(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "Protected Areas of the World: a review of national systems. Vol 4: Nearctic and Neotropical"

rotecte 
the World 

A review of national systems 



Nearctic and Neotropical 



Volume 4 




'm:xim 



Compiled by The World Conservation Monitoring Centre 



0^ IVth World Congress on National Parks and Protected Areas, 
^ i Caracas, Venezuela 



DISPLAY COPY 
DO NOT REMOVE 



The World Conservation Union 



"r-^i'^ 



Digitized by the Internet Archive 

in 2010 with funding from 

UNEP-WCIVIC, Cambridge 



http://www.archive.org/details/protectedareasof04wcmc 



If^^^ 



Protected Areas of the World 

A review of national systems 
Volume 4: Nearctic and Neotropical 



lUCN - THE WORLD CONSERVATION UNION 

lUCN - The World Conservation Union brings together States, government agencies and a diverse range of 
non-govemmental organisations in a unique world partnership: some 650 members in all, spread across 120 countries. 

As a union, lUCN exists to serve its members - to represent their views on the world stage and to provide them with 
the concepts, strategies and technical support they need to achieve their goals. Through its six Commissions, lUCN 
draws together over 5000 expert volunteers in project teams and action groups. A central secretariat coordinates the 
lUCN Programme and leads initiatives on the conservation and sustainable use of the world's biological diversity and 
the management of habitats and natural resources, as well as providing a range of services. The Union has helped many 
countries to prepare National Conservation Strategies, and demonstrates the application of its knowledge through the 
field projects it supervises. Operations are increasingly decentralised and are carried forward by an expanding network 
of regional and coimtry offices, located principally in developing countries. 

lUCN - The World Conservation Union seeks above all to work with its members to achieve develqjment that is 
sustainable and that provides a lasting improvement in the quality of life for people all over the world. 



WCMC - THE WORLD CONSERVATION MONITORING CENTRE 

The World Conservation Monitoring Centre (WCMC) is a joint venture between the three partners who developed 
the World Conservation Strategy and its successor Caring for the Earth: lUCN - The World Conservation Union, 
UNEP - United Nations Environment Programme, and WWF - World Wide Fund For Namre (formerly World Wildlife 
Fund). Its mission is to support conservation and sustainable development through the provision of information on the 
world's biological diversity. 

WCMC has developed a global overview database that includes threatened plant and animal species, habitats of 
conservation concern, critical sites, protected areas of the world, and the utilisation and trade in wildlife species and 
products. Drawing on this database, WCMC provides an information service to the conservation and development 
communities, governments and United Nations agencies, scientific institutions, the business and commercial sector, 
and the media WCMC produces a wide variety of specialist outputs and reports based on analyses of its data. 



Protected Areas of the World 

A review of national systems 
Volume 4: Nearctic and Neotropical 

Compiled by the World Conservation Monitoring Centre 

in collaboration with 

The lUCN Commission on National Parks and Protected Areas 

for the 

IVth World Congress on National Parks and Protected Areas, 
Caracas, Venezuela, 10-21 February 1992 

with the support of 

The British Petroleum Company p.l.c. 



lUCN - The World Conservation Union 
December 1992 



Published by: lUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK, 

with the financial support of The British Petroleum Company p. I.e. 

Prepared by: The World Conservation Monitoring Centre, Cambridge, UK 

A contribution to GEMS - The Global Environment Monitoring System 



pi 




WORLD CONSERVATION 
MONITORING CENTRE 



Copyright: (1992) International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources 

Reproduction of this publication for educational or other non-commercial purposes is authorised 
without prior permission from the copyright holder. 

Reproduction for resale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without the prior written 
permission of the copyright holder. 

Citation: lUCN (1992). Protected Areas of the World: A review of national systems. Volume 4: Nearctic 

and Neotropical. lUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. xxiv + 460 pp. 

ISBN: 2-8317-(X)93-0 

Printed by: Page Bros (Norwich) Ltd, UK 

Cover photos: Lauca National Park, Chile: C. Sharpe; Cozumel Marine Reserve, Mexico: C. Fairhurst; Bryce 

Canyon, Utah: WWF/P. Huber; Monteverde Cloud Forest, Costa Rica: WAVF/A. Petretti 

Produced by: lUCN Publications Services Unit, Cambridge, UK, on desktop publishing equipment purchased 

through a gift from Mrs Julia Ward 

Available firom: lUCN Publications Services Unit, 

219c Huntingdon Road. Cambridge, CB3 ODL, UK 



The designations of geographical entities in this book, and the presentation of the material, do not imply the expression 
of any opinion whatsoever on the part of lUCN, WCMC or BP concerning the legal status of any country, territory, or 
area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 



Page 

Foreword vii 

Introduction viii 

Acknowledgements ix 

Managing information on protected areas at WCMC xi 

Country accents and guidelines to their contents xiii 

Maps and Lists (explanation of) xiv 

Internationally-designated sites xv 

Western Hemisphere Convention xx 

NEARCTIC 

Canada 1 

Greenland - Denmark 45 

Mexico 51 

St Pierre & Miquelon - France 61 

United States of America 63 

NEOTROPICAL - Central America 

BeUze 119 

Costa Rica ' 127 

El Salvador 137 

Guatemala 143 

Honduras 153 

Nicaragua 161 

Panama 167 

NEOTROPICAL - South America 

Argentina 175 

Bolivia 187 

Brazil 197 

Chile 219 

Colombia 231 

Ecuador 247 

French Guiana - France 259 

Guyana 265 

Paraguay 271 

Peru 277 

Suriname 289 

Uruguay 297 

Venezuela 303 

NEOTROPICAL - Caribbean 

Aruba - Netherlands 317 

Anguilla - United Kingdom 319 

Antigua and Barbuda 321 

V 



Page 

Bahamas 327 

Barbados 331 

Bermuda - United Kingdom 335 

British Virgin Islands - United Kingdom 34 1 

Cayman Islands - United Kingdom 347 

Cuba 351 

Dominica 359 

Dominican Republic 367 

Grenada 373 

Guadeloupe - France 379 

Haiti 385 

Jamaica 391 

Martinique - France 399 

Montserrat - United Kingdom 405 

Netherlands Antilles - Netherlands 407 

Puerto Rico - USA 411 

St Kltts and Nevis 417 

St Vincent 421 

St Lucia 427 

Trinidad and Tobago 435 

Turks and Caicos - United Kingdom 441 

Virgin Islands - USA 447 

SOUTHERN OCEAN ISLANDS 

South Georgia 451 

South Sandwich Islands 455 

Tristan da Cunha and Gough Island 457 



VI 



FOREWORD 



The inspirational and aesthetic values of fine examples of the beauty and bounty of nature lay behind the establishment 
of many national parks and other types of protected areas. More recently there has been increasing recognition of the 
range of the value of protected areas and of their contribution to meet the needs of society by conserving the world's 
natural and physical resources. These values range from protection of representative samples of natural regions and the 
preservation of biological diversity, to the maintenance of environmental stabiUty in surrounding country. Protected 
areas can also facilitate complementary rural development and rational use of marginal lands, and provide opportunities 
for research and monitoring, conservation education, and recreation and tourism. 

Over the past thirty years, since \hcFirst World Conference on National Parks was held in Seattle, Washington (1962), 
our view of the world, and our impact on the world, has changed significantly. Throughout diis time, and despite the 
mounting pressures of expanding human populations, the number of protected areas established has continued to rise. 
Since the centennial of national parks was commemorated at the time of the Second World Conference on National 
Parks at Yellowstone and Grand Teton, Wyoming in 1972, the "human" element of protected areas has come more and 
more into focus. They are no longer seen as being "locked up" or "set apart". Rather, they are seen as being integral to 
strategic approaches to resource management, a concept enshrined in the World Conservation Strategy (1980) based 
on managing natural areas to support development in a sustainable way. 

The fundamental contribution of protected areas to sustainable management was reaffirmed by participants at the World 
Congress on National Parks held in Bali, Indonesia (1982), and for the last decade the Bali Action Plan has focused 
attention on a range of actions necessary for promoting and supporting protected areas. These actions were further 
focused in regional action plans subsequenUy developed by members of the lUCN Commission on National Parks and 
Protected Areas, covering the Afirotropical, Indomalayan, Neotropical and Oceanian regions. 

More recently, two significant, and widely accepted documents have stressed the very vital roles that protected areas 
play. The report of the World Commission on Environment and Development was published in 1987, and more recently 
a new strategy Caring for the World was launched in 1991. This latter strategy, which has its roots in the World 
Conservation Strategy, clearly identifies the functions and benefits of protected area systems, what they safeguard, and 
why they are important for development opportunities. 

Many countries have declared extensive systems of protected areas, and are continuing to develop and expand them. 
The systems and the sites they contain vary considerably from one country to another, depending on national needs and 
priorities, and on differences in legislative, institutional and financial support. Consequently, protected areas have been 
established under many different national designations to provide for a spectrum of management objectives, ranging 
from total protection to sustainable use: from strict nature reserves to lived-in landscapes. 

lUCN - The World Conservation Union has been involved in protected areas issues for many years, and has published 
a significant body of information on the subject. The lUCN Commission on National Parks and Protected Areas was 
set up both to ensure that the appropriate expertise was available to advise the Union, and to bring together professionals 
to share information and experience. lUCN and CNPPA have together had a very strong hand in developing the 
programme for the IV World Congress on National Parks and Protected Areas in Caracas, Venezuela (1992). 

For more than 10 years, lUCN and CNPPA have worked closely with what is now the World Conservation Monitoring 
Centre, to help in building an information resource on protected areas. The information is of value to the Commission 
in developing its own programmes, in identifying priorities, and for a wide range of other purposes such as supporting 
international initiatives in World Heritage, wetlands and biosphere reserves. It is also important to both lUCN and the 
Commission that such information is made available to others, so that the roles and values of protected areas are more 
widely recognised, appreciated and respected. 

The four volume Protected Areas of the World: A review of national systems is being published for the World Parks 
Congress by WCMC and lUCN in cooperation with British Petroleum, and aims to provide a standard format "overview" 
of the world's protected area systems. While this product has gaps, and no doubt inaccuracies, it does illustrate very 
clearly the range of protected areas activities around the world, and gives an indication of the protected areas estate 
under the stewardship of our managers. This product, in combination with the protected areas reviews being prepared 
for the Congress by the CNPPA Regional Vice-Chairs, will also provide a benchmark against which to measure our 
achievements over the next decade. 

P.H.C. (Bing) Lucas 

Chair 

rUCN Commission on National Parks and Protected Areas 



INTRODUCTION 



Participants at the Third World National Parks Congress held in Bali, Indonesia, in 1982, clearly recognised that the 
availability of comprehensive, good-quality information on the world's protected areas was essential to a wide range 
of international organisations, governments, protected area managers, voluntary bodies and individuals. Such 
information is a prerequisite for assessing the coverage and status of protected areas from regional and global 
perspectives, and is key to the development of regional and global priorities and strategies. Monitoring protected areas 
is vital to ensure that those areas allocated to conserve the world's natural resources meet the needs of society. 

The World Conservation Monitoring Centre (WCMC) is expanding its capabihties as an international centre for 
information on the conservation of biological diversity. Working closely with the lUCN Commission on National Parks 
and Protected Areas (CNPPA), WCMC continues to compile an extensive database on the world's protected areas, 
which is being used more and more frequently as a source of information. 

One result of WCMC's work as an information centre is the ability to draw material together into publications which 
provide background information on protected areas and protected area systems. At the previous Congress in 1982, two 
publications from the protected areas database were available, the 1982 UN List, and ihslUCN Directory of Neotropical 
Protected Areas. Since then, the Centre has collaborated with CNPPA and others on a wide range of publications, 
including two subsequent UN Lists in 1985 and 1990, directories of protected areas for Africa, Oceania, South Asia, 
and the mountains of central Asia, and various publications on eastern Europe. A full list of publications on protected 
areas (including those published by others with information provided by WCMC) is available from the Centre. 

The present work. Protected Areas of the world: A review of national systems, is the first attempt by WCMC to compile 
a world-wide survey of protected area systems. The book is organised into national (or occasionally sub-national) 
accounts, each comprising a description of the national protected areas system, accompanied by a summary list and 
map of protected areas. The book is divided into four volumes, with volume one covering the Indomalayan, Oceanian, 
AustraUan and Antarctic realms, volume two the Palaearctic realm, volume three the Afrotropical reahn, and volume 
four the Nearctic and Neotropical realms. The first three volumes were released at the fV World Congress on National 
Parks and Protected Areas, held at Caracas during February 1992, whilst the fourth volume was presented as a draft. 
This enabled WCMC staff, who attended the Congress, to obtain comments, corrections and additions from the 
numerous experts from the Neotropic and Nearctic regions who were present in Caracas. This volume therefore, 
drawing on this new source of information, completes the series. 

Publication of such a book serves two purposes. First, it provided extensive background information on the protected 
area systems of the world, relevant to several plenary sessions and workshops at the IV World Congress on National 
Parks and Protected Areas. In particular, it was a contribution to the third plenary session The Contributions of 
Protected Areas to Sustaining Society: A Global Review. Secondly, and perhaps more significantly, it is also part of 
the process of information collection and verification. Feedback from protected areas professionals, and others familiar 
with protected areas, is therefore both welcomed and encouraged, because only by a continual process of review and 
update can we present a true picture. 

Jeremy Harrison 
World Conservation Monitoring Centre 



ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 



Fteparation of a directory of this magnitude is only achieved through a tremendous amount of effort and cooperation. 
Over the years, protected areas professionals throughout the world have reviewed or compiled material for us, or 
provided new information. Quite simply, without their cooperation this book could not have been completed, and we 
greatly appreciate their support 

This assistance has been faciUtated in part by the lUCN Commission on National Parks and Protected Areas, and the 
support of the Commission and its past and present officers is gratefully acknowledged. In particular we would like to 
thank the present chair P.H.C. (Bing) Lucas of New Zealand, and his predecessor Harold Eidsvik of Canada. Work has 
also been supported by the staff of the lUCN Protected Areas Unit, and in particular James Thorsell and Jeffrey McNeely . 

This particular publication is the product of two projects. The British Petroleum Company pic has provided support 
for the preparation of part of the text and maps (for those areas not covered by the second mentioned project), and has 
provided funds for both publishing and distributing the book. At the same time, the British Overseas Development 
Administration has supported review of information on uopical and sub-tropical countries, as part of a project 
contributing to the FAO Forest Resources Assessment 1990. Thanks are due to both organisations for their support. 

A number of past and present staff of WCMC have been involved in preparing this directory, which includes material 
published in several earlier directories. Compilation of country accounts has been the responsibility of: 
Patricia Almada-Villela, Daphne Clark, Graham Drucker, Harriet Gillett, Donald Gordon, Sara Oldfield, 
James Paine, Chris Sharpe and Mark Spalding. Assistance with the preparation of maps has been provided 
by Ian Barnes, Clare Billington, Simon Blythe and Gillian Bunting and Joel Smith. Secretarial support was provided 
by Deborah Rothera. 

Notwithstanding the significant contributions of the many individuals who have provided information to WCMC and 
CNPPA, errors and omissions must remain the responsibility of die compilers. 

This directory is not intended to be a final statement but a review of the world's protected area systems. If WCMC is 
to continue to carry out its mission, there is a continual need to maintain and'update this information as national protected 
areas systems change and as more information becomes available. Therefore, with this directory goes a plea foi 
corrections, comments and additional material to help WCMC carry out its mission as effectively as possible. By the 
same token, the information that WCMC collects and manages is available to others to support their work and 
programmes. 

World Conservation Monitoring Centre 

219 Huntingdon Road, Cambridge, CB3 ODL, United Kingdom 

Tel: (44)223 277314 

Fax: (44)223 277136 

Tlx: 817036 SCMUG 



MANAGING INFORMATION ON PROTECTED AREAS 

AT WCMC 



Many individuals and organisations need basic 
information on protected areas systems, lists of protected 
areas with certain features, or analyses of protected areas 
statistics, yet it is unlikely that they will have the time or 
resources to collect, compile and analyse all of the 
information for themselves. Such information also 
needs to be kept up-to-date, as properties are added or 
extended, and as legislation or administrative regimes 
change. Users may also require details about the major 
protected areas within national systems, such as physical 
features, vegetation and fauna, or on other aspects such 
as management status and constraints. 

It is to meet these needs that the WCMC Protected Areas 
Data Unit (PADU) was founded. This service enables 
users to obtain quickly information on protected areas 
from a single source, be it for purposes of analysis and 
assessment, or as briefing material. It is not intended that 
this service should by-pass any need for users to contact 
or visit the relevant national authorities for such 
information, but use of PADU's resources enables users 
to be well informed prior to making such approaches and 
in a better position to ask the right questions when so 
doing. 



Institutional background 

rUCN -The World Conservation Union has been closely 
involved in protected areas issues for many years. As 
early as 1960, it established a Commission on National 
Parks and Protected Areas (CNPPA) to serve as the 
"leading international, scientific and technical body 
concerned with the selection, establishment and 
management of national parks and other protected 
areas". CNPPA has always emphasised the need for 
information on which to base effective conservation 
planning and management, and has been very active in 
collecting and disseminating information on protected 
areas. 



As the world's network of protected areas has expanded 
and its management improved, information on national 
protected areas systems and individual protected areas 
has proliferated. This led CNPPA to set up PADU in 
1981 to manage this increasing volume of information. 
Establishment of this Unit was supported by the United 
Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), as part of its 
Global Environment Monitoring System (GEMS). 
Originally part of the lUCN Conservation Monitoring 
Centre, PADU is now a unit within the World 
Conservation Monitoring Centre (WCMC), restructured 
in July 1988 and joindy managed by lUCN, the World 
Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) and UNEP. 



Objectives 

WCMC aims to provide accurate up-to-date information 
on protected area systems of the world for use by its 
partners (lUCN, WWF and UNEP) in the support and 
development of their programmes, and by other 
international bodies, governmental and 
non-governmental organisations, scientists and the 
general public. Such information covers the entire 
spectrum of protected areas, from national parks and 
sanctuaries established under protected areas legislation 
or customary regimes to forest reserves created under 
forestry legislation. It also includes privately-owned 
reserves in which nature is protected. 

Specific objectives are to: 

— maintain a comprehensive and up-to-date database 
of the world's protected areas; 

— compile definitive, standard-format accounts 
summarising national protected areas systems; 

— hold maps of protected areas systems and digitise 
them; 

— compile definitive, standard-format accounts 
coverin_g individual protected areas, particularly the 
major properties in tropical countries and those of 
international importance; 

— accumulate current and historical information on 
protected areas; and 

— provide support to regional and international 
activities, programmes and conventions relating to 
protected areas. 

Information capture, management and compilation 

Information is collected from official sources, namely 
national agencies responsible for administering 
protected areas, and other sources through a global 
network of contacts ranging in profession from 
fxjlicy-makers and administrators to land managers and 
scientists. It is also obtained from published and 
unpublished literature. Regional CNPPA meetings and 
other relevant scientific and technical meetings provide 
valuable opportunities for making new contacts and 
collecting fresh information. This material in itself is a 
major asset of the Centre. 

Information, ranging from books, reports, management 
plans, scientific papers, maps and correspondence, is 
stored as hard copy in manual files. Basic data on 
individual protected areas are extracted and, after 
verification, entered in a protected areas database, which 
currenUy holds some 32,0(X) records. This computerised 
database can be used for generating lists of protected 
areas meeting pre-defined criteria, together with 
summary statistics, as well as performing more complex 



Protected Areas of the World 



tasks. In addition, maps of protected areas are being 
digitised, using a Geographic Information System, in 
order to generate computerised mapped output and to 
allow other datasets, for example on habitats, to be 
overlain for analysis. 

The information is also used to produce accounts of 
protected areas systems and individual protected areas. 
These accounts are compiled according to standard 
formats developed over the years by WCMC in 
collaboration with CNPPA. 

Dissemination of information 

In keeping with its primary objective, WCMC aims to 
make available good quality information on protected 
areas to a wide range of users, including international 
organisations, governments, protected area managers, 
conservation organisations, commercial companies 
involved in natural resource exploitation, scientists, and 
the media and general public. Information may be 
provided or consulted by arrangement. 

Material may be prepared under contract: for example, 
WCMC regularly provides UNEP with summary data 
on protected areas for its biennial Environmental Data 
Report. WCMC is experimenting with providing 
outside users with direct access to its protected areas 
database. Trials have been ongoing with the US 
National Park Service since 1986 and it is hoped to be 
able to extend this service to other users shortly. 

Compiled information is periodically published in the 
form of regional or thematic directories and lists. 
Directories comprise sections on individual countries, 
each with a protected areas system information sheet, a 
list of protected areas and accompanying location map, 
and a series of site information sheets covering at least 
the more important properties. Prior to releasing or 
publishing documents, draft material is circulated for 
review by relevant government agencies and experts to 
help ensure that compiled information is accurate and 
comprehensive. 

Major lists and directories published to date are as 
follows: 

— United Nations List of National Parks and Protected 
Areas (1982, 1985, 1990) 

— lUCN Directory of Neotropical Protected Areas 
(1982) 

— lUCN Directory of Afrotropical Protected Areas 
(1987) 

— lUCN Directory of South Asian Protected Areas 
(1990) 

— Protected Areas in Eastern and Central Europe and 
the USSR (1990) 

— rUCN Directory of Protected Areas in Oceania 
(1991) 

— Nature Reserves of the Himalaya and the Mountains 
of Central Asia {\992) 



— Information System: Biosphere Reserves: 
CompilaUon4(1986) 

— Biosphere Reserves: Compilation 5 (1990) 

— Directory of Wetlands of International Importance 
(1987, 1990) 

— Protected Landscapes: Experience around the World 
(1987) 

In addition, numerous draft directories, reports, papers and 
reviews have been produced. A list of these is available 
from WCMC. 

WCMC also disseminates information through the CNPPA 
Newsletter and Parks magazine. In the case of the latter, 
WCMC has assumed responsibility for compiling 
Clipboard in which world news on protected areas is 
featured. 

Special services 

WCMC has a very close working relationship with 
CNPPA. While the Commission provides expert advice 
and support through its network of members, WCMC 
supports many of the Commission's activities through 
provision of technical information. WCMC has a 
particular responsibility for managing information on 
natural properties designated under international 
conventions and programmes, namely the Convention 
concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and 
Natural Heritage (World Heritage Convention), 
Convention on Wetlands of International Importance 
especially as Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar Convention) , and 
the Unesco Man and the Biosphere Programme. Thus, 
WCMC cooperates closely with the Division of Ecological 
Sciences, Unesco, in maintaining information on biosphere 
reserves and World Heritage sites accorded by the MAB 
Secretariat and World Heritage Committee, respectively. 
Likewise, it works closely with the Ramsar Bureau with 
respect to managing information on Ramsar wetlands. 

The rest of the World Conservation 
Monitoring Centre 

Information on protected areas is only one aspect of the 
programme of the World Conservation Monitoring Centre, 
which also covers information on plant and animal species 
of conservation concern, important natural habitats and 
sites of high biological diversity, wildlife utilisation, and 
the international trade in wildlife. 

To monitor the impact of man on nature is a major task. 
This requires close collaboration between agencies, and 
between agencies and individuals, and the development 
and exchange of information. WCMC acts both as an 
information centre, and as a facilitator of information 
management and exchange. WCMC has now embarked 
on an ambitious programme to promote improvements in 
the availability of information, and to develop its database 
capabilities and information services. Information on the 
distribution and status of the world's protected areas is an 
essential component of this programme. 



Information management 



COUNTRY ACCOUNTS: GUIDELINES TO THEIR CONTENTS 



In general, there is an account for each country, divided 
up into a series of sections with standard headings. The 
following notes summarise the type of information 
included in each section where it is available. In certain 
cases, accounts have been prepared for areas which are 
parts of countries, usually where the area concerned is 
geographically separate from the "parent" country. 

Country 

Full name of country or political unit, as used by the 
United Nations (United Nations Term/'notogyBu/Ze/in on 
Names of Countries and Adjectives of NationaUty). 

Area 

ToUl according to the latest volume of the FAO 
Production Yearbook prepared by the Statistics Division 
of the Economic and Social Policy Department, FAO, 
unless otherwise stated (with full reference). Terrestrial 
and marine components are distinguished, if appropriate. 

Population 

Total population and its mean annual rate of growth 
according to the latest issue of World Population 
Prospects, published by the United Nations Population 
Division. Year of census or estimate is indicated in 
parentheses. If another source has had to be used, it is 
cited. 

Economic indicators 

Gross domestic product and gross national product per 
capita in US dollars (or net material product in the case 
of centrally planned economies), with year in 
parentheses, according to the latest issue of National 
Accounts Statistics: Analysis of Main Aggregates 
(prepared by the United Nations Statistical Office) and 
The World Bank Atlas. 

Policy and legislation 

Information on aspects of the constitution that are 
relevant to nature conservation and protected areas. 

Summary of national policies that relate to nature 
conservation, particularly with respect to the protection 
of ecosystems. This may include reference to policies 
relating to environmental impact assessments, and 
national/regional conservation strategies. 

Brief chronological account of past and present national 
legislation and traditions that relate to the establishment 
of the protected areas system, with names (in English), 
dates and numbers of acts, decrees and ordinances. 
Legislation covering forestry and other resource sectors 
is included, in so far as it provides for protected areas 
establishment. Procedures for the notification and 
declassification of protected areas are summarised. 



Oudine of legal provisions for administering protected 
areas 

National designations of protected areas are cited and 
their range of provisions outlined. Their legal 
defmitions, together with the names of the authorities 
legally responsible for their administration, are 
summarised in an Annex (see below). 

Reviews of protected areas poUcy and legislation are 
noted, with any identified deficiencies in prevailing 
provisions highlighted. 

International activities 

Participation in international conventions and 
programmes (World Heritage and Ramsar conventions, 
MAB Programme, UNEP Regional Seas Programme) 
and regional conventions and agreements (such as the 
African, ASEAN and Berne conventions, the FAO Latin 
American/Caribbean Technical Cooperation Network, 
South Asian Cooperative Environmental Programme 
and the South Pacific Regional Environment 
Programme) relevant to habitat protection is 
summarised. 

Outline of any international, multilateral and bilateral 
cooperative programmes or transfrontier cooperative 
agreements relevant to protected areas, including 
mention of any transfrontier protected areas. 

Administration and management 

All authorities responsible for the administration and 
management of protected areas are named and 
described, with a brief history of their establishment, 
administrative organisation, staff structure, budget and 
any training programmes. Authorities responsible for 
different types of protected areas are clearly 
distinguished. 

Outline of the role of any advisory boards 

Cooperative agreements between management 
authorities and national or foreign universities and 
institutes, with details of any research underway or 
completed 

Names and brief details of non-governmental 
organisations concerned with protected areas. 
Reference to any national directories of voluntary 
conservation bodies is included. 

Effectiveness of protected areas management is noted 
where information has been provided. Attention is 
drawn to any sites registered as threatened under the 
World Heritage Convention, or by the lUCN 
Commission on National Parks and Protected Areas. 



Protected Areas of the World 



Systems reviews 

- Short account of physical features, biological 
resources, and land use patterns (with percentages if 
available), including the extent and integrity of major 
ecosystems. 

- Brief review of the development of nature conservation 
programmes, so far as it relates to the establishment and 
expansion of the national protected areas network. 
Emphasis is given to any systems reviews or 
comprehensive surveys of biological resources, with 
details of major recommendations arising from such 
studies. 

- Threats to the protected areas system beyond the 
control of the management agencies are outlined. 

Other relevant information 

- Tourism and other economic benefits of the protected 
areas system, if applicable 

- Other items, as appropriate 

Addresses 

- Names and addresses (with telephone, telex and fax 
numbers, and cable) of authorities responsible for 
administering protected areas. Names are given in the 
original language or transliterated, with English 
translation in brackets as appropriate, and followed by 
the tide of the post of the chief executive. 

- Names and addresses (with telephone, telex and fax 
numbers, and cable) of non-governmental organisations 
actively involved in protected areas issues. Names are 
given in the original language or transliterated, with 
English translation in brackets as appropriate, and 
followed by the title of the post of the chief executive. 



References 

- Key references (including all cited works) to the 
protected areas system, in particular, and nature 
conservation, in general, are listed. 

ANNEX 

Definitions of protected area designations, as 
legislated, together with authorities responsible for 
their administration. The annex includes the 
following sections: 

Title: Name and number of law in the origmal 
language or transliterated, with the English 
translation underneath, as appropriate. 

Date: Day, month and year of enactment, followed by 
dates of subsequent major amendments 

Brief description: Summary of main provisions (often 
this is stated at the beginning of the legislation) 

Administrative authority: Name of authority 
responsible for administering the law, given in the 
original language or transliterated, with the English 
translation underneath as appropriate. This is followed 
by the tide of the post of the chief executive. 

Designations: National designation of protected area in 
the original language or transliterated, followed in 
brackets by the English translation as appropriate. For 
each designation this would be followed by: definition 
of designation (if given in legislation), summary of 
activities permitted or prohibited, outline of f)enalties for 
offences, and, where relevant, reference to subsequent 
legislation relating to the original law. 

Source: This may be "original legislation", "translation 
of original legislation" or a referenced secondary source. 



MAPS and LISTS 



The descriptive sections are followed by lists of 
protected areas, and maps showing their location. In 
most cases, the lists comprise all of those areas 
qualifying for inclusion in lUCN management 
categories I- VIII, which have an area of over 1,000 
hectares. However, forest and hunting reserves 
qualifying for lUQ^ Management Category VIII have 
been omitted, largely because our information is not 
comprehensive. Also, size restrictions have been 
ignored for island nations. Note that in certain cases, 
nationally designated areas (such as some national 
parks) will not apjpear in the lists, as they do not meet the 
criteria. World Heritage sites, biosphere reserves and 
Ramsar sites are also listed. 



Categories and management objectives of protected 
areas 

I Scientific Reserve/Strict Nature Reserve: to 
protect nature and maintain natural processes in an 
undisturbed state in order to have ecologically 
representative examples of the natural environment 
available for scientific study, environmental 
monitoring, education, and for die maintenance of 
genetic resources in a dynamic and evolutionary 
state. 



National Park: to protect natural and scenic areas 
of national or international significance for 
scientific, educational and recreational use. 



Information management 



III Natural Monument/Natural Landmark: to 

protect and preserve nationally significant natural 
features because of their special interest or unique 
characteristics. 

IV Managed Nature Reserve/Wildlife Sanctuary: 

to assure the natural conditions necessary to protect 
nationally significant species, groups of species, 
biotic communities, or physical features of the 
environment where these require specific human 
manipulation for their perpetuation. 

V Protected Landscape or Seascape: to maintain 
nationally significant natural landscapes which are 
characteristic of the harmonious interaction of man 
and land while providing opportunities for public 
enjoyment through recreation and tourism within 
the normal life style and economic activity of these 
areas. 

VI Resource Reserve: to protect the natural resources 
of the area for future use and prevent or contain 
development activities that could affect the 



resource pending the establishment of objectives 
which are based upon appropriate knowledge and 
planning. 

Vn Natural Biotic Area/Anthropological Reserve: 

to allow the way of life of societies living in 
harmony with the environment to continue 
undisturbed by modem technology. 

Vni Multiple-Use Management Area/Managed 
Resource Area: to provide for the sustained 
production of water, timber, wildlife, pasture, and 
outdoor recreation, with the conservation of nature 
primarily oriented to the support of economic 
activities (although specific zones may also be 
designed within these areas to achieve specific 
conservation objectives). 

Abridged &om lUCN (1984). Categories and criteria for 
protected areas. In: McNeely, J.A. and Miller, K.R. (Eds), 
National parks, conservation, and development. The role of 
protected areas in sustaining society. Smithsonian Institution 
Press, Washington. Pp. 47-53. 



INTERNATIONALLY DESIGNATED SITES 



In the field of nature conservation there are two 
international conventions and one international 
programme that include provision for designation of 
internationally important sites in any region of the 
world. These are the Worid Heritage Convention, the 
Ramsar (Wetlands) Convention, and the Unesco Man 
and the Biosphere (MAB) Programme. While there is 
a wide range of other international conventions and 
programmes, these cover only regions, or small 
groups of countries. 

Both Worid Heritage sites and Ramsar sites must be 
nominated by a State that is party to the relevant 
convention. While there is an established review 
procedure for Worid Heritage sites (and nomination is 
no guarantee of listing), all nominated Ramsar sites 
are placed on the List of Wetlands of International 
Importance. Biosphere reserves are nominated by the 
national MAB committee of the country concerned, 
and are only designated following review and 
acceptance by the MAB Bureau. 

Each Contracting Party to the Ramsar (Wetlands) 
Convention is obliged to nominate at least one wedand 
of international importance. However, a country can 
be party to the World Heritage Convention without 
having a natural site inscribed on the List, and may 
participate in the MAB programme without 
designating a biosphere reserve. 



World Heritage Sites 

The Convention Concerning the Protection of the World 
Cultural and Natural Heritage was adopted in Paris in 
1972, and came into force in December 1975. The 
Convention provides for the designation of areas of 
"outstanding universal value" as World Heritage sites, 
with the principal aim of fostering international 
cooperation in safeguarding these important areas. 
Sites, which must be nominated by the signatory nation 
responsible, are evaluated for their Worid Heritage 
quality before being inscribed by the international Worid 
Heritage Committee. Only natural sites, and those with 
mixed natural and cultural aspects, are considered in this 
publication. 

Article 2 of the World Heritage Convention considers as 
natural heritage: natural features consisting of physical 
and biological formations or groups of such formations, 
which are of outstanding universal value from the 
aesthetic or scientific point of view; geological or 
physiographical formations and precisely delineated 
areas which constitute the habitat of threatened species 
of animals and plants of outstanding universal value 
from the point of view of science or conservation; and 
natural sites or precisely delineated areas of outstanding 
universal value from the point of view of science, 
conservation or natural beauty. Criteria for inclusion in 
the list are published by Unesco. 



Protected Areas of the World 



The following States Party to the Convention lie at least 
partially within the regions covered by this volume: 

Antigua and Barbuda 

Argentina 

Belize 

Bolivia 

Brazil 

Canada 

Chile 

Colombia 

Costa Rica 

Cuba 

Denmark 

(Greenland) 
Dominican Republic 
Ecuador 
El Salvador 
France 

(Guadeloupe) 

(French Guiana) 

(Martinique) 

(St Pierre & Miquelon) 
Guatemala 
Guyana 
Haiti 
Honduras 
Jamaica 
Mexico 
Nicaragua 
Panama 
Paraguay 
Peru 

St Kitts and Nevis 
St Lucia 
United Kingdom 

(Anguilla) 

(Bermuda) 

(British Virgin Islands) 

(Cayman Islands) 

(Montserrat) 

(Turks and Caicos) 
United States of America 

(Puerto Rico) 

(Navassa Island) 

(Virgin Islands) 
Venezuela 

The following natural World Heritage sites lie within the 
regions covered by this volume: 

Argentina 

Iguazu National Park 

Los Glaciaies National Park 

Brazil 

Iguacu National Park 

Canada 

Canadian Rocky Mountain Parks 
Dinosaur Provincial Park 
Gros Mome National Park 



Kluane-Wrangell/St EUas (with USA) 
Nahanni National Park 
Wood Buffalo National park 

Costa Rica 

Talamanca Range-La Amistad Reserves 

Ecuador 

Galapagos Islands 
Sangay National Park 

Guatemala 

Tikal National Park 

Honduras 
Rio Platano 

Mexico 

Sian Ka'an Biosphere Reserve 

Panama 

Darien National Park 

La Amistad International Park 

Peru 

Huascaran National Park 

Manu National Park 

Rio Abiseo National Park 

Sanctuario Historico de Macchu Picchu 

United States of America 
Everglades National Park 
Grand Canyon National Park 
Great Smoky Mountains National Park 
(Hawaii Volcanoes National Park) 
Kluane-Wrangell/St Elias National Park (with 
Canada) 

Mammoth Cave National Park 
Olympic National Park 
Redwood National park 
Yellowstone National Park 
Yosemite National Park 

Ramsar Sites 

The Convention on Wetlands of International 
Importance Especially as Waterfowl Habitat was signed 
in Ramsar (Iran) in 1971, and also came into force in 
December 1975. This Convention provides a 
framework for international cooperation for the 
conservation of wetiand habitats. The Convention 
places general obligations on contracting party states 
relating to the conservation of wetiands throughout their 
territory, witii special obligations pertaining to those 
wetlands which have been designated to the "List of 
Wetlands of International Importance". 

Each State Party is obliged to list at least one site. 
Wetlands are defined by the convention as: areas of 
marsh, fen, peatland or water, whether natural or 
artificial, permanent or temporary, with water that is 
static or flowing, fresh, brackish or salt, including areas 



Information management 



of marine waters, the depth of which at low tide does not 
exceed six metres. 

The following States Party to the Convention lie at least 
partially within the regions covered by this volume: 

Argentina 

Bolivia 

Canada 

Chile 

Costa Rica 

Denmark 

(Greenland) 
Ecuador 
France 

(Guadeloupe) 

(French Guiana) 

(Martinique) 

(St Pierre & Miquelon) 
Guatemala 
Mexico 
Netherlands 

(Aruba) 

(Netherlands Antilles) 
Panama 
Peru 
Suriname 
United Kingdom 

(Anguilla) 

(Bermuda) 

(British Virgin Islands) 

(Cayman Islands) 

(Montserrat) 

(Turks and Caicos) 
United States of America 

(Puerto Rico) 

(Navassa Island) 

(Virgin Islands) 
Uruguay 
Venezuela 

The following wetlands which lie within the region have 
been included in the List of Wetlands of International 
Importance: 

Argentina 

Laguna de Pozuelos 
Laguna Blanca 
Rio Klcomayo 

Bolivia 

Laguna Colorada 

Canada 
Alaksen 

Bale de I'lle Verte 
BeaverhiU Lake 
Cap Tourmente 
Chignecto 
Delta Marsh 
Dewey Soper 



Grand Codroy Estuary 

Hay-Zama Lakes 

Lac Saint-Francois 

Last Mountain Lake (northern part) 

Long Point 

Malpeque Bay 

Mary's Point 

McConnell River 

Musquodoboit Harbour Outer Estuary 

Oak-Hammock Marsh 

Old Crow Flats 

Peace-Athabasca Delta 

Point Pelee 

Polar Bear Provincial Park 

Polar Bear Pass 

Queen Maud Gulf 

Quill Lakes 

Rasmussen Lowlands 

Shepody Bay 

Southern James Bay Sanctuaries 

Southern Bight-Minas Basin 

St Clair 

Whooping Crane Summer Range 

Chile 

Carlos Anwandter Sanctuary 

Costa Rica 
Cailo Negro 
Palo Verde 

Denmark - Greenland 
Aqajarua-SuUorsuag 
Eqalummiut Nunaat-Nassuttuup Nunaa 
Hochstetter Forland 
Ddcatoq 
Kilen 

Kitsissunnguit 
Kuannersuit Kuussuat 
Natemaq 

Qinguata Marraa-Kuussuaq 
Ydre Kitsissut 

Ecuador 
MachaUlla 
Manglares-Churute 

Guatemala 

Laguna del Tigre 

Mexico 

Ria Lagartos, Yucatin 

Netherlands Antilles 
De Slagbaai 
Het Gotomeer 
HetLac 
Het Pekelmeer 
Het Spaans Lagoen 
Klein Bonaire Island and adjacent sea 



Protected Areas of the World 



Panama 

Golfo de Montijo 

Peru 

Reserva Nacional de Paracas 
Reserva Nacional Pacaya-Samiria 
Santuario Nacional Lagunas de Mejia 

Suriname 

Coppename Rivermouth 

United Kingdom 
(Turks and Caicos) 
North, Middle & East Caicos Islands 

Uruguay 

Bafiados del Este y Franja Costera 

Venezuela 
Cuare 

Biosphere Reserves 

The designation of biosphere reserves differs somewhat 
from that of either of the previous designations in that it 
is not made under a specific convention, but as part of an 
international scientific programme, the Unesco Man and 
the Biosphere Programme. The objectives of a network 
of biosphere reserves, and the characteristics which 
biosphere reserves might display, are identified in 
various documents, including the Action Plan for 
Biosphere Reserves (Unesco, 1984). 

Biosphere reserves differ from World Heritage and 
Ramsar sites in that they are designated not exclusively 
for protection of unique areas or significant wetlands, but 
for a range of objectives which include research, 
monitoring, training and demonstration, as well as 
conservation. In most cases the human component is 
vital to the functioning of the biosphere reserve, 
something which is not always true for either World 
Heritage or Ramsar sites. 

The following biosphere reserves are located within the 
region: 

Argentirui 

Parque Coslero del Sur 

Reserva de la Biosfera de Pozuelos 

Reserva Ecol6gica de Nacuft^ 

Reserva de la Biosfera San Guillermo 

Reserva Natural de Vida Silvestre Laguna Blanca 

Bolivia 

Estaci6n Biol6gica Beni 
Parque Nacional Pil6n-Lajas 
Reserva Nacional de Fauna Ulla Ulla 

Brazil 

Tijuca-Tingua-Orgaos 

Vale do Ribeira-Serra do Graciosa 



Caruida 

Long Point Biosphere Reserve 

MontStHilaire 

Niagara Escarpment Biosphere Reserve 

Reserve de la biosphere de Charlevoix 

Riding Mountain Biosphere Reserve 

Waterton Lakes National Park 

Chile 

Parque Nacional Lauca 

Parque Nacional Fray Jorge 

Parque Nacional Laguna San Rafael 

Parque Nacional Torres del Paine 

Parque Nacional Juan Femtodez 

Reserva de la Biosfera La Campana-Pefluelas 

Reserva de la Biosfera Araucarias 

Colombia 

Cinturdn Andino Cluster Biosphere Reserve 
El Tuparro Nature Reserve 
Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta 
(inc. Tayrona NP) 

Costa Rica 

Cordillera Volcdnica Central 
Reserva de la Biosfera de la Amistad 

Cuba 

Baconao 

Cuchillas del Toa 
Peninsula de Guanahacabibes 
Sierra del Rosario 

Denmark - Greenland 

North-east Greenland National Park 

Ecuador 

Archipidlago de Col6n (Galapagos) 
Reserva de la Biosfera de Yasuni 

Guatemala 
Maya 

Honduras 

Rio Platano Biosphere Reserve 

Mexico 

Montes Azules 

Reserva de la Biosfera Sierra de Manantl^ 

Reserva de la Biosfera de Sian Ka'an 

Reserva de Mapimi 

Reserva de la Michilia 

Reserva de la Biosfera "El Cielo" 

Panama 

Parque Nacional Fronterizo Dari6n 

Peru 

Reserva de Huascardn 
Reserva del Manu 
Reserva del Noroeste 



XVIU 



Information management 



United States of America 

Aleutian Islands National Wildlife Refuge 

Beaver Creek Experimental Watershed 

Big Bend National Park 

Big Thicket National Preserve 

California Coast Ranges Biosphere Reserve 

Carolinian-South Atlantic Biopshere Reserve 

Cascade Head Experimental Forest 

Central California Coast Biosphere Reserve 

Central Gulf Coastal Plain Biosphere Reserve 

Central Plains Experimental Range (CPER) 

Champlain-Adirondak Biosphere Reserve 

Channel Islands Biosphere Reserve 

Coram Experimental Forest (incl. Coram NA) 

Denali National Park and Biosphere Reserve 

Desert Experimental Range 

Everglades National Park 

(incl. Fl Jefferson NM) 

Fraser Experimental Forest 

Glacier Bay-Admiralty Is. Biosphere Reserve 

Glacier National Park 

Guanica Commonwealth Forest Reserve 

H J. Andrews Experimental Forest 

(Hawaii Islands Biosphere Reserve) 

Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest 

Isle Royale National Park 

Jornada Experimental Range 

Konza Prairie Research Natural Area 

Land between The Lakes 

Mammoth Cave Area 



Mojave and Colorado Deserts Biosphere Reserve 

New Jersey Pinelands Biosphere Reserve 

Niwot Ridge Biosphere Reserve 

Noatak National Arctic Range 

Olympic National Park 

Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument 

Rocky Mountain National Park 

San Dimas Experimental Forest 

San Joaquin Experimental Range 

Scenic Research Area 

Sequoia-Kings Canyon National Parks 

South Atlantic Coastal Plain BR 

Southern Appalachian Biosphere Reserve 

Stanislaus-Tuolumne Experimental Forest 

The Virginia Coast Reserve 

The University of Michigan Biological Station 

Three Sisters Wilderness 

Yellowstone National Park 

Puerto Rico - USA 

Guanica Commonwealth Forest Reserve 
Luquillo Experimental Forest (Caribbean NF) 

Uruguay 

Banados del Este 

Virgin Islands - USA 

Virgin Islands National Park & Biosphere Reserve 



Protected Areas of the World 



WESTERN HEMISPHERE CONVENTION 



Title: Convention On Nature Protection and 
Wildlife Preservation in The Western 
Hemisphere 

Date: 12 October 1940 

Brief description: 

The governments of the American Republics wish to 
protect and conserve in their natural habitat 
representatives of all species of native flora and 
fauna, including migratory birds, in sufficient 
numbers and over areas extensive enough to prevent 
them from becoming extinct through man's 
intervention. Protection will also be given to 
outstanding scenery and specific regions or objects 
of importance. To these means, the Convention 
provides the following conservation measures which 
the governments of the American Republic agree to 
put into effect. 

Designations: 

National park An area set aside for the protection 
and preservation of exceptional scenery, flora and 
fauna of national significance for die benefit of the 
general public. 

Access by the general public is allowed under official 
regulations and supervision as park is placed under 
public control. Facilities will be provided for public 
recreation and education 

Park boundaries are not be altered. Commercial 
exploitation of resources within the area is 
prohibited. The hunting and capture of fauna and the 
destruction and collection of flora are also 
prohibited, except by officially authorised scientific 
investigations or under the direction of the park 
authorities. 

National reserve An area under government control, 
established for the conservation and utilization of 
natural resources 

Plant and animal life will be protected as far as 
possible while complying widi Ihe objectives of the 
designation 

Nature monument An area, object or living species 
of flora and fauna of aesthetic, historic or scientific 
interest to be given total protection. The area or 
object is set aside, or the species named, as inviolable 

The only activites permitted are government 
inspections or scientific research by officially 
authorized personnel. 



Strict wilderness reserve An area under public 
control characterised by the presence of primitive 
conditions of flora, fauna and habitation, where there 
is no provision for the passage of motorised vehicles. 
All commercial developments and exploitation are 
prohibited. 

Protection will remain inviolate as far as practicable. 
The only activities permitted are government 
inspections consistent wiUi the purpose for which the 
area was established or officially authorised 
scientific investigations. 

Migratory bird species Those species of birds in 
which aU or some of its members may cross the 
boundaries between American countries at any 
season. Some species are named as examples: 
Charadriidae, Scolopacidae, Caprimulgidae, 
Hirundindae 

Suitable measures shall be taken to provide 
protection for migratory birds 

A list of plant and animal species in urgent need of 
protection is provided in the Annex to the 
Convention. Hunting, capture or collection of these 
species shall be permitted only under official 
authorisation and subject to strict regulation. The 
contracting governments shall take suitable 
measures to regulate the import and export of flora 
and fauna. 

The contracting governments will endeavour to 
establish areas in their territories under the 
designations described above, as soon as possible 
following the signing of the Convention. If 
establishment of such areas is not feasible 
immediately areas, objects or species shall be 
selected for later designation. The contracting 
governments agree to cooperate among themselves 
in promoting Uie objectives of the Convention and 
will provide and receive assistance for scientific 
research to increase the effectiveness of the 
provisions of the Convention. 

Establishment of protected areas shall be reported to 
the Pan American Union which will notify the 
contracting governments of any information from 
national or international scientific or other sources, 
relevant to the purposes of die Convention. The 
Convention remains open for signature by other 
American governments at any time. 

Source: Lyster, S. (1985). International Wildlife 
Law. Grotius Publications Ltd. 470 pp. 



XX 



Information management 



^ 




ou 



Q. 
fiO c 

£ o 
■n -3 

a = 



o o 
U U 






3 T) 



o 

.a « 



3 'C 



n H 



Internationally Designated Sites - World Heritage Sites 



Protected Areas of the World 



o 
1-1 o 

o 



I 




& 


u 






















s 




i 


€ 


fi 


4> 








* 


* 


S^ 


s 


s? 


£i 


•fi 


•R 


J; 


c 


c 

O 


1 


U 


U 


CO 




sss;s5s 


• 



Internationally Designated Sites - Biosphere Reserves 



Information management 



M 



I 




o U 

if 



dt 



■S c 
"2 '' 

c W 
■3 -O 

si 

6t 



J s 

li 
I! 

^ E 

.= u 



D □ 



Internationally Designated Sites - Ramsar (Wetlands) Convention 



CANADA 



Area 9,916,140 sq. km 

Population 26.5 tniUion (1990) (Hunter, 1991) 
Natural increase: 0.77% (1990) 

Economic Indicators 

GDP: US$ 16,200 per capita (1987) 
GNP: US$ 15,080 per capita (1987) 

Policy and Legislation Canada, with all its 
dependencies, was formally ceded from Great Britain in 
1 763 , although the various colonies were not united until 
the Act of the Imperial ParUament, the British North 
America Act, 1867. The Act provided that the 
constitution of the Dominion of Canada should be 
"similar in principle to that of the United Kingdom". In 
November 1981, a provisional constitution was agreed 
by the Canadian government (Constitutional Act, 1982) 
to replace the Ac t of 1 867 and the proposals were enacted 
by the United Kingdom Parliament as the Canada Act, 
1982. This Act gave to Canada the power to amend its 
own constitution, although executive authority 
continues to be invested in the Sovereign. The 
Constitutional Act, 1982 strengthened provincial 
ownership of natural resources, and affirmed the existing 
rights of native peoples. Legislative authority is vested 
in the federal government and the ten provincial 
governments, with many constitutional powers being 
delegated to the provinces. More than 90% of Canada is 
held as public lands (WWF, 1992). 

Following subsequent revisions to the Constitution, a 
subject of federal/provincial negotiations, it is likely that 
provincial control over natural resources will increase, 
and the recognised rights of native peoples will become 
further entrenched (A. Hackman, C. Stewart and G. 
Francis, pers. comm., 1992). Current proposals 
recognise the inherent right to aboriginal 
self-government as a kind of third order of government 
in the country. 

In Northern Canada (north of 60), land claim settlements 
between the federal government and aboriginal peoples 
are at various stages of completion. The 1984 Inuvialuit 
Final Agreement covering the western Arctic, the 1991 
Agreement-in-Principal to establish Nunavut, an Inuit 
governed region for the whole of the Eastern Arctic, and 
a 1990 agreement reached with the Council of Yukon 
Indians (and subsequently ratified by the various groups 
in 1991) are major developments in governance for the 
Territories, traditionally administered by federal 
authorities. Further, negotiations are still continuing 
with, and among the Dene and Metis groups in the 
Mackenzie Valley region. These agreements are 
prerequisites for the mutual recognition and 
management of protected areas in these Territories 
(G . Francis, pers. comm., 1992). Further, initiatives such 
as the Arctic Marine Conservation Strategy, the Inuit 
Regional Conservation Strategy, and the Task Force on 



Northern Conservation are aimed at improving arctic 
conservation, and giving local communities a larger role 
in making decisions regarding the use of land and 
wildlife (Anon, 1990). Similar issues and problems with 
native land claims exist and are being addressed in most 
of the western provinces (C. Stewart, pers. comm., 
1992). 

The first national parks were established on federal 
Crown land in the west, prior to the transfer of resources 
in 1930 which gave the western provinces control of 
Crown land. Thereafter, provincial protected areas were 
also established. In the east, where provinces had control 
of their natural resoiu'ces, as set out in the British North 
America Act, provincial parks were created, beginning 
around the turn of the century, in addition to the early 
establishment of national parks (Eidsvik, 1989; Kun, 
1981). Today, the major protected area designations are 
ecological reserve, national and provincial park, 
managed wildlife area, cultural heritage site, 
internationally designated area, and protected landscape. 

Federal policy and legislation Canada has a Federal 
Policy on Land Use, 1980 which is designed to guide 
federal fwlicies and programmes as they affect land use, 
and to guide the management of federal lands. 
Statements within the PoUcy support the setting aside of 
protected areas and protection of significant values of 
lands, including fragile and critical habitats and natural 
heritage. Canada's Federal Policy on Wetland 
Conservation, 1991 promotes wetland conservation on 
government lands using a number of strategies, 
including the development of a system of protected 
wetlands of national significance. Both of these federal 
policies work primarily through existing programmes 
and regulatory and decision-making mechanisms to 
advance wise land use and wetland conservation within 
the context of efficient delivery of federal services 
(Government of Canada, 1991; E. Zurbrigg, pers. 
comm., 1992). 

In 1 986, the Minister of Environment approved Canada' s 
first National Marine Parks Policy. The main goal of this 
policy is to protect and conserve representative examples 
of marine environments for the benefit, education and 
enjoyment of present and future generations. 

In 1 990, the Canadian WildUfe Service (CWS) published 
"A Wildlife Policy for Canada on behalf of the Wildlife 
Ministers" Council of Canada. This national policy, 
which emphasises ecosystems and biodiversity, 
provides a framework for federal, provincial, territorial, 
and non-governmental pohcies and programmes that 
affect wildlife. Included in the policy is reference to 
protection of habitats and ecosystems through 
comprehensive systems of protected areas and other 
supportive approaches. There also exists a 1990 
Canadian Parks Service policy related to protected areas 



Protected Areas of the World 



and the built heritage. A proposed revision of this 
document is currently in discussion form (C. Stewart, 
pers. comm., 1992). 

Relevant federal laws covering the whole of Canada 
include the National Parks Act, 1930 (amended to 1988); 
the Canada Wildlife Act, 1973; Fisheries Act; 
Endangered Species Act, 1989; and the Migratory Birds 
Convention Act, 1917 (amended to 1982)(see Annex). 
A Wild Animal and Plant Protection Act is currently 
(1992) before the federal parliament, and it has been 
recommended that a "federal" Ecological Reserves Act 
be passed. Currently, ecological reserves fall under 
provincial acts. 

The National Parks Act, as amended in 1974 and 1988, 
provides for the establishment of national parks and 
national historic parks throughout Canada on Crown 
land; the designation of ecological integrity as a prime 
mandate; mandatory management plan reviews; and 
increased protection for protected areas (see Annex)(C. 
Stewart, pers. comm., 1992). When support for the 
establishment of a new national park is demonstrated, a 
federal-provincial agreement sets out the terms and 
conditions for the transfer of land to the federal 
government (Finkelstein, 1992; Kun, 1981). An 
Order-in-Council reserves a park area, but the National 
Parks Act must be amended to officially create a national 
park. Where there are unresolved land claims, a national 
park reserve may be estabUshed. In these areas, the 
National Parks Act and Regulations apply, but 
traditional hunting, fishing and trapping may continue, 
and final boundaries remain open to negotiation. 
Auyuittuq and Pacific Rim are two examples of national 
park reserves in the country. The Canada Wildlife Act, 
1973 provides for the estabUshment of national wildlife 
areas through Order-in-Council (see Annex). The 
Migratory Birds Convention Act, 1917 provides for the 
designation of migratory bird sanctuaries. The federal 
government does not always own such areas; they can 
be designated by Order-in-Council on private lands with 
the consent of the landowner (see Annex). 

Marine protected areas may be established under the 
National Parks Act, and under some provincial 
ecological reserve and park acts. For example, marine 
provincial parks may be created under the Parks Act of 
British Columbia. 

Traditionally, the federal government has been 
responsible for the administration, management and 
control of most land in the Yukon and Northwest 
Territories, in a manner similar to that of the provinces. 
The Department of Indian Affairs and Northern 
Development Act is the basis of jurisdiction and land use 
control in both the Yukon and Northwest Territories 
through the Teiritorial Lands Act Under this Act, land 
can be protected by simple withdrawal, although the Act 
only appUes to Lands under the control, management and 
administration of the Minister. Neither the Land Use 
Regulations nor the Territorial Lands Act provides any 



entrenchment for reserves or guidance to reserve 
administrators (Taschereau, 1985). 

Since the mid-1980s, major land claim settlements (and 
proposed settlements), and an evolution towards local 
government, have moved management of the teiritories 
away from the federal government For example, Yukon 
now has a comprehensive territorial park proposal, based 
on territorial, not federal legislation (C. Stewart, pers. 
comm., 1992). 

Provincial policy and legislation Most provinces 
have policies in connection with wildUfe conservation 
and protected areas, and at least six provinces have 
reworked their provincial park policies since the 
mid-1980s (C. Stewart, pers. comm., 1992). For 
example, in 1988, Ontario announced its new parks 
policy which has served to increase protection for 
wilderness and nature reserve parks, and has allowed for 
new parks to be added to the provincial system. This 
policy has recently been complimented by the release in 
1991 of a wildlife strategy for Ontario, the goal of which 
is the provision of a diversity of healthy ecosystems and 
associated wildlife populations and habitats that will 
provide sustained social, cultural and economic benefits 
for all people (Ontario Wildlife Working Group, 1991). 
One of the tenets of this strategy is to ensure that Ontario 
has a system of protected areas which adequately 
represents ecosystems, landscapes and their associated 
wildUfe populations. British Columbia, meanwhile, has 
entered into an agreement with Environment Canada to 
produce a provincial State of the Environment report. 
Further, the majority of provinces and territories have 
either completed or are in the process of drafting 
provincial conservation strategies (CSEB, 1987). 

Wetlands are coming under increasing scrutiny in a 
number of provinces. Most provinces have inventoried 
and classified their remaining wedands, and some have 
formulated policies to protect the most valuable 
examples. For example, Ontario adopted a wetlands 
policy in June 1992 which directs municipalities and 
planning authorities to identify and protect provincially 
significant weUands. 

A review of provincial legislation is given by Taschereau 
(1985). Further, key pieces of relevant protected areas 
legislation in each of the provinces are outlined in the 
Annex. Under these statutes, there are up to 75 legally 
defmed designations of protected area, their titles and 
management varying from one province to the other, 
each with assorted meanings in terms of legal 
securement, function and management objectives 
(Turner, et al, 1991). Even when the tide is the same 
between provinces, the defmitions and management may 
be completely contrasting, and range from strict nature 
reserve, multiple-use management area to recreational 
area and cultural site with no natural elements. Some 
legally gazetted titles include provincial park, 
wilderness area, provincial nature reserve, game bird 
sanctuary, and ecological reserve (see Annex). In 
addition, every province and territory in Canada has 



Canada 



historic or heritage sites which serve to protect not only 
cultural but also significant expanses of natural heritage. 
Each piece of legislation defines activities permitted in 
each protected area type, identifies the responsible 
managing authority, and sets out penalties associated 
with offences. 

Existing protected areas legislation is highly variable 
from province to province. It varies in length from 
Saskatchewan's relatively simple two-page Act to 
Establish Ecological Reserves to the more detailed 
15-page Wilderness and Ecological Reserves Act of 
Newfoundland. The legislation contrasts in dedication to 
public use, from the Quebec Act, which specifically 
excludes the public, to the Newfoundland Act, in which 
natural areas are set aside "for the benefit, education and 
enjoyment" of the public. Complementary to ecological 
reserves and other forms of provincial protected areas 
legislation are statutes for the protection of rare and 
endangered species through the protection of their 
habitats or natural ecosystems. For example, the Ontario 
Endangered Species Act recognises this by providing 
that: "no person shall wilfully destroy or interfere with 
the habitat of any species of fauna or flora declared in 
the regulations to be threatened with extinction" 
(Taschereau, 1985). 

Various legislative constraints have been identified by 
Taschereau (1985). Most provinces lack any umbrella 
legislation that would integrate the efforts of different 
agencies involved in natural area protection. However, 
exceptions are Alberta and Newfoundland, where the 
statutes under which ecological reserves are established 
also serve to designate other categories of protected 
natural area such as wilderness reserve. Only two 
provinces, Ontario and Prince Edward Island, are 
without specific ecological reserves legislation, 
although numerous nature reserve zones (ecological 
reserve equivalent) are designated within Ontario 
provincial parks. An ecological reserves act has, 
however, been recenUy proposed for Ontario. Only four 
provinces have passed wilderness legislation: 
Newfoundland, Ontario, Alberta and British Columbia. 
In some provinces, such as British Columbia, there is no 
provision for the acquisition of private land for the 
establishment of protected areas (Taschereau, 1985). 
Federally, one deficiency of the National Parks Act is a 
lack of provision for legislation on wilderness areas, and 
park boundaries are rarely set in federal or provincial 
legislation (C. Stewart, pers. comm., 1992). 

Although complex, the labyrinth of jurisdictions 
(federal, territorial, aboriginal) responsible for the North 
is rapidly evolving. For example, the recent 
Agreement-in-Principal for Nunavut, as well as the 
Western Arctic (Innuvialuit) Claims SetUement Act, 
1984 provides for many new agencies with considerable 
authority over land and resource use (A. Hackman, pers. 
comm., 1992). 

International Activities The Convention concerning 
the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural 



Heritage (World Heritage Convention) was accepted on 
23 July 1976, and six natural sites had been inscribed by 
1991. Canada acceded to the Convention on Wetlands 
of International Importance especially as Waterfowl 
Habitat (Ramsar Convention) on 15 January 1981: one 
site was inscribed on ratification and a further 29 listed 
by 1991. Six sites have been accepted as biosphere 
reserves under the Unesco Man and the Biosphere 
(MAB) Programme. 

The Boundary Waters Treaty was signed by the US A and 
Canada in 1909, leading to the establishment of the 
International Joint Commission, formed in 1912, to 
report on pollution of boundary waters in the Great 
Lakes. Despite such early initiatives, die Great Lakes 
region has developed into one of the world's great 
industrial and population centres, with levels of toxic 
chemical discharge reaching staggering proportions, 
threatening 43 major protected areas including seven 
national and provincial parks and one national marine 
park. It has been estimated that even given the situation 
of zero pollutant emissions into the Lakes, the time taken 
to flush out all polluted water would be in the order of 
500 years for L^e Superior alone (lUCN East European 
Programme, 1989). Recent initiatives aimed at 
addressing this situation include the bringing together of 
at least 180 organisations in Canada and the US A to look 
at the environmental problems of the Great Lakes. This 
coalition, under an international umbrella body called 
Great Lakes United, had a collective membership 
exceeding half a million in 1989. One proposal which is 
currendy being considered is to use the protected areas 
along the Great Lakes as reference areas or monitoring 
sites for assessing the "ecosystem health" of the Lakes, 
and using the biosphere reserve concept as a guide. Lake 
Superior could be the starting point for such work, and 
the establishment of a Great Lakes Heritage Data 
Network (linking databases from the eight states and two 
provinces bordering the Lakes) should enable the 
determination of conservation priorities from a Great 
Lakes-St Lawrence bioregional perspective, and allow 
for the identification of sites which could serve as 
monitors for ecosystem health (G. Francis, pers. comm., 
1992). 

The Migratory Birds Convention between Canada and 
the USA was signed in 1916. The North American 
Waterfowl Management Plan, 1986 is a joint project 
involving Canada, the USA and Mexico, approximately 
200 conservation groups and many corporations in the 
planning of programmes conserving waterfowl and 
wetland habitats. In Canada, the goal is to secure and 
improve the quality of 1.5 million ha of priority 
waterfowl habitat. The Western Hemisphere Shorebird 
Reserve Network is a cooperative programme of 
government and private organisations recognising and 
protecting essential staging areas for migratory 
shorebirds. Two sites have been designated in Eastern 
Canada, and have been twinned with sites in Suriname, 
South America (Government of Canada, 1991; E. 
Zurbrigg, pers. comm., 1992). 



Protected Areas of the World 



Glacier National Park in Montana and Waterton 
National Park in Alberta, Canada, were combined in 
1932 to form the first international peace park in the 
world. Further opportunities for similar initiatives exist 
between the Yukon and Alaska, British Columbia and 
Alaska, and New Brunswick and Maine. 

Administration and Management Currently, there 
are over 120 different government and private 
programmes involved in acquiring and managing lands 
for conservation. Five bodies, including two agencies 
from Environment Canada, and the provinces of Quebec, 
Ontario and British Columbia, are responsible for about 
80% of the total area protected. Combined, these 
agencies do, however, control 73% of the land mass (C. 
Stewart, pers. comm., 1992). 

Federal administration and management A central 
administration for national parks was created in 1911, 
thereby enabling Canada to become the first country in 
the world to have a national parks service (Hummel, 
1989). Today, responsibility for the National Parks Act 
is vested in the federal Department of the Environment 
(Environment Canada), and is undertaken by the 
Canadian Parks Service (CPS), formerly Parks Canada 
(and previously the National and Historic Parks Branch). 
The CPS is headed by an Assistant Deputy Minister. The 
Parks head office is responsible for policy direction and 
new park establishment, while five regional offices 
direct the planning and operations across the country. 
The oldest of the world's modern protected area 
agencies, CPS is responsible for both the cultural and the 
natural heritage of the nation at federal level. CPS has 
3,500 staff and is responsible for 18,054,900ha, with 
jurisdiction for 24.4% of all protected areas (R. Maslin, 
pers. comm., 1992). CPS intends to undergo major 
growth over the coming decade, as the systems plan is 
developed and implemented (Taschereau, 1985; Waugh 
and Perez Gil, 1992). 

ResponsibiUty for the Canada Wildlife Act and the 
Migratory Birds Convention Act rests with the Canadian 
WildUfe Service (CWS) of Environment Canada, which 
has 323 staff nationally. Under these two acts, 
respectively, the CWS establishes national wildlife areas 
(of which there are 45 in Canada), and migratory bird 
sanctuaries (total of 101). Overall, CWS has 
responsibiUty for more than 11.4 million ha of protected 
areas, which is 15.5% of the total protected area. 

The CWS administers the implementation in Canada of 
the North American Waterfowl Management Plan 
(NAWMP) (see International Acuvities). The NAWMP 
offers long-term protection to lands through acquisition 
or lease. Significant contributions to the conservation of 
wetlands/waterfowl habitat are being made through 
habitat joint ventures, involving governments, 
non-government organisations (NGOs), the private 
sector and landowners. 

As well as national wildUfe areas, the CWS jointly 
acquires and manages lands with the provinces, called 



cooperative wildhfe areas. Each wildlife area is managed 
individually for the purpose of preserving or increasing 
its value to wildlife. The CWS also promotes the 
interests of wildlife habitat conservation by providing a 
secretariat for the Canadian Council on Ecological 
Areas, and is responsible for leading the 
implementation of the Federal Policy on Wetlands 
Conservation (E. Zurbrigg, pers. comm., 1992). In 
1991, the combined annual expenditure of CPS and 
the CWS totalled US$ 282,992,000 (Waugh and Perez 
Gil, 1992). 

Other agencies concerned with protected areas include 
Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (DIAND), owning 
439,093ha for strict nature conservation. It is the only 
government department to have undertaken 
comprehensive conservation planning in the northern 
region. The Northern Land Use Planning Program was, 
however, abolished in 1992 (A. Hackman, pers. comm., 
1992). 

The Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) has the 
primary mandate for marine mammals, and has 
jurisdiction over their marine habitat Further, the DFO 
administers the Fisheries Act (Anon, 1990). 
Responsibility for the Canadian Heritage Rivers System 
(CHRS) lies with the Canadian Heritage Rivers Board, 
based in the offices of the CPS. 

A national database on protected areas was created 
through the cooperation of several agencies, including 
CPS, CWS, and the State of the Environment Reporting 
Organization (SOER), all of Environment Canada, and 
the Canadian Council on Ecological Areas (CCEA) 
(Rubec et al., 1990). The database, the National 
Conservation Areas Data Base (NCADB), has also 
received advice from WWF (Canada) and from many 
provincial and territorial agencies. Information has been 
amassed on 2,945 parks, ecological reserves, and other 
categories of conserved or heritage areas, and is the most 
comprehensive data set of protected areas in Canada 
(vahd to 1990). SOER is currently in the process of 
working with other agencies to develop a 
commonly-accepted database on protected areas, and 
will include those sites managed by NGOs. NCADB will 
be the nucleus of this system (Turner, pers. comm., 
1991). Project WILD (Wilderness is the Last Dream) of 
the Western Canada Wilderness Committee, is an 
initiative to map all remaining wild areas, both nationally 
and internationally (I. Parfitt, pers. comm., 1992). 

The Federal Provincial/Territorial Parks Council 
includes representation from each of the thirteen senior 
governments in the country, and coordinates information 
exchange activities between the national, provincial and 
territorial park agencies. Further, a classification system 
has been devised for the over 2,000 parks listed by the 
Council. This classification system is separate from, but 
overlaps considerably with the National Conservation 
Areas Data Base (A.M. Turner, pers. comm., 1992). 



Canada 



The Canadian Council on Ecological Areas (CCEA) is 
an incorporated, nonprofit, independent national forum 
established in 1982 to encourage the selection, 
protection and stewardship of a comprehensive system 
of ecological areas. These areas are developed on the 
basis of representation and integrity, and are managed 
to the highest standard of ecological protection 
(CCEA, 1992). The CCEA, whose collective goal is the 
achievement of a nationwide network of ecological 
areas, is currently exploring ways to assess the extent to 
which the different ecoregions in Canada are represented 
by existing protected areas, to provide guidelines for the 
planning, management and research into ecological 
reserves, is looking into issues associated with marine 
protected areas, and recently completed a 
comprehensive document, the National Registry of 
Ecological Areas in Canada (Francis, 1991; Gray and 
Rubec, 1989). The CCEA is the successor to the earlier 
International Biological Programme (IBP-CT) in 
Canada. It draws its membership from federal, 
provincial and territorial governments, NGOs, 
universities and private citizens. 

Provincial administration and management 

Administration and management of areas designated 
under provincial legislation comes under the jurisdiction 
of the provincial governments themselves. CurrenUy, the 
various provincial/territorial protected area 
administrations comprise the following: 

Alberta Department of Tourism, Parks and Recreation, 
Ministry of Tourism, Parks and Recreation; Natural and 
Protected Areas Branch, Department of Forestry, Lands 
and Wildlife, Ministry of Forestry, Lands and Wildlife; 
Department of Culture and Multiculturalism; 

British Columbia BC Parks, Ministry of Environment, 
Lands and Parks (formally Environment and Parks); 
Department of Forests, Ministry of Forests; 

Manitoba Parks and Natural Areas Branch, Manitoba 
Natural Resources, Ministry of Natural Resources; 

New Brunswick Department of Recreation and 
Environment, Ministry of Natural Resources and 
Energy; 

Newfoundland and Labrador Parks Division, 
Department of Tourism and Culture; 

Northwest Territories Department of Economic 
Development and Toiu^ism, Ministry of Economic 
Development and Tourism; Department of Renewable 
Resources, Ministry of Renewable Resources; 

Nova Scotia Parks and Recreation Division, 
Department of Natural Resources (formerly Lands and 
Forests), Ministry of Natural Resources; Department of 
Education, Ministry of Education; 

Ontario Provincial Parks and Natural Heritage Policy 
Branch, Ministry of Natural Resources; 



Quebec Direction generale des pares et des territoires 
fauniques, Ministere Loisir, Chasse et Peche; Direction 
gendrale de la conservation et du patrimoine 6cologique, 
Ministere de I'Environnement; 

Prince Eklward Island Parks Division, Department of 
Tourism , Parks and Recreation (formerly Transportation 
and Public Works), Ministry of Tourism, Parks and 
Recreation; Department of Conservation and Planning, 
Ministry of Environment; 

Saskatchewan Parks Branch, Department of Natural 
Resources (formerly Parks, Recreation and Culture), 
Ministry of Saskatchewan Natural Resources; and 

Yukon Territories Parks and Outdoor Recreation 
Branch, Department of Renewable Resources, Ministry 
of Renewable Resources (A. Hackman, pers. comm., 
1992). 

Further, nature reserves are managed by the Island 
Nature Trust in cooperation with the provincial 
government in Prince Edward Island (C.D.A. Rubec, 
pers. comm., 1992; A.M. Turner, pers. comm., 1992). 
Below the provincial level, the management of protected 
areas becomes complex in a number of provinces. In 
Ontario, for example, there are 38 Conservation 
Authorities which own more than 1 55 ,(X)Oha of land and 
water, and administer a total of 303 conservation areas 
(Taschereau, 1985). In addition, advisory/wildlife 
committees have been provided for in most provincial 
legislation throughout the country. These committees 
make recommendations regarding the establishment of 
protected areas in the respective provinces and 
regulations for their management and use. 

A breakdown of provincial ownership of protected areas 
includes: Quebec which is responsible for 16.0 million 
ha (21.7%); Ontario with 7.47 million ha (10.1%); 
British Columbia, 5.81 million ha (8.0%); Manitoba, 
4.6 million ha (6.2%); Saskatchewan, 0.97 million ha 
(1.3%); Alberta, 0.80 million ha (1.1%); 
Newfoundland, 0.51 million ha (%); New Brunswick, 
0.34 million ha; Nova Scotia, 0.15 million ha; Prince 
Edward Island, 0.027 million ha; Northwest 
Territories, 3.1 million ha; and the Yukon, 0.90 million 
ha (Turner, etal., I99I; C. Stewart, pers. comm., 1992). 
In some cases, these figures include protected areas 
managed jointiy by various governments, for example, 
in both the Northwest Territories and the Yukon. Other 
estimates of provincial ownership include: Ontario with 
6.3 milUon ha (6% of total provincial area) contained 
within 261 provincial parks; Prince Edward Island with 
6,000ha; New Brunswick with .023 million ha; Quebec 
with 0.5 million ha; British Columbia with 4.6 to 
5.8 million ha; Alberta with around 0.7 million ha; 
Saskatchewan with 1.4 to 2.8 million ha; Manitoba with 
.06 to 6.6 million ha; and Nova Scotia with .005 to .16 
million ha. These estimates vary depending on the 
definition of a protected area (MNR, 1992b; C. Stewart, 
pers. comm., 1992). 



Protected Areas of the World 



Non-govemment involvement in protected areas is of 
great significance. Currently, there are about 200 
conservation groups, many of which are significant 
protected area landowners (Finkelstein, 1992). In the 
early 1990s, Ducks Unlimited (DU) was responsible for 
3 .9% of the total protected area coverage in Canada, with 
an estimated 2.9 million ha. The Nature Conservancy of 
Canada was responsible for 424 nature preserves 
protecting over 32,400ha, Wildlife Habitat Canada for 
over 1 5,000ha, the Nature Trust of British Columbia for 
ll,583ha, the Saskatchewan Wildlife Federation for 
9,300 ha, the Manitoba Wildhfe Federation for 8,000ha 
and the Federation of Ontario Naturalists for 530ha 
(Hilts, 1989; Turner, et at., 1991; D. Thompson, pers. 
comm., 1992). Currently , data is being compiled for over 
40 NGOs responsible for some 10,000 sites across the 
country (A.M. Turner, pers. comm, 1992). 



priorities, and the organisation publishes the newsletter 
The Ark twice yearly. 

In 1988, the Nature Conservancy of Canada and The 
Nature Conservancy (TNC US) formed a partnership for 
the introduction of Conservation Data Centres in 
Canada, using the software design and protocols for the 
databases developed by TNC for each of the states in the 
US (Taschereau, 1985; D. Thompson and G. Francis, 
pers. comm., 1992). Conservation Data Centres have 
now been established in Quebec, Saskatchewan and 
British Columbia, while discussions are at the contract 
stage in Ontario. These databases offer many 
advantages, including data exchange capabilities, and 
the provision of information on the status and 
distribution of rare and endangered species, natural 
communities, and other special ecological features. 



The Nature Conservancy of Canada (NCC) is a private, 
non-profit organisation established in 1961, which is 
dedicated to preserving biological diversity through the 
protection of wildlife habitat, natural communities and 
ecosystems. The NCC has an independent board of 
trustees drawn from conservation-minded business and 
professional j)eople and scientists, many of whom have 
been associated with other conservation organisations. It 
is funded by individuals, corporations, and foundation 
donations, and is the only national organisation 
dedicated to buying and preserving the best of Canada's 
natural land (NCC, 1991). 



A long-term goal of the NCC has been to secure some 
form of protection for current priority sites (some of 
which may also have been identified during the 
International Biological Programme (iBP)) representing 
samples of significant ecosystems. Toward this end, the 
Conservancy is providing funds and legal assistance to 
help evaluate and purchase important sites identified on 
private land. The NCC maintains a short list of priority 
sites for each province, compiled in consultation with 
ecological reserves and provincial parks staff, 
academics, and others. Sites on Crown lands are not 
included because governments alone can presumably 
decide on their fate. Sites on the list are either entirely 
privately owned (often by many individual owners), or 
have a substantial component of private ownership. The 
NCC can often move reasonably quickly to purchase 
properties when they become available on the market 
(G. Francis, pers. comm., 1992). Traditionally, the 
Conservancy's principal operating technique has been 
direct or indirect outright land acquisition with 
subsequent transfer of sites to public ownership for 
maintenance and preservation as a part of Canada's 
natural heritage (in the form of nature preserves, parks, 
conservation areas and ecological reserves). In recent 
times, however, the Conservancy has itself acquired, 
maintained and operated a number of specific sites, and 
increasingly, land is being donated to the NCC (NCC, 
1991; C. Stewart, pers. comm., 1992). Conservation of 
Canada's great swamps is currently one of NCC's top 



Wildlife Habitat Canada plays a similar role to that of 
the Nature Conservancy of Canada, although it 
emphasises direct private-stewardship programmes 
rather than acquisition projects (Hummel, 1989). These 
programmes arrange some form of protective 
conservation agreement with landowners, while leaving 
the natural habitat itself in private ownership. 

The Canadian Nature Federation (CNF) is a national, 
non-profit organisation representing provincial 
naturalists' federations, local societies and individuals. 
Evolving out of the Canadian Audubon Society in 1 97 1 , 
it speaks for approximately 20,000 members through its 
Ottawa office and executive representatives across the 
country. 

The Federation has long been concerned with the 
establishment of national and provincial parks and 
ecological reserves, and their long-term management Its 
national magazine. Nature Canada, has successfully 
drawn national attention over the years to the need to 
preserve such critical areas as South Moresby 
WUdemess Archipelago, Grasslands National Park, the 
muskoxen of Banks Island, and the north slope of the 
Yukon, home to one of the world's largest caribou herds. 
Federation priorities for parks and protected areas are set 
through its Environmental Advisory Committee. The 
Federation is currently woricing to accelerate action by 
the federal government to complete the national parks 
system by the year 2000, and the national marine parks 
system by 2010. CNF is also promoting government 
action to expand its national wildlife areas and migratory 
bird sanctuaries. Its particular focus is on the need to 
establish new national parks in the Northwest 
Territories, British Columbia and Quebec. It is also 
involved in an international campaign to protect the 
Tatshenshini-AIsek Rivers in north-western British 
Columbia. The Federation is working to promote an 
ecosystem management approach through revisions to 
the government's national parks policy, and in specific 
parks such as Wood Buffalo, Pacific Rim, Fundy and 
Pukaskwa (K. McNamee, pers. comm., 1992). 



Canada 



The Canadian Institute of Forestry has established a 
Natural Areas Committee. In 1972, the Committee set 
forth a policy for selection, protection and management 
of natural areas. It recommended that representative 
examples of significant forest types across the country 
be protected in a network of reserves. These reserves 
would serve for non-destructive observational research, 
and would help to conserve the genetic stock of 
commercially valuable forest trees and their related 
vegetation and animals. The Committee serves only in 
an advisory capacity, but has greatly assisted the 
movement to establish ecological reserves. The 
Committee maintains a registry of forested natural areas 
which are legally protected and advocates the 
development of a national system of reserves 
(Taschereau, 1985). 

The Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society (CPAWS), 
formerly the National and Provincial Parks Association 
of Canada (NPPAC), is a national, non-profit, 14,000 
member/supporter organisation established in 1963. Its 
purpose is the protection of nattual ecosystems in parks, 
wilderness and similar natural areas to preserve the full 
diversity of habitats and their species. Through its nine 
chapters across Canada, it promotes awareness of 
ecological principles, and the inherent values of 
wilderness through education, appreciation and 
experience. Whether working cooperatively or 
encouraging individual action, the Society envisages a 
healthy ecosphere where people experience and respect 
natural ecosystems. The Society publishes Borealis 
(called Park News prior to 1988), a full colour quarterly 
magazine that examines nature, environmental and 
ecological issues in the Canadian context. The Society 
regularly holds public meetings, and lectures, and it 
publishes books. Members and trustees regularly attend 
environmental hearings, meet with government and 
elected officials and parks officials across Canada. 
Currently, the Society is involved nationally in 
promoting the Endangered Spaces Campaign that seeks 
the protection of 12% of Canada to protect representative 
ecosystems in every region. In recent years, the Society 
has worked for and secured the creation of national parks 
on South Moresby Island, in Northern Yukon, the 
Grasslands, Bruce Peninsula and many other areas. A 
new focus is the development of programmes that seek 
cooperation in protecting core wilderness areas by 
protecting or simply better managing lands surrounding 
important sites such as the Waterton/Glacier International 
Peace Paries in southern Alberta (D. Dodge.pers. comm., 
1992). 

In 1989, the World Wildlife Fund (WWF-Canada) 
launched the Endangered Spaces Campaign, 'to 
conserve Canada's biological diversity by 
protecting a representative sample of each of the 
country's 350 natural regions by the year 2000', adding 
up to at least 12% of Canada's lands and waters 
(WWF, 1991). It has targeted priority areas for the 
establishment of additional protected areas. More than 250 
groups are now cooperating in the Endangered Spaces 



Campaign, and the Canadian Wilderness Charter 
has been signed by more than 500,000 individuals 
(WWF, 1992; A. Hackman, pers. comm., 1992). 
WWF-Canada is also involved in numerous regional 
conservation programmes made up of many 
sub-projects. Examples include the "Carolinian Canada 
program" , initiated in 1984, which focuses on the 
endangered flora and fauna of the most southerly areas 
of Ontario, and consists of over 30 projects supervised 
by a steering committee made up of representatives of 
federal and provincial governments, foresters, 
naturalists, academics and citizens groups. WWF- 
Canada has also created the Prairie Conservation Action 
Plan. One objective of this plan is to establish protected 
areas that represent each of the four distinctive prairie 
grassland ecosystems (WWF, 1989). 

Ducks Unlimited (Canada) is a private, nonprofit 
conservation organisation dedicated to perpetuating and 
increasing North America's waterfowl by preserving, 
restoring and creating breeding habitats. Founded in 
1938, it now has offices in eastern, western and central 
Canada, and board members representing all regions. It 
employs about 4(X) regular personnel and about 150 
additional individuals during the summer, including 
university students working on research projects. Ducks 
Unlimited (Canada) is the single largest conservation 
organisation in the country in terms of on-the-ground 
habitat programmes, and over 60% of its members are 
non-hunters dedicated to these programmes (C.D.A. 
Rubec, pers. comm., 1992). Contributions come mainly 
from the United States (C$ 24 million in 1981), but also 
partly from Canada (about C$ 1 million was raised in 
1981). During the past few years. Ducks Unlimited has 
expanded its staff of biologists, and broadened its 
mandate to include a larger concern for habitat 
preservation rather than merely waterfowl production. 

One of the most notable developments has been the 
growth in public awareness of environmental issues, 
including those of the North. Evidence of this can be seen 
in the interest and involvement of people in the Polar 
Bear Pass issue, and in the formation of public interest 
groups such as the Canadian Arctic Resources 
Committee (CARC). Organisations such as CARC not 
only keep the public informed about northern 
developments, but also keep the responsible government 
officials alert. 

Training in protected areas is generally available at 
universities in field-oriented natural sciences relevant to 
park management, if not in park management as a 
separate discipline. 

Management constraints are centred around pressures to 
keep land open for alternate resource development, 
actions which have damaged existing protected areas 
and restricted and slowed further reserve and park 
establishment. For example, of 1,349 provincial/ 
territorial paries only a small percentage are reserved, 
with no logging, mining or hydro development 
(WWF, 1992). Management of renewable resources has 



Protected Areas of the World 



been, and continues to be, the most controversial issue 
in many areas, most notably in the west and north. To 
assist management, there is a need for active long-range 
management and monitoring programmes, greater 
cooperation with agencies involved in land management 
beyond protected area boundaries, and the establishment 
of buffer zones between protected areas and adjacent 
unprotected lands (Bonnicksen, 1988). Research into 
natural ecosystems to assist protected areas management 
is also a priority. 

The small size of so many existing reserves is also an 
area of concern (Taschereau, 1985). It has been 
estimated that over 80% of the most highly protected 
areas (lUCN categories I and II) are less than l,0(X)ha in 
size, and that of the total of 2,827 protected areas in 
lUCN categories 1-V, about half are less than lOOha in 
size (Turner, et al., 1991). About 61% (1,737) of 
protected areas are strictly protected (lUCN 
categories I and II) (Government of Canada, 1991). 
Another constraint is lack of funds and a cutting back, 
on the part of the Government, of support for regular 
operations which could have implications for 
implementation of Canada's Green Plan. 

Systems Reviews Canada is bounded to the south by 
the USA, to the west by the Pacific Ocean and Alaska 
(USA), to the east by the Labrador Sea and Atlantic 
Ocean, to the northeast by Baffin Bay, to the northwest 
by the Beaufort Sea, and to the north by the Arctic Ocean. 
The climate ranges from polar conditions in the north to 
cool temperate in 'Jie south, but with considerable 
variation between east and west coasts and the interior. 
Mediterranean conditions are experienced on the east 
coast of Vancouver Island. 

The 39 natural regions (terrestrial) defined by the 
Canadian Parks Service are broadly divided into: 
Western mountains; interior plains; Canadian shield; 
Hudson Bay lowlands; St Lawrence lowlands; 
Appalachians; Arctic lowlands; and High Arctic islands. 
Vegetation ranges from: Arctic tundra, north of the tree 
line; Alpine tundra on western mountains above the tree 
line (900-2500m); coniferous forest, covering about 
three-quarters of Canada, dominated by white spruce and 
black spruce extending from Newfoundland to Alaska; 
a complex assemblage of sub-Alpine, montane and 
coastal coniferous forest in British Columbia; grassland 
prairie of various types in a narrow band across central 
and western Canada; between the prairie and coniferous 
forest in the centre, a transition zone characterised by 
trembling aspen; between the coniferous forest and the 
tundra, transitional Taiga, characterised by open spruce 
woodlands with lichen ground cover; and in eastern 
Canada, around the Great Lakes region, mainly 
deciduous forest predominated by maple, oaks and 
conifers (Davis et al., 1986; Skoggan, 1978/ 1979). 
Wetland ecosystems occupy about 14% of the country, 
but are disappearing rapidly in a number of locations. 
For example, it is estimated that more than 75% of the 
original wetlands of southern Ontario have already been 
lost (Government of Ontario, 1992). 



There are about 3,269 native species of vascular plants 
and about 884 introduced species. Pleistocene refugia 
exist on northern EUesmere Island, central and northern 
Yukon, the mountains of Labrador and the Gaspd 
Peninsula of Quebec, the eastern coastal plain, and the 
Queen Charlotte Islands of British Columbia. The most 
florisfically diverse regions are southern British 
Columbia and southwestern Ontario. A rare plants 
project, conducted by Argus et al. (1990) from the 
National Museum of Nature in Ottawa, has provided lists 
and information on some 1,010 vascular plant taxa that 
are considered to be nationally rare in Canada. The 
project, which is nearing completion, provides 
provincial lists of rare plants and is available to the 
provincial Conservation Data Centres (Argus and Prior, 
1990; G. Francis, pers. comm., 1992). 

The first protected areas were based on recreational 
areas, including Point Pleasant Park, HaUfax in 1866, 
Mount Royal Park, Montreal in 1872, and subsequently 
High Park, Toronto in 1873, Banff National Park, 
Alberta in 1885, and Stanley Park, Vancouver in 1888. 
Early national parks in both eastern and western Canada 
were established for a variety of reasons, including: their 
establishment as wilderness areas remote from 
population centres; to preserve outstanding scenic areas 
for outdoor recreation and tourism; for preserving 
outstanding geology, plant and animal populations; to 
protect wildlife habitat for hunting purposes; to preserve 
bison herds (western Canada); and, in the case of Banff 
(Rocky Mountain National Park), to keep a hot spring in 
public hands (Government of Canada, 1991). In 
addition, the location of national parks was influenced 
by economic conditions and political circumstances of 
the time. In the early period, grazing, lumbering and 
mining were allowed within national parks. 

Within a decade of its establishment, Banff was enlarged 
and three other national units added (Waugh and Perez 
GU, 1992). Between 1885 and 1929, 15 national paries 
were established (Hummel, 1989). Ontario's first 
national park (Point Pelee, 1906) was established to 
preserve duck habitat for hunters, and it was not imtil 
1936 that the Mari times' first national park was created. 
The first two national parks (La Maurice and Forillon) 
in Quebec were established in 1970 from provincial 
parks which had either been sold or leased to the 
federal government (C. Stewart, pers. comm., 1992). 

