visitors since March 17. Here in Sao Paulo the state parks have also been closed to visitors, and only staff enrolled in essential activities are keeping in the field. All staff above 60's must stay at home. The problem is that, in the case of state parks, there is no hiring of new park rangers since 1994, what have left many parks poorly attended by staff even before the current Coronavirus spread. Many park rangers are now older than 60 years old, and thus, some parks will be under less surveillance. Since polliceman (that may help with surveillance in parks) are more and more occupied by issues related to coronavirus, your concerns apply here also. However, I am not aware of news so far about important actions against protected areas by poachers or vandals. I will keep an eye on it. Maybe vandals and poachers are now also affraid of Coronavirus? Unfortunately our president is making things about Coronavirus crisis worse for us and he is also not a friend of our protected areas. If I have any news I will let you know. All the best!
- In Uganda, there is a full ban on any kind of motor-vehicle transportation especially across regions. This has isolated protected areas from direct supervision from government natural resource management. The lack of periodic monitoring coupled with limited supervision has led to a status quo - whereby there is increased poaching activities in National Parks. This is a threat to conservation efforts.
- Furthermore, due to the ban on public transportation, the food supply chains have been affected. Thus, it is hypothesized that some communities may turn to poaching (i.e. hunting of wild game) for survival.
- There is also a reduction in funding to Protected Area Management. This is partly due to prioritizing the control of Covid-19 as opposed to protected area management, and secondly - due to reduction in revenue from tourists.
Certainly! With the relaxation of surveillance in Brazil, natural areas are under the target of deforesters.
Are there any updates on these observations? Many PAs are in countries that are now 2-6 weeks into lockdown, while China is getting back to normal. How are things now?
Hi Richard. A brien update about Brazil. A few days ago a major operation by the federal police and environmental agencies operated on indigenous reserves of the Yanomami in northern Brazil to expel illegal gold miners in the area, due to the risk of spreading the coronavirus to the Indians (which unfortunately is already occurring, including among the Yanomami). The expel of gold miners is good news for the local environment also. There were also destruction of equipment and machines, something foreseen in our law in cases where the seizure of the material is logistically impossible. There was a repercussion in the press, but the result was that the superintendent of operations was fired by our "Minister of the environment". Unbelievable. We are having hard times with the current federal administration in Brazil. See newspaper report here
https://www1.folha.uol.com.br/equilibrioesaude/2020/04/ricardo-salles-exonera-diretor-de-protecao-ambiental-do-ibama.shtml
Thank you Alexander. That is optimistic and very depressing at the same time!
I point out three major impacts to wildlife conservation in this COVID-19 Pandemic as forest officers has limited the patrolling activities.
1. Forest fire has been prevalent and limited human resources are in the field to monitor and response.
2. Wildlife poaching could be increased as poachers could be active in such limitation.
3. Anti-wildlife behavior could be provoked as many news has linked Corona Virus with wildlife such as bat and pangolin.
Just a correction to my last post 2 days ago. The operation against illegal gold miners in Brazil to avoid spreading Sars-Cov-2 to indigenous people was not in the Yanomami area, but in another indigenous reserve farther south in Pará state (also in the Amazon region). In this other reserve there are 1,700 indigenous people that were at risk due to contact with the illegal miners. Anyway, there is already some Yanomami infected by the virus, and at least one confirmed death among them. The dismissal of the superintendent is true anyway. I apologize for my mistake.
Entry fee from visitors is a source of revenue for many PAs around the world. It the current pandamic situation the visitation has been drastically reduced, or has come to an end. It is important to think what could be a possible alternative where entry fee is a substantial part of the PAs revenue? Can PAs manage virtual tours as a substitute??
That's a good point, Muhammad, although often entry fees go to the central government and not directly to the PA concerned. Many PAs do have virtual tours and some have added them during the lockdown, but I doubt people would be willing to pay for them.