In 1923, the first opposition to industrial development in 
parks took place, with the formation of the Canadian 
National Parks Association to oppose a dam in Banff 
National Park. The government approved the dam, and 
reduced the size of the park to exclude the reservoir from 
the park boundaries. In 1930, the government passed a 
National Parks Act prohibiting certain activities within 
national parks. Federal policy here diverged from that of 
provincial parks which often tried to meet the needs of 
both resource extraction and conservation (Environment 
Canada, 1991; Waugh and Perez Gil, 1992). By the 
1960s, an organised set of principles was applied to park 
management, and a sense of a parks system emerged. In 



Canada 



1967, the policy was to eliminate as quickly as possible 
all exploitative human activities from new national 
parks, a policy sometimes proven to be unworkable or 
undesirable. By 1970, a total of 19 national parks had 
been established, and with the publication of the 
National Parks Systems Plan (1971), a long-term goal 
for national parks began to develop (Finkelstein, 1992). 
In the 1970s, public participation in planning was 
introduced, the traditional rights of aboriginal groups 
were recognised, and land was purchased directly for 
new parks. Growth of the national park system continued 
under the system plan of the 1980s, and innovative 
arrangements continue, especially in the establishment 
of parks under native land-claim agreements, and in the 
planning for a system of marine protected areas. 
Northern Yukon National Park (1984) represented the 
first national park in Canada to be negotiated through a 
native land claim settlement (Finkelstein, 1992). 

In the Canadian north, reserves were established as early 
as 1894 to protect game for native hunters, and by 1938, 
1.35 million sq. km or over one-third of the Northwest 
Territories had been reserved. From 1948, this was cut 
back to the present coverage (Kovacs, 1985). Last 
Mountain Lake (migratory bird sanctuary and national 
wildlife area), Saskatchewan, was created in 1887 and is 
North America's oldest wildlife refuge, while the first 
established provincial park was Algonquin (1893) in 
Ontario. The WWF-Canada publication Endangered 
spaces: The future foT Canada's wilderness provides an 
excellent overview of the development of 
provincial/territorial protected area systems, and on 
areas of cunent priority concern, worthy of protected 
areas status (Hummel, 1989). 

Overall, the growth of the protected areas system is such 
that between 19(K) and 1930 an average of 1.7 protected 
areas were created per year, between 1930 and 1960, 
13 sites were established per year, and since 1961, the 
yearly average has been 77 sites. Quebec, Yukon and 
Alberta all have 8% or more protected, while, in contrast, 
Newfoundland/Labrador, and Saskatchewan each have 
about 3% of their total respective areas protected 
(Turner, et ai, 1991). 

As of 199 1 , there were a total of 2,945 conservation sites 
(lUCN categories I-V) owned or managed by various 
government levels, amounting to some 70.8 million ha, 
representing 7.1% of the country's area, or 12.5% of 
the world's protected areas. Added to this is another 
3.2 million ha held by non-governmental 
organisations and private groups, bringing the total 
coverage to about 74 million ha or 7.4% of total area 
(Turner, et al., 1991). About 4.6% of this is, however, 
"highly" protected according to WWF's standard 
(WWF, 1992). In 1991, major federal contributions 
included national parks and migratory bird sanctuaries 
accounting for some 42% (by area) of government 
managed sites. Provincial wildlife management areas 
occupied almost 30% of all protected areas, and 
provincial parks accounted for another 22%. There were 
34 national parks covering 18,056,900ha, 101 migratory 



bird sanctuaries covering ll,363,288ha, 45 national 
wildlife areas covering 106,1 59ha, 185 wildlife 
management areas covering 20,754,828ha, 56 wildlife 
protection areas covering 3,429 ,828ha, and 62 national 
capital commission areas totalling 52,1 65ha. In addition, 
there were 1,588 provincial parks with a total of 
12,373,860ha, 204 ecological reserves totalling 
286,500ha, 38 wilderness areas totalling 640,493ha 
and 10 nature trust areas totalling 698ha Heritage areas of 
parks, and historic areas of parks, totalled 18 at 775ha 
and 55 at 15,479ha, respectively. In addition, there are 
more than 7,800 cultural heritage sites in the country 
(Carter, 1990). 

Running between 1964 and 1974, the International 
Biological Program (IBP) was established to help 
countries promote long-term ecological research, and to 
establish a set of relatively undisturbed protected areas 
in which this kind of research could continue (Francis, 
1991). Sponsored by the International Council of 
Scientific Unions (ICSU), with its headquarters in Paris, 
the IBP Canadian subcommittee (IBP-CT) identified and 
documented about 1,3(X) ecological sites in the country. 
The success of this subcommittee was due to the 
combined energy and enthusiasm of the regional panels, 
and, in some provinces, the provincial government's 
sympathetic reception of, and participation in the 
programme. The entire nationwide programme, 
however, was made possible by the federal government 
which provided funds through the National Research 
Council (Taschereau, 1985). Following the IBP-CT, and 
subsequent activities of the Canadian Council on 
Ecological Areas (CCEA), ecological reserves were, and 
continue to be, established across the country, with 
the objective of representing the major ecosystems. 
To date, about 200 ecological reserves and a total of 
600 ecological or equivalent reserves (e.g. nature 
reserve zones in Ontario) have been created in Canada 
(Taschereau, 1985; C.D.A. Rubec,pers. comm., 1992). 

The Canadian Heritage Rivers System (CHRS) is a 
cooperative programme established in 1984 by the 
federal government and the provinces. The objectives of 
the CHRS are to give national recognition to important 
rivers, and to ensure long-term management to conserve 
their natural, historical and recreational values. 
Although not afforded any special legal protection, many 
heritage rivers are protected by provincial park status 
(Government of Canada, 1991). The first river, 
French, was designated in February 1986, and today 
there are 25 heritage rivers in the system comprising 
about 536,900ha (R. Maslin, pers. comm., 1992). 

There are no fewer than eight private-stewardship 
programmes in Canada, the objective being to arrange 
some form of protective conservation agreement with 
landowners while leaving natural habitat in private 
ownership (Hilts, 1989). Examples include Manitoba's 
Habitat Enhancement Land-Use Program and Ontario's 
Nature Heritage Stewardship Program. Conservation 
land trusts are relatively new, but there is rapidly 



Protected Areas of the World 



growing interest in them among conservation groups (G. 
Francis, pers. comm., 1992). 

The natural regions concept was first adopted in 1 97 1 as 
a basis for the systematic planning of national parks, and 
was known as the National Parks System Plan. The 
principle of this plan, now superseded by the 
Environment Canada 1990 systems plan, was to protect 
outstanding representative samples of each of Canada's 
natural landscapes (Finkelstein, 1992). Of 48 "natural 
regions", the Canadian Parks Service defined 39 terrestrial 
and 29 marine regions, and, following the Endangered 
Spaces campaign of 1989, the goal is to represent at 
least one national park in each region by the year 
2000 (Government of Canada, 1991; Kun, 1981). 
Currently, national parks are in 22 of 39 natural regions, 
although there is either a national park or other protected 
area type in 33 of the 39 natural regions (Government of 
Canada, 1991). Only two marine regions currently have 
federal parks within them, although others are soon to be 
established. Gaps in the national parks system are 
predominantly found in the Northwest Territories, 
Quebec, British Columbia, Manitoba and Labrador 
(Finkelstein, pers. comm., 1992). In order to complete 
the national park network, it is anticipated that by the end 
of 1993 potential park sites will have been selected in all 
of the unrepresented natural regions. 

The most recent ecological classification, the Ecological 
Land Classification System, is based on identifying 
ecoregions and other levels of generalisation in a natural 
hierarchy: areas of the earth's surface characterised by 
distinctive ecological responses to climate, 
physiography and hydrology as expressed by the 
development of vegetation, soils and fauna. 
Nationally, about 177 ecoregions have been 
identified, and are divided into 15 less detailed 
"ecozones", 45 "ecoprovinces" and 5,400 more detailed 
"ecodistricts" (Rubec et al., 1992; Wiken, 1986). 
Currently, 41 of the 177 ecoregions have more than 
12% of their area protected, while 45 ecoregions have 
no protected areas. Up to 28% of Canada's ecoregions 
have at least 8% of their area protected, and 44% have 
less than 1 % of their area protected (Turner, ef a/., 1991). 
Using GIS technology, a model of ecological integrity 
for each ecoregion has been developed, with ecoregions 
being identified with the highest overall biodiversity 
risk. Rubec et al. (1992) have identified 14 ecoregions 
which are at greatest ecosystem risk to wildlife resource 
biodiversity. Another 120 ecoregions have moderate risk 
ratings, while 43 were identified as having low overall 
risk. These ecoregions have been adopted for national 
evaluation and generalised systems planning purposes 
including by the Canadian Council on Ecological Areas 
(CCEA) for a National Systems Plan, and most recently 
by the State of Environment Reporting Service of 
Environment Canada. Candidate sites with the highest 
degree of risk are to receive the greatest attention. 

Environment Canada has a National parks system plan, 
a systems review process in place, a "Draft Action Plan 
for Completing the National Parks System", and 



anticipates completing the "National Marine Parks 
System Plan" by 1993. Further, the Canadian 
Environmental Advisory Council's (CEAC)Aprorecre(i 
areas vision for Canada (1991) calls on Canadians to 
identify and protect the complete range of representative 
and unique natural areas, wilderness landscapes, wildlife 
habitat, and the like, as a prerequisite to sustainable 
development (CEAC, 1991; Provincial Parks and 
Natural Heritage Policy Branch, 1992). As part of 
CEAC's vision, Canada has initiated a 10-year 
programme to complete a network of national parks, and 
a 20-year programme for marine protected areas. WWF- 
Canada suppwrts planning for an expanded protected 
area system through its Endangered Spaces Program, 
which facilitates public involvement in the 
implementation of the Green Plan at all levels. The 
Canadian Parks Services' National parks system plan 
(1990), and the government's environmental policy are 
described under the Green Plan. 

The Green Plan (1990) calls for the government to: set 
aside 12% of the country in protected areas; establish at 
least five new national parks by 1996; negotiate 
agreements for the remaining 13 parks required to 
complete the terrestrial park system by 2000; establish 
three new marine national parks by 1996 and an 
additional three by 2000; officially designate 18 rivers 
or sections of rivers to the Canadian Heritage Rivers 
System; develop an enhanced resource management 
programme for national parks involving applied studies 
for ecological integrity and regional integration; work 
with the provincial governments to estabUsh a network 
of forest ecological reserves to preserve in their natural 
state the genetic stock of forest ecosystems; establish a 
national wildlife habitat network, and act to protect and 
conserve additional lands that are of prime impwrtance 
to the goal of preserving valuable wildlife habitat; 
release in 1991 a discussion paper on a Canadian Oceans 
Act, which will provide a legal basis for the designation 
of marine protected areas; and work with the provinces 
to develop a programme to transfer to farmers those 
agricultural practices compatible with wildlife habitat 
needs (Environment Canada, 1991). When completed, 
the national park system will cover about 3% of the 
country's area. As of 1989, the national park system, 
covering 1 82,000 sq. km, was considered to be about half 
complete (Hummel, 1989). What is still lacking and 
needed, however, is a comprehensive analysis of the 
ecological health of Canada's protected areas 
(Government of Canada, 1991). 

Currendy, the Canadian Wildlife Service (CWS) is 
proposing about 30 new migratory bird sanctuaries and 
national wildlife areas in the Northwest Territories and 
Yukon over the next six years, representing 3.7 milUon 
ha or an additional 0.4% of land area that would come 
under protected area status. Additional national wildlife 
areas will be negotiated in Southern Canada; for 
example, the Department of National Defence and 
Environment Canada have signed an agreement that will 
lead to formal designation of the Canadian Forces 



10 



Canada 



Base Suffield as a National Wildlife Area by 
Order- in-Council, thus protecting an area of undisturbed 
natural prairie (E. Zurbrigg, pers. comm., 1992). These 
will complement national parks proposals for the 1990s. 

Turner et al. (1991) have undertaken an initial analysis 
of a systems approach to conservation. In the discussion 
section, the analysis indicated that Canada still has some 
way to go in achieving an ecologically representative 
network of protected areas. Although 7. 1 % of land area 
may have some degree of government protected status, 
the ecological representation is widely disparate, as 
nearly 60% of the total areas conserved (lUCN 
categories I-V) are located in the Northwest Territories 
and Quebec. Recognised gaps in protected areas 
coverage include: Western mountains - Strait of 
Georgia lowlands; Interior dry plateau; Northern interior 
plateau and mountains; Interior plains - Manitoba 
lowlands; Canadian Shield - Tundra hills; Central 
tundra region; Northwestern boreal uplands; Laurentian 
boreal highlands; East coast boreal region; Boreal lake 
plateau; Whale river region; Northern Labrador 
mountains; Ungava tundra plateau; Southampton plain; 
Hudson Bay lowlands; Hudson-James lowlands; Arctic 
lowlands - Western Arctic lowlands; Eastern Arctic 
lowlands; High Arctic islands - Western High Arctic 
region (Environment Canada, 1991). It has been 
recognised that conservation efforts need to be focused 
on a broader range of participants to achieve ecological 
goals. For example, completion of the national parks 
system will only increase the national protected areas 
coverage by about 1.3%. Other agencies, therefore, 
including provincial administrations, must play a 
significant role to reach the national target of 12%. 

At the provincial/territorial level, each and every 
jurisdiction today has one or more protected areas 
programme and agency, as well as a mandate to establish 
new sites. Further, eleven of the thirteen jurisdictions 
(one federal, 10 provincial, two territorial) are officially 
committed to completing their representative protected 
area systems by the year 20(X), the Endangered Spaces 
goal (A. Hackman, pers. comm., 1992). For example, the 
Ministry of Natural Resources, Ontario, released a draft 
"Natural heritage areas strategy for Ontario: Responding 
to the endangered spaces challenge", as part of the 
government's commitment to completing the system of 
provincial parks and natural heritage areas by the year 
2000 (MNR, 1992b). When completed, another 12% of 
Ontario's lands and waters will be designated as parks 
and protected areas. 

Complementing this, system plans are in die process of 
being formulated for each jurisdiction. As of 1989, eight 
of twelve provinces and territories had park systems 
plans, but a number of these had yet to be completed 
(Hummel, 1989). For example, a systems plan for Nova 
Scotia is due to be released in March 1993, and there has 
been public discussion of systems plans in Saskatchewan 
and British Columbia, respectively, that identify 
candidate protected areas (CCEA, 1990). Further, the 
British Columbian government is committed to 



developing a Protected Areas Strategy (C. Stewart, pers. 
comm., 1992). This Strategy is a single, integrated 
process for coordinating all of the province's protected 
area programmes and objectives. A component of this 
Strategy is "Parks and Wilderness for the 90s", which 
sets out to inventory study areas and establishes a 
timetable for evaluating sites for possible designation as 
provincial parks or wilderness areas. In Prince Edward 
Island, the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), 
comprising representatives from each of the natural 
resource and land related branches of government and 
the Island Nature Trust (an NGO), was established in 
1990 under the auspices of the Natural Resources 
Protection Act. This committee has prepared a 
Significant Environmental Areas Plan (SEAP), which 
was adopted by the government in 1991, and represents 
a major and systematic expansion of the province's 
protected areas network, framed by a provincial 
classification of habitat zones (A. Hackman, pers. 
comm., 1992). To date, 25 sites have been completely 
designated, most of which are owned either by 
government or the Island Nature Trust The work of this 
committee is on-going in the designation of more sites, 
in approving management plans, and in advising on 
Canadian Heritage Rivers in the province (G.D. Murray, 
pers. comm., 1992). In New Brunswick, 
recommendations from the Premier's Round Table on 
Environment and Economy included the establishment 
of a system of protected areas by 1995, which will 
represent the important natural features of all the 
province's biogeographic regions (WWF, 1992). 

Currently, all but two jurisdictions. New Brunswick and 
the Northwest Territories, have developed natural region 
classifications for their ecological area programmes 
(CCEA, 1992). When all 13 jurisdictional classifications 
are complete, WWF-Canada has estimated that there 
will be about 340 natural regions (including both 
terrestrial and marine) which will collectively defme 
Canada's landscapes (Peterson and Peterson, 1991). 
These classifications, although slightly different 
(provincially/lerritorially-based) from the national 
ecoregion classification and still evolving, are already 
providing the basis for commitments to complete 
representative protected area systems in Ontario, 
Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Yukon, and by the federal 
government (CCEA, 1992). Currently, 87 of Canada's 
340 natural regions are now represented by protected 
areas (25%), 104 natural regions are partially 
represented (30%), and 149 natural regions (45%) have 
as yet not been represented (WWF, 1992). WWF (1992) 
contains a summary for each of the 1 3 major jurisdictions 
in the country, indicating new protected areas 
established over the past year, progress on systems 
planning, actions planned for the forthcoming year, and 
an assessment, based on grades, of progress made in 
protecting natural regions within the respective 
jurisdictions. 

Threats to protected areas and their surroundings are of 
critical concern, with factors ranging from degradation 



11 



Protected Areas of the World 



of resources, continued resource exploitation, poaching, 
proposed hydroelectric developments, adverse visitor 
impacts, urban and agricultural encroachment, alteration 
of water flows or groundwater levels, lack of secure land 
rights, introduction of exotic plant sp)ecies, and air and 
water pollution. Less than half of Canada's protected 
areas are free from industrial activity or motorised 
interference. Several parks, particularly in southern 
Ontario and the Maritimes, have suffered significant 
species losses. Wood Buffalo is threatened by changing 
water levels caused by dams, disease among the bison 
herd, pollution from upstream pulp mills, and, until 
recently, commercial timber harvesting in the park (B. 
Amos, pers. comm., 1992; A. Hackman, f>ers. comm., 
1992; C.D.A. Rubec, pers. comm., 1992). Little remains 
of the Carolinian forest of southern Ontario, prairie 
grasslands, or the virgin Acadian forests of the 
Maritimes. Further, west coast rain forest is being 
quickly lost to clearcut logging, estimates varying from 
15-50 years before no large ecologically viable or 
commercially valuable areas of forest are left (R. Maslin, 
pers. comm., 1992). Kejimkujik is on the lUCN List of 
Threatened F*rotected Areas because of the impacts of 
acid rain (Waugh and Perez Gil, 1992). 

Other Relevant Information Tourism in national 
parks is monitored within reporting units. In June 1992, 
the national parks received 3.96 million person-entries, 
national historic sites 1.30 million person-entries, and 
historic canals 0.05 million (Environment Canada, 
1992). Benefits produced in 1984/85 included an 
estimate of attributable visitor expenditures of Cnd$ 308 
million. A realistic figure for 1990 is about CndS 600 
million (Mosquin Biolnformation Ltd. and P.G. Whiting 
and Associates, 1992). Attendance figures and income 
accrued from provincial protected areas is also 
significant In Ontario, for example, more than eight 
million people visited the provincial parks in 1991, 
contributing an estimated CndS 655 million to the 
provincial economy through the purchase of goods and 
services (MNR, 1992a). 

A breakdown of annual park budgets (in CndS 000s) in 
1992 for the 13 jurisdictions are as follows: Federal - 
413,586; Northwest Territories - 2,749; Yukon - 2,824; 
British Columbia - 35,456; Alberta - 30,185; 
Saskatchewan - 12,419; Manitoba - 13,501; Ontario - 
55,989; Quebec - 16,500; Nova Scotia - 5,138; New 
Brunswick - 7,232; Prince Edward Island - 3,573; 
Newfoundland - 4,798, giving a national total of 
603,950 (WWF, 1992). 

Addresses (Federal) 

Canadian Parks Service (Director General), 
Environment Canada, Jules-Leger Building, 
OTTAWA, Ontario KIA 0H3 (Tel: 819 997 2800; 
FAX: 819 997 2443; Tlx:053 3608 pares) 

Canadian Council on Ecological Areas (Secretariat), c/o 
Canadian Wildlife Service, Place Vincent Massey 
Bldg., 351 St Joseph Boulevard, HULL, Quebec 
KIA 0H3 (Tel: 819 953 1444) 



Canadian Wildlife Service (Director General), 
Environment Canada, Place Vincent Massey Bldg., 
35 1 St. Joseph Boulevard, HULL, Quebec K 1 A 0H3 
(Tel: 819 953 1444/1421; FAX: 819 953 6283) 

State of the Environment Reporting, Environment 
Canada, OTTAWA, Ontario Kl A 0H3 

Nod Government Organisations (national) 

Canadian Nature Federation, 453 Sussex Drive, 

OTTAWA, Ontario KIN 6Z4 (Tel: 613 238 6154; 

FAX: 613 230 2054) 
Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society, Suite 1335, 160 

Bloor Street East, TORONTO, Ontario M4W 1B9 

(Tel: 416 972 0868) 
Canadian Wildlife Federation, 1673 Carling Avenue, 

OTTAWA, Ontario K2A 3Z1 (Tel: 613 725 2191) 
Ducks Unlimited Canada, 1190 Waverley Street, 

WINNIPEG, Manitoba R3T 2E2 
Nature Conservancy of Canada, 1 10 Eglinton Ave. West, 

TORONTO, Ontario M4R 1A3 (Tel: 416469 1701; 

FAX: 4 16 469 1493) 
Western Canada Wilderness Committee (Project 

WILD), 20 Water Street, Vancouver, BC, V6B 1 A4 

(Tel: 604 683 8220; FAX: 604 683 8229) 
Wildlife Habitat Canada, Suite 301, 1704 CarUng Avenue, 

OTTAWA, Ontario K2A 1C7 (Tel: 613 722 2090) 
World Wildlife Fund (Canada), 90 Eglinton Avenue 

E., Suite 504, TORONTO, Ontario M4P 2Z7 

(Tel: 416489 8800; FAX: 416 489 3611) 

Provincial 

Department of Tourism, Parks and Recreation 
(Director), Ministry of Tourism, Parks and 
Recreation, Standard Life Centre, 10405 
Jasper Avenue, EDMONTON, Alberta T5J 
3N4 (Tel: 403 427 6781; FAX: 403 427 5980) 

Natural and Protected Areas Branch (Manager), 
Department of Forestry, Lands and Wildlife, c/o 
Ministry of Forestry, Lands and Wildlife, 408 
Legislative Building, EDMONTON, Alberta 
T5K 2B6 (Tel: 403 427 3674) 

Alberta Wilderness Association, Box 6398, Station D, 
CALGARY, Alberta T2P 2E1 (Tel: 403 283 2025) 

BC Parks (Director), Ministry of Environment, Lands 
and Parks, 2nd Floor, 800 Johnson Street, 
VICTORIA, BC V8V 1X4 (Tel: 604 387 5002; 
FAX: 604 387 5757) 

Recreation Branch (Director), Department of 
Forests, c/o Ministry of Forests, Rm 128, 
Parliament Buildings, VICTORIA, BC, V8V 
1X4(604 387 6240) 

Friends of Ecological Reserves, Box 1721, Station E, 
VICTORIA, BC V8W 2Y1 (Tel: 604 731 6716) 

Parks and Natural Areas Branch (Director), Manitoba 
Natural Resources, 258 Portage Street, 4th Floor, 
WINNIPEG, Manitoba R3C 1K2 (TeL 204 945 4362) 

Manitoba Naturalists Society, 302128 James Avenue, 
WINIVIPEG, Manitoba R3B 0N8 



12 



Canada 



Department of Recreation and Environment (Director), 
Ministry of Natural Resources and Energy, PO Box 
6000, FREDERICTON, New Brunswick E3B 5H1 
(Tel: 506453 2510) 

Conservation Council of New Brunswick, 180 St John 
Street, FREDERICTON, New Brunswick E3B 4A9 
(Tel: 506 458 8747) 

Parks Division (Director), Department of Tourism and 
Culture, PO Box 8700, ST JOHN'S, Newfoundland 
AlB 4J6 (Tel: 709 729 0657) 

Protected Areas Association (of Newfoundland and 
Labrador), PO Box 1027, Stn C, ST. JOHN'S, 
Newfoundland AlC 5M5 

Department of Economic Development and Tourism 
(Deputy Minister), Government of the Northwest 
Territories, PO Box 1320, YELLOWKNIFE, 
Northwest Territories XIA 2L9 (Tel: 403 873 7962) 

Departmentof Renewable Resources (Deputy Minister), 
PO Box 1320, Yellowknife, Northwest Territories 
XIA 2L9 (Tel: 403 873 7128) 

Parks and Recreation Division (Director), Department of 
Natural Resources, R.R. No. 1 Belmont, Colchester 
County, Nova Scotia BOM ICO (Tel: 902 662 3030; 
FAX: 902 662 2160) 

Department of Education (Director), Ministry of 
Education, PO Box 578, HALIFAX, Nova Scotia 
B3J 2S9 (Tel: 902 424 7343) 

Nova Scotia Museum (Curator of Special Places), 
c/o Department of Education, PO Box 578, 
HALIFAX, Nova Scotia B3J 2S9 

Federation of Nova Scotia Naturalists, c/o 1747 
Summer Street, HALIFAX, Nova Scotia B3H 3A6 
(Tel: 902 466 7168) 

Provincial Parks and Natural Heritage Policy Branch 
(Director), Ministry of Natural Resources, Whitney 
Block, Queens Park, 99 Wellesley Street West, 
TORONTO, Ontario M7A 1 W3 (Tel: 416 3 14 2301) 

Federation of Ontario Naturalists, 385 Lesmill Rd., Don 
MUls, Ontario M3B 2W8 (Tel: 416 444 841 1) 

Parks Division (Director), Department of Tourism, 
Parks and Recreation, PO Box 2000, 
CHARLOTTETOWN, Prince Edward Island CIA 
7N8 (Tel: 902 368 5500/5511; FAX: 902 368 5737: 
Tlx: 01444154) 

Department of Conservation and Planning (Director), 
Ministry of Environment, PO Box 2000, 
CHARLOTTETOWN, Prince Edward Island CIA 
7N8 (Tel: 902 368 5340) 

Island Nature Trust, PO Box 265, CHARLOTTETOWN, 
Prince Edward Island (Tel: 902 892 7513) 

Direction g6n6rale des pares et des t^rritoires fauniques 
(Directeur de I'amSnagement), Ministere Loisir, 
Chasse et Peche, 150 Boulevard StCyrille est, 
QUEBEC, Quebec GIR 4Y1 (Tel: 418 643 6527) 

Direction g6n6rale de la conservation et du 
patrimoine dcologique (Directeur), 
Ministfere de I'Environnement, 3900 rue de 
Marly, 6 6tage, SAINTFOY, Quebec GIX 4E4 
(Tel: 418 643 8259) 



Fondation pour la sauvegarde des especes menac6es 
(FOSEM),8191 Avenue du Zoo, CHARLESBOURG, 
Quebec GIG 4G4 (Tel: 418 622 0313) 

Union qu6b6coise pour la conservation de la nature, 
160 76th Street East, CHARLESBOURG, Quebec 
GIW 2G5 (Tel: 418 628 9600) 

Parks Branch (Director), Department of Natural 
Resources, 3211 Albert Street, REGINA, 
Saskatchewan S4S 5W6 (Tel: 306 787 2854) 

Saskatchewan Natural History Society, PO Box 4348, 
REGINA, Saskatchewan S4P 3W6 

Parks and Outdoor Recreation Branch (Director), 
Department of Renewable Resources, Yukon 
Government Services, PO Box 2703, 
WHITEHORSE, Yukon Territory YIA 2C6 
(Tel: 403 667 581 1/5802; FAX: 403 667 2958/ 
3518; Tlx: 0368466) 

Yukon Conservation Society, Box 4163, WHITEHORSE, 
Yukon YIA 3T3 (Tel: 403 668 5678) 

References 

Anon (1990). IgalirtuuqiAconservationproposalfor 

Bowhead whales at Isabella Bay, Baffin Island, 

NWT. Prepared by the Community of Clyde River, 

NWT. 19 pp. 
Argus, G.W. and Prior, K.M. (1990). Rare vascular 

plants in Canada: Our natural heritage. 

(Unseen) 
Beardmort, R.M. (1985). Atlantic Canada's 

Natural Heritage Areas. Canadian Government 

Publishing Centre, Supply and Services, Ottawa. 

94 pp. 
Bonnicksen, T. (1988). Standards of naturalness: 

the national parks management challenge. 

Landscape Architecture 78(2): 134. 
Canadian Society of Environmental Biologists 

(1987). Conservation Strategies in Canada. 

Canadian Society of Environmental Biologists, 

Toronto, Ontario. 106 pp. (Unseen) 
Carter, M. (1990). The state of protection of cultural 

resources in the environment. Prepared for 

Environment Canada, Canadian Parks Service. 

Unpublished. (Unseen) 
CCEA (1990). Report of the biennium: 1988-1990. 

Canadian Council on Ecological Areas, Ottawa, 

Ontario. 1 1 pp. 
CCEA (1992). Canadian Council on Ecological 

Areas framework for developing a 

nation-wide system of ecological areas: Part 1 

- a strategy. CCEA, Ottawa, Ontario. Pp. 1-26. 
CEAC (1991). A protected areas vision for 

Canada. Canadian Environmental Advisory 

Council, Ottawa, Ontario. 88 pp. 
CSEB (1987). Conservation strategies in Canada. 

CSEB Newsletter/Bulletin 44:2. Canadian 

Society of Environmental Biologists, Toronto. 

106 pp. 
Davis, S.D., Droop, SJ.M., Gregerson, P., Henson, L., 

Leon, CJ., Lamlein ViUa-Lobos, J., Synge, R, and 

Zantovska, J. lUCN (1986). Plants in Danger: What do 



13 



Protected Areas of the World 



we know? lUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, 

UK Pp. 58-61. 
Department of Natural Resources (1985). A system plan 

for Manitoba' s provincial parks - Technical report. 

Planning section. Parks Branch, Department of 

Natural Resources, Winnipeg, Manitoba. 63 pp. 
Eidsvik, H.E. (1989). Canada in a global contet. 

In: Hummel, M. (Ed-). Endangered spaces: the 

future for Canada's wilderness. Key Porter Books, 

Toronto. 
Environment Canada (1986). National marine parks 

policy, September 26. Parks Service. Queens Printer, 

Ottawa. (Unseen) 
Environment Canada (1990). National parks system 

plan. Minister of Supply and Services, Ottawa, 

Ontario. 110 pp. 
Environment Canada (1991). State of the Parks Report 

1990 (Canada's Green Plan). 2 volumes. Canadian 

Parks Service, Environment Canada, Ottawa. 
Environment Canada (1992). Canadian Parks Service 

monthly attendance - June 1992. Canadian Parks 

Service, Ottawa. 20 pp. 
Finkelstein, M. (1992). National park dreams. 

In: Borea/ij 3(2)10: 32^2. 
Fisheries and Ocean Canada (1987). Canadian Arctic 

Marine Conservation Strategy. Supply and Services 

Canada, Ottawa. (Unseen) 
Francis, G. (1991). Joint session of the CCEA and the 

FPPC "Fostering participatory stewardship" 

- Panel presentation. Campbell River, British 

Columbia, 13 September 1991. 6 pp. 
Government of Canada (1991). The state of Canada's 

Environment. Chapter 7, Protected areas. 
Government of Ontario (1992). Province to protect 

Ontario's wetlands under planning act News release 

communique - June 24, 1992. 2 pp. 
Gray, P.A. and Rubec, CD. A. (1989). National Registry 

of Ecological Areas in Canada. Secretariat, Canada 

Council on Ecological Areas, Ottawa, Ontario. 
Griffiths-Muecke Associates (1982). Special places in 

Nova Scotia: History and context. The Nova Scotia 

Museum, Halifax. 45 pp. 
Harris, B. (1988). Canada's National Parks. Bramley 

Books, Colour Library Books Ltd, Godalming, 

England. 256 pp. (Unseen) 
Hilts, S. (1989). Private stewardship. In: Hummel, 

M. (Ed.), Endangered spaces, the future for 

Canada s Wilderness. Key Porter Books Ltd., 

Toronto. Pp. 99-106. 
Hummel, M. (Ed.) (1989). Endangered Spaces, the 

future for Canada's Wilderness. Key Porter Books, 

Toronto. 288 pp. 
Hunter, B. (Ed.) (1991). The statesman's yearbook - 

128th edition: 19911992. The MacMillan Press Ltd., 

London. Pp. 271-335. 
I AND ( 1 972). National Parks System Planning Manual. 

National and Historic Parks Branch. Indian Affairs 

and Northern Development, Canada. 138 pp. 

(Unseen) 
lUCN East European Programme (1989). Public 

Intervention in Pollution Aspects of Transboundary 



watercourses and international lakes; European and 
North American case studies. lUCN Background 
Paper for Meeting on the Protection of the 
Environment Conference on Security and 
Cooperation in europe. lUCN East European 
Programme, Cambridge, UK. 24 pp. 

Kovacs, T. (1985). National Overview for Canada on 
National Parks and Protected Areas in the Arctic. 
In: Nelson, J.G. and Needham, R. (Eds), Arctic 
Heritage: the proceedings of a Symposium. 
Association of Canadian Universities for Northern 
Sujdies, Ottawa. Pp. 530-536. (Unseen). 

Kun, S. (1981). An Overview of Canada's National 
Parks. Paper presented to the 16di international 
seminar on national parks and equivalent reserves. 
Jasper National Park, 5 August. 17 pp. 

Mosquin Biolnformation Ltd. and P.G. Whiting and 
Associates (1992). Canada country study of 
biodiversity: Taxanomic and ecological census, 
economic benefits, conservation costs and unmet 
needs. Ottawa, Ontario. 250 pp. 

MNR (1992a). Class environmental assessment for 
provincial park management. Special report number 
one: an invitation to participate. Ministry of Natural 
Resources, HuntsviUe, Ontario. 17 pp. 

MNR (1992b). A natural heritage areas strategy for 
Ontario: Responding to the endangered spaces 
challenge. Draft. Provincial Parks and Natural 
Heritage Policy Branch, Ministry of Natural 
Resources, Ontario. 29 pp. 

Nature Conservancy of Canada (n.d.). Minister of 
Environment's Task Force on Park Establishment. 
Parks 2000 - vision for the 21st Century. (Unseen) 

NCC (1991). The Nature Conservancy of Canada: 
1991 Annual report. The National Conservancy of 
Canada, Toronto, Ontario. 17 pp. 

Ontario Wildlife Working Group (1991). Looking 
ahead: a wild life strategy for Ontario. Publications 
Ontario, Toronto, Ontario. 172 pp. 

Peterson, E.B. and Peterson, N.M. (1991). A first 
approximation of principles and criteria to make 
Canada's protected area systems representative of 
the nation's ecological diversity. Prepared for the 
Canadian Council on Ecological Areas as an 
Occasional Paper. Western Ecological Services Ltd., 
Victoria, B.C. 47 pp. 

Rubec, C.D.A., Turner, A., Chartrand, N., and Wiken, 
E.B. (1990). Conserving Canadian Ecosystems: a 
systems approach. Canadian Council on Ecological 
Areas Occasional Paper 10: 52-75. 

Rubec, C.D.A., Turner, A., and Wiken, E.B. (1992). 
Integrated planning for protected areas and 
biodiversity assessment in Canada. Proceedings of 
the 3rd National Workshop of the Canadian Society 
for Landscape Ecology and Management June 1992. 

Saskatchewan Parks, Recreation and Culture (n.d.). 
Saskatchewan parks: The choice is yours! 
Communications Branch, Regina, Saskatchewan. 

Scoggan, H.J. (1978/1979). The Flora of Canada. 
4 volumes. National Museum of Natural Sciences, 
Ottawa. 



14 



Canada 



Taschereau, P.M. (1985). The Status of Ecological 
Reserves in Canada. Canadian Council on 
Ecological Areas and the Institute for Resource and 
Environmental Studies, Ottawa. 120 pp. 

Thompson, D. (1987). The designation of wilderness in 
British Columbia. Unpublished report. 16 pp. 

Turner, A.M., Rubec, C.D.A. and Wiken, E.B. (1991). 
Canadian Ecosystems: a systems approach to their 
conservation. In: Proceedings, International 
Conference on the Science and Management of 
Protected Areas (SAMPA), May 14-19 ,1991, 
Acadia University, Wolf ville. Nova Scotia, (in press) 

Waugh, J.D. and Perez Gil, R. (1992). North America 
Regional Review. Paper presented to the IV World 
Congress on National Parks and Protected Areas, 
Caracas, Venezuela 10-21 February 1992. 

Wiken, E.B. (Ed.) (1986). Ecozones of Canada. 
Ecological Land Classification Series No. 19. Land 
Directorate, Environment Canada, Ottawa, Ontario. 
26 pp. 



Wiken, E.B., Rubec, C.D.A., and Ironside, G.R. (1992). 

Landscape ecoregions of Canada. National Atlas of 

Canada map. Energy, Mines and Resources, Ottawa. 

(Unseen) 
WWF (1989). Prairie conservation action plan - 

1989-1994. Worid Wildlife Fund-Canada, Toronto, 

Ontario. 
WWF (Canada) (1990). Endangered Spaces: progress 

report No.l. World Wildlife Fund-Canada, Toronto, 

Ontario. 34 pp. (Unseen) 
WWF (1991). World Wildlife Fund Canada: 1991 

Annual report. World Wildlife Fund-Canada, 

Toronto, Ontario. 31 pp. 
WWF (1991). Endangered spaces: Progress report 

no. 2. World Wildlife Fund-Canada, Toronto, 

Ontario. 40 pp. 
WWF (1992). Endangered spaces: Progress report 

no. 3. World Wildlife Fund-Canada, Toronto, 

Ontario. 42 pp. 



ANNEX 

Deflnitions of protected area designations, as legislated, 

together with authorities responsible for their administration 



Title: National Parks Act 

Date: 1930; amended 1974 and 1988, with 1992 
amendments to the schedules 

Brief description: Provides for the establishment 
of national parks Uiroughout Canada Amendments 
to the National Parks Act in 1988 made ecological 
integrity of parks the principal management 
objective. 

Administrative authorities: Canadian Parks 
Service (Parks Canada), Environment Canada 

Designations: 

National Park Act to preserve for all times, areas 
which contain significant geographical, geological, 
biological, historic, or scenic features as a national 
heritage. Areas also established to encourage public 
understanding, appreciation and enjoyment of this 
natural heritage so as to leave it unimpaired for future 
generations. Representative samples of natural 
landscapes, seascap)es and ecosystems are acquired 
and maintained through Uie National Parks Act. 
National parks are established for: health through 
outdoor recreation and relaxation; heritage 
preservation through conservation of exceptional 
natural landscapes and their wildlife; and economic 
opportunity, through tourism, generating business 
enterprises in travel and other visitor services, as well 
as local employment in park management, amongst 
others. 1988 amendments included increased 



firearms control; strengthened authority of park 
wardens; expanded protection clauses to cover soil, 
waters, rocks, fossils, minerals and air quality, as 
well as the flora and wild animals already protected 
under the act; and provision for the setting and 
amending of fees and charges for park use. 
Motorised navigation and commercial fishing are 
permitted in marine national parks. Industrial 
activities are prohibited in national parks. 

Source: Kun (1981); Waugh and Perez GU (1992) 

Title: Migratory Birds Convention Act 

Date: 1917; August 1982 

Brief description: This act provides for the 
establishment of migratory bird sanctuaries 
throughout Canada and for enacting regulations to 
control and administer such sanctuaries in order to 
protect the birds, their nests and eggs. 



Canadian Wildlife 



Administrative authorites: 

Service, Environment Canada 

Designations: 



Migratory Bird Sanctuary Areas for the special 
protection of migratory birds and their habitat. The 
federal government does not always own such areas; 
they can be designated by order-in-council on private 
lands with the consent of the landowner. Such areas 
can be deregulated should consent be revoked on the 



15 



Protected Areas of the World 



part of the landowner or if the area loses its value to 
migratory birds. Regulations prohibit hunting of 
migratory birds or the taking of their eggs or nests. 
Activities such as clearcutting or mining are not 
prohibited provided they do not interfere with the 
"object species". 

Sources: Government of Canada (1991); C. Stewart, 
pers. comm. (1992) 

Title: Canadian Wildlife Act 

Date: 1973 

Brief description: Provides for national wildlife 
areas and sanctuaries throughout Canada 

Administrative authorities: Canadian Wildlife 
Service, Environment Canada 

Designations: 

National Wildlife Area Such areas are owned 
and managed by the Canadian WildUfe Service on 
behalf of the Canadian government, and all such 
areas are on federal lands. Some areas may be left 
unmanaged, although others may include various 
activities including: the construction of new ponds to 
create breeding sites for waterfowl; trees and shrubs 
may be planted as cover for birds and deer, or the 
natural plant cover may be altered in other ways to 
increase the food and shelter for wildlife; grain may 
be planted to draw migrating birds away from 
fanners' fields; haycutting and cattlegrazing may 
form part of the management programme; and 
hunting may be used to control populations. Such 
areas are also utilised for passive recreation and 
education, and many of them have interpretive 
facilities for this purpose. Limited human 
interference, including hunting and farming may be 
permitted. Originally established for wildlife 
conservation or interpretation in respect of migratory 
birds. Today, their scope includes the habitat of all 
wildlife. 

Source: Mosquin Bio-Information Limited and 
P.G. Whiting and Associates (1992) 



Protected Areas Branch, Department of Forestry, 
Lands and Wildlife; Department of Culture and 
Multiculturalism 

Designations: 

Ecological Reserve Throughout the country, 

such areas are set aside for scientific, educational and 
conservation purposes. In Alberta, such an area is set 
aside where it is a representative example of a natural 
ecosystem, contains rare or endangered native plants 
or animals, is suitable for scientific research of 
natural ecosystems, serves as an example of a 
man-modified ecosystem that is recovering, or 
contains unique or rare examples of natural 
biological or physical features. In most provinces, 
existing leases for timber removal, mineral 
extraction and the like are allowed to expire or are 
cancelled forthwith, although in Alberta, oil and gas 
leases may be exempted. The Alberta Act is unique 
in that there is a special provision which allows for 
power to control land uses and activities in buffer 
zones surrounding or adjacent to reserves. 

Prohibited activities include: the construction, 
maintenance, or operation of any pubUc work, road, 
railway, landing strip, structure or installation; travel, 
except on foot; the hunting or trapping of animals, or 
fishing; littering; the collecting, destroying or 
removing of any plant, animal, fossil, or other object 
of geological, ethnological, historical or scientific 
interest; Ughting or maintaining an open fire; and the 
pollution of any land, water, plant or animal Ufe, 
except with the consent of the Minister. 

Controlled Buffer Zone The Lieutenant 

Governor in council may designate any area of public 
land adjoining a wilderness area or ecological area as 
a controlled buffer zone. No person shall cause, allow 
or undertake any strip mining, quarrying, or any 
major water resource projects. 

Natural Area Established to protect sensitive or 
scenic public land from disturbance, and to ensure 
the availability of public land in a natural state for 
use by the public for recreation, education or any 
other purpose. 



PROVINCIAL LEGISLATION 
ALBERTA 

Titles: Wilderness Areas, Ecological 
Reserves and Natural Areas Act (1980); 
Willmore Wilderness Park Act (1959); 
Wildlife Act (1980); Forest Act; Provincial 
Parks Act; Historic Resources Act; Order in 
Council 



Wilderness Area 

ecological reserves 

Provincial Park 
Game Bird Sanctuary 
Historic Site 
Recreation Area 



Provisions generally as for 



Administrative authorities: Department of 
Tourism, Parks and Recreation; Natural and 



Sources: Original legislation; Griffiths-Muecke 
Associates (1982); A. Landals, pers. comm. (1992) 



16 



Canada 



BRITISH COLUMBIA 

Titles: Parks Act; Environmental Land Use 
Act; Ecological Reserve Act, 1971; Ministry of 
Lands, Parks and Housing Act; Park 
(Regional) Act (1979); Heritage Conservation 
Act; Forests Act; Wildlife Act; Order in 
Council 

Administrative authorities: BC Parks, Ministry 
of Environment, Lands and Parks; Department of 
Forests; Nature Trust of British Columbia 

Designations: 

Wildlife Management Area 

Wilderness Conservancy Roadless tracts in 

which ecological communities are preserved intact. 
No exploitation or development, except as may be 
necessary to preserve natural processes, is 
permissable. 

Ecological Reserve Such areas are set aside for 
research, education, and serve to protect areas of 
genetic diversity. Casual, non-consumptive, 
non-motorised use of most reserves by the public is 
allowed without a permit, while uses which could 
significantly alter the natural processes are 
prohibited. Hunting and fishing are prohibited. 



Provincial Park 

tenures. 



Free of all commercial resource 



Marine Provincial Park 

Recreation Area Represent transitions to parks 
where preexisting tenures are accommodated. In 
both provincial parks and recreation areas, it is 
possible to zone nature conservancies and 
wilderness. 

Wilderness Area Free of commercial forest 
harvesting, but open to continuous mineral 
evaluation and development. 

Sources: Thompson, D. (1987); D. Thompson, 
pers. comm.(1992) 

MANITOBA 

Titles: Ecological Reserves Act (1981); 
Provincial Park Lands Act (1972); Crown 
Lands Act; Wildlife Act (1980); Conservation 
District Act (1976); Order in Council 

Administrative authorities: Parks and Natural 
Areas Branch, Manitoba Natural Resources 

Designations: 

PROVINCIAL PARK LAND Dedicated to the 
people of Manitoba and visitors to Manitoba, and 
may be used by them for healthful enjoyment, and 



for the cultural, educational and social benefits that 
may be derived therefrom. Developed for: the 
conservation and management of flora and fauna 
therein; for the preservation of specified areas and 
objects therein that are of geological, cultural, 
ecological or other scientific interest; to facilitate the 
use and enjoyment of outdoor recreation Jierein. 
Most of the major provincial parks accommodate 
commercial harvesting activities, including trapping, 
agriculture, logging, mining, and commercial 
fishing. 

Provincial Natural Park 
Provincial Wilderness Park 
Provincial Recreation Park 
Provincial Recreational Trailway 
Pro vincial Parkway 
Provincial Recreational Waterway 
Provincial Heritage Park 
Special Use Park 
Wayside Park 
Marine Park 



Wildlife Management Area Managed to conserve 
habitats and maintain wildlife populations primarily 
for harvest purposes. 

Ecological Reserve Any area of Crown land in 
the proyince may be established as an ecological 
reserve. Scientific studies are encouraged but visits 
without an authorised permit are prohibited. 

Source: Department of Natural Resources (1985) 

NEW BRUNSWICK 

Titles: Parks Act, 1982; Ecological Reserves 
Act, 1976; Fish and Wildlife Act, 1980; CrovvTi 
Lands and Forests Act, 1982; Order in Council 

Administrative authorities: Department of 
Recreation and Environment, Ministry of Natural 
Resources and Energy 

Designations: 

PROVINCIAL PARK Such areas are divided into 
seven classes: 

Rest Area Designated to meet the needs of the 
travelling public. 

Campground Park Designed to meet the needs of 
resident and non-resident campers for overnight 
camping. 

Beach Park Created to meet the need for suitable 
bathing and swimming areas. 

Recreation Park Designed to provide a full range 
of activities, including picnic grounds, campgrounds 
and beaches in one park. 



17 



Protected Areas of the World 



Wildlife Park Established primarily to provide a 
public display of animals and birds native to the 
province. 

Resource Park A large, multiple-use park area, 
the primary function of which is to provide a large 
block of land for the enjoy ment of outdoor recreation 
in a natural environment. 

Fishing is allowed on a controlled basis, hunting and 
trapping are not permitted, and the harvesting of 
natural resources is allowed under controlled 
supervision. 

Marine Park Designed to preserve the natural 
environment of marine and shore fauna and flora 
Areas which wUl be reached primarily by boat and 
are to have no road access. 



Ecological Reserve May be established on 

private or Crown land. Regulations require that a 
management plan be prej)ared detailing the natural 
and cultural resources of each reserve and oudining 
the terms of use. 

No person shall hunt, fish, trap, conduct forestry, 
agriculture or mining operations, conduct 
exploration or boring, prosjjecting, levelling, or 
construction work; and in general, works of a nature 
that may alter any part of the terrain or of the 
vegetation, and any acts of a nature that may disturb 
the fauna or flora, are forbidden. 

Research or any other activity carried out requires a 
permit. 

Wildlife Management Area 

Wildlife Refuge Tend to be small and are 

intended to be used in the interest of public education. 

Sources: Original legislation; Beardmore (1985) 

NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR 

Titles:Wilderness and Ecological Reserves 
Act, 1980; Provincial Parks Act, 1970; 
Wildlife Act Wildlife Reserve Regulations, 
1963; Order in Council 

Administrative authorities: Parks Division, 
Department of Tourism and Culture 

Designations: 

Ecological Reserve Established to protect living 
organisms in their natural habitats, and for the 
benefit, education, and enjoyment of present and 
future generations in the province. Road and facility 
construction, hydro development, mining, forestry, 
and motorised transport are prohibited. Hunting, 
fishing, trapping, canoeing and camping are 
permitted so long as they do not threaten the natural 



resources. Some non-conforming uses may 
continue as long as they do not threaten the integrity 
of the reserve. 

PROVINCIAL PARK Such areas are divided into 
three categories: 



Camping Park Provides for a range of camping 
experiences. 



Day Use Park Designed solely for those wishing 
to spend an enjoyable day in a natural setting. 
Camping is not permitted. 



Natural Scenic Attraction Areas with special 
scenic qualities or natural significance. Picnicking is 
allowed but camping is not 



Wilderness Reserve Established largely because 
of their natural scenic beauty, and are intended to be 
used for recreation. Hunting and fishing are 
permitted. 



Seabird Sanctuary 

Source: Taschereau (1985) 
NORTHWEST TERRITORIES 

Titles: Northwest Territories Wildlife 
Act, 1978; Territorial Lands Act; 
Territorial Parks Act, 1973; Land Use 
Regulations; Territorial Wildlife and/or Park 
Ordinances; Order in Council 



Administrative authorities: Department of 
Renewable Resources; Department of Economic 
Development and Tourism 



Designations: 



Ecological Areas 
CommunityPark 
Game Preserve 
Wildlife Sanctuary 
Territorial Park 



Source: Original legislation 



18 



Canada 



NOVA SCOTIA 

Titles: Provincial Parks Act, 1988; Beaches 
Act, 1988; Wildlife Act, 1987; Conservation 
Easements Act, 1992; Special Places 
Protection Act, 1981; Museum Act 

Administrative authorities: Parks and 

Recreation Division, Department of Natural 
Resources; Department of Education (Nova Scotia 
Museum) 

Designations: 

Ecological Site Can be designated on Crown land 
or on private land widi permission of the owner. 
Consist of natural ecosystems, habitats of 
endangered plant or animal species, or other areas 
desirable for research and educational use. A 
management plan must be formulated before it is 
designated as a reserve. 

Heritage Site May be designated on Crown or 
private land and potential sites are protected while 
being investigated. These are areas containing 
archaeological, historical, or palaeotological objects 
or remains. 

Wildlife Management Area Private or public land 
where flexible regulations apply to the management 
and harvesting of wildlife. Established to protect 
wildlife and waterfowl habitat and to provide 
opportunities for natural history education and 
outdoor recreation. 

Game Sanctuary Established to allow the 

increase of game species and provide a reserve of 
game for surrounding forests. Hunting or disturbance 
of wildlife is prohibited. 

Nature Reserve 

Protected Beach Allows for the protection of 

sand dunes and a large variety of coast Applies to all 
'beaches' below high tide, and to designated beaches 
(including those on private land), with the 
landowners permission. 

Provincial Park Divided into the following 

general classes for statistical purposes: camping, 
picnic, beach, wildlife, and historic. 



Special Place The province is considering a parks 
classification system which will include the 
following designations: wildland park, natural 
heritage reserve, historic park, natural environment 
parks, outdoor recreation park, wayside park, 
wildlife park, and park reserve. 

Sources: Beardmore (1985); D. Smith, pers. 

comm. (1992) 



ONTARIO 

Titles: Ontario Provincial Parks Act, 1980; 
Ontario Game and Fish Act, 1980; Wilderness 
Areas Act, 1980; Conservation Land Act; 
Conservation Authorities Act, 1980; Ontario 
Heritage Act, 1980; Endangered Species Act, 
1971; Public Lands Act; Planning Act; Order 
in Council 

Administrative authorities: Provincial Parks 

and Natural Heritage Policy Branch, Ministry of 
Natural Resources; Federation of Ontario 
Naturalists; Ontario Heritage League; Niagara 
Escarpment Commission 

Designations: 

Ecological Area 
Conservation Area 
Wildlife Area 
Game Preserve 

PROVINCIAL PARK Areas which are set apart 
to protect special natural and historical features. 
They also provide outdoor recreauon and education 
opportunities. Divided into six classes: natural 
environment, nature reserve, wilderness, historical, 
waterway, and recreation. There are also six zones 
within any particular class of park: nature reserve, 
wilderness, natural environment, historical, access, 
and development. 

In all classes of park, mining activity, commercial 
hydroelectric development and logging (except in 
Algonquin) are prohibited. Eventually, commercial 
trapping, commercial wildrice harvesting and most 
commercial fishing will be eliminated. Hunting is not 
permitted in wilderness and nature reserve parks and 
zones. 

Wilderness Park Substantial areas where the 
forces of nature are permitted to function freely and 
where visitors travel by non-mechanised means and 
experience expansive solitude, challenge and 
personal integradon with nature. 

Nature Reserve Areas selected to represent the 
distinctive natural habitats and landforms of Ontario, 
and are protected for educational purposes and as 
gene pools for research to benefit present and future 
generauons. The closest equivalent to ecological 
reserves found in other provinces. 

Historic Park Areas selected to represent the 
distinctive historical resources of the province in 
open-space settings, and are protected for 
interpretive, educational and research purposes. 

Natural Environment Park Areas which 

incorporate outstanding recreational landscapes with 
representative natural features and historical 



19 



Protected Areas of the World 



resources to provide high quality recreational and 
educational experiences. 

Waterway Park Areas which incorporate 
outstanding recreational water routes with 
representative natural features and historical 
resources to provide high quality recreational and 
educational experiences. 

Recreation Park Areas which support a wide 
variety of outdoor recreation opportunities for large 
numbers of people in attractive surroundings. 

Sources: Taschereau (1985); MNR (1992a) 

PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND 

Title: Recreational Development Act, 1974; 
Natural Areas Protection Act, 1988; Planning 
Act, 1969; Provincial Parks Act, 1956; 
Fish and Game Protection Act, 1966; Order 
in Council 

Administrative authorities: Parks Division, 
Department of Tourism, Parks and Recreation; 
Department of Environment; Technical Advisory 
Committee; Prince Edward Island Nature Trust 

Designations: 

Protected Area 
Protected Beach 
Ecological Reserve 
Wetland Area 

Wildlife Management Area Established to 

provide protected feeding and resting areas for 
waterfowl during migration. Also provide improved 
hunting opportunities around such areas, and provide 
opportunities for bird watchers, photographers and 
naturalist to observe, photograph and study 
waterfowl. Hunting, trapping or other disturbances 
of wildlife are prohibited. 



PROVINCIAL PARK 

five classes: 



Such areas are divided into 



Nature Preserve Intended to protect and 

perpetuate in an undisturbed state, individual 
features of unique natural significance, fwssessing 
natural conditions of scientific and/or educational 
value. Plant and animal harvesting is not allowed 
within parks of die province. 

Nature Environment Park Natural lands set aside 
to educate and acquaint the user with the aesthetics 
and values of the natural landscape and to provide 
associated compatible forms of recreation. 

Recreation Park Established to provide areas that 
are adaptable to heavy use and offer a wide range of 
outdoor recreation opportunities. 



Wayside/Beach Access Park Created to promote 
a safe and pleasurable travel experience, and are set 
aside at reasonable intervals for motorists to stop and 
rest, or to provide access facilities for good beaches. 

Historic Park Created to preserve, restore, and 
interpret buildings, sites, objects and related lands of 
historical, educational and cultural interest. 

Sources: Beardmore (1985) 
QUEBEC 

Titles: Provincial Parks Act; Ecological 
Reserves Act, 1974; Cultural Property Act; 
Wildlife Conservation Act; Order in Council 



Administrative authorities: Direction gen6rale 
des pares et des t^rritoires fauniques, Ministere 
Loisir, Chasse et Peche; Direction g6nerale de la 
conservation et du patrimoine 6cologique, Ministere 
de I'Environnement 



Designations: 

Ecological Reserve Access requires written 
authorisation from the Minister of the Environment 
and is only given for scientific or educational 
purposes. 

PARK 

Conservation Park Established to permanently 
protect the representative areas of the province's 
natural regions, or of natural sites presenting 
exceptional features, while rendering them 
accessible to the public for the purposes of education 
and cross-country recreation. Open to the public for 
educational purposes, the recreational activities 
offered within these areas require simple equipment 
which is unlikely to affect the environment. In 
conservation and recreation parks, hunting is 
prohibited, whereas the carrying out of certain 
traditional activities such as the production of maple 
syrup is allowed under strict regulation. All forms of 
prospecting, and any utilisation, harvesting, or 
harnessing of resources related to logging, mining, 
or the production of energy, and the laying of oil or 
gas pipelines or powerlines are prohibited within 
park boundaries. 

Recreation Park Intended to encourage outdoor 
activities, while contributing to environmental 
protection and education. 

Source: Original legislation 



20 



Canada 



SASKATCHEWAN 

Titles: Parks Act, 1986; Ecological Reserves 
Act, 1980; Saskatchewan Wildlife Act; 
Critical Wildlife Habitat Protection Act, 1984; 
Regional Parks Act, 1979; Heritage Property 
Act, 1980; Order in Council 

Administrative authorities: Parks Branch, 
Department of Natural Resources; Saskatchewan 
Wildlife Federation 

Designations: 

Ecological Reserve Provincially administered 
Crown land which sustains or is associated with 
unique or representative parts of the environment. 

Wildlife Area 
Protected Area 
Park Land Reserve 
Recreation Site 



PROVINCIAL PARK 

under four designations: 



Such areas are classified 



Natural Environment Park Includes a wide range 
of natural and man-made attractions. Large areas, 
representative of natural landscapes, providing high 
quality outdoor recreation opportunities. 

Recreation Park Smaller areas which provide 
high quality recreation opportunities and facilities. 
Development occurs near urban population centres 
and travel routes. 

Wilderness Park Large, pristine tracts of land 
containing significant natural features and 



opportunities for activities such as canoeing, hiking, 
primitive camping and photography. Facility 
development is limited to basic comforts to ensure 
preservation of the environment. 

Historic Park Such areas are set aside to 

preserve, reconstruct and interpret the provinces 
history for the public. 

Regional Park A local, independent park 

authority is responsible for development and 
management of such areas, with maintenance and 
capital grants provided by the province. 

Source: Original legislation; Saskatchewan Parks, 
Recreation and Culture (n.d.); K. Lozinsky, pers. 
comm. (1992) 

YUKON 

Titles: Territorial Wildlife Act; Land Use 
Regulations; Territorial Wildlife and/or Park 
Ordinances; Territorial Park Act; Order in 
Council 

Administrative authorities: Parks and Outdoor 
Recreation Branch, Department of Renewable 
Resources 

Designations: 

Ecological Reserve 
Territorial Park 
Game Preserve 
Wildlife Sanctuary 

Source: F. McRae, pers. comm. (1992) 



21 



Protected Areas of the World 



SUMMARY OF PROTECTED AREAS 

(Environment Canada, 1990) 
Federal Protected Areas 

(National Map) 



Map Nationallinternadonal designations 
ref. Name of area 



lUCN management Area 

category (ha) 



Year 
notiHed 





Alberta 




Migratory Bird Sanctuaries 


1 


Richardson Lake 


2 


Saskatoon Lake 




National Parks 


3 


Banff 


4 


Elk Island 


5 


Jasper 


6 


Waterton Lakes 


7 


Wood Buffalo 




British Columbia 




Migratory Bird Sanctuary 


8 


Victoria Harbour 




National Parks 


9 


Glacier 


10 


Kootenay 


11 


Mount Revelstoke 


12 


Pacific Rim* 


13 


South Moresby* 


14 


Yoho 




National Wildlife Area 


15 


Columbia 




Manitoba 




National Park 


16 


Riding Mountain 




New Brunswick 




National Parks 


17 


Fundy 


18 


Kouchibouguac 




National Wildlife Area 


19 


Tintamarre 




Newfoundland 




National Parks 


20 


Gros Mome 


21 


Terra Nova 




Northwest Territories 




Migratory Bird Sanctuaries 


22 


Akimiski Island 


23 


Anderson River Delta 


24 


Banks Island No. 1 


25 


Banks Island No.2 


26 


Bylot Island 


27 


Cape Dorset 


28 


Dewey Soper-Res. 



V 


12,700 


1953 


IV 


1,140 


1948 


n 


664,080 


1885 


n 


19,430 


1913 


n 


1,087,800 


1907 


n 


50,500 


1895 


n 


3,136,490 


1922 



rv 



n 



n 
n 



IV 



1,700 



1,001 

297,590 

20,590 
23,880 

1.990 



1923 



n 


135,000 


1886 


n 


140,600 


1920 


n 


25,970 


1914 


n 


50,000 


1970 


n 


147,000 


1988 


n 


131,300 


1886 



1978 

1929 

1948 
1979 

1978 



n 


194,250 


1973 


n 


39,990 


1957 


rv 


336,700 


1941 


rv 


108,300 


1961 


IV 


2,051,800 


1961 


IV 


14,200 


1961 


IV 


1,087,800 


1965 


IV 


25,900 


1958 


IV 


815,900 


1957 



22 



Canada 



Map 


National/international designations 


lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 


notified 


29 


East Bay 


rv 


116,600 


1959 


30 


Harry Gibbons 


IV 


148,900 


1959 


31 


Kendall Island 


IV 


60,600 


1961 


32 


Mcconnell River 


rv 


32,900 


1960 


33 


Queen Maude Gulf 
National Parks 


rv 


6,278,200 


1961 


34 


Auyuittuq* 


n 


2,147,110 


1976 


35 


Ellesmere Island 


n 


3,777,500 


1982 


36 


Nahanni* 


n 


476,560 


1976 


37 


Wood Buffalo 


n 


1,344,210 


1922 



38 



National Wildlife Area 
Polar Bear Pass Reserve 



81,000 



1982 





Nova Scotia 










Migratory Bird Sanctuary 








39 


Sable River 
National Paries 


IV 


2,350 


1977 


40 


Cape Breton Highlands 


n 


95,050 


1936 


41 


Kejimkujik 
National Wildlife Area 


n 


40,370 


1974 


42 


Chignecto River 

Wildlife Management Areas 


rv 


1.020 


1980 


43 


Musquodoboit Harbour Outer 










River Estuary 


rv ■ 


1.200 


1987 


44 


South Bight-Minas River Basin 

Ontario 

Migratory Bird Sanctuaries 


IV 


26,800 


1987 


45 


Fielding 


IV 


1,300 


1952 


46 


Hanna Bay 


IV 


29,800 


1939 


47 


Moose River 


rv 


1,450 


1958 


48 


Upper Canada 

National Capital Commission Areas 


IV 


2,660 


1961 


49 


Carlsbad Springs 


vm 


1.655 




50 


Mer Bleue 


vm 


1,086 




51 


The Greenbelt 
National Parks 


vm 


11,824 




52 


Bruce Peninsula 


n 


26,630 


1987 


53 


Georgian Bay Islands 


n 


2,530 


1929 


54 


Point Pelee 


n 


1,550 


1918 


55 


Pukaskwa 

National Wildlife Area 


n 


187,780 


1978 


56 


Long Point 

Prince Edward Island 

National Park 


rv 


3.250 


1980 


57 


Prince Edward Island 

Quebec 

Migratory Bird Sanctuaries 


n 


2.590 


1937 


58 


Bale Des Loups 


IV 


4,000 


1925 


59 


Boatswain Bay 


rv 


17.700 


1941 


60 


He A La Brume 


IV 


4.450 


1925 



23 



Protected Areas of the World 



Map National/international designations 
ref. Name of area 



lUCN management Area 

category (ha) 



Year 
notifled 



61 lie Aux Basques 

62 lie Bonaventure And Perce Rock 

63 lies De La Paix 

64 lies Saint-mahe 

65 Nicolet 

66 Sl Augustin 

67 Watshishou 

National Capital Commission Area 

68 Gatineau Park 

National Parks 

69 Forillon 

70 La Maurice 

71 Mingan Archipelago Reserve 

National Wildlife Areas 

72 Cap Tourmente R. 

73 Lac St-Francois 

Saskatchewan 

Migratory Bird Sanctuaries 

74 Basin And Middle Lake 

75 Duncaim Reservoir 

76 Last Mountain Lake (Reserve) 

77 Lenore Lake 

78 Murray Lake 

79 Old Wives Lake 

80 Opuntia Lake 

81 Redberry Lake 

National Parks 

82 Grasslands* 

83 Prince Albert 

National Wildlife Areas 

84 Prairie 

85 Stalwart 

Wildlife Management Area 

86 Last Mountain Lake Coop 

Yukon Territory 

National Parks 

87 Kluane* 

88 Northern Yukon* 



IV 
IV 
IV 
IV 
IV 
IV 
IV 



vra 



IV 



n 
n 



1,000 
1,340 
1,100 
4,500 
2,850 
55,300 
11,200 

34,400 



15,602 



2,201,500 
1,016,840 



1919 
1972 
1925 

1925 
1925 



n 


24,040 


1974 


n 


54,390 


1977 


I 


15,070 


1984 


IV 


2,230 


1978 


rv 


1,335 


1978 


IV 


8,702 


1925 


IV 


1,550 


1948 


IV 


4,740 


1887 


IV 


8,830 


1925 


IV 


1,170 


1948 


IV 


26,060 


1925 


IV 


1,400 


1952 


IV 


6,400 


1925 


n 


90,650 


1988 


n 


387,460 


1927 


IV 


2,933 


1978 


IV 


1,460 


1978 



1887 



1976 
1984 



* indicates a National Park Reserve 



24 



Canada 



SUMMARY OF PROTECTED AREAS 
Provincial/Territorial Protected Areas and sites under multiple management agencies 

(provincial/teritorial maps) 



Map Nationallinternational designations 
ref. Name of area 



lUCN management Area 

category (ha) 



Year 
notifled 





Alberta 




Ecological Reserves 


1 


Athabasca Dunes 


2 


Hand ffills 


3 


Kennedy Coulee 


4 


Kootenay Plains 


5 


Silver Valley 


6 


Upper Bob Creek 


7 


Wainwright Dunes 




Game Bird Sanctuaries 


8 


Birch Lake 


9 


I AC. La Biche 


10 


Many Island Lake 


11 


Ministik Lake 


12 


Miquelon Lake 


13 


Pakowki Lake 


14 


Richardson Lake 


15 


Sheep River 




Wilderness Areas 


16 


Ghost River 


17 


Siffeur 


18 


White Goat 




Provincial Parks or Areas 


19 


Bow Valley 


20 


Carson Pegasus 


21 


Crimson Lake 


22 


Cross Lake 


23 


Cypress Hills 


24 


Dillberry Lake 


25 


Dinosaur 


26 


Dry Island Buffalo Jump 


27 


Hilliard's Bay 


28 


Kananaskis 


29 


Kootenay Plains 


30 


Lesser Slave Lake 


31 


Notikewin 


32 


Redwater 


33 


White Earth Valley 


34 


Whitney Lake 


35 


William A. Switzer 


36 


Willmore 


37 


Winagami 


38 


Young's Point 




British Columbia 




Ecological Reserves 


1 


Black Tusk Nature Conservancy 


2 


Byers/Conroy/Harvey/Sinnett 




Islands 


3 


Checleset Bay 



I 


3,774 


1987 


I 


2,229 


1988 


I 


1,035 


1987 


I 


3,204 


1987 


I 


1,805 


1987 


I 


2,601 


1989 


I 


2,821 


1988 


IV 


2,902 




IV 


23,897 




IV 


3,387 




IV 


7,335 




IV 


1,602 




IV 


11,469 




IV 


11,662 




IV 


5,785 




I 


15,317 




I 


41,215 




I 


44,457 




II 


1,261 


1959 


II 


1,177 


1982 


II 


3,443 


1955 


II 


2,076 


1955 


II 


20,461 


1951 


u 


1.012 


1957 


n 


5,946 


1955 


n 


1,180 


1970 


n 


2,329 


1978 


II 


50,308 


1977 


IV 


3,378 


1978 


II 


7,292 


1966 


II 


9,667 


1979 


IV 


1,813 


1971 


rv 


2,055 


1971 


II 


1,490 


1982 


u 


2,686 


1958 


n 


459,673 




n 


1,211 


1956 


n 


1,090 


1971 



17,819 

12,205 
34.650 



1974 

1981 
1981 



25 



Protected Areas of the World 



Map 


National! international designations 


lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 


notified 


4 


Dewdney And Glide Islands 




3,845 


1971 


5 


East Redonda Island 




6,212 


1971 


6 


Gingiet Creek 




2,873 


1985 


7 


Gladys Lake 




48,560 


1975 


8 


Goosegrass Creek 




2,185 


1974 


9 


Ilgachuz Range 




2.914 


1975 


10 


Kingfisher Creek 




1,441 


1973 


11 


Mount Griffin 




1,376 


1972 


12 


Narcosli Lake 




1,098 


1973 


13 


Ningunsaw River 




2,047 


1975 


14 


Purcell Wilderness Conservatory 




131,523 


1974 


15 


Robson Bight 




1,248 


1982 


16 


Sikanni Chief 




2.401 


1973 


17 


VJ. Krajina 

Provincial Parks or Areas 




9.834 


1973 


18 


Akamina-Kishinena 


n 


10,915 


1986 


19 


Adin 


n 


38,445 


1973 


20 


Atlin Cla 


n 


232,695 


1973 


21 


Babine Mountains 


n 


32,400 


1984 


22 


Birkenhead Lake 


n 


3,642 


1963 


23 


Bowron Lake 


n 


123,117 


1961 


24 


Boya Lake 


n 


4,597 


1965 


25 


Brooks Peninsula 


n 


28,780 


1986 


26 


Bugaboo Alpine 


n 


24,912 


1969 


27 


Cape Scott 


n 


15,054 


1973 


28 


Carp Lake 


n 


19,344 


1973 


29 


Cascade 


n 


16,680 


1987 


30 


Cathedral 


n 


33,272 


1968 


31 


Champion Lakes 


n 


1,425 


1955 


32 


Coquihalla Summit 


n 


5.750 


1988 


33 


Crooked River 


n 


1.016 


1963 


34 


Cypress 


n 


2,489 


1975 


35 


Darke Lake 


n 


1.470 


1943 


36 


Desolation Sound 


n 


2.550 


1973 


37 


Desolation Sound 


n 


5,706 


1973 


38 


E.C. Manning 


n 


71,400 


1941 


39 


East Sooke 


vra 


1,422 


1970 


40 


Elk Falls 


n 


1,087 


1940 


41 


Elk Lakes 


n 


11,620 


1986 


42 


Elk T flkes 


n 


5.625 


1973 


43 


Eneas Lakes 


n 


1,036 


1968 


44 


Eskers 


n 


1,603 


1988 


45 


Fiordland 


n 


91,000 


1987 


46 


Garibaldi 


n 


195,083 


1920 


47 


Gitnadoix 


n 


58,000 


1986 


48 


Golden Ears 


n 


55,594 


1967 


49 


Gwillim Lake 


n 


9,199 


1971 


50 


Hakai 


n 


122,998 


1987 


51 


Hamber 


n 


24,518 


1941 


52 


International Ridge 


n 


1.905 


1989 


53 


Joffre Lakes 


n 


1.460 


1988 


54 


Kakwa 


n 


127,690 


1987 


55 


Kinaskan I ^ke 


n 


1,800 


1988 


56 


Kokanee Glacier Park 


n 


25,832 


1989 


57 


Kokanee Glacier 


n 


25,900 


1922 


58 


Kwadacha Wilderness 


n 


167,540 


1973 


59 


Lake Lovely Water 


n 


1,300 


1988 



26 



Canada 



Map 


National/ international designations 


lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 


notiFied 


60 


Monashee 


II 


7,513 


1962 


61 


Monkman 


II 


32,000 


1981 


62 


Mount Assiniboine 


U 


39,052 


1922 


63 


Mount Edziza 


n 


228,698 


1989 


64 


Mount Judge Howay 


11 


6,180 


1967 


65 


Mount Robson 


II 


219,829 


1913 


66 


Mount Seymour 


II 


3,508 


1989 


67 


Mount Terry Fox 


11 


1,930 


1982 


68 


Mt Edziza 


11 


96,770 


1989 


69 


Mt Judge Howay 


II 


6,180 


1989 


70 


Mt Seymour 


n 


3,508 


1989 


71 


Muncho Lake 


n 


88,412 


1957 


72 


Naikoon 


n 


72,641 


1973 


73 


Nancy Green 


n 


8,086 


1969 


74 


Okanagan Mountain 


n 


10,462 


1973 


75 


Sasquatch 


n 


1,220 


1968 


76 


Schoen Lake 


n 


8,170 


1977 


77 


Silver Star 


n 


8,714 


1989 


78 


Skagit Valley 


n 


32,508 


1973 


79 


Spatsizi Plateau 


n 


659,650 


1975 


80 


Sl Mary's Alpine 


n 


9,146 


1973 


81 


Stagleap 


n 


1,133 


1964 


82 


Stikine River 


n 


217,000 


1987 


83 


Stone Mountain 


n 


25,691 


1957 


84 


Strathcona 


n 


10,250 


1987 


85 


Strathcona 


n 


191,881 


1987 


86 


Tatlatui 


n 


105,826 


1973 


87 


Top Of The World 


n 


8,791 


1973 


88 


Tweedsmuir 


n 


960,918 


1987 


89 


Valhalla 


n 


49,600 


1983 


90 


Wells Gray 


n 


527,789 


1939 


91 


Wells Gray 


n 


13,479 


1987 


92 


White Pelican 


u 


1,247 


1971 


93 


Whiteswan Lake 


II 


1,994 


1978 


94 


Wokpash 


n 


37.800 


1986 


95 


Murtle Lake Wells 

Manitoba 

Ecological Reserves 


I 


212,743 


1968 


1 


Baralzon Lake 


I 


39,000 


1990 


2 


Long Point 


I 


1,600 


1987 


3 


Reindeer Island 

Wildlife Management Areas 


I 


14,200 


1976 


4 


Alonsa 


vni 


10,559 


1974 


5 


Assiniboine 


vm 


2,207 


1984 


6 


Basket Lake 


vm 


7,190 


1974 


7 


Broad Valley 


vm 


3,692 


1969 


8 


Cape Churchai 


vm 


1,877,700 


1978 


9 


Cape Tatnam 


vm 


522,267 


1973 


10 


Catfish Creek 


vm 


6,281 




11 


Cayer 


vm 


1,522 




12 


Clematis 


vm 


6,828 


1969 


13 


Dog Lake 


vm 


32,389 


1972 


14 


Graham dale 


vm 


1,489 


1974 


15 


Gypsumville 


vm 


2,465 


1969 


16 


HUbre 


vm 


3,527 


1969 


17 


Inwood 


vm 


2,719 


1969 



27 



Protected Areas of the World 



Map 


National/international designations 


lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 


notified 


18 


Lake Francis 


vni 


6,416 


1990 


19 


Langruth 


vm 


1,781 


1965 


20 


Lauder Sandhills 


vni 


3,011 


1971 


21 


Lee Lake 


vni 


6,966 


1969 


22 


Little Birch 


vm 


22,802 


1969 


23 


Lundar 


vm 


1,101 


1969 


24 


Mantagao Lake 


vm 


50,339 


1968 


25 


Marshy Point 


vm 


1,490 


1984 


26 


Moose Creek 


vm 


78,917 




27 


Narcisse 


vm 


13,781 


1969 


28 


Oak Hammock Marsh 


vm 


3,488 


1974 


29 


Pembina Valley 


vm 


1,910 


1976 


30 


Peonan Point 


vm 


2,339 


1969 


31 


Point River 


vm 


3,370 


1984 


32 


Portage Sandhills 


vm 


1,328 


1984 


33 


Proulx Lake 


vm 


3,302 


1974 


34 


Proven Lake 


vm 


1,908 


1984 


35 


Rembrandt 


vm 


1,360 


1974 


36 


Sandridge 


vm 


1,879 


1969 


37 


Saskeram 


vm 


96,648 


1963 


38 


Sharpewood 


vm 


2,266 


1969 


39 


Sleeve Lake 


vm 


14,964 


1969 


40 


Souris River Bend 


vm 


2,073 


1968 


41 


Steeprock 


vm 


1,890 


1966 


42 


Tom Lamb 


vm 


217,960 


1965 


43 


Washow Bay 


vm 


1,392 




44 


Watson P. Davidson 


vm 


5,827 


1961 


45 


Wesdake 


vm 


5,739 


1984 


46 


Whitewater Lake 
Provincial Parks or Areas 


vm 


8,977 


1974 


47 


Asessipi 


n 


2,460 


1964 


48 


Atikaki Wilderness 


IV 


466,841 


1985 


49 


Birds Hill 


n 


3,521 


1964 


50 


Clearwater Lake 


n 


59.570 


1975 


51 


Duck Mountain 


II 


127,400 


1962 


52 


Elk Island 


n 


1.000 


1975 


53 


Grass River 


n 


228.960 


1963 


54 


Grindstone 


n 


25.841 


1969 


55 


Hecla 


II 


86.309 


1969 


56 


Nopiming 


n 


143.740 


1976 


57 


Paint Lake 


n 


22.660 


1969 


58 


Spruce Woods 


n 


24,860 


1964 


59 


Turtle Mountain 


n 


18,910 


1962 


60 


WhitesheU 


n 


273,400 


1961 



3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 



New Brunswick 

Wildlife Protection Areas 
University of New Brunswick 
Utopia Refuge 

Wildlife Management Areas 

Bantalor 

Becaguimec 

Burpee 

Canaan River 

Kedgwick 

King's Landing 



IV 


1.518 


1949 


IV 


3.109 


1940 


IV 


15.287 


1930 


IV 


11.142 


1929 


IV 


18,177 


1934 


IV 


22,543 


1921 


IV 


82,914 


1923 


rv 


53,238 


1980 



28 



Canada 



Map 


National/international designations 


lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 


notined 


9 


Lepreau River 


IV 


24,356 


1927 


10 


Plaster Rock-renous 


IV 


84,175 


1939 


11 


Tracadie River 
Provincial Parks or Areas 


IV 


3,915 


1937 


12 


Mount Carleton 


n 


17,427 




13 


Sugar Loaf 

Newfoundland 

Ecological Reserves 


n 


1,150 


1971 


1 


Cape St Mary's 


I 


1,260 


1983 


2 


Funk Island 


I 


1,860 


1983 


3 


The Grass 


I 


1,100 


1987 


4 


Watt's Point 


ni 


3,090 


1986 



Seabird Sanctuary 

5 Baccalieu Island 

Wilderness Reserves 

6 Avalon 

7 Bay Du Nord 

8 Middle Ridge 

Provincial Parks or Areas 

9 Barachois Pond 

10 Butter Pot 

11 Chance Cove 

12 La Manche 

13 Squires Memorial 

14 Stag Lake 

Northwest Territories 
Wildlife Sanctuaries 

1 Bowman Bay 

2 Thelon 

3 Twin Islands 

Game Preserve 

4 Peel River 

Territorial Parks or Areas 

5 Blackstone 

6 Reid Lake 

Nova Scotia 
Game Sanctuaries 

1 Chignieto 

2 Liscomb 

3 Waverley 

Wildlife Management Areas 

4 Eastern Shore Islands 

5 Scatarie Island 

6 Tobeatic 

Provincial Park or Area 

7 Uniacke House Natural Setting 

Ontario 

Nature Reserves^ 
1 Agassiz Peatlands 



IV 



1,210 



n 


107,000 


1986 


n 


289,500 


1989 


VI 


81,600 


1989 


n 


3,497 


1961 


n 


1,752 


1964 


n 


2,068 


1974 


n 


1,394 


1966 


n 


1,574 


1959 


n 


1,278 


1979 


IV 


107,900 


1957 


IV 


2,396,000 


1927 


rv 


142,500 


1939 



vm 



vn 



442,700 



n 


1,430 


1982 


n 


1,085 


1975 


IV 


22,099 


1937 


rv 


45,327 


1928 


rv 


5,698 


1926 


IV 


11,767 


1976 


rv 


1,555 


1976 


IV 


49,213 


1968 



4,938 



2,315 



1985 



29 



Protected Areas of the World 



Map 


National/international designations 


lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 


notiHed 


2 


Black Duck River (Polar Bear PP) 




100,000 


1970 


3 


Brent Crater (Algonquin PP) 




1.390 


1893 


4 


Brule Harbour (Lake Superior PP) 




1,274 


1950 


5 


Cape ChaiUon (Lake Superior PP) 




1,948 


1950 


6 


Centennial Lake 




3,830 


1989 


7 


Coldspring Lake Watershed 










(Algonquin PP) 




5,396 


1893 


8 


Gina Lake (Obatanga PP) 




1,323 


1967 


9 


Greenleaf Creek Watershed 










(Algonquin PP) 




3,730 


1893 


10 


Hailstorm Creek (Algonquin PP) 




1,092 


1893 


11 


Johnston Herb/Pine Tree Pt 




2,008 


1989 


12 


Knife Creek (Obatanga PP) 




1,495 


1967 


13 


Lower Agawa River 










(Lake Superior PP) 




2,393 


1950 


14 


Lower Sand River 










(Lake Superior PP) 




1,150 


1950 


15 


Minnitaki Kames 




4,340 


1989 


16 


Nadine Lake Hardwoods 










(Algonquin PP) 




1,105 


1893 


17 


Nr Zone (Wasaga Beach PP) 




1,000 


1959 


18 


O'conner (Lake Superior PP) 




1,565 


1950 


19 


Pantagruel Creek 




2,200 


1989 


20 


Petawawa Rapids (Algonquin PP) 




1,411 


1893 


21 


Pigeon River Clay Plain 




2,870 


1989 


22 


Round Lake 




4,620 


1989 


23 


Site 416 (Polar Bear PP) 




9,300 


1984 


24 


Site 421 (Polar Bear PP) 




9,300 


1984 


25 


Tarn Lake (Algonquin PP) 




1,004 


1893 


26 


Treeby Lake (Lake Superior PP) 




1,005 


1950 


27 


Trout Lake 




7,850 


1988 


28 


Wachi Creek (Polar Bear PP) 




50,000 


1984 


29 


Windigo Bay 




8,300 


1989 


30 


Wood Creek (Polar Bear PP) 
Wildltfe Areas 




50,000 


1984 


31 


Camden Lake 


IV 


1,052 




32 


Hullett 


IV 


2,100 




33 


Luther Marsh 


IV 


5,666 




34 


Mountain 


IV 


1,457 




35 


Point Petre 


rv 


1,276 




36 


Sl Edmunds 


IV 


6,799 





Wilderness Area 

37 Cape Henrietta-Marie 

Conservation Authority Areas 

38 Authority Forest 

39 Belwood Lake (43) 

40 Conestogo Lake (40) 

41 Depot Lakes (132) 

42 Fanshawe (21) 

43 Greenock Swamp 

44 Guelph Lake (38) 

45 Luther Marsh (44) 

46 WUdwood (22) 

Crown Game Preserves 

47 Brigden 



58,320 



vm 


1,094 


vm 


1,348 


vm 


2,348 


vm 


1,000 


vm 


1,200 


vm 


7,300 


vm 


1,607 


vra 


4,800 


vm 


1,255 



1970 



IV 



2,613 



30 



Canada 



Map National/international designations 
ref. Name of area 



lUCN management Area 

category (ha) 



Year 
notified 



48 


Chapleau 


49 


Dumfries 


50 


Geikie Island 


51 


Himsworth 


52 


Nipissing 


53 


Shirley Bay 


54 


Yarmouth 




Provincial Parks or Areas 


55 


Abilibi-de-Troyes 


56 


Algonquin 


57 


Aubrey Falls 


58 


Awenda 


59 


Bigwind Lake 


60 


Bon Echo 


61 


Buder Lake 


62 


Cabot Head 


63 


Carillon 


64 


Casde Creek 


65 


Chapleau-Nemegosenda River 


66 


Cranberry Lake 


67 


Esker Lakes 


68 


Fathom Five 


69 


Frontenac 


70 


Fushimi Lake 


71 


Greenwater 


72 


Grundy Lake 


73 


Halfway Lake 


74 


Ivanhoe Lake 


75 


Kabitotikwia River 


76 


Kashabowie 


77 


Kesagami 


78 


Kettle Lakes 


79 


Killamey 


80 


Killbear 


81 


La Cloche 


82 


Lady Evelyn Smoothwater 


83 


Lake Nipigon 


84 


Lake Of The Woods 


85 


Lake Superior 


86 


Larder River 


87 


Livingstone Point 


88 


Lolal^ke 


89 


Mac Gregor Point 


90 


Makobe-Grays River 


91 


Matawin River Nature 


92 


Mattawa River 


93 


Michipicoten Island 


94 


Missinaibi 


95 


Mississagi Delta 


96 


Mississagi 


97 


Mississagi River 


98 


Murphy's Point 


99 


Nagagami Lake 


100 


Nagagamisis 


101 


Neys 


102 


Obatanga 


103 


Ojibway 



IV 


811,054 




IV 


1,000 




IV 


5,527 




IV 


2,659 




IV 


62,454 




IV 


1,849 




IV 


1,318 




n 


11,068 


1985 


IV 


765,345 


1893 


n 


4,860 


1985 


n 


2,917 


1975 


n 


1,970 


1985 


n 


6,644 


1971 


I 


3,400 


1985 


I 


4,514 


1985 


n 


1,417 


1966 


I 


1,075 


1985 


n 


8,165 


1973 


I 


2,800 


1985 


n 


3,237 


1957 


n 


9,976 


1972 


n 


5,130 


1974 


n 


5,294 


1979 


n 


5,350 


1957 


n 


2,554 


1959 


II 


4,730 


1980 


n 


1,589 


1957 


I 


1,965 


1985 


n 


2,055 


1985 


n 


55,977 


1983 


II 


1,261 


1957 


n 


48,500 


1964 


n 


1,756 


1971 


n 


7,448 


1985 


n 


72,400 


1983 


n 


1,458 


1960 


II 


12,900 


1967 


IV 


155,659 


1950 


n 


2,500 


1985 


I 


1,800 


1985 


I 


6,572 


1985 


n 


1,204 


1975 


n 


1,427 


1985 


I 


2,615 


1985 


n 


3,258 


1970 


II 


36,740 


1985 


n 


44,061 


1970 


I 


2,395 


1985 


II 


2,883 


1973 


n 


19,814 


1974 


n 


1,240 


1967 


I 


1,650 


1985 


n 


8,131 


1957 


n 


3,445 


1965 


n 


9,409 


1967 


n 


2,630 


1963 



31 



Protected Areas of the World 



Map 


National/international designations 


lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 


notifled 


104 


Opasquia Wilderness 


n 


473,000 


1983 


105 


Petroglyphs 


n 


1,555 


1976 


106 


Polar Bear 


n 


2,408,700 


1970 


107 


Quetico 


n 


475,819 


1950 


108 


Quetico Wilderness 


n 


475,819 


1950 


109 


Rene Brunelle 


n 


2,964 


1957 


110 


Restoule 


n 


1,200 


1963 


111 


Rondeau 


n 


3,254 


1894 


112 


Sable Islands 


I 


1,980 


1985 


113 


Samuel De Champlain 


n 


2,550 


1967 


114 


Sandbanks 


n 


1,509 


1970 


115 


Sandbar Lake 


n 


5,083 


1970 


116 


Sedgman Lake 


I 


5,710 


1985 


117 


Sibley 


n 


24,435 


1950 


118 


Silent Lake 


n 


1,450 


1977 


119 


Silver Falls 


n 


3,261 


1985 


120 


Slate Islands 


n 


6,570 


1985 


121 


South Bay 


n 


1,525 


1985 


122 


The Pinery 


n 


2,533 


1957 


123 


The Shoals 


n 


10,644 


1970 


124 


Wabakimi Wilderness 


n 


155,000 


1983 


125 


Wakami Lake 


n 


8,806 


1973 


126 


Wanapitei 


n 


2,700 


1985 


127 


Wasaga Beach 


n 


1,545 


1959 


128 


West Bay Nature Reserve 


I 


1,120 


1985 


129 


White Lake 


n 


1,726 


1963 


130 


Winisk River 


n 


173,530 


1969 


131 


Winnange Lake 


n 


4,745 


1985 


132 


Woodland Caribou Wilderness 


n 


450,000 


1983 



Prince Edward Island 

Wildlife Management Area 
1 Malpeque Bay River Wetlands Area 

Quebec 

Ecological Reserves 

1 Lac-Malakisis 

2 Tantare 

Wildlife Sanctuaries 

3 Aiguebelle 

4 Ashuapmushuan 

5 Assinica 

6 Bale Trinite 

7 Baldwin 

8 Cap-chat 

9 Chics-chocs 

10 Duchenier 

1 1 Duchesnay 

12 Duniere 

13 Eastmain 

14 Fort George 

15 Fort Rupert 

16 Frontenac 

17 He D'Anticosti 

18 lies Aux Grues, Dune, 
L'oignon, P.Cochon 

19 Intowin 



IV 



24,440 



1988 



I 


2,000 


1978 


I 


1,491 


1978 


IV 


3,950 


1945 


IV 


448,700 


1946 


IV 


888,500 


1961 


vm 


35,600 


1974 


IV 


23,000 


1974 


IV 


12,100 


1964 


rv 


112,600 


1949 


IV 


27,000 


1977 


vm 


8,800 


1972 


rv 


55,300 


1972 


vm 


434,400 


1976 


vm 


1,816,600 


1976 


vm 


1,124,000 


1976 


IV 


11,900 


1978 


IV 


511,400 


1974 


vm 


2,500 


1977 


vm 


8,800 


1976 



32 



Canada 



Map 


National/international designations 


lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 


notified 


20 


Kipawa 


vm 


463,600 


1950 


21 


La Verendrye 


IV 


1,361,000 


1939 


22 


Lacs Albanel, Mistassini & 










Waconichi 


IV 


1,640,000 


1953 


23 


Laurentides 


IV 


796,100 


1895 


24 


Mastigouche 


IV 


161,900 


1971 


25 


Matane 


IV 


128,400 


1962 


26 


Mistassini 


vm 


1,787,000 


1953 


27 


Nemiscau 


vni 


233,800 


1976 


28 


Nouveau Comptoir 


vm 


752,100 


1976 


29 


Papineau Labelle 


rv 


166,700 


1971 


30 


Parke 


vm 


12,000 


1961 


31 


Petite Nation 


vm 


25,000 


1934 


32 


Plaisance 


IV 


2,700 


1978 


33 


Pointe-Taillon 


vm 


7,500 


1965 


34 


Port Daniel 


IV 


6,400 


1953 


35 


Portneuf 


IV 


77,400 


1968 


36 


Post De La Baleine 


vm 


535,400 


1976 


37 


Rimouski 


IV 


79,700 


1958 


38 


Riviere Cascapedia 


IV 


2,000 


1982 


39 


Riviere Matamec 


vra 


103,600 


1970 


40 


Riviere Matane 


IV 


1,400 


1972 


41 


Riviere Matapedia 


IV 


1,000 


1974 


42 


Riviere Petite Cascapedia 


IV 


1,700 


1945 


43 


Riviere Port Daniel 


IV 


3,600 


1948 


44 


Rouge-Ma ttawin 


IV 


163,500 


1935 


45 


Saint Maurice 


IV 


78,200 


1963 


46 


Sept lies-port Cartier 


IV 


642,300 


1965 


47 


Waswanipi 

Provincial Parks or Areas 


IV 


847,000 


1976 


48 


Aiguebelle 


n 


24,170 


1985 


49 


Bic 


II 


3,320 


1984 


50 


Frontenac 


II 


15,200 


1986 


51 


Gaspesie 


n 


80,200 


1981 


52 


Grands Jardins 


II 


31,000 


1981 


53 


Jacques Cartier 


n 


67,060 


1981 


54 


Mount-Orford 


n 


5,837 


1980 


55 


Mount-Tremblant 


n 


124,000 


1981 


56 


Oka 


II 


2,370 


1986 


57 


Pare Mont Ste Anne 


vm 


6,600 


1968 


58 


Paul Sauve 


vm 


1,900 


1962 


59 


Pointe-Taillon 


n 


9,220 


1985 


60 


Saquenay 


II 


28,360 


1983 


61 


Yamaska 


n 


1,289 


1985 



Saskatchewan 
Protected Area 
Wildcat Hill 



IV 



16,997 



1971 



Provincial Parks or Areas 

2 Big Buffalo Beach 

3 Bronson Forest 

4 Buffalo Pound 

5 Candle Lake 

6 Clearwater River 

7 Cypress Hills 

8 Danielson 



n 


3,650 




n 


12,938 


1974 


II 


1,927 


1963 


II 


1,274 


1986 


IV 


224,035 


1986 


IV 


18.410 


1931 


II 


2,914 


1971 



33 



Protected Areas of the World 



Map 


Nationallinternadonaldesignations 


lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 


notified 


9 


Douglas 


IV 


4,434 


1973 


10 


Duck Mountain 


IV 


26,159 


1931 


11 


Good Spirit Lake 


IV 


1,901 


1931 


12 


Green-water Lake 


IV 


20,720 


1932 


13 


Jan Lake 


II 


1,854 


1976 


14 


I .ac La Ronge 


IV 


344,470 


1939 


15 


Meadow Lake 


IV 


156,%7 


1959 


16 


Moose Mountain 


IV 


40,060 


1931 


17 


Nipawin 


IV 


53,613 


1934 


18 


Saskatchewan Landing 


IV 


5,597 


1973 


19 


Whiteswan Lake (Whelan Bay) 


II 


1,834 




20 


Woody River 

Yukon Territory 

Wildlife Sanctuaries 


II 


15,540 




1 


Kluane 


IV 


422,200 


1943 


2 


Macarthur 
Game Preserve 


IV 


169,600 


1958 


3 


Peel River 

Territorial Parks or Areas 


vni 


300,000 




4 


Fishing Branch River 


vm 


384,000 


1978 


5 


Herschel Island 


IV 


11,200 


1989 



tThe "nature reserve" category in Ontario actually refers to "nature 
reserve zones" which fall within the provincial parks. These are listed, 
however, as they are equivalent to the "ecological reserves" of other 
provinces in tenns of protection afforded. The number and area of 
protected areas for Ontario is, therefore, inflated due to inclusion of 
this category. 

Category headings are generic in some cases and may not be defined 
in legislation (Annex). 

The database list for Canada was supplied by Environment Canada, 
dated September 1990. Upon receiving database lists from the various 



provincialAerri tonal administrations, the database record will be 
amended accordingly, and will be reflected in subsequent publications. 

Map infomiation (polygons and point sources) from the National Atlas 
Information Service (1992) is to be regarded as preliminary only. 
Locations and boundaries of protected areas are currently being 
verified by the National Atlas Infomiation Service. When completed, 
a revised spatial dataset will replace the one used in this publication 
for subsequent work by WCMC. 



34 



Canada 




o 



Federal Protected Areas - Canada 



35 



Protected Areas of the World 




135° 



130° 

_J 



125° 

_l 



120° 



115° 

I 



Provincial Protected Areas - British Columbia 



36 



Canada 




Provincial Protected Areas - Alberta 



37 



Protected Areas of the World 



1 %^ 



110° 



105' 



^cr 



55° 



50° 



^ 






w ^ 



f u 



~3- 



yvy 



^"-=^ 






b . 
l//^^. 



% 
^^W. 



r 



14 



■■'-n 1 






.<-, 






-w 



V7 



55' 



>o lo 



ri 



17 



C^ 







\. 



18 



'v^ 



50' 



200 400km 



110° 

I 



105° 

_l 



Provincial Protected Areas - Saskatchewan 



38 



Canada 




Provincial Protected Areas - Manitoba 



39 



Protected Areas of the World 




95° 
_l_ 



90° 

_l_ 



85° 

_l_ 



80° 



75° 



Provincial Protected Areas - Ontario 



40 



Canada 



60° 

200 400km 




Provincial Protected Areas - Quebec 



41 



Protected Areas of the World 




Provincial Protected Areas - Maritime Provinces 



42 



Canada 




Territorial Protected Areas - Northwest & Yukon Territories 



43 



GREENLAND (DENMARK) 



Area 2,175,600 sq. km 

Population 55,558 (1990) (Hunter, 1991) 

Natural increase: 1.3% per annum (1980) (estimate from 
Anon., 1984a) 

Economic Indicators 
GDP: No information 
GNP: No information 

Policy and Legislation In 1979, Greenland acquired 
home rule; full internal self-government was established 
under the Greenland Home Rule Authorities (Gronlands 
Hjemmestrye). Prior to this, the highest political 
assembly was the Greenlandic Council, which had an 
advisory capacity under the Danish authorities, except in 
relation to hunting and fishing where the Council had 
legislative powers which were applied to pass certain 
hunting regulations (Meyer, 1987). 

In 1962 the sub-Arctic valleys of south-west Greenland, 
with their unique and fragile "woods", were declared 
preserves by the Greenlandic Council (Meyer, 1987). 

The Conservation (Nature and Ancient Relics) Act for 
Greenland was enacted on 25 May 1974 (Act No. 266). 
The chief purpose was "to safeguard and care for 
Greenland's natural scenic assets". It gave authority to 
protect plant and animal species, and also areas of land 
where preservation or scientific considerations merit 
this. Protected areas are established through executive 
orders within this Act. Thus, in 1974, the two major 
protected areas were first established, under two separate 
orders: Northeast Greenland National Park (the largest 
national park in the world, some 972,000 sq. km) and 
Melville Bay National Wildlife Reserve. These 
executive orders were maintained by the Home Rule 
Government in the Landsting Act No. 11 of 
12 November 1980 on the preservation of natural 
amenities. This Act was later amended in the Landsting 
Act No. 15 of 9 November 1988, under which Northeast 
Greenland National Park was expanded in size. Some 
areas have been declared breeding reserves for birds, 
where certain restfictions operate only during a defined 
season (Anon., 1984b; Meyer, 1987). A ruling 
concerning the preservation of in situ relics and 
buildings, the Landsting Act No. 5, was passed by the 
home rule government on 16 October 1980. 

There is no right to private ownership of land. All land 
uses requiring areas to be withdrawn from common 
usage require permission; this is granted by municipal 
authorities in built-up areas, and by home rule authorities 
elsewhere. Local authorities are empowered to designate 
their own protected areas, and to take their own 
conservation measures (Helms, 1991). 



International Activities Denmark acceded to the 
Convention on Wedands of International Importance 
especially as Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar Convention) 
on 2 September 1977; Greenland was added to this 
Convention on 27 January 1988 and II sites covering 
l,044,000ha have been listed, two of these within 
NorthEast Greenland National Park. NorthEast 
Greenland National Park was declared a biosphere 
reserve in 1977. Unlike mainland Denmark, Greenland 
is not covered by the World Heritage Convention. It is 
no longer part of the European Community, and 
therefore not covered by Community conservation 
regulations, although there have been some moves to 
rejoin for economic reasons. 

Administration and Management F*rior to 1980, 
protected areas administration was under the jurisdiction 
of the Danish authorities, but since this date it has been 
under the autonomous home rule government. 

The Office of the Environment is responsible for the park 
system, and collaborates closely with the Danish 
Ministry of the Environment. The Natural Resources 
Office works on the Ramsar sites, amongst other things 
(Helms, 1991). Administration of NorthEast Greenland 
National Park is under the jurisdiction of the home rule 
Premier, wHo is advised by a National Park Board 
consisting of four members of the Greenland Assembly, 
four scientists and a chairman (Meyer, 1987; Fredskild, 
pcrs. comm., 1986). On the ground administration and 
management is carried out by the Danish military 
through their Sirius Sledge Patrol (Silis, 1990). 

Systems Reviews Greenland is the world's largest 
island (excluding continental islands). Most of its land 
area is within the Arctic circle. Iceland lies some 300km 
off the easLcm coast; Canada lies to the west, separated 
by the Davis Strait in the south and Baffin Bay further 
north. Ellesmcre Island (Canada) in the north is only 
some 50km from Greenland, separated by the Nares 
Su-ait. Some 80% of total land area is covered by an 
ice-cap 2,500km long, 1,000km wide and up to 3km 
thick. An icefree zone of some 384,000 sq. km borders 
the coast. This zone is generally quite narrow, but 
broadens to 200 - 300km in some places, and is 
intersected by deep fjords which connect the inland ice 
with the sea. The counuy is also much influenced by sea 
ice. Polar basin ice permanently blocks the north and 
north-east coast, and pack ice often drifts down along the 
east coast. In summer this pack ice drifts southwards 
along the east coast, and passes around Kap Farvel and 
northwards along the west coast (Anon., n.d.; Grimmett 
and Jones, 1989). 

The country is underlain by Precambrian bedrock, with 
younger rock overlying it in places. It is largely 
mountainous, but with some areas of more gentle relief 
in the coastal zone. The climate is largely low- to 



45 



Protected Areas of the World 



high-Arctic, although in the extreme south some 
sheltered valleys may be considered subArctic. The 
northern high-Arctic areas have very low precipitation 
and short growing seasons; they are sparsely vegetated. 
Much of the low-Arctic is covered by dwarf-shrub 
heaths, dominated by Im high Salix. In the sub- Arctic 
valleys Betula woods are found reaching a height of 
2-Atc\. It is largely in marshy areas, along streams and 
around lakes that the vegetation is relatively luxuriant 
(Grimmett and Jones, 1989). A total of 497 species of 
vascular plants has been described, including 15 
endemics (BOcherera/., 1978). 

Fishing is the principal industry. Subsistence hunting is 
also important. There is some sheep farming in South 
Greenland, also reindeer farming and haymaking in 
some areas. Mining for lead and zinc occurs, as well as 
oil and mineral exploration. Tourism has also begun to 
develop, although it is limited at present (Anon., 1983). 

The protected areas system comprises Northeast 
Greenland National Park, Melville Bay Nature Reserve, 
several Ramsar protected areas along the west and east 
coasts, which cover 10,500 sq. km, and a huge mosaic of 
regulated coastal areas, each with its own rules 
depending on the season and the animal species 
occurring there (Helms, 1991). 

Threats to wUdlife, including that within some of the 
protected areas, may arise from excessive hunting 
(Grimmett and Jones, 1989). The expansion of 
sheep-farming is also cause for some concern (Meyer, 
1987). Most of Greenland's Ramsar sites lie on the coast, 
such that any marine oil spills are potential hazards to 
the fragile ecological integrity and balance of these sites 
(Ministry of the Environment, 1990). A research 
programme has been carried out to establish the most 
effective cultivation measures in southern regions, and 
how to avoid erosion in these areas (Meyer, 1987). This 
programme involved the laying out of protected areas as 
"reference areas". It is suggested (Meyer, 1987) that the 
research project should create a basis for decisions 
regarding further regional preserves to safeguard natural 
assets and recreational use. 

Other Relevant Information Greenland has been a 
Danish possession since 1 380. It became an integral part 
of the Danish kingdom on 5 June 1953. A referendum in 
January 1979 led to home rule from 1 May 1979, 
followed by full internal self government in January 
1981 (Paxton, 1989). 

Addresses 

Gronlands Hjemmestyre (Greenland Home Rule 
Authorities), Direktoratet for Bohger, Teknik og 
Miljo, Dept. Fysisk Planlaegning and 



Naturforvaltning, Postbos 1070, 3900 NUUK 
(Tel: 299 23000; FAX: 299 24693) 
Danish Polar Centre, Hausergade 3, 1128 
COPENHAGEN K, Denmark 



References 

Helms, HJ. (1991). Nature Conservation in Greenland. 
In: Andreasen, C, Angantyr, L.A., Bay, C, 
Boertmann, D., Bom, E.W., EUing, H., Helms, H.J., 
Larsen, F., Olesen, C.R. and Siegstad, H. 
Atuakkiorfik. Nature Conservation in Greenland 
Research Nature and Wildlife Management. 1 32 pp. 

Anon. (1983). Factsheet Denmark, Greenland. Royal 
Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Copenhagen, 
Denmark. 12 pp. 

Anon. (1984a). Greenland in Figures. The Ministry for 
Greenland. 29 pp. 

Anon. (1984b). Guidelines on Greenland Expeditions. 
Ministry for Greenland and the Secretariat of the 
Commission for Scientific Research in Greenland. 
16 pp. 

Anon, (n.d., post- 1984). Greenland. Danish Tourist 
Board in cooperation with the Greenland Home Rule 
Authorities, Tursarliivik. 8 pp. 

Bocher, T.W., Fredskild, B., Hohnen, K. and Jacobsen, 
K. (1978). Gronlands Flora. 3rd Edition, Haase, 
Kobenhaven. 326 pp. (Translated from Danish 2nd 
Edition by T.T. EUdngton and M.C. Lewis) 

Grimmett, R.F.A. and Jones, T.A. (1989). Important 
Bird Areas in Europe. ICBP, Cambridge, UK. 
888 pp. 

Helms, HJ. (1991). Nature Conservation in Greenland. 
In: Andreasen, C, Angantyr, L.A., Bay, C, 
Boertmann, D., Bom, E.W., Elling, H., Helms, HJ., 
Larsen, F., Olesen, C.R., and Siegstad, H. 
Atuakkiorfik. Nature Conservation in Greenland 
Research Nature and Wildlife Management. 1 32 pp. 

Meyer, H. (1987). Protected areas and national parks 
in Greenland. In: Nelson, J.G., Needham, R. and 
Norton, L. (Eds), Arctic Heritage, Proceedings of 
a Symposium, August 24 - 28 1985. Association of 
Canadian Universities for Northern Studies, 
Ottawa, Canada. Pp. 567 - 575. 

Ministry of the Environment (1990). Danish Report 
1990 on the Ramsar Convention, Denmark and 
Greenland. Ministry of the Environment, National 
Forest and Nature Agency, Horsholm, Denmark. 
Pp. 127 - 149. 

Paxton, R. (Ed.) (1989). The Statesman's Yearbook. The 
MacMillan Press Ltd, London and Basingstoke, UK. 

SUis, I. (1990). The World's Greatest National Park, 
North and East Greenland. The Greenland Home 
Rule Authorities, Department of Environment and 
Wildlife, Nuuk. 



46 



Greenland (Denmark) 



ANNEX 

Deflnitions of protected area designations, as legislated, 

together with authorities responsible fortheiradministration 



Title: No information 

Date: 1962 

Brief description: A declaration by the 

Greenlandic Council for the protection of the 
"woods" in the subArctic valleys of southwest 
Greenland. 

Administrative authority: No information 

Designations: 

All dwellings and all cutting of trees are 
prohibited; sheep are not allowed to graze in 
these areas, and camping and hunting are 
restricted. 

Title: Conservation (Nature and Ancient 
Reics) Act (Act No. 266) and Executive Orders 
formed within the framework of this Act, 
maintained by the Landsting Act No. 11 on the 
preservation of natural amenities, amended in 
the Landsting Act No. 15. 

Date: 25 May 1974 (Act No. 266); 12 November 
1980 (Landsting Act No. 11); 9 November 1988 
(Landsting Act No. 15) 



Brief description: General acts giving authority 
to protect plant and animal species as well as areas 
of land. Sites are nominated individually by 
executive orders within these acts. 

Administrative authority: Greenland Home 

Rule Authorities 

Designations: 

Not applicable 

Title: No information 

Date: No information 

Brief description: No information 

Administrative authority: No information 

Designations: 

Breeding reserve for birds No trespassing or 
traffic is allowed within 500m between 1 June and 
31 August. 



47 



Protected Areas of the World 

SUMMARY OF PROTECTED AREAS 

Map Nationallinternadonaldesignations lUCN management Area Year 

ref. Name of area category (ha) notified 





National Park 








1 


Greenland 
Nature Reserve 


n 


97,200,000 


1974 


2 


Melville Bay 


I 


1,050,000 


1977 




Biosphere Reserve 










Northeast Greenland National Park 


K 


70,000,000 


1977 




Ramsar Wetlands 










Aqajarua-SuUorsuag 


R 


30,000 


1988 




Eqalummiut Nunaat-Nassuttuup Nunaa 


R 


500,000 


1988 




Heden 


R 


125,000 


1988 




Hochstetter Forland 


R 


140,000 


1988 




Dckatoq 


R 


35,000 


1988 




Kilen 


R 


30,000 


1988 




Kitsissunnguit 


R 


16,000 


1988 




Kuannersuit Kuussuat 


R 


4,500 


1988 




Natemaq 


R 


150,000 


1988 




Qinguata Marraa-Kuussuaq 


R 


6,000 


1988 




Ydre Kitsissut 


R 


8,000 


1988 



48 



Greenland (Denmark) 



1 r 



75° 70° 65° 60° 55° 50° 45° 40° ,~-f^^.x,^ 25° 20° 15° 10' 










y 



1 




65° 



\^i 



500 1000 1500 2000km 



i7,5f tI)'? 6S° 60° 55° 50^'^ij 35° 30° 25° 20° 15° 10° 

/ I "- h di \ \ \ \ \ \ \ I I I I 



Protected Areas of Greenland-Denmark 



49 



UNITED MEXICAN STATES (MEXICO) 



Area 1,958,201 sq. km 

Population 81,140,922(1990) 
Natural increase: 2.01% (1990) 

Economic Indicators 

GDP: US$ 1,686 per capita (1987) 

GNP: US$ 1,990 per capita (1989) 

Policy and Legislation Mexico is a representative, 
democratic and federal republic, comprising 31 states 
and one federal district Each state is autonomous in all 
internal affairs (Hunter, 1991). 

In practice, nature conservation began during the 
Prehispanic era (before 1521). The most notable 
example is the Maya civilisation, which based its 
development on a balanced agricultural-forestry system, 
which involved the strict protection of numerous areas, 
and provided "rest" periods for exploited areas 
(Gomez-Pompa, 1987; Gomez-Pompa and Kaus, 1990). 
This early commitment to resource protection was also 
shown by Nezahualcoyotl, who planted forested areas in 
Chapultcpec, Molino de las Flores, El Contador and 
others, and the botanical gardens and zoological parks 
established by the Emperor Moctezuma II in the 16th 
century (SEDUE, n.d.a; Vargas, 1984). 

The Spanish conquest of Mexico destfoyed or modified 
patterns of traditional resource use. Rapid demographic 
growth and intensive exploitation of many natural 
resources left only inaccessible areas, or those remaining 
under indigenous control, in their natural state 
(Alcerrecae/a/., 1988). 

Prior to the first Forestry Law of 1926, the declaration 
of national parks or reserves was carried out by virtue of 
presidential decrees for individual areas. By this means, 
the first protected area was created in 1876, the first 
forest reserve (rescrva forcstal) in 1898 and the first 
national park in 1917 (SEDUE, n.d.b). The first legal 
definition of a protected natural area appeared in the 
Forestry Law (1926), although this definition was rather 
ambiguous as it al lowed the establishment of both forest 
and tourist areas. 

A great increase in the number of protected areas was 
brought about by President Lazaro Cardenas 
(1934-1940): under his presidency, 40 national parks and 
seven reserves (58% of the present day system) were 
created, and major improvements were made in 
administration (Alccrreca el al., 1988; SEDUE, n.d.b; 
Vargas, 1984). The 1942 Forestry Law made more 
detailed provisions for the protection of national parks 
and their resources (Vargas, 1984). In addition, the 
Regulation of National and International Parks 
(Reglamento de Parqucs Nacionalcs e Iniernacionalcs) 
was approved in the same year (SEDUE, n.d.a.), and 



provided the clearest concept on national parks so far 
(Vargas, 1984). 

In 1944, further regulations to the 1942 Forestry Law 
were published, providing some measures for wildlife 
protection. The 1948 Forestry Law provided some 
control of forest exploitation. The Regulations of the 
1 948 Forestry Law were published in 1 950. The Forestry 
Law and its Regulations also provided for the 
establishment of forestry protected zones. The Federal 
Hunting Law (Ley Federal de Caza), 1952 made 
provisions for the establishment of wild faunal refuges 
(Vargas, 1984). Between 1950-1980,apolicy of creating 
"vedas forestales" (hunting reserves) was carried out. 
These were declared over large areas of the country, 
but the scheme was a failure and caused serious 
over-exploitation of resources and corruption 
(Vargas, 1990; E.J. Jardel, pcrs. comm., 1992). 

The current Forestry Law was promulgated in 1960, and 
it provided for the establishment of national parks for 
public use within suitable forested areas by the Federal 
Executive (SEDUE, n.d.a). In 1973, the National 
Commission of Works in Natural Parks (Comision 
Nacional de Obras en Parques Naturales) (CONOR AN) 
was created within the erstwhile Ministry of Public 
Works (Secretari'a de Obras Publicas). CONOPAN 
promoted the unlegislatcd concept of "natural parks" 
(parques naturales) which caused increased confusion 
within the existing system (SEDUE, n.d.a). In 1976 
CONOPAN was dissolved. Protected areas thrived again 
under the presidency of Jose Lopez Portillo 
(1976-1982): nine new national parks and 20 new 
reserves (rescrvas) were declared and administrative 
changes were made (SEDUE, n.d.b). In 1977 the first 
two national biosphere reserves, Michilia and Mapimi, 
were created (Alccrreca et al., 1988), and a third, 
Montes Azules, was declared the following year 
(SEDUE, n.d.b). 

The Ministry (Secretariat) for Urban Development and 
Ecology (Secretari'a de Desarrollo Urbano y Ecologia) 
(SEDUE) was created in 1982. Within the SEDUE, the 
Sub-secretariat for Ecology (Subsecretaria de Ecologia) 
was created in 1983, and it established the national 
system of natural protected areas (sisiema nacional de 
areas naturales protegidas) (SINAP) in 1986 as part of 
the National Programme for Ecology. The SINAP is an 
instrument to ensure the preservation, rational use and 
value of the natural and cultural resources, determining 
their management and priorities (SEDUE, n.d.a). 

Prior to the 1980s, national biosphere reserves were 
established by virtue of individual presidential decrees 
(Vargas, 1984). In addition, the Fisheries Ministry has 
established aquatic faunal refuges by virtue of the 
Fisheries Legislation, 1972 and 1986. Similarly, there 
are a few protected areas that have been established by 



51 



Protected Areas of the World 



virtue of other laws, i.e. the Federal Hunting Law, the 
Fisheries Legislation, state decrees and other 
government agencies (Vargas, 1984). Exjjerimental 
forestry plots (campos experimentales forestales) 
(CEFs) and experimental biological stations (estaciones 
experimentales de biologia) (EEBs), administered by the 
SARH (Secretan'a de Agricultura y Recursos 
Hidraubcos) and the UNAM (Universidad Nacional 
Autonoma de M6xico), respectively, appeared around 
1961. Although these two types of experimental areas 
were set up mainly for research, they provided some 
degree of protection (Vargas, 1984). 

The current law governing protected areas is the 1988 
General Law for Ecological Equilibrium and 
Environmental Protection (Ley General del EquUibrio 
Ecol6gico y la Proteccion al Ambiente) was finally 
promulgated in 1988 (see Annex). This regulates natural 
protected areas, makes legal provisions for SINAP, 
defining categories used and making provisions for wild 
and aquatic flora and fauna (SEDUE, 1989). It also 
provides for the decentralisation of environmental 
management to the federal agencies and municipalities, 
and includes an ecology code and guidelines for 
environmental impact assessment (FAO, n.d.). Another 
positive step appears to be the pubUcation of the General 
Law for Ecological Equilibrium by 19 states (SEDUE, 
n.d.a). 

Early legislation problems included limitations on the 
area of jurisdiction (Vargas, 1984). In addition, the 
concept of 'natural park', introduced by CONOPAN in 
1973, caused considerable confusion, as these were 
established within legally existing areas such as the 
national parks of El Chico, Iztaccihuatl-Popocat6f)etl, 
Cumbres de Ajusco, Lagunas de MontebeUo, Nevado de 
Toluca, and others (SEDUE, n.d.a). 

In the past, the protected areas system has been unable 
to protect adequately the natural richness of the 
country due to lack of legislation and resources for 
management (Vargas, 1984; Alc6rreca et al., 1988; 
WCMC, 1988). This has been compounded by the fact 
that many of the existing decrees have not been 
carried out (SEDUE, n.d.a). Ambiguity over 
management arises because areas designated as 
national parks often remain in private ownership 
(Halffter, 1992; Jardel et al., 1992; G. Aguirre, pers. 
comm., 1992). 

In 1992, the President reformed Mexico's Constitution 
and introduced important changes into the structure of 
federal govemmenL The fuU extent of these changes is 
not yet known (Perez-Gil and Jaramillo, 1992). 

International Activities Mexico signed the 

Convention on Nature Protection and Wildlife 
Preservation in the Western Hemisphere (Convenci6n 
sobre la Protecci6n de la Rora, de la Fauna y de las 
Bellezas Esc^nicas Naturales de los Paises de America) 
(Western Hemisphere Convention) in 1940, and ratified 
it subsequently. Mexico became a signatory to the 



Convention concerning the World Cultural and Natural 
Heritage (World Heritage Convention) in 1984 and the 
Convention on Wetlands of International Importance 
especially as Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar Convention) in 
1986. Mexico participates in the Unesco Man and the 
Biosphere Programme and has six internationally 
recognised biosphere reserves. It is also a signatory to 
the Convention on the Protection and Development of 
the Marine Environment of the Wider Caribbean Region 
(Cartagena Convention) (lUCN, 1985). Mexico signed 
this Convention and the related Protocol concerning the 
Cooperation in Combatting Oils Spills in the Wider 
Caribbean Region on 24 March 1983. It ratified both 
these agreements on 9 April 1985. The second Protocol 
concerning Specially Protected Areas and Wildlife 
(SPAW) was signed in June 1991. 

Mexico, through SEDUE, participates in the FAO Latin 
American Network Programme (Red Latinoamericana 
de Cooperaci6n T6cnica en Parques Nacionales, Otras 
Areas Protegidas, Flora y Fauna Silvestres). 

Administration and Management Up until 1976, 
protected area management was the responsibility of 
various bodies within the forestry sector. In 1901, the 
Central Board for Forests and Woods (Junta Central de 
Bosques y Arbolados) was created through a Presidential 
Decree as the first body responsible for protected areas 
(Vargas, 1984). Until 1910, natural areas were the 
responsibility of the Central Board of Forest and Woods; 
from 1910 to 1912 they were covered by the Forest 
Department (Departamento de Bosques) (SEDUE, 
n.d.a). From 1914 to 1920 they were the responsibiUty 
of the Department of Forests, Hunting and Fishing 
(Departamento de Bosques, Caza y Pesca), and from 
1932 to 1934 this responsibility was placed on the 
General Directorate of Forestry, Hunting and Fishing 
(Direccion General Forestal y de Caza y Pesca) (Vargas, 
pers. comm., 1992). Between 1934 and 1939, with the 
creation of a large number of new protected areas, 
special institutes were created for the administration of 
these areas. The first was the Forests and National Parks 
Office (Oficina de Bosques y Parques Nacionales) as 
part of the Autonomous Department of Forestry 
(Departamento Aut6nomo Forestal). The Office was 
then raised to the status of a department, the Department 
of National and International Parks (Departamento de 
Parques Nacionales e Internacionales), within the 
Direcci6n General Forestal y de Caza, a part of the 
Secretariat for Agriculture and PubUc Works (Secretan'a 
de Agricultura y Fomento) (SAF). Between 1940 and 
1951, the Department of Reserves and National Parks 
(Departamento de Reservas y Parques Nacionales) dealt 
with protected areas within the General Directorate of 
Forestry and Hunting of the SAF. There were a great 
number of changes between 1951 and 1972 and the 
responsibiUty for protected areas was shifted between 
numerous government departments. The short-lived 
National Commission of Works in Natural Parks 
(Comisi6n Nacional de Obras en Parques Naturales) 
(CONOPAN) was created in 1973, but dissolved three 



52 



United Mexican States (Mexico) 



years later due to its incompatibility with existing 
administrative bodies. 

From 1976 to 1982, five government agencies were 
responsible for protected area management; the Ministry 
of Agriculture and Water Resources (Secretaria de 
Recursos Hidrdulicos), the Ministry of Human 
Settlements and Public Works (Secretaria de 
Asentamientos Humanos y Obras Piiblicas), the 
Government of the Federal District (Gobemaci6n del 
Distrito Federal), the Ministry of Tourism (Secretaria de 
Turismo) and the Ministry of Fisheries (Secretaria de 
Pesca) (Perez-Gil and Jaramillo, 1992). 

The Ministry for Urban Development and Ecology 
(Secretaria de DesarroUo Urbano y Ecologia) (SEDUE) 
was created in 1982. Within SEDUE, the Subsecretariat 
of Ecology was responsible for protected areas through 
the General Directorate for Ecological Conservation of 
Natural Resources (Direcci6n General de Conservacidn 
Ecologica de los Recursos Naturales) (DGCERN), 
created in 1985. DGCERN was formed by the 
amalgamation of the former General Directorate of 
Reserves and Ecological Protected Areas (Direcci6n 
General de Parques, Reservas y Areas Ecol6gicas 
Protegidas) (DGPRAEP) was established and the 
General Directorate for Wild Flora and Fauna (Direccion 
General de Flora y Fauna SUvestres) (Alc6rreca et al., 
1988). The administration of protected areas was the 
responsibiUty of SEDUE, although this responsibility 
could also be delegated to states and municipalities by 
SEDUE (SEDUE, n.d.a). Management may also be 
contracted to NGOs in certain cases (L. Gonzdlez, pers. 
comm., 1992). 

In May 1992, SEDUE was dissolved and its functions 
taken over by the new Ministry for Social Development 
(SEDESOL) (P6rez-GU and Jaramillo, 1992). Further 
information is not currently available. 

Systems Reviews Mexico is the third largest country 
in Latin America after Brazil and Argentina. It is 
bounded in the north by the USA, west and south by the 
Pacific Ocean, south-east by Guatemala, Belize and the 
Caribbean Sea, and north-east by the Gulf of Mexico. It 
is mainly mountainous, with less than 35% of its surface 
area below 500m, and more than half above 1,000m 
(WCMC, 1988). Volcanic activity is considerable and 
has formed much of the topography. 

The Sierra Madre Occidental is the main mountain chain 
(1,400km) running parallel to the Pacific coast. The 
Sierra Madre Oriental (600km) runs north-west to 
south-east down the Atlantic coast. Between these two 
cordUleras is the Altiplanicie Mexicana, a plateau at an 
altitude of 3,000m. The Baja California mountain system 
is continuous with the Sierra Nevada in N. California; 
being almost completely surrounded by sea, its 
biological characteristics, like those of the Yucatan 
Peninsula, resemble those of an island. The 950km Eje 
Neovolcdnico runs east to west and includes Mexico's 
highest peak, Pico de Orizaba (5,675m). South of this is 



the 1,100km Sierra Madre del Sur. The south-east 
mountain system runs from Chiapas, and is contiguous 
with the Central American mountain chain 
(Rzedowski, 1978; G. Aguirre, pers. comm., 1992). 

The coastline extends for nearly 10,0(X3km, 6,760km on 
the Pacific and 2,900km on the Atlantic. There are an 
important number of islands on both the Pacific and the 
Atlantic sides of the country, as well as varied and 
important marine and coastal habitats such as coral 
reefs, mangroves and estuaries. The Usumacinta Delta 
(11 ,(X)0 sq. km) on the Atlantic coast is considered one 
of the most important wetlands in North America 
(Duever and Sprunt, 1978). There are two main river 
basins, the Gulf and the Pacific, with some enclosed 
basins in the interior of the country. 

Mexico ranks fourth in the world after Indonesia, Brazil 
and Colombia in terms of biodiversity (Toledo, 1988). It 
is also among the top ten countries in the world for the 
number of restricled-range bird species and endemic bird 
areas it supports (ICBP, 1992). It has the highest 
diversity of reptiles in the world, the second greatest 
mammal diversity and holds 8.7% of the worlds 
amphibian species, 11% of reptile, bird and mammal 
species and 14% of fish species. Furthermore, 32% of 
Mexico's terrestrial vertebrates and 40-50% of her plant 
species are endemic (Alcerreca et al., 1988; 
Flores- Villela and Gerez, 1988). This biological richness 
results from great habitat variation and diverse 
ecological regions, complex topography, climate, 
geology and geographical location. Ecosystems range 
from deserts to rain forests and mangrove swamps. In 
addition, Mexico, like Indonesia, bridges two major 
biogeographic realms, the Nearctic and the Neotropical, 
which provide exchanges between elements of northern 
temperate and tropical origins (Rzedowski, 1978). 
Reviews of Mexico's terrestrial biodiversity have been 
undertaken by Toledo (1988), Flores- Villela and Gerez 
(1988) and WCMC (1988). 

Mexico has tropical and subtropical zones, which, 
together with the complexity of its terrain, result in a 
great variety of climates. The Atlantic region is wetter 
than the north-west. Alpine climate is found in 
mountains higher than 4,000m. 

Vegetation can be divided into three approximately 
equal areas: the tropical/subtropical, temperate and 
semi-arid/arid. The tropical/subtropical region includes 
tropical rain forests originally covering 6% of the 
country, but half of which has been destroyed. The 
vegetation of the temperate region occupies the main 
Cordilleras and about 15% of the country; the principal 
forest consists of a wide diversity of pines Pinus spp. and 
oaks Quercus spp.; 80% of plants found in the pine 
forests are endemic (Rzedowski, 1978). In addition, 
pine forests supply 80% of national timber production 
(E. Jardel, pers. comm., 1992). In the higher parts of the 
Cordilleras, to 3,300m, forests of silver fir Abies spp. 
occur. The semi-arid/arid zone is found mainly in the 
north and centre (Sonoran and Chihuahuan deserts and 



53 



Protected Areas of the World 



central altiplano) and includes mostly open shmbland 
(matorral), cacti and xerophytic monocotyledons 
(Davis eta/., 1986). 

Until recently, the majority of existing protected areas 
have represented temperate ecosystems. The SINAP 
intended to include areas representative of all the 
ecosystems found in the country (SEDUE, n.d.a). 
However, at present national biosphere reserves are the 
only protected areas to have been selected using 
biological criteria; they are also the only ones which 
fulfil the minimum management requirements for 
conservation (E. Jardel, pers. comm., 1992). In terms of 
biological diversity, ecological value and vulnerability, 
conservation priorities are: montane broad-leaved forest, 
mangroves and coastal wetlands, moist tropical forest, 
dry tropical forest and arid zones (E. Jardel, pers. comm., 
1992). 

There appear to be discrepancies in the definitions and 
number of established protected areas. According to 
Vargas (1984 and pers. comm., 1992), at present there 
are 15 legally defined categories. Flores Villela and 
Gerez (1988) also reported the same number, although 
the categories differ, while Alcerreca et al. (1988) 
suggest that the number is as high as 26. The 
SlNAP's current categories only include nine 
definitions (SEDUE, n.d.a.). By 1969 there was a 
total of 40 protected areas covering 795,760ha, of 
which 34 were national parks (649,778ha) and six were 
special biosphere reserves (145,982ha) (SEDUE, n.d.a). 
However, Vargas (1984 and pers. comm., 1992) reports 
46 national parks only for the same period. By 1992 the 
total number of protected areas administered by SEDUE 
had increased to 68 (SEDUE, n.d.a). Although 20% of 
national territory is protected, these protected areas have 
not functioned in practice (Jardel, 1990). In view of this, 
biosphere reserves are the ideal type of protected area as 
they adapt well to socioeconomic conditions (Halffter, 
1984; 1991; Jardel e(fl/., 1992). 

Some of the problems facing protected areas include: 
lack of clear objectives, scientific research and 
management plans, appropriate legal support, and 
management resources; irregularities in land tenure and 
pressure form settlements in and around protected areas; 
and lack of public awareness (Alcerreca el al., 1988; 
SEDUE, n.d.a). By the early 1980s, property rights had 
been left undefined in 60% of national parks (Vargas, 
1984). The majority of protected areas have been 
established on communal land or ejidales. This has led 
to conflicts between nature conservation and local 
utilisation (Jardel, 1990). The legal situation is further 
complicated when the limits of protected areas are 
confused or erroneous, as is frequently the case in 
existing decrees (Alcerreca el al., 1988). The following 
are the principal threats: deforestation, poaching, 
rubbish dumping, plant poaching, mineral exploitation, 
over-grazing and erosion. Activities, like the expansion 
of agriculture have resulted in loss of soil, exhaustion of 
watercourses and pollution (Alcerreca el al., 1988; 
SEDUE, n.d.a). More detailed analyses of the problems 



relating to protected areas are made by Vargas (1984) 
and Alcerreca et al. (1988). For example, in 1970 it was 
reported that 69.1% of the national parks had human 
settlements, containing 73,715 people (Vargas, 1984). 
Thirty-three parks were overgrazed by livestock, 
hunting occurred in 31 parks, and deforestation and/or 
tree-cutting occurred in 30 (Vargas, 1984). 

Addresses 

Secretari'a de Desarrollo Urbano y Ecologia (SEDUE), 
Subsecretari'a de Ecologia (Directora General), 
Direccion General de Conservacion Ecologica de los 
Recursos Naturales, Rio Elba No. 20, 10 Piso, 
Colonia Cuauhtemoc, Delegaci6n Cuauhtemoc 
06500, MEXICO DF (Tel/FAX: 525 553 9462) 

Centro de Ecologia, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de 
Mexico (UNAM), Aptdo. Postal 70-275, MEXICO 
04510, D.F. 

Amigos de Sian Ka'an, Apartado 770, 77500 Canciin, 
QUINT ANA ROO 

Fundacion Chiapaneca Miguel Alvarez del Toro para la 
Proteccion de la Naturaleza (FUNDAMAT), A.C. 
Apartado Postal No. 970, Tuxtia Gutierrez, 
CHIAPAS CP 29000 

Laboratorio Natural Las Joyas de la Sierra de 
Manantlan, Universidad de Guadalajara, 
Aptdo Postal 1-3933, 44100 GUADALAJARA 
(Tel. 268655) Mariposa Monarca, Avenida 
Conslituyenles 345-806, Colonia Daniel Garza, 1 183 
MEXICO, DF(Tel: 525 515 9910) 

PRONATURA, A.C, Apartado Postal 14, 53160 
NAUC ALPAN, Estado de Mexico (Tel: 525 545 1 776) 

References 

Alcerreca, C, Consejo, J.J., Flores, O., Gutierrez, D., 
Hcntschell, E., Herzig, M., Perez-Gil, R., Reyes, 
J.M., y Sanchez-Cordero, V. (1988). Fauna silvestre 
y dreas naturales prolegidas. Universo Veintiuno. 
193 pp. 

Anaya, A., De la Maza, J., Consejo, J.J., Garcia, J.M. 
(1985). Conservacion del patrimonio natural de 
Mexico. World Forestry Congress. Unpublished. 
(Unseen) 

Beltran, E. ( 1 973). Los Parques Nacionales y la Semana 
de los Cinco Dlas. Instituto Mexicano de Recursos 
Naturales Renovables, A.C. Mexico. (Unseen) 

Davis, S.D., Droop, S.J.M., Gregerson, P., Henson, L., 
Leon, C.J., Villa-Lobos, J., Synge, H., and 
Zantovska, J. (1986). Plants in Danger -What do we 
know? lUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, 
UK. 461 pp. 

Duever, M.J. and Sprunt, A. (1978). Ecosystem analysis 
of the Usumacinta Delta, Tabasco and Campeche, 
Mexico 1978-1981. A proposal to lUCN. 123 pp. 

FAO (n.d.). La Red Latinoamericana de Cooperacion 
Tccnica en Parques Nacionales, Otras Areas 
Protcgidas, Flora y Fauna Silvestres. Oficina 
Regional de la FAO para America Latina y el Caribe, 
Santiago, Chile. 8 pp. 



54 



United Mexican Slates (Mexico) 



Flores-Villela, O. and Gerez, P. (1988). Conservacidn en 
Mixico: sintesis sobre vertebrados terrestres, 
vegetacidn y uso del sueto. INIREB, Conservation 
Intemalional. 302 pp. 

G6mez-Pompa, A. (1987). On Maya silviculture. 
Mexican Studies 3(1): 1-17. (Unseen) 

G6mez-Pompa, A. and Kaus, A. (1990). Traditional 
management of tropical forests in Mexico. In: A.B. 
Anderson (Ed.), Alternatives to Deforestation: Steps 
toward Sustainable Use of the Amazon Rain Forest. 
Columbia University Press, New York. Pp. 45-64. 

Gonzalez, A. and Sdnchez L., V.M. (1961). Losparques 
nacionales de Mixico. Institulo Mexicano de 
Recursos Naturales Renovables, A.C. 149 pp. 

Halffler, G. (1984). Las Reservas de la Biosfera: 
Conservacion de la Naturaleza para el Hombre. Acta 
Zool. Mix. 5: 448. 

Halffter, G. (1991). El concepto de la reserva de la 
bi6sfera. Memorias del Seminario sobre 
Conservacidn de la Diversidad Bioldgica de Mixico 
1: 1-25. 

Halffter, G. (1992). Areas naluralcs protegidas de 
Mexico: una perspcctiva. Instiluto de Ecologfa. 
(Unpublished). 12 pp. 

Hunter, B. (1991). The Statesn^an's Year-Book 
1991-1992. The Macmillan Press Ltd, London. 

ICBP (1992). Putting biodiversity on the map: priority 
areas for global conservation. International Council 
for Bird Preservation, Cambridge, UK. Pp. 90. 

lUCN (1985). Status of multilateral treaties in the field 
of environment and conservation. lUCN 
Environmental Policy and Law Occasional Paper 1 : 
1-6. 

Jardel, E.J. (1990). Conservacion y uso sostenido de 
recursos foreslales en ecosistcmas de montana. In: 
Rojas, R. (Ed.) En busca del equilibrio perdido: el 
uso de los recursos naturales en Mixico. Editorial 
Universidad dc Guadalajara. Pp. 209-235. 

Jardel, E.J., Aguirre, G., Santana, E., and Halffter, G. 
(1992). DesarroUo de las reservas dc la biosfera en 
Mexico. Paper presented at Workshop III.3 of IV 
World Parks Congress, Caracas, Venezuela. 

Melo, G.C. (1977). Balance anali'tico de la opcracion 
del sistema mexicano de parqucs nacionales. 



Instituto de Geografia, UNAM. Serie Varia 1(3): 
155-231. (Unseen) 

Ormazdbal, C. (1988). Sistemas nacionales de dreas 
silvestres protegidas en Amirica Latina. Basado en 
los resultados del taller sobre Planificaci6n de 
Sistemas Nacionales de Areas Silvestres Protegidas, 
Caracas, Venezuela, 9-13 junio 1986. Proyecto 
FAO/PNUMA sobre manejo de areas silvestres, 
areas protegidas y vida silvestre en America 
Latina y el Caribe. Oficina Regional de la FAO 
para America Latina y el Caribe, Santiago, 
Chile. Pp. 20-23. 

Perez, R., and Jaramillo, F. (1992). Natural Protected 
Areas in Mexico. Report by PG7 Consultores, S.C. 
for lUCN-BID. 21 pp. (unpublished) 

Rzedowski, J. (1978). Vegetacidn de Mixico. Editorial 
LIMUSA, Mexico DF. 432 pp. 

SEDUE (n.d.a). Resefia de la conservacion de Sreas 
naturales protegidas en Mexico. 23 pp. 

SEDUE (n.d.b). Sistema nacional de dreas naturales 
protegidas. 24 pp. 

SEDUE (n.d.c). Sistema nacional de areas naturales 
protegidas (SINAP), Mexico. 9 pp. 

SEDUE (1989). Informacidn bdsica sobre las dreas 
naturales protegidas de Mixico. Subsecretaria de 
Ecologfa. Direccion General de Conservacion 
Ecologica de los Recursos Naturales (DGCERN). 
SINAP. 82 pp. 

Toledo, V.M. (1988). La diversidad biologica de 
Mexico. Ciencia y DesarroUo. 14(81): 17-30 
(Unseen) 

Vargas, F. (1984). Parques nacionales de Mixico y 
reservas equivatentes. Instituto de Investigaciones 
Economicas, UNAM. 266 pp. 

Vargas, F. (1990). Las dreas naturales "protegidas" en 
Mixico; una Utopia, basada en simulaciones, mitos, 
demagogia y autoritarismo. II International 
S ymposium on Protected Areas in Mexico. Centro de 
Ecologia UNAM. 22-26 October 1990. 

WCMC (1988). Mexico -Conserva:ion of biological 
diversity. World Conservation Monitoring Centre, 
Cambridge, UK. 19 pp. 



55 



Protected Areas of the World 



ANNEX 

Definitions of protected area designations, as legislated, 

together with authorities responsible for their administration 



Title: Ley General del Equilibrio Ecologico y 
la Proteccion al Amblente (General Law for 
Ecological Equilibrium and Environmental 
Protection) 

Date: 1 March 1988 

Brief description: The backbone of ecological 
regulation in the country and is an integrated 
approach to the ecology issue and the commitment 
to tackle the related problems through the combined 
efforts of the state and society. The first seven 
categories are federal while the remaining two are of 
local interest. 

Administrative authority: Secretarfa de 
Desarrollo Urbano y Ecologia (SEDUE) 

Designations: 

Reserve de la Bids/era (Biosphere Reserve) 
Area no less than 10,000ha containing relevant 
biogeographic representative areas at the national 
level, of one or more ecosystems not significantly 
altered by human action, with at least a pristine area 
inhabited by endemic, threatened or endangered 
species. 

Reserva Especial de la Bidsfera (Special Biosphere 
Reserve) Representative area of one or more 
ecosystems not significantly altered by man, 
inhabited by endemic, threatened or endangered 
species. Their smaller size and ecosystems are the 
main differences with the above. 

Parque Nacional (National Park) 
Biogeographic representative area at a national level 
of one or more ecosystems which are significant as a 
result of their scenic beauty, their scientific, 
educational, recreational or historic value, their 
nationally important flora and fauna and their 
suitability for tourist development. 

Monumento Natural (Natural Monument) 
Area with one or more natural elements of national 
importance, consisting of natural places and objects 
that due to their unique or exceptional character, 
aesthetic interest, historic and scientific value are 
incorporated into a system of absolute protection. 

Parque Marino Nacional (Marine National Park) 
Marine areas, beaches and federal maritime- 
terrestrial neighbouring areas, dedicated to the 
preservation of the aquatic ecosystems and elements, 
ecological research and the rational use of their 
resources under specific norms of ecological 
protection. 



A rea de Proteccidn de Recursos Naturales (Natural 
Resource Protection Area) Areas destined to 
preserve and restore forested areas and to the 
conservation of the soil and water. The following 
areas are further found within this category: (a) forest 
reserve, (b) national forest reserve, (c) protective 
forest area, (d) area of forest restoration and 
propagation and (e) protection area for rivers, 
springs, deposits and in general, sources for urban 
water replenishment. 

Area de Proteccidn de Flora y Fauna Silvestre y 
Acudtica (Wild and Aquatic Flora and Fauna 
Protection Area) Areas containing critical 

habitats for the existence, transformation and 
development of species of wild and aquatic fiora and 
fauna. 

Parque Urbano (Urban Park) Areas for public 
use with natural, artificial ecosystems or nature 
elements dedicated to protect a healthy environment 
for recreation of the population and for the protection 
of artistic and historical values and natural beauty of 
regional or local significance. 

Zona Sujeta a Conservacidn Ecoldgica (Ecological 
Conservation Zone) Areas with one or more 

ecosystems in good conservation state, destined to 
preserve natural elements indispensable for 
ecological equilibrium and general welfare. Urban 
parks and areas subject to ecological conservation 
are the responsibility of state governments and 
municipalities. 

Source: SEDUE (1989) 

Title: Regulation of National and 
International Parks (Reglamento de Parques 
Nacionales e Internacionales) 

Date: Promulgated 15 April 1942; published 
29 May 1942 

Brief description: Provides the clearest national 
parks concept in the Mexican park legislation 

Administrative authority: Federal 

government 

Designations: 

Parque Nacional (National Park) Areas 

destined to ensure the protection of natural scenic 
beauties and flora and fauna of national importance, 
which the public may better enjoy by being placed 
under official surveillance. 

Source: Original legislation 



56 



United Mexican States (Mexico) 



SUMMARY OF PROTECTED AREAS 



Map National/international designations 
ret. Name of area 



lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


category 


(ha) 


notified 


II 


2,737 


1937 


II 


15,000 


1940 


II 


55,900 


1938 


II 


21,789 


1980 


II 


6,263 


1981 


II 


1,100 


1938 


II 


11,700 


1937 


II 


5,009 


1962 


II 


4,772 


1939 


II 


246,500 


1939 


II 


2,739 


1982 


II 


2,447 


1982 


II 


25,000 


1936 


II 


2,000 


1936 


II 


24,000 


1937 


II 


3,159 


1980 


III 


1,600 


1936 


II 


4,324 


1939 


II 


1,760 


1936 


II 


194 


1980 


II 


25,679 


1935 


II 


45,711 


1938 


II 


14,187 


1937 


II 


6,022 


1959 


II 


4,669 


1936 


II 


23,150 


1936 


II 


22,200 


1936 


II 


51,000 


1936 


V 


1,772 


1981 


II 


19,750 


1937 


II 


29,316 


1940 


II 


63,000 


1947 


II 


19,418 


1937 


V 


723,185 


1989 


V 


480,956 




I 


119,177 


1972 


V 


2,546,790 


1988 


V 


103,000 


1977 


V 


42,000 


1977 


II 


331,200 


1978 


II 


528,147 


1986 


V 


139,577 


1987 





National Parks 


1 


Benito Juarez 


2 


Bosencheve 


3 


Cafion del Ri'o Blanco 


4 


Can6n del Sumidero 


5 


Cascada de Bassaseachic 


6 


Cerro de la Estrella 


7 


Cofre de Perote 


8 


Constitucion de 1857 


9 


Cumbres de Majalca 


10 


Cumbres de Monterrey 


11 


El Chico 


12 


El Cimatario 


13 


ElGogorron 


14 


El Potosi 


15 


El Tepozteco 


16 


El Veladero 


17 


Grutas de Cacahuamilpa 


18 


Insurgcnie Jose Maria Morelos y Pavon 


19 


Insurgcnte Miguel Hidalgo y Costilla 


20 


Isla Isabela 


21 


Iziaccihuail-Popocatcpetl 


22 


La Malinchc 


23 


Lagunas dc Chacahua 


24 


Lagunas de Montcbcllo 


25 


Lagunas de Zempoala 


26 


Los Marmoles 


27 


Nevado de Colima 


28 


Nevado de Toluca 


29 


Palenque 


30 


Pico dc Orizaba 


31 


Pico dc Tancitaro 


32 


Sierra dc San Pedro Manir 


33 


Zoquiapun y Ancxas 




Biosphere Reserves (National) 


34 


Calakmul 


35 


El Pinacale 


36 


El Triunfo 


37 


El Vizcaino 


38 


Mapimi 


39 


Michili'a 


40 


Monies Azulcs 


41 


Sian Ka'an 


42 


Sierra dc Manantlan 




Marine Reserve 


43 


La Blanquilla 




Faunal Reserve 


44 


Isla Cedros 



IV 



66,868 



1,000 



1975 



1978 



Cetacean Sanctuary 
45 Isla dc Guerrero Negro 



40,000 



1979 



57 



Protected Areas of the World 



Map 


National/international designations 


lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 


notified 




Refuges 








46 


La Mojonera 


IV 


9,201 


1981 


47 


La Primavera 


IV 


30,500 


1980 


48 


Sierra de Alvarez 


IV 


16,900 


1981 


49 


Sierra del Pinacate 


IV 


28,660 


1979 


50 


Valle de los Cirios 


IV 


3,500,000 


1980 



51 



52 



53 
54 
55 
56 
57 
58 
59 
60 
61 
62 
63 



64 



65 
66 
67 
68 
69 
70 
71 
72 
73 
74 
75 
76 
77 
78 
79 



80 



Natural Monument 
Cerro de la Silla 

Natural and Typical Biotope 
La Encrucijada 

Special Biosphere Reserves 

Cascadas de Agua Azul 

El Ocoie 

Isla Conioy 

Isla Guadalupe 

Isla Tiburon 

Islas del Golfo de California 

Mariposa Monarca 

Ri'a Celesiun 

Ri'a Lagartos 

Sierra de Santa Martha 

Volcan de San Marifn 

Park 
Omiltcmi 

Forest Reserves 

Bavispe 

Campo Verde 

Ccntenario 

El Gavilan 

Mesa del Pitorreal 

Papigochic 

Porcion Boscosa de San Luis Potosi 

San Jose de los Molinos 

Sierra de Juarez 

Sierra de Los Ajos, Buenos Aires y Purica 

Sierra de Pedro Martir 

Sierras de Hansen y San Pedro Martir, y Mesa Pinal 

Tcquixquipan 

Terenos de Puebla y Mexico 

Tutuaca 

Protection Area for Wild Flora and Fauna 
Corrcdor Biologico Chichinautzin 



IV 



6,045 



30,000 



1991 



1972 



III 


2,580 


1980 


IV 


48,140 


1982 


I 


176 


1961 


I 


25,000 


1922 


VII 


120,800 


1963 


I 


150,000 


1978 


I 


16,100 


1980 


IV 


59,130 


1979 


IV 


47,840 


1979 


vn 


20,000 


1980 


vn 


1,500 


1979 



VIII 
VIIl 
VIII 
VIII 
VIII 
VIII 
VIII 
VIII 
VIII 
VIII 
VIII 
VIII 
VIII 
VIII 
VIII 



IV 



3,600 



198,164 

78,792 

3,000 

9,682 

4,900 

172,480 

29,885 

2,995 

140,000 

21,494 

74,000 

1,249,000 

32,000 

18,215 

364,952 



37,302 



1939 
1938 
1949 
1923 
1923 
1939 
1923 
1942 
1951 
1936 
I95I 
1923 
1935 
1926 
1937 



1988 



Biosphere Reserves 

El Cielo 

Monies Azulcs 

Rcscrva de Mapimi 

Rescrva de la Michilia 

Sian Ka'an 

Sierra de Mananilan 



IX 


144,530 


1986 


IX 


331,200 


1979 


IX 


103,000 


1977 


IX 


42,000 


1977 


IX 


523,147 


1986 


IX 


139,577 


1988 



58 



United Mexican States (Mexico) 



Map Nationallinternadonaldesignations 
ref. Name of area 



lUCN management 
category 


Area 

(ha) 


Year 
notifled 


R 


47,480 


1986 


X 


528,000 


1987 



Ramsar Wetlands 
Ria Lagartos, Yucatin 

World Heritage Site 
Sian Ka'an 



59 



Protected Areas of the World 




Protected Areas of Mexico 



60 



ST PIERRE AND MIQUELON (FRANCE) 



Area 242 sq. km (SaintPierre group: 26 sq. km; 
MiquelonLanglade group: 216 sq. km) 

Population 6,392(1990) 
Natural increase: No information 

Economic Indicators 

GDP: No information 
GNP: No information 

Policy and Legislation The eight islands of 

the St Pierre and Miquelon archipelago were first 
settled from France in the 17th century they were ceded 
by Britain to France in 1776. They remained French 
territory from 1816 to 1976 and an overseas department 
until 1985. In June 1985 they were reformed as a 
collectivit6 territorial, with intermediate status 
between overseas department and overseas territory 
(Hunter, 1991). 

As a dependency, the islands adhere to the policy and 
legislation of France (Frean, 1991; Hunter, 1991), and 
are administered by a General Council, which is 
represented in the National Assembly in Paris. The 
French government is represented on the islands by a 
Commissioner. 

The Constitution of the Fifth Republic, superseding 
that of 1946, came into force on 4 October 1958. It has 
92 articles and gave rise to the current conservation 
legislation. The general framework for establishing 
protected areas in France and its dependencies is 
provided by the Law Relating to the Creation of National 
Parks No. 60.708 of 22 July 1960 and the Nature 
Conservation Act No. 76 629 of 10 July 1976, which 
includes provision for the general framework for 
defining, designating and establishing nature reserves 
(reserves naturelles). No information is available 
concerning protected areas in St Pierre and Miquelon. 

International Activities No international sites 

have been designated in the islands, although France 
itself is a signatory to the Convention on Wetlands of 
International Importance especially as Waterfowl 
Habitat (Ramsar Convention) (1 October 1986) and the 
Convention concerning the World Natural and Cultural 
Heritage (World Heritage Convention) (27 June 1975), 
and is also a participant in the Unesco Man and the 
Biosphere Programme. 

France has not signed a number of important regional 
treaties in North America, most notably the Migratory 
Birds Convention which was signed between Canada 
and the US A in 1 9 1 7 and the North American Waterfowl 
Management Plan (NAWMP): a joint project involving 
Mexico, the USA and Canada. 

Administration and Management As a collectivity 
territoriale, authority is vested in the Commissioner. The 



ordinary budget for 1989 was balanced at FF 87.4 
million. 

Administrative responsibility for nature conservation 
throughout France lies with the Ministry of the 
Environment (Ministfere de I'Environnement), which 
was established in 1971. Bodies involved in the central 
organisation within France include the Agency for the 
QuaUty of Life (Delegation a la qualite de la vie), the 
Directorate for Water and the Prevention of Pollution 
Risks (Direction de I'eau et de la prevention des 
pollutions et des risques), the Directorate for Nature 
Conservation (Direction de la protection de la nature), 
and the High Committee for the Environment (Haut 
Comit6 de I'Environnement). There are several 
semi-autonomous bodies which fall under the 
supervision of the Ministry of the Environment; these 
include the National Hunting Office (Office national de 
la chasse), the Higher Council for Fishing (Conseil 
sup^rieur de la peche), the National Parks and the 
Coastal and Lakeshore Conservancy (Conservatoire de 
I'espace Uttoral et des rivages lacustres) (CERL). 

The Higher Council for Fishing has had some 
involvement in negotiations with the government of 
Canada and the province of Newfoundland over fishing 
rights for the islands (Frean, 1991). 

Systems Reviews The eight islands of the 

Archipelago lie in the northwest Atlantic, some 20km off 
the south coast of Newfoundland, west of the Burin 
Peninsula. Much of the area of the islands is rocky, while 
ponds, swamps and marshes cover over half of the total 
area. Most of the land area is treeless; however, some of 
the valleys are wooded. Agriculture is not a major feature 
of the landscape, although some vegetables and livestock 
are kept for local consumption (Davis et al., 1986; 
Hunter, 1991). 

There are 391 native species and 96 introduced species 
of vascular plants (Davis et al., 1986). 

Fisheries provide the economical mainstay of the 
islands, although fish stocks are now severely depleted 
due to overfishing (Horsfield, 1990). The islanders claim 
a 200mile fishing zone to the south and east of the 
islands. This fishing zone is the source of a major dispute 
with the Canadians, who blame the islanders for 
overfishing in the area (Frean, 1991; Hunter, 1991). 

Other Relevant Information For further 

information relating to national French policy, 
administration and management, see the relevant 
section in Volume 2. In 1989 there were 14,100 
visitors to the islands. 



61 



Protected Areas of the World 



Addresses 

Commissioner, Collectivit6 Territoriale, St Pierre, 
Saint Pierre et Miquelon, France 

References 

Davis, SX).,Droop,SJM.,GregCTSon,P.,Henson,L.,Leon, 
C J., Lamlein Villa-Lobos, J., Synge, H., and Zantovska, 
J. (1986). Plants in danger: What do we know? lUCN, 
Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. 



De La Rue, E.A. (1963). SaintPierre et Miquelon. Paris. 
Frean, A. (1991). Battle rages over the islands of fog. 

The European. Weekend 2628 July. P. 1 1. 
Horsfield, M. (1990). Gee whiz! It's France's North 

American foothold. The European. Weekend 

November 911. Pp. 2223. 
Hunter, B. (1991). The Statesman's Yearbook. 128th 

edition. The MacMillan Press Ltd, London and 

Basingstoke, UK. Pp. 483521. 



62 



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 



Area 9,372,614 sq. km 

Population 249,224,000 (1989) 
Natural increase: 0.72% per annum 

Economic Indicators 

GDP: US$19,049 per capita (1989) 
GNP: US$21,100 per capila(1989) 

Policy and Legislation The Declaration of 
Independence of the American colonies from Great 
Britain was adopted by Congress on 4 July 1776 and the 
Treaty of Peace ratified on 14 January 1784. The 
Constitution dates from 17 September 1787, and by this 
the national government is divided into executive, 
legislative and judicial coordinated branches. Under 
Article 1 Section 1 all legislative powers are vested in 
the Congress of the United States (US). The US is a 
federal nation, comprising 48 coterminous states, as well 
as the disjunct states of Alaska and Hawaii. Each of these 
50 states has its own Constitution and legislation. 
Overseas, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, American 
Samoa, Guam and the Virgin Islands each has a local 
legislature, the acts of which may be modified or 
annulled by Congress. For detailed information 
concerning Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands see 
the relevant sections in this volume. For information 
relating to Hawaii, American Samoa and Guam see the 
relevant sections of Volume 1. 

In North America the protected area systems are large 
and complex. Policy and legislation for the conservation 
of protected areas is found at both state and federal level, 
whilst, within states, a number of sites have been 
protected at the local and regional levels. This report 
deals largely with protected areas declared under federal 
legislation and administered by federal agencies. 

When first colonised by Europeans, North America was 
very much a wilderness, with a vast and largely 
undisturbed wealth of natural resources. The native 
Americans had a great respect for the natural 
environment, on which their liveUhood, reUgion and 
culture were almost wholly dependent For generations 
sacred areas had been respected by the tribes, entry 
forbidden, or such activities as hunting and fishing 
restricted, and in a number of locations this philosophy 
continues to the present day (Gattuso, 1991). 

The evolution of the modem concept of protected area 
is generally regarded as having started in the State of 
Georgia which boasted a reserve for public use as early 
as 1825. However, there is some evidence which traces 
the history of parks to a state reservation in 
Massachusetts in 1641. Parks conservation began in 
earnest, however, on 30 June 1864, when President 
Abraham Lincoln signed a law granting the Yosemite 
Valley and the Mariposa Grove of Giant Sequoias to 
California to be held for "public use, resort, and 



recreation. ..inalienable for all time." A short time after 
this, on 1 March 1872 Yellowstone was declared as a 
"national park" , widely accepted as the first national park 
in the world. The Antiquities Act, 1906 granted the 
President the power unilaterally to declare sites of 
historic or scientific value as monuments. The Act 
favoured cultural and historical preservation, but 
President Theodore Roosevelt interpreted the criteria of 
scientific value broadly, and invoked his new executive 
powers widely to create national monuments in areas of 
value for nature conservation. 

Federal Policy and Legislation 

Legislation governing protected areas is largely covered 
under single organic acts or series of laws enacted by 
Congress giving protected area jurisdiction to specific 
agencies. These organic acts impose on the agencies 
certain duties or areas of responsibiUty for a whole range 
of laws pertaining to protected areas. These areas of 
responsibiUty have been grouped into systems such as 
the National Park System with a number of differentpark 
designations. The main systems listed here include the 
National Park System , National Wilderness Preservation 
System, National Forest System, National Wild and 
Scenic Rivers System, National Marine Sanctuary 
Code/Natipnal Estuarine Research Reserves System and 
the National Wildlife Refuge System (see below and 
Annex). 

Individual federal laws are contained in a series of 
volumes (Statutes at Large) in the order in which they 
were passed, and subsequendy codified and put into the 
United States Code (USC). The President may also 
delegate specific duties to specific departments and 
agencies by Executive Order. Regulations for the 
differing categories of protected area are drafted in the 
relevant department or agency and put before the public 
in open hearings and published both in the draft and final 
form in the Federal Register. Final regulations are, like 
individual pieces of legislation which are passed by 
Congress, codified, appearing in the Code of Federal 
Regulations (CFR) (see Annex). 

National Park System National parks and other 
categories of lands within this system are established by 
individual acts of Congress (prior to 1980, national 
monuments could also be established by the President on 
federal lands by proclamation under the Antiquities Act, 
1906). The National Park Service was established by the 
Act of 1916, Tide 16 of the USC, Chapter 1 (16 USC 1). 
It contains the authorising legislation, or "organic act" 
for the National Park Service. This law stipulates that 
"the Service. ..shall promote and regulate the use of the 
federal areas known as national parks, monuments, and 
reservations hereinafter specified..." The National Park 
Service has responsibility for three broad types of areas, 
natural, historical and recreational, represented by some 



63 



Protected Areas of the World 



16 categories of nomenclature under the National Park 
System. These include: national park, national 
monument, national reserve, national preserve, national 
recreation area, national historic site, national historic 
park, national battlefield, national seashore, national 
lakeshore, national scenic trail, national river, as well as 
national wild and scenic river (see Annex). Detailed 
definitions for these different categories are not provided 
under general legislation, and restrictions and 
regulations vary considerably between sites of the same 
category. 

National Wilderness Preservation System This is 
based on the Wilderness Act (Wilderness Act, 1964, 
PL 88-577, 16 USC 1131-1136) and dates ft-om 3 
September 1964. The Act establishes criteria for the 
management of areas of land as "wilderness" and the 
processes under which many areas have been added to 
the system, areas are added only by individual acts of 
Congress (see Annex). Four federal agencies (US 
National Park Service, US Forest Service, US Fish and 
Wildlife Service and US Bureau of Land Management) 
are authorised and mandated to manage wilderness. A 
large proportion of the designated areas lie within other 
categories of protected land administered by the federal 
agencies, and, where this is the case, the additional 
categorisation as wilderness will generally increase the 
degree of protection. 

National Forest System This is based on the Forest 
Reserves Act, often referred to as the Creative Act, 1891 
(USC Tide 16, Chapter 2 (16 USC 2); die Organic 
Administration Act, 1897 (16 USC 475); and the Weeks 
Law and Resources Planning Act. The Resources 
Planning Act, 1974 incorporated the term national forest 
system into the statutes. Under the System die US Forest 
Service has responsibility for national forests, national 
grasslands and land utilisation projects. Within national 
forests are a number of administrative designations: 
forests are classed into general or special interest areas, 
the latter listed as scenic areas, palaeontological areas, 
geological areas, botanical areas and zoological areas 
(see Annex). 

The resources of these lands are managed according to 
the Multiple Use-Sustained Yield Act, 1960 and the 
National Forest Management Act, 1976. The former 
established the policy that national forests be established 
and administered for "outdoor recreation, range, timber, 
watershed and wildlife and fish purposes", while the 
latter required the development and implementation of 
integrated plans for the management of forest and 
rangeland ecosystems. Under these Land and Resource 
Management Plans management direction is provided 
for the entire National Forest System: lands may be 
protected from or managed for various uses and at 
varying levels of intensity, and, in this way, a form of 
de facto protection status is provided for large areas. Two 
further administrative designations on Forest Service 
land are game refuges and game preserves, of which 
there are 21 sites, mostly in the eastern US, which 



provide an additional degree of habitat protection within 
parts of some national forests (McCloskey, 1992). 

In addition to its own legal and administrative categories, 
the Forest Service manages lands in the following 
categories: wilderness area, national recreation area, 
research natural area, national wild and scenic river, and 
national monument. In terms of degree of protection and 
area covered, the wilderness areas on USFS land are 
undoubtedly the most important form of protected area 
for conservation purposes. The Forest Service maintains 
probably the largest network of research natural areas of 
any federal agency. It also administers a number of large 
natural monuments, notably Misty Fjords and Admiralty 
Island in Alaska, and Mount St Helens in Washington. 

National Wild and Scenic Rivers System This is 
based on the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (USC, Title 16, 
Chapter 28) of 2 October 1968. The system was 
authorised by Congress in 1968, declaring certain 
selected rivers of the nation as national wild and scenic 
rivers. They are designated as wild river areas, scenic 
river areas or recreational river areas, and include both 
federal and state land. The Law states that the system 
shall comprise rivers that are designated by Act of 
Congress or designated by a legislature of die state(s) 
through which they flow (see Annex). 

National Elstuarine Research Reserves System and 
National Marine Sanctuaries Congress has 

authorised the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration (NOAA) to maintain two types of 
protected areas: national marine sanctuaries and national 
estuarine research reserves. The National Marine 
Sanctuary Programme was authorised by the 
Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries 
Act, 1972 (PL 92-532), as amended, 16 USC 1431 et 
seq. Programme regulations for the national marine 
sanctuary programme are found at 1 5 CFR 922. National 
marine sanctuaries are established in the ocean and 
coastal environment for resource protection and 
management of compatible uses. The National Estuarine 
Research Reserve System was audiorised by section 315 
of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (PL 
92-583), as amended, 16 USC 1451 et seq. Programme 
regulations for the national estuarine research reserve 
system are found at 15 CFR 921. National estuarine 
research reserves are established primarily as "natural 
laboratory" areas for estuarine research (see Annex). 

National Wildlife Refuge System The Organic Act 
relating to national wildlife refuges is the National 
Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act, 1966, 
which expresses policy and provides guidelines for 
operating the system. The most important category in 
this system is the national wildlife refuge, aldiough 
waterfowl production areas and coordination areas also 
form part of the system. The Refuge Recreation Act, 
1962 authorises the purchase of adjacent lands to serve 
as recreational areas and as buffer areas to the refuges 
(funds for the purchase of such lands under the Land and 
Water Conservation Fund Act, 1965). The Wilderness 



64 



United States of America 



Act, 1964 and the Endangered Species Act, 1973 
(revised 1982, supplemented in the International 
Environmental Protection Act, 1983) have some bearing 
on the system. The Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, 
1934 (amended 1958) authorises federal water resource 
agencies to acquire lands in connection with water 
resource projects specifically for the conservation of 
wildlife. In 1903, Pelican Island, Florida, was protected 
as a wildlife refuge under an executive order. S ubsequent 
growth in numbers of wildlife refuges created under 
executive order resulted in the need for a management 
authority. 

Policy and direction for the Refuge System are identified 
in the USFWS's refuge manual. This gives four broad 
goals for the management of the System: to preserve, 
restore and enhance populations of species that are 
becoming endangered; to perpetuate the migratory bird 
resource; to preserve a natural biodiversity on refuge 
lands; and to provide for an understanding and 
appreciation of ecology and man's role in the 
environment and provide for recreation where this is 
compatible with the primary purposes of the specific 
refuge. Management plans have been, or will be 
developed for each refuge 

Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Lands 

The Federal Land Policy and Management Act, 1976 
(PL 94-579; 43 USC 1 70) is the equivalent of an organic act 
which contains the authorising legislation for the BLM and 
the declaration of congressional poUcy with respect to public 
lands administered by the BLM. The Act specifies that the 
public lands be managed in a mannCT that will protect the 
quality of scientific, scenic, historical, ecological, 
environmental, air and atmospheric, water resource, and 
archaeological values; where appropriate, the BLM will 
preserve and protect certain public lands in their natural 
condition; management will provide food and habitat for fish 
and wildlife and domestic animals; will also provide frar 
outdoor recreation and human occupancy and use; and that 
regulations and plans for the psotection of pubUc land areas 
of critical environmental concern be promptly developed. 
The Act also slates that public lands should generally be 
retained in Federal ownership; goals and objectives be 
established by law as guidelines for public land use planning; 
and management should be on the basis of multiple use and 
sustained yield, unless otherwise ^)ecified by law. 

Several different categories of protected areas are operative 
on pubUc lands administered by the BLM. The first type of 
designations are administrative designations, such as: 
scenic areas, areas of environmental concern, trails, natural 
areas, research natural areas, special recreation 
management areas, by-ways, significant caves and others. 
Such administrative designations are made by the general 
authority of the Secretary of the Interior in administering 
the public lands, or by the BLM under the resource 
management planning process (eg. areas of critical 
environmental concern) using the authority contained in 
Section 202 of the Federal Land PoUcy and Management 
Act. The other categories of protected area are those 
founded in legislation and enacted as pubUc land laws 



on a generic basis such as wilderness areas under the 
authority of the Wilderness Act, scenic and recreation 
rivers under the authority of the Wild and Scenic Rivers 
Act, or by special laws on an ad hoc basis for a specific 
area, such as national recreation areas, national 
conservation areas, national historic trails, national 
scenic trails, national outstanding natural areas and 
others. 

Department of Defense Lands The Organic Act 
relating to Department of Defense (DoD) land, federal 
statutes (Title 16, USC) authorises the Secretary of 
Defense "to carry out a programme of planning for, and 
the development, maintenance, and coordination of 
wildlife, fish and game conservation and rehabilitation 
in military reservations". There are a number of other 
laws which also relate specifically to conservation on 
military lands, for example Public Laws 86-797, 90-465, 
93-452 and 96-561. Several sections of the US Code 
(Tide 10) provide for conservation on military land. 
Finally, worth mentioning, is the Departmentof Defense 
Directive Number 4700.4, the Natural Resources 
Management Program (Keystone Center, 1991). 

Also of relevance at the federal level is the system of 
national natural landmarks which are designated on any 
areas of land outside the national park system. This is an 
administrative rather than a legal designation, 
participation in the scheme by private landowners is 
entirely voluntary (see Annex). Another non-legislated 
category is that of research natural area, designated by 
any one of eight federal agencies on federal land. Their 
objective is to preserve a representative array of natural 
and mostly undisturbed natural ecosystems, and to use 
these for education and research into these areas. Most 
of these sites lie within existing protected areas (see 
Annex). 

The Endangered Species Act, 1973 has some relation to 
the protection of land. This Act lists some 600 species (a 
further 3,000 species are considered as candidates for 
listing). Among the measures listed for the protection of 
these species Is the designation of critical habitat for 
listed species and that this habitat should also receive 
protection. Current controversies concerning the fate of 
the northern spotted owl and its equally threatened 
habitat of oldgrowth temperate forest of the Pacific 
north-west coast of North America are clearly putting the 
habitat protection clauses of this Act to the test, and it 
remains to be seen how much of Its fast-disappearing 
critical habitat receives protection in the near future. 

There is also a considerable body of legislation which 
relates to the protection of wetland areas within the US, 
this includes: the Clean Water Act, 1977; Executive 
Order 11990 Protection of Wedands, 1977; the Food 
Security Act, 1985 (Swampbusier and other provisions); 
Emergency WeUand Act, 1986; Tax Reform Act, 1986; 
andWaterResourcesDevelopmentAct, 1986. Although 
these do not actually provide a legal category of 
protection, or provide clearly delineated boundaries, it is 



65 



Protected Areas of the World 



estimated that the total area of wetlands protected under 
such legislation may be in excess of 40 million ha. 

The 1965 Land and Water Conservation Fund Act 
established the Land and Water Conservation Fund 
which is largely supplied from tax revenues. Money 
from the fund is used for protection purposes, with 
approximately half going to federal agencies, and half to 
individual states. The federal money is used largely for 
land acquisition purposes for the establishment or 
expansion of protected areas, and some of the state 
money is also used for this purpose, although much of 
the remainder is granted more broadly to a range of 
outdoor recreation activities. 

State Policy and Legislation 

Each of the 50 states within the United States has its own 
state park system, with at least one protected area 
management agency (Myers and Green, 1989). The state 
of New York created Niagara Falls Reservation in 1883, 
and Adirondak Park two years later. By 1907, the state 
of Wisconsin had developed a park system plan. It is 
beyond the scope of this publication to describe in detail 
the situation of each and every one of the 50 states (for 
greater detail see TNC, 1976). The establishment and 
expansion of the conservation units in Alaska is 
governed by the Alaska National Interests Lands 
Conservation Act, 1980, which provided for the 
additional preservation of some 42 million ha within this 
state. All of these areas fall within federal protected area 
systems. 

International Activities The United States participates 
in the Unesco Man and the Biosphere Programme, with 
47 sites having been recognised as part of the 
international biosphere reserve network. The Convention 
on Wetlands of International Importance Especially as 
Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar Convention) was ratified on 1 8 
December 1986, and ten sites have been Usted. The United 
States ratified the Convention Concerning the Protection of 
the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (World Heritage 
Convention) on 7 December 1973. Ten natural sites have 
been inscribed on the World Heritage List, including a 
joint nomination with Canada. 

The United States ratified both the Convention for the 
Protection and Development of the Marine Environment 
of the Wider Caribbean Region (Cartagena Convention) 
and the Protocol Concerning Co-operation in Combating 
Oil Spills in the Wider Caribbean Region on 3 1 October 
1984. The Protocol Concerning Specially Protected 
Areas and WildUfe has also been signed. The United 
States is party to the South Pacific Regional 
Environment Programme, and the 1986 Convention for 
the Protection of the Natural Resources and 
Environment of the South Pacific Region (SPREP 
Convention) has been signed (25 November 1986), but 
not yet ratified. The Migratory Birds Convention was 
signed between Canada and the US A in 1 9 1 7. The North 
American Waterfowl Management Plan is a joint project 
involving Canada and Mexico, 27 US states. 



approximately 200 conservation groups and many 
corporations, in the planning of programmes conserving 
waterfowl and wedand habitats. A similar programme is 
in development for international cooperation in the 
protection of neotropical migrants. 

The US Fish and Wildlife Service and the US National 
Park Service maintain cooperative agreements with 
protected area agencies throughout the world for 
technical assistance in support of protected area 
management 

There are a number of transboundary protected areas. 
Glacier National Park in Montana and Waterton 
National Park in Alberta, Canada were combined in 1 932 
to form the first international peace park in the world. 
Others include the Wrangell-St Elias national park 
(USA) and Kluane national park (Canada); Arctic 
national wildlife refuge (USA) and Northern Yukon 
national park (Canada); Boundary Waters Canoe Area 
national forest wilderness (USA) and Quetico 
WUdemess provincial park (Canada); Pasayten national 
forest wilderness (USA) and the complex of Cathedral, 
Cascade and Manning provincial parks (Canada). A 
management agreement is currently being discussed 
concerning the establishment of a 2 million ha border 
park between the US A and Mexico along the Rio Grande 
which would incorporate Big Bend national park in the 
USA. 

Administration and Management There are five 
principal federal authorities, and at least four others with 
minor roles; the overall expenditure of federal agencies 
on protected areas in 1991 alone was USS 1,962,704,000 
(Waugh and Perez Gil, 1992). 

Federal Land 

National Park Service (NFS), US Department of the 
Interior was estabUshed in 1916 with two main aims: 
to conserve the scenery and natural and historic objects 
and wildlife within the areas under its jurisdiction; and 
to provide for public access and enjoyment of these 
areas. The efforts to balance these two missions have 
shaped the development of this agency, making it unique 
among the federal natural resource management 
agencies. The NPS administers over 360 units, covering 
over 32 million ha, including sites of both natural and 
cultural significance, visited by over 360 milUon f)eople 
each year. Under the Director of the NPS are associate 
directors responsible for: Natural Resources (includes 
the NPS science programme); Cultural Resources 
(includes the NPS history and archaeology 
programmes); Operations (includes visitor services, 
ranger activities, and interpretation); Budget and 
Administration; Planning and Development (includes 
the Denver Service Center); and Management Systems. 
Appropriations legislation for the fiscal year 1993 has 
designated some USS 992.4 milUon for the operation of 
the national park system, with a further USS 118.9 
million to be derived from the Land and Water 
Conservation Fund to be granted for land acquisition and 



66 



United States of America 



state assistance, and with a further US$ 23 1 .8 million for 
construction, improvements, repair or replacement of 
physical facilities. The National Fish and Wildlife 
Foundation has recently recommended a restructuring of 
the NPS budgets. One of the main aims of this is to shift 
the emphasis away from development within parks, 
notably the large sums directed to accommodating 
visitor needs and services, towards an increase in 
funding for natural resource management under four 
headings: protection, mitigation, inventory and 
monitoring, and research (NFWF, 1992). NPS has over 
13,000 full time employees, and nearly double this 
number, with part time employees and volunteers, 
during peak visitation periods. 

As part of its science programme, the NPS maintains ties 
to research and academic institutions through a network 
of Cooperative Park Study Units at major universities. 
Authority for most national monuments administered by 
the Forest Service was transferred to the NPS in 1933, 
and responsibility for national battlefields was 
transferred from the Department of the Army soon after. 
Other federal agencies, including the Forest Service and 
the Bureau of Land Management, continue to maintain 
significant holdings in national monuments and 
recreation areas. 

The US Fish and WUdlife Service (USFWS) of the US 
Department of the Interior: Federal involvement in the 
conservation of fish and wildlife began with the 
establishment of the Bureau of Fisheries in 1871 in the 
Department of Commerce. The Bureau of Biological 
Inventory was estabUshed in 1885 in the Department of 
Agriculture. In 1939 both of these agencies were 
transferred to the Department of the Interior, where they 
were later consolidated into the USFWS . The central aim 
of the Service is to conserve, protect and enhance fish 
and wildlife populations and their habitats - it has 
principal authority and responsibility for migratory 
birds, threatened and endangered species and lands 
under Service control. In terms of protected areas the 
USFWS has responsibiUty for the National Wildlife 
Refuge System. The Service employs around 7,000 
people, with a headquarters in Washington, and eight 
regional offices. Appropriations legislation for the fiscal 
year 1993 has designated some US$ 535.1 milUon for 
resource management (as a guide, in 1 990 somewhat less 
than one third of this figure went to "refuge ojjerations 
and maintenance"). A further US$ 76.2 million has been 
designated for land acquisition to be derived from the 
Land and Water Conservation Fund in 1993, and a 
further US$ 82.1 million for construction of buildings 
and other facilities. The most important protected areas 
under USFWS jurisdiction include national wildlife 
refuges, waterfowl production areas, and coordination 
areas. The Service also manages wildlife research 
centres, fish hatcheries and fish research stations. There 
are a number of federal acts which give the USFWS an 
important role in projects and activities concerning fish 
and wildlife resources on non-USFWS lands. Through 
these, for example, the Service plays an important role 



in the protection and restoration of wetland habitats. It is 
also able to influence the land management strategies of 
other federal agencies, such as the Department of 
Defense. The Service began work in 1990 on a combined 
plan and environmental impact statement for 
management of the system through the year 2003, the 
100th anniversary of the establishment of the first 
national wildhfe refuge on Pelican Island, Florida. 

The US Forest Service (USFS), US Department of 
Agriculture was established in 1905 and has often been 
faced with the balancing the conflicting demands of 
production and protection in die forest resources under 
its authority - the Multiple Use Sustained Yield Act and 
the National Forest Management Act have helped to 
refine this balance to some degree. Appropriations 
legislation for the fiscal year 1993 has designated some 
USS 1,318.5 million for the management, protection, 
improvement, and utilisation of the national forest 
system, with a number of large additional funds covering 
fire protection, firefighting, construction, research and 
land acquisition. In this latter fund, USS 62.9 million 
have been designated for land acquisition, to be derived 
from the Land and Water Conservation Fund in 1993. 

Of the 77.4 million ha managed in the National Forest 
System, some 24 million ha are considerea as potentially 
suitable for timber production, although a proportion of 
these will remain protected from timber production. The 
USFS maintains a network of forest research 
laboratories, through which it cooperates with academic 
and research institutions. 

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 
(NOAA),US Department of Commerce was established 
in 1970 with a broad range of aims from managing 
marine resources, to mapping, to meteorology, to 
oceanographic and atmospheric research. NOAA's 
programmes are grouped into six areas: the National 
Ocean Service which manages ocean and coastal 
resources. National Marine Fisheries Service, Oceanic 
and Atmospheric Research, National Weather Service, 
National Environmental Satellite, Data and Information 
Service, and Program Support. Appropriations 
legislation for the fiscal year 1993 has designated some 
USS 1,539 million for the operations, research and 
facilities for this entire organisation. Only a very small 
proportion of this, however will in any way be related to 
protected areas (see below). Through the Sanctuary 
Programme, NOAA is empowered to enforce protected 
area regulations, and to manage protected areas in two 
distinct programmes covering national estuarine 
research reserves and national marine sanctuaries. 
NOAA works cooperatively with state agencies and with 
research institutions in the management of the national 
estuarine research reserve system. NOAA's mandate to 
manage marine protected areas has no parallel in the 
federal system; because it does not manage titled land, 
but an intensively-used public resource, NOAA is thus 
required to develop collaborative mechanisms with 
numerous bodies. The annual budget for managing the 
national marine sanctuary programme is less than USS 



67 



Protected Areas of the World 



10 million annually. The federal share of the budget for 
the administration of national estuarine research reserves 
is USS 3.2 million annually (NOAA, pers comm, 1992). 

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM), US 
Department of the Interior was established in 1946 
through the consolidation of the General Land Office 
and the Grazing Service. It is responsible for over 100 
million ha of federal land, as well as many millions of 
hectares of subsurface, reserved mineral rights. Under 
the Federal Land Policy and Management Act, 1976, the 
BLM was required to review and inventory its roadless 
lands of 5,000 acres (2,025ha) or more, as well as 
roadless islands, in the contiguous 48 states. The aim of 
this exercise was to report to the President, with a 
recommendation as to the suitability of each such area 
or island for preservation as a wilderness area. Certain 
areas identified as natural or primitive areas prior to 1 975 
were also to be reported to the President Public lands 
administered by the BLM in Alaska were exempt from 
the FLPMA wilderness review, and may be studied for 
wilderness as part of the regular land and resource use 
planning process used by the BLM, as provided for by 
the provisions of the Alaska National Interest Lands 
Conservation Act, 1980, as amended. Appropriations 
legislation for the fiscal year 1993 has designated some 
US$ 544.9 million for the management of lands and 
resources. 

BLM's protected areas are typically "islands within the 
lands" administered for multiple uses, including forestry, 
mining, and grazing. BLM has developed proficiency in 
community outreach that can be applied in participation 
in the planning and management of its protected areas. 
Its managers are responsible not only for the protected 
areas, but for the managed areas that constitute potential 
buffers. BLM's routine interactions with the public in 
these more intensively-used areas provide a basis for 
cooperation in management of the protected areas as 
well. 

The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), US Department 
of the Interior, authorised under Title 25 of the US 
Code, does not have a specific mandate for protected 
areas, but under general provisions for welfare of Indian 
citizens of the US, can administer reservation lands for 
nature conservation. BIA provides technical assistance 
to tribes, with a general mandate for multiple uses, and 
assists, upon application of a tribe, in protected area 
management Management authority is reserved by the 
tribe. Navaho Park is an example of management by a 
tribe of tribal lands for nature conservation. 

The Bureau of Reclamation, US Department of the 
Interior, and the Tennessee Valley Authority are not 

specifically authorised to manage protected areas, but do 
maintain protected lands under executive orders to 
maintain watersheds and water resources. These sites are 
frequently developed and managed as recreation areas 
similar to those of other federal agencies. 



The four services of the Department of Defense manage 
approximately 10 million ha between them. Although 
not resf)onsible directly for conservation issues, the DoD 
clearly has an enormous wealth of natural resources on 
its lands. It does maintain some programmes deabng 
with monitoring, research, protection and restoration, 
often in coordination with federal, state and local 
agencies, whilst in December 1988 it entered into a 
cooperative agreement with The Nature Conservancy. 
Funding for the majority of this environmental work 
comes from the DoD Natural Resources Reserves 
Account, and from similar accounts in the individual 
services this money is largely generated from the sale of 
hunting and fishing licences, timber, and rents paid for 
agriculture and grazing leases. Money generated in this 
way amounts to approximately USS 30 million per year. 
The DoD employs over 300 professional resource 
managers, and a number of military personnel who are 
assigned natural resource functions. 

Another important and extremely influential body is the 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) which was 
established in 1971 as an independent agency of the 
government. Discussions are underway concerning the 
raising of the rank of this organisation to that of a 
department (Department of Environmental Protection). 
Although not specifically responsible for any categories 
of protected area, the EPA has considerable powers in 
the field of pollution control, waste dumping and water 
control in federal and other lands, which can lead directly 
to the protection of resources. This is particularly true in 
relation to wetlands. The principal authorities relating to 
wetlands in the US are the US Army Corps of Engineers, 
the EPA and the USFWS. Permits are required for most 
activities relating to wetland use, even on private land 
these are granted by the Corps, with input from the EPA 
and the USFWS, and this form of strict control provides 
some form of protection for all major wetlands. 