Great question -- thanks for starting this thread. I anticipate that those already inclined to poach (whether for subsistence or profit) will increase activities where/when protected areas are closed or visitation declines. I suspect this will occur because even where policing continues, much of the risk of being caught comes from being detected by others (non-law enforcement); thus, where visitation declines, this source of risk will decline.
Richard- thanks for initiating this conversation- i think its quite a critical question at this time. In Cambodia, poaching of 3 Critically Endangered birds https://news.mongabay.com/2020/04/poachers-kill-3-near-extinct-giant-ibises-amid-pandemic-pressure-in-cambodia/ . I think the 'increased poaching due to less surveillance' is going to be widespread and perhaps largely undocumented given that field work hasn't resumed in many places. I think it is perhaps an opportune time to make a strong case for increased investment in PAs and nature protection post COVID - for a start, ensuring that COVID recovery packages are 'green'.
Please have a look at the following link:
Article Impacts of the coronavirus pandemic on biodiversity conservation
In my opinion: 1. Local participation in conservation is low during pandemic 2. Professional Poacher activities will increase 3. Jobless people might engage in wildlife crime.
In my opinion: 1. Local participation in conservation is low during pandemic 2. Professional Poacher activities will increase 3. Jobless people might engage in wildlife crime.
This Might help: Article How conservation will be impacted in the COVID-19 pandemic
As like other items PAs also facing problems due to Covid-19 such revinue, proper care and security, etc.
Afeta de muitas forma, mas principalmente em relação a fiscalização de impactos ambientais e a interação com a comunidade residente.
Creo que el desafio está en el manejo de especies invasoras, y en el diseño de manejo de visitantes para la post pandemia, dado que seguramente la presión de visitantes impactará notoriamente en el anp
we have also done small research in Nepal based on news and found that pressure and incidents were high in the protected areas near to the huge settlement areas.
I think the pandemic had an impact on both ways. Limited tourism had undisturbed wildlife habitats and their activities, some positive impact to be happy with. However, revenue generated through the protected areas had declined sharply. In Nepal, income from protected areas was also shared with the local communities to implement the integrated conservation and development program around the protected areas. However, a sharp decline of revenue had not only impacted conservation initiatives inside the protected areas but had made people more vulnerable. In many protected areas, the salary of the staff has been reduced. Likewise, budget allocation from the public sources had declined drastically. Besides, pleasure hunting has increased in rural parts due to limited surveillance. It is more likely that the biodiversity threats would increase in the coming days. There is a need to develop an alternative financing mechanism to finance conservation initiatives around the protected area.
Thank you all for this really helpful and instructive thread. I just wanted to point out that your testimonies clearly show that our current crisis is not an ecological, but socio-ecological crisis, and that to address it adequately we need more systemic changes that include an eradication of poverty (see SDG’s). COVID-19 is a disease that globally affects people differently along socio-economic lines. Economically weaker communities are hit harder. As many of you have pointed out, the pandemic has also a destructive impact on wildlife, PAs and the environment in general, because poorer communities are hit worse (e.g., poaching). The ramifications of the various lockdowns worldwide are felt economically, and already big industries are calling for support and a liberalization of markets. In Germany, the car industry, one of the foremost drivers of German prosperity, were invited by the chancellor to figure out state-support strategies. It seems to me that a global common goods economy and a equitable distribution of wealth would have kept the negative social, ecological and economic impact of the pandemic smaller. Meanwhile, in germany alone, 19 billionaires have increased their wealth by a total of 95 billion Dollars in 2020. This is a sustainability issue. And no, I am not a socialist... I just want to underline the complexity of the issue at hand.
Dear R. T. Corlett, please have a look at the following link:
Article COVID-19 and protected and conserved areas
R. T. Corlett
In many of India's protected areas, the sustenance of the local community is dependent on the income generated through tourism. The COVID-19 pandemic has let the protected area managers think of developing contingency plans to economically support the local community.
Because of complete paralysis of all sectors movement of the people has been restricted
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Geoscience
- Cartography
- Mapping