Management constraints in the protected areas systems 
of North America vary gready, however the USNPS has 
been singled out here for a more detailed appraisal, to 
provide a single, but wide-ranging example. According 
to the National Parks and Conservation Association 
(NPCA), industrialisation and urbanisation are "making 
islands of ...national parks.. .impairing natural processes 
in the larger ecosystems upon which the parks depend". 
In the USNPS, federal budgets have failed to keep pace 
with inflation; combined with a doubling in size of the 
national parks system over the past 20 years, this has 
reduced the relative managerial capacity of the NPS to 
effectively manage properties under its jurisdiction by as 
much as 20%. Pay has not kept pace with the cost of 
living for park rangers. Experienced rangers are leaving; 
low pay, a stressful work environment, and a restricted 
career path are drawing top talent away from parks. 
Overall, the backlog of repair, maintenance, 
preservation, and public health and safety projects in 
national parks exceeds USS 2 billion. There is a USS 500 
million backlog just for essential monitoring and 
resource management projects that must be addressed 



68 



United States of America 



immediately in parks. According to thie NPCA, 
development of credible fundraising mechanisms for 
parks worth USS 250 million is needed to supplement 
the USS 1.2 billion appropriated annually (Waugh and 
Perez Gil, 1992). An assessment of the threats reported 
by units of the NFS was undertaken in 1988 (USNPS, 
1988): some twenty-one major issues stemming from the 
threats were identified. Representative of the threats 
facing the protected area estate as a whole, these include: 
overpopulation of species; impacts to, or loss of, plant 
and animal species; degradation of resources due to 
non-native plants and animals; disruptions due to past 
land practices; disruption of natural fire regimes; 
degradation of water quality; alteration of water flows or 
groundwater levels; lack of secure water rights; loss of 
visibility and biological diversity and damage due to air 
jxjUution; and lack of basic data about sites. 

State Land 

Every state has its own state park system, with at least 
one protected area management agency, and often more, 
as the fragmentation at the federal level is characteristic 
of the state activities too (Myers and Green, 1989). All 
50 states also have coordinated programmes to protect 
flora, fauna and their habitats through establishment of 
parks and other protected areas; the first such programme 
began in 1951 although there is considerable variation 
from one state to the nexL Many state agencies have 
cooperative agreements with such agencies as the BLM 
and the USPS. 

The situation described above for the national parks 
system is regarded as being much worse in state parks, 
many of which have been forced to close their gates to 
users as a result of budgetary shortfalls in 1990-91 
(Waugh and Perez GU, 1992). 

Private Land 

A number of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) 
are responsible for the acquisition and management of 
protected areas. With a number of these, purchased land 
is later sold to federal or state protected area authorities, 
who frequently are unable to buy land at short notice. 
Many of these NGOs are extremely powerful 
economically, and also have an influential role 
politically. Amongst these, The Nature Conservancy 
(TNC) is pre-eminent. Since its founding in 1951, TNC 
has conserved over 2 mUUon ha, much of which has been 
passed to federal or state agencies. TNC has created a 
50-state natural heritage network that sets protection 
priorities for itself, and which is also used by most states 
and a growing number of federal agencies. The projected 
income in 1991 was US$ 122.8 million. TNC has 
launched a Last Great Places initiative, aimed at 
protecting 75 large, landscape level, ecological systems 
and plans to invest USS 1 billion from pubhc and private 
sources (including grants from the federal Land and 
Water Conservation Fund) in this enterprise over the 
next five years. Also of great importance is the Trust for 



Public Land which, after TNC, is largest and most active 
land acquiring agency in the country. 

Of the other larger citizen groups involved with 
protected areas ownership or administration, the 
National Audubon Society, owns or leases a number of 
sanctuaries. The Society of American Foresters has 
designated over 500 natural areas. There are several 
other programmes in private land conservation, notably 
the Conservation Fund, the Land Trust Alliance, Ducks 
Unlimited and Trout Unlimited. The Land Trust Alliance 
represents local land trusts across the continent which 
together manage a very large area this land is either held 
outright, or under easements, where the landowner 
voluntarily, or for payment, surrenders rights to certain 
types of development and use. Public-private 
partnerships have been central to the history of 
conservation in the US A, such as the Boone and Crockett 
Club and the Sierra Club. The National Fish and Wildlife 
Foundation, a non-profit organisation established by 
Congress in 1984 to foster cooperation, uses funds 
appropriated by Congress as seed money for 
partnerships in challenge grants to be matched by 
private-sector institutions. The foundation has supported 
more than 120 projects, and spent USS 31.5 mUUon on 
habitat protection and restoration in cooperation with the 
USFWS and other organisations. The National Parks 
Foundation is a similar body, established by the US 
government. 

Systems Reviews The US is among the largest 
countries in the world. Including the disjunct states of 
Alaska and Hawaii, it covers a vast range of latitude, 
from the Arctic Circle in northern Alaska to the tropics 
in southern Hawaii, and over 120 of longitude, from the 
east coast of Maine to the westernmost of the Aleutian 
Islands and also the westernmost of the Hawaiian 
Islands. 

The east coast of the 48 coterminous states runs along 
the Atlantic Ocean from Maine to Florida and then runs 
west along the north coast of the Gulf of Mexico until 
the border with Mexico at the Rio Grande. America's 
largest river, the Mississippi, also flows into the Gulf. 
Moving west from the Atlantic coast, the Appalachian 
mountains run from Georgia in the south to the states of 
new England in the north reaching 2,037m. North-west 
of these, along the Canadian border, he the Great Lakes: 
Ontario, Erie, Huron, Michigan and Superior, and, to the 
south of these, the Mississippi Basin. West again lie the 
Great Plains of the mid- west which stretch to the base of 
the Rocky Mountains. The Rockies are a huge band of 
geologically recent mountains, which run north-south 
along the entire length of the continent, and stretch up to 
1,500km east- west from the Great Plains to the Pacific 
coast there are a number of peaks in these ranges that 
rise above 4,000m. 

Alaska, the largest state, lies some 900km north-west of 
Washington, separated by the western seaboard of 
British Columbia in Canada. Alaska has a long border 
with Canada, with an even longer coastUne, facing the 



69 



Protected Areas of the World 



Arctic Ocean to the north, the Chukchi Sea and Bering 
Sea to the west, and the Pacific to the south. Much of the 
state is mountainous, dominated by the Brooks Range to 
the north and the Alaska Range to the south, which 
includes Mount McKinley, the highest peak in the US, 
reaching 6,194m. 

The Hawaiian Islands are a chain of volcanic islands 
lying in the North Pacific, and stretching some 2,300km 
from Hawaii in the southeast, to Kuie Atoll in the 
northwest. For reasons of their geographic location, the 
Hawaiian Islands have been included in a separate 
account, in Volume 1 of this work. 

The following is a simplified summary of the major 
vegetation types. Tundra of low scrub dominated by 
willows and birches is found in Alaska, with plant cover 
decreasing northwards. Large areas of coniferous forest, 
mainly pine, spruce and fir, are found in Alaska, in a belt 
stretching over much of Canada and down the Pacific 
coast to central California. Montane coniferous forest is 
found in the Rockies, the Appalachians and on other 
mountain ranges; in eastern North America, the original 
vegetation cover was deciduous forest of many different 
associations that variously included bald cypress, 
hemlock, hickory, maple and oak, but is now extensively 
cleared. In the centre, from the Rockies east to Indiana, 
and from Canada south to Mexico, the former massive 
grassland (prairie) has largely been cleared for 
agriculture, and now survives only in relicts. In the west, 
from Washington south to Mexico, deserts, including the 
Great Basin, Mojave and Sonoran, are foimd. On coastal 
California, the chapparal, a high, dense scrub, is found. 
Subtropical vegetation, including mangrove, is found in 
Florida. Anderson (1977) gives an indication of the area 
covered by each type. Klopatek et al. (1979) present a 
map showing loss in natural vegetation, based on 
Kuchler's 1964 map of potential natural vegetation. 
Twenty-three of Kuchler's 106 predominant vegetation 
types have lost more than 50% of their potential area, 
including the Florida Everglades, California steppe, 
southern floodplain forest, bluestem prairie and 
beech-maple forest (Davis et al., 1986). 

A preliminary assessment of the status of major 
terrestrial ecosystems on federal and Indian lands in the 
United States has been prepared by Crumpacker et al. 
(n.d.). This used 135 jxjtential natural vegetation types 
of Kuchler. Their results indicate that at least 33 types 
are inadequately represented, and 9 of these have no 
representation, whilst 11 others have relatively little 
representation as they are either natiu"ally rare or have 
been largely converted to non-natural uses. 

All of the federal agencies mentioned undertake some 
regular form of inventorying and monitoring of the land 
resources under their control. The NPS has no centrally 
coordinated systems review procedure. Most of the lands 
under its jurisdiction, however, have some inventory 
and/or ongoing monitoring programs, arranged on a 
site-by-site basis. The BLM conducts inventories of 
soils, vegetation and wildlife - to date soil surveys have 



been completed fora large proportion of BLM lands, but 
only 15% (outside Alaska) has received the mandatory 
minimum vegetation survey, and less than 5% has been 
surveyed under the standard wildlife inventory system. 
The USFWS carries out inventory, monitoring and 
research activities which provide information for the 
management of refuge lands; it also carries out other 
surveys relating to migratory and breeding birds, 
selected populations of fish stocks, the effects of 
pesticides and toxic chemicals in the environment and 
waterfowl and wetlands surveys which form part of the 
National Wetlands Inventory. The Forest Service has a 
comprehensive system of inventorying, mapping and 
monitoring of its lands, with a large amount of this 
information stored on a highly developed computer 
network. Inventories have been compiled for a large 
proporrion of DoD lands, often undertaken in 
conjunction with local authorities or educational 
establishments, or with local or national NGOs 
(Keystone Center, 1991). 

The number of land management agencies complicates 
systematic approaches to protected area conservation. 
As a result, there is no comprehensive system plan for 
the United States. The government in general lacks 
action plans for the completion of protected area systems 
at the federal level, with the exception of the NOAA, 
which is authorised by legislation to develop a 
programme for marine reserves. The 5(K) or more 
national natural landmarks designated since 1962 by the 
Secretary of the Interior, on advice from the USNPS, are 
listed in the National Registry of Natural Landmarks 
which is published regularly. In order to augment 
government efforts, NGOs such as the National Parks 
and Conservation Association have produced their own 
action plan which covers the National Parks System. 
Other bodies advocating programmes for protected areas 
agencies include the Sierra Club, the Wilderness Society 
(wilderness issues, especially with the Forest Service), 
Defenders of Wildlife (formed an alliance with the Fish 
and Wildlife Service) and the American Rivers (National 
Wild and Scenic Rivers System). The Natural Heritage 
System organised by TNC, together with the initiatives 
of other citizens groups, provides a foundation for a 
scientifically-based interagency planning programme. 

The North American Waterfowl Management Plan 
(NAWMP) is a joint project involving Mexico, USA and 
Canada, 27 states and approximately 200 conservation 
groups and many private corporations, in planning 
programmes to conserve waterfowl and wetland 
habitats. 

The establishment of Yosemite Valley and the Mariposa 
Grove of Giant Sequoias in 1864 was the first instance 
of the nation setting aside a natural area through 
legislation to be protected explicitly for public use. The 
federal government ceded Yosemite to a state 
government for management as a public park during a 
period when there was no precedent for federal 
management of parks. Even as President Abraham 
Lincoln signed the act transferring Yosemite to a state 



70 



United States of America 



government, the United States was in the grips of a civil 
war over the issue of state sovereignty. Had the territory 
of Yellowstone fallen under the jurisdiction of a state 
rather than an unincorporated territory in 1872, 
Yellowstone would have been handed over to the state 
authorities, just as Yosemite had been 18 years before. 
The establishment of Yellowstone as a national park 
under the jurisdiction of federal rather than state 
authorities was an historic precedent It provided the first 
instance of the exercise of federal power, an ascendant 
force in American public life, for the sequestration of 
land for conservation. Yellowstone represents the 
transition of the US from a federation of sovereign states 
to a nation united in which all parties participate in a 
common vision of the future. An upwelling of support 
for parks followed the Yellowstone experiment, and 
Congress authorised additional parks in 1890 (Sequoia, 
General Grant, later incorporated into Kings Canyon, 
and Yosemite); in 1899 (Mount Rainier); and 1902 
(Crater Lake). 

The basis for the current National Wilderness 
Preservation System began with an administrative 
designation established by the USPS , that of wilderness 
and wild areas. The first such area to be designated was 
Gila Wilderness in New Mexico in 1924. All of the 
former USPS wilderness and wild areas became part of 
the National Wilderness Preservation System in 1964. 

Approximately 2.6 million sq. km, or nearly 30% of the 
US land area, is owned by the federal government, with 
the great majority lying in the western half of the country 
and in Alaska. The remainder of the land lies within state, 
local or private ownership, and hence can only be added 
to the federal protected areas network through purchase, 
lease, exchange or other agreement by federal agencies. 
By 1893, the government had reserved 5.25 million ha 
of forest, and, by 1 9 1 0, the system of national forests rose 
to 60 million ha. In 1916 there were 35 national parks 
and monuments. By 1992 the National Park System 
included 360 units covering nearly 32.5 million ha; the 
National Forest System, included over 77 million ha 
including 154 national forests, 19 national grasslands 
and 17 land utilisation projects; the National Wildlife 
Refuge System included 492 national wildlife refuges 
covering some 35.75 million ha administered by the 
FWS; National Marine Sanctuaries and the National 
Estuarine Reserves System, administered by NOAA 
included 8 national marine sanctuaries covering some 
3.1 million ha, and 21 national estuarine research 
reserves; Bureau of Land Management had 
responsibility for over 28 research natural areas on 
23,000ha, 40 other natural areas including outstanding 
natural areas and primitive areas on 328,000ha. 
The national wilderness preservation system consists of 
492 wilderness areas covering 37.3 million ha (well over 
half of this Ues in Alaska). A large proportion of these 
areas are further protected under the other jjroiection 
systems listed above (Hendee et at., 1990). More than 
one-third of the Wilderness System (13.1 milUon ha) is 
managed by the USPS, including nearly 80% of the 



wilderness area outside Alaska (CRS, 1989). Of the 
Pederal lands administered by the BLM, approximately 
10,754 ,000ha were designated as wilderness study areas 
for possible wilderness designation. Of these lands, the 
BLM recommended, and the Secretary of the Interior 
concurred, that 3,950,000ha were suitable for 
designation as wilderness. By 1992, some652,000ha had 
been legally designated as wilderness under the National 
Wilderness Preservation System, comprising 66 units in 
nine different states. 

The National Association of State Park Directors 
(NASPD) annually publishes data relating to state park 
systems: in June 1990 there were 2,040 state parks 
covering 2.98 million ha. These state agencies 
frequently manage other areas - NASPD (1991) lists 
over 80 categories, covering forests, natural areas, 
recreation areas, historic sites, water use areas, 
environmental education areas and state trails. The 
total for all these categories (including state parks) is 
4,022 sites covering over 4.5 million ha. This is not a 
comprehensive figure for all state protected areas 
however, given that it only covers sites managed by one 
agency, and in many states there are likely to be others, 
for example dealing specifically with forestry, or with 
fish and wildUfe, which are not included. 

Private protected areas include over 1,300 preserves 
covering 650,000ha administered by The Nature 
Conservancy (Waugh and Perez Gil, 1992), the National 
Audubon Society owns or leases over 100 sanctuaries, 
covering over 60,000 ha (NAS, 1991); the Society of 
American Foresters has designated over 500 natural 
areas which overlap with the Research Natural Areas 
network established under the federal government; 
Ducks Unlimited administers 161,780ha of wetlands; 
the local land trusts across the continent represented in 
the Land Trust Alliance administer a total of 828,630ha 
(McCloskey, 1992); Operation Stronghold is an alliance 
of 8(X)-900 private landholders who have undertaken 
conservation measures on private land estimated to 
cover 2-2.5 miUion ha (Waugh and Perez Gil, 1992). 

In a recent analysis McCloskey (1992) estimates that 
some 1 1 % of the total area of the US is protected in areas 
managed in categories equivalent to lUCN categories 
I-V, with the federal government protecting 9.2% of the 
territory, and non-federal agencies the remaining 1.8%. 
Of the non-federal agencies the most important are the 
state government agencies, although the figure also 
includes a number of local government protected areas, 
tribal lands and private protected areas. This analysis 
estimates that more than 8 million ha of federal lands are 
awaiting permanent legal designation mostly land that 
is already being administered as wilderness by the Forest 
Service or the BLM. Actually data for the percentage 
cover, and for the total area covered, by the federal 
protected estate are to some degree misleading, as they 
are skewed by the very high proportion of protected land 
in the western states and Alaska, and by the vast area of 
protected land in Alaska. 



71 



Protected Areas of the World 



Waugh and Perez Gil (1992) list the priorities for action 
in the North American region, most of which could be 
applied equally to the US. These include: enhancing the 
capacity to manage protected areas; strengthening the 
constituency of protected areas; assessing and 
demonstrating benefits; extending coverage; developing 
the capacity to protect marine and coastal areas; putting 
all protected areas on a sound financial footing; 
strengthening protected areas through development 
planning; restoring the quality of degraded parks and 
applying the lessons of science and management. 

The General Authorities Act, 1976 directed that the 
Department of the Interior investigate, study, and 
continually monitor the welfare of areas whose resources 
"exhibit qualities of national significance" that have 
potential for inclusion in the National Park System. The 
Secretary of the Interior was directed to transmit a listing 
each year of not less than 12 areas for consideration of 
inclusion in the system. In 1981, Congress retracted the 
funding to undertake these studies and expansion of the 
system in favour of additional funding to improve 
management of existing areas. 

The USFWS and the University of Idaho are undertaking 
an analysis of gaps in protected area coverage of 
biological resources, on a state-by-state basis. 
Completion of this process is expected to take five to ten 
years. 

Other Relevant Information Recreation and tourism 
is a major element of the protected areas philosophy. 
Visits to parks increased from six million in 1942 to 
33 million in 1950, and 72 milUon in 1960. In 1990 more 
than 250 million visitors came to national parks, whereas 
state parks hosted 723 million visitors (NASPD, 1991; 
Waugh and Perez and Gil, 1992). Huge numbers of 
visitors in many parks are causing problems of erosion, 
waste and pollution and general overcrowding and 
disturbance. 

Addresses 

US National Park Service (Director), US 

Department of Interior, Washington, DC 20240 

(Tel: 1 202 208 1100) 
US Fish and Wildlife Service (Director), US 

Department of Interior, Washington, DC 

20240(Tel: 1 202 208 1100) 
Bureau of Land Management (Director), US 

Department of Interior, Washington, DC 

20240-9998(Tel: 1 202 208 3100) 
Land Resources Office, US Department of the Interior 

Bureau of Indian Affairs, Washington, DC 20240 

(Tel: 1 202 208 4004) 
Office of Resource Management (Director), Bureau of 

Reclamation, US Department of the Interior 

Denver Federal Center, Denver, CO 80224 

(Tel: 1 303 236 2389) 
Forest Service (Chief Forester), US Department 

of Agriculture, Washington, DC 20240 

Tel: 1 202 447 6661) 



National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administrauon 
(Assistant Administrator for Ocean Services and 
Coastal Zone Management), US Department 
of Commerce, Washington DC 20230 
(Tel: 1 202 377 4699) 

Department of Defense (Deputy Assistant Secretary for 
Environment), OASD(PandL)E, The Pentagon, 
Room 3D-833m, Washington DC 20301-8000 
(Tel: 1 703 695 7820) 

Tennessee Valley Authority (Senior Vice-President), 
Muscle Shoals, AL 35660 (Tel: 1 205 386 2601) 

Select References 

Anderson, J.R. (1977). Land use cover and land cover 

changes a framework for monitoring. J. Res. U.S. 

Geological Survey 5(2): 143-153. 
Crumpacker, D.W., Hodge, S.W., Friedley, D. and 

Gregg, W.P. (n.d.). A preliminary assessment of the 

stams of major terrestrial ecosystems on federal and 

Indian lands in the United States. Manuscript. 33 pp. 
Dahl, T£. and Johnson, C.E. (1991). Status and Trends 

of Wetlands in the Coterminous United States, 

Mid-1970s to Mid-1980s. US Department of the 

Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, 

D.C. 28pp. 
Davis, S.D., Droop, SJ.M., Gregerson, P., Henson, L., 

Leon, C.J., Lamlein Villa-Lobos, J., Synge, H., and 

Zantovska, J. lUCN (1986). Plants in Danger: What 

do we know? lUCN, Gland, Switzerland and 

Cambridge, UK. Pp. 381-396. 
Gattuso, J. (1991). Native America. Insight Guides. Apa 

Publications (HK) Ltd. 389 pp. 
Gorte, R.W. (1989). Wilderness: overview and statistics. 

Congressional Research Service, Washington, DC. 

US Government Printing Office. CRS report for 

Congress 89-460 ENR, August 4. 
Hamilton, B. (1989). Unfinished business. Sierra 

September/October. Pp. 48-51, 106-108. Sierra 

Club, San Francisco. 
Hartzog, G.B. (1972a). Part one of the National Park 

Systemplan : history. U.S . Department of the Interior, 

Washington, DC. 164 pp. 
Hartzog, G.B. (1972b). Part two of the National Park 

Systemplan: natural history. U.S. Department of the 

Interior, Washington, DC. 140 pp. 
Hendee, J.C, Stankey, G.H. and Lucas, R.C. (1990). 

Wilderness Management. Second Edition, revised. 

North American Press, Golden, Colorado. 546pp. 
Keystone Center (1991). Final Consensus Report of the 

Keystone Policy Dialogue on Biological Diversity on 

Federal Lands. The Keystone Center, Keystone, 

Colorado. 98pp. 
Klopatek, J.M., Olson, R.J., Emerson, C.J. and Jones, 

J.L. (1979). Land use conflicts with natural 

vegetation in the United States. Environmental 

Conservation 6(3): 191-199. 
McCloskey, M. (1992). Protected areas in the United 

States: What is the US record? In press. 19pp. 
Myers, P. and Green, S.N. (1989). State Park in a New 

Era. The Conservation Foundation, Washington. 



72 



United States of America 



NfFWF (1992). National Park Service. In: FY 1993 
Fisheries and Wildlife Assessment. National Fish and 
WUdUfe Foundation. Pp. \-M. 

NAS (1991). Wildlife Sanctuaries. National Audubon 
Society Sanctuary Department, Sharon, Connecticut. 
42 pp. 

NASPD (1991). Annual Information Exchange, April, 
1991. National Association of State Park Directors. 
19 pp. 

TNC (1975). Preserving our natural heritage. Volume 1. 
Federal activities. The Nature Conservancy, 
Washington, DC, published in cooperation with the 
U.S.Man and theBiosphere Program, Washington DC. 
323 pp. 

TNC (1976). Preserving our natural heritage. Volume 2. 
State activities. The Nature Conservancy, 
Washington, DC, published in cooperation with the 



U.S. Man and the Biosphwe Program, Washington DC. 

671 pp. 
USPS (1977). A Directory of Research Natural Areas on 

Federal Lands of the United States of America. 

Federal Committee on Ecological Reserves, Forest 

Service, US Department of Agriculture. Pp. 5-8. 
USNPS (1988). Natural Resources Assessment and 

Action Program Report. US Department of the 

Interior, National Park Service, Office of Natural 

Resources, Washington DC. 
Waugh, J.D. and Perez Gil, R. (1992). North America 

Regional Review. Paper presented to the IV th World 

Congress on National Parks and Protected Areas 

Caracas, Venezuela 10-21 February 1992 
Wilderness Society (1989). Wilderness America: a 

vision for the future of the nation's wildlands. The 

Wilderness Society, Washington DC. 



ANNEX 

Definitions of protected area designations, as legislated, 

together with authorities responsible for their administration 



Title: National Park Service Act, United States 
Code: Title 16, Chapter 1 (16 USC 1): the 
National Park System; related acts include 
Cooperation Agreement Act (16 USC 17) 

Date: 25 August 1916 (National Park Service Act); 
1946 (Cooperation Agreement Act); 1964 (Land and 
Water Conservation Fund Act) 

Brief description: Contains the authorising 

legislation, or "Organic Act" for the National Park 
Service. This law stipulates that "the Service... shall 
promote and regulate the use of the Federal areas 
known as national parks, monuments, and 
reservations. It provides for the establishment of 
national parks networks with over 11 categories 
throughout the USA. 

The Act of 25 August 1916 (39 Stat. 535) provides 
for the creation of the US National Parks Service. It 
has the authority to identify areas within the national 
parks system which are established by individual acts 
of Congress. 

The Cooperation Agreement Act, 1946 permits large 
natural areas of land to come into the park system 
without specific acts of Congress. Eight units of the 
park system entered through the 1946 AcL 

Administrative authorities: National Park 

Service (NPS) of the US Department of the Interior 

Designations: 

Three broad categories are placed within the 
National Park System: natural, recreational and 



historic. All sites are established by Acts of 
Congress. The National Parks System as a whole 
holds two, occasionally contradictory, missions: to 
provide for public access and enjoyment of natural 
and historic areas, and to conserve their scenery and 
natural resources. Within each park, regardless of 
management category, all lands are classified into a 
land-use system with flexible zoning and sub-zoning. 
They are divided into natural zones, historic zones, 
development zones and special use zones. The 
natural zone may be sub-divided into 
wilderness/wilderness study subzone; environmental 
protection subzone; outstanding natural feature 
subzone; and natural environment subzone. 

Exact definitions vary within the different categories 
of protected area in the System, and there may well 
be similarities and overlaps between the different 
categories. The designations under the system 
include the following: 

Natural sites These include: national park, national 
monument, national reserve, and national preserve. 

Recreation sites These include: national recreation 
area, national seashore, national lakeshore, national 
scenic trail, national river, and national wild and 
scenic river. 

Historic sites These include: national historic site, 
national historic park, national battlefield. 

Source: US Department of the Interior (1992); TNC 
(1975) 



73 



Protected Areas of the World 



Title:An Act to establish a National 
Wilderness Preservation System for the 
permanent good of the whole people, and for 
other purposes. Short title: the "Wilderness 
Act". PL 88-577, 16 USC 1131-1136. 

Date: 3 September 1964 

Brief description: Federal agencies are authorised 
and mandated to manage areas of land as wilderness 
under the Wilderness Act, 1972. Under this Act of 
Congress, the statute states that the National 
Wilderness Preservation System was established 
with major objectives "to secure for the American 
people of present and future generations the benefits 
of an enduring resource of wilderness". 

The system consists of federally-owned lands 
designated by Congress as Wilderness areas. All lie 
within the National Parks System, the National 
Forest System, the National Wildlife Refuge System, 
and public lands administered by the Bureau of Land 
Management. The Wilderness Act does not ^ply to 
public or Federal Lands administered by 
Departments or Agencies other than these. 

Administrative authorities: US National Park 
Service, US Forest Service, US Fish and Wildlife 
Service, US Bureau of Land Management 

Designations: 

Wilderness area To "be administered for the use 
and enjoyment of the American people in such 
manner as will leave them unimpaired for future use 
and enjoyment as wilderness, and so as to provide for 
the protection of these areas, the preservation of their 
wilderness character, and for the gathering and 
dissemination of information regarding their use and 
enjoyment as wilderness." 

Wilderness as "in contrast with those areas where 
man and his own wOTks dominate the landscape, is 
hereby recognised as an area where the earth and its 
community of life are untrammelled by man, where 
man himself is a visitor who does not remain." 

An area of wilderness is further defmed to mean in 
this chapter an area of undeveloped federal land 
retaining its primeval character and influence, 
without permanent improvements or human 
habitation, which is protected and managed so as to 
preserve its natural conditions and which: 

- generally appears to have been affected primarily 
by the forces of nature, with the imprint of man's 
work substantially unnoticeable; 

- has outstanding opportunities for solitude or a 
primitive and unconfmed type of recreation; 



- covers at least 5,000 acres (2023 .4ha) of land or is 
of sufficient size as to make practicable its 
preservation and use in an unimpaired condition; 

- may also contain ecological, geological, or other 
features of scientific, educational, scenic, or 
historical value." 

Source: US Department of Interior (1992), TNC 
(1975) 

Title: Forest Reserves Act, often referred to as 
the Creative Act, 1891, United States Code: 
Title 16. Chapter 2 (16 USC 2); Organic 
Administration Act (16 USC 475); Weeks 
Law; Resources Planning Act: National Forest 
System; National Forest Management Act 

Date: May 1891 (Forest Reserve Act/Creative 
Act); 4 June 1897 (Organic Administration Act); 
1905 (US Forest Service establishment); 1911 
(Weeks Law); Resources Planning Act, 1974; 
National Forest Management Act, 1976. 

Brief description: In 1891 Congress passed the 
Forest Reserve Act (Creative Act), giving the 
President authority to withdraw portions of the public 
domain and designate them as forest reservations. 
A system of administration of the reserves was set 
forth in the Organic Administration Act, 1897. The 
US Forest Service (USFS) was established in 
1905. Authority for the USFS is contained in 
Chapter 2 of Title 16, US Codes, that grants the 
Secretary of Agriculture authority to administer 
the nation's forest reserves. 

The Resources Planning Act, 1974 incorporated the 
term "National Forest System" into the statutes. 
Under the System the USFS has responsibility for 
national forests, national grasslands and land 
utilisation projects. The resources of these lands are 
managed according to the Multiple Use-Sustained 
Yield Act, 1960. The rules which require the 
integration of land and resource planning can be 
found in 36 CFR Part 219, the implementing 
regulations for the National Forest Management Act. 

Administrative authorities: US Forest Service 
of the US Department of Agriculture 

Designations: 

NATIONAL FOREST The laws contained in 
Chapter 2 specify that each Forest Service unit 
develop an integrated management plan. Chapter 36 
of the same Code requires the USFS to develop 
guidelines for multiple-use management of reserves 
under its authority that "require the identification of 
the suitability of lands for resource management; 
provide for obtaining inventory data on the various 
renewable resources, and soU and water, including 
pertinent maps, graphic material, and explanatory 



74 



U ruled States of America 



aids; and provide for methods to identify special 
conditions or situations involving hazards to the 
various resources and their relationship to 
alternative activities." 

The law makes provision for land management 
plans that: "ensure consideration of the economic 
and environmental aspects of various systems of 
renewable resource management, including the 
related systems of silviculture and protection of 
forest resources, to provide for outdoor recreation 
(including wilderness), range, timber, watershed, 
wildlife, and fish; provide for diversity of plant and 
animal communities based on the suitability and 
capability of the specific land area in order to meet 
overall multiple-use objectives, and within the 
multiple-use objectives of a land management plan 
adopted pursuant to this section, provide, where 
appropriate, to the degree practicable, for steps to be 
taken to preserve the diversity of tree species similar 
to that existing in the region controlled by the plan; 
(and) ensure research and evaluation (based on 
continuous monitoring and assessment in the field) 
of the effects of each management system to the end 
that it will not produce substantial and permanent 
impairment of the productivity of the land." 

Under the Organic Administration Act (36 CFR 294) 
areas worthy of special classification within the 
National Forest, are classed as special interest areas, 
and listed as the following: 

Scenic area place of outstanding beauty which 
requires special management to preserve its 
qualities; 

Palaeontological area containing relict 
palaeontological specimens of fauna and flora; 

Geological area unit of land with outstanding 
formations or unique geological features of the 
earth's development, including caves and fossils; 

Botanical area contains specimens or group 
exhibits of plants, plant groups and plant 
communities which are significant for a variety of 
reasons; 

Zoological area contains authentic, significant 
and interesting evidence of American natural 
heritage. 

Source: US Department of Agriculture (1992) 
TNC (1975) 

Title: Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, National 
Wild and Scenic Rivers System, United States 
Code, Title 16. Chapter 28 

Date: 2 October 1968 



Brief description: The National Wild and 

Scenic Rivers System was authorised by Congress 
in 1968. This statute, found in Tide 16, US Code, 
Chapter 28 declares as national policy "that certain 
selected rivers of the Nation which, with their 
immediate environments, possess outstandingly 
remarkable scenic, recreational, geologic, fish and 
wildlife, historic, cultural, or other similar values, 
shall be preserved in free-flowing condition, and 
that they and their immediate environments shall 
be protected for the benefit and enjoyment of 
present and future generations. The Congress 
declares that the established national policy of dam 
and other construction at appropriate sections of 
the rivers of the United States needs to be 
complemented by a policy that would preserve 
other selected rivers or sections thereof in their 
free-flowing condition to protect the water quality 
of such rivers and to fulfil other vital national 
conservation purposes." 



Relevant federal 



Administrative authorities: 

authorities 

Designations: 



NATIONAL WILD AND SCENIC RIVER The 
system shall comprise rivers that are designated by 
Act of Congress or designated by a legislature of the 
state(s) liirough which they flow. Every wild scenic 
or recreational river in its free-flowing condition, or 
upon restoration to this condition, shall be considered 
eligible for inclusion in the national wild and scenic 
rivers system and if included, shall be classified, 
designated, and administered as one of the following: 

Wild river area those rivers or sections of rivers 
that are free of impoundments and generally 
inaccessible except by trail, with watersheds or 
shorelines essentially primitive and waters 
unpolluted. These represent vestiges of primitive 
America. 

Scenic river area those rivers or sections of rivers 
that are free of impoundments, with shorelines and 
watersheds still largely primitive and shorelines 
largely undeveloped, but accessible in places by 
roads. 

Recreational river area those rivers or sections of 
rivers that are readily accessible by road or raih-oad, 
that may have some development along their 
shorelines, and that may have undergone some 
impoimdment or diversion in the past. 

Source: TNC (1975) 



75 



Protected Areas of the World 



Title: National Marine Sanctuary Program: 
Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries 
Act of 1972 (PL 92-532), as amended, 16 USC 
1431 etseq. (authorization); 15 CFR 922 
(program regulations). National estuarine 
research reserve system: Section 315 of the 
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (PL 
92-583), as amended, 16 USC 1451 et seq. 
(authorization); 15 CFR 921 (program 
regulations). 

Date: 1972 

Brief description: Congress authorises the 
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 
(NOAA) to establish and maintain two types of 
protected areas: national marine sanctuary and 
national estuarine research reserve. 

The Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries 
Act authorises the Secretary of Commerce to 
designate ocean waters as marine sanctuaries. 

Administrative authorities: National Oceanic 
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) 

Designations: 

National marine sanctuary Acknowledging that 
the US has directed most protected area efforts 
towards the terrestrial estate, the statutes reflected in 
this code affirm that "certain areas of the marine 
environment" possess qualities of "conservation, 
recreational, ecological, historical, research, 
educational, or aesthetic qualities which give them 
special national significance." The Code 
characterizes this programme as serving "to enhance 
public awareness, understanding, appreciation, and 
wise use of the marine environment" 

National Estuarine Research Reserves System 
Title 15 of die Code of Federal Regulations, Chapter 
IX, provides regulations for the National Estuarine 
Reserve Research System. The mission of the 
National Estuarine Reserve Research System, 
according to die Regulations, "is the establishment 
and management, through Federal-State 
cooperation, of a national system of estuarine 
research reserves representative of the various 
regions and estuarine types in die United States." 

Estuarine research reserve established to 

provide opportunities for long-term research, 
education, and interpretation and: 

- to ensure a stable environment for research dirough 
long-term protection of estuarine reserve resources; 

- address coastal management issues identified as 
significant through coordinated estuarine research 
widiin die System; 



- enhance public awareness and understanding of 
the estuarine environment and provide suitable 
opportunities for public education and interpretation; 

- promote federal, state, public and private use of 
one or more reserves within the System when such 
entities conduct estuarine research; and 

- conduct and coordinate estuarine research widiin 
the System, gathering and making available 
information necessary for improved understanding 
and management of estuarine areas." 

- Under the provisions of the Act an area may be 
designated as an estuarine reserve only if the area is a 
representative estuarine ecosystem diat is suitable for 
long-term research. 

Source: NOAA ( 1 992) TNC ( 1 975) 

Title: National Wildlife Refuge System 
Administration Act: National Wildlife Refuge 
System. Incorporates the Migratory Bird 
Treaty Act (16 USC 703-711); Migratory Bird 
Hunting and Conservation Stamp Act, 1934; 
Migratory Bird Convention Act, 1929; Land 
and Water Conservation Fund Act, 
Wilderness Act, 1964; Endangered Species 
Act, 1973 (revised 1982, supplemented in the 
International Environmental Protection Act, 
1983); Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, 
1934 (amended 1958); Fish and Wildlife 
Improvement Act, 1978 

Date: 1966 (National Wildlife Refuge System 
Administration Act) 

Brief description: Expresses policy and provides 
guidelines for operating the system. The Refuge 
Recreation Act, 1962 authorises the purchase of 
adjacent lands to serve as recreational areas and as 
buffer areas to die refuges (funds for die purchase of 
such lands under die Land and Water Conservation 
Fund Act, 1965). The Wilderness Act, 1964 and die 
Endangered Species Act, 1973 have some bearing on 
the system. The Fish and WUdUfe Coordination Act, 
1934 (amended 1958) audiorizes Federal water 
resource agencies to acquire lands in connection with 
water resource projects specifically for the 
conservation and enhancement of fish and wUdlife, 
and requires consultation widi the FWS and the 
wUdUfe agency of the state concerned. 

Administrative authorities: Fish and Wildlife 
Service (USFWS), US Department of die Interior 

Designations: 

Widiin die Refuge System are a series of die 
following different categories as defined in die Code 
of Federal Regulations (Tide 50, Chapter 1, Section 
25): Migratory Bird (Waterfowl) Areas; Migratory 



76 



United States of America 



Bird (General) Areas; Big Game Areas, National 
Game Ranges; National Wildlife Ranges and 
Waterfowl Production Areas. 

National wildlife refuge maintained for the 
primary purpose of developing a national 
programme of wildlife and ecological conservation 
and rehabilitation. These refuges are established for 
the restoration, preservation, development and 
management of wildlife and wildlands habitat; for 
the protection and preservation of endangered or 
threatened species and their habitat; and for the 
management of wildlife and wildlands to obtain the 
maximum benefits from these resources. 

Supplementary designations may be applied to parts 
of, or entire, refuges. These include wilderness areas, 
research natural areas, wild and scenic rivers, natural 
landmarks, international shorebird reserves. 

The FWS also has obligations for wildlife 
management areas or coordination areas under 
cooperative agreements with federal, state, local and 
private agencies and organisations. 

Source: TNC (1975) 

Title: Department of Defense, United States 
Code, Title 16 

Date: 1966 

Brief description: The organic act relating to 
Department of Defense (DoD) land. Federal statutes 
(Titie 16, US Code) authorise the Secretary of 
Defense "to carry out a programme of planning for, 
and tiie development, maintenance, and coordination 
of wildlife, fish and game conservation and 
rehabilitation in each military reservation in 
accordance with a cooperative plan mutually agreed 
upon by the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of 
the Interior, and the appropriate State agency 
designated by the state in which the reservation is 
located." 



Administrative authorities: 

Defense 

Designations: 



Department of 



Military reservation Cooperative plans under 

tills authority are intended to include "fish and 
wildlife habitat improvements or 
modifications.. .range rehabilitation where necessary 
for support of wildlife,.. .control of off-road vehicle 
traffic, and.. .specific habitat improvement projects 
and related activities and adequate protection for 
species of fish, wildlife, and plants considered 
threatened or endangered." Cooperative plans are to 
be "reviewed as to operation and effect by the parties 
thereto on a regular basis, but not less often than 
every 5 years, . . . shall, if a multi-use natural 
resources management plan is applicable to the 



military reservation, be treated as the exclusive 
component of that management plan with respect to 
wildlife, fish, and game conservation and 
rehabilitation." 

The statute continues, "the Secretary of each military 
department shall manage the natural resources of 
each miUtary reservation with the United States that 
is under the jurisdiction of the Secretary ... so as to 
provide for sustained multipurpose uses of those 
resources; and to provide the public access that is 
necessary or appropriate for those uses; to the extent 
that those uses and that access are not inconsistent 
with military mission of the reservation." 

Source: TNC (1976) 

Title: Tiie National Natural Landmarlcs 
Program 

Date: 1963 

Brief description: An administrative rather 

tiian a legal designation, national natural landmarks 
are designated on any areas of land outside the 
national park system. Participation in the scheme by 
private landowners is entirely voluntary. Guidelines 
concerning the objectives of this designation are 
given in the Federal Register Volume 40, No. 87, 
5 May, 1975, p. 19504. 

Administrative authorities: National Parks 
Service, US Department of the Interior 

Designations: 

National natural landmark Sites must lie 

outside land already administered by the National 
Park Service. They are designated if they are of 
national significance in illustrating the diversity of 
the country's natural history. Sites are entered on the 
National Registry of Natural Landmarks this is 
voluntary and does not change ownership. Inclusion 
"is intended to: 1) encourage the preservation of sites 
illustrating the geological and ecological character of 
die US; 2) enhance the educational and scientific 
value of sites thus preserved; 3) strengthen cultural 
appreciation of natural history; and 4) foster a wider 
interest and concern in the Nation ' s natural heritage" . 

Source: TNC (1976) 

Title: The Researcli Natural Areas Program 

Date: No information 

Brief description: An administrative rather than a 
legal designation, research natural areas are 
designated by any one of eight cooperating federal 
agencies wiUi the aim of preserving a representative 
array of all significant natural ecosystems and 
providing for their research 



77 



Protected Areas of the World 



Administrative authorities: Forest Service in the 
US Department of Agriculture; Bureau of Indian 
Affairs, Bureau of Land Management, Fish and 
Wildlife Service and National Parks Service in the 
US Department of the Interior; Department of 
Defense; Energy Research and Development 
Administration; Tenessee Valley Authority 

Designations: 

Research natural area to preserve an anay of all 
significant natural ecosystems and their inherent 
processes as baseUne areas, and to obtain from them, 
through research and education, information 



concerning the natural systems, their components 
and comparisons with representative manipulated 
systems. Restrictions and regulations vary depending 
on the administrative agency and the specific site, but 
generally sites are areas of minimal human 
intervention and activities such as logging, grazing 
burning or restocking are prohibited. Hunting, 
fishing and trapping, as well as camping, swimming 
and hiking are generally not encouraged. Research is 
encouraged, although generally it must be 
non-destructive in character. 

Source: USPS (1977) 



78 



United States of America 



SUMMARY OF PROTECTED AREAS 



Map 


National/international designations 


lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 


notified 




Alabama 










National Wildlife Refuges 








1 


Bon Secour (FWS)* 


IV 


1,819 




2 


Choctaw (FWS) 


IV 


1,708 




3 


Eufaula(FWS) 


rv 


3,211 




4 


Wheeler (FWS) 

National Estuarine Research Reserve 


IV 


13,839 




5 


Weeks Bay (NOAA)* 
Parkway 


rv 


1,483 


1986 


6 


Natchez Trace (NPS)* 
Wildernesses** 


V 


18,300 


1938 


7 


Cheaha (FS)* 
Sipsey (FS) 


n 


3,031 


1983 


8 


n 


10,484 


1975 




Alaska 










National Parks 








9 


Denali (NPS) 


n 


1,911,495 


1917 


10 


Gates of the Arctic (NPS) 


n 


2,939,689 


1980 


11 


Glacier Bay (NPS) 


n 


1,304,550 


1925 


12 


Katmai (NPS) 


n 


1,504,774 


1980 


13 


Kenai Fjords (NPS) 


n 


271,255 


1980 


14 


Kobuk Valley (NPS) 


n 


708,502 


1978 


15 


Lake Clark (NPS) 


II • 


1,068,805 


1978 


16 


Wrangell-StElias(NPS) 
National Preserves 


n 


3,382,014 


1978 


17 


Aniakchak (NPS) 


n 


188,427 


1978 


18 


Bering Land Bridge (NPS) 


n 


1,125,124 


1980 


19 


Denali (NPS) 


n 


529,800 


1980 


20 


Gates of the Arctic (NPS) 


n 


383,246 


1980 


21 


Glacier Bay (NPS) 


n 


23,385 


1978 


22 


Katmai (NPS) 


n 


151,096 


1980 


23 


Lake Clark (NPS) 


n 


568,546 


1980 


24 


Noatak (NPS) 


n 


2,655,870 


1978 


25 


Wrangell-St. Elias (NPS) 


n 


1,962,115 


1980 


26 


Yukon Charley Rivers (NPS) 
National Wildlife Refuges 


n 


915,000 


1978 


27 


Alaska Maritime (FWS) 


IV 


1,440,597 


1980 


28 


Alaska Peninsula (FWS) 


IV 


1,417,500 


1980 


29 


Arctic (FWS) 


rv 


7,714,940 


1980 


30 


Bechaiof(FWS) 


IV 


486,000 


1978 


31 


Innoko (FWS) 


rv 


1,559,250 


1980 


32 


Izembek (FWS) 


IV 


129,961 


1960 


33 


Kanuti (FWS) 


IV 


579,150 


1980 


34 


Kenai (FWS) 


IV 


797,850 


1980 


35 


Kenai National Moose Range (FWS) 


IV 


698,920 




36 


Kodiak (FWS) 


IV 


755,325 




37 


Koyukuk (FWS) 


IV 


1,437,750 


1980 


38 


Nowitna(FWS) 


IV 


631,800 


1980 


39 


Selawik (FWS) 


IV 


870,750 


1980 


40 


Tedin (FWS) 


rv 


283,500 


1980 


41 


Togiak (FWS) 


IV 


1,662,525 


1980 


42 


Yukon Delta (FWS) 


IV 


7,947,905 


1980 



79 



Protected Areas of the World 



Map Nationallinternational designations 
ref . Name of area 



lUCN management Area 

category (ha) 



Year 
notified 



43 


Yukon Flats (FWS) 
National Monuments 


IV 


3,495,150 


1980 


44 


Admiralty Island (FS) 


m 


387,530 


1980 


45 


Aniakchak (NPS) 


m 


55,514 


1978 


46 


Cape Krusenstem (NPS) 


m 


267,206 


1978 


47 


Misty Fjords (FS) 
Wildernesses 


m 


928,491 


1980 


48 


Chuck River (FS) 


n 


29.341 


1990 


49 


Coronation Island (FS) 


n 


7,783 


1980 


50 


Endicott River (FS) 


n 


39,954 


1980 


51 


Karta River (FS) 


n 


15,640 


1990 


52 


Kootznoowoo (FS) 


n 


386,732 


1980 


53 


Kuiu (FS) 


n 


24,514 


1990 


54 


Maurelle Islands (FS) 


n 


1,998 


1980 


55 


Misty Fjords (FS) 


II 


866,939 


1980 


56 


Petersburg Creek-Duncan Salt Chuck (FS) 


II 


18,930 


1980 


57 


Pleasant/Lemusurier/Inian Islands (FS) 


n 


9,364 


1990 


58 


Russell Fjord (FS) 


n 


141,115 


1980 


59 


South Baranof(FS) 


n 


129,325 


1980 


60 


South Etolin (FS) 


n 


33,849 


1990 


61 


South Prince of Wales (FS) 


n 


36,825 


1980 


62 


Stikine-LeConte (FS) 


n 


181,640 


1980 


63 


TebenkofBay(FS) 


n 


27,049 


1980 


64 


Tracy Arm-Fords Terror (FS) 


n 


264,333 


1980 


65 


Warren Island (FS) 


n 


4,525 


1980 


66 


West Chichagof-Yakobi (FS) 

Arizona 

National Parks 


n 


107,140 


1980 


67 


Grand Canyon (NPS) 


n 


493,441 


1919 


68 


Petrified Forest (NPS) 
National Wildlife Refuges 


n 


37,880 


1962 


69 


Buenos Aires (FWS) 


rv 


45,126 




70 


CabezaPrieta(FWS) 


rv 


348,042 




71 


Cibola (FWS) 


IV 


1,277 




72 


Havasu (FWS) 


IV 


3,138 


1941 


73 


Imperial (FWS) 


IV 


7,206 


1941 


74 


Kofa (FWS) 
National Memorial 


siv 


267,102 


1939 


75 


Coronado (NPS) 
National Monuments 


V 


1,145 


1952 


76 


Canyon de Chelly (NPS) 


in 


33,536 


1931 


77 


Chiricahua (NPS) 


in 


4,853 


1924 


78 


Organ Pipe Cactus (NPS) 


m 


133,925 


1937 


79 


Saguaro (NPS) 


in 


33,836 


1933 


80 


Sunset Crater (NPS) 


in 


1,230 


1930 


81 


Wupatki (NPS) 


m 


14,267 


1924 


82 


Apache Creek (FS) 


n 


2,193 


1984 


83 


Bear Wallow (FS) 


n 


4,484 


1984 


84 


CasUe Creek (FS) 


n 


10,534 


1984 


85 


Cedar Bench (FS) 


n 


6,050 


1984 


86 


Chiricahua (FS) 


n 


35,491 


1964 



80 



United Stales of America 



Map 


National/international designations 


lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 


notified 


87 


F,.sr.udilla (FS) 


n 


2,104 


1984 


88 


Fossa Springs (FS) 


n 


8,963 


1984 


89 


Four Peaks (FS) 


n 


24,716 


1984 


90 


Galiuro (FS) 


n 


30,885 


1964 


91 


Granite Mountain (FS) 


n 


3,966 


1984 


92 


Hellsgate (FS) 


n 


15,151 


1984 


93 


Juniper Mesa (FS) 


n 


3,076 


1984 


94 


Kachina Peaks (FS) 


n 


7,534 


1984 


95 


Kanab Creek (FS) 


n 


25,803 


1984 


96 


Kendrick Mountain (FS) 


n 


2,635 


1984 


97 


Mazatzal (FS) 


n 


102,139 


1964 


98 


MUlerPeak(FS) 


n 


8,171 


1984 


99 


Mount Baldy (FS) 


n 


2,865 


1970 


100 


Mount Wrightson (FS) 


n 


10,222 


1984 


101 


Munds Mountain (FS) 


n 


9,879 


1984 


102 


Pajarita (FS) 


n 


3,003 


1984 


103 


Pine Mountain (FS) 


n 


8,118 


1972 


104 


Pusch Ridge (FS) 


n 


23,040 


1978 


105 


Red Rock-Secret Mountain (FS) 


n 


19,099 


1984 


106 


Rincon Mountain (FS) 


n 


15,617 


1984 


107 


Saddle Mountain (FS) 


n 


16,406 


1984 


108 


Salome (FS) 


n 


7,499 


1984 


109 


Salt River Canyon (FS) 


n 


12,991 


1984 


110 


Santa Teresa (FS) 


n 


10,838 


1984 


HI 


Sierra Ancha (FS) 


n 


8,438 


1964 


112 


Strawberry Crater (FS) 


n 


4,348 


1984 


113 


Superstiuon (FS) 


n 


64,652 


1964 


114 


Sycamore Canyon (FS) 


u 


22,637 


1972 


115 


West Clear Creek (FS) 


n 


6,167 


1984 


116 


Wet Beaver (FS) 


n 


2,491 


1984 


117 


Woodchute(FS) 


n 


2,266 


1984 


118 


Aravaipa Canyon (BLM)* 


n 


7,972 


1984 


119 


Arrastra Mountain (BLM) 


n 


52,528 


1990 


120 


Aubrey Peak (BLM) 


n 


6,232 


1990 


121 


Beaver Dam Mountains (BLM) 


n 


6,070 


1984 


122 


Big Horn Mountains (BLM) 


n 


8,498 


1990 


123 


Cottonwood Point (BLM) 


n 


2,776 


1984 


124 


Coyote Mountains (BLM) 


n 


2,064 


1990 


125 


Dos Cabezas (BLM) 


n 


4,735 


1990 


126 


Eagletail Mountains (BLM) 


n 


40,712 


1990 


127 


East Cactus Plain (BLM) 


n 


5,921 


1990 


128 


Fishhooks (BLM) 


n 


4,249 


1990 


129 


Gibraltar Mountain (BLM) 


n 


7,604 


1990 


130 


Grand Wash CUffs (BLM) 


n 


14,986 


1984 


131 


Harcuvar Mountains (BLM) 


n 


10,137 


1990 


132 


Harquahala Mountains (BLM) 


n 


9,259 


1990 


133 


Hassayampa River Canyon (BLM) 


n 


4,978 


1990 


134 


Hells Canyon (BLM) 


n 


4,290 


1990 


135 


Hummingbird Springs (BLM) 


n 


12,626 


1990 


136 


Kanab Creek (BLM) 


n 


2,711 


1984 


137 


Mount Logan (BLM) 


n 


5,929 


1984 


138 


Mount Nutt (BLM) 


n 


11,194 


1990 


139 


Mount Tipton (BLM) 


n 


13,258 


1990 


140 


Mount Trumbull (BLM) 


II 


3,189 


1984 


141 


Mount Wilson (BLM) 


n 


9,672 


1990 


142 


Muggins Mountains (BLM) 


n 


3,092 


1990 


143 


Needle's Eye (BLM) 


u 


3,545 


1990 



81 



Protected Areas of the World 



Map Nationall international designations 
ref. Name of area 



lUCN management Area 

category (ha) 



Year 
notified 



144 


New Water Mountains (BLM) 


145 


North Maricopa Mountains (BLM) 


146 


North Santa Teresa (BLM) 


147 


Paiute (BLM) 


148 


Paria Canyon-Vermilion Cliffs (BLM) 


149 


Peloncillo Mountains (BLM) 


150 


Rawhide Mountains (BLM) 


151 


Redfield Canyon (BLM) 


152 


Sierra Estrella (BLM) 


153 


Signal Mountain (BLM) 


154 


South Maricopa Mountains (BLM) 


155 


Swansea (BLM) 


156 


Table Top (BLM) 


157 


Tres Alamos (BLM) 


158 


Trigo Mountains (BLM) 


159 


Upper Burro Creek (BLM) 


160 


Wabayuma Peak (BLM) 


161 


Warm Springs (BLM) 


162 


White Canyon (BLM) 


163 


Woolsey Peak (BLM) 




National Recreation Areas 


164 


Glen Canyon (NPS) 


165 


Lake Mead (NPS) 




Arkansas 




National Park 


166 


Hot Springs (NPS) 




National River 


167 


Buffalo NaRiv (NPS) 




National Wildlife Refuges 


168 


Big Lake (FWS) 


169 


Cache River (FWS) 


170 


Felsenthal (FWS) 


171 


Holla Bend (FWS) 


172 


Overflow (FWS) 


173 


Wapanocca (FWS) 


174 


White River (FWS) 




National Military Park 


175 


Pea Ridge (NPS) 




Wildernesses 


176 


Black Fork Mountain (FS) 


177 


Caney Creek (FS) 


178 


Dry Creek (FS) 


179 


East Fork (FS) 


180 


Flatside (FS) 


181 


Hurricane Creek (FS) 


182 


Leathenvood (FS) 


183 


Poteau Mountain (FS) 


184 


Richland Creek (FS) 


185 


Upper Buffalo (FS) 




California 




National Parks 


186 


Channel Islands (NPS) 



n 


9,955 


1990 


n 


25,576 


1990 


n 


2,347 


1990 


n 


35.572 


1984 


n 


36,179 


1984 


n 


7,867 


1990 


n 


15,568 


1990 


n 


4,019 


1990 


n 


5,827 


1990 


n 


5,403 


1990 


n 


24,322 


1990 


n 


6,637 


1990 


n 


13,921 


1990 


n 


3,359 


1990 


n 


12,262 


1990 


n 


11,105 


1990 


n 


16,187 


1990 


n 


45,487 


1990 


n 


2,343 


1990 


n 


25,900 


1990 


V 


483,404 


1972 


IV 


1,000 


1964 



n 



2,330 



38,100 



1,729 



1921 



1972 



rv 


4,466 




rv 


1,898 




rv 


26,285 


1975 


IV 


2,274 


1957 


IV 


2,875 




rv 


2,219 


1961 


rv 


45,746 





1961 



n 


3,066 


1984 


II 


5,852 


1975 


n 


2,554 


1984 


n 


4,361 


1984 


n 


4,089 


1984 


n 


6,093 


1984 


n 


6,772 


1984 


n 


4,405 


1984 


n 


4,782 


1984 


n 


4,445 


1975 



n 



100,987 



1980 



82 



United States of America 



Map 


National/international designations 


lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 


notified 


187 


Kings Canyon (NPS) 


n 


187,069 


1940 


188 


I ,assen Volcanic (NPS) 


n 


43,293 


1916 


189 


Redwood (NPS) 


n 


42,400 


1968 


190 


Sequoia (NPS) 


n 


163,115 


1890 


191 


Yosemite(NPS) 
National Wildlife Refuges 


n 


308,273 


1890 


192 


Butte Sink (FWS) 


IV 


3,275 




193 


Clear Lake (FWS) 


IV 


13,543 




194 


Coachella Valley (FWS) 


IV 


1,049 




195 


Colusa (FWS) 


IV 


1,636 




196 


Delevan (FWS) 


IV 


2,282 




197 


Grasslands (FWS) 


rv 


10,669 




198 


Imperial* (FWS) 


IV 


3,223 




199 


Kern (FWS) 


IV 


4,297 




200 


Kesterson (FWS) 


IV 


2,388 




201 


Lower Klamath (FWS) 


rv 


19,027 




202 


Merced (FWS) 


IV 


1,038 




203 


Modoc (FWS) 


IV 


1,038 




204 


Pixley (FWS) 


IV 


2,426 




205 


Sacramento (FWS) 


IV 


4,367 


1937 


206 


SaltonSea(FWS) 


IV 


15,219 




207 


San Francisco Bay (FWS) 


rv 


6,978 


1972 


208 


San Luis (FWS) 


IV 


3,009 




209 


San Pablo Bay (FWS) 


IV 


4,737 




210 


Sutter (FWS) 


IV 


1,049 


1945 


211 


Tule Lake (FWS) 


rv 


15,646 


1928 


212 


Willow Creek-Lurline (FWS) 
National Marine Sanctuaries 


IV ' 


1,586 




213 


Bitter Creek (NOAA) 


IV 


5,482 


1973 


214 


Channel Islands (NOAA) 


V 


405,506 


1980 


215 


Cordell Bank (NOAA) 


V 


128,777 


1989 


216 


Gulf of the Farallones (NOAA) 
National Monuments 


V 


307,044 


1981 


217 


Death Valley (NPS) 


m 


837,388 


1933 


218 


Joshua Tree (NPS) 


m 


226,781 


1936 


219 


Lava Beds (NPS) 


in 


18,856 


1925 


220 


Pinnacles (NPS) 


in 


6,587 


1908 



221 



222 
223 
224 
225 
226 
227 
228 
229 
230 
231 
232 
233 
234 
235 



National Seashore 
Point Reyes NS (NPS) 

Wildernesses 
Agua Tibia (FS) 
Ansel Adams (FS) 
Bucks Lake (FS) 
Caribou (FS) 
Carson-Iceberg (FS) 
Casde Crags (FS) 
ChancheluUa(FS) 
Cucamonga (FS) 
Desolation (FS) 
Dick Smith (FS) 
Dinkey Lakes (FS) 
Dome Land (FS) 
Emigrant (FS) 
Golden Trout (FS) 



28,733 



1972 



n 


6,448 


1975 


n 


93,182 


1964 


n 


8,498 


1984 


n 


8,315 


1964 


n 


64,195 


1984 


n 


3,491 


1984 


n 


3,318 


1984 


n 


5,172 


1984 


n 


25,688 


1969 


n 


27,438 


1984 


n 


12,141 


1984 


n 


37,952 


1964 


n 


45,437 


1975 


n 


122,827 


1978 



83 



Protected Areas of the World 



Map 


National/international designations 


lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 


notified 


236 


Granite Chief (FS) 


n 


7,708 


1984 


237 


Hauser (FS) 


n 


3,054 


1984 


238 


Hoover (FS) 


n 


19,668 


1964 


239 


Ishi (FS) 


n 


16,632 


1984 


240 


Jennie Lakes (FS) 


n 


4,164 


1984 


241 


John Muir (FS) 


n 


234,849 


1964 


242 


Kaiser (FS) 


n 


9,186 


1976 


243 


Machesna Mountain (FS) 


n 


7,997 


1984 


244 


Marble Mountain (FS) 


n 


97,831 


1964 


245 


Mokelumne (FS) 


n 


40,032 


1964 


246 


Monarch (FS) 


n 


18,169 


1984 


247 


Mount Shasta (FS) 


n 


13,697 


1984 


248 


North Fork (FS) 


n 


3,237 


1984 


249 


Pine Creek (FS) 


n 


5,455 


1984 


250 


Red Buttes (FS) 


n 


6,536 


1984 


251 


Russian (FS) 


n 


4,856 


1984 


252 


San Gabriel (FS) 


n 


14,616 


1968 


253 


San Gorgonio (FS) 


n 


22,955 


1964 


254 


San Jacinto (FS) 


n 


13,050 


1964 


255 


San Mateo Canyon (FS) 


n 


15,574 


1984 


256 


San Rafael (FS) 


n 


61,100 


1968 


257 


Santa Lucia (FS) 


n 


7,559 


1978 


258 


Santa Rosa (FS) 


n 


5,579 


1984 


259 


Sheep Mountain (FS) 


n 


16,950 


1984 


260 


Siskiyou (FS) 


n 


61,788 


1984 


261 


Snow Mountain (FS) 


n 


14,718 


1984 


262 


South Sierra (FS) 


n 


33.218 


1984 


263 


South Warner (FS) 


n 


28,577 


1964 


264 


Thousand Lakes (FS) 


n 


6,611 


1964 


265 


Trinity Alps (FS) 


n 


201,591 


1984 


266 


Ventana(FS) 


u 


66,441 


1969 


267 


YoUa BoUy-Middle Eel (FS) 


n 


59,366 


1964 


268 


Trinity Alps (BLM) 


n 


1,871 


1984 


269 


Yolla BoUy-Middle Eel (BLM) 
National Recreation Areas 


n 


2,891 


1984 


270 


Golden Gate (NFS) 


V 


29,611 


1972 


271 


Santa Monica Mountains (NFS) 


V 


60,729 


1978 


272 


Whiskeytown Shasta Trinity (NFS) 

Colorado 

National Parks 


V 


17,213 


1965 


273 


Mesa Verde (NFS) 


n 


20,830 


1906 


274 


Rocky Mountain (NFS) 
National Wildlife Refuges 


n 


107,519 


1915 


275 


Alamosa (FWS) 


IV 


4,523 


1962 


276 


Arapaho (FWS) 


IV 


7,393 


1967 


277 


Browns Park (FWS) 


IV 


5,449 




278 


Monte Vista (FWS) 
National Monuments 


rv 


5,746 




279 


Black Canyon of the Gunnison (NPS) 


m 


5,682 


1933 


280 


Colorado (NFS) 


III 


8,274 


1911 


281 


Dinosaur (NPS) 


ni 


82,655 


1915 


282 


Florissant Fossil Beds (NPS) 


III 


1,698 


1969 


283 


Great Sand Dunes (NPS) 


III 


14,596 


1932 



84 



United States of America 



Map 


National/international designations 


lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 


notified 




Wildernesses 








284 


Big Blue (FS) 


n 


39,847 


1980 


285 


Cache La Poudre (FS) 


n 


3,739 


1980 


286 


Collegiate Peaks (FS) 


n 


67,468 


1980 


287 


Comanche Peak (FS) 


n 


27,029 


1980 


288 


Ragles Nest (FS) 


n 


53.955 


1976 


289 


Flat Tops (FS) 


n 


95,116 


1975 


290 


Holy Cross (FS) 


n 


49,529 


1980 


291 


Hunter Fryingpan (FS) 


n 


30,108 


1978 


292 


Indian Peaks (FS) 


n 


28,479 


1978 


293 


La Garita (FS) 


n 


42,082 


1964 


294 


Lizaid Head (FS) 


n 


16,669 


1980 


295 


Lost Creek (FS) 


n 


42,529 


1980 


296 


Maroon Bells-Snowmass (FS) 


n 


73.233 


1980 


297 


Mount Evans (FS) 


n 


30,109 


1980 


253 


Mount Massive (FS) 


n 


11,323 


1980 


299 


Mount Sneffels (FS) 


n 


6,679 


1980 


300 


Mount Zirkel(FS) 


n 


56,583 


1964 


301 


Neota (FS) 


n 


4,016 


1980 


302 


Never Summer (FS) 


n 


5,567 


1980 


303 


Raggeds (FS) 


n 


24,087 


1980 


304 


Rawah (FS) 


n 


29,570 


1964 


305 


South San Juan (FS) 


n 


51,675 


1980 


306 


Weminuche (FS) 


n 


185,996 


1975 


307 


West Elk (FS) 

National Recreation Area 


a 


71,295 


1964 


308 


Curecanti (NPS) 


V 


16.985 


1965 



Delaware 

National Wildlife Refuges 

309 Bombay Hook (FWS) 

310 Prime Hook (FWS) 



IV 
IV 



6.124 
3.929 



Florida 

National Parks 

311 Biscayne(NPS) 

312 Everglades (NPS) 



n 
n 



41,967 
592.920 



1980 
1947 





National Preserve 








313 


Big Cypress (NPS) 
National Wildlife Refuges 


n 


21,198 


1974 


314 


Arthur R. Mitchell Loxahatchee (FWS) 


rv 


58.994 


1951 


315 


Chassahowitzka (FWS) 


IV 


12,317 




316 


Crocodile Lake (FWS) 


IV 


1,619 




317 


Great White Heron (FWS) 


IV 


2,996 




318 


JJN[. "Ding" Darling (FWS) 


IV 


2.037 


1945 


319 


Lake Woodruff (FWS) 


IV 


7,494 


1964 


320 


Lower Suwannee (FWS) 


IV 


15,856 




321 


Merritt Island (FWS) 


IV 


56,356 




322 


National Key Deer (FWS) 


IV 


3.068 




323 


Okefenokee (Horida) (FWS) 


IV 


1.490 


1937 


324 


Pelican Island (FWS) 


rv 


1.780 




325 


Sl Johns (FWS) 


IV 


2.533 




326 


St Mark's (FWS) 


IV 


26,399 


1931 


327 


Sl Vincent (FWS) 


IV 


31.650 


1968 



85 



Protected Areas of the World 



Map Nationall international designations 
ref. Name of area 



lUCN management Area 

category (ha) 



Year 
notified 



National Marine Sanctuaries 



328 


Key Largo Coral Reef (NOA A) 


329 


Looe Key (NOAA) 




National Estuarine Research Reserve 


330 


Rookery Bay (NOAA) 




National Monument 


331 


Fort Jefferson (NFS) 




National Seashores 


332 


Canaveral NS (NFS) 


333 


Gulf Islands (Florida) NS (NFS) 




Wildernesses 


334 


Alexander Springs (FS) 


335 


Big Gum Swamp (FS) 


336 


BiUies Bay (FS) 


337 


Bradwell Bay (FS) 


338 


Juniper Prairie (FS) 


339 


Little Lake George (FS) 


340 


Mud Swamp/New River (FS) 




Georgia 




National Wildlife Refuges 


341 


Banks Lake (FWS) 


342 


Blackbeard Island (FWS) 


343 


Eufaula(FWS) 


344 


Harris Neck (FWS) 


345 


Okefenokee (FWS) 


346 


Piedmont (FWS) 


347 


Savannah (FWS) 


348 


Wassaw Island (FWS) 


349 


Wolf Island (FWS) 



National Marine Sanctuary 
350 Gray's Reef (NOAA) 

National Military Park 



351 


Chickamauga and Chattanooga (NFS) 




National Battlefield Park 


352 


Kennesaw Mountain (NFS) 




National Estuarine Research Reserve 


353 


Sapelo Island (NOAA) 




National Monument 


354 


Fort Pulaski G^S) 




National Seashore 


355 


Cumberland Island NS (NFS) 




Wildernesses 


356 


Blood Mountain (FS) 


357 


Brasstown (FS) 


358 


Cohutta(FS) 


359 


Mark Trail (FS) 


360 


Raven CUffs (FS) 


361 


Rich Mountain (FS) 



V 


32,388 


1975 


V 


1.554 


1981 


IV 


8.585 


1991 


m 


19,083 


1935 


V 


23,321 


1975 


V 


57,084 


1971 


n 


3.116 


1984 


n 


5,504 


1984 


n 


1,263 


1984 


n 


9,956 


1975 


n 


5,366 


1984 


II 


1.012 


1984 


n 


3,157 


1984 


IV 


1,639 




IV 


2,275 


1940 


IV 


1,309 




IV 


1,119 


1962 


IV 


158,518 




IV 


14,CW4 


1939 


IV 


4,586 


1927 


rv 


4,078 


1968 


IV 


2,076 


1930 


IV 


5,441 


1981 


V 


3,278 


1890 


V 


1,488 


1917 


rv 


2,892 


1976 


V 


2,229 


1924 


V 


14,924 


1972 


n 


3,157 


1991 


n 


5,000 


1986 


n 


14,264 


1975 


n 


6,831 


1991 


u 


3,465 


1986 


u 


3,840 


1986 



86 



United States of America 



Map National/international designations lUCN management Area Year 

ref. Name of area category (ha) notified 

362 Southern Nantahala(FS) U 5,034 1984 

363 Tray Mountain (FS) H 3,926 1986 

Hawaii 

For a list of sites, a map, and detailed information concerning this state, see Volume I 





Idaho 










National Scenic River 








364 


Salmon River (FS) 
National Wildlife Refuges 


V 


12,943 


1968 


365 


Bear Lake (FWS) 


IV 


7,269 


1968 


366 


Camas (FWS) 


IV 


4,284 




367 


Deer Flat (FWS) 


rv 


4,562 




368 


Grays Lake (FWS) 


IV 


6,652 


1965 


369 


Kootenai (FWS) 


IV 


1,123 




370 


Minidoka (FWS) 
National Monument 


IV 


8,386 




371 


Craters of the Moon (NFS) 
Wildernesses 


m 


21,669 


1924 


372 


Gospel Hump (FS) 


n 


83,270 


1978 


373 


Hells Canyon (FS) 


n 


33,917 


1975 


374 


Sawtooth (FS) 


n 


87,853 


1972 


375 


Selway-Bitterroot (FS) 


n 


440,711 


1964 


376 


Frank Church-River of No Return (FS) 


n 


957,224 


1980 



National Historic Park • 

111 Nez Perce (NFS) V 1,212 1965 

Illinois 

National Wildlife Refuges 

378 Chautauqua (FWS) 

379 Crab Orchard (FWS) 

380 Mark Twain (FWS) 

381 Mississippi River Caue (FWS) 

Wildernesses 

382 Bald Knob (FS) 

383 Bay Creek (FS) 

384 Burden Falls (FS) 

385 Clear Springs (FS) 

386 Garden of ihe Gods (FS) 

387 Lusk Creek (FS) 

Indiana 

National Wildlife Refuge 

388 Muscatatuck (FWS) 

National Lakeshore 

389 Indiana Dunes (NFS) 

Wilderness 

390 Charles C. Deam (FS) 

Iowa 

National Wildlife Refuges 

391 De Soto (FWS) 

392 Mark Twain (FWS) 

393 Mississippi River Caue (FWS) 

87 



rv 

IV 
IV 

rv 


2,510 

17,682 

6,714 

8,148 


1958 


n 
n 
n 
n 
n 
n 


2,373 
1,160 
1,486 
1,914 
1,323 
1,807 


1990 
1990 
1990 
1990 
1990 
1990 


IV 


3,128 




V 


5,073 


1966 


n 


5,235 


1982 


IV 

IV 
IV 


1,417 

4,241 
12,278 





Protected Areas of the World 



Map National/international designations 
ref. Name of area 



lUCN management Area 

category (ha) 



Year 
notified 



394 


Union Slough (FWS) 


395 


Upper Mississippi (FWS) 




Kansas 




National Wildlife Refuges 


396 


FUnt Hills (FWS) 


397 


Kirwin (FWS) 


398 


Quivira (FWS) 




Kentucky 




National Park 


399 


Mammoth Cave (NPS) 




Wildernesses 


400 


Beaver Creek (FS) 


401 


Clifty(FS) 




National Historic Park 


402 


Cumberland Gap (NPS) 




Louisiana 




National Wildlife Refuges 


403 


Atchafalaya(FWS) 


404 


Bogue Chitto (FWS) 


405 


Breton (FWS) 


406 


Catahoula (FWS) 


407 


D'Arix)nne(FWS) 


408 


Delta (FWS) 


409 


Lacassine (FWS) 


410 


Sabine (FWS) 


411 


Tensas River (FWS) 


412 


Upper Ouachita (FWS) 




Wilderness 


413 


Kisatchie Hills (FS) 



IV 

rv 



IV 
IV 
IV 



n 



n 
n 



1,152 
8,230 



7,478 
4,365 
8,837 



20,541 



1,925 
5,029 



8,150 



rv 


6,178 


rv 


8,324 


IV 


3,664 


rv 


2,150 


rv 


7,055 


rv 


19,763 


IV 


13,213 


IV 


56,472 


rv 


22,259 


IV 


8,460 



1938 
1924 



1966 



1934 



1975 
1985 



1940 



n 



3,521 



1904 



1935 



1978 



1980 



414 



415 



416 

417 
418 



National Historic Park 
Jean Lafitte (NPS) 

Maine 

National Park 
Acadia (NPS) 

National Wildlife Refuges 
Moosehom (FWS) 
Petit Manan (FWS) 
Rachel Carson (FWS) 



n 



3,480 



15,590 



IV 


9,211 


rv 


1,350 


IV 


1,280 



1978 



1919 



1937 



419 



420 
421 
422 



423 



Wilderness 

Caribou-Speckled Mountain (FS) 

Maryland 

National Wildlife Refuges 
Blackwater (FWS) 
Martin (FWS) 
Patuxent (FWS) 

National Estuarine Research Reserve 
Chesapeake Bay (NOAA) 



II 



IV 



4,856 



IV 


6,353 


rv 


1,791 


IV 


1.896 



2.374 



1990 



1981 



88 



United States of America 



Map National/international designations 
ref. Name of area 



lUCN management Area 

category (ha) 



Year 
notUied 



424 



425 
426 



427 



National Seashore 
Assateague Island NS (NPS) 

Parks 

Catoctin Mountain (NPS) 

Piscataway (NPS) 

National Historic Park 
Chesapeake and Ohio Canal (NPS) 

Massachusetts 

National Wildlife Refuges 



428 


Great Meadows (FWS) 


429 


Monomoy (FWS) 


430 


Parker River (FWS) 




National Estuarine Research R 


431 


Waquoint Bay (NOAA) 




National Seashore 


432 


Cape Cod (NPS) 




Michigan 




National Park 


433 


Isle Royale (NPS) 




National Wildlife Refuges 


434 


Kirtlands Warbler (FWS) 


435 


Seney (FWS) 


436 


Shiawassee (FWS) 




National Lakeshores 


437 


PictJired Rocks (NPS) 


438 


Sleeping Bear Dunes (NPS) 




Wildernesses 


439 


Big Island Lake (FS) 


440 


Delirium (FS) 


441 


Horseshoe Bay (FS) 


442 


Mackinac (FS) 


443 


McCormick (FS) 


444 


Nordhouse Dunes (FS) 


445 


Rock River Canyon (FS) 


446 


Sturgeon River Gorge (FS) 


447 


Sylvania(FS) 




Minnesota 




National Park 


448 


Voyageurs (NPS) 




National Wildlife Refuges 


449 


Agassiz (FWS) 


450 


Big Stone (FWS) 


451 


Mid-Continent WMP (FWS) 


452 


Minnesota Valley (FWS) 


453 


Mississippi River Caue (FWS) 


454 


Rice Lake (FWS) 


455 


Sherburne (FWS) 


456 


Tamarac (FWS) 


457 


Upper Mississippi (FWS) 



V 
V 



IV 
IV 
IV 



IV 



n 



16,038 

2,334 
1,701 

50,161 



1,168 

1,094 
1,888 



1,077 
18,018 

215,740 



87,772 



1965 



1936 
1961 



1971 
1944 

1988 
1961 

1940 



IV 


2,127 




IV 


38,659 




IV 


3,639 


1953 


V 


28,661 


1966 


V 


28,775 


1970 


n 


2,363 


1987 


II 


4,804 


1987 


II 


1,534 


1987 


n 


4,949 


1987 




6,819 


1987 




1,396 


1987 




1,878 


1987 




5.868 


1987 




7,417 


1987 



1971 



IV 


24,726 


1937 


IV 


4,371 




IV 


1,999 




IV 


2,973 




IV 


6,246 




IV 


6,629 




IV 


11,981 


1965 


IV 


14,252 


1938 


IV 


7,189 





89 



Protected Areas of the World 



IV 


2,648 




IV 


6,239 


1975 


IV 


7,692 


1974 


IV 


1,324 




IV 


18,786 


1940 


IV 


10,993 




rv 


5,051 





Map National/international designations lUCN management Area Year 

ref. Name of area category (ha) notified 

Wilderness 

458 Boundary Waters Canoe Area (FS) U 323.457 1964 

Mississippi 

National Wildlife Refuges 

459 Bogue Chitto (FWS) 

460 HUlside(FWS) 

461 Mississippi Sandhill Crane (FWS) 

462 Morgan Brake (FWS) 

463 Noxubee (FWS) 

464 Panther Swamp (FWS) 

465 Yazoo (FWS) 

Wilderness 

466 Black Creek (FS) H 2,028 1984 

Missouri 

National Scenic River 

467 Ozark NScRv (NFS) V 32,209 1972 

National Wildlife Refuges 

468 Clarence Cannon (FWS) 

469 Mingo (FWS) 

470 Squaw Creek (FWS) 

471 Swan Lake (FWS) 

Wildernesses 

All BeU Mountain (FS) 

473 DevUs Backbone (FS) 

474 Hercules Glades (FS) 

475 Irish (FS) 

476 Paddy Creek (FS) 

477 Piney Creek (FS) 

478 Rockpile Mountain (FS) 

Montana 

National Park 

479 Glacier (NPS) H 410,058 1910 

National Wildlife Refuges 

480 Benton Lake (FWS) 

481 Bowdoin (FWS) 

482 Charles M. Russell (FWS) 

483 Creedman Coulee (FWS) 

484 Halfbreed Lake (FWS) 

485 Lake Mason (FWS) 

486 Lake Thibadeau (FWS ) 

487 LeeMetcalf(FWS) 

488 Medicine Lake (FWS) 

489 National Bison Range (FWS) 

490 Pablo (FWS) 

491 Red Rock Lakes (FWS) 

492 Ul Bend (FWS) 

493 War Horse (FWS) 

Wildernesses 

494 Absaroka-Beartooth (FS) 

495 Anaconda-PinUer(FS) 

496 Bob Marshall (FS) 

497 Cabinet Mountains (FS) 

90 



IV 


1,513 


1964 


IV 


8,779 




IV 


2,802 




IV 


4,321 


1937 


n 


3,633 


1980 


n 


2,669 


1980 


n 


4,983 


1976 


n 


6,522 


1984 


n 


2,841 


1983 


n 


3,273 


1980 


n 


1,655 


1980 



IV 


5,015 




IV 


5,094 




IV 


364,808 


1936 


IV 


1,105 




rv 


1,748 




IV 


6,773 




IV 


1,567 




IV 


1,131 


1964 


rv 


9,243 




IV 


7,509 




rv 


1,030 




IV 


14,050 




IV 


22,700 




IV 


1,293 




n 


372,445 


1978 


n 


63,890 


1964 


n 


408,474 


1964 


n 


38,151 


1964 



United States of America 



Map 


National/international designations 


lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 


notified 


498 


Gates of the Mountains (FS) 


n 


11,559 


1964 


499 


Great Bear (FS) 


n 


116,024 


1978 


500 


lwMetcalf(FS) 


n 


100,744 


1983 


501 


Mission Mountains (FS) 


n 


29,897 


1975 


502 


Rattlesnake (FS) 


n 


13,292 


1980 


503 


Scapegoat (FS) 


n 


96,840 


1972 


504 


Selway-Bitterroot (FS) 


n 


101,756 


1964 


505 


Welcome Creek (FS) 


n 


11,386 


1978 


506 


TwMetcalf(BLM) 
National Recreation Area 


n 


2,428 


1983 


507 


Bighorn Canyon (MPS) 

Nebraska 

National Wildlife Refuges 


V 


48,644 


1966 


508 


Crescent Lake (FWS) 


IV 


18,556 




509 


De Soto (FWS) 


rv 


1,751 




510 


Fort Niobrara (FWS) 


rv 


7,563 


1912 


511 


North Platte (FWS) 


IV 


2,044 




512 


Valentine (FWS) 
National Monuments 


IV 


27,174 


1935 


513 


Agate Fossil Beds (NFS) 


m 


1,236 


1965 


514 


Lehman Caves (NFS) 


m 


3,098 


1922 


515 


Scotts Bluff (NFS) 
Wilderness 


V 


1,209 


1919 


516 


Soldier Creek (FS) 

Nevada 

National Park 


n 


3.154 


1986 


517 


Great Basin (NFS) 
National Wildlife Refuges 


n 


31,080 


1986 


518 


Ash Meadows (FWS) 


IV 


5,174 




519 


Desert (FWS) 


IV 


643.471 




520 


Fallon (FWS) 


IV 


7,250 




521 


Paharanagat(FWS) 


IV 


2,179 




522 


Ruby Lake (FWS) 


rv 


15.230 




523 


Sheldon (FWS) 


IV 


231,037 


1931 


524 


Stillwater (FWS) 
Wildernesses 


rv 


9.802 




525 


Alta Toquima (FS) 


n 


15,378 


1989 


526 


Arc Dome (FS) 


n 


46,539 


1989 


527 


Boundary Peak (FS) 


n 


4,047 


1989 


528 


Currant Mountain (FS) 


n 


14,569 


1989 


529 


East Humboldt (FS) 


n 


14.933 


1989 


530 


Grant Range (FS) 


n 


20,234 


1989 


531 


Jarbidge (FS) 


n 


45,797 


1964 


532 


Mount Charleston (FS) 


n 


17,402 


1989 


533 


Mount Moriah (FS) 


n 


33,184 


1989 


534 


Mount Rose (FS) 


n 


11,331 


1989 


535 


Quinn Canyon (FS) 


n 


10,927 


1989 


536 


Ruby Mountains (FS) 


n 


36,422 


1989 


537 


Santa Rosa - Paradise Peak (FS) 


n 


12,545 


1989 


538 


Table Mountain (FS) 


n 


39,659 


1989 


539 


Mount Moriah (BLM) 


n 


2,604 


1989 



91 



Protected Areas of the World 



Map Natiorml/international designations 
ref. Name of area 



lUCN management Area 

category (ha) 



Year 
notified 



National Recreation Area 

540 Lake Mead (NPS) 

New Hampshire 

National Estuarine Research Reserve 

541 Great Bay (NOAA) 

Wildernesses 



542 


Great Gulf (FS) 


543 


Pemigewasset (FS) 


544 


Presidential Range-Dry Riv< 


545 


Sandwich Range (FS) 




New Jersey 




National Reserve 


546 


Pinelands NaR (NPS) 




National Wildlife Refuges 


547 


Edwin B. Forsythe OFWS) 


548 


Great Swamp (FWS) 




National Recreation Area 


549 


Delaware Water Gap (NPS) 




New Mexico 




National Park 


550 


Carlsbad Caverns (NPS) 




National Wildlife Refuges 


551 


Bitter Lake (FWS) 


552 


Bosque del Apache (FWS) 


553 


Grulla(FWS) 


554 


I ^s Vegas (FWS) 


555 


Maxwell (FWS) 


556 


San Andres (FWS) 


557 


Sevilleta(FWS) 




National Monuments 


558 


Bandelier(NPS) 


559 


Chaco Canyon (NPS) 


560 


White Sands (NPS) 


902 


El Malpais (NPS) 




Wildernesses 


561 


Aldo Leopold (FS) 


562 


Apache Kid (FS) 


563 


Blue Range ^S) 


564 


Capitan Mountains (FS) 


565 


Chama River Canyon (FS) 


566 


Cruces Basin (FS) 


567 


Dome (FS) 


568 


Gila(FS) 


569 


LatirPeak(FS) 


570 


Manzano Mountain (FS) 


571 


Pecos (FS) 


572 


San Pedro Parkss(FS) 


573 


Sandia Mountain (FS) 


574 


Wheeler Peak (FS) 


575 


White Mountain (FS) 


576 


Withington (FS) 



IV 



IV 
IV 



n 



606,123 



3.002 



438,210 

14,017 
2,809 

28,340 
18,921 



1964 



1989 



n 


2,247 


1964 


n 


18,211 


1984 


n 


11,080 


1975 


n 


10,117 


1984 



1978 

1964 

1965 

1930 



rv 


9,457 




IV 


23,162 


1939 


rv 


1,309 


1969 


IV 


3,499 




IV 


1,498 




IV 


23,172 




IV 


92,394 


1973 


m 


14,904 


1916 


m 


8,708 


1907 


in 


58,614 


1933 


m 


46,170 


1987 


n 


81,753 


1980 


n 


18,060 


1980 


n 


11,859 


1980 


n 


14,026 


1980 


n 


20,356 


1978 


n 


7,284 


1980 


n 


2,104 


1980 


n 


225,764 


1964 


n 


8,094 


1980 


n 


14,923 


1978 


n 


90,380 


1964 


n 


16,646 


1964 


n 


15,328 


1978 


n 


7,957 


1964 


n 


19,509 


1964 


II 


7,689 


1980 



92 



United States of America 



Map National/international designations 
ref. Name of area 



lUCN management Area 

category (ha) 



Year 
notified 



577 
578 
579 
580 



581 



Bisti (BLM) 
Cebolla(BLM) 
De-na-zin (BLM) 
West Malpais (BLM) 

National Historic Park 
Chaco Culture (NFS) 





New York 




National Wildlife Refuges 


582 


Iroquois (FWS) 


583 


Montezuma (FWS) 


584 


Oyster Bay (FWS) 




National Estuarine Research Reserve 


585 


Hudson River (NOAA) 




National Seashore 


586 


Fire Island NS (NFS) 




National Historic Park 


587 


Saratoga (NFS) 




North Carolina 




National Wildlife Refuges 


588 


Alligator River (FWS) 


589 


Cedar Island (FWS) 


590 


Great Dismal Swamp # (FWS) 


591 


Mackay Island (FWS) 


592 


Mattamuskeet(FWS) 


593 


Pea Island (FWS) 


594 


Pee Dee (FWS) 


595 


Pungo (FWS) 


596 


Swanquarter (FWS) 




National Estuarine Research Reserve 


597 


North Carolina (NOAA) 




National Seashores 


598 


Cape Hatteras NS (NPS) 


599 


Cape Lookout National Seashore (NPS) 




Wildernesses 


600 


Birkhead Mountains (FS) 


601 


Catfish Lake South (FS) 


602 


EllicottRock(FS) 


603 


Joyce Kilmer-Slickrock (FS) 


604 


Linville Gorge (FS) 


605 


Middle Prong (FS) 


606 


Pocosin (FS) 


607 


Sheep Ridge (FS) 


608 


Shining Rock (FS) 


609 


Southern Nantahala (FS) 




North Dakota 




National Park 


610 


Theodore Roosevelt (NPS) 




National Wildlife Refuges 


611 


Ardoch (FWS) 


612 


Arrowwood OFWS) 



n 


1,597 


1984 


n 


25,414 


1987 


n 


9,087 


1984 


n 


16,066 


1987 



IV 
IV 
IV 



IV 



IV 

rv 
rv 

IV 
IV 
IV 
IV 
IV 
IV 



IV 

V 
V 



IV 
IV 



13,760 



4,381 
2,605 
1,298 



2,023 
7,834 
2,222 



56,297 
5,073 
9,945 
2,526 

20,323 
2,376 
3,418 
5,002 
6,335 

4,743 

12,270 
11,493 

1,938 
3,076 
1,590 
5,314 
4,441 
3,197 
4,452 
3,861 
7,466 
4,895 



28,150 



1,092 
6,453 



1907 
1958 

1982 
1964 
1938 



1982 

1937 
1966 



1984 
1984 
1975 
1975 
1964 
1984 
1984 
1984 
1964 
1984 



1978 



1935 



93 



Protected Areas of the World 



Map National/international designations lUCN management Area Year 

ref. Name of area category (ha) notified 



613 


Audubon (FWS) 


614 


Chase Lake (FWS) 


615 


Dakota Lake (FWS) 


616 


Des Lacs (FWS) 


617 


J.ClarkSalyer(FWS) 


618 


Lake Alice (FWS) 


619 


Lake George (FWS) 


620 


Lake Ilo (FWS) 


621 


Lake Nettie (FWS) 


622 


Lake Zahl (FWS) 


623 


Long Lake (FWS) 


624 


Lostwood (FWS) 


625 


Rock Lake (FWS) 


626 


SUver Lake (FWS) 


627 


Slade (FWS) 


628 


Tewaukon (FWS) 


629 


Upper Souris (FWS) 


630 


WUlow Lake (FWS) 




Ohio 




National Wildlife Refuge 


631 


Ottawa (FWS) 




National Recreation Area 


632 


Cuyahoga Valley (NPS) 




Oklahoma 




National Wildlife Refuges 


633 


Optima (FWS) 


634 


Salt Plains (FWS) 


635 


Sequoyah (FWS) 


636 


Tishomingo (FWS) 


637 


Washita (FWS) 


638 


Wichita Mountains (FWS) 




Wildernesses 


639 


Blackfork Mountain (FS) 


640 


Upper Kiamichi (FS) 





Oregon 




National Park 


642 


Crater Lake (NPS) 




National Wildlife Refuges 


643 


Ankeny (FWS) 


644 


Baskett Slough (FWS) 


645 


Bear VaUey (FWS) 


646 


Cold Springs (FWS) 


647 


Hart Mountain (FWS) 


648 


Klamath Forest (FWS) 


649 


Lewis and Clark (FWS) 


650 


Lower Klamath # (FWS) 


651 


Malheur (FWS) 


652 


UmauUa(FWS) 


653 


Upper Klamath (FWS) 


654 


WUliam L. Finley (FWS) 



IV 


5,969 


1956 


IV 


1,776 


1908 


IV 


1,116 




IV 


7,915 




rv 


23,771 




rv 


4,534 




rv 


1,263 




rv 


1,637 




rv 


1,237 




rv 


1,548 




rv 


9,046 


1932 


rv 


10,048 




IV 


2,230 




rv 


1,356 




rv 


1,215 


1941 


IV 


3,327 


1935 


IV 


12,997 




IV 


1,062 





IV 2,346 

V 12,950 1975 



rv 


1,755 




IV 


12,958 


1930 


rv 


8,424 


1971 


IV 


6,668 


1943 


IV 


3,274 




rv 


23,903 




n 


1.855 


1988 


n 


3,922 


1988 



National Recreation Area 
641 Arbuckle(NPS) V 3,576 1965 



n 74,150 1902 



IV 


1,132 


1965 


rv 


1,009 


1965 


rv 


1,378 




IV 


1,262 


1909 


rv 


100,994 




rv 


6,633 




IV 


15,390 




IV 


2,680 




rv 


74,707 




IV 


3,5% 


1969 


rv 


5,045 


1928 


IV 


2,157 





94 



United Stales of America 



Map National/international designations 
ref. Name of area 



lUCN management Area 

category (ha) 



Year 
notified 



National Esluarine Research Reserve 

655 South Slough (NOAA) 

National Monument 

656 John Day Fossil Beds (NFS) 



IV 



III 



2,502 



5,671 



1974 



1974 





Wildernesses 


657 


Badger Creek (FS) 


658 


Black Canyon (PS) 


659 


Boulder Creek (FS) 


660 


Bridge Creek (FS) 


661 


Bull of the Woods (FS) 


662 


Columbia (FS) 


663 


Cummins Creek (FS) 


664 


Diamond Peak (FS) 


665 


Drift Creek (FS) 


666 


Eagle Cap (FS) 


667 


Gearhart Mountain (FS) 


668 


Grassy Knob (FS) 


669 


Hells Canyon (FS) 


670 


Kalmiopsis (FS) 


671 


Menagerie (FS) 


672 


Middle Santiam (FS) 


673 


MUl Creek (FS) 


674 


Monument Rock (FS) 


675 


Mount Hood (FS) 


676 


Mount Jefferson (FS) 


677 


Mount Thielsen(FS) 


678 


Mount Washington (FS) 


679 


Mountain Lakes (FS) 


680 


North Fork John Day (FS) 


681 


North Fork Umatilla (FS) 


682 


Red Buttes (FS) 


683 


Rock Creek (FS) 


684 


Rogue-Umpqua Divide (FS) 


685 


Salmon-Huckleberry (FS) 


686 


Sky Lakes (FS) 


687 


Strawberry Mountain (FS) 


688 


Three Sisters (FS) 


689 


Waldo Lake (FS) 


690 


Wenaha-Tucannon (FS) 


691 


WUd Rogue (FS) 


692 


Table Rock (BLM) 


693 


WUd Rogue (BLM) 



Pennsylvania 

National Scenic River 

694 Middle Delaware NScRv (NPS) 

National Wildlife Refuge 

695 Erie (FWS) 

National Estuarine Research Reserve 

696 Narragonsett Bay (NOAA) 

Wilderness 

697 Hickory Creek (FS) 

National Historic Park 



n 


9,712 


1984 


II 


5,423 


1984 


II 


7,730 


1984 


II 


2,185 


1984 


II 


14,124 


1984 


II 


15,783 


1984 


II 


3,712 


1984 


II 


21,928 


1964 


n 


2,346 


1984 


II 


145,065 


1964 


II 


9,231 


1964 


II 


6,961 


1984 


II 


52,648 


1975 


II 


72,722 


1964 


II 


1,942 


1984 


n 


3,035 


1984 


II 


7,042 


1984 


II 


7,952 


1984 


n 


18,826 


1964 


n 


43,305 


1968 


II 


22,298 


1984 


II 


21,342 


1964 


II 


9,337 


1964 


II 


49,110 


1984 


II 


8,270 


1984 


II 


1,518 


1984 


u 


3,024 


1984 


II 


13,436 


1984 


II 


18,033 


1984 


II 


47,065 


1984 


II 


27,802 


1964 


II 


115,418 


1964 


II 


15,864 


1984 


II 


26,861 


1978 


II 


10,383 


1978 


II 


2,327 


1984 


II 


3,630 


1978 


V 


1,113 


1978 


IV 


3.238 




IV 


1,286 


1980 


II 


3,468 


1984 



95 



Protected Areas of the World 



Map National/international designations lUCN management Area Year 

ref. Name of area category (ha) notified 

698 Gettysburg (NPS) 

National Recreation Area 

699 Delaware Water Gap (NPS) 

South Carolina 

National Wildlife Refuges 

700 Cape Romain (FWS) 

701 Carolina SandhUls (FWS) 

702 Pinckney Island (FWS) 

703 Santee (FWS) 

704 Savannah # (FWS) 

705 Waubay (FWS) 

National Monument 

706 Congaree Swamp (NPS) m 6,125 1976 





Wildernesses 


707 


EllicottRock(FS) 


708 


Little Wambaw Swamp (FS) 


709 


Wambaw Swamp (FS) 




South Dakota 




National Parks 


710 


Badlands (NPS) 


711 


Wind Cave (NPS) 




National Wildlife Refuges 


712 


La Creek (FWS) 


713 


Pocasse(FWS) 


714 


Sand Lake (FWS) 




Wilderness 


715 


Black Elk (FS) 



Tennessee 

National Park 
716 Great Smoky Mountains (NPS) 





National Scenic River 


717 


Obed(NPS) 




National Wildlife Refuges 


718 


Chickasaw (FWS) 


719 


Cross Creeks (FWS) 


720 


Haichie (FWS) 


721 


Lower Hatchie (FWS) 


722 


Tennessee (FWS) 




Wildernesses 


723 


Bald River Gorge (FS) 


724 


Big Frog (FS) 


725 


Big Laurel Branch (FS) 


726 


Citico Creek (FS) 


727 


Gee Creek (FS) 


728 


Joyce Kilmer-Slickrock (FS) 


729 


Little Frog Mountain (FS) 


730 


Pond Mountain (FS) 


731 


Sampson Mountain (FS) 


732 


Unaka Mountain (FS) 



V 


1,377 


1895 


V 


11,478 


1965 


IV 


13,861 


1932 


IV 


18,319 




IV 


1,641 


1975 


IV 


17,673 


1941 


IV 


5,785 




IV 


1,047 





n 


1,137 


1975 


n 


2.086 


1980 


n 


1,929 


1980 


n 


98,463 


1978 


n 


11,223 


1903 


IV 


6,650 




IV 


1,047 




IV 


8,039 


1935 


n 


3,976 


1980 


n 


209,160 


1934 


V 


2,125 


1976 


IV 


6,266 




IV 


3,589 




IV 


5,285 


1965 


rv 


1,678 




rv 


20,800 




n 


1,506 


1984 


n 


3,232 


1984 


n 


2,530 


1986 


n 


6,566 


1984 


n 


1,009 


1975 


n 


1.551 


1975 


n 


1,896 


1986 


n 


2,681 


1986 


n 


3,367 


1986 


n 


1,902 


1986 



% 



United States of America 



Map 


National/international designations 


lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 


notified 




Texas 










National Parks 








733 


Big Bend (NPS) 


n 


286,572 


1944 


734 


Guadalupe Mountains (NPS) 
National Preserve 


n 


31,364 


1972 


735 


Big Thicket (NPS) 
National Scenic River 


V 


34,712 


1974 


736 


Rio Grande (NPS) 
National Wildlife Refuges 


V 


3,885 


1978 


737 


Anahuac (FWS) 


IV 


9,897 


1963 


738 


Aransas (FWS) 


IV 


42,407 


1937 


739 


Attwater's Prairie Chicken (FWS) 


IV 


3,234 


1972 


740 


Big Boggy (FWS) 


rv 


1,770 




741 


Brazoria (FWS) 


rv 


4,941 




742 


Buffalo Lake (FWS) 


rv 


3,104 




743 


Hagerman (FWS) 


rv 


4,585 


1945 


744 


T .aguna Atascosa (FWS) 


IV 


18,301 




745 


Lower Rio Grande Valley (FWS) 


rv 


10,662 




746 


McFaddin (FWS) 


IV 


17,397 




747 


Moody (FWS) 


IV 


1,424 




748 


Muleshoe (FWS) 


IV 


2,352 




749 


San Bernard (FWS) 


rv 


9,904 


1967 


750 


Texas Point (FWS) 


rv 


3,626 





National Seashore 
751 Padre Island NS (NPS) 



54,196 



1968 





Wildernesses 


752 


Big Slough (FS) 


753 


Indian Mounds (FS) 


754 


Little Lake Creek (FS) 


755 


Turkey HiU(FS) 


756 


Upland Island (FS) 




National Recreation Areas 


757 


Amistad (NPS) 


758 


Sanford (NPS) 


759 


Shadow Mountain (NPS) 




Utah 




National Parks 


760 


Arches (NPS) 


761 


Bryce Canyon (NPS) 


762 


Canyonlands (NPS) 


763 


Capitol Reef (NPS) 


764 


Zion (NPS) 




National Wildlife Refuges 


765 


Bear River (FWS) 


766 


Fish Springs (FWS) 


767 


Ouray (FWS) 




National Monuments 


768 


Cedar Breaks (NPS) 


769 


Natural Bridges (NPS) 



n 


1,450 


1984 


n 


4,418 


1984 


n 


1,542 


1984 


n 


2,139 


1984 


n 


5,027 


1984 


V 


26,260 


1965 


V 


16,603 


1965 


V 


7,369 


1952 


n 


29,260 


1971 


n 


14,405 


1924 


n 


136,542 


1964 


n 


97,870 


1971 


n 


59,308 


1909 


rv 


26,337 




rv 


5,758 


1959 


rv 


4,651 




m 


2.469 


1933 


m 


3,040 


1908 



97 



Protected Areas of the World 



Map National/international designations 
ref. Name of area 



lUCN management Area 

category (ha) 



Year 
notified 



Wildernesses 

770 Ashdown Gorge (FS) 

771 Box-Death HoUow (FS) 

772 Dark Canyon (FS) 

773 Deseret Peak (FS) 

774 HighUintas(FS) 

775 Lone Peak (FS) 

776 Mount Naomi (FS) 

777 Mount Nebo(FS) 

778 Mount Olympus (FS) 

779 Mount Timpanogos (FS) 

780 Pine Valley Mountain (FS) 

781 Twin Peaks (FS) 

782 WellsvUle Mountain (FS) 

783 Beaver Dam Mountains (BLM) 

784 Paria Canyon-VermUion Cliffs (BLM) 

National Recreation Area 

785 Glen Canyon (NPS) 





Vermont 




National Wildlife Refuge 


786 


Missisquoi (FWS) 




Wildernesses 


787 


Big Branch (FS) 


788 


BreadIoaf(FS) 


789 


Bristol Cliffs (FS) 


790 


George D. Aiken (FS) 


791 


Lyle Brook (FS) 


792 


Peru Peak (FS) 




Virginia 




National Park 


793 


Shenandoah (NPS) 




National Wildlife Refuges 


794 


Back Bay (FWS) 


795 


Chincoteague (FWS) 


796 


Great Dismal Swamp (FWS) 


797 


Plum Tree Island (FWS) 


798 


Wallops Island (FWS) 



National Memorial 
799 Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania Co. Battle (NPS) 





National Battlefield 


800 


Manassas (NPS) 


801 


Petersburg (NPS) 




Park 


802 


Prince William Forest (NPS) 




M/derncwes 


803 


Barbours (FS) 


804 


Beartown (FS) 


805 


James River Face (FS) 


806 


KimberUng Creek (FS) 


807 


Lewis Fork (FS) 


808 


Little Dry Run (FS) 



n 


2,833 


1984 


n 


10,421 


1984 


n 


18,211 


1984 


n 


10,320 


1984 


n 


184,823 


1984 


n 


12,176 


1978 


n 


17,948 


1984 


n 


11,331 


1984 


n 


6,475 


1984 


n 


4,350 


1984 


n 


20,234 


1984 


n 


4,587 


1984 


n 


9,652 


1984 


n 


1,469 


1984 


n 


9,308 


1984 



IV 



n 



V 
V 



n 



580,558 



2,365 



84,921 



1,483 



1,101 
1,103 



7,048 



1927 



n 


2,719 


1984 


n 


8,693 


1984 


n 


1,513 


1975 


n 


2,048 


1984 


n 


6,274 


1975 


n 


2,800 


1984 



1926 



IV 


1,859 


1938 


IV 


3,853 




IV 


33,154 


1973 


IV 


1,327 




rv 


1,366 





1940 
1926 



1936 



n 


2,266 


1988 


n 


2,446 


1984 


n 


3,677 


1975 


n 


2,258 


1984 


n 


2,348 


1984 


n 


1,376 


1984 



98 



Map National/international designations 
ret. Name of area 



United States of America 



lUCN management Area 

category (ha) 



Year 
notified 



809 


Little Wilson Creek (FS) 


810 


Mountain Lake (FS) 


811 


Peters Mountain (FS) 


812 


Ramseys Draft (FS) 


813 


Rich Hole (FS) 


814 


Rough Mountain (FS) 


815 


Saint Marys (FS) 


816 


Shavers Run (FS) 




National Historic Park 


817 


Colonial (NPS) 




Washington 




National Parks 


818 


Mount Rainier (NPS) 


819 


North Cascades (NPS) 


820 


Olympic (NPS) 




National Wildlife Refuges 


821 


Columbia (FWS) 


822 


Conboy Lake (FWS) 


823 


LitUe Pend OreiUe (FWS) 


824 


McNaiy (FWS) 


825 


Nisqnally (FWS) 


826 


Ridgefield(FWS) 


827 


Saddle Mountain (FWS) 


828 


Tumbull(FWS) 


829 


UmatiUa(FWS) 


830 


Willapa (FWS) 




National Monument 


903 


Mount St Helens (FS) 




Estuarine Sanctuary 


831 


PadiUa Bay (NOAA) 




Wildernesses 


832 


Alpine Lakes (FS) 


833 


Boulder River (FS) 


834 


Buckhom (FS) 


835 


Clearwater (FS) 


836 


Colonel Bob (FS) 


837 


Glacier Peak (FS) 


838 


Glacier View (FS) 


839 


Goat Rocks (FS) 


840 


Henry M. Jackson (FS) 


841 


Indian Heaven (FS) 


842 


Lake Chelan-Sawtooth (FS) 


843 


Mount Adams (FS) 


844 


Mount Baker (FS) 


845 


Mount Skokomish (FS) 


846 


Noisy-Diobsud (FS) 


847 


Norse Peak (FS) 


848 


Pasayten (FS) 


849 


Salmo-Priest(FS) 


850 


Tatoosh (FS) 


851 


The Brothers (FS) 


852 


Trapper Creek (FS) 


853 


Wenaha-Tucannon (FS) 



n 


1,560 


1984 


n 


3,340 


1984 


n 


1,346 


1984 


n 


2,722 


1984 


n 


2,610 


1988 


n 


3,764 


1988 


n 


4,083 


1984 


n 


1,459 


1988 



m 



IV 



3,810 



44,550 



12,570 



1930 



n 


95,268 


1899 


n 


204,284 


1968 


n 


371,225 


1938 


IV 


11,985 


1944 


rv 


2,290 


1965 


rv 


16,200 




IV 


1,470 


1955 


rv 


1,145 




IV 


1,874 




IV 


12,478 


1971 


IV 


6,304 


1937 


rv 


5,672 




IV 


5,830 





1982 



1980 



n 


146,748 


1976 


n 


19,698 


1984 


n 


17,911 


1984 


u 


5,908 


1984 


n 


4,840 


1984 


n 


231,618 


1964 


n 


1,264 


1984 


n 


42,347 


1964 


n 


41,550 


1984 


n 


8,482 


1984 


n 


61,284 


1984 


n 


18,869 


1961 


n 


47,562 


1984 


n 


5,267 


1984 


n 


5,719 


1984 


n 


20,778 


1984 


n 


214,497 


1968 


n 


16.728 


1984 


n 


6,374 


1984 


u 


6,751 


1984 


n 


2,416 


1984 


n 


44,940 


1978 



99 



Protected Areas of the World 



Map National/international designations lUCN management Area Year 

ref. Name of area category (ha) notified 



854 


William 0. Douglas (FS) 


855 


Juniper Dunes (BLM) 




National Recreation Areas 


856 


Coulee Dam (NPS) 


857 


Lake Chelan (NPS) 


858 


Ross Lake (NPS) 




West Virginia 




National River 


859 


New River Gorge (NPS) 




Wildernesses 


860 


Cranberry (FS) 


861 


Dolly Sods (FS) 


862 


Laurel Fork North (FS) 


863 


Laurel Fork South (FS) 


864 


Mountain Lake (FS) 


865 


Otter Creek (FS) 




Wisconsin 




National Scientific Reserve 


866 


Ice Age (NPS) 




National Scenic Rivers 


867 


Lower St. Croix (NPS) 


868 


Sl Croix (NPS) 




National Wildlife Refuges 


869 


Horicon (FWS) 


870 


Mississippi River Caue (FWS) 


871 


Necedah (FWS) 


872 


Trempealeau (FWS) 


873 


Upper Mississippi (FWS) 





Wildernesses 


875 


Blackjack Springs (FS) 


876 


Headwaters (FS) 


877 


Porcupine Lake (FS) 


878 


Rainbow Lake (FS) 


879 


Whisker Lake (FS) 




Wyoming 




National Parks 


880 


Grand Teton (NPS) 


881 


Yellowstone (NPS) 




National Wildlife Refuges 


882 


National Elk (FWS) 


883 


Pathfinder (FWS) 


884 


Seedskadee (FWS) 




National Monuments 


885 


Devil's Tower (NPS) 


886 


Fossil Butte (NPS) 



n 68,104 1984 

n 2,792 1984 



V 40,424 1946 

V 25,044 1968 

V 47,582 1968 



25,101 1978 



n 


14,514 


1983 


n 


4,134 


1975 


n 


2,450 


1983 


n 


2,427 


1983 


n 


1,012 


1988 


n 


8,094 


1975 



13,153 1964 



V 


3,512 


1972 


V 


25,373 


1969 


IV 


8,495 


1941 


rv 


16,338 




IV 


17,681 




IV 


2,275 




rv 


19,425 





National Lakeshore 
874 AposUe Island (NPS) V 17,084 1970 



n 
n 
n 
n 
n 


2,382 
7,328 
1,720 
2,664 
2,972 


1978 
1984 
1984 
1975 
1978 


n 
n 


124,140 
899.139 


1929 
1872 


rv 

IV 
IV 


9,989 
6,807 
6,011 


1965 


V 

m 


1,346 
3,280 


1906 
1972 



Parkway 
887 John D. RockefeUer, Jr. Memorial (NPS) V 9,672 1977 

100 



United Slates of America 



Map 


National/international designations lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 


notified 




Wildernesses 








888 


Bridger (FS) 


n 


173,241 


1964 


889 


Cloud Peak (FS) 


n 


76,502 


1984 


890 


Encampment River (FS) 


n 


4,097 


1984 


891 


Fitzpatrick (FS) 


n 


80,341 


1976 


892 


Gros Ventre (FS) 


n 


116,145 


1984 


893 


Huston Parks (FS) 


n 


12,379 


1984 


894 


Jedediah Smith (FS) 


n 


49,959 


1984 


895 


North Absaroka (FS) 


n 


141,838 


1964 


896 


Plaae River (FS) 


n 


9,206 


1984 


897 


Pope Agie (FS) 


n 


41,225 


1984 


898 


Savage Run (FS) 


n 


6,046 


1978 


899 


Teton (FS) 


n 


236,838 


1964 


900 


Washakie (FS) 


n 


285,011 


1964 


901 


Winegar Hole (FS) 


n 


4,336 


1984 




Biosphere Reserves 










Aleutian Islands National Wildlife Refuge 


IX 


1,100,943 


1976 




Beaver Creek Experimental Watershed 


DC 


111,300 


1978 




Big Bend National Park 


IX 


283,247 


1976 




Big Thicket National Preserve 


K 


34,217 


1981 




California Coast Ranges 


IX 


62,098 


1983 




Carolinian-South Atlantic 


IX 


125,545 


1986 




Cascade Head Experimental Forest 










Scenic Research Area 


IX 


7,051 


1976 




Central Gulf Coastal Plain 


IX 


72,964 


1983 




Central California Coast 


DC 


404,863 


1988 




Central Plains Experimental Range (CPER) 


IX 


6,210 


1976 




Champlain- Adirondak 


IX 


3,990,000 


1989 




Channel Islands 


IX 


479,652 


1976 




Coram Experimental Forest (incl. Coram NA) 


IX 


3,019 


1976 




Denali National Park and 


K 


2,441,295 


1976 




Desert Experimental Range 


DC 


22,513 


1976 




Everglades National Park (incl. Ft Jefferson NM) 


DC 


585,867 


1976 




Eraser Experimental Forest 


DC 


9,328 


1976 




Glacier National Park 


DC 


410,202 


1976 




Glacier Bay-Admiralty Is. 


DC 


1,515,015 


1986 




H J. Andrews Experimental Forest 


DC 


6,100 


1976 




Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest 


DC 


3.076 


1976 




Isle Royale National Park 


DC 


215,740 


1980 




Jornada Experimental Range 


DC 


78,297 


1976 




Konza Prairie Research Natural Area 


DC 


3,487 


1979 




Land between The Lakes 


DC 


1,560,000 


1991 




Mammoth Cave Area 


DC 


83,337 


1990 




Mojave and Colorado Deserts 


DC 


1,297,264 


1984 




New Jersey Pinelands 


DC 


445.300 


1988 




Niwot Ridge 


DC 


1,200 


1979 




Noatak National Arctic Range 


DC 


3,035.200 


1976 




Olympic National Park 


DC 


363,379 


1976 




Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument 


DC 


133,278 


1976 




Rocky Mountain National Park 


DC 


106,710 


1976 




San Dimas Experimental Forest 


DC 


6,947 


1976 




San Joaquin Experimental Range 


DC 


1,832 


1976 




Sequoia-Kings Canyon National Parks 


DC 


343,000 


1976 




South Atlantic Coastal Plain BR 


DC 


6,125 


1983 




Southern Appalachian 


DC 


215,596 


1988 



101 



Protected Areas of the World 



Map National/international designations 
ref. Name of area 



lUCN management Area 

category (ha) 



Year 
notified 



Stanislaus-Tuolumne Experimental Forest 


IX 


607 


1976 


The University of Michigan Biological Station 


IX 


4,048 


1979 


The Virginia Coast Reserve 


IX 


13,511 


1979 


Three Sisters Wilderness 


IX 


80,900 


1976 


Virgin Islands National Park 


EX 


6,127 


1976 


Yellowstone National Park 


EX 


898,349 


1976 


Ramsar Wetlands 








Ash Meadows 


R 


9,509 


1986 


Cache-Lower White Rivers 


R 


145,690 


1989 


Catahoula Lake 


R 


12,150 


1990 


Chesapeake Bay 


R 


45,000 


1987 


Cheyenne Bottoms 


R 


8,036 


1988 


Edwin B Forsythe NWR 


R 


13,080 


1986 


Everglades 


R 


566,143 


1987 


Horicon Marsh 


R 


12,911 


1990 


Izembek 


R 


168,422 


1986 


Okefenokee 


R 


159,889 


1986 


World Heritage sites 








Everglades National Park 


X 


585,867 


1979 


Grand Canyon National Park 


X 


493,270 


1979 


Great Smoky Mountains National Park 


X 


209,000 


1983 


Mammoth Cave National Park 


X 


21,191 


1981 


Olympic National Park 


X 


362,848 


1981 


Redwood National Park 


X 


42,400 


1980 


Yellowstone National Park 


X 


898,349 


1978 


Yosemite National Park 


X 


308,283 


1984 



* Abbreviations following the site name give the name of the management agency responsible for the site, which are 
as follows: 

FWS US Fish and Wildlife Service 

NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

NPS National Park Service 

FS US Forest Service 

BLM Bureau of Land Management 
** Wilderness areas have only been listed here when they do not overlap with other categories of protected area 
included in this list There are a large number of other wilderness areas which lie within national parks, national 
monuments, national wildlife reguges and other categories. 



102 



United States of America 




p: 



Federally Protected Areas of the USA 
Alaska 



103 



Protected Areas of the World 




Federally Protected Areas of the USA 
Idaho, Montana, Oregon, Washington, Wyoming 



104 



United States of America 



-34° 



-32° 



"~1 
IU° 




Federally Protected Areas of the USA 
California, Nevada 



105 



Protected Areas of the World 




Federally Protected Areas of the USA 
Arizona, New Mexico 



106 



United States of America 




Federally Protected Areas of the USA 
Colorado, Utah 



107 



Protected Areas of the World 



104° 



48° 



46° 



42° 



40° 



-38° 



»622 ^1 



36° 



104° 
J 




Federally Protected Areas of the USA 
Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota 



108 



United States of America 




Federally Protected Areas of the USA 
Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Texas 



109 



Protected Areas of the World 




Federally Protected Areas of the USA 
Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee 



110 



United Stales of America 




Federally Protected Areas of the USA 
Florida 



111 



Protected Areas of the World 




Federally Protected Areas of the USA 
Michigan, Wisconsin 



112 



United States of America 




Federally Protected Areas of the USA 
Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Ohio 



113 



Protected Areas of the World 




Federally Protected Areas of the USA 
Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia 



114 



United Stales of America 




Federally Protected Areas of the USA 
New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania 



115 



Protected Areas of the World 



44° 



-43° 



42° 








50 100km 



41°- 



73° 



72° 

_l 



71° 



70° 



Federally Protected Areas of the USA 
Connecticut, Massachussets, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont 



116 



United States of America 




Federally Protected Areas of the USA 
Maine 



117 



BELIZE 



Area 22,965 sq. km 
Population 191,000(1991) 

Economic Indicators 

GDP: US$ 1,304 per capita (1987) 
GNP: US$ 1,720 per capita (1989) 

Policy and Legislation Belize, formerly known as 
British Honduras, obtained independence from Britain 
in 1981, although it has been self-governing since 1964 
(Van Rest, 1986). 

Belize participates in the Tropical Forestry Action Plan 
(TFAP) of the FAO, an international strategy for 
maximising the contribution of forestry sectors to 
national economic and social development while 
maintaining conservation principles. A country Action 
Plan was drawn up in 1989 with support from a number 
of international aid agencies. Much of the plan is devoted 
to economic development and maximising resource 
utilisation in a sustainable manner, through legislative 
changes, institutional strengthening and changes in 
management techniques. On conservation, the plan 
proposes several measures to counter the current 
deterioration of forests, including the establishment of 
an Office of Conservation within the Forest Department. 
This has now been established (S. Matola, pers. comm., 
1992; O. Salas, pers. comm., 1992). Production of 
resource inventories is recommended so that gaps in the 
existing protected areas network can be highlighted 
(OFI, 1989). The UK Overseas Development Agency 
has taken over conservation aspects of the Action Plan a 
forest planning and management project was established 
in May 1992 to run for five years (S. Zisman, pers. 
comm., 1992). 

The first piece of legislation concerning forest resource 
regulation and protection was the Forest Ordinance, 
1927, revised in 1958. This provides for the 
establishment and management of forest reserves within 
which timber extraction is strictly regulated (Hartshorn 
and Green, 1985; US-AID, 1988). Forest reserves are 
established under individual decrees, and controlled 
timber extraction is permitted within them. 
Approximately 22% of the land in forest reserves is 
recognised unofficially as protection forest, which 
cannot be utilised except for selective fellings of minor 
importance. 

The Crown Land Ordinance, 1924, revised in 1958, 
enabled the relevant Minister to categorise sites on an 
ad hoc basis, leading to the designation of a number of 
sites, sometimes known as crown reserves. These 
included a number of bird sanctuaries (see Annex) which 
have not been renotified under the more recent 
legislation (Zisman, 1989). The first crown reserve, 
Half-Moon Cay, was established in 1928. 



The principal protected area legislation currently in 
effect is the National Parks System Act No. 5, 1981, 
which provides for the declaration by the government of 
national parks and other protected areas to be 
administered by the Chief Forest Officer. However, no 
regulations have been drawn up for the implementation 
of this legislation (US-AID, 1988). Definitions are given 
for four categories of protected area (see Annex) that are 
to be established by the Minister. The process whereby 
areas are delimited and developed as a protected area are 
given. Licences for construction and other activities 
within the area may be issued only by the Minister. 

The final piece of legislation relating directly to 
protected areas is the Fisheries Ordinance, 1977, which 
enables the designation of marine nature reserves (see 
Annex). Further reference to these is covered under the 
Fisheries Amendment Act, 1983 (Zisman, 1989). 

The Wildlife Protection Act No. 4, 1981 provides for the 
conservation, restoration, development and regulation of 
wildlife resources. Hunting regulations are detailed, and 
the Forest Department is authorised to ensure 
compliance with the regulations. Under this Act, all wild 
animals are protected from unregulated capture, while 
some 30 mammal species and all but six bird species are 
completely, protected. A seven-year moratorium on 
harvesting wildhfe for commercial purposes was due to 
expire in 1988. It has been extended, however, and 
is due to expire in December 1992 (US-AID, 1988; 
D. Rosado, pers. comm., 1991). 

International Activities BeUze is a member of the 
Caribbean Community (CARICOM). It is a member of 
the Caribbean Conservation Association (CCA), a 
regional, non-governmental, non-profit organisation 
dedicated to promoting policies and practices which 
contribute to conservation, protection and wise use of 
natural and cultural resources, and to the Central 
American Commission on Development and the 
Environment (CCAD). 

Belize ratified the Convention Concerning the 
Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage 
(World Heritage Convention) on 6 November 1990, but 
no natural sites have been inscribed to date. Belize is not 
party to the Convention on Wetlands of International 
Importance especially as Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar 
Convention), nor does it participate in the Unesco Man 
and the Biosphere Programme, although it is currently 
considering the advantages of joining these, as well as 
the Convention on Nature Protection and Wildlife 
Preservation in the Western Hemisphere (Convenci6n 
sobre la Protecci6n de la Flora, de la Fauna y de las 
Bellezas Escenicas Naturales de los Pai'ses de America) 
(Western Hemisphere Convention). 

A proposed agreement between Belize and Mexico has 
been drawn up concerning the protection of the 



119 



Protected Areas of the World 



environment in the border areas between the two 
countries (D. Rosado, pers. comm., 1991). Efforts are 
also underway to establish an international protected 
area around Gran Peten between Mexico, Guatemala and 
Belize. Also known as the Azul Triangle, this is a vast 
and mostly uninhabited region, with numerous Mayan 
ruins. On the Belize side, some 85,000ha have already 
been established for conservation, and limited 
sustainable exploitation in the Rio Bravo Conservation 
Areas managed by the Programme for Belize. A further 
proposed international initiative concerns the 
Chiquibul/Mayan Mountain project between Guatemala 
and Belize. 

Administration and Management The Forest 

Department within the Ministry of Natural Resources 
(formerly in the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and 
Fisheries) is nominally responsible for all protected 
areas in the country. In reality, the main burden of 
conservation work has been undertaken by 
non-governmental organisations (NGOs), notably the 
Belize Audubon Society (B AS), and also the Programme 
for Belize, a consortium of conservation organisations 
(US- AID, 1988). BAS has been given authority to 
manage the government reserves established between 
1981 and 1990, in the absence of an appropriate 
government authority. The only categories not managed 
by BAS are forest reserves and the single marine nature 
reserve. BAS also has an important role in promoting 
environmental awareness, and identifying and 
promoting new sites for nature reserves. The Programme 
for Belize owns and manages over 85,000ha for 
conservation purposes. Another NGO, Coral Cay 
Conservation, has worked closely with the Ministry of 
Agriculture and Fisheries in surveying the coastline, 
including existing and proposed protected areas, and 
drafting up management plans (PFB, 1992). 

The Forest Department is responsible for managing all 
forest reserves in the country. Around 62% of forested 
land is owned by the public sector, just under half of 
which comes under designation as 15 forest reserves 
(US-AID, 1988). This Department comprises a Chief 
Officer, three forest officers, three foresters, two 
conservation officers, 1 1 rangers, 20 forest guards and 
support staff. However, training facilities are lacking for 
staff, and none has received training in wUdlife or parks 
management Lack of adequate equipment and funding 
also restricts the effectiveness of the department 
(US-AID, 1988). 

Responsibility for the administration of marine 
resources, including marine nature reserves, rests with 
the Fisheries Administrator in the Ministry of 
Agriculture and Fisheries (Zisman, 1989). 

The government's decision to hand over policy and 
management responsibilities concerned with the 
protected areas sector is widely felt to be unacceptable. 
It is felt that a systematic approach to the conservation 
of the country's biodiversity is required, to ensure that 
all ecosystems are properly represented in the protected 



areas system, while an administrative and managerial 
body within the pubUc sector may be essential if external 
assistance in planning, research, training and 
management is to be effective. A Conservation Advisory 
Board was established in February 1989 to advise the 
Forest Department on matters relating to conservation 
and the Environment, but has no statutory powers, and 
is ineffective. Proposals put forward by the World 
Wildlife Fund-US for the establishment of a 
Conservation Division, or an Office of Conservation, 
within the Forest Department, were incorporated in the 
Forest Department Annual Report and in the Belize 
Tropical Forest Action Plan, and a Conservation 
Division has now been established, to manage some or 
all of the protected areas (S. Matola, pers. comm., 1992; 
O. Salas, pers. comm., 1992). WWF-US also proposed 
that some form of systems review should be undertaken, 
to identify areas of critical importance for inclusion in 
an expanded protected areas network (OFI, 1989; 
WWF-US. 1989; D. Rosado, pers. comm., 1991). 

In 1992, the government of Belize approved in principle 
a Belize Revenue Generation Strategy for Protected 
Areas (O. Salas, pers. comm., 1992). 

Systems Reviews Belize is the second smallest and 
the least populated country in Central America. It Ues in 
the northern portion of the Mesoamerican land bridge, 
and shares its borders to the north with Mexico, and to 
the west and south with Guatemala. To the east there is 
a long coastline on the Caribbean Sea, with numerous 
offshore islands and coral cays. Many of these lie in a 
chain some IS^Okm offshore, along the second largest 
barrier reef in the world, which is almost continuous for 
some 257km. The country can be subdivided into the 
level and low-lying northern half, which continues to the 
south along a coastal strip, and the Maya Mountains in 
the south central area of the country. The low-lying 
areas, which are continuous with the Mexican Yucatan 
Platform, are dominated by limestone topography, while 
the mountain range, which rises to 1,120m, is largely 
composed of metamorphosed sediments, with granitic 
intrusions. The country lies within the subtropics, and 
has a history of devastating effects of cyclones 
(Hartshorn et al., 1984; US-AID, 1988). 

Following the Holdridge (1967) classification system, 
and the work of Hartshorn et al. (1984), six life 
(ecological) zones have been described in Belize: 
subtropical moist forest, subtropical lower montane 
moist forest, subtropical lower montane wet forest, 
subtropical wet forest, tropical moist - transition to 
subtropical, and tropical wet - transition to subtropical. 
Mangroves are a major feature of the coastal and marine 
ecosystems (Hartshorn et al., 1984; OFI, 1989). Coral 
reefs are highly developed and contain a typical 
Caribbean fauna (lUCN, 1988). The most recent 
estimates of forest cover suggest that closed 
broad-leaved forest covers some 74% of the land area, 
and open pine forest a further 5% (P. Simonetti, pers. 
comm., 1992). 



120 



Belize 



More than 1,000 years ago the Maya civilisation was 
widespread, and extensive areas of the country were 
farmed. The decline of this civilisation led to the 
abandonment of many of these farms, and permitted 
forest regeneration. In most cases, this regeneration has 
reached the stage where it is widely regarded as climax 
vegetauon (US-AID, 1988). 

Although Belize is not noted among the Central 
American countries as having particularly high 
biodiversity, it is nonetheless very diverse, especially for 
its size, with approximately 4,000 species of flowering 
plants. The flora in the north is closely allied to that of 
the Yucatan Peninsula, which is thought to comprise up 
to 17% endemics. Another feature which raises the staUis 
of Belize as a country of considerable conservation 
importance is the fact that much of the habitat is 
undisturbed, and relatively unthreatened at present. 
Hence, populations are more stable here than in many 
other countries (Hartshorn etai, 1984; WWF-US, 
1989). 

Belize is unique in tropical America in that the country's 
geopolitical identity is related directly to its forest 
resources. Settlement of the region in the mid- 17th 
century was for cutting logwood, and for nearly three 
centuries the local economy depended on exported logs 
and imported food. By 1984 only 2% of land area was 
used for agriculture, of a maximum of 16% which is 
considered suitable for mechanised agriculture without 
large financial and technical investments (Hartshorn 
era/., 1984). 

The protected area system has its origins in a series of 
crown reserves, focusing on major sea-bird rookeries, 
and 15 forest reserves, established for timber 
exploitation rather than wildhfe exploitation. The first 
crown reserve, Half-Moon Caye, was established in 
1928. In 1977, seven tiny mangrove cays were 
established as crown reserves to protect rookeries, with 
administration entrusted to BAS. One of BAS's first 
projects was to raise funds to purchase the remaining 
privately-owned land on Half-Moon Caye, an important 
breeding ground for red-footed booby Sula sula. Half- 
Moon Caye Natural Monument was established in 1982. 
Similar initiatives by BAS have resulted in the creation 
of other protected areas, such as Crooked Tree Wildlife 
Sanctuary in 1984. The collective efforts of BAS, the 
BeUze Centre for Environmental Studies, Programme 
for Belize, Belize Zoo and the government have 
consolidated the consei-vation system (Simons, 1988; 
S. Matola, pers. comm., 1992). Since 1981, five national 
parks have been established. By 1991 there were some 
20 legally declared conservation areas, which covered 
some 10% of the total area (US-AID, 1988). 

BAS has identified a further 15 sites for potential 
protection, including designating the barrier reef, 
associated cays and lagoons as a World Heritage site 
(Hartshorn el al., 1984; US- AID, 1998). 



The government is the largest land-owner in the country, 
and as such it has a strong influence on conservation. 
Some 21,323 sq. km, or 93% of the total national 
territory, is classified by the government as " forest land" , 
over 60% of which is state-owned. Actually, this figure 
does not give an accurate reflection of current land use, 
as it contains a considerable area of open grassland and 
small farms which were not included in calculations. 
Within the state-owned forestry system there are 15 
legally notified forest reserves that cover 6,368 sq. km, 
or 28% of total area. The majority of the land in these 
forest reserves is broad-leaved forest, although there is 
also some open woodland and pine. Approximately 22% 
of the land in these reserves is recognised unofficially as 
protection forest, a further 33% has been described as 
inaccessible. Despite this, however, a number of these 
reserves have lost forest to illegal agriculture, and at least 
one has been degazetted. None of the existing forest 
reserves has a formal management plan, and it is unclear 
to what extent they will contribute to conservation in the 
long-term (Hartshorn et at, 1984; US-AID, 1988). 

Tourism is growing exceptionally fast, and tourism in 
protected areas doubled between 1987 and 1989. Unless 
properly managed this could seriously threaten sites. 
However, tourism also presents a great potential source 
of revenue for a sector that is particularly short of 
funding. There is currently no legal mechanism to 
guarantee the capture of revenue from protected areas, 
although a WWF-US/Govemment of Belize project is 
looking into' this (WWF-US, 1989). 

Several innovative conservation projects have been 
implemented. For instance, in 1985, following a survey 
of the black howler monkey range, the 777ha 
Community Baboon Sanctuary was established, 
involving more than 60 private land-owners who have 
pledged to leave parts of their land undisturbed. Tourism 
has been especially encouraged in the area to provide 
jobs for local f)eople (Simons, 1988). There are two other 
large private nature reserves: Shipstem Nature Reserve 
and Rio Bravo Conservation Area (Zisman, 1989). 

Hartshorn et al.'s 1984 comprehensive review includes 
a chapter on natural resources and another on 
institutional and legal aspects of enviromental issues. 
The chapter on natural resources comprises sections on 
forests, including forest reserves, and wildlands 
conservation including the status of conservation units. 

Addresses 

Commissioner of Lands and Survey, Ministry of Natural 

Resources, Belmopan 
Chief Forest Officer, Department of Forestry, Ministry 

of Natural Resources, Behnopan (Tel: 8 22711; 

FAX: 8 22333) 
Fisheries Administrator, Ministry of Agriculture and 

Fisheries, PO Box 148, Belize City 
Belize Audubon Society, 29 Regent Street, PO Box 

1001, Belize City (Tel: 2 77369; FAX: 2 78562) 



121 



Protected Areas of the World 



Coral Cay Conservation, The Sutton Business Centre, 
Restmor Way, WaUington, Surrey SM6 7AH, UK 
(Tel: 081 669 0011; FAX: 081 773 0406) 

Programme for Belize, PO Box 749, Belize City 

References 

Hartshorn, G.S., Nicolait, L., Hartshorn, L., Bevier, G., 
Brightman, R., Cal, J., Cawich, A., Davidson, W., 
DuBois, R., Dyer, C, Gibson, J., Hawley, W., 
Leonard, J., Nicolait, R., Weyer, D., White, H., and 
Wright, C. (1984). Belize Country Environmental 
Profile. A Field Study. US-AID Contract No. 
505-0000-C-00-3001-00. 151 pp. Hartshorn, G.S. 
and Green, G.C. (1985). Belize. Wildlands 
conservation in North-Central America. September. 
6 pp. 

lUCN (1988). Coral Reefs of the World, Volume 1: 
Atlantic and Eastern Pacific. lUCN Conservation 
Monitoring Centre, Cambridge, UK. 373 pp. 



OFI (1989). Belize Tropical Forestry Action Plan. 

Report by Oxford Forestry Institute. Unpublished. 

Oxford Forestry Institute, Oxford, UK. 273 pp. 
PFB (1992). Programme for Belize. Newsletter 6. 

Programme for BeUze, Suffolk, UK. 
Simons, P. (1988). Belize at the crossroads. New 

Scientist, 29 October 61-65. 
US- AID (1988). Tropical forests/biodiversity. Annex to 

US-AID/BeUze FY 89-90 Action Plan, March. 26 pp. 
Van Rest, J. (1986). Partners in development; Belize. 

Horizons. Spring. Pp. 13-17. 
WWF-US ( 1 989). The establishment of the conservation 

division and expansion of a protected areas system 

in Belize. Unpublished report submitted to the 

Biodiversity Support Program. Pp. ? 
Zisman, S. (1989). The Directory ofProtected Areas and 

Sites of Nature Conservation Interest in Belize. 

Occasional Publications No. 10, Department of 

Geography, University of Edinburgh, UK. 1 10pp. 



122 



Belize 



ANNEX 

Definitions of protected area designations, as legislated, 

together with authorities responsible for their administration 



Title:: Crown Land Ordinance 
(Section 6, Chapter 110) 

Date: 1924, revised 1958 

Brief description: Chapter 110 provides the 
Minister with the power to establish sites, sometimes 
known as crown reserves, on an ad hoc basis. A 
number of these remain today as bird sanctuaries 



Belize Audubon 



Administrative authority: 

Society 

Designations: 



Bird sanctuary No information is available 
concerning regulations, although Zisman (1989) 
states they may be considered as IUCT4 Management 
Category IV. All sites are small (between 0.4 and 
21ha). 

Title: Fisheries Ordinance and Fisheries 
Amendment Act 

Date: 1977, Amendment 1983 

Brief description: Section 9 (A) enables the 
designation of marine nature reserves 

Administrative authority: Fisheries Unit, 
Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries 

Designations: 

Marine nature reserve The hunting, killing or 
taking of certain species of marine mammals and 
crocodiles is prohibited. Only one site has been 
designated. This site was declared to prevent 
overfishing, and to protect the coral resources largely 
because of their value to tourism, fishing and as a 
genetic resource. The existing site has been zoned, 
with Zone (A) being closed to fishing and coral 
collecting, and two further zones where regulations 
are less strict 

Title: The National Parks System Act No. 5 

Date: 25 November 1981 

Brief description: Provides for the creation of 
national parks and other protected areas, which 
collectively comprise the National Parks System. 
Definitions for the different management categories 
to be employed, and prohibited activities common to 
all of them, are given. 



Administrative authority: Chief Forest Officer, 
Forest Department, Ministry of Agriculture 

Designations: 

National park An area set aside for the 

protection and preservation of examples of natural or 
scenic value, considered to be of national 
significance, for the benefit and enjoyment of the 
public. 

Entry is permitted only for scientific research, 
recreational or educational purposes, with prior 
authorisation from the Minster of Natural Resources. 

Nature reserve An area set aside for the 

protection of biological communities or species, to 
allow the continuation of natural processes in an 
undisturbed state, and to ensure that ecologically 
representative examples of the natural environment 
are available for purposes of scientific research, 
education and the maintenance of genetic resources. 

Entry is prohibited unless under the authority of the 
Ministry, and following regulations given in the 
legislation. 

Wildlife sanctuary An area set aside for the 
protection of nationally significant species, or groups 
of species, biotic communities or physical features 
that require human manipulation for their continuing 
survival. Hunting or capture of wildlife, and the 
destruction of bird or reptile nests or eggs, are 
prohibited. 

Natural monument An area set aside for the 
protection of nationally significant features of 
special interest or unique characteristics for the 
purpose of education, research and public 
enjoyment Disruption of features of the national 
monument is prohibited, but the monument may be 
used for educational, interpretational and research 
purposes. 

Activities prohibited in all four categories include: 
Hunting or capturing wildlife species, fishing, 
destroying or collecting floral specimens, and the 
construction of structures for permanent or 
temporary residence or other purposes. 

The Minister may issue permits to appropriate 
organisations, scientists or suitably qualified 
professionals for the collection of specimens, at his 
discretion. 

Source: Original legislation 



123 



Protected Areas of the World 



SUMMARY OF PROTECTED AREAS 



Map National/international designations 
ref. Name of area 



lUCN management Area 

category (ha) 



Year 
notified 





National Parks 


1 


Chiquibul 




Nature Reserves 


2 


Bladen Branch 


3 


Rio Grande 


4 


Society Hall 




Wildlife Sanctuaries 


5 


Cockscomb Basin 


6 


Crooked Tree 




Marine Nature Reserve 


7 


Hoi Chan 




National Monument 


8 


Hal f Moon Cay e 




Forest Reserves 


9 


Chiquibul 


10 


Columbia River 


11 


Commerce Bight 


12 


Deep River 


13 


Freshwater Creek 


14 


Grants' Work A 


15 


Machaca 


16 


Manatee Lagoons 


17 


Mango Creek 


18 


Maya Mountains 


19 


Mountain Pine Ridge 


20 


Sibun 


21 


Silk Grass 


22 


Sittee River 


23 


Swasey-Bladen 




Archaeological Reserve 


24 


Caracol 



n 



I 

IV 

I 



IV 
IV 

n 
n 



107,607 

39,256 
2,340 
2,729 

102,400 
1.470 

411 

3.925 



1991 

1990 
1968 
1986 

1986 
1984 

1987 

1982 



vm 


184,955 


1991 


vra 


44,789 


1954 


vm 


1,200 


1989 


vm 


31,647 


1991 


vm 


29,593 


1960 


vm 


3,439 


1986 


vm 


2,300 


1954 


vm 


3,300 




vm 


23,224 


1987 


vm 


52,124 


1984 


vm 


51,282 


1920 


vm 


42,966 


1987 


vm 


2,641 


1920 


vm 


37,938 


1977 


vm 


6,200 


1958 



IV 



20,000 



124 



Belize 




Protected Areas of Belize 



125 



COSTA RICA 



Area 50,900 sq. km 

Population 3,015,000 (1990) 
Natural increase 2.25% per annum 

Economic Indicators 

GDP: No information 

GNP: US$ 1,780 per capita (1989) 

Policy and Legislation Information on natural 
resource j)rotection given in the Political Constitution of 
the Republic of Costa Rica (Constituci6n Politica de la 
Repiiblica) is currently not available. Two major 
strategies for the conservation and sustainable use of 
natural resources have been adopted (Bradley et ai, 
1990). 

Costa Rica participates in the FAO Tropical Forestry 
Action Plan (TFAP), an international strategy for 
maximising the contribution of forestry sectors to 
national economic and social development while 
maintaining conservation principles. In 1989, the 
government formulated its Forestry Action Plan (Plan de 
Accion Forestal para Costa Rica), to interpret the global 
designs of TFAP to suit national interests (Bradley et ai, 
1990; MIRENEM, 1990). The Forestry Action Plan 
reviews the current situation of the forest sector, and 
proposes measures to make forest conservation more 
effective. These include increasing coordination 
between the numerous institutes involved in forest 
management; supporting the establishment of a 
coordinated national system of protected areas; and 
increasing scientific knowledge of forest resources, 
necessary to implement sustainable use programmes 
(MIRENEM, 1990). 

The Conservation S trategy for Sustainable Development 
(Estrategia de Conservacion para el Desarrollo 
Sostenible) (ECODES), completed in 1989 under the 
direction of the Ministry of Natural Resources, Energy 
and Mines (Ministerio de Recursos Naturales, Energia y 
Minas) (MIRENEM), marks a significant advance in 
governmental poUcies for natural resource protection 
(Quesada, 1990). The strategy provides a comprehensive 
review of the current situation of natural resource 
management, and establishes national guidelines for 
sustainable development: preserving genetic diversity; 
maintaining essential ecosystems; and ensuring 
sustainable natural resource use. In 1987, an Executive 
Secretariat (SecretariaEjecutiva) was established within 
MIRENEM 10 supervise the formulation of ECODES, 
which took several years, and to execute its 
implementation (Bradley et ai, 1990; Quesada, 1990). 

Natural resource regulation dates back to 1853 when 
hunting was prohibited close to human settlement (SPN, 
1979). Law No. 13 of 10 January 1939 makes reference 
to national forests (bosques nacionales), and prohibits 
the enclosure of uncultivated land, and the destruction 



or cultivation of mountain habitats. Areas of land 200m 
wide along the length of coasts, and 500m wide on either 
side of rivers are declared protected for forest 
conservation purposes (SPN, 1979). 

The term national park (parque nacional) fu'st appeared 
in legislation in Law No. 197 (1945), which prohibited 
forest exploitation for 200m on either side of the 
Panamerican Highway, and declared part of the 
remaining construction area as a national park. However, 
owing to economic problems, this law was never put into 
effect, and the fu'st strictly protected natural area was not 
established until 1963 (SPN, 1979; Ugalde, 1992). 

The promulgation of the Forestry Law (Ley Forestal) 
No. 4465 (1969) was a significant step for the effective 
establishment and management of protected areas 
(Ugalde, 1992). Under this law, the General Forestry 
Directorate (Direcci6n General Forestal) (DGF) was 
created within the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock 
(Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganaden'a) (MAG), to be 
responsible for various categories of protected area. 
Definitions of these categories are to be given in the 
individual legislation providing for the creation of the 
each area. National parks and reserves are to be created 
by executive decree and, once established, their 
boundaries catn be altered only by a Congressional Law 
(Ley de Congreso). Provision is made for the 
expropriation of jnivately-owned land for the creation of 
strictly protected areas where necessary, and penalties 
for infringements are given. 

In order to implement the provisions of the 1 969 Forestry 
Law with respect to protected areas, the DGF established 
within itself the Department of National Parks 
(Departamento de Parques Nacionales). In 1977, Law 
No. 6084 officially raised the status of this department 
to that of a separate general directorate within the MAG, 
known as the National Parks Service (Servicio de 
Parques Nacionales) (SPN) (SPN, 1979; Ugalde, 1992). 

WildUfe resources are considered under the provisions 
of Law No. 6919 Wildlife Conservation Law (Ley de 
Conservaci6n de Fauna Silvestre), 1984, which state the 
regulations governing hunting and fishing. It is the 
responsibility of the Wildlife Department 
(Departamento de Vida Silvestre) (DVS), under 
MIRENEM, to ensure compliance with the legislation. 
The Regulations to the Wildlife Conservation Law, 
Decree No. 15403, 1984 provide further details of 
wildlife protection, and list prohibited activities and 
penalties. Provision is made for the creation of the 
Coordinating Committee for Wildlife Conservation 
(Comitd Coordinador de Conservaci6n de Fauna 
Silvestre), comprising representatives from the various 
agricultural and environmental institutes including the 
National Parks Service, to supervise and assess activities 
relating to wildlife conservation. 



127 



Protected Areas of the World 



In 1986, MERENEM was established under Law No. 
7152, specifically responsible for formulating national 
policies for natural resource protection and use. Both the 
DGF and the SPN became part of this new ministry upon 
its creation, and the Wildlife Department became the 
Wildlife Directorate, independent of the DGF (Ugalde, 
1992). 

In 1990, the Reformation of the Forestry Law (Reforma 
de la Ley Forestal) No. 7174 replaced the 1969 Forestry 
Law and its subsequent modifications. The 
responsibilities and structure of the DGF are detailed, 
and provision is made for the creation of the National 
Forestry Council (Consejo Forestal Nacional) to assess 
the activities of MIRENEM with respect to the 
protection, exploitation and administration of forest 
resources. Definitions are given for five categories of 
protected area (see Annex). Establishment requirements 
include a preliminary inventory, staled objectives and a 
management plan for each area, to be formulated by the 
DGF or the SPN. 

There is no single piece of legislation uniting protected 
areas by stating national conservation objectives, and 
providing a legislative framework for a coherent national 
system (MIRENEM, 1990). 

In 1991, MIRENEM submitted a project for a new law 
to the Legislative Assembly (Asamblea Legislativa), as 
part of the ongoing process of consolidating protected 
areas into a coordinated national system (MIRENEM, 
1991a; Ugalde, 1992). The Project for a Law of the 
National System of Conservation Areas (Proyecto de 
una Ley del Sistema Nacional de Areas de 
Conservacidn) does not replace current legislation on 
protected area management, but is intended to 
implement a new management system for protected 
areas which will unify the national system to a greater 
degree, and in which local and private participation will 
be encouraged (MIRENEM, 1991a; Ugalde, 1992). 

International Activities Costa Rica signed the 

Convention on Nature Protection and Wildlife 
Preservation in the Western Hemisphere (Convenci6n 
sobre la Protecci6n de la Flora, de la Fauna y de las 
Bellezas Esc6nicas Naturales de los Pai'ses de America) 
(Western Hemisphere Convention) in 1940 with 
subsequent ratification. 

Costa Rica ratified both the Convention Concerning the 
Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage 
(World Heritage Convention) on 23 August 1977, with 
one natural site inscribed in 1983, and the Convention 
on Wetlands of International Importance especially as 
Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar 

Convention) on 27 March 1992 and two sites have been 
listed. Costa Rica participates in the Unesco Man and the 
Biosphere Programme and two biosphere reserves were 
approved in 1982 and 1988. 

In 1982 Costa Rica signed the Basic Convention for 
Creation of the Park (Convenio B^ico de Creaci6n 



del Parque), a binational agreement with Panama for the 
creation, joint planning and administration of the La 
Amistad transfrontier park. Costa Rica and Nicaragua 
are also cooperating closely on the development of the 
binational protected areas system along the border 
between the two countries through the SIAPAZ project. 
A binational commission (comisi6n binacional) was 
established in October 1990, and Costa Rica and 
Nicaragua signed a cooperative agreement on 15 
December 1990 for collaboration with frontier protected 
areas (ireas protegidas fronteriaas). 

Costa Rica, through the National Park Service 
participates in the FAO Latin American Network 
programme (Red Latinoamericana de Cooperaci6n 
Tecnica en Parques Nacionales, Otras Areas Protegidas, 
Flora y Fauna SUvestres). This programme aims to 
coordinate the activities of participating countries, to 
assist in the implementation and functioning of a 
coherent and effective national system of protected areas 
in each country (FAO, n.d.). 

Administration and Management The structure of 
protected areas and forestry administration has existed 
in its present form since the creation of MIRENEM, in 
1986. By establishing a ministry specifically responsible 
for natural resources and the environment, such issues 
are afforded a relatively high staftis within government 
(Quesada, 1990). 

MIRENEM incorporates those organisations that 
administer natural resources and protected areas: the 
General Forestry Directorate (DGF) and the National 
Parks Service (SPN), both formerly part of the Ministry 
of Agriculture (Ministerio de Agricultura) (MAG); and 
the Wildlife Directorate (Direccion de Vida Silvestre) 
(DVS), formerly a department within the DGF 
(MIRENEM, 1991b; Ugalde, 1992). The 
Responsibilities for protected area management are 
assigned to the DGF or the SPN according to 
management category; the DVS is responsible for 
wildlife, and does not administer protected areas 
(A.F. Ugalde, pers. comm., 1992). 

The DGF, established in 1969, has a broad range of 
responsibilities for forest resource administration, 
including the management of forest reserves (reservas 
forestales), protective zones (zonas protectoras) and 
faunal refuges (Bradley et at., 1990; A.F. Ugalde pers. 
comm., 1992). The principal aim of the areas managed 
by the DGF is the sustainable production of natural 
resources. Land within these areas may be 
privatelyowned, and the state is not obliged to acquire 
territory for the establishment of these categories 
(Ugalde, 1992). 

The SPN, established as a separate directorate in 1977, 
manages national parks (parques nacionales), biological 
reserves (reservas biologicas) and national monuments 
(monumentos nacionales). It has the principal 
responsibility for formulating and implementing 
protected area management policies under the 



128 



Costa Rica 



supervision of MIRENEM (Bradley et al., 1990; Ugalde, 
1 992). The principal objective of the areas administrated 
by the SPN is the conservation of national biodiversity 
and for this reason, land under these categories must be 
acquired by the state (Ugalde, 1992). In total, there are 
approximately 600 personnel working in protected area 
management (Ugalde, 1992). 

There are numerous other organisations and institutions 
involved, directly or indirectly, in the protection and 
utilisation of forest resources. The DGF and the SPN are 
the two principal institutions responsible for 
coordinating and directing forest related activities 
(MIRENEM, 1990). 

The National Forestry Council, created in 1990, is 
responsible for assessing the activities of forest resource 
use and protection activities of MIRENEM. It comprises 
the minister and viceminister of MIRENEM, the 
Director General of the DGF; the Minister of National 
Planning and Economic Policy (Ministro de 
Planificaci6n Nacional y Politica Econ6mica); and 
presidents or representatives from several governmental 
and private institutions concerned with agrarian and 
environmental affairs. 

The National Commission of Indigenous Affairs 
(Comisi6n Nacional Asuntos Indigenas) (CONAI) is 
responsible for a number of indigenous reserves 
(reservas indigenas) which play an important role in 
the conservation of forests and natural resources 
(Bradley et al., 1990; MIRENEM, 1991a). Although 
CONAI does not directly define management policies 
for these reserves, it coordinates management 
activities with the various indigenous development 
associations and local groups (Bradley et al., 1990). 

There are seven privately-owned protected areas that 
cover 24,3S7ha, and constitute an important addition to 
the protected area network (MIRENEM, 1991b). These 
may be owned by universities, private individuals or 
institutions such as the Tropical Science Centre (Centre 
de Ciencias Topicales) (CCT), which manages 
Monteverde Qoud Forest Reserve, and the Organization 
for Tropical Studies (OTS), which manages La Selva 
Biological Research Station (Bradley et al., 1990). 

A number of other NGOs are working in conservation 
issues. Among the oldest and most active in protected 
area support are the National Parks Foundation 
(Fundaci6n de Parques Nacionales) (FPN), the 
Neotropical Foundation (Fundacidn NeotnSpica) and the 
National Biodiversity Institute (Institute Nacional de 
Biodiversidad) (INBio) (Bradley et al., 1990). The main 
objectives of FPN include promoting environmental 
education and working towards the establishment of an 
effective legal framewo± for environmental protection 
(Alfaro, pers. comm., 1986). The FPN is responsible for 
administering funds generated by debtfomature swaps in 
Costa Rica (Bradley et al., 1990). In 1983, the FPN 
together with The Nature Conservancy, developed the 
Natural Heritage Programme (Programma de 



Patrimonio Natural) to carry out biological inventories 
on endangered species and natural habitats in the country 
and to maintain a data base of information on the current 
situation of protected areas (Alfaro, pers. comm., 1986). 
The Fundaci6n Neotr6pica, is also involved in the 
Natural Heritage Programme, besides playing a broader 
role in education about protected areas. INBio, 
established in 1988, promotes environmental education 
and training of field personnel to work in protected areas 
(Bradley et al., 1990). It also manages conservation 
databases. 

Funding for protected areas is through state budgets, and 
funds generated by NGOs and foreign governments. 
Financial support from the government was greatest 
during the 1970s, but funds were reduced during the 
1980s (Ugalde, 1992). In 1987 a debtfomature swap was 
established, by which the protected area system received 
significant financial support in the form of a bilateral 
government cooperation, and ft'om international NGOs 
(Ugalde, 1992). Between 1987 and 1990 the state funds 
assigned to the SPN and the DGF, were US$ 27 million, 
with a further US$ 19 million from private foundations 
(Ugalde, 1992). 

Problems in protected area management arise from a 
lack of coordination between the responsible institutes, 
and the lack of participation of local communities, 
combined with the absence of a clear legislative 
framework for implementing conservation objectives 
(MIRENEM,' 1990). The existence of two principal 
administrative entities in charge of protected areas has 
resulted in an unnecessary duplication of effort (Ugalde, 
1992). Also, a lack of funding results in inadequate 
staffing levels and inadequate training of personnel 
(MIRENEM, 1990). 

There are noticeable differences in the effectiveness 
of protected area management under the various 
administrative authorities. Only national parks and 
biological reserves may be considered adequately 
protected and receiving effective management 
(Ugalde, 1992). 

The new law proposed by MIRENEM in 1991 provides 
for the reorganisation of protected area administration. 
The SPN would be changed to the National Service for 
Conservation Areas (Servicio Nacional de Areas de 
Conservaci6n) and vested with the responsibility for the 
management, planning and development of the new 
national system of protected areas (MIRENEM, 1991a; 
Ugalde, 1992). Management agreements may be 
established with NGOs. Local participation would be 
encouraged through the creation the advisory National 
Council on Conservation Areas (Consejo Nacional de 
Areas de Conservaci6n) and numerous Regional 
Councils (Consejos Regionales), which incorporate 
local people and enable group decisions to be taken 
(MIRENEM, 1991a). Significant developments in 
tourism in protected areas have also taken place 
(Ugalde, 1992). 



129 



Protected Areas of the World 



Systems Reviews Costa Rica lies between two 

oceans, with a mountainous topography shaped by 
volcanic activity and an altitudinal range fom sea level 
to 3,819m (MIRENEM, 1990). The entire country is 
tropical with an mean annual rainfall of 3300 mm 
(Bradley et al., 1990). The interrelationship of 
geographical, physical and climatic features within a 
relatively small area has given rise to a large variety of 
environments and habitats. Studies indicate that over 
half a million species, equivalent to around 7% of the 
world's biodiversity, are found in the country (Bradley 
et al., 1990; Quesada, 1990). FoUowing the Holdridge 
(1967) classification system, 12 Life Zones and eight 
transitional zones have been identified. Two Life Zones, 
tropical moist forest and tropical wet forest cover almost 
50% of the country (Bradley et al., 1990; CCT. 1982; 
Ugalde, 1992). 

There are great differences between the two coastlines. 
The Pacific coastline extends for 1,328 km, is 
characterised by a mixture of beaches, rocks, headlands, 
and peninsulas, and has extensive tracts of mangrove 
forest along the rivers and estuaries running into the 
Pacific Ocean. This coast is physically more diverse than 
the 212km of Caribbean coastUne which consists mainly 
of deltas, canals, alluvial plains and freshwater swamps 
fronted by long barrier beaches (Bradley et al., 1990; 
Quesada, 1990). 



Three mountain ranges run northwest to southeast across 
the country. The Cordillera de Guanacaste in the 
northwest comprises five volcanic massifs reaching an 
altitude of 2,020m. The lowlands extending from the 
foothills of this range to the Caribbean coast cover 
around 20% of the total land area of the country (Bradley 
el al, 1990; Quesada, 1990). Just below the Cordillera 
de Guanacaste lies the Central Cordillera, reaching 
altitudes of 3,432m, and, south of this range, the 
Cordillera de Talamanca extends almost to the 
Caribbean coast Between the Cordillera Central and the 
Cordillera de Talamanca Ues the Central Valley, the 
most densely populated region in the country. Around 
52% of the population lives in the valley, an area that 
accounts for only 3.83% of the total national territory, 
and in which are situated the national capital and three 
provincial capitals (Bradley et al., 1990; Quesada, 
1990). 



The economy is based on agriculture. Indiscriminate 
deforestation for agriculture and timber production has 
left many areas in a fragile situation, particularly the 
heads of water basins and water sources (MIRENEM, 
1990; Bradley et al., 1990). Between 1950 and 1987, 
forest coverage was reduced from 53% to 29%, much of 
which now lies within the network of protected areas. 
However, forest resources in Costa Rica are severely 
threatened by overexploitation, and in 1987 the 
government declared a moratorium on industrial forest 
activities in order to allow forest recuperation 
(MIRENEM, 1990). 



The first effectively managed protected area was 
established in 1963 (Ugalde, 1992). Since then, the 
development of a protected area system has been 
relatively rapid, and Costa Rica has the second greatest 
proportion of territory under protection in Latin 
America. By January 1992, the National System of 
Protected Wildlands (Sistema Nacional de Areas Silvescres 
Protegidas), under the administration of MIRENEM, 
comprised 70 areas covering 1 miUion ha, equal to 21% of 
the total national territory (Ugalde, 1992). 

Around 11% of the total national territory is under 
absolute protection with management categories that 
prohibit the extraction of natural resources. Forest 
reserves and protective zones account for the remaining 
10.2% (Bradley et al., 1990; Quesada, 1990). Indigenous 
reserves cover 6.6% of the country area, giving a total of 
28% of the total land area under protection (MIRENEM, 
1991b). Protected areas incorporate 19 of the 20 Life 
Zones identified in the country (MIRENEM, 1991b; 
Ugalde, 1992). Estimates of the proportion of forested 
land within the protected area system vary from 65% 
(MIRENEM, 1990) to 86% (Ugalde, 1992). 

The effectiveness of protected areas is limited by the 
lack of strategic planning, and the extent of 
privately-owned land (MIRENEM, 1990). Land 
tenure has become an increasingly serious problem in 
the past few decades. National parks continue to contain 
private property within their boundaries (MIRENEM, 
1991a; Ugalde, 1992). Since the mid-1960s a 
combination of population growth and private land 
ownership has exacerbated land shortage, and 
agricultural expansion and migration into protected 
areas has had a severe impact (Bradley et al., 1990; 
MIRENEM, 1991a). This migration process is 
encouraged indirectly by the Agrarian Development 
Instibite (Instituto de DesarroUo Agrario) (IDA), which 
recognises squatters' rights, and provides for 
compensation for eviction (Bradley et al., 1990). 

The majority of protected areas are not of sufficient 
size to fulfil their conservation objectives, and they 
are all inadequately developed, from basic protection 
activities to facilities for personnel and visitors 
(MIRENEM, 1990; Ugalde, 1992). Protected areas are 
assigned a low level of national importance. Natural 
resources are not considered part of the national 
capital, and are not included in economic analyses, 
resulting in a lack of information about their economic 
potential and the extent of deterioration they have 
suffered so far (Ugalde, 1992). As the areas are not 
utilised to their full economic potential, there is a 
significant lack of benefits for local populations and 
conflicts often arise (Ugalde, 1992). As a combined 
result of these factors, protected areas have become 
biogeographically isolated (MIRENEM, 1990; 
Ugalde, 1992). 

In an attempt to halt this isolation process, and to better 
coordinate conservation activities, MIRENEM has 
proposed a restructuring of the entire protected area 



130 



Costa Rica 



system: the National System of Conservation Areas 
(Sistema Nacional de Areas de Conservaci6n) (SINAC) 
(MIRENEM, 1991a). This involves regrouping 
protected areas into conservation areas (areas de 
conservaci6n) as the basic management unit, which will 
integrate local communities to a greater extent (Bradley 
etai, 1990; Ugalde, 1992). A conservation area consists 
of a grouping of protected wildlands, contiguous or close 
to each other, which are divided for managerial purposes 
into zones according to their ecological characteristics 
and the presence of neighbouring communities (Bradley 
et al., 1990; Ugalde, 1992). The areas have one or more 
strictly protected core zone owned by the state, 
surrounded by zones that allow sustainable development 
and use of natiutd resources, under private ownership, 
and is similar to the concept of the biosphere reserve 
(Bradley et al, 1990; Ugalde, 1992). 

So far, eight conservation areas have been identified, 
each comprising a collection of national parks, other 
protected areas, forest reserves, and in some cases 
indigenous reserves. A further four satellite areas, that 
owing to their geographic isolation cannot form part of 
a conservation area, are also to be included in SINAC 
(Bradley et al., 1990; MIRENEM, 1991a). The system 
is to be implemented and administered by the National 
Service for Conservation Areas, currently the SPN, with 
the collaboration of NGOs and local communities 
(MIRENEM, 1991a; Ugalde, 1992). SINAC was created 
by four governmental institutions involved in protected 
area management (the DGF, SPN, DVS, and CONAI), 
and is more a result of independent work by the these 
institutions and conservationists than of formal longterm 
planning (MIRENEM, 1991a). 

The consolidation of the system into conservation areas 
will require the creation of corridors and protection of 
additional small areas not included in the system at 
present. However, around 7% of the land included in 
SINAC is still privatelyowned and must be purchased 
(MIRENEM, 1991b). Consolidation is intended to take 
place during the five years after the 1991 proposal for 
the new law. Details on the degree of implementation are 
not available. 

Addresses 

Servicio de Parques Nacionales, (SPN), Ministerio de 
Recursos Naturales, Energia y Minas (MIRENEM), 
Aptdo 101041000,SANJOSE (Tel: 335673/336213; 
FAX: 338840) 

Instituto Nacional de Biodiversidad (INBio), Aptdo 
3100, Santo Domingo de HEREDIA (Tel: 364269; 
FAX: 362816) 

Centro de Ciencias Tropicales (CCT), Aptdo 83870, 
1000 SAN JOSE (Tel: 252649; FAX: 534963). 

Fundaci6n de Parques Nacionales (FPN), Programa de 
Patrimonio Natural de Costa Rica (PPN), Aptdo 
10094, SAN JOSE (Tel: 229260; FAX: 236963) 

Fundaci6n Neotr6pica, Programa de Patrimonio Natural 
(PPN), Aptdo 2361002, SAN JOSE 



Organization for Tropical Studies (OTS), Aptdo 6762050, 
SAN PEDRO (TeL 4066%; FAX: 406783). 

References 

Boza, M.A. (1978). Los Parques Nacionales de Costa 
Rica. Incafo, Madrid. 224 pp. 

Boza, M.A. and Mendoza, R. (1981). The National 
Parks of Costa Rica. Incafo, Madrid. 

Bradley, T., McCaffrey, D., Rodriguez, F., Losilla, M. 
(1990). Costa Rica natural resource policy 
inventory. USAIDIROCAP RENARM project. 
Volume II, The Inventory, October 1990, Technical 
Report No. 112. Agricultural Policy Analysis 
Project, Phase II (APAP II), under contract to the 
Agency for International Development (AID), 
Maryland, USA. 151pp. 

CCT (1982). Areas potenciales para unidades de 
conservacidn de recursos naturales en Costa Rica. 
Informe preparado para el Ministerio de la 
Presidencia por el Centro Cientifico Tropical (CCT), 
San Jos6. 306 pp. 

FAO (n.d.). La red latinoamericana de cooperaci6n 
t6cnica en parques nacionales, otras areas protegidas, 
flora y fauna silvestres. Oficina regional de la 
FAO para Amdrica Latina y el Caribe, Santiago, 
Chile. 8 pp. 

FPN (1985). Areas de Manejo en Costa Rica. Programa 
patrimonio natural de Costa Rica. Fundaci6n de 
Parques Nacionales. 

Herrera, J.C.G. (1984). Planificacidn estratigica del 
Subsistema de Parques Nacionales y Reservas 
equivalentes de Costa Rica, y una metodologla para 
redefinicidn de Ibnites de dreas protegidas. MagistCT 
Scientiae. Centro AgrcMi(inico Trc^ical de Investigacion 
y Enseflanza (CATE), Turrialba. 

Holdridge, L.R. (1967). Life zone ecology; revised 
edition. Tropical Science Centre, San Jos6. 206 pp. 
(Unseen) 

MIRENEM (1990). Plan de accidnforestalpara CostaRica; 
documenio base. Ministerio de Recursos Naturales, 
EnCTgia y Minas (MIRENEM), con la colaboraci6n del 
gobiemo del Reino de los Paises Bajos, San Jos6. 84 pp. 

MIRENEM (1991a). Consolidation of the national system of 
conservation areas. Ministry of Natural Resources, 
EnCTgy and Mines (MIRENEM), Rqxiblic of Costa 
Rica. A proposal submitted by the Costa Rican 
government to the Worid Bank's consultative group, 
Paris, Fiance, 1991. 71 pp. 

MIRENEM (1991b). National Smdy of Biodiversity; costs, 
benefits and needs for financing the conservation of 
biological diversity in Costa Rica. Executive Summary. 
Ministry of Natural Resources, Energy and Mines 
(MIRENEM), Government of Costa Rica, January 
1991). 21 pp. 

Quesada, CA. (1990). Estrategia de conservacidn para el 
desarrollo sostenible de Costa Rica. Ministerio de 
Recursos Naturales, Energia y Minas (MIRENEM). 
San Jos6. 162 pp. 

Rodriguez, J.M. (1983). Costa Rica. Informe de la Mesa 
redonda sobre Parques Nacionales, offas ireas 



131 



Protected Areas of the World 

protegidas, flora y fauna silvestres. FAO, Santiago Regulations for National Parks Management - Costa 

deChile, 8-10 Junio 1983. Pp. 21-25. Rica. Report presented to the Ministerio de 

SPN (1979). Breve reseila hist6rica sobre la Planeaci6n Nacional de Costa Rica. 

conservacidn y el programa de parques nacionales en Ugalde, A. (1992). Draft country rqxjt on Costa Rica. 4 pp. 

Costa Rica. Servicio de Parques Nacionales (SPN), USAID (1982). Costa Rica: Country Environmental 

Ministeriode AgriculturayGanaderia. 12 pp. Profile. Field Study. Tropical Science Centre, 

Thelen, K.D. and Dalfelt, A. (1975) Systems and SanJos6. 
Policies for Wildland Management and Policies and 



132 



Costa Rica 



ANNEX 

Definitions of protected area designations, as legislated, 

together with authorities responsible for their administration 



Title (English title): Reforma a la Ley 
Forestal (Reform of the Forestry Law), 

No. 7174 

Date: 28 June 1990 

Brief description: Replaces the Forestry Law 
(Ley Forestal) No. 4465 of 1969 and its subsequent 
modifications. Gives details of the structure, function 
and objective of the General Forestry Directorate 
(Direcci6n General Forestal) and provides for the 
creation of the National Forestry Council (Conesjo 
Forestal Nacional) as a high level organization to 
assess the activities of the Ministry of Natural 
Resources, Energy and Mines (Ministerio de 
Recursos Naturales, Energi'a y Minas) (MIRENEM) 
with respect to the protection and utilization of forest 
resources. The national forest estate is defined and 
regulations for forest resource use given. Definitions 
for five management categories of protected area and 
the prerequisites for their establishment are also 
given. These areas form part of the national forest 
estate. 

Administrative authority: The Direcci6n 

General Forestal (General Forestry Directorate) 
(DGF) is responsible for managing forest reserves; 
protective zones and wildlife refuges. The National 
Parks Service (Servicio de Parques Nacionales) 
(SPN) is responsible for managing national parks and 
biological reserves. Both institutes are within the 
Ministry of Natural Resources, Energy and Mines 
(Ministerio de Recursos Naturales, Energi'a y Minas) 
(MIRENEM). 

Designations: 

Parque Nacional (National Park) An area 
containing one or more ecosystems that have not 
been transformed by human activity, or to a minimal 
extent, in which floral or faunal species, 
geomorphological formations, and habitats are of 
special scientific or recreational interest, or which 
contain landscape of outstanding national scenic 
beauty. 

The area is set aside for the protection and 
conservation of natural beauty, flora and fauna of 



national importance with the aim of allowing pubUc 
assess and enjoyment under supervision and subject 
to regulation. 

It is the responsibility of the highest authority in the 
country to take adequate measures to remove and 
prevent, as soon as possible, exploitation or 
occupation within the entire area to affect the 
protection of the species or structures for which the 
area was estabUshed. 

Exploitation of natural resources is prohibited. 

Reserva Bioldgica (Biological Reserve) An area 
comprising forest and forested land whose principle 
use is the conservation, study and research of wildlife 
and the habitats in which it lives. 

Exploitation of naUiral resources is prohibited. 

Zona Protectora (Protective Zone) An area 
comprised of forest and land suitable for forests, in 
which the principle objective is die protection of soil, 
the regulation of water resources and the 
conservation of the environment and water basins. 

Exploitaaon of natural resources is permitted only 
with prior authorization from the DGF and is subject 
to regulations given in the legislation. 

Reserva Forestal (Forest Reserve) An area 
comprising forest whose primary function is the 
production of timber, and by those forested lands 
which are naUirally particularly suitable for these 



Exploitation of natural resources is permitted only 
with prior authorization from the DGF and is subject 
to regulations given in the legislation. 

Refugio Nacional de Vida Silvestre (National 
Wildlife Refuge) An area comprising forest and 
land whose primary function is the protection, 
conservation, augmentation and management of 
floral and faunal species. 

Exploitation of natural resources is permitted only 
with prior authorization from the DGF and is subject 
to regulations given in the legislation. 



133 



Protected Areas of the World 



SUMMARY OF PROTECTED AREAS 



Map National/international designations 
ref. Name of area 



lUCN management Area 

category (ha) 



Year 
notifled 





National Parks 


1 


Arenal 


2 


Ballena 


3 


Barra Honda 


4 


Braulio Carrillo 


5 


Cahuita 


6 


Chirrip6 


7 


Corcovado 


8 


Guanacaste 


9 


Isla del Coco 


10 


La Amistad (Talamanca) 


11 


Palo Verde 


12 


Rinc6n de la Vieja 


13 


Santa Rosa 


14 


Tortuguero 


15 


Volcan Irazu 


16 


Volcdn Pods 




Biological Reserves 


17 


Cabo Blanco 


18 


Carara 


19 


Hitoy-Cerere 


20 


Isla del Caflo 


21 


Islas Guayabo y Negritos 


22 


Lomas Barbudal 




Faunal Refuges 


23 


Barra del Colorado 


24 


Cafio Negro 


25 


Gandoca y Manzanillo 


26 


Golfito 


27 


Isla Bolanos 


28 


Tapanti 




Protection Zones 


29 


Acuiferos de Guicimo y Pocosi 


30 


Arenal 


31 


Caraigres 


32 


Cerros de Escazii 


33 


Cerros de Turrubares 


34 


Cerros de la Carpintera 


35 


Cuencas del Rio Tuis 


36 


El Rodeo 


37 


Juan Castro Blanco 


38 


La Cangreja 


39 


La Selva 


40 


LasTablas 


41 


Miravelles 


42 


Rio Grande 


43 


Rio Pacuare 


44 


Rio Sombrero - Rio Navarro 


45 


Rio Tivives 


46 


San Ram6n 


47 


Tenorio 


48 


Tortuguero 



n 


2,000 


1991 


rv 


4,200 


1990 


V 


2,295 


1974 


n 


44,099 


1978 


V 


1,067 


1970 


n 


50,150 


1975 


n 


54,568 


1975 


n 


32,512 


1991 


n 


2,400 


1978 


n 


193,929 


1982 


n 


13,228 


1982 


n 


14,083 


1973 


n 


37,217 


1971 


n 


18,946 


1975 


V 


2,309 


1955 


I 


15,600 


1971 


I 


1,172 


1963 


I 


4,700 


1978 


I 


9,154 


1978 


IV 


200 


1978 


I 


143 


1973 


rv 


2.279 


1986 


IV 


98,000 


1985 


IV 


9,969 


1983 


IV 


9,449 


1985 


rv 


1,350 


1985 


IV 


100 


1981 


rv 


6,080 


1982 


vni 


4,270 


1987 


vm 


18,325 


1991 


vni 


4,000 


1976 


vni 


7,060 


1976 


vm 


2,340 


1983 


vm 


2,000 


1976 


vm 


4,095 


1986 


vm 


2,222 


1976 


vm 


14,258 


1968 


vm 


1,937 


1984 


vm 


2,815 


1982 


vm 


19,602 


1981 


vm 


11,670 


1991 


vm 


1,500 


1976 


vm 


13,060 


1991 


vm 


6,440 


1984 


vm 


2,368 


1986 


vm 


7,800 


1991 


vm 


17,650 


1991 


vm 


13,000 


1990 



134 











Costa Rica 


Map 


National/international designations 


lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 


notiHed 




Forest Reserves 








49 


Cordillera Volcdnica Central 


vni 


61,542 


1975 


50 


Golfo Dulce 


vm 


67,287 


1978 


51 


Grecia 


vra 


2,000 


1973 


52 


Los Santos 


vni 


62,000 


1975 


53 


Manglares 


vra 


35,000 


1977 


54 


Rio Macho 


vra 


69,604 


1964 


55 


Volc^ Arenal 
Anthropological Reserves 


vra 


5,256 


1969 


56 


Abrojos 


vn 


1,480 


1978 


57 


Alto Chirrip6 


vn 


77,973 


1976 


58 


Alto Pacuare 


vn 


1,336 




59 


Awari 


vn 


1,332 




60 


Bajo ChirrifxS 


vn 


18,783 


1976 


61 


Barbilla 


vn 


2,077 


1982 


62 


Boruca 


vn 


12,470 


1956 


63 


Boruca-Terraba 


vn 


31,983 


1957 


64 


Cabagra 


vn 


27,860 


1956 


65 


China Kicha 


vn 


2,459 




66 


Chirrip6 


vn 


75,824 


1976 


67 


Cocles 


vn 


3,538 




68 


Conte Burica 


vn 


11,910 


1977 


69 


Corina 


vn 


1,555 




70 


Coto Brus 


vn 


7,500 


1976 


71 


Guatuso 


vn 


2,743 


1976 


72 


La Estrella 


vn 


13,616 




73 


Matambii 


vn 


1,710 


1976 


74 


Nimari Bukiri 


vn 


7,439 




75 


Osa 


vn 


1,700 


1985 


76 


Rey Curr6 


vn 


10,620 


1985 


77 


Salitre 


vn 


11,700 


1956 


78 


Sibuju Norte 


vn 


2,195 




79 


Talamanca - Bribri 


vn 


43,690 


1976 


80 


Talamanca - Cab&ar 


vn 


22,729 


1976 


81 


Talamanca 


vn 


62,253 


1976 


82 


Tayni 


vn 


13,616 


1976 


83 


Telire 


vn 


16,260 


1976 


84 


T6rraba 


vn 


9,350 


1956 


85 


Ujarras Salitre-Cabagra 


vn 


56,561 


1957 


86 


UjarrSz 


vn 


19,040 


1956 


87 


Z^at5n 


vn 


2,855 


1981 




Biosphere Reserves 










Reserva de la Biosfera de la Amistad 


IX 


584,592 


1982 




Cordillera Volcinica Central 


IX 


144,363 


1988 




Ramsar Wetlands 










CiAo Negro 


R 


19,800 


1992 




Palo Verde 


R 


9,969 


1992 



World Heritage Sius 

Cordillera de TalamancaLa Amistad 



1977 



135 



ProtectedAreasofthe World 




Protected Areas of Costa Rica 



136 



EL SALVADOR 



Area 20,935 sq. km 

Population 5,252,000(1990) 
Natural increase 2.47% per annum 

Economic Indicators 

GDP: No information 

GNP: US$ 1,070 per capita (1989) 

Policy and Legislation There are currently no 

official national policies regarding the utilisation and 
protection of natural resources and the environment in 
El Salvador. A national forestry plan and a conservation 
policy are required (Niiflez et al, 1990). 

The main legislation concerning forest resources is the 
1973 Forestry Law (Ley Forestal), Decree No. 268, 
although this is now outdated in many respects (Niiflez 
etal.,\ 990). The object of the Forestry Law is to regulate 
the conservation, rational use and management of forest 
resources on a sustainable basis to ensure the 
continuation of forest industries. Reforestation, the 
control of erosion and the establishment of national 
forests and parks are all in the national interest. Provision 
is made for the creation of the Forestry and Wildlife 
Service (Servicio Forestal y de Fauna), known simply as 
the Forestry Service (Servicio Forestal), within the 
Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock (Ministerio de 
Agricultura y Ganaderia) (MAG), to be responsible for 
all forest resources and implementation of forestry 
legislation. 

The Forestry Law also provides for the creation of 
various categories of protected areas: protective zone 
(zona protectora), forest reserve (reserva forestal), 
national park (parque nacional) and equivalent reserves 
(reserva equivalente), which may be established by 
decree. Private land may be expropriated for the creation 
of protected areas where necessary. These areas are to 
be administered by the Forestry Service, and the 
exploitation of forest resources within them is strictiy 
regulated. However, detailed definitions of the different 
categories and details of the regulations governing tiieir 
management are not given and no regulation to the 
Forestry Law has been formulated (Nunez et al., 1990). 

Ministerial Decree No. 236 of April 1981 raised the 
status of the National Parks and Wildlife Section 
(Secci6n de Parques Nacionales y Vida Silvestre) from 
a department within the Forestry Service to that of a 
service itself, creating die first institute sjjecifically 
responsible for protected area management. All 
mandates included in the Forestry Law regarding 
national parks and wildlife management are transferred 
to the National Parks and Wildlife Service (Servicio de 
Parques Nacionales y Vida Silvestre). 

Although the 1981 Basic Land Reform Law (Ley B^sica 
de Reforma Agraria) does make provision for the 



protection of natural areas (Serrano, 1992), there is no 
comprehensive law providing regulations for the 
establishment and management of national parks and 
equivalent reserves. Such a law was drafted in 1980 but 
has never reached the appropriate authority, and there 
are no current high level governmental proposals to 
revise legislation (Alvarez, 1992; Nunez et al., 1990). 
Protected areas are created by individual decrees. 
However, only two natural areas currenUy have specific 
legislation providing for their declaration as national 
parks: Decree 53 (1987) established Montecristo 
National Park, a cloud forest along the joint border with 
Honduras and Guatemala; and Decree 20 (1989) 
established El Imposible National Park near the Pacific 
coast in western El Salvador. 

There are five other protected natural areas which, 
although lacking specific individual decrees, have been 
acquired by the government through agrarian reform, 
and their ownership has been transferred to the Natural 
Resources Centre (Centro de Recursos Naturales) 
(CENREN) which is the Ministry of Agriculture and 
Livestock (Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganaderia) 
(MAG) unit within which is found the National Paries 
and Wildlife Service. In addition, approximately 40 
small areas totalling 13,(X)0ha were reserved in the name 
of CENREN 'as part of the land reform process which 
began in 1980, but lack both individual decrees and 
formal transfer of land ownership to CENREN. 

International Activities El Salvador signed the 
Convention on Nature Protection and Wildlife 
Preservation in the Western Hemisphere (Convencion 
sobre la Protecci6n de la Flora, de la Fauna y de las 
Bellezas Esc^nicas Naturales de los Raises de America) 
(Western Hemisphere Convention) in 1940 and ratified 
it later. It participates actively in the Central American 
Commission on Environment and Development 
(Comisi6n Centroamericana del Ambiente y 
Desarrollo). 

El Salvador has not ratified the Convention Concerning 
the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural 
Heritage (World Heritage Convention) nor the 
Convention on Wetlands of International Importance 
especially as Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar Convention), 
neither does it participate in the Unesco Man and the 
Biosphere Programme, although several areas have been 
proposed (Benitez et al., 1992). El Salvador participates 
in the FAO Tropical Forestry Action Plan, but no funds 
for work are yet available (J.M. Alvarez, pers. comm., 
1992). 

El Salvador, through the National Parks and Wildlife 
Service, participates in the FAO Latin American 
Network (Red Latinoamericanade Cooperaci6n Tecnica 
en Parques Nacionales, Otras Areas Protegidas, Flora y 
Fauna Silvestres). This programme aims to coordinate 



137 



Protected Areas of the World 



the activities of participating countries, to assist in the 
implementation and functioning of a coherent and 
effective national system of protected areas in each 
country (FAO, n.d.). 

It is hoped that projects can soon get underway for joint 
management initiatives between El Salvador, Honduras 
and Nicaragua for the shared mangrove estuaries and 
coastal zone of the Gulf of Fonseca (J. Barborak pers. 
comm., 1992). In 1987 the governments of El Salvador, 
Honduras and Guatemala signed an agreement to create 
a trinational cloud forest biosphere reserve El Trifinio or 
Brotherhood Biosphere Reserve (Reserva de la Bi6sfera 
La Fratemidad) in the mountainous region where the 
three nations meet Formal efforts are also under way to 
elaborate a cooperative management plan for the 
reserve, which would include Montecristo National 
Park, and to obtain official recognition as an 
international biosphere reserve (Mardones, 1988; 
Ugalde and Godoy, 1992). 

El Salvador has received very limited international 
financial and technical assistance for its conservation 
programmes during the past decade. The major 
Salvadorian Environment Programme (Programa del 
Medio Ambiente Salvadorefio) (PROMESA), which is 
to be carried out by US-AID and includes support for 
coastal parks and reserves, is currendy in the design 
phase (J.M. Alvarez, pers. comm. 1992). An increase in 
international aid is expected to come from the current 
biosphere reserves and trinational park projects (Bem'tez 
et al., 1992). The Nature Conservancy has included 
El Imposible National Park in their "Parks in Peril 
Program", and will start work on this national park with 
Eco Active 20-30 in the near future. The consortium 
Paseo Pantera (Wildlife Conservation International and 
Caribbean Conservation Corporation) is working with 
Eco Active 20-30 and AMAR on a proposal for work in 
El Imposible National Park and Barra de Santiago 
Wildlife Refuge and the areas in between for submission 
to US-AID (J.M. Alvarez, pers. comm. 1992). 

Administration and Management The first 

protected area was established for recreational purposes 
on privately-owned land that was donated to the 
Salvadorean Institute of Tourism (Institute Salvadorefio 
de Turismo) (ISTU). Therefore, the ISTU was the first 
institute with managerial responsibilities of this nature 
(Alvarez, 1992; Niiflez et al., 1990). 

Following the 1973 legislation, natural resources were 
the responsibility of the Forestry Service under the 
Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock (MAG). In 1974 
a unit was created within the Forestry Service to manage 
protected areas, which became known as the National 
Parks and Wildlife Unit (Unidad de Parques Nacionales 
y Vida Silvestre) (Alvarez, 1992). The new unit 
conducted inventories, identified areas throughout the 
country for protection and undertook various activities 
regarding wildlife management. It comprised two 
sections: National Parks and Equivalent Reserves (Secci6n 
de Parques Nacionales y Reservas Equivalentes), and 



Wildlife (Secci6n de Vida Silvestre). In 1981, the status 
of the unit was formally raised to that of a service 
(Alvarez, 1992). 

Protected areas are the responsibility of the National 
Parks and Wildlife Service (Servicio de Parques 
Nacionales y Vida Silvestre) (SPNVS), which is itself 
directly dependent on the Natural Resource Centre 
(Centre de Recurses Naturales) (CENREN) within the 
MAG. It comprises two specific departments: the 
Natural Areas Department (Departamento de Areas 
Naturales) in charge of managing natural ecosystems; 
and the Wildlife Department (Departamento de Vida 
Silvestre), responsible for a wide variety of activities 
including the study, protection and management of all 
native faunal species (Alvarez, 1992; Niifiez et al., 
1990). 

Towards the end of the 1970s, the SPNVS was managing 
five areas but its activities were severely limited by the 
inability to buy additional land for restoration and 
protection. The agrarian reform of 1981-1982 significanUy 
changed this situation by expropriating over half of the 
potential protection forest in EI Salvador in the first 
phase of the reformation. This increased both the size of 
the areas under protection and the effectiveness of their 
administration (Alvarez, 1992; Niifiez et al., 1990). Five 
other protected natural areas, although lacking specific 
individual decrees, have been acquired by the 
government through agrarian reform, and their 
ownership has been transferred to CENREN (Bem'tez et 
al., 1992). A large number of other small areas were 
identified at the same time for protection but there are no 
plans or budgets available for their management 
(Alvarez, 1992). 

In addition to the area managed by the SPNVS, the 
Salvadorean Institute of Tourism (ISTU) manages two 
small reserves, Deininger National Park and Cerro Verde 
National Park (Bem'tez et al., 1992). Non-governmental 
organisations (NGOs) may also play an important part 
in protected area management. There are over 20 
conservation-directed NGOs. Several are involved in 
promoting the creation and management of a number of 
small parks, and in developing environmental education 
and buffer zone management around existing protected 
areas (Benitez et al., 1992). In 1991, an agreement was 
signed between the MAG and an NGO, the Active 20-30 
Salvadorean Ecological Foundation (Fundacidn 
Ecol6gica Salvadorefia Activo 20-30), known as Eco 
Activo 20-30 or FES A, for die cooperative management 
of El Imposible National Park (Alvarez, 1992; Benitez 
et al., 1992). Eco Activo 20-30 is concentrating on 
raising money to purchase land for the consolidation of 
this national park. The Foundation was created in 1990 
and is the only NGO involved in protected area 
management (J.M. Alvarez, pers. comm. 1992). The 
SPNVS continues to manage and administer the park, 
but it receives support from Eco Activo 20-30. This is 
the first agreement of its kind between a governmental 
authority and an NGO (Alvarez, 1992). Another NGO, 



138 



El Salvador 



Friends of Trees (Amigos del Arbol) (AMAR), assists in 
protection of Barra de Santiago Wildlife Refuge. 

Problems in protected area management stem from the 
lack of appropriate legislation, which impedes the 
implementation of an effective administrative 
infrastructure (Alvarez, 1992; Nufiez et al., 1990). 
Official regulations are not specified for the 
management of national parks and equivalent reserves, 
and there are no definitions or regulations stated in the 
legislation to provide specific management guideUnes 
(Nufiez et al., 1990). The effectiveness of the SPNVS 
has also been impeded by the division of the country into 
four administrative regions by CENREN (Alvarez, 1992; 
Nufiez et al., 1990). Following this regionahsation, funding 
for the SPNVS at the operational level such as wardens, 
was reduced. The SPNVS also lost direct authority over 
field personnel which become dependent on the 
respective regional divisions of CENREN (Alvarez, 
1992; Nufiez et al., 1990). This has made it increasingly 
difficult for the government to administer 
widely-dispersed, small areas, and the return of 
centralised administrative authority to the SPNVS has 
been suggested (Nufiez et al, 1990). 

Systems Reviews El Salvador is the smallest mainland 
nation in the Western Hemisphere (Benitez et al, 1992). 
The high population density (300 people per sq. km) has 
resulted in an advanced state of deforestation, and 
reforestation projects are very limited. Less than 12% of 
the country is forested, and only 3% remains in its natural 
state (Benitez et al, 1992; Nufiez et al, 1990; SPNVS, 
1987). Excessive exploitation of natural resources has 
taken place since the colonial era, and, as a result, around 
80% of the natural vegetation has been destroyed, and 
around 77% of the country has been seriously affected 
by soil erosion (Anon., n.d.; SPNVS, 1987). 

Very little research has been carried out on biodiversity, 
and there are no inventories of national wildlife or plant 
species (Niifiez et al, 1990). Owing to its small size and 
more limited altitudinal and climatic variability than 
neighbouring nations, and the fact that it only adjoins one 
ocean. El Salvador has the lowest biodiversity in the 
Central American region (Benitez etal.,1 992). Altitudes 
do not exceed 2,730m, and the most distinctive 
topographic characteristic of the country is the rugged 
and broken landscape resulting from volcanic activities 
(Anon., n.d.). A thin coastal plain, interrupted by 
mountains and deep fissures, runs parallel to the Pacific 
Ocean. The volcanic soils of the coastal plain are rich, 
and commercial agriculture is extensive in the region. 

In contrast, the soils of the coastal mountains just inland 
from the plain are poor, and this region has suffered 
severe erosion and environmental degradation. The 
northern region of the country, where the highest 
mountains are located on the border with Honduras, is 
also characterised by extensive deforestation and soil 
erosion (Anon., n.d.). Following the Holdridge (1977) 
classification system of natural habitats, six life zones 
are found within the country. 



The conservation of natural areas began with the 
donation to the Salvadorean Institute of Tourism (ISTU) 
in 1972 of 704ha of privately-owned land covered with 
secondary forest, (Alvarez, 1992). Altiiough the primary 
objective of the area was recreational, the written 
agreement with ISTU specified that the natural 
conditions of the area were not to be altered. Towards 
the end of the 1970s, five protected areas were under the 
administration of the Ministry of Agriculture and 
Livestock. 

International tourism has been quite limited for the past 
decade due to civil strife. Owing to its degraded habitats 
and small size, it is the Central American nation least 
likely to become a major international ecotourism 
destination in coming years (Benitez el al, 1992). 

Lack of public awareness is a considerable problem for 
conservation. Hunting and fishing are not regulated, as 
a result of the lack of national policy and legislation 
(Nufiez et al, 1990). Owing to the small size of 
remaining natural habitats and the severe pressure on 
them by neighbouring communities, many native plant 
and animal species have become extinct over the past 
few decades. Particularly noticeable is the disappearance 
of species that require large areas of pristine habitat, or 
are susceptible to intense hunting pressure, such as 
jaguar, harpy eagle, and scarlet macaw (Benitez et al, 
1992). 

The establishment of protected areas is not taking place 
fast enough to offset the continuous destruction of the 
natural environment. The main limiting factors are the 
lack of fmancial resources and governmental support. 
The majority of the areas identified for conservation 
purposes are without any form of protection, and only 
four have park wardens (Nufiez et al, 1990). Of 47 
properties expropriated for nature conservation during 
the 1981 agrarian reform, only one is being administered 
by SPNVS; the rest are affected by agriculmre, hunting, 
firewood gathering and construction of houses (Serrano, 
1992). None has faciUties for recreation or tourism, 
which limits the number of visitors and hence public 
awareness. 

Classification of natural areas is vague, and the scarcity 
of studies on biogeographic regions in the country or 
species present inhibits the identification of priority 
areas for protection (Nufiez et al, 1990). Because of 
widespread civil strife during the past decade, combined 
with the small size and relative lack of international 
importance of most of its protected areas. El Salvador 
has received very little international financial and 
technical assistance for its conservation programmes. 
Much of the international support which has arrived in 
recent years has been diverted to the war rather than to 
more profitable activities (Serrano, 1992). A minimum 
of 14,000ha still needs to be bought for administration 
by SPNVS (at a total cost of some US$ 10.5 mUUon) in 
order to produce a representative system of national 
parks (Serrano, 1992). 



139 



Protected Areas of the World 



Fortunately, lUCN and WWF have maintained support 
and, with their assistance, CENREN has been planning 
a coordinated national wildlands system since 1988 
which will soon be completed (Benitez et al., 1992). A 
major new programme for conservation activities 
including park management is now being planned by 
US-AID which includes support for coastal parks and 
reserves. Support from the European Community is 
hoped for through the trinational Trifinio project, and 
from several donors through the Central American 
Tropical Forestry Action Plan for the Gulf of Fonseca 
mangrove project (Benitez et al., 1992). 

Addresses 

Servicio de Parques Nacionales y Vida 
Silvestre, (Director), Canton El Matasano, 
Soyapango, Apartado 226S, SAN SALVADOR 
(Tel: 270484/770622; FAX: 770490) 

Amigos del Arbol (Amar), Calle Los Granados #9, 
Colonia Las Mercedes, SAN SALVADOR 

Fundacidn Ecologica Salvadorefla Activo 20-30 
(Eco-Activo 20-30), 79 Avenida Norte No. 509, 
Colonia Escalon, SAN SALVADOR (Tel: 23-8947 
FAX: 233620) 

References 

Alvarez, J.M. (1992). Apoyo privado al Servicio de 
Parques Nacionales y Vida Silvestre: el Caso del 
Parque Nacional El Imposible. Paper presented at 
IV World Parks Congress, Caracas, Venezuela, 
10-20 Febniary 1992. 13 pp. 

Anon. (n.d.). Perfil ambiental de El Salvador. 
US-AID/EMTESCA. 266 pp. 

Benitez, M. et al. (1987). La conservacidn de las dreas 
naturales y culturales de El Salvador. Informe a la 
II Conferencia Centroamericana de Conservacion 
de Recursos Naturales y Culturales, Guatemala. 
San Salvador. 66 pp. (Unseen) 

Benitez, M., Hasbiin, C.R., Barborak, J. (1992). 
El Salvador - Draft country report 3 pp. 

FAO (n.d.). La red latinoamericana de coop)eraci6n 
t6cnica en parques nacionales, otras Sreas protegidas, 
flora y fauna silvestres. Oficina regional de la FAO 



para America Latina y el Caribe, Santiago, Chile. 
8 pp. 

Holdridge, L.R. (1977). Mapa ecoldgico de El Salvador. 
Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganaderia, Direccion 
General de Recursos Renovables y Programas de las 
Naciones Unidas para el Desarrollo/ FAO, San 
Salvador. 98 pp. (Unseen) 

Mardones, C. (1988). Trifinio: un desafi'o de la 
conservacion para tres parses. Flora y fauna y dreas 
silvestres 3(7). Oficina Regional de la FAO para 
America Latina y el Caribe, Santiago, Chile. 
Pp. 18-22. 

Nufiez, R.D., Serrano, F., Martinez, A.C., Guerra, H. 
(1990). El Salvador Natural Resource Policy 
Inventory. USAIDIROCAP RENARM Project. 
Technical report No. 113, prepared for the US 
Agency for International Development, El Salvador. 
Pp. 76-98. 

Serrano, F. (1992). Los parques nacionales y la reforma 
agraria en El Salvador. Pajier presented at IV World 
Parks Congress, Caracas, Venezuela, 1992. 

SPNVS (1991). Anteproyecto de Ley de Proteccion y 
Manejo de Vida Silvestre. Documento intemo. 
Servicio Nacional de Parques Nacionales y Vida 
SUvestre (SPN). 17 pp. (Unseen). 

SPNVS (1990). Marco melodoldgico y conceptual para 
la evaluacidn de las dreas del sistema nacional de 
dreas naturales protegidas de El Salvador. Servicio 
de Parques Nacionales y Visa Silvestre (SPN), San 
Salvador. 87 pp. (Unseen) 

SPNVS (1987). Elaboracidn del plan y estrategia del 
sistema nacional de dreas silvestres protegidas de El 
Salvador. Servicio de Parques Nacionales y Vida 
Silvestre, Centro de Recursos Naturales, Ministerio 
de Agricultura y Ganaderia, Soyapango. 74 pp. 

SPNVS (1984). Anteproyecto de Ley de Parques 
Nacionales y Reservas Equivalentes. Documento 
intemo. Servicio de Parques Nacionales y Vida 
SUvestre (SPN). 12 pp. (Unseen). 

Ugalde, A. and Godoy, J.C. (1992). Regional Review: 
Central America. Regional reviews. IV World Parks 
Congress, Caracas, Venezuela, 10-21 February 
1992. Pp. 13.3-13.27. 



140 



El Salvador 



ANNEX 

Deflnitions of protected area designations as legislated, 

together with authorities responsible for their administration 



Title : Ley Forestal (Forestry Law), 
Decree No. 268 

Date: 1973 

Brief description: States the regulations 

governing forest use to ensure the conservation, 
improvement and development of forest resources in 
a sustainable manner. Provides for the establishment, 
by decree, of various categories of protected areas, 
but does not give detailed definitions of these nor 
regulations governing their management. 

Administrative authority: The Servicio 

Forestal (Forestry Service) within the Ministry of 
Agriculture (Ministerio de Agricultura) 

Designations: 

Parque Nacional (National Park) An area of 
forested land that, owing to its location, natural 
scenic beauty, flora and fauna of national 
importance, or other circumstances, merits 
protection as a national park. 

It is in the public interest to protect such areas as 
national parks. Public access is permitted under 
authorised official supervision. 

Within the area, forest resources may be exploited 
only by the Forestry Service. 

Reserva Equivalente (Equivalent Reserve) An 
area of forested land protected for scientific and 
recreational purposes, in the public interest 

Public access is permitted under authorised official 
supervision. 



Within the area, forest resources may be exploited 
only by the Forestry Service. 

Zona Protectora (Protective Zone) An extension 
of forested land which is protected for its importance 
in maintaining and regulating water resources, to 
improve the living conditions of the local populations 
in the area and for other suitable reasons such as the 
presence of rivers, streams or lakes 

Natural resources may be exploited in the zone, 
within the regulations estabUshed in the respective 
legislation providing for the creation of the area. 
Specific characteristics of the area must also be taken 
into account. 

Reserva Forestal (Forest Reserve) A forested 
area maintained in its complete state for future 
exploitation 

The area may be mountainous, of low productivity 
owing to infertile or rocky soil, or an area where the 
protection of forest cover is considered essential for 
the following reasons: production of forest products; 
regulation of water resources; development of 
projects ind works involving water resources; for the 
protection of agricultural land to prevent soil erosion; 
and for general use 

The area may compise state-owned or privately-owned 
land. 

The Ministry of Agriculture may at any time, declare 
permanent forest reserves for the supply of forest 
products required by the government, for works or 
public services. 

Source: Original legislation 



SUMMARY OF PROTECTED AREAS 



Map National/international designations 
ref. Name of area 



lUCN Management 
Category 



Area 
(ha) 



Year 
notified 



National Parks 
Cerro Verde 
El Imposible 
Montecristo 

Wildlife Refuges 
Barra de Santiago 
ElJocotal 



IV 
II 

rv 



IV 
IV 



6,500 
5,600 

3,893 



2,200 
1,200 



1981 
1983 
1979 



1983 
1978 



141 



Protected Areas of the World 




Protected Areas of El Salvador 



142 



GUATEMALA 



Area 108,889 sq. km 

Population 9,197,000 (1990) 
Natural increase 2.88% per annum 

Economic Indicators 

GDP: No information 

GNP: US$ 910 per capita (1989) 

Policy and Legislation A commitment to 

preserve the environment is made in the Political 
Constitution of Guatemala (Constitucidn Politica de 
Guatemala) which declares it in the national interest to 
conserve, protect and improve the natural heritage of the 
country. For this purpose, the state shall establish 
inalienable protected areas. The conservation of forest 
resources and reforestation activities are of national 
priority (Detlefsen et al., 1991). 

Guatemala participates in the Tropical Forestiy Action 
Plan (TFAP) of the FAO, an international strategy for 
maximising the contribution of forestry sectors to 
national economic and social development while 
maintaining conservation principles. In 1991, 
Guatemala formulated its Forestry Action Plan (Plan de 
Accion Forestal para Guatemala) (PAFG), to interpret 
the global designs of TFAP to suit specific national 
interests (Detlefsen et al., 1991; Ministerio de 
Agricultura, Ganaderia y Alimentacion, pers. comm., 
199 1). The Office for Formulation of the Forestry Action 
Plan for Guatemala (Oficina de Formulacidn del PAFG) 
was established for this reason and has drawn up the 
basic document which includes several 
recommendations and details of projects to increase the 
effectiveness of the forestry sector in Guatemala 
(Ministerio de Agricultura, Ganaderia y Alimentacidn, 
pers. comm., 1991). The PAFG stresses the importance 
of protecting forest resources and includes the 
conservation of forest ecosystems, reduction of 
deforestation and promotion of reforestation activities 
among its objectives. However, national policies on 
forest conservation, management and recuperation have 
been unclear and inconsistent (Detlefsen et al., 1991). 

The first natural resource legislation was tiie 1921 
Forestry Law (Ley Forestal) (Detiefsen et al., 1991). 
Provision for establishing protected areas was first made 
in the Forestry Law of 1945, but the first protected areas, 
designated as national parks, were not actually created 
until 1955 (Nations era/., 1988). 

Several modifications to the forestry legislation were 
passed subsequentiy, but all previous acts are replaced 
by the 1989 Forestry Law (Ley Forestal) Decree 
No. 7089, currenUy in effect. This law was passed in 
response to the increasing degradation of forests, and 
states die importance of protecting and renovating forest 
resources while improving their administration and 
utilisation. Under provision of die 1989 Forestry Law, 



a new forestry institute, the General Forestiy Directorate 
(Direcci6n General de Bosques) (DIGEBOS) was 
created, replacing former forestry authorities. 
DIGEBOS is responsible for managing and 
administering forest resources in compliance with 
national conservation objectives. All extraction 
concessions must gain the approval of the conservation 
authorities before they may be issued by DIGEBOS. 
However, DIGEBOS often grants concessions without 
consulting conservation authorities such as CONAP 
(J.C. Godoy, pers. comm., 1992) (see Adminstration and 
Management). The 1989 Forestry Law prohibits the 
destruction of rare or protected tree species, and the 
extraction of forest resources from within protected 
areas, except where specifically authorised, and 
penalties are given. Resource guards (guardarecursos) 
ensure compliance with forestry regulations. 
Regulations to the 1989 Forestiy Law were passed in 
1990, but further details are not available. 

In the past, policies on the trade and development of 
wildlife resources have not been conducive to their 
protection (Detiefsen et al., 1991). However, a major 
step in wildlife protection was taken in 1989 with the 
Forestry Law and new protected area legislation (see 
below). Both these laws comprise a significant policy 
of regulation of forest and wildlife resources 
(Detiefsen et al., 1991). 

The first organisation specifically responsible for 
environmental issues, the National Environment 
Commission (Comision Nacional del Medio 
Ambiente) (CON AM A), was created under provision 
of Decree No. 6886 Law for the Protection and 
Improvement of the Environment (Ley de Protecci6n y 
Mejoramiento del Medio Ambiente), 1986. The law 
attempts to reduce pollution, and restrictions are placed 
on the construction of buildings for industrial or otiier 
purposes. Provision is made for the establishment of 
conservation units and die government is to create an 
unified national system of protected areas. 
Environmental impact studies for industiial projects 
become obligatory, though these are rarely carried out in 
practice (J.C. Godoy, pers. comm., 1992). CONAMA is 
responsible for assessing and coordinating 
environmental activities throughout die country. 

A significant step towards increasing the number and 
effectiveness of conservation units was the passing of 
Decree No. 4-89, the Law of Protected Areas (Ley de 
Areas Protegidas), in 1989. Under fffovision of diis 
decree, an extensive national system of conservation 
units in the country was created, the Guatemalan System 
of Protected Areas (Sistema Guatemalteco de Areas 
Protegidas) (SIGAP). All existing areas previously 
managed as protected areas but lacking legal notification 
were legaUsed and incorporated into SIGAP, togetiier 
wiUi those areas already legally established. A total of 



143 



Protected Areas of the World 



44 new sites was declared under special protection 
(proteccidn especial), to be designated appropriate 
management categories upon their delimitation, and 
incorporated into SIGAP. However, by 1992, none of 
these 44 sites had been legally declared or incorporated 
into SIGAP, and none managed. The Law of 
Protected Areas names six different management 
categories together with objectives and selection 
criteria (J.C. Godoy, pers. comm., 1992). 

Also declared protected are: Skm of both oceans 
measured out from the high tide line; 200m around all 
lake shores; 100m on each side of navigable rivers; and 
50m on each side of water sources and springs. Protected 
areas under private ownership are officially recognised, 
provided that the area is managed according to the terms 
and regulations of the law. Regulations are given for 
natural resource use within protected areas. Prohibited 
activities include hunting, and collecting or destroying 
specimens of fauna or flora. However, both Law 
No. 6886 and Law No. 4-89 lack regulations which 
would allow for fines for breaches of the law (J.C. 
Godoy, pers. comm., 1992). 

The Law of Protected Areas also makes provision for the 
creation of the National Council for Protected Areas 
(Consejo Nacional de Areas Protegidas) (CONAP) as a 
means of increasing the efficiency of protected area 
management CONAP is responsible for formulating 
and implementing a national conservation strategy, and 
has the ultimate responsibility for the direction and 
management of SIGAP. Protected areas may be 
managed by a number of different institutions but their 
activities are assessed and coordinated by CONAP. An 
Executive Secretariat (Secretaria Ejecutiva) executes the 
policies and objectives of CONAP. 

The Regulation to the Protected Area Law (Reglamento 
de la Ley de Areas Protegidas), Governmental Accord 
No. 75990 (1990), provides definitions for the terms 
used in the Law of Protected Areas, and details the 
processes involved in the selection, establishment 
and declaration of protected areas. Definitions for 
the 15 managementcategories to be employed in SIGAP 
are given (see Annex). Inventories are to be conducted 
for those areas previously established by law, and 
management plans are obligatory for all areas. 

Two laws in 1 990 provided for the creation of the largest 
protected areas to date in Guatemala: Decree No. 590 
which declared a significant portion of the forest in the 
Department of Peten as a biosphere reserve; and Decree 
No. 4990 declaring a second new biosphere reserve in 
the eastern lowlands (Godoy and Castro, 1990). 
Implementation of the two major environmental laws in 
effect today, the 1989 Forestry Law and the 1989 Law 
of Protected Areas, is hindered by the lack of human and 
financial resources (Detlefsen et al., 1991). In order to 
achieve their stated objectives, strengthening of the 
institutions involved, and increased coordination 
between the public and private sectors, is required. 
Strategies need to be formulated to develop educational 



programmes and involve local communities in forest 
conservation and management to a greater degree 
(DeUefsen et al., 1991). 

International Activities Guatemala signed the 

Convention on Nature Protection and Wildlife Preservation 
in the Western Hemisphere (Convenci6n sobre la 
Protecci6n de la Flora, de la Fauna y de las BeUezas 
Escenicas Naturales de los Paises de America) (Western 
Hemisphere Convention) in 1940 and ratified it later. 
Guatemala ratified both the Convention Concern ing the 
Protection of the World Cultural and Natural 
Heritage (World Heritage Convention) on 16 
January 1979 with one natural site inscribed to date, and 
the Convention on Wetlands of International Importance 
especially as Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar Convention) 
on 26 June 1990 with one site listed. Guatemala 
participates in the Unesco Man and the Biosphere 
Programme with one biosphere reserve internationally 
recognised in 1990. 

Guatemala participates in the Latin American Network 
of Technical Cooperation in National Parks, Other 
Protected Areas, Flora and Wildlife (Red 
Latinoamericana de Cooperaci6n T&nica en Parques 
Nacionales, Otras Areas Protegidas, Flora y Fauna 
Silvestres) of the FAO. This programme aims to 
coordinate the activities of participating countries to 
assist in the implementation and functioning of a 
coherent and effective national system of protected areas 
in each country (FAO, n.d.). 

In 1987 the governments of Guatemala, Honduras and 
El Salvador signed an agreement to create a trinational 
cloud forest biosphere reserve El Trifinio or 
Brotherhood Biosphere Reserve (Reserva de la Bi6sfera 
La Fratemidad) in the mountainous region where the 
three nations meet. Efforts are now underway to 
elaborate a cooperative management plan for the reserve 
that will integrate the local populations of all three 
nations, and to obtain official recognition as an 
intemafional biosphere reserve (Mardones, 1988; 
Ugalde and Godoy, 1992). Projects have also been 
proposed for a binational protected area Chiquibul/Maya 
Mountain between Guatemala and Belize, and a network 
of protected areas in the Gran Pet6n region involving 
cooperation between Guatemala, Mexico and Belize 
(Ugalde and Godoy, 1992). 

Administration and Management There are 

currently around 60 institutions whose activities are 
directly or indirecdy related to protected areas and 
wildlife. Of these, 29 are state or independently owned, 
and the rest are national and international 
non-governmental conservation organisations 
(DeUefsen et al., 1991). 

The National Environment Commission (CONAMA) 
was created in 1986 as a dependency of the President, 
and is responsible for assessing and coordinating all 
activities related to the protection and improvement of 
the environment. CONAMA has been instrumental in 



144 



Guatemala 



creating an Environmental Commission (Comisidn del 
Medio Ambiente) within the National Congress to assess 
environmental issues at a high level within the 
government (Nations et at., 1988). 

The first institute specifically vested with responsibility 
for protected areas is the National Council for Protected 
Areas (CONAP). Established in 1989, the aim of 
CON AP is to create a high level governmental institution 
with sufficient autonomy that it may be entirely 
dedicated to the administration of the national system of 
protected areas (Godoy, 1990). CONAP is directly 
dependent on the President of the Republic (Presidencia 
de la Republica) and it sits on the Coordinating Council 
of CONAMA (Consejo Coordinador). Protected areas 
may be managed directly by CONAP or by other 
organisations or individuals through a legal agreement 
with CONAP and under its supervision. CONAP 
coordinates the activities of the various institutions in 
order to comply with national conservation objectives. 
Vigilance within protected areas and the enforcement of 
regulations is the responsibility of CONAP and the 
resource guards (Guardarecursos), and authorisation for 
activities permitted within protected areas must be 
issued by CONAP. 

CONAP comprises representatives from the different 
institutions with protected area management 
responsibilities: CONAMA; the Forest Directorate 
(Direccidn de Bosques); the Guatemalan Tourism 
Institute (Instituto Guatemalteco de Turismo) 
(INGUAT); the Institute of Anthropology and History 
(Instituto de Antropologia y Historia) (IDAEH); the 
National Agrarian Transformation Institute (Instituto 
Nacional de Transformaci6n Agraria); the Centre for 
Conservation Studies (Centro de Estudios 
Conservacionistas) (CECON); the Association of 
Municipalities (Asociaci6n de Municipahdades); the 
National Council for Urban and Rural Development 
(Consejo Nacional de Desarrollo Urbano y Rural); three 
delegates from non-governmental conservation 
organisations and one representative from the Committee 
of Agricultural Associations (Comit6 de Asociaciones 
Agricolas), a total of 14 individuals (Dedefsen et a/., 
1991; Godoy, 1990). 

The policies of CONAP are implemented by an 
Executive Secretariat (Secretaria Ejecutiva), which 
comprises departments of research, studies and 
planning; execution, development and control; and 
administration. An Executive Secretary (Secretario 
Ejecutivo) assigned by the President of the Council is 
responsible for directing the activities of the Executive 
Secretariat. 

Forests are presenUy the responsibility of the General 
Directorate of Forests and Wildlife (Direcci6n General 
de Bosques y Vida Silvestres) (DIGEBOS), created in 
1989 and replacing the former National Forestry 
Institute (Instituto Nacional Forestal) (INAFOR). 
DIGEBOS is part of the Ministry of Agriculture, 
Livestock and Food (Ministerio de Agricultura, 



Ganaderia y Alimentaci6n) (MAGA). At the local level, 
it is represented in eight administrative regions of the 
country, but its financial management is centralised and 
the distribution of funds often does not reflect the true 
requirements of the regions (Detlefsen et at., 1991). 
Around 1 ,9 1 5 personnel are employ ed by DIGEBOS , of 
which 1,550 are unqualified manual labourers. Forest 
and conservation authorities work closely together. 
Concessions for forest extraction issued by DIGEBOS 
must first be ^proved by CONAP and CONAMA. 
Forests within protected areas are not the direct 
responsibility of DIGEBOS but are managed by, or 
under the supervision of, CONAP (Detlefsen, et al., 
1991). 

Because of inadequate government support for protected 
areas, a large number of non-governmental 
organisations (NGOs) are involved in protected area 
administration. The Defenders of Nature Foundation 
(Fundaci6n Defensores de la Naturaleza) manages Sierra 
de las Minas Biosphere Reserve, and the Interamerican 
Foundation for Tropical Investigation (Fundacion 
Interamericana de Investigacidn Tropical)(FIIT) 
manages another area. The Ecodevelopment and 
Conservation Foundation (Fundacion para el 
EcodesarroUo y la Conservacion) (FUNDAECO) and 
the Mario Dary Rivera Foundation (Fundaci6n Mario 
Dary Rivera) are each carrying out sustainable 
development projects in one protected area. Other NGOs 
working with rural communities in and around protected 
areas are: Friends of the Forest (Asociaci6n Amigos del 
Bosque), Guatemalan Natural History Society (Asociaci6n 
Guatemalteca de Historia Natural), Environment Defence 
Association (Asociacion Prodefensa del Medio Ambiente), 
Association for Research and Social Studies (Asociacidn 
de Investigacion y Estudios Sociales) (Asi Es), and the 
Centre for Conservation Studies (Centro de Estudios 
Conservacionistas) (CECON). 

Since the creation of CONAP, significant improvements 
in protected area management have been initiated, but 
these are still not sufficient to bring about the effective 
planning and administration of the areas. One limiting 
factor is the lack of human resources to implement the 
conservation legislation, and the lack of adequate 
training and qualification for such personnel. Only 68 
personnel are employed directly in the management of 
protected areas. Only six areas have management plans, 
and more than 80% have still not resolved problems 
concerning land ownership; although most legally 
declared protected areas are stateowned, many lack 
official boundaries. There is little or no infrastructure 
and many areas are isolated within their regions. An 
analysis of the 54 areas declared legally protected 
reveals critical problems in their administration and 
financing, and a lack of managerial capacity to put 
protection measures into effect (Detlefsen et al., 1991). 

Additionally, there is a serious lack of communication 
between CONAP and DIGEBOS. DIGEBOS often 
grants Ucences for timber extraction within the 44 areas 
under special protection by Law No. 489 without 



145 



Protected Areas of the World 



consulting CONAP. This makes the creation of new 
protected areas and the formulation of a national 
strategy for the conservation of forest resources 
difficult (J.C. Godoy. pers. comm., 1992). 

Systems Review The topographical variation within 
Guatemala, and its geographical location as a bridge 
between two continents with coastlines on two oceans, 
gives rise to one of the richest biodiversities in Latin 
America (Nations et al., 1988). Guatemala has an 
altitudinal range from sea level to 4,0(X)m and, following 
the Holdridge Ufe zone classification system, 14 life 
zones occur in the country (Detlefsen et al., 1991; URL 
y ICATA, 1984). Two distinct biogeographic realms are 
identified: the lowlands of the Pet^n and Caribbean 
region are Neotropical, while the interior highlands and 
high Pacific mountains are classically Nearctic. This 
combination gives rise to a high degree of biodiversity, 
with representative wildlife and flora from each realm, 
and of endemism (Detlefsen et al., 1991 ; Nations et al., 
1988). 

Guatemala may be divided roughly into four main 
regions according to physical biogeographic 
characteristics: the Pacific coastal plain; the Pacific 
mountain chain; the Interior Highlands; and the Pet6n 
and Caribbean lowlands (Nations, et al., 1988). The 
Pacific coastal plain was entirely forested, until the 
1940s, but the region has undergone great environmental 
transformation into pastures and swamps as a result of 
agricultural development. Cattle ranching is 
concentrated on the fertile, volcanic soils of this region 
(Nations and Komer, 1984). Mangrove forests found 
along the coast have been seriously degraded by 
intensive shrimp production, salt extraction and 
fuelwood production (Nations, et al., 1988). 

The Pacific mountain chain consists of a chain of 
33 volcanoes running parallel to the Pacific Ocean. 
Forests are found at the base of the mountains, giving 
way to cloud forest higher up. These highland montane 
forests have around 70% endemism amongst animal 
species, but, as a result of colonisation, wood timber 
extraction and agriculture, they represent some of the 
most endangered ecosystems in the country (Nations 
et al., 1988). The interior highlands reach altitudes of 
4,000m, and are quite heavily populated. This region has 
also suffered environmental degradation from 
agricultural practices. 

The Pet6n and Caribbean lowlands in the northeast are 
the most sparsely populated region, in the country. The 
Department of Pet6n contains the largest tracts of 
undisturbed tropical forest, and one of the largest 
remaining in Central America (Nations et al, 1988). 
However, the Department of Pet6n is threatened by the 
imminent construction of a road connecting the region 
with the capital city, and providing access to 
neighbouring Belize through the forested lowlands of 
Pet6n. This will also open the area up lo oil exploration 
(Anon., 1991). The total forest cover is around 40% of 



total land area, and protection forests account for 13% 
of this coverage (Detlefsen et al., 1991). 

Unequal exploitation of natural resources has been a 
feature of the nation's history. Much land was converted 
into banana plantations around the turn of the century to 
satisfy foreign markets. As a result of land reformations, 
there is a severe shortage of land available for the 
Guatemalan peasantry, giving rise to overpopulation 
in many areas and colonisation into previously 
undisturbed rain forest regions. In recent years the 
government, through the National Institute of 
Agrarian Transformation (Instituto Nacional de 
Transformaci6n Agraria) (INTA), has embarked on a 
largescale colonisation programme which relocated 
around 60,000 people to the northern forest region, with 
a further 100,000 proposed (Colchester, 1991). 
Migration to forest areas often results in inappropriate 
land use and degradation of forest ecosystems (Detlefsen 
eta/., 1991). 

The fu-st protected areas were established in 1955 with 
the declaration of 10 national parks (Godoy and Castro, 
1990; Nations et al., 1988). Between 1955 and 1988, a 
total of 52 conservation areas were declared, but die 
majority of these areas did not meet international criteria 
for protected areas and were ineffectual (Godoy and 
Castro, 1990; Nations etal., 1988). Several management 
categories were employed in this fu-st step towards 
creating a system of protected areas, such as wild reserve 
(reserva silvestre), multiple use reserve (reserva de uso 
multiple) and national monument (monumento 
nacional). 

The unification of protected areas into a national system 
took place in 1989 as a result of the Law of Protected 
Areas (Godoy, 1990). The Guatemalan System of 
Protected Areas (SIGAP) was created as a union of all 
protected areas throughout the country, whether 
previously established by law or not. SIGAP 
incorporates six reserves administered by CECON that 
had been without legal support, declaring them legally 
established, and has raised the stabis of 26 small areas 
managed by various other institutes to a higher level of 
legal protection. Finally, 44 new sites were declared 
areas of special protection (areas de proteccion especial) 
to be studied and legally declared under the appropriate 
management categories at a later date (Godoy, 1990). At 
the same time, the National Council of Protected Areas 
(Consejo Nacional de Areas Protegidas) (CONAP) was 
established to coordinate protected area management. 

With the creation of SIGAP, protected area coverage 
increased ft-om less than 0.01% to around 2.22% of total 
land area. With the incorporation of the new areas, 
coverage will reach between 8 and 14%, and encompass 
nine of the 14 Holdridge life zones (Detlefsen et al., 
1991; Godoy, 1990). Around 44.4% of the protected 
areas in SIGAP are located in the Department of Pet6n 
(Detlefsen et al., 1991). The national system employs 
15 different management categories, grouf)ed into six 
types based on the common characteristics (Godoy and 



146 



Guatemala 



Castro, 1990). The oldest management category in use 
is cultural monument (monumento cultural), and over 
half of the present protected areas are classified as 
such. However, as the primary objective of this 
category is the protection of national archaeological 
remains, the flora and fauna in the majority of areas 
has suffered severe degradation (Detlefsen etal., 
1991). 

A regional network of protected areas has been 
proposed for the Department of Pet6n, the Integrated 
System of Protected Areas in Pet6n (Sistema 
Integrado de Areas Protegidas de El Pet6n) (SIAP). At 
the time of development of the national system, Peten 
was recognised as being of high priority for 
conservation efforts owing to its important forest 
ecosystems and the increasing rate of their destruction 
(Godoy and Castro, 1990). SIAP will comprise three 
national parks; five forest reserves; six wildlife 
refuges; four archaeological monuments; two 
biotopes; four natural monuments; one biological 
reserve; one experimental station; and one biosphere 
reserve, and management objectives are given for 
each area. These areas have been proposed in an order 
of priority for development and instigation of 
protection measures. Implementation of the system 
will be the responsibility of the institutions that 
comprise CONAP, together with the municipalities of 
the region. SIAP aims to encourage a decentralisation 
of CONAP to improve the coordination of protected 
area administration at the regional level (Godoy and 
Castro, 1990). The extent of implementation of this 
proposed system is not known. 



Addresses 

Direcci6n General de Bosques (DIGEBOS), Ministerio 
de Agricultura, Ganaderia y Alimentaci6n (MAGA), 
7a Avda 680 Zona 1 3 , CIUD AD DE GUATEMALA 
(Tel: 2 720509/735213; FAX: 2 735214) 

Consejo Nacional de Areas Protedigas 
(CONAP), Presidencia de la Repiiblica, 7a 
Av, 400, Zona 1, CIUDAD DE GUATEMALA 
(Tel: 2 21816/532477; FAX: 2 535109) 

Asociaci6n Amigos del Bosque, 9a Calle 223, Zona 1, 
CIUDAD DE GUATEMALA (Tel. 2 83486; 
FAX: 513478) 

Asociacidn de Investigaci6n y Estudios Sociales 
(ASIES), 10 Calle 760, Zona 9, CIUDAD DE 
GUATEMALA (Tel: 2 347178/9; FAX: 2 314950) 

Asociaci6n Pro Defensa del Medio Ambiente 
(APRODEMA), 20 Calle 1952, Zona 10, 
CIUDAD DE GUATEMALA (Tel: 2 682000; 
FAX: 2 372084) 

Centro de Estudios Conservacionistas (CECON), 
Ave. Reforma 063, Zona 10, CIUDAD DE 
GUATEMALA (Tel: 2 310904; FAX: 2 347664) 

Fundacion Defensores de la Naturaleza, 7a. Ave. 
1301, Zona 9, CIUDAD DE GUATEMALA 
(Tel: 2 325064; FAX: 2 322671) 

Fundacion Mario Dary, Ave. Reforma 063, Zona 10, 
CIUDAD DE GUATEMALA (Tel: 2 310904; 
FAX: 2 347664) 

FUNDAECO, 14 Calle B 1424, Zona 10, CIUDAD DE 
GUATEMALA (Tel: 2 337527/8; FAX: 2 682454) 

References 



Despite significant improvements in protected area 
coverage and coordination, as a result of the creation 
of SIGAP and CONAP, the effective conservation of 
ecosystems, with the exception of a few areas, has not 
been achieved. SIGAP is characterised by a lack of 
human and financial resources which impede the 
achievement of protection objectives, a situation that 
has worsened in recent years (Detlefsen et ai, 1991). 
Many areas have been legally declared protected but 
no funds have been assigned to them in order to 
implement this protection. 

One of the major threats to protected areas is the 
exploitation of floral and faunal resources by 
neighbouring local communities. Many of the areas do 
not have physically defined limits, and are not 
protected from uncontrolled exploitation, primarily 
hunting and timber extraction. Around 35% of 
protected areas have human settlements within their 
boundaries, and more than 80% do not have buffer 
zones and are surrounded by agricultural 
communities. The administration and planning of 
protected areas needs to be strengthened to integrate 
conservation and tourism practices to a greater extent, 
to allow local populations to benefit from the 
existence of such areas (Detlefsen et al., 1991). 



Anon. (1991). Cairetera a Pet6n sera una realidad. 
PrensaLibre. Guatemala, September 13, 1991. 

Colchester, M. (1991). Guatemala: the clamour for land 
and the fate of the forests. The Ecologist 21(4): 
177185. 

Detlefsen, G., Castaiieda, L.A., Oliva, E. (Eds) (1991). 
Plan de accidn forestal para Guatemala (PAFG). 
Oficina del Plan de Acci6n Forestal para Guatemala, 
Guatemala. 227 pp. 

FAO (n.d.). La red latinoamericana de cooperaci6n 
tecnica en parques nacionales, otras ^eas protegidas, 
flora y fauna silvestres. Oficina regional de la FAO 
para America Latina y el Caribe, Santiago, Chile. 
8 pp. 

Godoy, J.C. (1990). El sistema de areas protegidas de 
Guatemala; el pequefio que se agiganta. Flora, Fauna y 
Areas Silvestres 4(12). Oficina Regional de la FAO para 
Am6rica Latina y el Caribe, Santiago, Chile. Pp. 13 16. 

Godoy, J.C. and Castro, F. (1990). Plan del sistema de dreas 
protegidas de El Petin, Guatemala, SIAP. Proyecto de 
conservacidn para el desarrollo sostenido en Am&ica 
Central, Centro Agron(3mico Trcpical de Investigacion y 
Ensefianza (CATTE) y el Union Mundial para la 
Naturaleza (UICN), Turrialba, Costa Rica. 105 pp. 

Hartshorn, G.S. and Green, G.C. (1985). Witdlands 
conservation in Northern Central America 
Guatemala. 8 pp. 



147 



Protected Areas of the World 



Holdridge, L.R. (1967). Life zone ecology; revised 
edition. Tropical Science Centre, San Jos6, Costa 
Rica. 206 pp. (Unseen) 

Mardones, C. (1988). Trifinio: un desafi'o de la 
conservaci6n para tres paises. Flora y fauna y 
dreas silvestres 3(7). Oficina Regional de la FAO 
para America Latina y el Caribe, Santiago, Chile. 
Pp. 1822. 

Nations, J.D. and Komer, D.I. (1984). Conservation in 
Guatemala: Final report Presented to the World 
Wildlife Fund, US, Washington DC. Centre for 
Human Ecology, Austin, Texas, USA, February 
1984.170 pp. 

Nations, J. D., Houseal, B., Ponciano, 1., Billy, S.,Godoy, 
J.C, Castro, F., Miller, G., Rose, D., Rey, M., 
Azurdia, C. (1988). Biodiversity in Guatemala: 
biological diversity and tropical forests assessment. 
Center for International Development and 



Environment, World Resources Institute, 
Washington D.C., USA, December 1988. 1 10 pp. 

Ugalde, A. and Godoy, J.C. (1992). Regional Review: 
Centroamerica. Regional reviews, lUCN, IV World 
Congress on National Parks and Protected Areas, 
Caracas, Venezuela, 1021 February 1992. 
Pp. 13.113.26. 

URL y ICATA (1984). Perfil ambienlal de la Republica 
de Guatemala, tomo 11. Universidad Rafael Landivar 
y el Instituto de Ciencias Ambientales y Tecnologi'a 
Agricola (ICATA), URL/AIDGuatemala/ROCAP, 
Ciudad de Guatemala. 249 pp. 

Zepeda, E.G. (1986). Situacion actual de las areas 
silvestres protegidas de Guatemala. Instituto 
Nacional Forestal (INAFOR), Departamento de 
Parques Nacionales y Vida Silvestre, Guatemala. 
18 pp. 



ANNEX 

Deflnitions of protected area designations, as legislated, 

together with authorities responsible for their administration 



Title (English title): Reglamento de la Ley de 
Areas Protegidas (Regulation to the Protected 
Areas Law), Acuerdo Gubernativo No. 75990 

Date: 22 August 1990 

Brief description: Provides further details 

governing the establishment and functioning of the 
Guatemalan System of Protected Areas (Sistema 
Guatemalteco de Areas Protegidas) (SIGAP) and the 
National Council for Protected Areas (Consejo 
Nacional de Areas Protegidas) (CONAP), both of 
which are created under provision of the Protected 
Areas Law (Ley de Areas Protegidas), Decree No. 
489 of 7 February 1989. Definitions are given for the 
management categories to employed in SIGAP. 

Administrative authority: The protected areas 
that form SIGAP may be managed by a number of 
different institutions or private individuals, but the 
ultimate responsibility for supervising, directing and 
coordinating the national system lies with the 
National Council for Protected Areas, (Consejo 
Nacional de Areas Protegidas) (CONAP). 

Designations : 

Protected areas management categories conform to 
six major groups: 

Parque Nacional (National Park); Reserva 
Bioldgica (Biological Reserve) Area of relatively 
large extension essentially unaltered by human 
activities, that contains ecosystems, populations or 
samples of flora or fauna species of scientific 



importance and/or national or international interest, 
whose ecological processes have been allowed to 
continue with the minimum interference. The area is 
to be managed for the protection, conservation and 
maintenance of natural biological processes and 
biodiversity in an unaltered state, so as to be available 
for scientific research, environmental monitoring, 
education and limited ecological tourism activities. 
Visitors will have access to certain parts of the area 
under special conditions, for education, cultural and 
recreation purposes. Prohibited activities include the 
extraction of timber, hunting and mineral exploration 
and exploitation. Collecting or destroying floral or 
faunal specimens is also prohibited unless for 
scientific research purposes and with prior 
authorisation from the respective administration 
authority and approved by CONAP. No new human 
habitation is allowed except where necessary for 
administrative purposes. Where habitation already 
occurs, methods to integrate these populations with 
the objectives of the area are sought. If this is not 
possible, relocation of the communities to other 
suitable areas is to take place. 

Biotopo Protegido (Protected Biotope); 
Monumento Natural (Natural Monument); 
Monumento Cultural (Cultural Monument); 
Parque Histdrico (Historical Park) Area that 
generally contains one or more example of 
outstanding natural beauty, archaeological or 
historical remains, or other natural examples of 
national or international importance. The ecosystems 
may not necessarily be in an intact state, and the size 
of the area depends on the example or specimen that 



148 



Guatemala 



is to be protected. The area is to be managed for 
conservation purposes and its ecosystems 
maintained to as near a natural state as possible. 
Limited recreation, tourism, education and scientific 
research activities are permitted. 

Area de Uso Multiple (Multiple Use Area); 
Manantial (Spring); Reserva Forestal (Forest 
Reserve); Refugio de Vida Silvestre (Wildlife 
Refuge) Relatively large area, generally covered 
by forest. May contain zones appropriate for the 
sustainable production of timber, water, floral and 
wildlife resources without adversely affecting the 
ecosystems of the area. The area may have been 
altered by human intervention, but stiU retains a large 
portion of its natural habitat. The area may be under 
public or private ownership. Management 
objectives are to ensure the sustainable use of water, 
forest, plant, wildlife, or marine resources. 
Conservation may be oriented primarily to sujjport 
economic activities with zones of strict conservation 
within the area, or it may be a primary objective in 
itself. The importance of economic and social 
objectives must always be maintained, and 
environmental education and ecological recreation is 
stressed. Planning and management of the area must 
ensure that all exploitation is carried out in a 
sustainable manner to maintain the continuing 
productivity of the area. Where insufficient 
management plans exist, to ensure sustainability 
exploitation of any sort is prohibited except for the 
traditional exploitation by local indigenous 
communities until such a plan is implemented. 

Area Recreativa Natural (Natural Recreation 
Area); Parque Regional (Regional Park); Rutas y 
Vias Escinicas (Scenic Paths and Roads) 

Area where conservation activities are required to 
protect natural communities or wild species, but the 
emphasis is on educational and recreational 



functions. Generally, the area contains scenic 
qualities and some attraction for the general public, 
and is easily accessible. Minimum alteration or 
modification of the natural habitat is permitted. The 
area may be under private or public ownership. 
Regional parks are usually under municipal 
ownership. Management objectives are aimed at 
recreation and education. 

Reserva Natural Privada (Private Natural Reserve) 
Area that is owned by a private individual or 
organisation, whose owners have voluntarily 
dedicated the area to conservation purposes. The area 
is legally established and is recognised by the state. 
Management objectives are to ensure the 
continuance of natural conditions required to protect 
significant species or groups of species, ecosystems, 
or cultural or environmental examples on the private 
property. In very exceptional cases, the production 
of renewable natural resources may occur, but it is of 
secondary importance to the management objectives. 
The size of the area depends on the proposal by the 
owner who maintains his rights to the area and is 
responsible for its management. 

Reserva de la Bidsfera (Biosphere Reserve) 
Area of global importance with respect to its natural 
and cultural resources. All the areas in this category 
must be previously ajjproved by the Unesco Man and 
the Biosphere committee. The principal 
management objective of this area is to allow various 
land uses and sustainable natural resource use with 
emphasis on traditional activities, as well as effect 
strict conservation in the nuclear core of the area. 
Scientific research is permitted. The areas provide 
important sites for environmental monitoring and 
facilities for environmental education, training and 
controlled tourism. Criteria for selection, and zoning 
within the area are as given by the Unesco 
programme. 



149 



Protected Areas of the World 



SUMMARY OF PROTECTED AREAS 



Map 


National/internationaldesignations 


lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 


notified 




National Parks 








1 


Atitldn 


vm 


54,773 


1955 


2 


Bahia de Santo Tom^ 


V 


1,000 


1956 


3 


EI Rosario 


vm 


1.031 


1980 


4 


ElTigre 


n 


350,000 


1990 


5 


Lacand6n 


n 


200,000 


1990 


6 


Laguna Lachua 


n 


10,000 


1978 


7 


Mirador/Dos Lagunos/Ri'o Azul 


u 


147,000 


1990 


8 


Rio Dulce 


vm 


7,200 


1955 


9 


Santa Rosalia 


vm 


1,000 


1956 


10 


Sipacate-Naranjo 


IV 


2,000 


1969 


11 


Tikal 


n 


57,400 


1957 


12 


Trifmio 


n 


4,000 


1987 


13 


Volc^ de Pacaya 
Biotopes 


111 


2,000 


1963 


14 


Chocdn-Machacas 


IV 


6,265 


1981 


15 


Mario Dary Rivera (Quetzal) 


IV 


1,173 


1976 


16 


Monterrico 


vm 


2,800 


1977 


17 


San Miguel - El Zotz 


rv 


42,000 


1989 


18 


Biotopo Universitario para la 










Conservacion del Quetzal 


IV 


1,153 


1977 




Forest Reserves 








19 


Area de Use Multiple R.B.M. 


vra 


650,000 


1990 


20 


Area de Uso Multiple R.S.M. 


vm 


34,000 


1990 


21 


Franja Transversal del Norte 


vm 


1,200 


1981 


22 


Ri'o Chixoy 


vm 


28,000 


1980 


23 


Rio Salama 
Cultural Monuments 


vm 


63,124 


1956 


24 


Aguateca 


III 


1,709 


1987 


25 


Ceibal 


III 


2,100 


1984 


26 


DosPilas 


III 


3,166 


1987 


27 


Machaquilla 
Biosphere Reserve 


m 


2,000 


1974 


28 


Sierra de las Minas (Zona Niicleo) 


I 


105,700 


1990 




Biosphere Reserve 










Maya 


IX 


1,000,000 


1990 




Ramsar Wetland 










Laguna del Tigre 


R 


48,372 


1990 




World Heritage Site 










Parque Nacional Tikal 


X 


57,400 


1979 



150 



Guatemala 




Protected Areas of Guatemala 



151 



HONDURAS 



Area 1 12,088 sq. km 

Population 5,138,000(1990) 
Natural increase 3% per annum 

Ek;onomic Indicators 

GDP: 

GNP: US$ 900 per capita (1989) 

Policy and Legislation The 1982 constitution 

declares all natural resources to be state property, and the 
rational use of such resources to be in the national 
interest The National Development Plan (Plan Nacional 
de DesarroUo) includes amongst its objectives the 
rational use of natural resources in order to ensure their 
continuity. The state is obliged to conserve the 
environment, is responsible for imposing regulations on 
natural resource use, and is empowered to create 
protected areas. 

The Advanced Council of Economic Planning (Consejo 
Superior de Planificacidn Econ6mica (CONSUPLANE) 
has produced the National Conservation Strategy which 
states thataNational System of Protected Areas (Sistema 
Nacional de Areas Protegidas) must be established 
(Campanella et al., 1982; Barborak el al. 1984). 

Current forest policy dates back to 1986 and was 
formulated in accordance with the National 
Development Plan. Its aim is to ensure the continuity of 
forest resources through rational exploitation, 
conservation, and improvement of forest resources by 
means of current forestry legislation and the application 
of social integration projects by the national forestry 
administration. 

There is no systematic organisation of environmental 
legislation. Provisions for environmental protection and 
natural resources occur in a number of different 
legislative acts, such as the Water Law (Ley de Aguas) 
(1927) which regulates the use of public water resources; 
the current Fishing Law (Ley de Pesca), Decree No. 1 54 
(1959) which protects marine wildlife and ecosystems; 
and the Mining Code (C6digo de Mineria) Decree No. 
143 (1968) which merely mentions hunting or reserved 
zones (zonas vedadas o reservadas) to protect forest, 
archaeological or zoological heritage. 

The first regulations for the establishment of protected 
areas are given in the Forestry Law (Ley Forestal) 
Decree 85 (1971), which declares the Secretariat of 
Natural Resources (Secretaria de Recursos Naturales) 
responsible for the development of national parks and 
equivalent reserves, and establishes a methodology for 
their selection and development. However, detailed 
deflnitions of the different management categories are 
not given. Forest exploitation and commercialisation are 
to be rationalised, and multiple-use forest reserves 
incorporating recreational activities and environmental 



protection are encouraged. Forested areas within the 
national forest estate are classified according to use, and 
all forested land for 250m on either side of any water 
source and for 150m around lakes and on either side of 
rivers and streams is protected. 

Decree-Law No. 103 (1974) provided for the 
establishment of the Honduran Forest Development 
Corporation (Corporaci6n Hondurefla de DesarroUo 
Forestal) (COHDEFOR), and the nationalisation of the 
forest industry and all trees with economic value. The 
objectives of COHDEFOR include ensuring rational use 
of forest resources and integrating forestry practices into 
the national economy. One of the principal projects of 
COHDEFOR, die Social Forestry System (Sistema 
Social Forestal), is described. 



Decree No. 123 (1974) provided for the creation of die 
General Directorate for Forest Resources and Wildlife 
(Direcci6n General de Recursos Forestales y Vida 
Silvestre) (RENARE) widiin die Secretariat of Natural 
Resources (Secretaria de Recursos Naturales), to be 
vested with forest protection and conservation 
responsibilities, including the management of national 
parks and odier protected areas. However, owing to the 
lack of political support, RENARE never undertook 
these functions effectively, and natural resource 
protection has remained the responsibility of 
COHDEFOR (Yates, 1987). The exact distribution of 
responsibilities for protected areas and natural resources 
is ambiguous. Decree No. 74-91 (1991) dissolves 
RENARE and transfers its responsibility for protected 
areas to the Department of Natural Areas and Fauna 
(Departamento de Areas Silvestres y Fauna) widiin 
COHDEFOR (J. Trinidad, pers. comm., 1992). Details 
of this recent decree are not currendy available. 



Protected area establishment and forest resource 
regulation are governed by the General Forestry 
Regulation, Resolution No. 634 (Reglamento General 
Forestal, Acuerdo No. 634) of 9 April 1984, which 
details the principles of the 1971 Forestry Law and of 
Decree No. 103 providing for the creation of 
COHDEFOR. The national forest estate is defined, and 
details of die forest classification system of the 1971 
forestry law are given (see Annex). National forested 
areas are divided into protected forest zones (zonas 
protegidas forestales) for protection purposes; zones of 
forestry interest (zonas de interes forestal) for productive 
purposes; and non-classified forest areas (areas 
forestales no-clasificadas). Provision is made for die 
creation of national parks, natural monuments and other 
protected areas (collectively known as protected forest 
zones), and the processes for their selection and 
establishment are set out. Private land may be 
expropriated for their estabUshment. 



153 



Protected Areas of the World 



In 1987, the Cloud Forest Law (Ley de Bosques 
Nublados) Decree No. 87-87 was passed. This law 
declares the protection of cloud forest ecosystems to 
be in the national interest, and provides for the 
creation of 11 national parks, eight wildlife 
refuges and 18 biological reserves in cloud forest 
areas. All these areas are to be administered by the 
Ministry of Natural Resources through RENARE, in 
coordination with various other institutions and local 
authorities. Around each area a permanent protected 
zone (zona protegida a perpetuidad) is established, 
within which no agricultural activities are permitted, 
buffer zones, in which regulated activities are permitted. 
However, Decree No. 87-87 is incomplete as no details 
of the above management categories are given in the law 
and no regulations relating to it have been passed. 

Problems arise from a marked lack of environmental 
legislation and inconsistency among the existing 
legislative acts applying to natural resources (Yates, 
1987). There is no legislation that would allow for the 
formulation of an environmental planning system; for 
delimiting the responsibilities of the various 
governmental and non-governmental institutions 
involved in natural resource management; and for 
establishing a national system of protected areas with 
coordinated management. Although the Forestry Law 
provides for the creation of various categories of 
protected areas, the definitions are unclear and do not 
bear relation to internationally accepted definitions 
(Yates, 1987). There is no legislation providing for 
wildlife management 

In all the areas of natural resource management except 
forestry new laws have been proposed. Two projects to 
revise environmental legislation were proposed and 
discussed in 1985 in collaboration with the FAO. The 
Project for the Law for the Protection of the Environment 
and Natural Resources (Anteproyeclo de Ley de 
Protecci6n del Medio Ambiente y de los Recursos 
Naturales) was formulated to coordinate all provisions 
relating to the environment into one legal instrument. 
The Project for the General Fishing Law (Proyecto de 
Ley General de Pesca) is intended to revise the 1959 
fishing legislation, and contains provisions for protected 
marine zones (Rend6n, 1986). However, of these 
proposed laws, only that for the creation of the 
Department of Natural Areas and Fauna has come into 
effect yet. 

International Activities Honduras is one of the 

few countries in the Americas that has not signed the 
Convention on Nature Protection and Wildlife 
Preservation in the Western Hemisphere (Convenci6n 
sobre la Protecci6n de la Flwa, de la Fauna y de las 
Bellezas Esc6nicas Naturales de los Pai'ses de Amdrica) 
(Western Hemisphere Convention). Honduras ratified 
the Convention Concerning the Protection of the World 
Cultural and Natural Heritage (World Heritage 
Convention) on 8 June 1979 with one natural site 
inscribed to date, and it participates in the Unesco Man 



and the Biosphere Programme with one reserve accepted 
in 1980. 

Honduras, through the National Secretariat for Natural 
Resources (Secretaria de Recursos Naturales), 
participates in the Latin American Network of Technical 
Cooperation in National Parks, Other Protected Areas, 
Flora and Wildlife Programme of the FAO (Red 
Latinoamericana de Cooperaci6n Tecnica en Parques 
Nacionales, Otras Areas Protegidas, Flora y Fauna 
Silvestres). This programme aims to coordinate the 
activities of participating countries, to assist in the 
implementation and functioning of a coherent and 
effective national system of protected areas in each 
country (FAO, n.d.). Honduras participates in the FAO 
Tropical Forestry Action Plan (TFAP). 

In 1987 the governments of Honduras, Guatemala and 
El Salvador signed an agreement to create the 
trinational cloud forest biosphere reserve El Trifinio 
or La Fratemidad in the mountainous region where the 
three nations meet. Efforts are now being made to 
elaborate a cooperative management plan for the reserve 
that will integrate the local populations of all three 
nations, and to obtain official recognition as an 
international biosphere reserve (Mardones, 1988; 
Ugalde and Godoy, 1992). 

The Honduran and Nicaraguan governments have 
initiated projects for a joint management agreement for 
a large tract of land along this border. A similar 
agreement has been proposed between Honduras, 
Nicaragua and El Salvador for the shared mangrove 
estuaries and coastal zone of the Gulf of Fonseca 
(J. Barborak, pers. comm., 1992; Ugalde and Godoy, 
1992). 

Administration and Management Current legislation 
states that the Secretariat of Natural Resources 
(Secretaria de Recursos Naturales) is responsible for 
natural resources. The control and exploitation of forest 
resources and the administration of natural areas are the 
resfwnsibility of COHDEFOR, a semi-autonomous 
institute responsible for implementing national forest 
policies in coordination with national development plans 
(J. Trinidad, pers. comm., 1992). In practice, natural 
resources have been managed by the various 
governmental sectors with interest in a particular 
resource, and responsibility is divided accordingly. 

RENARE was intended to manage activities relating to 
the protection and conservation of fish, wildlife and the 
environment, including protected areas. However, 
owing to the lack of political support or interest, 
RENARE never undertook any of these functions. 
Although many laws providing for the creation of 
individual protected areas cite RENARE as the institute 
responsible for implementing the legislation and 
managing the area, in effect this was not carried out 
(Yates, 1987). This has resulted in the various 
institutions previously in charge of natural resources 
continuing their activities with little or no coordination 



154 



Honduras 



between them. Now that COHDEFOR takes sole 
responsibility for protected areas, the situation may 
improve (J. Trinidad, pers. comm., 1992). 

Since 1991, COHDEFOR has been responsible for 
formulating and implementing national policies and 
laws regarding the protection, conservation and 
management of wildlands and wildlife; promoting and 
coordinating scientific research activities; encouraging 
the participation of urban and rural populations in 
conservation activities; and developing a National 
System of Protected Wildlands (Sistema Nacional de 
Areas Silvestres Protegidas) (Mufioz, 1991; J. Trinidad, 
pers. comm., 1992). 

In 1991, the first restructuring of COHDEFOR took 
place with the creation of the Protected Areas Section 
(Secci6n de Areas Protegidas) and the Wildlife Section 
(Secci6n de Vida Silvestre) within the Department of 
Natural Areas and Fauna. As part of a plan to develop 
projects to strengthen current protection measures, seven 
priority protected areas were identified for immediate 
support, in five different forestry regions (Mufioz, 1991). 

At the national level, COHDEFOR comprises nine 
forestry regions (regiones forestales) throughout the 
country (Anon., 1988). As part of its forest conservation 
programme COHDEFOR, has implemented the Social 
Forestry System, as detailed in the 1984 General 
Forestry Regulations, by which local rural populations 
are directly responsible for many aspects of forest 
management The object of the Social Forestry System 
is to increase the effectiveness of forest protection, 
generate employment and improve the standard of living 
within local rural populations around forested regions. 
COHDEFOR formulates action plans and strategies in 
conjunction with the local cooperatives, and lends 
assistance as necessary. Local groups participate in the 
activities of the State Forestry Guard (Guardia Forestal 
Estatal) which is responsible for vigilance and regulation 
enforcement in forested areas. 

The Honduran Institute of Anthropology and History 
(Instituto Hondureflo de Antropologia e Historia) 
(IHAH) manages the Ruinas de Copdn Natural 
Monument (Barborak et ai, 1984), and the Universidad 
Nacional Aut6noma de Honduras manages Cuero y 
Salado Wildlife Reserve (M. Dur6n, pers. comm., 1992). 

There are a number of non-governmental organisations 
(NGOs) working in conservation. One of the most active, 
longest established and infiuential is the Honduran 
Ecology Association (Asociaci6n Hondurefla de 
Ecologia) (AHE) which supports and promotes the 
establishment and maintenance of protected areas 
through publications and public awareness campaigns 
(Cruz, 1986). Since 1985, the AHE has been directly 
involved with managing El Tigre National Park in 
coordination with park personnel (AHE, 1987). The 
AHE formulated the proposal to protect cloud 
forest regions, and it was through the work of this NGO 
that 37 cloud forest areas were declared as national 



parks, wildlife reserves and biological reserves under the 
1987 legislation. The Cuero y Salado Foundation 
(Fundaci6n Cuero y Salado) runs research and 
conservation projects in the Cuero y Salado Wildlife 
Refuge. 

Problems in natural resource administration arise fi-om 
the lack of public awareness of conservation 
organisations and the lack of training and motivation. 
There is a considerable amount of ambiguity regarding 
the distribution of responsibilities, and a marked lack of 
collaboration between the respective institutions 
involved in natural resource management, precluding 
effective protected area management (Yates, 1987). 

Systems Reviews Honduras is the second largest 
country in Central America and the most mountainous, 
with over 75% of the land having a gradient greater than 
20% (Campanella et ai, 1982). The only fiat areas are 
the narrow coastal plains along the Caribbean Sea and 
the Gulf of Fonseca in the Pacific Ocean, and a few 
interior valleys (AHE, 1987; Campanella et ai, 1982). 
The country is divided naturally into four geographically 
distinct regions: the highlands; interior valleys; lowlands 
of the Caribbean; and the lowlands of the Pacific 
(Campanella et ai, 1982). 

The Caribbean lowlands account for around 16.4% of 
total land area and, together with the valleys connecting 
the Caribbean coastal plains, they constitute the most 
fertile soils' in Honduras (Campanella et at., 1982); 
banana and palm cultivation is extensive. The most 
eastern part of the region, and extending down into 
Nicaragua, is collectively known as La Mosquitia or the 
Moskito Coast It is characterised by natural pine forest 
plains interspersed with tropical forests, and has the 
richest biodiversity and the lowest population density in 
the country with a long history of indigenous 
civilization (Campanella et al, 1982; Herlihy and 
Herlihy, n.d.). Rio Platano Biosphere Reserve was 
established in 1980 in this region to protect both natural 
resources and local populations of Miskito, Pech and 
Garifuna Indians. However, colonisation into the area 
has become an increasing threat to the integrity of the 
natural ecosystems and the indigenous communities 
(Herlihy and Herlihy, n.d.). 

The highlands of the interior account for 81.7% of total 
land area. The dominant vegetation is pine forest which 
makes the soil acid and unsuitable for agriculture. Since 
colonial times, cattle ranching has been the primary 
economic activity in the region (Campanella er a/, 1 982). 
The soils of the interior valleys are more fertile, and 
intensive cultivation of vegetables and sugar occurs. 

The Pacific lowlands along the Gulf of Fonseca are 
bordered by mangrove forests and narrow coastal plains. 
Cattle ranching, cotton, sugar and vegetable production 
are extensive in this region (Campanella et al., 1982). 
Around 60% of the total population of Honduras lives in 
rural regions and 40% in urban areas (Anon., 1988). 



155 



Protected Areas of the World 



The marine influence, the mountainous topography and 
the various soil types have given rise to a great variety 
of ecosystems. Using the Holdridge (1967) classification 
system, eight different life zones are found in the 
country. The humid and very humid life zones of the 
Caribbean slopes cover over 75% of total area 
(CampaneUaef a/., 1982). 

The development of protected areas has been a slow 
process (Cruz, 1986). A significant advance was made 
with the passing of the 1987 legislation and subsequent 
protection of a number of cloud forest areas. However, 
the lack of national environmental policy and planning, 
and the absence of coherent legislation providing for 
standardisation of protected area management has 
precluded the creation of a coordinated national 
protected area system (Yates, 1987). 

The estimated total coverage of protected areas is around 
3 million ha, or 27% of country area (COHDEFOR, 
n.d.). A more accurate and widely-accepted figure for 
percentage coverage is 22.6% (COHDEFOR, n.d.; 
S. Midente, f)ers. comm., 1992). No systematic review 
of the current situation of protected areas is currently 
available. 

The protected area categories employed are not clearly 
defmed in the legislation, which causes some confusion 
over protection and management of the areas. For 
example, forest reserves (reservas forestales) may also 
be referred to as protected forest zones (zonas forestales 
protegidas), reserved forest zones (zonas forestales 
reservadas), and protected and reserved zones (zonas 
protegidas y reservadas). Without a precise defmition in 
the legislation creating protected areas, different uses of 
the same category result from total protection in one area 
to temporary protection for future exploitation in an 
another (Cruz, 1986; Yates, 1987). 

Protected area management is further hindered by the 
lack of adequate administrative legislation providing for 
the effective functioning of governmental organisations. 
There is a great need for new legislation to clarify the 
situation, and to assign responsibilities to specific 
institutions (Yates, 1987). However, COHDEFOR is 
now beginning to operate under modem legislation and 
this situation may be improving (see Policy and 
Legislation). 

Addresses 

Corporaci6n Hondurefia de Desarrollo Forestal 
(COHDEFOR), Aptdo 1378, TEGUCIGALPA 
(Tel/FAX: 222614) 

Departamento de Vida Silvestre y Recursos 
Ambientales (RENARE), Ministerio de Recursos 
Naturales Renovables, Blvd. Miraflores, Aptdo 
309, TEGUCIGALPA (Tel: 327828/384237; 
FAX: 324054; Tlx: 8071 Serena) 

Asociaci6n Hondurefla de Ecologi'a (ARE), Apdo 
T-250, Toncontin, TEGUCIGALPA 



Fundaci6n Cuero y Salado, Apdo 122, La Ceiba, 
ATLANTIDA (Tel: 43 0329) 

References 

ARE (1987). Ecologta. Boletin informative de la 
Asociaci6n Hondurefia de Ecologi'a (AHE), 
Tegucigalpa. 14 pp. 

Anon. (1988). Mesa redonda; participacidn 
internacional en el desarrollo forestal de Honduras. 
RepiibUca de Honduras. 206 pp. 

Barborak, J., Morales, L., and MacFarland, C. (1984). 
Plan de Manejo y Desarrollo del Monumento 
Nacional Ruinas de Copdn. IHAH/CATIE, 
Turrialba, Costa Rica. 156 pp. 

Campanella, P., Dickinson, J., DuBois, R., Dulin, P., 
GUck, D., Merkel, A., Pool, D., Rios, R., Skillman, D., 
Talbot, J. (1982). Honduras. Perfil ambiental del pals: 
un estudio de campo. Resumen ejecudvo. US-AID. 201 
pp. 

COHDEFOR (n.d.). Areas protegidas de Honduras. 
Departamento de Areas Protegidas y Vida Silvestre, 
orporaci6n Hondurefia de Desarrollo Forestal 
(COHDEFOR). 12 pp. 

Cruz, G.A. (1986). Guia de los parques nacionales, 
refugios de vida silvestre, reservas bioldgicas y 
monumentos naturales de Honduras. Asociaci6n 
Hondurefia de Ecologi'a, Tegucigalpa, Honduras. 
49 pp. 

FAO (n.d.). La red latinoamericana de cooperacion t&nica 
en parques nacionales, otras dreas protegidas, flora y 
fauna silvestres. Oficina regional de la FAO para 
America Latina y el Caribe, Santiago, Chile. 8 pp. 

Halihy, PJi. and Herlihy, L.H. (n.d). Herencia de nuestro 
pasado: Reserva de la Bidsfera del Rio Pldtano. WCI, 
WWF, ROCAP, CCC, COHDEFOR/AID. 26 pp. 

Holdridge, LR. (1%7). Ltfe zone ecology; Revised edition. 
Tropical Science Centre, San Jos6, Costa Rica. 206 pp. 
(Unseen) 

Mardones, C. (1988). Trifinio: un desafio de la 
conservaci6n para tres paises. Flora y fauna y dreas 
ilvestres 3(7). Oficina Regional de la FAO para 
America Latina y el Caribe, Santiago, Chile. Pp. 18-22. 

Mufloz, E. (1991). Perfil general del departamento de ireas 
protegidas y vida silvestre. 8 j)p. 

Rend6n, J. (1986). Legislaci6n de pesca y legislaci6n del 
medio ambiente y vida silvestre, informe tecnico 
TCP/HON/4509 (A). Organizaci6n de las Naciones 
Unidas para la Agricultura y la Alimentacion, Roma. 
32 pp. 

Ugalde, A. and Godoy, J.C. (1992). Regional Review: 
Central America. lUCN Regional reviews. 
IV World Congress on National Parks and Protected 
Areas, Caracas, Venezuela, 10-21 February 1992. 
Pp. 13.3-13.27. 

Yates, E. (1987). Perspectiva del derecho de recursos 
naturales en Honduras. Tegucigalpa. 27 pp. 



156 



Honduras 



ANNEX 
Definitions of protected area designations, as legislated, 
together with authorities responsible for their administration 



Title : Reglamento General Forestal (General 
Forestry Regulation), Resolution No. 634 

Date: 17 July 1984 

Brief description: Develops the principles of the 
1971 Forestry Law (Ley Forestal) and the 1974 Law 
for the Honduran Forestry Development Corporation 
(Ley de la Corporaci6n Hondurefia de Desarrollo 
Forestal) (COHDEFOR). The structure and function 
of COHDEFOR is given. The national forestry estate 
is classified according to use, and regulations are 
detailed. Provision is made for the creation of 
national parks and other protected areas as part of the 
national forest estate, and definitions are given. 

Administrative authority: COHDEFOR is 

responsible for implementing provisions of the 
legislation including the administration and 
management of protected areas. 

Designations: 

CLASSIFIED FOREST AREA 
(AREA FORESTAL CLASIFICADA) 

Protected Forest Zone (Zona Forestal Protegida) 
An area of pubUc or private forest declared to be of great 
importance for the conservation of the natural habitats, 
watCT or soils. - The following areas are particularly to 
be considered for designation as protective forest zones: 
mountains and springs; water sources; water basins; 
areas around lakes and water resources, pamanent and 
temporary water courses; forested areas that merit 
classification as national parks or other protected 
spaces. The following protected areas are considered 
to be protected forest zones: 

Parque Nacional (National Park) An area of 
exceptional natural beauty, forest cover or natural 
ecosystems particularly primitive ecosystems, 
unaltered by human activity, to be protected for 



its floral or faunal species richness. - Access to 
the area and exploitation of natural resources are 
strictly regulated. 

Monumento Natural (Natural Monument) . 
Those natural formations, accidents or elements 
such as outstanding trees, caves or waterfalls, that 
are located in forested areas whose natural 
characteristics merit it special protection. - 

Sitio Natural de Interes Nacional (Natural Site 
of National Interest) A natural area with 

defmed limits that, although it does not meet the 
necessary conditions to be declared a national 
park, it merits protection to ensure that it remains 
in its natural state. 

In all protected forest zones including national parks 
and natural protected spaces, no activities are 
permitted that would alter the vegetation, wildlife, 
scenery or soil, or decrease water resources unless 
specified in the management plans approved by the 
state forest administration. In national parks and 
natural protected spaces recreational activities are 
permitted only with prior authorisation from 
COHDEFOR. Construction of buildings for touristic 
purposes is permitted only on cooperative agreement 
between COHDEFOR and the Honduran Tourism 
Institute (Instituto Hondureflo de Turismo). 
Scientific investigation is the only other activity 
permitted within the areas. 

Zone of Forestry Interest (Zona de Interis Forestal) 
An area of public or private forest classified 
according to its relevant economic interest 
particularly for extraction activities. 

NON-CLASSIFIED FOREST AREA 

(AREA FORESTAL NO CLASIFICADA) A 

private or publicly owned forested area not included 
in either of the above categories, the function of 
which has not yet been determined. 



157 



Protected Areas of the World 



Summary of Protected Areas of Honduras 



Map National/international designations 
ref. Name of area 



lUCN management Area 

category (ha) 



Year 
notiHed 





National Parks 


1 


Agalta 


2 


Azul Meambar 


3 


Celaque 


4 


Cerro Azul 


5 


Islas de la Bahia 


6 


La Tigra 


7 


Montafla de Comayagua 


8 


Montafla de Cusuco 


9 


Montafla de Yoro 


10 


Pico Bonito 


11 


Pico Pijol 


12 


Santa Barbara 


13 


Trifinio 




Biological Reserves 


14 


El Chiflador 


15 


El Chile 


16 


ElPital 


17 


Guajiquiro 


18 


Guisayote 


19 


Lancetilla 


20 


Misaco 


21 


Montecillos 


22 


Opalaca 


23 


Volcin Pacayita 


24 


Yerba Buena 


25 


Yuscaran 




Wildlife Refuges 


26 


Corral itos 


27 


EI Armado 


28 


Erapuca 


29 


La Muralla 


30 


Mixcure 


31 


Montafla Verde 


32 


Montafla de Puca 


33 


Ri'os de Cuero y Salado 


34 


Texiguat 




Protected Area 


35 


Jardin Botanico de Lancetilla 




Forest Reserves 


36 


Agalteca 


37 


El Caj6n 


38 


Guanaja 


39 


Golfo de Fonseca 


40 


Olancho 


41 


Sierra de Omoa 




Multiple Use Reserves 


42 


Cerro Guanacaure 


43 


Lago de Yojoa 



n 


62,400 


1987 


n 


20,000 


1987 


n 


27,000 


1987 


n 


15,000 


1987 


n 


29,416 




n 


7,550 


1980 


n 


18,000 


1987 


n 


18,000 


1987 


n 


15,000 


1987 


n 


112,500 


1987 


n 


11,400 


1987 


n 


13,000 


1987 


n 


5,400 


1987 


IV 


1,000 


1987 


rv 


12,000 


1987 


rv 


3,800 


1987 


IV 


7.000 


1987 


IV 


7.000 


1987 


rv 


1.681 


1987 


IV 


4,600 




rv 


12,500 


1987 


IV 


14,500 


1987 


rv 


9,700 


1987 


IV 


3.600 


1987 


rv 


2.300 


1987 


rv 


5.500 


1987 


rv 


3.500 


1987 


IV 


5,600 


1987 


rv 


6,093 


1987 


rv 


8,000 


1987 


IV 


8,300 




rv 


4,900 


1987 


rv 


8,500 


1988 


rv 


10,000 


1987 



rv 



1.253 



1978 



n 


100,000 


1966 


vra 


33,696 




vm 


5,400 


1969 


vni 


50,000 


1958 


vra 


1,000,000 


1966 


vra 


8,315 




vra 


1,000 




vra 


34,628 


1971 



158 











Honduras 


Map 
ref. 


National/international designations 
Name of area 


lUCN management 
category 


Area 

(ha) 


Year 
notified 




Biosphere Reserve 

Reserva de la Bi6sfera Rio PMtano 

World Heritage Site 

Reserva de la Bi6sfera Ri'o Plitano 


IX 
X 


500,000 
500,000 


1980 
1982 



159 



Protected Areas of the World 




Protected Areas of Honduras 



160 



NICARAGUA 



Area 139,000 sq. km 

Population 3,871,000(1990) 
Natural increase 3.19% (1990) 

Economic Indicators 

GDP: No infonnation 

GNP: US$ 800 per capita (1987) 

Policy and Legislation Prior to the 1979 revolution, 
Nicaragua had no national conservation objectives or 
policies, nor any institutional framework to implement 
or support environmental protection (Anon., 1989; 
Hartshorn and Green, 1985). Only since 1990, with die 
end of die war, have protected areas been properly 
planned and supported by adequate administration and 
infrastructure (Nietschmann, 1990). 

Nicaragua particijiates in die FAO Tropical Forestry 
Action Plan (TFAP), an international strategy for 
maximising the contribution of forestry sectors to 
national economic and social development while 
maintaining conservation principles. Further details on 
the extent of implementation of the TFAP in Nicaragua 
are required. 

Until recently, natural resource legislation was 
orientated towards exploitation, with little or no 
provision made for conservation. For example, the Law 
of Conservation, Protection and Development of the 
Nation's Forest Resources (Ley de Conservacion, 
Protecci6n y DesarroUo de las Riquezas Forestales del 
Pais), Decree No. 1381, 1967 deals almost exclusively 
with timber extraction and die granting of concessions. 
The first protected area, a wildlife refuge, was 
established by decree in 1958, and die first national park 
was legally established in 1971. However, with no 
national policy to support their protection, these areas 
were largely ineffectual (Anon., 1989). 

Following the 1979 revolution, a new policy of natural 
resource management was implemented with the Law of 
Creation of the Nicaraguan Institute of Natural 
Resources and the Environment (Ley de Creaci6n del 
Instituto Nicaragiiense de Rescursos Naturales y del 
Ambiente) (IRENA) of 24 August 1979. This law 
provided for die creation of the first institute specifically 
responsible for managing natural resources, and vested 
it widi the responsibility of formulating a national 
environmental policy to ensure dieir protection and 
rational use. The institute is also responsible for 
recommending new environmental legislation. Natural 
resources are declared part of the state heritage, available 
to all Nicaraguans, to allow die development of die 
country and to improve die quality of life (Anon., 1989). 

Also in 1979, the Law for the Establishment of die 
National Parks Service (Ley de Creaci6n del Servicio de 
Parques Nacionales), Decree No. 340 of 25 October 



provided for the creation of the National Parks Service 
(Servicio de Parques Nacionales) (SPN) within IRENA. 
The SPN is specifically responsible for the establishment 
and management of protected areas. 

These principles of natural resource protection were 
incorporated into the new political constitution 
(constitucion politica) approved in June 1987, die first 
constitution in die history of the country to include 
provisions for the rational use and protection of the 
environment. The state, through the relevant institutions, 
is responsible for the execution of national conservation 
objectives (Anon., 1989). 

In 1983, a number of legislative acts provided for die 
creation of a total of 17 protected areas in die Pacific 
region: Decree No. 1 194 of 3 February provided for the 
establishment of a national park (parque nacional); 
Decree No. 1294 of 12 August provided for a wildlife 
refuge (refugio de vida silvestre); and Decree No. 1320 
of 19 September 1983 declared a further 14 areas 
protected under the transitional category of nature 
reserves (reservas naturales) (Anon., 1989). 

Decree No. 527 of 23 April 1990 formalised die creation 
of a network of protected areas in die souUi-eastem 
region on tiie. border widi Costa Rica. These comprise 
the Nicaraguan component of the International System 
of Protected Areas for Peace (Sistema Intemacional de 
Areas Protegidas para la Paz) known as SI-A-PAZ, first 
proposed in 1974 (Castiglione, 1990). 

Three decrees passed in 1 99 1 provided for die protection 
of further areas of natural habitat Decree No. 42-91 
declared protected remnant montane ecosystems in die 
central part of die country, pine forests of the Caribbean 
coast and volcanic craters of the Pacific slope mountains, 
including die Pacific estuaries declared as natural 
reserves under the 1983 Decree (Cedeno et al., 1992). 
IRENA is empowered to define the limits and assign a 
management category for each area, and to provide 
detailed regulations for natural resource protection once 
the area is established. Decree No. 43-91 provided for 
the creation of a biological reserve in die north-east along 
the Honduran border to protect islands, reefs, sea turtles, 
coastal wetlands and the indigenous Miskito 
community, traditional inhabitants of the region. Decree 
No. 44-91 declared a substantial area in die north of the 
country protected as a national natural resource reserve 
(reserva nacional de recursos naturales), along the Coco 
River which separates Nicaragua and Honduras. This is 
the second largest reserve in Nicaragua and includes a 
wide range of habitats varying from lowland rain forest 
to cloud forest (Cedefio et al., 1992). IRENA is 
responsible for managing the reserve, and establishing 
regulations for natural resource use. Prohibited activities 
include commercial exploitation of forest resources; 



161 



Protected Areas of the World 



destruction of flora and fauna; and disorganised 
colonisation that threatens indigenous communities. 

There is no single, unifying law that gives definitions of 
the management categories of protected areas used in 
Nicaragua. Regulations and prohibitions pertaining to 
each area are given in the individual legislation 
providing for the creation of the area. During 
preparations for the creation of protected areas in the 
Caribbean region, it was noted that the existing 
management categories needed modification to suit 
specific conditions (Anon., 1989). Only three categories 
were available for use, two permanent (national park and 
wildhfe refuge) and one transitional (natural reserve). 

Most protected areas have been established in "holding 
categories", such as resource reserve (reserva de 
recursos) and natural reserve (reserva natural) (Cedeno 
et al., 1992). Detailed planning exercises for each of 
these areas, such as the one already under way for 
Miskito Cays Wildlife Refuge, will eventually define 
core conservation areas, multiple use zones and 
anthropological reserves (Cedeflo et al., 1992). 

Since 1990, IRENA has produced a national plan for 
strengthening and consolidating Nicaragua's protected 
area system (Nietschmann, 1990). Details are not 
available. 

International Activities Nicaragua signed the 

Convention on Nature Protection and Wildlife 
Preservation in the Western Hemisphere (Convenci6n 
sobre la Protecci6n de la Flora, de la Fauna y de las 
Bellezas Escenicas Naturales de los Parses de America) 
(Western Hemisphere Convention) in 1940 and ratified 
it in 1946. It actively participates in the Central 
American Commission on Environment and 
Development (Comision Centroamericana de Ambiente 
y DesarroUo) (CCAD). 

Nicaragua accepted the Convention Concerning die 
Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage 
(World Heritage Convention) on 1 7 December 1 979, but 
no natural sites have been inscribed to date. Nicaragua 
is not party to the Convention on Wetlands of 
International Importance especially as Waterfowl 
Habitat (Ramsar Convention), neither does it participate 
in the Unesco Man and the Biosphere Programme. 

Through cooperative agreements, Nicaragua and Costa 
Rica are working closely on the development of the 
binational protected areas system along the 
Nicaragua-Costa Rica border through the SI-A-PAZ 
project A binational commission (comisi6n binacional) 
was established in October 1990, and an agreement 
signed by Nicaragua and Costa Rica on 15 December 
1990 for collaboration with frontier protected areas 
(areas protegidas fronterizas). It is hoped that similar 
projects can soon get underway with the Honduran 
government for lands along the joint border with that 
country, and with both Honduras and El Salvador for the 



shared mangrove estuaries and coastal zone of the Gulf 
of Fonseca (Cedeno el al., 1992; Castiglione, 1990). 

During the past decade, Nicaragua was subjected to an 
economic blockade, and international assistance for 
conservation activities was extremely limited. However, 
in the past two years this situation has improved, and 
major new projects are foreseen with assistance from 
groups including lUCN, WWF, Cultural Survival, 
Wildlife Conservation International, Caribbean 
Conservation Corporation, the MacArthur Foundation; 
and bilateral donors, including the Nordic countries, the 
US, and Germany, and others (Cedeflo et al., 1992; 
B. Nietscmann, pers. comm., 1992). 

Administration and Management In the absence 
of a ministry or agency responsible for natural resources 
and the environment prior to 1979, the Central Bank 
(Banco Central) was assigned responsibility for the two 
national paries and one natural reserve created during die 
Somoza regime (Anon., 1989; Hartshorn and Green, 
1985). 

The Nicaraguan Institute of Natural Resources and the 
Environment (IRENA), estabUshed in 1979, was the first 
institute specifically responsible for managing natural 
resources. IRENA was created to formulate and 
implement a national conservation policy, to ensure the 
protection and sustainable exploitation of national 
natural resources (Anon., 1989). In practice, IRENA has 
broad responsibilities for natural resource management, 
including administration of protected natural areas 
(Cedeno et al., 1992). By the end of the 1980s, IRENA 
had suffered an 85% cut in staff, and was demoted to a 
sub-unit under die Ministry of Agriculture and Agrarian 
Reform (Ministerio de Agricultura y Reforma Agraria); 
few of its conservation programmes remained. Even 
after the war, despite good management, progress has 
been slow due to lack of foreign government support 
(Nietschmann, 1990). 

Within IRENA, the National Parks Service (Servicio de 
Parques Nacionales) (SPN) was created by decree in 
1979 as the technical division of the national park system 
(Cedeno et al., 1992). The SPN is responsible for 
conducting studies to select areas requiring protection, 
and for the implementation of IRENA's poUcies with 
respect to the development and administration of 
protected areas for scientific, educational, recreational 
and touristic purposes (Anon., 1989; Comisi6n 
IRENA-CORFOP,n.d.). 

Following the regionalisation policy initiated after 1979, 
protected area administration at the local level is the 
responsibility of regional delegauons of IRENA. 
IRENA's management policy is to include the 
participation of local populations to achieve 
conservation objectives (Anon., 1989). For example, 
Miskito Cays Biological Reserve will be managed 
cooperatively by IRENA, the regional autonomous 
government for north-west Nicaragua and the Miskito 
indigenous communities. An inter-institutional 



162 



Nicaragua 



commission was established recently to coordinate its 
planning and management. An indigenous, 
non-governmental environmental organisation, 
Mikupia, has been set up by the Miskitos to take direct 
responsibility for and benefit from reserve management 
(Cedeiio et al., 1992). Management involves the 
participation of 15,000 Miskito people in 23 coastal 
communities (Nietschmann, 1991). 

The NGO conservation movement is arguably still the 
weakest in Central America, but with recent changes in 
government it will no doubt become increasingly 
important. However, with the exception of Mikupia, 
NGOs are not involved directly in protected area 
management (Cedefio el al., 1992). The Nicaraguan 
Association of Biologists and Ecologists (Asociacion de 
Bidlogos y Ec6Iogos Nicaragiiense) (ABEN) is 
dedicated to promoting the protection of natural 
resources and the envirorunent, and has gained poUtical 
influence. ABEN monitors national environmental 
activities and represents the nation's concerns 
internationally (Karliner and Faber, 1986). The 
Environmental Network for Nicaragua (ENN), 
established in 1988, is an NGO working from outside the 
country to gain support for the government's activities, 
in environmental protection. 

IRENA maintains a limited institutional presence in 
seven areas of the protected area system. Protection 
efforts are concentrated in these areas, and personnel 
numbers range from one to 20, with basic equipment and 
infrastructure in a few of the areas. On-site 
administration staff and facilities are only in place at two 
areas (Cedeflo et al., 1992). 

The problems facing protected area management include 
not only the lack of public awareness and political 
support and the over exploitation of natural resources, 
but specific problems arose as a result of the long 
guerrilla war. Certain regions of the country were 
inaccessible until recently, and the entire nation was 
isolated in the international sphere, preventing potential 
financial and technical support for environmental issues 
(Anon., 1989). 

Systems Revievfs Nicaragua is the largest Central 
American country, and, after Belize, the nation with the 
lowest population density (Cedefio et al., 1992). The 
longest river, the two largest freshwater lakes and the 
richest volcanic soils in Central America are found here. 
The lowland tropical rain forests in the south-eastern 
comer of the country, and similar forests across the 
border in north-eastern Costa Rica, comprise the largest 
and wettest lowland rain forest remaining around the 
entire Caribbean rim , and the largest area of tropical rain 
forest north of Amazonia (Nietschmann, 1990). 
Likewise, the coastal lagoons, pine savannas, and 
wetlands of the north-east, together with similar areas 
across the border in Honduras, are the largest and best 
preserved examples of such ecosystems in the region 
(Cedefio e< al., 1992; Karliner, 1987). Nicaragua has the 
widest continental shelf and stretch of coral reefs in the 



Caribbean, and the most extensive seagrass pastures in 
the Western Hemisphere (Nietschmann, 1990). 

The country comprises three distinct biogeographic 
regions: Pacific, Central and Caribbean (Anon., 1989). 
The Pacific region is the most densely populated area of 
the country, and the major economic and productive 
activities take place here, including intensive agriculture 
and cattle ranching. It has the most severely degraded 
ecosystems and presents the most environmental 
problems (Anon., 1989). The remaining natural areas, 
for the most part small remnant dry forests on the higher 
slopes of volcanoes, and coastal mangroves, are 
fragmented, and degraded. Only the mangrove estuaries 
of Estero Real in the Gulf of Fonseca are largely intact 
(Cedefio eta/., 1992). 

The Central region is mountainous, but does not exhibit 
great altitudinal range. The largest tract of undisturbed 
tropical humid forest in Central America is located in the 
Caribbean region, the eastern third of the country 
(Anon., 1989; Cedefio et al., 1992). This sparsely 
populated area is the traditional homeland of the Miskito 
indigenous people. 

In spite of its distinction of being the largest Central 
American nation, Nicaragua has somewhat lower total 
biological diversity than neighbouring countries in the 
region. This is due primarily to its lower altitudinal 
diversity and absence of isolated high mountain ranges. 
For the same reasons, endemism rates are also lower 
(Cedeflo et al., 1992). However, this may also be due to 
the relative paucity of scientific research in Nicaragua 
(B. Nietschmann, pers. comm., 1992). 

Nicaragua's environment has a history of exploitation 
and destruction. In the early 20th century, US timber, 
banana and mining companies began to exploit the 
nation 's natural resources indiscriminately (Karliner and 
Faber, 1986). During the 43 years of the Somoza 
family's rule, environmental degradation increased 
severely. During the 1950s and 1960s, the area of land 
planted with cotton increased four-fold, and pesticide 
contamination was serious. In the 1960s and 1970s the 
spread of cattle ranching gave rise to one of die world's 
highest rates of deforestation. Trade in endangered 
species was rife (Nietschmann, 1990). As a result of 
these changes, displaced peasants migrated to the rain 
forest regions (Karliner, 1987). Around 30% of the 
country's tropical rain forests were destroyed during the 
1970s alone (Karliner and Faber, 1986). In this context, 
the war may have relieved pressure on natural resources: 
tight firearms control reduced hunting, cattle were 
slaughtered and sold, timber could not be moved, 
production from ecologically damaging gold mines 
suffered, and exploitative foreign projects were 
abandoned or shelved (Nietschmann, 1990). In fact, as 
fighting subsided, the Caribbean region began to be 
heavily exploited by foreign fishing boats. Only since 
1990 has the government been seriously dedicated to the 
conservation of natural resources: IRENA has been 
restructured and is under new direction, but lack of 



163 



Protected Areas of the World 



international government funds makes progress slow 
(Nietschmann, 1990). 

The first natural protected area was a wildlife refuge, 
established in 1956, and the first national park was 
declared in 1971. However, both areas were protected 
only in name, and no research or management activities 
were implemented (Anon., 1989; Cedefio et al., 1992). 
Shortly before the revolution, the National Registrar 
(Catastro Nacional) initiated studies to identify and 
select potential areas for protection throughout 
Nicaragua, which resulted in the creation of a second 
national park in 1979. 

IREN A began the development of a network of protected 
areas across the country called die National System of 
Protected Wildlands (Sistema Nacional de Areas 
Silvestres Protegidas) (SINASIP). This included a 
nationwide study to identify priority areas; define a 
system of management categories including those of 
transitory nature; and collect information to allow for 
new protected area legislation to be formulated. By 
1983, the preliminary identification study was 
completed, and 35 areas had been selected for protection, 
covering 13.28% of total land area (Anon., 1989). The 
proposed national system was divided into three 
sub-systems, according to the three distinct 
biogeographic regions in the country, and the Pacific 
region was identified as being of the highest priority 
(Anon., 1989). 

In 1983, the Pacific sub-system of SINASIP was 
initiated by the declaration of 17 protected areas, 
covering 1.1% of national territory and including a 
previously established national park. By 1987, of the 
17 areas described, three were designated pwrmanent 
management categories and were actively managed, and 
14 were protected under the transitory category of 
natural reserve (reserva natural) and awaiting 
management plans (Anon., 1989). 

Nicaragua, through IRENA, participates in the FAO 
Latin American Network Programme (Red 
Launoamericana de Cooperaci6n T6cnica en Parques 
Nacionales, Otras Areas Protegidas, Flora y Fauna 
Silvestres). This programme aims to coordinate the 
activities of participating countries, to assist in the 
implementation and functioning of a coherent and 
effective national system of protected areas in each 
country (FAO, n.d.). 

In 1991 two major new reserves were created: a 
biological reserve (reserva biologica) to protect islands, 
reefs, sea turtles and coastal wetiands and the Miskito 
Indian culture in the north-east along the Honduran 
border; a resource reserve (reserva de recursos), the 
second largest single reserve in Nicaragua along the 
Coco River, which separates Nicaragua and Honduras, 
to protect a wide range of habitats ranging from lowland 
rain forest to cloud forest. Also in the same year, a decree 
provided initial protection as resource reserves to 
remnant montane ecosystems of the central part of the 



country, pine forests of the Pacific coast and volcanic 
craters of die Pacific slope (Cedefio et al., 1992). 

The past decade of civil war severely Umited tourism in 
Nicaragua. With the end of the war, a major boom is now 
expected. However, only one park currently has minimal 
tourism infrastructure (Cedefio et al., 1992). 

Major threats to the protected area system include lack 
of on-site protection and management in most areas; die 
growing colonisation dueat, particularly to wildlands in 
Uie eastern half of the country, by former Sandinista 
soldiers and Contra guerillas who are now living in large 
numbers in forested lands; fires and overuse of mangrove 
forests along die dry and highly deforested Pacific slope; 
and uncontrolled logging and poaching in eastern parks 
and reserves (Cedefio et al., 1992). 

Addresses 

Instituto de Recursos Naturales y del Ambiente (IRENA) 

(Minister-Director), Apartado 5123, MANAGUA 

(Tel: 505 2 31273/31848; FAX: 505 2 31274/ 

670998) 
Mikupia (Director), Apartado 5123, MANAGUA 

(Tel: 505 2 31273/31848; FAX: 505 2 31274/ 

670998) 
Fundaci6n Nicaraguense para la Conservacion y el 

Desarrollo (Executive Director), Aptdo 1009, 

MANAGUA (Tel/FAX: 505 2 74563) 
Environmental Network forNicaragua,NSC,23 Bevenden 

Street, LONDON Nl 6BH 

References 

Alpizar, P. (1990). Un SI a lapaz y al proyecto SI-A-PAZ. 
Recursos suplemento especial: SI-A-PAZ. lUCN. 
16 pp. 

Anon. (1984). Plan de desarrollo forestal de la 
Republica de Nicaragua. Anexo II: Recursos 
forestales existentes y su desarrollo potencial para 
la produccidn de madera. IRENA/Corporaci6n 
ForestaldelPueblo (CORFOP)/Interforestas/Swedforest 
Consultind AB, Stockholm. 1 10 pp. 

Anon. (1989). El sistema de ^eas silvestres protegidas 
de Nicaragua articulo basado en el documento 
resullante del Taller Nacional sobre Conservacidn 
del Patrimonio Natural y Cultural realizado en 
Managua, en octubre de 1987. Oficina Regional de 
la FAO para Am6rica Latina y el Caribe, Santiago, 
Chile. Flora, Fauna y Areas Silvestres 9: 14-17. 

Castiglione, J. (1990). SI-A-PAZ en 1990, Recursos 
suplemento especial: SI-A-PAZ. lUCN, Gland, 
Switzerland. 16 pp. 

Cedefio, V., Cedefio, J., Barborak, J. (1992). Draft 
country report on Nicaragua. 4 pp. 

Comisidn IRENA-CORFOP. (n.d.). Patrimonio forestal: 
analisis cri'tico de la situacion actual y 
recomendaciones. Comisi6n Instituto Nicaraguense 
de Recursos Naturales y del Ambiente-Corporacion 
Forestal del Pueblo sobre bases para una politica y 
legislaci6n forestal. 



164 



Nicaragua 



FAO (n.d.). La red latinoamericana de cooperaci6n 
t6cnica en parques nacionales, otras ^eas protegidas, 
flora y fauna silvestres. Oficina regional de la FAO 
para America Latina y el Caribe, Santiago, 
Chile. 8 pp. 

Hartshorn, G.S. and Green, G.C. (1985). Wildlands 
conservation in northern Central America: 
Nicaragua.Tropical Science Center, San Jose/ 
CATIE, Turrialba, Costa Rica. 5 pp. 

Karliner, J.N. (1987). Make parks, not war. Amicus. 
Fall: 8-13. 



Karliner, J. N. and Faber, D. (1986). Nicaragua: an 

environmental perspective. Green paper Ul. The 

environmental project on Central America 

(EPOCA), San Francisco, USA. 8 pp. 
Nietschmann, B. (1990). Conservation by Conflict in 

Nicaragua. Natural History 1 1/90: 4249. 
Nietschmann, B. (1991). Miskito Coast Protected Area. 

National Geographic Research and Exploration. 

7(2): 232-237. 
Saravia, D. (1990) Recursos suplemento especial: 

SI-A-PAZ. lUCN, Gland, Switzerland. 16 pp. 



SUMMARY OF PROTECTED AREAS 



Map 


National/international designations 


lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 


notined 




National Parks 








1 


Archipielago Zapatera 


n 


10,000 


1983 


2 


Saslaya 


II 


11,800 


1971 


3 


Volcan Masaya 
Biological Reserves 


II 


5,500 


1978 


4 


Cayos Miskitos 


IV 


502,654 


1991 


5 


Ri'o Indio Mai'z 
Wildlife Refuges 


I 


295,000 


1990 


6 


La nor 


VI 


1,500 


1983 


7 


Los Guatusos 


IV 


10,000 


1990 


8 


Rio Escalante-Chococente 
Wildland Areas 


IV 


4,800 


1983 


9 


Macizos de Pefias Blancas 


VI 


7,000 


1976 


10 


Pinares de Dipilto 


VI 


1,500 


1983 



11 



National Natural Resource Reserve 
Bosawas 



vni 



800,000 



1991 



National Natural Reserve 

12 Alamikamba 

13 Archipielago de Solentiname 

14 Castillo de la Inmaculada 

15 Cerro Bana Cruz 

16 CordUlera Maribios 

17 Estero Real 

18 Isla Juan Venado 

19 Isla de Ometepe 

20 Laguna Mecatepe 

21 Laguna de Apoyo 

22 Laguna de Tisma 

23 Makantaka 

24 Padre Ramos 

25 Peninsula Chiltepe 

26 Volcan Concepcion 

27 Volcin Cosiguina 

28 Volcin Maderas 

29 Volcan Mombacho 

30 Volc^ Momotombe y Momotombito 

31 Yucul 



IV 


2,100 


1991 


IV 


8,500 


1990 


IV 


1.500 


1990 


IV 


19,700 


1991 


VI 


34,460 


1983 


IV 


38,725 


1976 


IV 


4,500 




IV 


3,700 




III 


1,050 




IV 


2,100 




IV 


7,000 


1983 


IV 


2,000 


1991 


IV 


4,826 


1990 


VI 

vni 


1,800 
2,200 


1983 


IV 


12,420 


1976 


IV 


4,000 


1983 


VI 


2,847 


1983 


VI 


8,500 


1983 


VI 


4,826 


1990 



165 



Protected Areas of the World 



^ •"•• . 

"v"^. '' 




Protected Areas of Nicaragua 



166 



Panama 



PANAMA 



Area 75,517 sq. km 

Population 2,400,000(1990) 
Natural increase: 1.90% (1990) 

Economic Indicators 

GDP: US$2,337 (1987) 

GNP: US$ 2,239 per capita (1987) 

Policy and Legislation No national conservation j)olicy 
has been officially adopted in Panama to date. However, 
the National Plan for Environmental Protection and 
Rehabilitation 1989-2000 (Plan Nacional para 
Proteccion y Rehabilitacion Ambiental) includes 
measures to integrate environmental issues into national 
development (lUueca, 1988). 

Panama participates in the FAO Tropical Forest Action 
Plan (TFAP), an international strategy for maximising 
the contribution of forestry sectors to national economic 
and social development while maintaining conservation 
principles. The Forestry Action Plan for Panama (Plan 
de Accion Forestal de Panama) was developed in 1990 
to interpret the global designs of TFAP to suit specific 
national needs, and is an integral component of the 
National Plan for Environmental Protection and 
RehabiUtation 1989-2000 (lUueca, 1988). ObjecUves of 
the action plan include revising current environmental 
legislation; coordinating the activities of all 
organisations involved in forest resource protection; and 
promoting training programmes for the forest service to 
increase the effectiveness of protection. Several projects 
are proposed, including recommendations to reinforce 
forest and protected area management Details of the 
extent of implementation of the projects are not known. 

The General Forestry Law No. 39, 1966 establishes all 
forest land as the property of the state, and declares the 
conservation, improvement and rational use of forest 
resources to be in the national interest Three classes of 
forest reserves are identified: production forest (bosque 
de produccion), protection forest (bosque de proteccion) 
and special forest (bosque especial). The latter category 
includes national parks, reserves and other protected 
area, as the definition provides for the declaration of 
special forest reserves for scientific, educational, 
historic, touristic, recreational or other reasons (Annex). 
Private land may be expropriated for protected areas. 

National parks, reserves and other categories of 
protected area are declared and modified by means of 
separate legal instruments which establish management 
objectives for the area and provide general regulations 
governing its use. Most protected areas have been 
created by executive decree, although a few were created 
by congressional law and two wildlife refuges were 
created by municipal ordinances. All but two areas, El 
Cop6 National Park and Chepigana Forest Reserve, have 



clear limits defined in the legislation providing for their 
creation. 

Law No. 12, 1973 created the first institute specifically 
responsible for natural resources in Panama, the National 
Directorate of Renewable Natural Resources (Direccion 
Nacional de Recursos Naturales Renovables) 
(RENARE), and established its general functions 
regarding wildlands conservation. Law No. 21, 1986 
converted RENARE into the current National Institute 
of Natural Renewable Resources (Instituto Nacional de 
Recursos Naturales Renovables) (INRENARE). 

There is no legislation unifying protected areas, aldiough 
plans for a national system have been proposed. 
INRENARE is currently drafting comprehensive new 
protected areas legislation which would standardise the 
management of all protected areas as part of an 
integrated system. 

International Activities Panama signed the Convention 
on Nature Protection and Wildlife Preservation in the 
Western Hemisphere (Convencion sobre la Proteccion 
de la Flora, de la Fauna y de las Bellezas Escenicas 
Naturales de los Pai'ses de America) (Western 
Hemisphere Convention) in 1940 and ratified it later. 

Panama ratified the Convention Concerning the 
Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage 
(World Heritage Convention) on 3 March 1978 and two 
sites are Usted; and ratified the Convention on Wetlands 
of International Importance especially as Waterfowl 
Habitat (Ramsar Convention) on 26 November 1990 
with one site listed; and participates in the Unesco Man 
and Biosphere programme with one site declared as a 
biosphere reserve. Through the Panama Tropical 
Forestry Action Plan, new projects are being designed 
with the Spanish International Cooperation Agency, the 
World Bank, and other donors. 

Panama, through INRENARE, participates in the FAO 
Latin American Network programme (Red 
Latinoamericana de Cooperacion Tecnica en Parques 
Nacionales, Otras Areas Protegidas, Flora y Fauna 
Silvestres). This programme aims to coordinate the 
activities of participating countries, to assist in the 
implementation and functioning of a coherent and 
effective national system of protected areas in each 
country (FAO, n.d.). 

On a regional level, Panama is actively involved in the 
Central American Commission on Environment and 
Development (Comisi6n Centroamericana de Ambiente 
y Desarrollo) (CCAD). Many projects in protected areas 
are supported by international agencies: Unesco in the 
case of World Heritage sites and biosphere reserves, 
lUCN and Paseo Pantera in Bocas del Toro, WWF in La 
Amistad, Bastimentos, and Darien, and TNC and 
US-AID on a national level. In 1982 Panama signed the 



167 



Protected Areas of the World 



Basic Convention for Creation of the Park (Convenio 
BSsico de Creaci6n del Parque), a binational agreement 
with Costa Rica for the creation, joint planning and 
administration of the transboundary park La Amistad. 
Assistance for this project comes from the Organisation 
of American States (OAS) and Conservation 
International (CI). CATIE and FAO have provided 
considerable technical assistance and training 
opportunities. 

Administration and Management The first 
governmental national parks department was established 
in 1968, primarily to administer Altos de Campana 
National Park. Under current legislation, all natural 
resources are the responsibility of INRENARE, whose 
objectives include formulating and implementing 
national environmental and forestry policies. 

Administrative responsibilities are divided between the 
respective directorates within INRENARE. Forest 
resources, particularly extractive and commercial 
activities, are managed by the National Directorate for 
Forest Development (Direccion Nacional de Desarrollo 
Forestal) which replaces the former Forestry Service. 
National parks, other protected areas and wildlife 
resources are managed by the National Directorate of 
Protected Areas and Wildlife (Direccion Nacional de 
Areas Protegidas y Vida Silvestre). Despite this broad 
mandate, the institution has a relatively small staff, 
including guards in the field who undergo a two-month 
training course but generally lack equipment, transport 
and funding (Candanedo and Barborak, 1992). 

Based on their management objectives and legal 
framework, several protected areas are managed with the 
collaboration of other organisations. This occurs in the 
case of Portobelo National Park, in collaboration with 
the Panamanian Institute of Tourism (Instituto 
Panameilo de Turismo) (IPAT), and Barro Colorado 
National Monument in collaboration with the 
Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute. The Water and 
Electricity Institute (Instituto de Recursos Hidrologicos 
y Electrificacion) (IRHE) provides support for 
management of La Fortuna Reserve. Barro Colorado has 
been the site of continuous and intensive ecological 
research since the early 1900s (Leigh et at., 1983), and 
is one of the best studied natural areas in the tropics. 

The National Indigenous Institute for Social 
Anthropology (Instituto Indigena Nacional de 
Antropologfa Social), created in 1958, divided 
indigenous populations for administrative purposes into 
areas known as comarcas. The Kuna and Embera 
peoples have authority for managing their own largely 
forested comarcas, or indigenous reserves, in 
coordination with government authorities. However, 
these two are the only comarcas that have been 
established legally, and many are without defined hmits 
(Candanedo and Barborak, 1992). The Kuna 
communities of San Bias Comarca have designated 
60,000ha of their 320,000ha indigenous reserve as a 
specially protected area, even though this reserve has no 



specific legislative designation, and are also proposing 
the whole area as a biosphere reserve. The Kuna have a 
well-trained team of wildland rangers and professionals 
and have benefited from considerable international 
technical and financial assistance (Archibold, 1990, 
1991; Houseal and Archibold, 1988). In 1983 the Study 
Project for the Management of Kuna Wildlands 
(Proyecto de Estudio para el Manejo de Areas Silvestres 
de Kuna Yala) (PEMASKY) was established to support 
the Kuna in managing their reserve. They now advise 
other Indian groups in Panama and other Neotropical 
nations on improving land management by indigenous 
peoples. Unfortunately, their success has not been 
matched by that of the other major indigenous groups of 
Panama, the Embera-Wounan and Guaymi, which 
nevertheless still maintain control over important 
predominantly forested areas of the country (Candanedo 
and Barborak, 1992). 

Several national non-governmental organisations 
(NGOs) are quite active in supporting protection and 
management of protected wildlands. These include the 
National Association for the Conservation of Natiu'e 
(Asociacion Nacional para la Conservacion de la 
Naturaleza) (ANCON), which helps to raise funds for 
park and buffer-zone management, and is home to the 
national conservation data centre (CDC), and the 
National Parks and Environment Foundation (Fundacion 
PA.NA.M.A.) which consists of 24 NGOs whose aim is 
to assist in the development of a protected area system. 
The University of Panama also assists INRENARE, 
particularly regarding research in protected areas. 

The highest priority of government and NGO agencies 
involved in protected areas is to improve the 
management and protection of existing parks and 
reserves. However, some additional protected areas have 
been proposed. These include an indigenous territory for 
the Guaymi Indians in western Panama, several island 
parks and reserves (Las Perlas, Isla Coiba), and a reserve 
in the Serrani'a de Maje mountains of eastern Panama. 
Another priority is to establish definite boundaries for El 
Cope National Park, the limits of which are defined in 
the decree creating this potentially large area. 

Systems Reviews Owing to its tropical setting, 
location on the Central American land bridge, and 
altitudinal and climatic variabiUty , Panama has very high 
biological diversity for its size. Some 218 species of 
mammals, 929 of birds, 226 of reptiles, and 170 of 
amphibians are found in the country, together with 
diverse coastal and marine ecosystems, including the 
largest mangrove estuaries in Central America along the 
Pacific coast, and important reef complexes along the 
Caribbean coast. It is home to an estimated 8,000-9,000 
vascular plants, including 1,226 endemic taxa (Davis 
et al., 1986). Endemism is highest in the highlands along 
the Costa Rican and Colombian borders; for this same 
reason, most endemic species are shared with these 
neighbours. 



168 



Panama 



Topographically, Panama comprises four regions: 
western Panama, dominated by the Cordillera de 
Talamanca extending down from Costa Rica in a 
southeasterly direction; central lowlands bisected by the 
Canal; the eastern region characterised by a series of 
coastal ranges; and the narrow Caribbean lowlands on 
the Caribbean coast (Hartshorn, 1981). Following the 
Holdridge (1967) ecological classification system, 12 
life zones are found in Panama. More than 75% of the 
country is located in just three zones: tropical moist, 
including extensive areas of tropical moist forest along 
the Caribbean coast and in the eastern Darien region; 
premontane wet; and rain forest (Hartshorn, 1981). 
Other important forest types include tropical dry forest 
along the Pacific coast, small areas of montane wet forest 
and subalpine paramo along the higher ridges near the 
Costa Rican border, and lower montane wet forests in 
much of the western highlands. 

With a population density of 31.2 persons per sq. km, 
and a growth rate of just 2.1% annually, Panama is less 
densely populated and has a lower population growth 
rale than neighbouring countries. However, destructive 
landuse practices, particularly extensive grazing on 
marginal lands, have led to large losses of forest cover 
(Heckadon and McKay, 1982), amounting to 
approximately 1% of remaining forest cover annually. 
Natural forests now cover around 3.2 milUon ha or under 
half of the total national territory, of which 1 .2 million 
ha are production forest and 2 million ha protection and 
conservation forest, including national parks and 
reserves (INRENARE, 1990b). The three categories of 
forest reserves (Annex) are collectively managed as the 
National Forest Management System (Sistema de 
Manejo de Bosques Nacionales) (INRENARE, 1990a, 
1990b). 

Barro Colorado Island has functioned as a biological 
reserve since 1923 and is thus the oldest continuously 
managed and protected wildland in the Central 
American region. It was established as a natural 
monument by the 1977 Torrijos-Carter Treaty on the 
Panama Canal. 

Efforts to plan and create a national protected areas 
system date back to the 1960s. By the late 1970s, 
substantive plans and proposals were made for priority 
parks and reserves and the protected areas system with 
the assistance of lUCN, FAO and CATIE (lUCN, 1976; 
see lUCN (1982) for information on a number of specific 
early management plans; Dalfelt and Morales, 1978). 
Most protected areas have been established since the 
beginning of the 1980s, and most have at least annual 
operational plans. A national protected areas system plan 
was produced in the mid-1980s with assistance from 
US-AID (Houseal, 1985). At present, protected areas 
collectively comprise the System of National Parks and 
other Protected Wildlands (Sistema de Parques 
Nacionales y otras Areas Silvestres Protegidas) 
(SPNASP), but there is no law which unifies them as 
such (INRENARE, 1990a). INRENARE is currently 



drafting the relevant legislation to provide for a 
comprehensive system. 

Nearly 20% of the territory is included in SPNASP, 
excluding indigenous reserves (Palacios, pers. comm., 
1992). Stricdy protected national parks, wildlife refuges 
and natural monuments cover just over 1 million ha, or 
1 3 .4% of the country. Forest reserves, recreational parks 
and protection forests, all less strictly protected, cover 
332,000 ha or 4.25% of the country. SPNASP covers a 
considerable percentage of the remaining natural areas 
of the country (Candanedo and Barborak, 1992; 
Palacios, pers. comm., 1992). In addition, a water 
production reserve is managed for forest protection but 
is not part of SPNASP. 

Major threats confront most protected areas, including 
insufficient budgets and personnel; illegal activities such 
as poaching, illegal timber harvest, and fire in drier areas; 
shipment of narcotics; looting of archaeological sites; 
and encroachment by landless farmers. Exploration for 
oil has taken place in a number of areas and poses a threat 
to certain protected areas. A large oil exploration project 
planned by Texaco for the Bocas del Toro region was 
recenUy cancelled, but the possibility of activities being 
transferred to the Darien region remains (Santos, 1991). 

Protected areas in general are also insufficiently used for 
educational programmes and research, and the potential 
economic benefits of ecotourism for the national 
economy andlocal communities around parks has yet to 
be realised. To provide a firm longterm financial basis 
for protecting and managing the nation ' s protected areas, 
an international debtswap is currenUy being negotiated 
with US-AID and The Nature Conservancy to help set 
up a permanent endowment fund to be managed by a new 
foundation (Fundaci6n Natura) recentiy established for 
that specific purpose. 

Tourism in protected areas is still quite limited, as are 
park visitor faciUties, even tiiough some protected areas 
near Panama City, such as Altos de Campana National 
Park, Soberani'a National Park, and Barro Colorado 
Island National Monument, are very accessible. 
However, as part of the general boom in naturebased 
tourism occurring throughout the Central American 
region, visitation is expected to increase substantially in 
the near future. As part of a new US -AIDf unded national 
conservation project, major investments in basic 
infrastiucture are planned for the protected areas system 
over the next decade (Candanedo and Barborak, 1992). 

Addresses 

Institute Nacional de Recursos Naturales Renovables 
(INRENARE), Apartado 2016, Parai'so, ANCON (Tel: 
507 32 45 18; FAX: 507 32 4975) 

Institute Panameilo de Turismo, Apartado 4421, 
PANAMA 5 (Tel: 507 26 7000; FAX: 507 26 3483) 
Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, PO Box 
2072, BALBOA (Tel: 507 27 6022; FAX: 507 62 
5942) 



169 



Protected Areas of the World 



Asociacidn Nacional para la Conservaci6n de la 

Naturaleza (ANCON), Apaitado 1387, PANAMA 1 

(Tel: 64 8100; FAX: 64 1836) 
Fundaci(3n PA.NA.M.A., Apdo 66623, El Dorado, 

PANAMA 
PEMASKY (Kuna wildlands management project), 

Apartado 2012, Paraiso, ANCON (Tel: 507 82 3226; 

FAX: 507 28 0516) 

References 

Alvaiado, R. (1989). Procedimiento para la creaci6n y 

manejo inicial de parques nacionales: dos estudios de 

caso en Panami. M.S. Thesis, CATIE, Turrialba, Costa 

Rica. 
Archibold, G. (1990). Pemasky en Kima Yala. In: 

Heckadon, S. et al., Hacia una Centroamirica Verde. 

Editorial DEI, San Jose, Costa Rica Pp. 37-52. 
Archibold, G. (1991). Conservacion y comunidades 

indigenas en Panami Panami: PEMASKY. 
Candanedo, 1., and Baiborak, }R. (1992). DRAFT country 

report for Panama. 7 pp. 
Chang, R., R.A. (1987). Panamd y sus parques: el canal y 

algo m5s hacia el tercer milenio. REN ARE presentation 

to the first international meeting "Los Parques 

Nacionales Hacia el Tacer Milenio". Caracas. 
Dalfelt, A. and Morales, R. (1978). Plan maestro, parque 

nacional Dari6n. CATIE: Turrialba, Costa Rica. 

213 pp. 
Davis, S.D., Droop, SJ.M., Gregerson, P., Henson, L., 

Leon, CJ., Lamlein Villa-Lobos, J., Synge, H. and 

Zantovska, J.(1986), Plants in danger what do we 

know?. lUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge. 

461 pp. 
FAO (n.d.). La red latinoamericana de cooperaci6n 

t6cnica en parques nacionales, otras ^eas protegidas, 

flora y fauna silvestres. Oficina Regional de la FAO 

para Amdrica Latina y el Caribe, Santiago, Chile. 

8 pp. 
FAO (1966). Food and Agricultural Legislation, Vol XV 

No.4., chapter Xm/I. Pp. 1-15 
Hartshorn, G.S. (1981). Forests and forestry in Panama 

Institute of Cunent World Affairs. 16 pp. 
Hartshorn, G.S. (1983). Wildlands conservation in Central 

America. In: Sutton, S.L. et al, (Eds), Tropical 

Rainforest ecology and management. Spec. pub. 2, 

British Ecological Society. Blackwell Scientific 

Publications, Oxford, UK. 
Heckadon, S. and McKay, A. (1982). Colonizacidn y 

Destruccidn de Basques en Panamd. Asociacion 

Panamefla de Antropologia Panamd. 174 pp. 
Herlihy, P.H. (1989). Panama's quiet revolution: comarca 

homelands and Indian rights. Cultural Survival 

Quarterly 13(3): 17-24. 
Holdridge, L.R. (1967). Life zone ecology; revised 

edition. Tropical Science Centre, San Jos6, Costa 

Rica. 206 pp. (Unseen) 
Houseal, B.L. (1985). Plan estratdgico para el sistema de 

parques nacionales y reservas equivalentes de 

Panamd. RENAREAJS-AID. 



Houseal, B.L. and Archibold, G. (1988). Kuna 
wildlands: traditional conservation. lUCN 
Bulletin 18(10-12): 8-10. 

lllueca, J.E. (1988). Report on behalf of the 
Government of the Republic of Panama to the 
7th meeting of Tropical Forest Action Plan 
(TFAP) forestry advisors. Tokyo, Japan, 
9-11 November 1988. 13 pp. 

INGTG (1988). Atlas nacional de la Republica de 
Panamd. Instituto Nacional Geogrdfico Tommy 
Guardia (INGTG). 222 pp. (Unseen) 

INRENARE (1990a). Plan de acci6n forestal de 
Panamd. Instituto Nacional de Recursos 
Naturales Renovables, Panama City. 106 pp. 

INRENARE (1990b). La cobertura boscosa de 
Panama. Trabajo realizado conjuntamente por: 
Direccion Nacional de Desarrollo Forestal del 
INRENARE y la Direcci6n de Planificaci6n. 
8 pp. 

lUCN (1976). Actas de la reunion centroamericana 
sobre manejo de recursos naturales y culturales. 
lUCN Publications New Series 36. 

lUCN (1982). Directory of neotropical protected 
areas. lUCN, Gland, Switzerland. 436 pp. 

LaBastille, A. (1976). An ecological survey of the 
proposed Volcdn Barii National Park, Panama. 
lUCN Occasional Paper 6: 177. 

Leigh, E.G. Jr., Rand, A.S. and Windsor, D.M. 
(Eds)(1983). The Ecology of a neotropical 
forest: seasonal rhythms and longer term 
fluctuations. Smithsonian Institution Press, 
Washington DC. 

MacFarland, C. and Zadroga, F. (n.d.). Plan de manejo 
y desarrollo del Parque Nacional Volcan Bani, 
Panamd. CATIE, Turrial'-ia Costa Rica 

Morales, R. and Cifuentes, M. (Eds) (1989). 
Sistema regional de dreas silvestres protegidas 
en Am6rica Central: plan de accion 1989-2000. 
CATIE, Turrialba, Costa Rica. 

Morales, R., Barborak, J.R. and MacFarland, C. 
(1984). Planning and managing a 
multicomponent, multicategory international 
biosphere reserve: the case of the 
La Amistad/Talamanca Range/Bocas del Toro 
Wildlands Complex of Costa Rica and Panama. 
In: Conservation, Science, and Society. Natural 
Resources Research XXI, Vol. 2. Unesco, Paris. 

Nyrop, R. (Ed.) (1980). Panama: a country study. 
American University, Washington, DC. 

OAS (1978). Proyecto de desarrollo integrado de la 
regi6n oriental de Panamd-Darien. Organisation 
of American States, Washington DC. 

Ogle, R.A. and Jones, H.R. (1973). Inventariacidn 
y demonstraciones forestales . Panamd, parques 
nacionales: un plan de desarrollo. FO: SF/PAN 
6 Informe tScnico 10. FAO/PNUD, Panama. 

Santos, E. (1991). Texaco se retira de exploraci6n 
petrolera en Bocas del Tore. La Prensa, Panamd, 
sdbado 14 de diciembre. 

Ugalde, A. and Godoy, J.C. (1992). Regional 
review: Central America. Regional reviews. 



170 



Panama 



lUCN, IVth World Congress on National Parks and 
Protected Areas, Caracas, Venezuela, 1021 February 
1992. Pp. 13.313.27. 
Vallester, P.E. (1981). Panami. Informe de la mesa 
redonda sobre parques nacionales, otras dreas 



protegidas, flora y fauna silvestres. Santiago, Chile, 
8-10 June. 
Wong, M. and Ventocilla, J. (1986). A day on Barro 
Colorado Island. Smithsonian Tropical Research 
Institute: Panama. 



ANNEX 

Definitions of protected area designations,as legislated, 

together with authorities responsible for their administration 



Title : DecretoLey No. 39 Ley General 
Forestal (DecreeLaw No. 19 General Forestry 
Law) 

Date: 29 September 1966 

Brief description: Declares it in the national 
interest to protect, conserve, renew and rationally 
utilise forest resources in the country. General forest 
regulations are stated. Provision is made for the 
classification of forest into three categories of forest 
reserve, details of which are given. 

Administrative authority: The Servicio 

Forestal (Forestry Service) within the Ministerio de 
Agriculture, Comercio y Industria (Ministry of 
Agriculture, Commerce and Industry) is assigned 
responsibility for the administration of this 
Decree-Law. 

Designations : 

Reserva Forestal (Forest Reserve): Bosque 
Productivo (Production Forest) A forested area 
declared suitable for the production of forest 
products. The main objective of the area is the 
generation of an annual or periodic income by the 
exploitation of its forest resources. 

Exploitation within the area is permitted only with 
prior approval of the Forest Service. 



Bosque Protectivo (Protection Forest) A forested 
area which, by virtue of its situation or other specific 
characteristics, is important for regulating water 
systems; protecting soils, crops, roads, agricultural 
developments, river banks, streams and other water 
resources; preventing soil erosion and landslides; 
protecting and providing habitat for species of flora 
and fauna which are declared important. 

Protection forests may only be worked for 
improvement purposes. 

Bosque Especial (Special Forest) All those 
forested areas maintained for scientific, educational, 
historic, touristic or recreational purposes. Land must 
be state owned and may be purchased for the 
establishment of such an area. 



This category includes public parks and woods, 
national parks, biological reserves, recreational 
areas, trees hning roads and associated stands and 
coppices. 

All exploitation is prohibited within special forest 
areas, except for specific cases in the public interest 
for which they were created. 



Source: FAO(1966) 



SUMMARY OF PROTECTED AREAS 



Map 


National/international designations 


lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 


notiried 




National Parks 








1 


Altos de Campana 




4,816 


1977 


2 


Cerro Hoya 




32,557 


1984 


3 


Chagres 




129,000 


1984 


4 


Coiba 




270,000 


1991 


5 


Darien 




579,000 


1980 


6 


La Amistad 




207,000 


1988 



171 



Protected Areas of the World 



Map National/international designations 
ref. Name of area 



lUCN management Area 

category (ha) 



Year 
notifled 



7 
8 
9 

10 



11 



Portobelo 
Sarigua 
Soberania 
Volcin Bani 

National Marine Park 
Isla Bastimentos 



12 


Scientific Reserve 
Isla Maje 


13 
14 
15 


Wildlife Refuges 
Ci6nega del Mangle 
Islas Taboga y Uraba 
Pefi6n de la Onda 


16 


Natural Monument 
Barro Colorado 


17 


Natural Park 
Metropolitano 


18 
19 
20 
21 
22 


Forest Reserves 
Canglon 
Chepigana 
La Tronosa 
La Yeguada 
Montuoso 


23 
24 


Protection Forests 
Alto de Darien 
Palo Seco 


25 
26 


Indigenous Reserves 
Comarca Kuna Yala (San Bias) 
Embere-Wounan (Ember-Orua) 



II 
n 
n 
n 



n 



rv 

IV 

rv 



n 



34,846 

8,000 

22,104 

14,000 



13,226 
1,433 



776 
258 

2,000 



15,400 



265 



1976 
1984 
1980 
1976 



1988 



1977 



1980 
1984 
1984 



1977 



1985 



vm 


31,650 


1984 


vm 


146,000 


1960 


vm 


22,000 


1977 


vni 


3,000 


1960 


vm 


10,000 


1978 


vm 


211,000 


1972 


vm 


244,000 


1983 


vn 


320,000 


1938 


vn 


432,600 


1983 



27 



Water Production Reserve 
La Fortuna 



vm 



15,000 



1976 



28 



Recreation Area 
Lago Gatiin 
Golfo de Montijo 



348 
80,765 



1985 
1990 



Biosphere 

Parque Nacional Fronterizo Dari6n 

Ramsar Wetland 
Golfo de Montijo 

World Heritage Sites 

Parque Nacional Darien 
Parque Intemacional La Amistad 



K 



DC 
X 



597,000 



80,765 



579,000 
207,000 



1983 



1990 



1981 
1990 



172 



Panama 




Protected Areas of Panama 



173 



THE REPUBLIC OF ARGENTINA 



Area 2,766,890 sq. km 
Population 32,322,000 (1990) 
Natural increase: 1.17% per annum 

Economic indicators 

GDP: US$ 2,647 per capita (1987) 
GNP: US$ 2,160 per capita (1989) 

Policy and Legislation Politically, Argentina is a 
federation. There are 23 provinces, one federal district 
(Buenos Aires), and the national territories of Antarctica 
and the South Atlantic Islands. Under provisions of the 
1922 Constitution, the creation and management of 
protected areas pertain to both national and provincial 
governments. No national conservation objectives have 
been stated in their entirety, although the large number 
of legal acts relating to conservation collectively 
comprise what may be considered a national objective 
(Anon., 1990; Merino, 1987). 

The first national protected areas legislation was the 
1934 Law of National Parks (Ley de Parques 
Nacionales) No. 1 2. 103 , which provided for the creation 
of the National Parks Service (Direccion de Parques 
Nacionales). A revision of the 1934 Law in 1970, 
National Parks Law No. 18.594, modified and 
standardised protected area designations. Power of 
administration and enforcement were vested in the 
National Park Service, an autonomous body under the 
Secretariat of State for Agriculture, Livestock and 
Fisheries (Secretaria de Estado de Agricultura, 
Ganaderia y Pesca). Provision was made for the creation 
of a national administrator to direct and supervise the 
National Park Service. The law also enables the 
establishment of a local advisory committee for each 
national park and a warden service with police force 
status. 

The National Parks Law currently in effect is No. 22.35 1 , 
1980 which is a modification of the previous two laws. 
It provides for the creation of an autonomous 
organisation, the National Parks Administration 
(Administraci6n de Parques Nacionales) (APN), to be 
resfKDnsible for managing protected areas on federal 
territory. The APN is empowered to expropriate private 
land where required to establish a protected area. Three 
categories of protected area are defined in the 1980 law; 
national park (parque nacional), natural monument 
(monumento natural) and national reserve (reserva 
nacional). Economic activities other than tourism are 
prohibited in the first two categories; commercial, 
industrial and other exploitative activities are permitted 
in national reserves (C. Daniele and C.E. Natenzon, pers. 
comm., 1992; Fourcade and Uribelairea, 1992) (see 
Annex). Protected areas on federal territory collectively 
form the system of national parks, national reserves and 
natural monuments (sistema de parques nacionales, 
reservas nacionales y monumentos naturales) and are 



owned by federal government (Giudice, 1988). In 1991, 
Decree No 2419/91 transferred the APN from the 
Secretariat of State for Agriculture, Livestock and 
Fisheries to the Secretariat for Natural Resources and 
Human Environment (Secretaria de Recursos Naturales 
y Ambiente Humano) (F. Erize, pers. comm., 1992; 
C. Daniele and C.E. Natenzon, pers. comm., 1992). 

Provincial legislation makes provision for the 
establishment of protected areas at local level, and varies 
from simply declaring the creation of a specific site, to 
listing objectives, prohibitions, and administrative 
details (APN, 1991; Merino, 1987). Human settlement 
and cattle exploitation are generally prohibited. 
Provincial legislation may also make provision for 
protected areas under private or university tenure, which 
are formed by agreement with the appropriate 
administrative organisation. A protected area must be 
transferred from provincial to national ownership by 
provincial law in order to be included in the national 
system. The area is then designated a management 
category - either national park, national reserve or 
natural monument - following the 1980 National Parks 
Law (F. Erize, pers. comm., 1992). 

Forest resource use and protection is founded on the 
1948 Defence of Forest Heritage (Defensa de la Riqueza 
Forestal) Law No. 13.273. Protection and permanent 
forests are defined (see Annex). Forested land within 
national parks or other protected areas is subject to the 
regulations given in the 1948 Law. Several 
modifications to this law, mainly with respect to articles 
regulating forest exploitation, have been made 
(see Annex). 

The fragmentary nature of conservation policy and 
legislation precludes a uniform strategy to be applied by 
all the appropriate administrative organisations (Anon., 
1990; Merino, 1987). Because of the very hmited 
participation that the present National Parks Law affords 
the provinces, and because of the overabundance of 
national security provisions it contains, there have been 
several attempts to revise it since 1984, but none of these 
has proceeded beyond draft form (F. Erize, pers. comm., 
1992). The current proposal for revision, written by 
APN, is part of a major effort to unify protected areas 
into a national system (APN, 1991). The draft states 
national conservation objectives and provides a legal 
framework for a coherent system, consolidating both 
national and provincial protected areas. Additional 
management categories and standardised designations 
are proposed (APN, 1991). The draft also proposes the 
establishment of a Federal Council of Natural Protected 
Areas (Consejo Federal de Areas Naturales Protegidas), 
comprising representatives from each province, as the 
highest authority for implementation of the law 
(APN, 1991). It must be stressed that, while 
much agreement has been reached informally 



175 



Protected Areas of the World 



between all parties involved, this project is in draft form 
only, and as such may be subject to major changes before 
being finally approved (F. Erize, pers. comm., 1992). By 
April 1992, it had still not passed through 
congress (C. Daniele and C.E. Natenzon, pers. 
comm., 1992) 

International Activities Argentina signed the 
Convention on Nature Protection and Wildlife 
Preservation in the Western Hemisphere (Convencion 
sobre la Proteccidn de la Flora, de la Fauna y de las 
Bellezas Esc^nicas NaOirales de los Paises de America) 
(Western Hemisphere Convention) in 1940, which has 
since been ratified. In 1976, Argentina and Bolivia 
signed the Agreement on the Protection of Flora and 
Fauna and the Formation of Frontier Parks (Acuerdo 
sobre la Proiecci6n de la Flora y Fauna y la Formaci6n 
de Parques Fronterizos). The Convention for the 
Conservation and Management of Vicuila (Convenio 
para la Conservaci6n y Manejo de la Vicuila) was signed 
by Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Ecuador, and Peru in 1979, 
and later ratified under Argentinian legislation. 

Argentina is party to the Convention concerning the 
Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage 
(World Heritage Convention) to which it acceded on 23 
August 1978, with two sites inscribed. Argentina also 
participates in the Unesco Man and the Biosphere 
Programme, having five sites approved as biosphere 
reserves. Argentina ratified the Convention on Wetlands 
of International Importance especially as Waterfowl 
Habitat (Ramsar Convention) on 5 May 1992 and has 
three sites inscribed. 

In 1991, The Nature Conservancy (USA) bought more 
than USS 500,000 of Argentine foreign debt to be used 
to fund conservation efforts in the Patagonian Andes. 

Administration and Management A large number of 
institutions are responsible for protected area 
management, and the situation is complex (APN, 1991; 
Merino, 1987). Generally, protected areas may be under 
either national legislature and administered by federal 
government, or under provincial legislature and 
administered according to tenure. A significant step in 
unifying administration and management of federal 
protected areas was the creation of the National Parks 
Service in 1934. The organisation was vested with the 
responsibility to regulate resource use in protected areas 
on federal territory. 

The National Parks Service became the National Parks 
Administration (APN) under the 1980 National Parks 
Law, and it continues to manage federally owned areas. 
At the same time, the provinces developed their own 
policies, created protected areas and assigned 
administrative responsibilities to various organisations 
(Anon., 1990; Giudice, 1988). The APN is an 
autonomous government agency under the Secretariat 
for Natural Resources and Human Environment 
(Secretaria de Recursos Naturales y Ambiente Humano). 
The APN has a directorate comprising a president, a 



vice-president and four members (APN, 1 99 1 ; Boyle and 
Boyle, 1986), and managerial power such as formulating 
and implementing management plans, research and 
conservation activities (FAO, 1983). In 1991, the APN 
was in the process of changing the structure of its 
directorate to include representatives from provincial 
governments (APN, 1991). The APN employs 260 park 
guards (guardaparques), of which 180 are involved in 
vigilance and control of protected areas (C. Daniele and 
C.E. Natenzon, pers. comm., 1992). 

The APN is responsible for national parks, national 
reserves, national natural monuments. All national parks 
have areas within them that are managed as strict natural 
reserves, and many national parks include a national 
natural reserve as part of their total area. Although these 
natural reserves are delimited, they are managed together 
with the park as one entity (APN, 1991). 

Forest reserves, designated as multiple use reserves, are 
declared by national decree or law but are managed by 
the National Forestry Institute (Instituto Forestal 
Nacional) (IFONA). Forests that occur within a national 
park or other protected area are managed by the 
respective administration, according to the tenure of the 
protected area. 

Most administrative responsibilities are determined by 
provincial laws. In some provinces, institutions have 
been established specifically to manage protected areas, 
while in others, more general institutions are given 
responsibility. These organisations are responsible for 
research activities, development and regulation 
enforcement (APN, 1991; Merino, 1987). 

Protected areas situated on land that is owned by a 
municipality are declared by municipal order and are 
managed either by provincial administrations or by the 
municipality itself Protected areas on land owned by 
universities are declared and managed in agreement with 
the respective provincial administrative body. 
Privately-owned protected areas may be managed 
independently or by provincial administration. 
Independent administration is often undertaken by 
non-governmental organisations, which either buy the 
land themselves, or work in conjunction with private 
landowners (APN, 1991). 

In recent years, the human pressure on Argentina's 
natural resources has increased dramatically because of 
the country's severe economic crisis, and it is often 
difficult to maintain strict protected areas. Thus, 
biosphere reserves constitute an important alternative. 
Of Argentina's five biosphere reserves, two are managed 
by slate Subsecretariats, one by a municipality, and two 
by independent institutes; this gives rise to a 
heterogeneous system of logistics and management. 
Unfortunately, poor regional development throughout 
Argentina has retarded the integration of biosphere 
reserves into territorial planning (Daniele et al., n.d.) 



176 



The Republic of Argentina 



There are many non-governmental organisations 
(NGOs) dedicated to conservation and sustainable 
development. One of the largest, the Argentinian 
Wildlife Foundation (Fundaci6n Vida Silvestre 
Argentina) (FVSA), is the most active in assisting 
private land owners to establish and manage protected 
areas (APN, 1991). The FVSA obtains provincial legal 
declarations, formulates management plans, and visits 
the area periodically (FVSA, n.d.). By 1991, the FVSA 
managed the majority of privately-owned protected 
areas (APN, 1991). Other NGOs include the River Plate 
Ornithological Association (Asociaci6n Omitologica 
del Plata), Friends of the Earth Foundation (Fundacidn 
Amigos de la Tierra), and the Argentinian Museum of 
Natural Sciences (Museo Argentino de Ciencias 
Naturales "Bernardino Rivadavia"). 

There has been little or no coordination between the APN 
and the provinces with respect to protected areas 
management (Boyle and Boyle, 1986). Great differences 
in management between the provinces have arisen, with 
inconsistent designations and differences in the number 
of personnel employed (APN, 1991; Giudice, 1988; 
Merino, 1987). In many cases, insufficient resources are 
available for effective natural resource regulation, and 
information on the efficiency of provincial management 
is not readily available (APN, 1991). 

Projects to formulate a new National Parks Law and 
create a National System of Natural Protected Areas 
(Sistema Nacional de Areas Naturales Protegidas) are 
being put forward. These strive to coordinate policies 
and management and stimulate cooperation between the 
provinciaUy managed protected area systems and the 
federally managed, or national, system. A Federal 
Council (Consejo Federal), comprising representatives 
from all the provinces and the federal government would 
assess the activities of the different management 
authorities and propose poUcies to them (see Systems 
Reviews) (APN, 1991; Giudice, 1988; F. Erize, pers. 
comm., 1992). 

To increase administrative efficiency, a wider range of 
management categories would be introduced, varying 
from multiple use to strict protection, and protected areas 
sub-divided into different managerial zones. 
Management plans would be mandatory for each area 
(APN, 1991; Giudice, 1988). By 1992, four management 
plans had been written (Fourcade and Uribelarrea, 
1992). 

Systems Reviews Four main geographical regions are 
distinguished: mountain, sub-mountain, grassland and 
steppe. The Andean mountains extend almost the entire 
length of the country along the western border, and 
encompass a variety of associated ecosystems from 
Andean desert in the north and west, to forest and 
Patagonian steppe in the south (Luna, 1977). Altitudes 
range to 6,960m. In the south, the Andes are much lower 
in elevation with many glacial lakes (Luna, 1977). The 
sub-Andean region is extensively irrigated for 
agricultural production. 



Grassland extends east of the Andes over a large part of 
the country, and may be distinguished into two different 
types: Chaco and pampas grassland (Paxton, 1989). The 
Chaco is a humid and swampy region with annual 
precipitation between 400mm and 1000mm, extending 
from Bolivia and Paraguay into northern Argentina. The 
vegetation is sub-tropical, and cotton farming is the 
major agricultural activity. Pampas grassland, 
characterised by deep, fertile soU and a mild cUmate, 
extends in a wide belt from the Chaco in the north to 
southern Buenos Aires Province and covers most of San 
Luis and La Pampa provinces. Together with a large tract 
of savanna grassland, known as the Pampeana Steppe in 
Buenos Aires province, this comprises the flattest and 
most densely populated region in the country. 
Agriculture is extensive; the main industries are located 
in this region and 60% of the population lives here (APN, 
1991; Paxton, 1989). This region has suffered the 
greatest degree of human alteration in the country, and 
only those parts not suitable for agriculture remain in 
their natural state (APN, 1991). 

The Patagonian Steppe, a low, cold and arid plateau 
characterised by strong wind, extends from Neuquen 
Province to Tierra del Fuego, covering the majority of 
the southern part of the country. It is bordered to the east 
by the Atlantic Ocean and to the west by the Andean 
mountains. The ecosystems found here are very fragile 
and soil erosion occurs in areas of extensive pastoral 
agriculture (APN, 1991). 

Sub-tropical forests are found in two regions. The 
Tucumano-Boliviana forest, an extension of Bolivian 
forest, covers part of Salta, Jujuy and Tucuman 
provinces in the north, and the Mision forest (Selva 
Misionera), an extension of the southern Brazilian forest, 
covers most of Misiones Province in the north-east 
(Correa Luna, 1977). Agricultural activities have 
affected 41% of the Mision forest, 23% remains in its 
natural state and 36% is secondary growth. Subantarctic, 
or Andinopatagonian forest stretches in a narrow belt 
(50km at its widest) from Neuquen Province to Tierra 
del Fuego, and may be considered as two distinct regions 
divided by the 47 southern latitude. North of this is the 
Valdivian District, and south, the Magellan forest, 
characterised by strong winds and extreme cold (APN, 
1991). A detailed, modem work, classifying Argentine 
vegetation into 20 categories, has been produced 
(Natenzon, 1988). 

The creation of protected areas dates back to 1 903 when 
privately-owned land was donated to the government, to 
be maintained in its natural state in the area that is now 
Nahuel Huapi National Park. Likewise, land in Misiones 
Province has been regulated as a natural reserve since 
1909, in the area that now forms Iguazii National Park 
(APN, 1991). Neither of these areas was legally 
protected, and the first national park provided for by 
legislation was created in 1922. Prohibited activities 
included felling trees, killing wildlife and altering 
watercourses. The first provincial protected area was 
established in 1936. 



177 



Protected Areas of the World 



By 1991, a total of 12,135,900ha was protected, 
corresponding to around 4.35% of total land area and 
comprising 190 individual sites. There are 24 
conservation units under national administration, 
covering 25,817 sq. km, and one under the 
administration of Buenos Aires city, all declared by 
federal legislation. The nationally administered system 
represents 0.9% of the country (Fourcade and 
Uribelarrea, 1992). The remaining 165, covering 95,542 
sq. km, are under provincial legislation, the majority of 
which are administered by provincial organisations 
alone, but eight are managed by municipalities, 23 by 
individuals, and four by universities, often in 
conjunction with provincial institutions (APN, 1991; 
Erize, n.d.). 

The present system of protected areas does not reflect the 
diversity present in Argentina, with many ecosystems 
f)oorly represented or not included at all (APN, 1991). 
Of the 25-30 different ecosystems found in Argentina, 
only 12 are represented in the national system (Fourcade 
and Uribelarrea, 1992). Sub-tropical forest and the 
Chaco region are significantly under represented, and 
pampas grassland, where human impact has been 
greatest, is virtually unprotected. The regions with the 
highest coverage of protected areas are high Andean 
steppe and Subantarctic Forest, including lakes and 
glaciers (APN, 1991; F. Erize, pers. comm., 1992). 

Protected areas are very heterogeneous in terms of 
legislation, ownership, administration and management 
In some cases, there is little more than a decree creating 
the protected area, without defining boundaries or 
objectives. This results in confusion and inconsistencies 
over the designation of management categories (APN, 
1991). Federal protected areas collectively comprise the 
system of national parks, national reserves and natural 
monuments administered by the APN. Provincial 
protected areas must first be ceded to federal ownership 
before they can be included in the system (Giudice, 
1988). 

The main problems facing protected areas differ between 
north and south. In the north, hunting and timber 
extraction are the main threats, whereas excessive 
tourism and "exploitation of forest resources" are 
problems in the south. Grazing is a problem throughout 
Of twenty units of the national system seven are 
managed inadequately (Fourcade and Uribelarrea, 
1992). 

Following the creation of the FAO Latin American 
Network (Red Latinoamericana de Cooperaci6n T6cnica 
en Parques Nacionales, otras Areas Protegidas, Flora y 
Fauna Silvestres) in 1983, all participating countries 
were encouraged to form national networks to 
consolidate protected area management. The aim of a 
national system is to organise conservation units within 
national territory so that national conservation objectives 
may be attained (APN, 199 1). The National Network of 
Technical Cooperation in Protected Areas in Argentina 
(Red Nacional de Cooperaci6n T6cnica en Areas 



Naturales Protegidas) was created in 1986 to instigate 
the process of creating a national system (APN, 199 1 ; Di 
Pace, 1989). It comprises representatives from all 
organisations that administer protected areas, both 
national and provincial. The Provisional Board of 
Directors (Comision Directiva Provisoria) is made up of 
representatives from the APN, the National Commission 
of Environmental Politics (Comision Nacional de 
Politica Ambiental) (CONAPA), and from 18 of the 23 
provinces. Workshops are held at least once a year (APN, 
1991). 

The proposal for a national system of protected areas was 
put forward by the National Network in 1990. All 
conservation units, under their respective administrative 
organisations and legislation, are lo be united in this 
system by the National Network. Increased cooperation 
between the APN and provincial organizations is 
encouraged. Proposed national conservation objectives 
are stated and include maintaining natural biological 
process and protecting representatives of national 
ecosystems. The national system of protected areas 
would comprise two sub-systems; the national 
sub-system managed by the APN, IFONA, and Buenos 
Aires city, and the provincial sub-system managed by all 
other provincial and private institutions. The network 
encourages provincial governments to unify their 
protected areas into coherent sub-systems (APN, 1991). 

The first stage in unifying protected areas into a national 
system is to standardise designations. In 1989, the 
network adopted a classification system for protected 
areas in Argentina along the lines of the lUCN system 
of management categories (see Annex). Existing 
protected areas throughout the country were reviewed 
and reclassified as necessary, although this procedure is 
not yet complete (APN, 1991). 

Argentina is undergoing a process of increasing 
federalisation and the provinces are asserting their power 
to administer natural resources in their territory. This 
accentuates the need for a national strategy for resource 
protection (Anon., 1990). The implementation of the 
proposed national system of natural protected areas 
would be a significant step towards effective protection 
of natural resources in Argentina (APN, 1991). 

Addresses 

Administraci6n de Parques Nacionales (APN) 
(Presidente), Secretaria de Recursos Naturales y 
Ambiete Humano, Avda Santa Fe 690, 1059 
BUENOS AIRES (Tel: 1 311 6633; Tlx: 21535 
dgaag ar) 

Comit6 Nacional MAB Argentina, Secretaria de 
Vivienda y Ordenamiento Ambiental, Defensa 120, 
1002 BUENOS AIRES (Tel: 1 331 0680) 

Asociacion Omitol6gica del Plata, 25 de Mayo 749, 2 
piso 6, 1002 BUENOS AIRES (Tel: 1 312 8958) 

Fundacion Vida Silvestre Argentina (FVSA), Avenida 
Leandro N., Alem 968, planta baja, 1001 BUENOS 
AIRES (Tel: 1 311 1973/1942) 



178 



The Republic of Argentina 



Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales, Angel Gallardo 
470, 1405 BUENOS AIRES (Tel: 1 982 0306) 

References 

Anon. (1990). Bases del sistema nacional de dreas 
protegidas para la conservacidn del palrimonio 
natural de la Argentina. FAOAJNDP Project 
ARG/85/012. 55 pp. 

APN (1991). El sistema nacional de dreas naturales 
protegidas de la Republica Argentina. Diagonostico 
de su desarrollo institutional y patrimonio natural. 
Administracidn de Parques Nacionales, Buenos 
Aires. 127 pp. 

Boyle, S.C. and Boyle, T.P. (1986). Parks and reserves 
of Argentina. Unpublished. 

Di Pace, MJ. (1989). Algunos aspectos significativos 
ligados a la investigacion en las Sreas naturales 
protegidas de Argentina. Taller intemacional sobre 
investigacion en areas silvestres protegidas, Islas 
Galapagos, Ecuador. 5 pp. 

Daniele, C, Gomez, I., and Zas, M. (n.d.). Diagnostico 
comparativo de las reservas de biosfera de la 
Republica Argentina. Secretaria Permanente del 
Comite MAB Argentino, Direccion Nacional de 
Ordenamiento Ambiental. SVOA. Unpublished. 
15 pp. 

Echechuri, H.A. (1985). Consolidacion del manejo de 
las areas protegidas en la Argentina: "Mision de 
apoyo para el desarrollo del proyecto". lUCNAVWF. 
Buenos Aires. 



Erize, F. (n.d.). La experiencia argentina en manejo 
privado de areas naturales protegidas. Unpublished. 
6 pp. 

FAO (1983). Informe de la mesa redonda sobre parques 
nacionales. otras dreas protegidas, flora y fauna 
silvestres. Santiago de Chile, 8-10 junio 1983. 
Pp. 12-15. 

Fourcade de Ruiz, M.T. and Uribelarrea, D.S . de ( 1 992) . 
Sistema de 5reas protegidas en Argentina. 
In: Amend, S. and Amend, T. (Eds) ^Espacios sin 
Habitantes? Parques Nacionales de America del 
Sur. International Union for the Conservation of 
Nature and Natural Resources and Editorial Nueva 
Sociedad, Caracas. Pp. 12-17. 

FVSA (n.d.). Creacion de refugios privados de vida 
silvestre. Fundacion Vida Silvestre Argentina. 5 pp. 

Guidice, L.A. (1988). Planificaci6n del sistema de 
parques nacionales. Administraci6n de Parques 
Nacionales/FAOAJNDP, Buenos Aires. 18 pp. 

Merino, S. (1987). Inventario de ireas naturales 
protegidas de la Argentina. Unpubhshed. 600 pp. 

Natenzon, C.E. (1988). Marco biogeogrdfico nacional. 
Administracion de Parques Nacionales, Buenos 
Aires. (Unseen) 

Paxton, J. (Ed.) (1989). The Statesman's Yearbook 
1989-90. The Macmillan Press Ltd., London and 
Basingstoke, UK. 1691 pp. 

SNPN (1974). La conservacidn de la naturaleza: 
parques nacionales argentinos. Servicio Nacional de 
Parques Nacionales, Buenos Aires. 165 pp. 



179 



Protected Areas of the World 



ANNEX 



Deflnitions of protected area designations, as legislated, together with authorities 
responsible for their administration 



Title: Ley de Parques y Reservas Nacionales y 
Monumentos Naturales (Law of National 
Parks and Reserves and Natural Monuments), 
National Law No. 22.351 

Date: 12 December 1980 

Brief description: To provide for the creation 
of protected areas on land owned by the Republic, 
giving three designations. Protection of natural 
resources is in accordance with national security 
requirements. 

Administrative authority: Administraci6n de 
Parques Nacionales (National Parks Administration), 
within the Ministerio de Economi'a (Ministry of 
Economy) 

Designations: 

Parque Nacional (National Park) Natural area 
that has not been altered in any way except to fulfil 
essential tourist and National Security requirements. 
Protection is inviolable, exploitation of floral and 
faunal resources, except in relation to tourism, is 
prohibited. 

Reserva Nacional (National Reserve) 
Conservation area established either as a protection 
zone adjacent to a national park, or as an independent 
protected area when the designation of national park 
is not appropriate. 

Human settlement and development must be 
compatible with specified conservation objectives 
and priorities. 

Monumenio Natural (Natural Monument) 

Inviolable area allocated for protection of any plant 
or animal species or communities, or natural 
formations of scientific, scenic or historic interest. 
The only activities permitted are authorised scientific 
research and those relating to tourism. 

Source: Original legislation 

Management categories adopted within the 
National System of Protected Areas in 1989 
(APN, 1991) 

Reserva Cientifical Reserva Natural Estricta 
(Scientific Reserve/Strict Natural Reserve) 
Natural area with exceptional ecosystems or 
communities of floral or faunal species, the 
protection of which is of scientific and national 



interest. The ecosystems or organisms may be 
particularly fragile and do not demonstrate any 
human interference. 

Protection is inviolable. The only activities permitted 
are research for scientific and educational purposes. 

Parque Nacional (National Park) Natural 

area showing little or no human interference, which 
is representative of a particular national 
biogeographic region or of particular scenic or 
scientific interest. Two different administrative 
zones are distinguished within a national park: 

Zona Intangible (Intangible Zone) 
Inviolable protection given to an area containing 
floral or faunal species of scientific interesL All 
activities that would cause disturbance to the 
ecosystem are prohibited. 

Zona Restringida (Restricted Zone) 
Tourism and minimum alteration for effective 
management are allowed in the area but human 
settlement, hunting, fishing, and industrial 
exploitation are all prohibited. 

Monumenio Natural (Natural Monument) 
Area that contains natural formations, habitats or 
plant or animal species of national or provincial 
importance. Protection is inviolable and public 
access restricted. 

Reserva Natural ManejadalSantuario de Fauna y 
Flora (Natural Managed Reserve/Floral and 
Faunal Sanctuary) Area where the protection 
of a sp)ecific habitat is essential for maintaining the 
existence of wild species of national or provincial 
importance. 

Size is unimportant as long as the criteria for 
protection are met. 

Activities that are compatible with protection 
objectives are allowed, subject to regulation, as long 
as they do not endanger the protected species or 
habitats. 

Paisaje Protegido (Protected Landscape) 

Diverse category of areas protected to maintain 
nabiral or cultural characteristics. Areas that come 
under this designation may be distinguished as two 
types: 

Natural or modified areas (but not urban centres) 
that have been intensively exploited by man for 



180 



The Republic of Argentina 



recreation and tourism and have attractive scenic 
characteristics. 

Landscapes that exhibit cultural modifications 
owing to human inhabitance over a long period 
of time. 

Reserva Natural-Cultural (Natural-Cultural 
Reserve) Natural area inhabited by indigenous 

communities interested in preserving their cultural 
integrity. In these areas, people are directly 
dependent on the land to provide their livelihood. 
May be of anthropological interest 

The administrative organisations responsible for 
these areas must reach an agreement with the 
community in question, to protect and develop 
indigenous culture. 

Management plans are to be drawn up, that promote 
the participation of the communities themselves. 

Reserva de Uso Multiple (Multiple-Use Reserve) 
Area with certain degree of transformation from its 
natural state, where production activities are 
practised in a sustainable manner. The administrative 
organisations impose prohibitions and regulations to 
ensure exploitation is sustainable. 

Different functional zones may be distinguished 
within the area. Zones set aside for the exploitation 
of wildlife or plant species are maintained more or 
less in their natural condition, whereas zones set 
aside for human settlement allow the introduction of 
exotic floral or faunal species for economic purpose. 

Area may be extensive. Management plans are 
obligatory, to be drawn up by the administrative 
organisation for each area. 

This category may include severely degraded areas 
where protection and regulation is required to restore 
them to a stable state. 

Source: APN, 1991 NB Only categories "parque 
nacional", "reserva natural", and "monumento 
natural" are used within the federal system; the rest 
apply to the provincial system (F. Erize, pers. comm., 
1992). It is unclear whether these categories have yet 
been legally approved. 



Title: Defensa de la Riqueza Forestal (Defence 
of Forest Heritage) Law No. 13.273 

Date: 30 September 1948, Amendments in 1963, 
1972, 1973, 1974, 1975 and 1979 

Brief description: Declares it in the pubUc 

interest to protect and improve natural forested areas, 
whether on federal, provincial or private land. The 
provinces receive federal support to comply with this 
law. 

Administrative authority: Administracion 

Nacional de Bosques (National Forestry 
Administration), within the Ministerio de 
Agricultora (Ministry of Agriculture). The provinces 
are obliged to create their own corresponding 
administrative organisations. Privately-owned land 
is under the respective provincial administration. 

Designations: 

Bosque Protector (Protection Forest) A 

forested area that is important as a watershed, refuge 
for protected species, or for soil stabilisation. 

Bosque Permanente (Permanent Forest) Areas 
that are to remain forested because they form part of 
national or provincial park or reserve, or because 
they include protected species. 

For both protection and permanent forest, 
commercial exploitation is prohibited. Only 
improvement activities are allowed. 

Source: Original legislation 

Title: Modification of Law No. 13.273 

Date: 30 August 1973 

Brief description: A modification of the 1948 
Defence of Forest Heritage Law, providing for the 
creation of an autonomous, federal organisation 
responsible for forestry administration. The new 
institute replaces the former National Administration 
of Forests. 

Administrative authority: Instituto Forestal 

Nacional (National Forestry Institute), within the 
Ministerio de Economia (Ministry of Economy) 

Source: Original legislation 



181 



Protected Areas of the World 



SUMMARY OF PROTECTED AREAS 



Map National/international designations 
ret. Name of area 



lUCN management Area 

category (ha) 



Year 
notified 





National Parks 


1 


Baritu 


2 


Calilegua 


3 


Chaco 


4 


El Palmar 


5 


ElRey 


6 


Iguazu 


7 


Lago Puelo 


8 


Laguna Blanca 


9 


Lani'n 


10 


Lihu6 Calel 


11 


Los Alerces 


12 


Los Arrayanes 


13 


Los Glaciares 


14 


Nahuel Huapi 


15 


Perito Moreno 


16 


Rio Pilcomayo 


17 


Tierra del Fuego 




Scientific Reserves 


18 


Bahia San Bias 


19 


Bahia de Samborombon 


20 


Cope 


21 


El Payen 


22 


Fuerte Esperanza 


23 


Isla Botija 


24 


Laguna de Llancanelo 


25 


Los Andes 


26 


Nacufidn 


27 


Punta Le<5n 




National Scientific Reserve 


28 


Otamendi 




Natural Reserves 


29 


Acambuco 


30 


Agua Dulce 


31 


Auca Mahuida 


32 


Batea Mahuida 


33 


Cabo Virgenes 


34 


Cabo dos Bahias 


35 


Chacharrameni 


36 


Chancani 


37 


Chafly 


38 


Complejo Islote Lobos 


39 


Dunas del Atldntico Sur 


40 


El Rico 


41 


Guasamayo 


42 


Iberd 


43 


Ichigualasto 


44 


Isla Embudo, Bermeja y Trinidad 


45 


Isla Martin Garcia 


46 


La Azotea 


47 


La Humada 


48 


LaLoca 


49 


La Reforma 



n 


72,439 


1974 


II 


76,000 


1980 


II 


15,000 


1954 


II 


8,500 


1966 


II 


44,162 


1948 


II 


49,395 


1934 


II 


14,220 


1971 


II 


8,213 


1940 


II 


200,870 


1937 


II 


9,900 


1977 


II 


186.730 


1937 


II 


1,000 


1974 


II 


450,000 


1937 


n 


475,781 


1934 


II 


85,100 


1937 


II 


47,000 


1951 


11 


63,000 


1960 




7,386 


1987 




9,380 


1982 




114,250 


1968 




192,996 


1982 




11,619 






730 


1958 




40,000 


1980 




1,440,000 


1980 




12,880 


1961 




1,000 


1985 



2,632 



1990 



IV 


8,266 


1979 


IV 


10,000 


1970 


IV 


1,000 


1990 


IV 


1,286 


1968 


IV 


1,230 


1986 


IV 


1,183 


1973 


IV 


2,500 


1974 


IV 


4,920 


1986 


IV 


2,039 


1986 


IV 


800 


1977 


IV 


3,000 


1989 


IV 


2,600 


1968 


IV 


9,000 


1963 


IV 


1,200,000 


1982 


IV 


62,916 


1971 


IV 


14,000 


1991 


IV 


180 


1969 


IV 


2,458 


1990 


IV 


5,000 


1974 


IV 


2,169 


1968 


IV 


5,000 


1974 



182 



The Republic of Argentina 



Map 


National/international designations 


lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 


notified 


50 


Laguna Brava 


IV 


405,000 


1980 


51 


Laguna Hu 


VI 


1,800 


1970 


52 


Laguna la Felipa 


IV 


1,307 


1986 


53 


Lagunas del Epulafquen 


IV 


7,450 


1973 


54 


Lihue Calel 


IV 


2,600 


1974 


55 


Limay Mahuida 


rv 


5,000 


1974 


56 


Los Cabrera 


IV 


17,500 


1979 


57 


Los Palmares 


rv 


6,000 


1979 


58 


Monte de las Barrancas 


rv 


7,656 


1988 


59 


Olaroz-Cauchari 


IV 


180,000 


1981 


60 


Parque Luro 


IV 


7,608 


1975 


61 


Peninsula San Julian 


IV 


10,400 


1986 


62 


Pichi Mahuida 


IV 


4,119 


1974 


63 


Pilaga 


IV 


1,250 


1971 


64 


Potrero de Yala 


IV 


3,000 




65 


Punta Delgada 


rv 


2,829 


1969 


66 


Punta Loma 


rv 


1,707 


1967 


67 


Quebracho de la Legua 


IV 


2,242 


1979 


68 


Ri'a de Puerto Deseado 


rv 


10,000 


1977 


69 


Rinc6n de Ajo 


IV 


2,311 


1988 


70 


Salitral Levalle 


IV 


9,501 


1974 


71 


San Guillermo 


IV 


860,000 


1972 


72 


Santa Ana 


IV 


18,500 


1951 


73 


Talampaya 


IV 


215,000 


1975 


74 


Telteca 


IV 


20,400 


1986 


75 


Urugiia-I 


rv 


84,000 


1988 


76 


ValleF6rtiI 
Natural Parks 


V 


800,000 


1971 


77 


Baflados del Rio Dulce y Laguna de Mar 


V 


50,000 


1966 


78 


Cerro Colorado 


V 


3,000 


1974 


79 


Parque Costero del Sur 
Protected Landscapes 


V 


74,000 




80 


La Florida 


V 


98,592 


1936 


81 


Laguna de los Pozuelos 


V 


364,000 


1980 


82 


Parque La Quebrada 


V 


4,200 


1987 


83 


Parque Pereyra Iraola 


V 


10,248 


1949 


84 


Pozuelos Carahuasi 
Resource Reserves 


V 


20,000 


1980 


85 


Domuyo 


VI 


3,620 


1989 


86 


Isla Curuzii Chali 


VI 


16,000 


1968 


87 


Isla del PUlo 


VI 


100,000 


1968 


88 


Laguna del Pescado 


VI 


20,200 


1968 


89 


Salto Grande 
Provincial Parks 


VI 


860,000 


1968 


90 


Aconcagua 


n 


70,000 


1983 


91 


Copahue 


n 


28,300 


1962 


92 


El Tromen 


n 


24,000 


1971 


93 


Pampa del Indio 


n 


8,633 


1957 


94 


Parque Ernesto Torquinst 


V 


6,097 


1958 


95 


Sierra de La Ventana 


n 


6,718 


1958 


96 


Volc^ Tupungato 
Private Reserves 


n 


110,000 


1985 


97 


Aguaray-Mi 


rv 


4,050 


1988 


98 


Bouvier 


I 


5,000 


1990 



183 



Protected Areas of the World 



Map 


National/international designations 


lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 


notified 


99 


Campos del Tuyii 


1 


3,500 


1978 


100 


Canadon del Duraznillo 


IV 


1,740 


1990 


101 


Dicky 


IV 


1,900 


1991 


102 


El Bagual 


1 


6,000 


1986 


103 


El Cachape 


IV 


1,750 


1990 


104 


El Destine 


IV 


1,500 




105 


Lago Esperanza 


IV 


15,000 


1991 


106 


Las Dos Hermanas 


rv 


1,055 


1989 


107 


Saltino 


rv 


2,000 


1990 


108 


San Juan de Periahu 
Multiple Use Reserves 


IV 


14,199 


1989 


109 


Caleta de los Loros 


vm 


3,000 


1984 


110 


Cinco Chanares 


vni 


40,000 


1981 


111 


General Manuel Belgrano 


vm 


1,505 


1948 


112 


General Obligado 


vni 


3,447 


1948 


113 


Guarani 


vm 


17,000 


1977 


114 


Laguna Blanca 


vm 


770,000 


1979 


115 


Loma del Medio y Ri'o Azul 


vm 


2,435 


1948 


116 


Meseta de Somuncura 


vm 


1,600,000 


1986 


117 


Peninsula de Valdes 


vm 


360,000 


1983 


118 


Presidente de la Plaza 


vm 


2,250 


1935 


119 


San Pedro Reserva Forestal 


vm 


9,500 


1977 


120 


Teuquito 


vm 


14,960 


1987 


121 


Trevelin 

National Natural Monuments 


vm 


3,030 


1944 


122 


Bosques Petrificades 


m 


10,000 


1954 


123 


Laguna de los Pozuelos 
National Natural Reserves 


III 


16,000 


1979 


124 


Foniiosa 


IV 


10,000 


1968 


125 


Iguazu 


IV 


6,105 


1934 


126 


Lago Puelo 


IV 


9,480 


1971 


127 


Laguna Blanca 


IV 


3,038 


1940 


128 


Lani'n 


IV 


178,130 


1937 


129 


Los Alerces 


IV 


76,270 


1937 


130 


Los Glaciares 


IV 


150,000 


1937 


131 


Nahuel Huapi 


IV 


282,219 


1934 


132 


Perito Francisco P. Moreno 
University Reserves 


IV 


29,900 


1937 


133 


La Reforma 


I 


9,500 


1973 


134 


Sierra de San Javier 


n 


14,174 


1973 



Biosphere Reserves 

Parque Costero del Sur 

Pozuelos 

Reserva Ec61ogica de Nacunan 

Reserva Natural de Vida Silvestre Laguna Blanca 

San GuiUermo 



IX 


30,000 


1984 


IX 


405,000 


1990 


IX 


11,900 


1986 


IX 


981,620 


1982 


IX 


981,460 


1980 



Ramsar Wetlands 

Laguna de Pozuelos 



16,224 



1992 



184 



The Republic of Argentina 



Map Nationall international designations 
ref. Name of area 



lUCN management Area 

category (ha) 



Laguna Blanca 
Rio Pilcomayo 

World Heritage Sites 
Parque Nacional Iguazii 
Parque Los Glaciares 



R 
R 



X 
X 



Year 
notiHed 



11,250 
55.000 



55.000 
600,000 



1992 
1992 



1984 
1981 



185 



Protected Areas of the World 




Protected Areas of Argentina 



186 



BOLIVIA 



Area 1,098,580 sq. km 

Population 7,314,000(1990) 
Natural increase: 2.28% per annum 

Economic Indicators 

GDP: USS 588 per capita (1987) 
GNP: USS 620 per capita (1989) 

Policy and Legislation Following independence 

in 1832, the newly-formed government implemented the 
first legal measures for natural resource protection. 
However, no coherent national conservation strategy 
had been elaborated by 1991 (Marconi and Morales, 
1991). Bolivian legislation describes 100 legal measiu'es 
concerning environmental protection. Although these 
may contain adequate policies on the importance of 
conservation, sustainable resource use and preservation 
of natural resources, their dispersed and inconsistent 
nature reduces their objectives to an incoherent form. 
Many were passed without considering previous acts, 
and, as a result, confusion and contradictions in the 
legislation are common (Marconi and Morales, 1991; 
Sandoval et al., 1989). 

Bolivia participates in the FAO Tropical Forestry Action 
Plan (TFAP), an international strategy for maximising 
the contribution of forestry sectors to national economic 
and social development while maintaining conservation 
principles. A national action plan, in accordance with 
TFAP objectives, was drawn up in 1989 (Sandoval et al. , 
1989). Information on the extent of implementation of 
this plan is currently not available. 

The first legislative act specifically concerning the 
protection of natural resources was the 1953 Decree Law 
No. 3612, Law of the Republic (Ley de la Repiiblica). 
Under this Law, provision is made for the creation of an 
institute responsible for establishing national forest 
reserves and classifying them as protection (protector), 
permanent (permanente), experimental (experimental), 
exploitation (de explotacion), or special (especial) 
forests, according to their respective ecosystems and 
national economic need (Marconi, 1989). Through 
various changes, this institute became the present Forest 
Development Centre (Centro de Desarrollo Forestal) 
(CDF). Supreme Decree No. 9013 (1969) provided for 
the creation of the Forest Guard (Guardia Forestal), a 
body vested with regulation enforcement responsibilities 
within forest reserves, national parks and other protected 
areas. 

Two laws form the current legal basis for the protected 
areas system, one governing forests and the other 
national parks and similar areas. Forests are currently 
protected under tiie 1974 National General Forest Law 
(Ley General Forestal de la Nacion), Decree No. 1 1686, 
which covers production, exploitation and conservation, 
and defines four categories of reserve. Regulations and 



definitions are given for forest reserves (see Annex). The 
creation of protected areas is referred to in a general 
sense, declaring water sources, soils, wildlife and human 
setdements as priority areas. The CDF is cited as the 
institute responsible for forest protection, and the Forest 
Guard is now a department within it (Marconi, 1989). 
The Law also states that the CDF will create reserves for 
the survival of forest-dwelling indigenous peoples 
(Marconi and Donoso, 1992). Regulation of the 1974 
Forest Law in 1977 (Reglamento de la Ley General 
Forestal de la Naci6n) strengthens forestry 
administration, tightens exploitation controls, and states 
that the Forest Guard has the function of a forest police 
force. Management plans are made obUgatory (CDF, 
1987; Marconi, 1989). 

Protected areas are covered by the 1975 Wildlife, 
National Parks, Hunting and Fishing Law (Ley de Vida 
SUvestre, Parques Nacionales, Caza y Pesca), Decree 
Law No. 1 230 1 . Five categories are defined (see Annex), 
and administrative responsibilities assigned. Reference 
is made to a future regulation to this Law, which would 
give further details of protected area management and 
resource control, but no such regulation has yet been 
made (Hanagartii and Arce, 1986; Marconi, 1989). The 
1975 Law is very confused, vague and contradictory. 
Designations given are not clearly defined, and neither 
prohibitions nor prerequisites for classification are 
detailed (Hanagarth and Arce, 1986; Marconi, 1989). No 
distinction is made in Uie legislation, between a national 
park and a wildhfe reserve and there is no designation of 
higher importance that may be used for particularly 
fragile ecosystems or species, such as strict natural 
reserve or scientific reserve (Sandoval et al., 1989). 

Supreme decrees providing for the creation of individual 
protected areas may give further details of their 
objectives and management, but these often do not 
coincide with die 1975 Law. For example, reserves are 
referred to as "natural wildlife reserves" (reservas 
naturales de vida silvestre) or "national wildlife 
reserves" (reservas nacionales de vida silvestre), neither 
of which is defined in die 1975 Law (Hanagarth and 
Arce, 1986). In practice, 1 1 protected area designations 
are used (Marconi, 1989); those not defined in the 
legislation are fiscal reserve (reserva fiscal) and 
biological station (estacion bioldgica). 

Without detailed description of protected area 
management, the 1975 Law is ineffective in controlling 
natural resource use. Many areas require reclassification 
under a new system that would supersede the current 
legislation (CDF, 1987; Marconi et al., 1988). An 
evaluation of the legal system was undertaken by the 
Bolivian Conservation Data Centre (CDC-Bolivia), 
which includes an analysis of the legal protection 
afforded to each current category of protected area 
(Marconi, 1989). This states that no clear definitions of 



187 



Protected Areas of the World 



management categories exist in Bolivian legislation, 
inhibiting the establishment of a coherent system of 
protected areas. In many cases, there is a difference 
between the legal designation assigned to an area, and 
the category by which it is effectively managed 
(Marconi, 1989). 

In 1986, a proposal was made to coordinate all previous 
environment and natural resource legislation into a 
coherent Environment Law (Ley del Medio Ambiente). 
A new Project for the General Environment Law 
(Proyecto de Ley General del Medio Ambiente) was 
formulated in 1 99 1 , and by the end of the same year, the 
law was passing through National Congress (Congreso 
Nacional). It proposes to unify all existing protected 
areas in the country into the National System of 
Protected Areas (Sistema Nacional de Areas Protegidas) 
(SNAP), under the administration of the proposed 
Environment Secretariat However, standard definitions 
of management categories to be included in the system 
are not given, but are to be stated in the legislation 
providing for the creation of each protected area 
(M.R. Marconi, pers. comm., 1991; Pinaya, pers. 
comm., 1991). 

Internationa! Activities Bolivia signed the 

Convention on Nature Protection and Wildlife 
Preservation in the Western Hemisphere (Convenci6n 
sobre la Proteccion de la Flora, de la Fauna y de las 
Bellezas Esc6nicas Naturales de los Paises de America) 
(Western Hemisphere Convention) in 1940. In 1976, 
Bolivia and Argentina signed the Agreement on die 
Protection of Flora and Fauna and the Formation of 
Frontier Parks (Acuerdo sobre la Proteccion de Flora y 
Fauna y la Formacion de Parques Fronterizos). Bolivia 
is one of the eight countries with territory in the Amazon 
region that signed the Amazon Cooperation Treaty 
(Tratado de Cooperaci6n Amaz6nica) on 3 July 1978, an 
agreement to regulate natural resource conservation and 
management over the region. The Convention for the 
Conservation and Management of Vicufla (Convenio 
para la Conservacion y Manejo de la Vicuila) was signed 
by Chile, Peru, Argentina, Ecuador and BoUvia in 1979, 
and ratified under Bolivian legislation in 1980. 

An agreement between the government and 
Conservation International, the US-based non- 
governmental organisation (NGO), was signed in 1987, 
to provide financial and technical support for 
conservation and sustainable resource management with 
emphasis on protected areas. Following this agreement. 
Conservation International bought part of the country's 
external debt in exchange for the creation of a protection 
and management fund for Beni Biological Station and 
Biosphere Reserve. 

Bolivia ratified the Convention Concerning the 
Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage 
(World Heritage Convention) on 4 October 1976, but no 
natural sites have been nominated. Bolivia ratified the 
Convention on Wetlands of International Importance 
especially as Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar Convention) 



on 27 June 1990, and one wetland site has been listed. 
Bolivia also participates in the Unesco Man and the 
Biosphere Programme, and has three biosphere reserves. 

Administration and Management All natural 
resources are the responsibility of the Forest Development 
Centre (CDF), an autonomous organisation within the 
Ministry of Rural and Agrarian Affairs (Ministerio de 
Asuntos Campesinos y Agropecuarios) (MACA). 
Responsibilities of the CDF include formulating and 
implemenung national forestry and conservation 
policies. Within the CDF, the Forest Department 
(Departamento de Bosques) is responsible for managing 
forest reserves, and the Wildlife, National Parks, 
Hunting and Fishing Department (Departamento de 
Vida Silvestre, Parques Nacionales, Caza y Pesca) 
(DVSPN) manages other protected areas and wildlife 
(Marconi, 1989). 

In the first few years of its functioning, the CDF 
comprised a general directorate at the highest level, 
below which was a subdirectorate with four departments, 
including the DVSPN. The CDF has its own legal 
department to formulate resource legislation. However, 
since the mid 1980s, the lack of economic resources and 
competent personnel has greatly reduced its capabilities 
(Sandoval et al., 1989). At the local level, regional 
directorates (direcciones regionales) of the CDF operate 
in nine departments in the country. In total, the CDF 
employs 313 personnel, including 94 professional and 
technical staff, and 76 park or forest guards (Sandoval 
e/ a/., 1989). 

In some cases, legislation providing for the creation of a 
protected area makes no reference to any organisation 
responsible for its administration, or cites another 
institute apart from the CDF (Marconi, 1989). Protected 
areas may be located on land that belongs to the state; 
joindy to the state and a community; or to private 
individuals or companies. Defending on land tenure, 
administration of protected areas may be the sole 
responsibiUty of the CDF, or of another institution in 
conjunction with the CDF, or a delegated NGO, or 
independent institute (Marconi, 1989; Marconi and 
Donoso, 1992). 

A number of NGOs are involved in conservation 
activities, such as The Nature Pro- Defence Association 
(Asociaci6n Pro-Defensa de la Naturaleza) 
(PRODENA), founded in 1979. PRODENA works in 
coordination with the MACA and the CDF to provide 
technical assistance for Ambor6 National Park, and 
has a number of other on-going projects (Hardy, 1986). 
A support group, the Bolivian Wildlife Society, has 
been set up, with offices in both the USA and the UK, to 
promote Uie activities of PRODENA. In 1985, the 
Environment Defence League (Liga de Defensa del 
Medio Ambiente) (LIDEMA) was created to coordinate 
NGO activities. It links 11 different ecological groups 
(Marconi, 1988). 



188 



Bolivia 



The CDC-Bolivia was established in 1986 to collect and 
analyse information on protected areas and the 
environment and provide this information to the 
government and relevant national and international 
organisations (Sandoval et al., 1989). 

The CDF is very inefficient due to lack of human and 
economic resources, and lack of coordination with other 
government agencies. For example, the National 
Colonisation Institute (Institute Nacional de 
Colonizacion) has settled people in protected areas 
(Marconi and Morales, 1991). Reorganisation of the 
CDF has resulted in fmancial and operational disorder 
and overall lack of coordination between the regional 
offices and central government (Marconi et al., 1988; 
Sandoval et al, 1989). The majority of protected areas 
do not have any administration (Marconi et al., 1988). 

A revision of natural resource management is being 
undertaken as part of the Project for the General 
Environment Law which proposes the creation of a 
Environment Secretariat (SENMA). Responsibilities 
of the SENMA are to include managing protected 
areas in the form of a coordinated national system and 
therefore unifying administration into one 
organisation (M.R. Marconi, pers. comm., 1991). At the 
local level. Departmental Environment Secretariats 
(Secretarias Departamentales del Medio Ambiente) will 
be responsible for natural resources and protected areas 
in each department. Departmental Environment 
Councils (Consejos Departamentales del Medio 
Ambiente) (CODEMA) are to be established, to 
formulate local conservation pxjlicies and assess the 
activities of the Departmental Secretariats (M.R. 
Marconi, pers. comm., 1991). 

Systems Reviews Bolivia encompasses tropical, 
subtropical and temperate regions, resulting in a number 
of different ecosystems and a high degree of biodiversity 
(Arce, 1988; Sandoval era/., 1989). The country may be 
crudely divided into two distinct biogeographical 
regions: the Andean region, with altitudes between 500m 
and 7,000m; and the Amazon-Chaco (Amaz6nica- 
Chaquefla) lowland region, with altitudes below 500m 
(Arce, 1988). 

The Andes mountains extend in two ranges along the 
south-western part of the country, the Western and 
Eastern Cordillera. Between them Ues the Altiplano 
Intercordillerano, a large, high altitude plain, with puna 
(alpine) vegetation. The Altiplano is characterised by 
extreme cold and lack of rain. Human habitation in the 
mountain regions is very difficult (Sandoval et al., 
1989). 

The Amazon-Chaco region comprises humid, lowland 
forest of the Beni region in the north, and the swampy 
savanna and dry plains of the Chaco extending to the 
south. Semi-humid, Tucumano-Boliviana forest is found 
on the border with Argentina (Arce, 1988). The Brazilian 
Shield, flat, swampy plains including part of the 
Pantanal, extend east into Brazil. Between the mountains 



and the lowlands is the Humid Mountain Forest region, 
an important watershed, comprising the sub-Andean 
belt, the yungas and the humid, fertile valleys (Arce, 
1988). 

A total of 55.8 million ha of land is forested, accounting 
for 51.4 %of total land area. Of this, 44.1 mUUonhaare 
lowland forest and the remaining 1 1 .7 million ha are 
Andean slope forest (Sandoval et al., 1989; Pinaya, 
pers. comm., 1991). Around half of the forested areas, 
22.5 million ha, is under concession to commercial 
foresters (Marconi and Morales, 1991; Sanz, 1988). 
Forest exploitation is particularly threatening to lowland 
forest (Arce, 1988; Marconi and Morales, 1991). Under 
forestry legislation, concessions are restricted to 
designated production forests, but as these only account 
for 6.4 milUon ha, most of the concessions are located in 
unclassified forests (Marconi and Morales, 1991). 

Some 78% of the population is concentrated in only 40% 
of the territory in the High Andes (Sandoval et al., 1989). 
Serious degradation of ecosystems has resulted from 
over-exploitation in this region. Mining activities 
threaten watersheds and river basins (Arce, 1988). 
Agricultural activities involve 70% of the population, 
and result in deforestation and overworking of the soil in 
populated regions (Sandoval et al., 1989). 

The first national park was created in 1939, but legal 
protection of natural resources began in 1953. This 
marked thc'creation of an organisation within the 
Ministry of Agriculture specifically for natural resource 
administration (Marconi, 1989; Sandoval et al., 1989). 
In 1991, the CDC listed 42 protected areas; 30 parks, 
reserves, refuges or sanctuaries, 1 biological station, and 
11 forest reserves (M.R. Marconi, pers. comm., 1991). 
However, estimates of the number of protected areas 
vary from 12, covering almost 4 million ha, to 45, 
covering 15 million ha (Marconi and Morales, 1991). 
There is no official Ust of protected areas owing to the 
lack of clesr definitions (Marconi, 1989; M.R. Marconi 
pers. comm., 1990). 

The present system of protected areas may be considered 
to comprise two parts; forest reserves, and protected 
areas as defined under the 1975 Wildlife and National 
Parks Law. There is Uttle information regarding private 
reserves, and no clear relationship exists between 
independent administrative organisations and the CDF 
(Marconi, 1989). The majority of protected areas are 
located in the Beni plains and the High Andes. Therefore, 
many representative examples of Bolivian ecosystems 
are not protected (Marconi, 1988). Important ecosystems 
lacking in protected area coverage are: valleys and 
semi-arid mountains; semi-arid puna lower south of the 
Chaco; semi-arid, lowland and mountainous forest 
(Sandoval et al., 1989). 

The 1974 General Forest Law makes provision for the 
CDF to set aside indigenous territories (territorios 
indi'genas) to protect forest-dwelling indigenous 
peoples; by the end of 1990, four indigenous areas 



189 



Protected Areas of the World 



covering more than 2 million ha had been declared, two 
overlapping with existing protected areas (Marconi and 
Donoso, 1992; H. Eilers, pers. comm., 1992). 

There is little or no communication between the 
administrative organisations responsible for protected 
areas. New areas have been created with little 
consideration of existing conservation units, and hardly 
anything is known about their biogeographical 
characteristics. All protected areas show signs of human 
interference (Marconi, 1988; Marconi and Donoso, 
1992; Pinaya, pers. comm., 1991). Very few 
conservation units are managed in accordance with the 
decrees declaring their creation (CDF, 1987). Marconi 
and Donoso (1992) have assessed the management of 
36 of Bolivia's protected areas: 12 totally lack 
administration, 10 are still in the planning stage, and just 
three are adequately or well managed. The government 
is also planning exploitative activities in 12 protected 
areas (Marconi and Morales, 1991). 

Bolivia is working towards the implementation of a 
national system of protected areas, and participates in the 
FAO Latin American Network programme (Red 
Latinoamericana de Cooperacion Tecnica en Parques 
Nacionales, Otras Areas Protegidas, Flora y Fauna 
Silvestres) through the CDF (Marconi, 1988; 
Ormazabal, 1988). A review of protected areas by 
Marconi (1988) cites the need for coherent legislation 
giving details of national conservation objectives, in 
order to implement a national system. 

Addresses 

Jefatura Nacional de Vida Silvestre, Parques Nacionales, 
Caza y Pesca (DVSPN), Centro de Desarrollo 
Forestal, Ministerio de Asuntos Campesinos y 
Agropecuarios, Avda Camacho 1471, 6to piso, 
CasiUa 8928, LA PAZ (Tel: 376304 FAX: 377380) 

Secretaria Nacional del Medio Ambiente (proposed), 
Edificio Batallon Colorados, Piso 3, LA PAZ 
(Tel: 361 6474; FAX: 399304) 

Centro de Datos Para la Conservacion de Bolivia 
(CDC-Bolivia), Cota cota - Calle 26 y Av. Muiioz 
Reyes s/n, Casilla 11250, LA PAZ (Tel/FAX: 
797399) 

Centro Regional de Conservacidn de la Naturaleza 
"Noel Kempff Mercado" (CERCONA), CasUla 881, 
SANTA CRUZ 

Estacion Biol6gica del Beni, Av. 16 de Julio 1732, LA 
PAZ (Tel: 379651) 

Parque Nacional Amboro, Casilla 4064, SANTA CRUZ 
(FAX: 0932 2007) 

Pro-Defensa de la Naturaleza Asociaci6n Boliviana 
(PRODENA), Avda Camacho esq. Loayza BBA, 
Piso 12, CasiUa 989, LA PAZ (Tel: 361 180/361181; 
Tlx: 2328 BV) 

The Bolivian Wildlife Society (PRODENA BOLIVIA), 
PO Box 6, ABERGAVENNY, Gwent NP7 8A Y, UK 
(Tel: 060 085 388); 130 Coconut Row, Pahn Beach, 
PL 33480, USA 



References 

Arce, J.P. (1988). La problematica de la diversidad 
biol6gica en Bolivia. In: Arce, J. P., Beck, S., 
Ergueta, P., Estenssoro, S., Flores, E., Garcia, E., 
Goitia, L., Marconi, M. and Salinas, E. (1988). 
Diagndstico de la diversidad bioldgica de Bolivia. 
AID, Washington DC, USA. Pp. 1-55. 

Arce, J. P., Beck, S., Ergueta, P., Estenssoro, S., 
Flores, E, Garcia, E., Goitia, L., Marconi, M. and 
Salinas, E. (1988). Diagndstico de la diversidad 
bioldgica de Bolivia. AID, Washington DC, USA. 
141 pp. 

Brockmann, C.E. (Ed.) (1986). Perftl ambiental de 
Bolivia. Institute intemacional para el desarrollo 
y medio ambiente, Washington, DC, USA/ Agenda 
de los Estados Unidos para el desarrollo 
intemacional. La Paz. 171 pp. 

Cardozo, A. (1987). Areas protegidas de Bolivia. Flora, 
faunaydreas silvestres 5: 8-13. Oficina Regional de 
la FAO para America Latina y el Caribe, Santiago, 
Chile. 

CDF (1987). Lineamientos y proyecciones para una 
nueva politica forestal en Bolivia. Centro 
de desarrollo forestal, Ministerio de asuntos 
campesinos y agropecuarios. La Paz. 41 pp. 

FAO (n.d.). Food and agricultural legislation. Jungius, H. 
and Pujol, R. (1970). Bolivia national parks and 
reserves. Unesco, Paris, France. 

Hanagarth, W. and Arce, J.P. (1986). La situaci6n de los 
parques nacionales y reservas de vida silvestre en el 
departamento de La Paz, en el marco de una 
Planificaci6n Regional. Revista del Instituto de 
Ecol6gica, UMSA. Ecologla en Bolivia 9: 1-67. 

Hardy, R. (1986). Bolivian Wildlife Society - US/UK 
(Prodena Bolivia). News sheet 5: 7. 

Marconi, M. (1988). Las areas protegidas de Bolivia. 
In: Arce, J.P., Beck, S., Ergueta, P., Estenssoro, S., 
Flores, E., Garcia, E., Goitia, L., Marconi, M. and 
Salinas, E. (1988). Diagndstico de la diversidad 
bioldgica de Bolivia. AID, Washington DC, USA. 
Pp. 78-88. 

Marconi, M. (1989). Base legal del sistema de areas 
protegidas de Bolivia, evaluacion general. Centro de 
Datos para la Conservacion, CDC-Bolivia, La Paz. 
40 pp. 

Marconi, M. and Morales, I. (1991). Cited in 
lUCN/ITTO Conserving biological diversity in 
managed tropical forests. Proceedings of a workshop 
held at the lUCN General Assembly, Perth, 
Australia, 30 November- 1 December 1990. Latin 
American Draft Report. 84 pp. 

Marconi, M. and Donoso, S. (1992). BoUvia: Habitantes 
en las areas protegidas. In: Amend, S. and Amend, T. 
(Eds) iEspacios sin Habitantes? Parques 
Nacionales de America del Sur. lUCN and Editorial 
Nueva Sociedad, Caracas. Pp. 53-79. 

Marconi, M., Arce, J.P., Ergueta, P. and Salinas, E. 
(1988). Marco institucional y operative. In: Arce, 
J.P., Beck, S., Ergueta, P., Estenssoro, S., Flores, E., 
Garcia, E., Goitia, L., Marconi, M. and Salinas, E. 



190 



Bolivia 



(1988). Diagndstico de la diversidad bioldgica de 
Bolivia. AID, Washington DC, USA. Pp. 93-1 18. 
Ormaz^bal, C. (1988). Sistemas nadonales de dreas silvestres 
protegidas en America Latino. Basado en los resultados del 
tallCT solre Planificack5n de Sistemas Nadonales de Areas 
Silvestres Ptot^idas, Caracas, Venezuela, 9-13junb 1986. 
Pioyecto FAO/FNUMA sobre manejo de Sieas silvestres, 
iireas fHOtegjdas y vida silvestre en Am&ica Latina y el 
Caribe. Oficina Regional de la FAO para America Latina 
y el Caribe, Santiago, Chile. 205 pp. 



Sandoval, G J., Reyes, J.M. and Soria, J.L. (1989). Plan 

de accidnpara el desarrollo forestal 1990-1995. 
Minislerio de Asuntos Camf)esinos y Agropecuarios, 

Subsecretaria de recursos naturales renovables y 

medio ambiente. La Paz. 98 pp. 
Sanz, J.A.O. (1988). Parques nacionales de Bolivia. 

Informe de la Sociedad Boliviana de Ecologi'a 

(Sobe). San Jos6, Costa Rica. 32 pp. 



ANNEX 

Deflnitions of protected area designations, as legislated, 

together with authorities responsible for their administration 



Title: Ley General Forestal de la Nacion 
(National General Forest Law), Decree 
No. 11686 

Date: 13 August 1974 

Brief description : Regulates the exploitation of 
forest resources and makes provision for the creation 
of forest reserves for the protection and conservation 
of forest resources. Forests and forested land is 
owned by the state. 

Administrative authority: Centro de Desarrollo 
Forestal (CDF), (Forest Development Centre), 
within the Ministerio de Asuntos Campesinos y 
Agropecuarios, (MACA), (Ministry of Rural and 
Agricultural Affairs) 

Designations: 

Bosque Permanente de ProduccUn (Permanent 
Production Forest) Forest which is exploited in 
a sustainable manner, for economic purpose. May be 
nationally or privately owned. 

Bosque Permanente de Proteccidn (Permanent 
Protection Forest) Forest which is important 

for the protection of other resources in the 
environment, such as a watershed or wildlife habitat. 

Reserva Forestal de Inmovilizacidn (Closed Forest 
Reserve) Those forests that are placed under 
government protection, prohibiting exploitation of 
their resources until a suitable designation is assigned 
to them by an act of legislation, such as national park, 
forest reserve or private property. 

Bosque Especial (Special Forest) Forests 

which, owing to their special characteristics, require 
special classification and management They may be 
for mixed use, such as arable forest or grazing forest, 
or for harvesting forest products without felling. 



Harvesting of forest products is covered by the 
regulations under this law. 

Bosque de Uso Multiple (Multiple-Use Forest) 
Forests which are suitable to function as production, 
protection, recreation and wildlife conservation as a 
combination. 

Bosque no Clasificado (Unclassified Forest) 
Two types of forest are not covered by the above 
classifications, and no specific functions are assigned 
to them: ■ 

Bosque Fiscal de la Nacidn en Terrenos Bald(os 
(National Fiscal Forest on Unformed Land) 

Bosque no Clasificado (Unclassified 
Forest) under private ownership 

Source: FAO (n.d.) 

Title: Ley de Vida Silvestre, Parques 
Nacionales, Caza y Pesca (Wildlife, National 
Parks, Hunting and Fishing Law), Decree Law 
No. 12301 

Date: 24 March 1975 

Brief description: Provides for the establishment 
of protected areas and the rules governing the 
protection and exploitation of faunal resources, and 
declares it the responsibility of the supreme 
government to protect natural resources and the 
environment. It was first proposed in article 123 
of the 1974 National General Forest Law to 
complement forest protection. 

Administrative authority: Departamento de 
Vida Silvestre, Parques Nacionales, Caza y Pesca 
(DVSPN), (Department of Wildlife, National Parks, 
Hunting and Fishing), part of the Centro de 
Desarrollo Forestal (CDF), (Forest Development 
Centre), which is itself within the Ministerio de 



191 



Protected Areas of the World 



Asuntos Campesinos y Agropecuarios (MACA), 
(Ministry of Rural and Agricultural Affairs) 

Designations: 

Parque Nacional y Reserva de Vida Silvestre 
(National Park and Wildlife Reserve) An area 
set aside for scientific research, protection and 
management of a wild faunal population, to assure 
the conservation and continuing production of the 
species. 

Planning for a national park or reserve will be 
subjected to a special regulation. 

A national park or wildlife reserve is declared by 
Executive Power. 

Refugio de Fauna Silvestre (Wildlife Refuge) 
Considered important for the protection, 
conservation and propagation of wild animals, 
particularly those species in danger of extinction. 



Santuario de Vida Silvestre (Wildlife Sanctuary) 
That is the natural habitat for an endemic or 
endangered species, or where the concentration of 
particular species is, or could be, an important tourist 
attraction. 

A wildlife refiige or sanctuary is declared by the 
Ministry of Rural and Agricultural Affairs. 



In the four categories defined above it is prohibited 
to alter the boundaries or undertake any activities 
within the area that are contrary to the protection 
objectives of its designation, specifically hunting. 



Coto de Caza (Hunting Reserve) Specifically suited 
for developing wildlife management programmes 
and hunting. 



Source: Original legislation 



192 



Bolivia 



SUMMARY OF PROTECTED AREAS 



Map 


National/international designations 


lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 


notified 




National Parks 








1 


Ambord 


n 


180,000 


1973 


2 


Carrasco Ichilo 


n 


1,300,000 


1988 


3 


Isiboro Sdcure 


n 


1,100,000 


1965 


4 


Llica 


n 


97,500 


1991 


5 


Noel Kempff Mercado 


n 


914,000 


1979 


6 


Sajama 


n 


29,940 


1939 


7 


Santa Cruz la Vieja 


n 


17,080 


1989 


8 


Torotoro 


V 


16,576 


1989 


9 


Tunari 


vni 


6,000 


1962 


10 


Tuni Condoriri 


vni 


14,800 


1942 



11 



Biological Station 
Beni 



135,000 



1982 



National Reserves 

12 Cordillera de Sama 

13 Eduardo Avaroa 

14 Incacasani Altamachi 

15 Lagunas del Beni y Pando 

16 Manuripi Heath 

17 Noel Kempff Mercado 

18 Ri'os Blanco y Negro 

19 Tariquii 

20 UUaUUa 

Wildlife Refuges 

21 El Dorado 

22 Estancias Eisner Espiritu 

23 Estancias Eisner San Rafael 

24 Huancaroma 

Reserves 

25 Altamachi Vicuna 

26 Huancaroma Vicuna 



IV 


108,500 


1991 


IV 


714,000 


1973 


IV 


23,000 


1991 


IV 


275,000 


1961 


IV 


1,884,000 


1973 


IV 


21,900 


1988 


IV 


1,400,000 


1990 


IV 


246,870 


1989 


IV 


250,000 


1972 


IV 


180,000 


1988 


IV 


70,000 


1978 


IV 


20,000 


1978 


IV 


11,000 


1975 


IV 


100,000 


1977 


IV 


140,429 


1975 



27 



Sanctuary 

Cavemas El Repechon 



IV 



1,500 



1986 



28 
29 
30 
31 

32 



33 
34 
35 



36 
37 
38 



Forest Reserves 
Baja Paragua 
Chimanes 
El Chore 
Guaravos 
Quinera del Aten 

Protection Forest Reserves 
Bella Vista 
Eva Eva - Mosetenes 
Sajta Ichilo 

Regional Park 
ElPirai 
Lomas Arena 
Yacuma 



vni 


3,388,200 


1988 


vni 


804,000 


1986 


vm 


800,000 


1966 


vra 


1,400,000 


1969 


vni 


20,000 


1977 


vra 


90,000 


1964 


vra 


225,000 


1990 


vra 


350,000 


1988 


vm 


250,000 


1984 


V 


13,300 


1989 


vm 


130,000 


1987 



193 



Protected Areas of the World 



Map 


National/international designations 


lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 


notiHed 




Closed Forest Reserves 








39 


Chiquitania 


VI 


5,774,000 


1977 


40 


Convendo 


VI 


249,195 


1984 


41 


ItSnez 


VI 


1,500,000 


1988 


42 


Ri'o Boppi 


VI 


128,000 


1979 


43 


Ri'o Grande Masicuri 


VI 


242,000 


1979 




Biosphere Reserves 










Estaci6n Biologica Beni 


IX 


135,000 


1986 




Parque Nacional Pilon-Lajas 


IX 


100,000 


1977 




Reserva Nacional de Fauna Ulla Ulla 


IX 


200,000 


1977 




Ramsar Wetland 










Laguna Colorada 


R 


5,240 


1990 



194 



Bolivia 




Protected Areas of Bolivia 



195 



FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF BRAZIL 



Area 8,51 1,9% sq. km 

Population 155,562,917 (1990) 
Natural increase: 1.87% per annum 

Economic Indicators 

GDP: US$ 2,306 per capita (1987) 
GNP: US$ 2,540 per capita (1989) 

Policy and Legislation The present government 
structure consists of 26 states and one federal district Each 
state has its own administrative, legislative and judicial 
authorities, its own constitution and laws, which must, 
however, agree with the constitutional principles of the 
Union (Hunter, 1991). Protected area legislation is 
summarised in the Environment Qiapter (Capitulo do Meio 
Ambiente)ofthe 1988 Brazilian Constimtion(Constitui9ao 
Brasileira) (Dias et al., 1991; IBAMA, 1991), the eighth 
since indqjendence from the Portuguese in 1822 (Hunter, 
1 99 1). An important aspect of this chapter is the recognition 
of a new right of the people to enjoy an ecologically 
balanced environment, which is considered the common 
property of the population (IBAMA, in Dias et al., 1991). 
It is the duty of the government and the conmiunity to 
safeguard and preserve the environment in the interests of 
present and future generations. A national conservation 
strategy has not been prepared, and Brazil does not 
participate in the FAO Tropical Forest Action Plan. 

Principles for nature conservation were first established by 
virtue of the Royal Charter of 1797, which provided 
measures for forest protection as well as severe penalties 
for burning or destroying forests (Anon., n.d). Later, Jos6 
Bonifacio, the Father of Independence, published an article, 
"Vision of the Great Motherland" (VisSo da Grande Patria), 
in which he suggested the creation of a government 
portfolio to protect the forests that were being progressively 
destroyed by serious environmental and climatic 
modifications (Anon., n.d.). The first national parks (Itaiaia 
and Serra dos OrgSos) were not established until the 
following century (1937 and 1939, respectively). The first 
modem legal measures relating to protected areas were 
taken in the 1930s: amongst important developments were 
the promulgation of the First Forestry Code (Primeiro 
C6digo Horestal) Decree No. 23.793 (1934), the Hunting 
and Fisheries Code (Codigo de Caqa e Pesca) and the Water 
Code (C6digo de Aguas) (Dias er a)., 1 99 1 ). They were later 
replaced by the New Forestry Code (Novo C6digo 
Horestal) Law No. 4.771 (1965) and the 1%7 Faunal 
Protection Law (Lei de Prote^So a Fauna) Law No. 5.197 
which are still in force (see Annex). 

The New Forestry Code made provision for the creation of 
parks (parques), biological reserves (reservas biol6gicas) 
and forests (florestas), each at national, state and municipal 
levels (see Annex). Decree No. 97.635 (1989) regulates 
Article 27 of the 1965 Forestry Code, and makes provision 
for the prevention and fighting of forest fires. The 1%7 
Faunal Protection Law makes provision for the protection 



of fauna, and the creation of biological reserves and 
hunting parks (parques de ca?a) (Anon., n.d.; IBAMA, 
199 1). Although biological reserves were briefly defined 
by this Law, the regulations which define and 
characterise them have still to be established (IBAMA, 
1991; Rylands, 1990). Law No. 6.902 (1981) provides 
for the creation of ecological stations (esta^ao ecol6gica) 
and environmental protected areas (area de prote^ao 
ambiental) (APA), both categories to be administered by 
SEMA (created in 1974 to design and implement 
Brazil's environment policy) (see Annex) (Dias et al., 
1991; IBAMA, 1991; Schenkel and Kaniak, 1992). 

The basis for modem environmental protection is 
established by the National Environment PoUcy (Poh'tica 
Nacional do Meio Ambiente) which was established by 
virtue of Law No. 6.938 (1981). This Policy makes 
provision for the creation of the National Environment 
System (Sistema Nacional do Meio Ambiente) 
(SISNAMA), constitutes the National Environment 
Council (Conselho Nacional do Meio Ambiente) 
(CONAMA), and institutes the National Directory of 
Environmental Institutions (Cadastro Nacional das 
Instituifoes que Atuam na Area do Meio Ambiente), an 
official register (IBAMA, 1990a, 1990b). CONAMA's 
role is to advise the President on environmental policy, and 
to produce guidelines for environmental management and 
sustainable development Laws Nos 6.902 and 6.938 are 
fimher regulated by Decree No. 99.274 (1990) (IBAMA, 
1991). Decree No. 89.336 (1984) recognises as ecological 
reserves (reservas ecologicas) those areas established by 
the public sector as well as those established by Law No. 
6.938, 1981 (see Annex) (Anon., n.d.). Decree No. 84.017 
(1979) E^jproves the Regulation for Brazilian National 
Parks (Regulamento dos Parques Nacionais Brasileiros) 
and defines them more clearly. ResolufSo CONAMA No. 
11 (1988), provides resolutions for the use of forests 
affected by fires; the use of burnt wood, which can only be 
used in and around the conservation area, and educational 
programmes on the control and prevention of fires in 
natural areas (IB AMA, 1991). Areas of relevant ecological 
interest (irea de relevante interesse ecol6gico) are 
established by virtue of Decree No. 88.351/83 (1983) and 
are further recognised by Decree No. 89.336 (1984). 
Private flora and fauna reserves (reservas particulares de 
flora e fauna) can be registered on the basis of Portaria No. 
217/88 (1988) (Anon., n.d.). Resolugao CONAMA No. 13 
(1990) details the protection of ecosystems in existing 
conservation units. Scientific research in conservation units 
is strictly regulated through Portaria No. 174/81P (1981) 
(IBAMA, 1991). 

Law No. 7735 ( 1989) led to the creation of the Brasilian Institute 
icr the Environment and Renewable Natural Resources 
([nstituto Brasileiro do Mdo Ambiente e dos Recursos Naturais 
Renoviveis) (IBAMA). IBAMA's objectives are to carry out 
national en vironment policy , and to conserve and control the use 
of the renewable natural resources (Dias et al., 1991). 



197 



Protected Areas of the World 



pressure from rubbertappers led to the passing of Law 
No. 7.804 to provide for the creation of extractive 
reserves (reservas extrativistas). 

The protection of the historical and cultural heritage, and 
of outstanding landscapes, is by virtue of Law Decree 
No. 25 of 30 (1937). The protection of archaeological 
and prehistoric monuments was further advanced by 
Law No. 3.924 (1961) (see Annex). Provisions for the 
establishment of special areas and sites of touristic 
interest (dreas especiais/locais de interesse turistico) 
were made by virtue of Law No.6.513(1977).This Law 
is further regulated through Decree No. 86.176 (1981) 
(Anon., n.d.). Decree No. 99.556 (1990) makes 
provisions for the protection of natural caves (cavemas) 
(Anon., n.d.). Private natural heritage reserves (reserva 
particular do patrimonio natural) are established by 
virtue of Decree No. 98.914 (1990). The Constitution of 
1988 makes provision for the establishment of 
anthropological reserves (reserva antropol6gica) 
through several of its Articles (see Annex) (Anon., n.d.). 

Although Brazil does not have specific legislation for a 
protected area system, it has begun work to establish one. 
A Conservation Units Plan was prepared by the IBDF, 
Phase I in 1979 and Phase II in 1982. This plan proposed 
new protected areas, several of which have now been 
declared. New management categories, linking local, 
regional and national protected area designations more 
closely with those used by lUCN, have been put forward. 

A proposal for a National S ystem of Conservation Units 
has been developed by FUNATURA and IBAMA and 
approved by CONAMA; it still awaits the approval of 
the National Congress and publication in law. The 
System consists of three groups of units as follows: 

Group I. Integral Protection Units Their resources can 
only be "indirectly" used, and ecosystems must remain 
in their natural state with only a minimum of disturbance. 
Management categories are: biological reserve, 
ecological station, national park, natural monument and 
wildlife refuge. 

Group II. Provisional Management Units Total 
protection of natural resources. "Indirect use" of 
resources is compatible, and native communities are 
allowed to use resources directly on a sustainable basis. 
The only category is natural resource reserve. 

Group in. Sustainable Use Units This comprises 
faunal reserve, environmental protection area (APA), 
national forest, and extraction reserve (Schenkel and 
Kaniak, 1992). 

International Activities Brazil signed the Convention 
on Nanire Protection and Wildlife Preservation in the 
Western Hemisphere (Western Hemisphere 
Convention) in 1940, and ratified it subsequently. Brazil 
is developing joint programmes with other Latin 
American countries through the Amazonian Treaty 
which it signed in 1978. Member countries of this Treaty 
integrate the subnetwork 



of planning and management of protected areas in the 
Amazon Region. Within this Treaty, Brazil supports the 
importance of preserving continuous areas in the 
Amazon region which will transcend geopolitical 
boundaries (Dias et al., 1991). 

Brazil participates in the Unesco Man and the Biosphere 
Programme and two biosphere reserves were recognised 
in 1991. In 1977, Brazil ratified the International 
Convention on Civil Responsibility for damages caused 
by oil pollution. In 1977, it ratified the Convention 
concerning the World Cultural and Natural Heritage 
(World Heritage Convention) and one site was inscribed 
in 1986. However, it has not yet ratified the Convention 
on Wetlands of International Importance especially as 
Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar Convention) (Diegues, 
1990). 

Brazil participates in the FAO Latin American Network 
programme (Red Latinoamericana de Cooperaci6n 
Tecnica en Parques Nacionales, otras Areas Protegidas, 
Flora y Fauna Silvestres) (FAO, n.d.; Ormazabal, 1988). 
An extensive technical cooperation programme for the 
environment is being carried out with Germany, Canada, 
USA and UK (B. Griesinger, pers. comm., 1992). 

Administration and Management Shortcomings in 
protected area administration were largely resolved with 
the creation of IBAMA in 1989. Prior to this, particularly 
between 1981-1989, problems arose because 
conservation units were administered at national level by 
two different bodies under separate ministries. The 
Institute of Forestry Development (Departamento de 
Instituto Brasileiro de Desenvolvimento Florestal) 
(IBDF) was created under the Ministry of Agriculture in 
1967. It was responsible for national parks, biological 
reserves and national forests. In 1973, the Special 
Environmental Secretariat (Secretaria Especial do Meio 
Ambiente) (SEMA) was created within the Ministry of 
the Interior (MINTER), to manage ecological stations, 
ecological reserves and environmental protection areas 
(APAs) (Schenkel and Kaniak, 1992). Addiuonally, 
SEMA prepared an incoherent programme of 
establishing a network of ecological stations to represent 
all major ecosystems (Nogueira-Neto and Carvalho, 
1979; Rylands, 1990). 

The Directorate of National Historic and Artistic 
Heritage (Diretoria do Patrimonio Hist6rico e Artfstico 
Nacional) within the Ministry for National Historic and 
Artistic Heritage (SPHAN) maintains a register of 
archaeological monuments (Anon., n.d.). 

Currently, the main organisation responsible for the 
formulation and coordination of national environmental 
policies is the Ministry of the Environment (Secretaria 
do Meio Ambiente) (SEMAM), created by virtue of Law 
No. 99.244 (1991). In 1989. the IBDF and SEMA were 
merged together with other superintendencies to form 
the Brazilian Institute for the Environment and Natural 
Renewable Resources (IBAMA) under the Ministry of 
the Environment (Rylands, 1990). Within IBAMA, two 



198 



Federal Republic of Brazil 



directorates deal with protected areas: the Directorate of 
Renewable Natural Resources (Directoria dos Recursos 
Naturals Renovivais) and the Directorate of Ecosystems 
(Directoria de Ecosistemas) (Schenkel and Kaniak, 
1992). 

IBAMA has initiated a programme of consolidation of 
its conservation units through the national Programme 
for the Environment (PNMA) with financial 
resources in the order of US$ 117 million for its first 
phase (B. Griesinger, pers. comm., 1992). 

Numerous government and nongovernment 
organisations (NGOs) are concerned with the 
environment, woricing at local, regional or national level. 
These are listed in the national register (cadastre) 
produced by IBAMA. Some NGOs working national 
level are Fundagao ProNatureza (FUNATURA), the 
Brazilian Foundation for Nature Conservation 
(Funda?ao Brasileira para a Conserva?ao da Natureza) 
(FBCN), and Funda?ao SOS Mata Atlantica. 
FUNATURA has established a network of private 
wildlife refuges which are of considerable importance 
and are better protected than government areas 
(Mittermeier, 1988b). 

Problems with protected areas have been apparent from 
colonial times, when the Portuguese showed Uttle regard 
for the native wildlife while exploiting natural resources, 
and ignored existing regulations (Anon., n.d.). 
Currently, the main problems related to conservation 
units are insufficient and irregular funding, and lack of 
personnel and infrastructure. A large proportion of the 
conservation units have not been implemented or do not 
have the minimum infrastructure to fiinction adequately. 
Parks which are affected include Pico da Neblina and 
Sao Joaquim which, despite being established in 1979 
and 1961, respectively, do not have any infrastructure 
(Diasera/., 1991). Only 10% of national protected areas 
have a management plan (Dourojeanni, 1988). None 
of the ecological stations has a management plan 
(Rylands, 1990). 

IBAMA employs 548 people to administer and manage 
158,000 sq. km of protected areas (one person to 
29,000ha) (Dias et al., 1991). Unfortunately, at present 
only three people in the current system are trained to a 
degree level adequate to conduct basic activities in the 
conservation units, leaving them vulnerable to invasion, 
poaching, deforestation, illegal agricultural and 
livestock exploitation, pollution of watercourses and 
soils, disorganised tourism, mining and fires. Only 20% 
of the territory included in the protected areas has some 
form of management (Schenkel and Kaniak, 1992). This 
is an extremely serious problem especially for protected 
areas in the Amazon or other distant and inhospitable 
parts of the country (Dias et al., 1991). 

Systems Reviews Brazil is the fifth largest country 
in the world, with a 7,500km long coastline (4"25'N - 
33'45'S). It is bounded by the Adantic on the east, and, 
on its northern, western and southern borders, by all 



South American countries except Chile and Ecuador 
(Hunter, 1991). It is mainly located in the tropics and has 
three main geographical zones: the Amazon basin 
(c. 3,500 000 sq. km); the plains ("chapadas"), and two 
mountains chains: the Guyanas and the Atlantic massif. 
Because of the large variety of its habitats, it harbours 
potentially one of the greatest biological diversities in 
the world (Dias et al., 1991). 

The large area of inland water (55,457 sq. km) (Hunter, 
1991) results in a wide diversity of wetlands of 
ecological and socioeconomic importance, amongst 
them the Pantanal, the Amazon floodplain (vdrzeas) and 
innumerable important coastal ecosystems (Diegues, 
1990). Mangroves are particularly important, as Brazil 
has the largest areas of mangrove in the world. In 
addition, there are thousands of square kilometres of 
artificial wetlands such as dams and reservoirs (Diegues, 
1990). However, they are still under serious threat 
(Diegues, 1990). 

The Amazon has extensive alluvial plains created by 
meandering rivers, raised plateaux worked by erosion, 
low cliffs and rivers with black, clear and white waters. 
Approximately 30% of the world's tropical forests occur 
in Brazil. Representative ecosystems include the 
Amazon forest, the Atlantic forest, Caatinga ecosystems 
(dwarf vegetation and cacti), closed ecosystems, 
Araucaria forests, swamps, southern washes, 
mangroves, coastal shrubs ("restingas") and palm tree 
zones (Dias et al., 1991). The Amazon forest occupies 
40% of total land area, representing around 2.7 million 
sq. km. (Dias et al., 1991). 

The "chapadas" are residuals of an ancient crystalline 
massif which gradually ascend from west to east to reach 
altitudes over 1,000m in some areas of Goias and Mato 
Grosso. The highest mountain is Roraima (2,875m), part 
of the Guyanas range. The Atlantic mountain ranges 
form an abrupt maritime relief, and comprise various 
systems: Serra Geral, Serra do Mar (Pico Bandeira, 
2,790m), Serra de Mantiqueira (Pico da Itatiaia, 
2,787m), Serra do Espinhaco and Chapada Diamamtina. 

According to the definition given by the FAO Latin 
American Networic Programme, Brazil is in the process 
of developing a coherent national system. The first 
management plan for federal conservation units was 
produced in 1979, based on lUCN methodology. 
Currently, only 16 of the 34 existing national parks and 
five of the 22 biological reserves have management 
plans, and the majority of these require updating. There 
are no such plans for any of the ecological stations (Dias 
etal., 1991). 

The current protected area system is made up of several 
superimposed subsystems (at local, state and national 
levels). All systems lack human and financial resources, 
and face severe threats; particularly from agriculture. 
Not all Brazilian ecosystems are adequately represented. 
Omissions include: caatinga (arboreal, sertao, serido and 
cariri), cerrados, veredas, pantanal, Araucaria forest. 



199 



Protected Areas of the World 



northeast Atlantic forest, savannas, Amazon forest and 
caves (Dias et al., 1991; Dourojeanni, 1988; Schenkel 
and Kaniak, 1992). 

The public sector has expressed an interest in financing 
the system of conservation units. In addition, the 
governments of Japan and Germany have expressed 
interest in funding activities related to protected area 
establishment and management (Dias et al., 1991). 

Addresses 

Divisao de Gerenciamento de Unidades de Conserva?ao 
(DIGER/DEUC) (Chefe), IBAMA, Sain Av. U 
Norte Ed. Sede, 70.910 BRASILIA, BrasiUa DF 
(Tel: 61 223 7879/321 2324; Tlx: 614304) 

Instituto de Meio Ambiente (IMAC), Rua Rui Barbosa 
No. 450, Centro CEP 69.900, Rio Branco, ACRE 
(Tel: 68 224 5497) 

Conselho Estadual de Prote^So Ambiental (CEPRAM), 
Rua Dr. Cincinato Pinto No. 503, Centro, CEP 
57.000, MACEI6, Alagoas (Tel: 82 221 1427/221 
4188/223 3856) 

Coordenadoria Estadual do Meio Ambiente 
(CEMA/AP), Av. Mendonga Furtado No. 900, CEP 
68.000, MACAPA, Amapa (Tel: 96 222 4669) 

Instituto de Desenvolvimento dos Recursos Naturals e 
Prote^ao Ambiental do Estado do Amazonas (IMA), 
Rua Recife No. 3280, Flores, CEP 69.000, 
MANAUS, Amazonas (Tel: 92 236 2574/236 2064) 

Conselho Estadual de Prote^ao Ambiental (CEPRAM), 
Rua Rio Sao Francisco No. 01, Mont Serrat, CEP 
40.425, Salvador, BAHIA (Tel: 071 312 3365/312 
7191) 

Conselho Estadual do Meio Ambiente (COEMA), Rua 
Barao de Aratanha No. 1319, Fatima, CEP 60.000, 
FORTELEZA, Ceara (Tel: 85 231 81 18/231 5945) 

Secretaria de Meio Ambiente, Ciencia e Tecnologia do 
Govemo do Distrito Federal (SEMATEC), Edificio 
Sede da Shis, Q.6, 6 Andar, Selor Comercial Sul, 
CEP 70.300, BRASILIA DF (Tel: 61 255 8314/321 
8448 R. 176/229) 

Instituto de Ecologia e Meio Ambiente, Edificio Sede da 
Shis Q.6, 6 Andar, Setor Comercial Sul, CEP 70.300, 
BRASILIA DF (Tel: 61 225 8314/321 8448 
R. 176/229) 

Instituto de Terras Cartografia e Horestas (ITCF), Av. 
Princesa Isabel No. 599, Centro, CEP 29.010, 
VIT6RIA, Espirito Santo (Tel: 27 222 6766) 

Fundagao Estadual do Meio Ambiente de Goias 
(FEMAGO), Decima Primeira Avenida No. 1272, 
Setor Universitario, GOIAS (Tel: 62 261 2780/261 
6292) 

Conselho Estadual do Meio Ambiente (CEMEMA), Pra^a 
Teixeira Mendes No. 01, Sao Francisco, CEP 65.000, 
SAOLUIS,Maranhaoael:98235 1511/235 1575/235 
1543) 

Secretaria Estadual do Meio Ambiente (SEMA), Edificio 
da Saude, Centro Poh'tico Administrativo, CEP 78.000, 
CUIABA,MatoGrosso (Tel: 65 313 3184/313 352/2 
3109) 



Secretaria do Meio Ambiente do Estado do Mato 
Grosso do Sul, Av. Cal6geras No. 616, CEP 
79.005, Campo Grande, Mato Grosso do Sul, CX 
Postal 856 (Tel: 67 383 3161/383 3831/383 
3014/382 0681) 

Instituto Estadual de Floreslas (lEF), Rua Paracatu 
No. 304, CEP 30.180, BELO HORIZONTE, 
Minas Gerais (Tel: 31 295 4266) 

Conselho Estadual de Saiide Saneamento e Meio 
Ambiente, Rua Presidente Pemambuco No. 489, 
CEP 66.000, BELEM, Para (Tel: 91 224 401 1) 

Departamento de Meio Ambiente (DMA), Rua 
Presidente Pemambuco No. 489, CEP 66.000, 
BELEM, Para (Tel: 91 243 1697) 

Superintendencia de Desenvolvimento do Meio 
Ambiente (SUDEMA), Av. Monsenhor Walfredo 
Leal No. 1 8 l,Tambii, CEP 58.000, JOAOPESSOA, 
Paraiba (Tel: 83 222 1647/222 4663/222 3149) 

Instituto de Terras, Cartografia e Florestas 
(ETCF/SEAB), Rua Desembargador Motta 
No. 3384, CEP 80.410, CURITIBA, Parana 
(Tel: 41 234 1611) 

Secretaria de Planejamento do Estado de Pemambuco, 
Av. Marques de Olinda, CEP 50.000, RECIFE, 
Pemambuco (Tel: 81 224 4509/224 7061) 

Secretaria Estadual do Meio Ambiente, Ciencia e 
Tecnologia e Desenvolvimento Urbano, Rua 24 de 
Janeiro No. 330, Sul, CEP 64.000, TERESINA, Piaui 
(Tel: 86 222 8000/222 8019) 

Funda^ao Instituto Estadual de Florestas (lEF/RJ), Av. 
Treze de Maio No. 33, 15 Andar, Centro, CEP 
20.03 1 , RIO DE JANEIRO RJ (Tel: 21 240 7655/282 
1252) 

Conselho Estadual de Ciencia, Tecnologia e Meio 
Ambiente (CECTEMA), Centro Administrativo do 
Estado, Lagoa Nova, Bloco, Seplan, BR 101, CEP 
59.059, NATAL, Rio Grande do Norte (TeL 84 231 
6946/231 6082 R. 10/21) 

Departamento de Meio Ambiente (DMA), Av. A.J. 
Renner No. 10, Navegantes CEP 90.250, PORTO 
ALEGRE, Rio Grande do Sul (Tel: 512 42 0224/43 
5799) 

Departamento de Recursos Naturals Renovaveis, Centro 
Administrativo do Estado, 20 Andar, Av. Borges de 
Medeiros No. 1 501 , CEP 90.068, PORTO ALEGRE, 
Rio Grande do Sul (Tel: 512 26 3298) 

Instituto Estadual de Florestas (lEF/RO), Av. Getulio 
Vargas No. 1693, Centro, CEP 78.900, PORTO 
VELHO, Rondonia (Tel: 69 221 4229/221 4321) 

Secretaria de Agricultura de Roraima, Rua General Penha 
Brasil No. 1123, Sao Francisco, CEP 69.300, BOA 
VISTA, Roraima (Tel: 95 224 7841/224 0990) 

Conselho Estadual de Tecnologia e Meio Ambiente, Av. 
Osmar CunhaNo. 25, CEP 88.000, FLORL\NOPOLIS, 
Santa Catarina (Tel: 482 23 6813) 

Conselho Estadual do Meio Ambiente (CONSEMA), 
Rua Tabapua No. 81, 14 Andar, CEP 04.533, SAO 
PAULO SP (Tel: 1 1 883 3482/883 0766 R. 201/204) 

Conselho Estadual de Meio Ambiente, Pra^a Fausto 
Cardoso S/N, Ed. Walter Franco, 6 Andar, CEP49.000, 
ARACAJU, Sergipe (Tel: 79 224 7959) 



200 



Federal Republic of Brazil 



Fundafao Natureza do Tocantins (NATURANTINS), 
Rua Hosana Gongalves Cavalcante No. 322, CEP 
77.570. MIRACEMA DO TOCANTINS, Tocantins 
(Tel: 62 866 1482) 

Fundagao Biodiversitas (Director), Rua Maria Vaz de melo 
7 1 , B. Dona Clara, CEP 3 1 .250, BELO HORIZONTE, 
MG (Tel: 031 44321 19; Fax: 031 4417037) 

Funda?ao Brasileira para a Conservagao da Natureza, 
Rue Miranda Valverde 103, RIO DE JANEIRO, Rio 
de Janeiro 22.281 

Funda^ao ProNatureza (FUN ATURA) (President), C.P. 
020186,70.001 BRASILIA DF 

References 

Anon. (n.d.). Unidades de Conserva? ao no Brasil. 57 pp. 

(part of a larger unseen document) 
Dias, I.F.O., Gon?alves, A.R., Borges, M. and Meneses, 
E.O. (1991). Sistema de unidades de conservaQ&o 
federals do Brasil. IBAMADIRECDEUC. 11 pp. 
Diegues, A.C.S. (1990). Programa de pesquisa e 
conservagdo de areas umidas no Brasil. Inventario 
de Areas Umidas do Brasil. Versao Preliminar. 
Universidade de Sao Paulo/IUCN/Ford Foundation, 
Sao Paulo. 450 pp. 

Dourojeanni, M. (1988). Brazil National Environment 
Project. Conservation Unit component Draft. 

FAO (n.d.). La red latinoamericana de cooperacidn 
t6cnica en parques nacionales, otras areas 
protegidas, flora y fauna silvestres. Oficina 
regional de la FAO para America Latina y el 
Caribe, Santiago, Chile. 8 pp. 

Hunter, B. (1991). The Statesman's YearBook. 
Statistical and Historical Annual of the States of 
theWorld. 1 99 1 1992. The MacMillan Press, London. 

IBAMA (1990a). Cadastre nacional das instituigoes 
que atuam na area do meio ambiente. IBAMA 
MINTER. 4a. Edifao. Volume 1 . 50 pp. 

IBAMA (1990b). Cadastre nacional das instituigoes 
que atuam na area do meio ambiente (Instituifoes 
nao govemamentais). IBAMA, SEMAM, SINIMA. 
4a Edifao. Volume 2. 1 15 pp. 

IBAMA (1991). Volume Legislagde ambiental 
referente a parques nacionais. reservas bieldgicas e 



estaciones ecoldgicas. DIGER/DEUC/DIREC. 
4a. Edi?ao. IBAMA, MINTER, Brasilia. 
^CJ^ (1990). 1990 UnitedNations list of national parks 
and protected areas. lUCN, Gland, Switzerland and 
Cambridge, UK. 275 pp. 
Jorge Padua, M.T. and Magnanini, A. (1972). Parques 
Nacionais do Brasil. Caracteristicas Gerais, Situa^ao 
Atual, Aspectos da Fauna. M.A. Instituto Brasileiro 
de Desenvolvimento Horestal. 32 pp. 
Jorge Padua, M.T. and Rocha Porto, E.L. (1979). Plane 
do sistema de unidades de conservagdo do Brasil. 
M.A. Instituto Brasileiro de Desenvolvimento 
Florestal, Funda^ao Brasileira para Conserva^ao da 
Natureza, Brasilia. 105 pp. 
Mittermeier, R. (1988b). Biological diversity in Brazil. 

5 pp. (Unpublished) 
NogueiraNeto, P. and Carvalho, J.C. (1979). A 
programme of ecological stations for Brazil. 
Environmental Conservation 6(2): 95- 104. (Unseen) 
Ormazabal, C. (1988). Sistemas nacionales de dreas 
silvestres protegidas en America Latina. Pioyecto 
FAO/PNUMA sobre Manejo de Areas Silvestres, 
Areas Protegidas y Vida Silvestre en America Latina 
y El Caribe. Oficina Regional de la FAO para 
America Latina y El Caribe, Santiago, ChUe. 205 pp. 
Rylands. A.B. (1990). Evaluation of the current 
status of federal conservation areas in the 
tropical rain forest of the Brazilian Amazon. 
Volume 1. Review of Conservation Units 
System. WWF Project No. 6083, Washington 
DC. 156 pp. 
Schenkel, C.S. and Kaniak, V.C. (1992). Sistemas de 
unidades de conservacion. In: Amend, S. and 
Amend, T. ^Espacios sin Habitantes? Parques 
nacionales de America del Sur. lUCN/Editorial 
Nueva Sociedad, Caracas. Pp 107-113. 
Strang, H.E., Sobrinho, J. de P.L. and Tosetti, L.D. 
(1982). Parques estaduais do Brazil, sua 
characteriza^ao e essencias nativas mais 
importantes. Fundagao Brasileira para a 
Consen-afao da Natureza, Rio de Janeiro. Congresso 
Nacional sobre Essencias Nativas. Campos de Jordao 
(SP), 12-18 September 1982. 143 pp. 



201 



Protected Areas of the World 

ANNEX 

Definitions of protected area designations, as legislated, together with authorities 

responsible for their administration 



Title: Decree Law No. 25 

Date: 30 November 1937 

Brief description: Organises the protection of the 
historical and artistic national heritage. 

Administrative authority: Instituto Brasileiro do 
Meio Ambiente e dos Recursos Naturals Renovdveis 
(Brazilian Institute for the Environment and Natural 
Renewable Resources) within the Ministry of the 
Environment (Secretaria do Meio Ambiente) 

Designations: 

Monumento Natural (Natural Monument) Sites 
or landscapes which should be conserved and protect 
because of their notable natural ac manmade features. 

Source:Anon. (n.d.) 

Title: Law No. 3.924 

Date: 26 June 1961 

Brief description: Makes provision for 
archaeological and prehistoric monuments 

Administrative authority: Secretaria do 
Patrimonio Histtkico e Artistico Nacional 

Designations: 

Monumento Arqueoldgico ou PreHistdrico 
(Archaeological or PreHistoric Monument 

No authorisation will be given for research or 
production of calcareous shells with the 
characteristics of an archaeological or prehistoric 
monument without prior knowledge of the 
Directorate of Historic and Artistic National 
Heritage office. 

Source: Anon, (n.d.) 

Title: Forestry Code, Law No. 4.771 
Date: 15 September 1965 

Brief description: Provides protection to aU 
existing forests and other forms of vegetation. 
Makes provisions for the creation of national parks, 
ecological reserves and forests. 

Administrative authority: Instituto Brasileiro 
do Meio Ambiente e dos Recursos Naturals 
Renovdveis (Brazilian Institute for the Environment 
and Natural Renewable Resources) within the 
Ministry of the Environment (Secretaria do Meio 
Ambiente) 



Designations: 

Parque Nacional, Estadual e Municipal and 
Reserva Bioldgica (National, State and Municipal 
Park and Biological Reserve) Set aside to protect 
areas with exceptional natural attributes, conciliating 
the overall protection of the flora and fauna with use 
for educational, recreational and scientific purposes 

Foresta Nacional, Estadual e Municipal (National, 
State and Municipal Forest) Set aside for 

economical, technical or social purposes, even in 
areas that are not covered by forest but are intended 
for use as forest 

Article 16 limits the use of privately-owned forests 
and sets a minimum limit of 20% to 50% of the area 
in each property with localised tree cover to be 
respected. This extensive Article distinctly limits the 
use of the properties for each region of the country. 

Prohibited activities in these conservation units 
include destroying or damaging the forest or other 
forms of vegetation; cutting trees without adequate 
permits; entering the area with arms or any other 
prohibited substance or instrument; lighting fires 
without proper care; making, selling, transporting or 
releasing balloons which may cause fires; preventing 
or hindering natural regeneration; receiving or 
transporting timber or timber products without 
licence; failing to return expired licences to the 
authorities; releasing animals or failing to take 
necessary precautions to prevent domestic animals 
firom entering the forests; extracting stones, sand, 
lime OT any type of mineral. 

Source: Original legislation 



Title: Law No. 5197 (Dispositions on the 
protection of fauna and other provisions) 

Date: 3 January 1967 

Brief description: Provisions for the protection 
of fauna and the establishment of biological reserves 
and hunting parks. It revokes DecreeLaw No. 5894 
of 20 October 1943. 

Administrative authority: Instituto Brasileiro 
do Meio Ambiente e dos Recursos Naturals 
Renovdveis (Brazilian Institute for the Environment 
and Natural Renewable Resources) within the 
Ministry of the Environment (Secretaria do Meio 
Ambiente) 



202 



Federal Republic of Brazil 



Designations: 

Reserva Bioldgica Nacional, Estadual e Municipal 
(National, State and Municipal Reserve) Areas 
where activities relating to the use, persecution, 
hunting, harvest (gathering), or introduction of 
specimens of wild and domestic fauna and flora, as 
well as any modifications of the environment are 
prohibited, with the exception of scientific activities 
dully authorised by the authorities. 

Parque de Caqa Federal, Estadual e Municipal 
(Federal, StaU and Municipal Hunting Park) 

Areas partially or totally open to the public where 
hunting is allowed either on a temporary or 
permanent basis with recreational, educational and 
touristic purposes. 

Source:Original legislation 

Title: Law No. 6.513 

Date: 20 December 1977 

Brief description: Makes provisions for the 
establishment of special areas and sites of touristic 
interest 

Administrative authority:EMBRATUR 

Designations: 

Area Special de Interesse Turtstico e Local de 
Interesse Turtstico (Special Area of Touristic 
Interest and Site of Touristic Interest) Set aside 
due to their cultural and natural value, they are 
protected by specific legislation especially regarding 
historic, artistic, archaeological or prehistoric wealth 

Continuous spaces which include territorial waters 
and which should be preserved and valued in the 
cultural and natural sense, destined for tourist 
development plans and projects. Their development 
will depend on the areas not being subjected to 
special protection regulations and their respective 
entorno of environmental protection. 

Source: Anon, (n.d.) 



Title: Decree No. 84.017 (Regulation for 
Brazilian National Parks) 

Date: 21 September 1979 

Brief description: Provides definitions of 

national parks at the three levels (federal, state and 
municipal) 

Administrative authority: Instituto Brasileiro 
do Meio Ambiente e dos Recursos Naturais 
Renov^veis IBAMA (Brazilian Institute for the 
Environment and Natural Renewable Resources) 



Designations: 

Parque Nacional (National Park) Extensive 

and defined geographical areas with exceptional 
natural attributes, permanently protected. 

Destined for scientific, cultural, educational and 
recreational purposes and are created and 
administered by the federal government Constitute 
the wealth of the Union destined for the use of the 
people and should be preserved and maintained 
untouched by the authorities. 

Main objective is the preservation of the ecosystems 
from any modification. 

Source: Anon, (n.d.) 



Title: Law No. 6.902 

Date: 27 April 1981 

Brief description: Allows for the creation of 
ecological stations, environmental protected areas 
and other provisions. 

Administrative authority: Instituto Brasileiro 
do Meio Ambiente e dos Recursos Naturais 
Renovaveis (Brazilian InstiUite for the Environment 
and Natural Renewable Resources) within the 
Ministry of the Environment (Secretaria do Meio 
Ambiente) 

Designations: 

Estagdo Ecoldgica (Ecological Station) 

Areas representative of ecosystems destined for 
basic and applied ecological research, the protection 
of the namral environment and the development of 
conservation education. Afford protection to 90% of 
the area, the rest may be modified for research 
purposes. They can be estabUshed by federal, state 
and municipal dependencies. 

Area de Proteqdo Ambiental (Environmental 
Protection Area) Areas set aside by the Executive 
Power for the protection of the environment to ensure 
the welfare of the human population and to conserve 
or improve the local ecological situation. 

The following activities are prohibited: the 
establishment or functioning of potentially polluting 
industries capable of affecting water streams; the 
alteration of the soil through canalisation; activities 
capable of causing soil erosion or water basin 
siltation; and activities which threaten rare species 
within the protected area with extinction. 

Source: Original legislation 



203 



Protected Areas of the World 



Title: Decree No. 89-336 
Date: 31 January 1984 

Brief description: Makes further provision for 

ecological reserves 

Administrative authority:Instituto Brasileiro do 
Meio Ambiente e dos Recursos Naturals Renovdveis 
IB AMA (Brazilian Institute for the Environment and 
Natural Renewable Resources) 

Designations: 

Reserve Ecoldgica (Ecological Reserve) Those 
areas for permanent preservation mentioned in 
Article 18 of Law No. 6.938 of 1981, as well as those 
established by the Public (Executive) Power. 
Exceptions to this include those areas established as 
ecological stations by virtue of Laws No. 6.938 and 
6.902 of 1981. These areas may be public or private 
according to the status of their land tenure. 

Source: Anon, (n.d.) 



Title: Decree No. 98.914 
Date: 31 January 1990 

Brief description: Makes provision for the 
establishment of na&iral heritage private reserves. 

Administrative authority: Institute Brasileiro 
do Meio Ambiente e dos Recursos Naturals 
RenovSveis IBAMA (Brazilian Institute for the 
Environment and Natural Renewable Resources) 

Designations: 

Reserva Particular do Patrimonio Natural (Natural 
Heritage Private Reserve) Area set aside 

permanently by its owner in which natural primitive 
or semi primitive, recovered conditions will be 
identified or whose characteristics justify recovery 
action due to their landscape aspects or for the 
preservation of the biological cycle of the native 
species of fauna or flora. 

Article 4 of this Decree states that these areas will be 
recognised as such in the pubUc interest through the 
President of IBAMA. They will be exempt of rural 
tax. 

Source: Anon, (n.d.) 



Title: Decree No. 99 J74 

Date: 6 June 1990 

Brief description: Regulates Law No. 6.902 of 
27 April 198 1 and Law No. 6.938 of 3 1 August 198 1 
by governing the processes of establishment and 
management of ecological stations. It further 
determines that any activity which may affect the 
biota within a distance of 10km from any ecological 
station will depend on provisions supplied by 
CONAMA. 

Administrative authority: Institute Brasileiro 
do Meio Ambiente e dos Recursos Naturals 
Renovdveis IBAMA (Brazilian Institute for the 
Environment and Natural Renewable Resources) 

Designations: 

Estaqao Ecoldgica (Ecological Station) Created 
by virtue of Public Executive decrees, through 
proposals of the Secretary of the Environment. The 
act should define its geographical limits, its 
denominations and entities respwnsible for their 
administration and management and zoning. 

Any activity carried out within 10km of the 
surrounding area that could affect the biota of the 
conservation unit will be subject to regulations by 
CONAMA. 

Area de Prote(;ao Ambiental (Environmental 
Protection Area) At the federal level it is the 
responsibility of the Secretary of the Environment in 
accordance with IBAMA to propose the 
establishment of such areas to the President of the 
Republic. The decree should mention its 
denomination, geographical limits, main objectives 
and any prohibitions or restrictions in the use of its 
environmental resources. 

The supervisory entity should direct and assist 
owners so that the legislation objectives are 
followed. 

Any action or omission that result in noncompliance 
of regulations will be regarded as an offence. 
Amongst others, this includes actions that cause 
decline in water or environmental quaUty, any type 
of pollution which affect cultivated or wild plants, 
carry out activities which may potentially degrade 
the environment without appropriate licence, injury, 
killing or capture of rare species in the conservation 
unit 

Source: Original legislation 



204 



Federal Republic of Brazil 



SUMMARY OF PROTECTED AREAS 



Map Nationallinternational designations 
ref. Name of area 



lUCN management Area 

category (ha) 



Year 
notified 





National Parks 




1 


Amazonia (Para-Amazonas States) 


n 


2 


Aparados da Serra (R Grande Sul-Sta Catarina) 


II 


3 


Araguaia 


n 


4 


Brasilia 


n 


5 


Cabo Orange 


n 


6 


Caparao (Espirito Santo - Minas Gerais) 


n 


7 


Chapada Diamantina 


n 


8 


Chapada dos Guimaraes 


n 


9 


Chapada dos Veadeiros 


n 


10 


Emas (Gioas - Mato Grosso) 


n 


11 


Grande Sertao Veredas (Bahia and Minas Gerais) 


n 


12 


Iguacu 


n 


13 


Itatiaia (Rio de Janeiro-Minas Gerais) 


n 


14 


Jau 


n 


15 


1 ^goa do Peixe 


n 


16 


Lencois Maranhenses 


n 


17 


Marinho Fernando de Noronha 


n 


18 


Marinho dos Abrolhos 


n 


19 


Monte Pascoal 


n 


20 


Monte Roraima 


n 


21 


Pacaas Novos 


n 


22 


Pantanal Matogrossense 


n 


23 


Pico da Neblina 


n 


24 


Sao Joaquim 


n 


25 


Serra da Bocaina (Sao Paulo - Rio de Janeiro) 


n 


26 


Serra da Canastra 


n 


27 


Serra da Ci^ivara 


n 


28 


Sena do Cipo 


n 


29 


Serra do Divisor 


n 


30 


Serra dos Orgaos 


n 


31 


Sete Cidades 


n 


32 


Superagui 


n 


33 


Tijuca 


n 


34 


Xingu 

Ecological Reserves 


n 


35 


Jutai-Solimoes 


I 


36 


Raso da Catarina 
Ecological Stations 


I 


37 


Agaas Emendades 


IV 


38 


Anavilhanas 


IV 


39 


Ilha Maraca-Jipioca 


IV 


40 


IlhadoMel 


IV 


41 


Jari (Amapa and Para States) 


IV 


42 


Juami-Japura 


IV 


43 


Jureia-Itatins 


IV 


44 


Mamiraua 


IV 


45 


Piria-Gurupi (Maranhao and Para) 


I 


46 


Rio Acre 


IV 


47 


Serido 


IV 


48 


Serra das Araras 


IV 


49 


Taiama 


rv 



994,000 
10,250 

562,312 
28,000 

619,000 
26,000 

152,000 
33,000 
60,000 

131,868 
84,000 

170,000 

30,000 

2,272,000 

34,357 

155,000 
11,270 
91,300 
22,500 

116,000 

764,801 

135,000 

2,200,000 

49,300 

100,000 
71,525 
97,933 
33,800 

605,000 

11,000 

6,221 

21,000 

3,200 

2,200,000 



28435 
200,000 



9,768 

335,000 

72,000 

2,240 

227,126 

745,850 

80,000 

1,124,000 

341,650 

77,500 

1,116 

115,000 

12,000 



1974 
1959 
1959 
1961 
1980 
1961 
1985 
1989 
1961 
1961 
1989 
1939 
1937 
1980 
1986 
1981 
1988 
1983 
1961 
1989 
1979 
1981 
1979 
1961 
1971 
1972 
1979 
1984 
1989 
1939 
1961 
1989 
1961 
1961 



1983 
1983 



1968 
1981 
1981 
1982 
1982 
1985 
1987 
1990 
1988 
1981 
1982 
1982 
1981 



205 



Protected Areas of the World 



Map 


Nationallinternadonal designations lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 






Biological Reserves 








50 


Abufaii 


I 


288,000 


1982 


51 


Atol das Rocas (R. Grande do N and Maranhao) 


I 


36.249 


1979 


52 


Guaribas 


I 


4,321 


1990 


53 


Lago Piratuba 


I 


357,000 


1980 


54 


Pedra Talhada (Alagoas - Pemambuco) 


I 


4,469 


1989 


55 


Rio Trombetas 


I 


385,000 


1979 


56 


Tapirape 


I 


103,000 


1989 


57 


Uatuma 

Federal Biological Reserves 


I 


560.000 


1990 


58 


Augusto Ruschi (Nova Lombardia) 


I 


4,000 


1982 


59 


Caracara 


I 


61,126 


1971 


60 


Corrego Grande 


I 


1,504 


1989 


61 


Corrego do Veado 


I 


2,392 


1982 


62 


Marinha do Arvoredo 


I 


17,600 


1990 


63 


Poco das Antas 


I 


5,000 


1974 


64 


Santa Isabel 


I 


2,766 


1988 


65 


Serra Negra 


I 


1,100 


1982 


66 


Sooretama 


I 


24,000 


1982 


67 


Tingua 


I 


26,000 


1989 


68 


Una 

Federal Ecological Stations 


I 


11,400 


1980 


69 


Aiuaba 


IV 


11,525 


1981 


70 


Babitonga 


IV 


7,833 


1987 


71 


Caracarai 


IV 


394,560 


1982 


72 


Carijos 


IV 


11,295 


1987 


73 


Coco-Javaes 


IV 


37,000 


1981 


74 


Cunia 


IV 


104,000 


1982 


75 


Foz do Sao Francisco/Praia do Peba 


IV 


5,322 


1981 


76 


Guaraquecaba 


IV 


13,638 


1982 


77 


Ique 


IV 


200,000 


1981 


78 


Itabaiana 


IV 


1,100 


1987 


79 


Jureia 


IV 


24,065 


1986 


80 


Maraca 


IV 


101,312 


1981 


81 


Niquia 


IV 


286,600 


1985 


82 


Pirai 


IV 


4,000 


1982 


83 


Pirapitinga 


IV 


1,090 


1987 


84 


Taim 


IV 


33.995 


1986 


85 


Tamoios 


IV 


4,070 


1990 


86 


Tupinambas 


IV 


4.628 


1987 


87 


Urucui-Una 

Federal Environment Protection Areas 


IV 


135,000 


1981 


88 


Cairucu 


V 


33,800 


1983 


89 


Cananeia - Iguape e Peruibe 


V 


202.832 


1984 


90 


Carstre do Lagoa Santa 


V 


35.600 


1990 


91 


Fernando de Noronha- 


V 


1,692 


1986 


92 


Guapi-Mirim 


V 


14,340 


1984 


93 


Guaraquecaba 


V 


291,500 


1985 


94 


Morro da Pedreira 


V 


66,200 


1990 


95 


Petropolis 


V 


44,000 


1982 


96 


Serra da Mantiqueira (M Gerais-S Paulo-R Jan) 


V 


402,517 


1985 


97 


Serra da Tabatinga (Maranhao - Tocantins) 
Faunal Reserve 


V 


61,000 


1990 


98 


Secundario Perimetro de Sao Roque 


VI 


23,900 


1978 



206 



Federal Republic of Brazil 



Map National/inlernationaldesignations 
ref. Name of area 



lUCN management Area 

category (ha) 



Year 



Area of Outstanding Ecological Interest 
99 Manguezais da Foz do Rio Mamanguape 

State Forest Parks 



IV 



5,721 



1985 



100 


Espigao Alto 


n 


1,319 


1949 


101 


Nonoai 


n 


17,498 


1949 


102 


Rondinha 

Environmental Protection Areas 


n 


1,000 


1982 


103 


Abaete 


V 


1,800 


1987 


104 


Algodoal 


V 


2,367 


1990 


105 


Bacia do Descoberto (D Federal - Goias) 


V 


32,100 


1983 


106 


Bacia do Rio Sao Bartolomeu 


V 


84,100 


1983 


107 


Bacias do Gama e Cabeca do Veado 


V 


25,000 


1986 


108 


Cachoeira Andorinhas 


V 


18,700 


1989 


109 


Cafuringa 


V 


30,000 


1988 


110 


Cavema do Moroaga 


V 


256,200 


1990 


111 


Cavemas do Peruacu 


V 


150,000 


1989 


112 


Floresta do Jacaranda 


V 


2,700 


1983 


113 


Gruta dos BrejoesA'ereda do Romao Gramacho 


V 


11,900 


1985 


114 


Igarape Gelado 


V 


21,600 


1989 


115 


Jericoacoara 


V 


6,800 


1983 


116 


Lago Ayapua 


V 


610,000 


1990 


117 


Mangaratiba 


V 


22,936 


1987 


118 


Marituba do Peixe 


V 


8,600 


1988 


119 


Parintins Nhamunda 


V 


195,900 


1990 


120 


Piacabucu 


V 


5,500 


1983 


121 


Santa Rita 


V • 


8,800 


1984 


122 


Serra de Baturite 
National Forests 


V 


3,269 


1990 


123 


Anapa 


vm 


412,000 


1989 


124 


Amazonas 


vni 


1,573,100 


1989 


125 


Araripe 


vm 


38,262 


1946 


126 


Bom Futuro 


vni 


250,000 


1988 


127 


Capao Bonito 


vm 


4,347 


1968 


128 


Caxiuana 


vm 


200,000 


1961 


129 


Chapeco 


vm 


1,686 


1968 


130 


Cubate 


vm 


416,532 


1990 


131 


Cuiari 


vm 


107,516 


1990 


132 


Ibirama 


vm 


57,058 


1988 


133 


Icana 


vm 


200,561 


1990 


134 


Icana-Aiari 


vm 


491,400 


1990 


135 


Irati 


vm 


3,495 


1968 


136 


Jamari 


vm 


215,000 


1984 


137 


Macaua 


vm 


173,475 


1988 


138 


Mapia 


vm 


311,000 


1989 


139 


Mapia-Inauini 


vm 


311,000 


1989 


140 


Pari Cachoeira I 


vm 


18,000 


1989 


141 


Pari Cachoeira II 


vm 


654,000 


1989 


142 


Passo Fundo 


vm 


1,260 


1947 


143 


Pira/Auara 


vm 


631,436 


1990 


144 


Purus 


vm 


256,000 


1988 


145 


Rio Preto 


vra 


2,830 


1990 


146 


Roraima 


vm 


2,664,685 


1989 


147 


Sao Francisco de Paula 


vm 


1.138 


1947 


148 


Saraca Taquera 


vm 


429,600 


1989 


149 


Tapajos 


vm 


600,000 


1974 


150 


Tapirj^-Aquiri 


vm 


190,000 


1989 



207 



Protected Areas of the World 



Map 


National/international designations 


lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 




151 


Taracual 


vm 


647,744 


1990 


152 


Taracua II 


vra 


559,504 


1990 


153 


Tefe 


vni 


1,020,000 


1989 


154 


TresBairas 


vm 


4,458 


1968 


155 


Urucu 


vm 


66,496 


1990 


156 


Xie 

Forest Reserves 


vm 


407,935 


1990 


157 


Gorotire 


VI 


1,843,000 


1961 


158 


Jani 


VI 


1,085,000 


1961 


159 


Juruena 


VI 


1,800,000 


1961 


160 


Mundurucania 


VI 


1,377,000 


1961 


161 


Parima 


VI 


1,756,000 


1961 


162 


Pedras negras 


VI 


1,171,000 


1961 


163 


Rio Negro 


VI 


3,790,000 


1961 


164 


Tumucumaque 
Indigenous Reserves 


VI 


1,793,000 


1961 


165 


Amanayes 


vn 


261,000 




166 


Apiaca-Kayabi 


vn 


111,410 




167 


Areoes 


vn 


218,515 




168 


Irantxe 


vn 


46,790 




169 


Jarina 


vn 


268,813 




170 


Marechal Rondon 


vn 


98,500 




171 


Merure 


vn 


82,301 




172 


Nambiquara 


vn 


1,011,961 




173 


Parabubure 


vn 


224,447 




174 


Pareci 


vn 


563,586 




175 


Pimental Barbosa 


vn 


328,966 




176 


Sao Marcos 


vn 


188,478 




177 


Xerente 
Indigenous Areas 


vn 


167,542 




178 


Alto Purus 


vn 


265,000 


1987 


179 


Alto Rio Guama 


vn 


278,000 


1990 


180 


Alto Tarauaca 


vn 


23,840 


1987 


181 


Alto Turiacu 


vn 


530,524 




182 


Anambe 


vn 


7,912 


1988 


183 


Ananas 


vn 


1,769 




184 


AndiraMarau 


vn 


465,868 




185 


Aningal, Mpio Alto Alegre 


vn 


7,627 




186 


Anta 


vn 


2,250 




187 


Apinayes 


vn 


141,904 




188 


Apiterewa 


vn 


981,722 


1988 


189 


Araca 


vn 


50,018 




190 


Araral 


vn 


247,010 


1990 


191 


Ararall 


vn 


46,232 




192 


Aiara 


vn 


1,060,400 




193 


Aiara do Igarape Humaita 


vn 


27,700 


1987 


194 


Arariboia 


vn 


413,288 




195 


Arawete 


vn 


985,000 


1987 


196 


Aripuana (Mato Grosso and Rondonia) 


vn 


753,400 




197 


Awa 


vn 


232,000 




198 


Bacaja 


vn 


192,126 


1979 


199 


Bacurizinho 


vn 


82,432 




200 


Bakairi 


vn 


61,405 




201 


Barata Livramento 


vn 


18,830 




202 


Bau Menkranotire 


vn 


1,850,000 


1986 



208 



Federal Republic of Brazil 



Map 


National/international designations 


lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 




203 


Bom Jesus 


vn 


1,313 




204 


Boqueirao 


vn 


13,950 




205 


Cabeceira do Rio Acre 


vn 


18,870 


1988 


206 


Cachoeira Seca/Iriri 


vn 


760,479 


1989 


207 


Cajueiro 


vn 


4,304 




208 


Campinas 


vn 


28,862 


1985 


209 


Cana-Brava 


vn 


131,868 




210 


Canauamim 


vn 


6,324 




211 


Capoto 


vn 


186,000 




212 


Cam 


vn 


172,667 




213 


Catete 


vn 


439,151 


1987 


214 


Cubate 


vn 


1,023,000 




215 


Cuminapanema 


vn 


2,059,700 


1987 


216 


Cunia 


vn 


13,000 


1988 


217 


Deni 


vn 


998,400 




218 


Escondido 


vn 


275,100 




219 


Est. Rondon 


vn 


2,400 




220 


Estivadinho 


vn 


1,970 




221 


Estrela da Paz 


vn 


16,300 




222 


Evare 1 


vn 


596,000 




223 


Evare2 


vn 


165,000 




224 


Figueira 


vn 


25,973 


1987 


225 


Figueiras 


vn 


10,000 




226 


Funil 


vn 


16,000 




227 


Galibi 


vn 


6,689 




228 


Gaviao 


vn 


7,980 




229 


Geraldo e Toco-Preto 


vn 


16,588 




230 


Govemador 


vn 


41,644 




231 


Guapenu 


vn 


2,450 




232 


lauarete 


vn 


990,000 




233 


Ibirama 


vn 


14,156 




234 


Icana-Ajari 


vn 


896,000 




235 


Icana-Xie 


vn 


480,000 




236 


Igarape Lages 


vn 


107,321 




237 


Igarape Preto 


vn 


79,500 




238 


Igarape Ribeirao 


vn 


47,863 




239 


Uha Jacare Xipaca 


vn 


2,044 




240 


Ipixuna 


vn 


179,640 




241 


Jaboti 


vn 


8,000 




242 


Jacamim 


vn 


107,000 




243 


Jaminawa Arara 


vn 


28,280 


1977 


244 


Jaminawa do Igarape Preto 


vn 


23,117 


1986 


245 


Jj^uira 


vn 


148,450 




246 


Jaquiri 


vn 


1,830 




247 


Jarina/Margem Direita 


vn 


139,000 




248 


Jarudore 


vn 


4,706 




249 


Jatuarana 


vn 


5,251 




250 


Jumina 


vn 


24,000 




251 


Kampa do Rio Amonea 


vn 


91.200 


1987 


252 


Kampa do Rio Envira 


vn 


238,400 


1987 


253 


Kanamari 


vn 


607,563 




254 


Kanela 


vn 


125,212 




255 


Karaja Santana do Araguaia 


vn 


1,126,000 




256 


Kararao 


vn 


224,000 


1988 


257 


Karipuna 


vn 


195,000 




258 


Karitiana 


vn 


89,682 




259 


Katukina/Kaxinawa 


vn 


17,750 


1984 



209 



Protected Areas of the World 



Map 


Nationall international designations 


lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 




260 


Kaxarari (also Rondonia) 


vn 


127,540 




261 


Kaxinawa do Igarape do Caucho 


vn 


9,540 


1986 


262 


Kaxinawa do Nova Olinda 


vn 


32,150 


1986 


263 


Kaxinawa do Rio Breu 


vn 


23,840 


1987 


264 


Kaxinawa do Rio Humaita 


vn 


127,383 


1984 


265 


Kaxinawa do Rio Jordao 


vn 


92,000 


1984 


266 


Kayabi 


vn 


117,246 


1982 


267 


Kayapo 


vn 


3,204,000 


1985 


?^ 


Koatinema 


vn 


288,600 


1988 


269 


Kraolandia 


vn 


302,533 




270 


Krikati 


vn 


85,500 




271 


Kulina do Igarape do Pau 


vn 


14,400 


1987 


272 


Kulina do Medio Jurua 


vn 


770,300 




273 


Kulina do Rio Envira 


vn 


48,400 


1986 


274 


Lago Aiapoa 


vn 


25,500 




275 


Lago Beruri 


vn 


4,600 




276 


I-agoaComprida 


vn 


13,198 




277 


Lamerao 


vn 


49,500 




278 


Lauro Sodre 


vn 


9,600 




279 


Macarrao 


vn 


25,312 




280 


Mae Maria 


vn 


62.488 


1981 


281 


Malacacheta 


vn 


16,150 




282 


Mamoadate 


vn 


313.646 


1985 


283 


Mangueira 


vn 


4,064 




284 


Manoa/Pium 


vn 


43,337 




285 


Mariene 


vn 


10,793 




286 


Mekrangnoti 


vn 


4,913,000 


1990 


287 


Menku 


vn 


47,094 




288 


Mequens 


vn 


105,250 




289 


Miratu 


vn 


28,800 




290 


Mundurucu 


vn 


1,965,000 


1978 


291 


Murutinga 


vn 


1,210 




292 


Nhamunda Mapuera (part) 


vn 


845,400 




293 


Nhamunda Mapuera 


vn 


1,022,400 




294 


Nove de Janeiro 


vn 


234,400 




295 


Nukini 


vn 


30,900 


1986 


296 


Ouro 


vn 


13,573 




297 


Paquicamba 


vn 


4.351 


1990 


298 


Paracana 


vn 


351.697 


1985 


299 


Paracuhuba 


vn 


1.040 




300 


Pari-Cachoeira 


vn 


1,152.000 




301 


Pani d'Este 


vn 


1.182.800 




302 


Perigara 


vn 


10.740 




303 


Piraha 


vn 


389.000 




304 


Pirineus de Souza 


vn 


28,212 




305 


Pium 


vn 


3.180 




306 


Ponta de Serra 


vn 


15,597 




307 


Porquinhos 


vn 


79,520 




308 


Poyanawa 


vn 


19,987 


1986 


309 


Raimundao 


vn 


4,300 




310 


Raposa/Serra do Sol 


vn 


1,401,320 




311 


Recanto da Saudade 


vn 


13,750 




312 


Rikbaktsa 


vn 


79,935 




313 


RioBia 


vn 


1,180.200 




314 


Rio Branco 


vn 


236,137 




315 


Rio Formoso 


vn 


19,700 




316 


Rio Gregorio 


vn 


92.859 


1983 



210 



Federal Republic of Brazil 



Map 


National/internationaldesignations lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 




317 


Rio Guapore 


vn 


128,196 




318 


Rio Negro Ocaia 


vn 


104,063 




319 


Rio Paru do Leste 


vn 


1,182,800 




320 


Rio Pindare 


vn 


15,002 




321 


Rodeador 


vn 


2,319 




322 


Roosevelt (part with MT) Mpio Pimenta Bueno 


vn 


233,055 




323 


Roosevelt 


vn 


233,055 




324 


S.Ines 


vn 


29,698 




325 


S.Leopoldo 


vn 


55,000 




326 


Sagarana 


vn 


8,400 




327 


Sai-Cinza 


vn 


125,552 


1988 


328 


Saluma 


vn 


533.940 




329 


SangradouraA'olta Grande 


vn 


11,660 




330 


Sangradouro 


vn 


88,620 




331 


San tana 


vn 


35,471 




332 


Sao Domingos 


vn 


5,474 




333 


Sao Marcos 


vn 


653,949 




334 


Sarare 


vn 


67,420 




335 


Serra Morena 


vn 


148,300 




336 


Serra da Moca 


vn 


11,626 




337 


Sete de Setembre (Rondonia and Mato Grosso) 


vn 


247,870 




338 


Sororo 


vn 


26,258 


1977 


339 


Sucuba 


vn 


5,983 




340 


Tabalascada 


vn 


7,000 




341 


Tadarimana 


vn 


9,785 




342 


Tapirape/Karaja 


vn 


66,166 




343 


Taracua-Uaupes 


vn 


1,666,000 




344 


Tembe 


vn 


1,075 


1989 


345 


Tenharim/Transamazonia 


vn 


488,550 




346 


Terese Cristina 


vn 


25,694 




347 


Terra Vemielha 


vn 


8,750 




348 


Ticuna Feijoal 


vn 


1,320 




349 


Ticuna Porto Espiritual 


vn 


3,550 




350 


Ticuna de Santo Antonio 


vn 


1,450 




351 


Tirecatinga 


vn 


130,575 




352 


Tora 


vn 


24,600 




353 


Tracaja 


vn 


1,550 




354 


Trincheira 


vn 


1,550 




355 


Trinciieira/Bacaja 


vn 


1,438,856 


1989 


356 


Trocara 


vn 


21,722 


1982 


357 


Truaru 


vn 


6,640 




358 


Tubarao Latunde 


vn 


116,000 




359 


Tuere 


vn 


640,000 




360 


Uaca, 1 and 2 


vn 


434,660 




361 


Uai-Uai 


vn 


330,000 




362 


Uaimiri Atroari 


vn 


2,585,911 




363 


Uati-Parana 


vn 


102,187 




364 


Umariacu 


vn 


1,600 




365 


Umutina 


vn 


28,120 




366 


Uneiuxi 


vn 


405,000 




367 


Uru-Eu-Uau-Uau 


vn 


1,832,300 




368 


Urucu-Jurua 


vn 


12,697 




369 


Utiariti 


vn 


412,304 




370 


Vale do Guapore 


vn 


242,593 




371 


Vale do Javari 


vn 


8,338,000 




372 


Vui-Uata-In 


vn 


125,000 




373 


Waiapi 


vn 


543,000 





211 



Protected Areas of the World 



Map 


National/international designations 


lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 




374 


Waimiri-Atroari 


vn 


2,440,000 




375 


Xambioa 


vn 


3,265 




376 


Zoro 


vn 


431,700 




377 


Zuruaha 
Indigenous Paries 


vn 


233,900 




378 


Araguaia 


vn 


1,395,000 




379 


Aripuana 


vn 


1,258,323 




380 


Tumucumaque 


vn 


2,700,000 


1968 


381 


Xingu 


vn 


2,642,008 




382 


Yanomami (Amazonas and Roraima) 
Slate Parks 


vn 


7,751,945 




383 


Alto Ribeira 


n 


37,712 


1958 


384 


Bacanga 


II 


3,075 


1980 


385 


Brigadeiro 


11 


32,500 


1988 


386 


Campos do Jordao 


11 


8,286 


1941 


387 


Carlos Botelho 


u 


37,797 


1982 


388 


Caxambu 


n 


1,040 


1979 


389 


Delta do Jacui 


II 


4,322 


1976 


390 


Desengano 


V 


22,500 


1983 


391 


Ibitipoca 


n 


1,488 


1973 


392 


Ilha Anchieta 


n 


828 


1977 


393 


Ilha Bela 


n 


27,025 


1958 


394 


Ilha Grande 


u 


15,000 


1978 


395 


Ilha do Cardoso 


II 


??,500 


1962 


396 


Itacolomi 


u 


7,542 


1967 


397 


Jacupiranga 


II 


150,000 


1969 


398 


Jaiba 


II 


6,358 


1973 


399 


Mananciais da Serra 


II 


2,249 




400 


Mirador 


II 


385,000 


1980 


401 


Morro do Chapeu 


II 


6,000 


1973 


402 


Morro do Diabo 


II 


34,441 


1986 


403 


Pedra Branca 


u 


12,500 


1974 


404 


RioDoce 


II 


35,973 


1944 


405 


Serra Caldas Novas 


II 


12,315 


1970 


406 


Serra Furada 


u 


1,329 


1980 


407 


Serra do Mar 


II 


314,800 


1969 


408 


Serra do Tabuleiro 


II 


87,405 


1975 


409 


Sumidouro 


II 


1,300 


1980 


410 


Tainhas 


II 


4,924 


1975 


411 


Terra Ronca 


II 


14,493 




412 


Turvo 


II 


17,491 


1965 


413 


Vascununca 


II 


1,484 


1970 


414 


Vila Velha 

Slate Biological Reserves 


u 


3,245 


1953 


415 


Aguai 




7,672 


1983 


416 


Araras 




2,068 


1972 


417 


Canela Preta 




1,844 


1980 


418 


Guapore 




600,000 


1982 


419 


Jam 




268,150 


1979 


420 


Mata Acaua 




5,000 


1974 


421 


Para una 




3,490 


1979 


422 


Praia do Sul 




3,600 


1981 


423 


Rio Ouro Preto 




46.438 


1990 


424 


Sassafraz 




5,416 


1977 


425 


Serra Geral 




1,700 


1982 



212 



Federal Republic of Brazil 



Map National/international designations 
ret. Name of area 



lUCN management Area 

category (ha) 



Year 



426 



Tracadal 



22,540 



1990 





State Ecological Stations 


427 


Angatuba 


428 


Bracinho 


429 


Caetetus 


430 


Chauas 


431 


Itirapina 


432 


Jatai 


433 


Paraiso 


434 


Santa Barbara 


435 


Xitue 




State Environment Protection Areas 


436 


Bacia dos Rios Piracicaba e Juqueri - Mirim 


437 


Cabreuva 


438 


Cajamar 


439 


Campos do Jordao 


440 


Corumbatai-Botucatu-Tejupa 


441 


Ibitinga 


442 


Ilha Comprida 


443 


Jundiai 


444 


Serra das Mangabeiras 


445 


Serra do Mar 


446 


Silveiras 


447 


Tiete 


448 


Varzea do Alto Tiete 




State Forest 


449 


Antimari 




Extractive Reserves 


450 


Alto Jurua 


451 


Antimari 


452 


Cachoeira 


453 


Cajari-2 


454 


Cajari-3 


455 


Cautario, Mpio Costa Marques 


456 


Chico Mendes 


457 


Iratapuru 


458 


Jaciparana and Mutumparana 


459 


Macaua 


460 


Maraca-1 


461 


Maraca-2 


462 


Maraca-3 


463 


Matauau 


464 


Ouro Preto 


465 


Pacaas Novos 


466 


Porto Dias 


467 


Reman so 


468 


Rio Cajari 


469 


Rio Ouro Preto 


470 


Rio Pedras Negras 


471 


Riozinho 


472 


Santa Quiteria 


473 


Terrua 



rv 

IV 

rv 

IV 

rv 

IV 
IV 
IV 
IV 



V 
V 
V 
V 
V 
V 
V 
V 
V 
V 
V 
V 
V 



vm 



1,394 
4,606 
2,188 
2,700 
2,300 
4,532 
4,920 
2,712 
3,095 



390,000 
26,100 
13,400 
26,900 

641,000 
64,900 
19,375 
43,200 
96,743 

548,100 

42,700 

45,100 

8,500 



66,168 



1985 
1984 
1987 
1987 
1984 
1982 
1987 
1984 
1987 



1987 
1984 
1987 
1984 
1984 
1987 
1987 
1984 
1983 
1984 
1984 
1983 
1987 



vm 


506,186 


1990 


vni 


260,277 


1988 


vm 


24,099 


1987 


vm 


82,000 




vm 


104,000 




vm 


230,000 




vm 


970,570 


1990 


vm 


70,000 




vm 


240,000 




vm 


103,106 


1978 


vm 


75,000 


1988 


vm 


22,500 


1988 


vm 


226,500 


1988 


vm 


68,000 




vm 


170,000 




vm 


180,000 




vm 


22,145 


1987 


vm 


43,502 


1987 


vm 


481,650 


1990 


vm 


204,583 


1990 


vm 


180,000 




vm 


35,896 


1988 


vm 


43,248 


1980 


vm 


139,295 


1989 



213 



Protected Areas of the World 



Map National/internationaldesignations lUCN management Area Year 

ref. Name or area category (ha) 

Biosphere Reserves 

TijucaTinguaOrgSos IX 67,600 1991 

Vale do RibeiraSerra do Graciosa IX 1,794,500 1991 

World Heritage Site 

Igua?u Nauonal Park X 170,000 1986 



214 



Federal Republic of Brazil 




Protected Areas of Brazil 
North-West Brazil 



215 



Protected Areas of the World 




Protected Areas of Brazil 
North-East Brazil 



216 



Federal Republic of Brazil 




Protected Areas of BrazU 
Southern Brazil 



217 



CHILE 



Area 756,943 sq. km 

Population 13,173,000 (1990) 
Natural increase: 1.55 % per annum 

Economic Indicators 

GDP: US$ 1,51 1 per capita (1987) 
GNP: US$ 1,770 per capita (1989) 

Policy and Legislation Article 19 of the 1980 

Political Constitution of CliUe (Constituci6n Poli'tica de 
la Repiiblica de Chile) states that all inhabitants are 
assured the right to live in an environment firee of 
contamination, and that the state is responsible for nature 
protection. However, little importance is afforded to 
protected areas as part of a national development 
strategy, and a comprehensive strategy for protected 
areas is lacking (Stutzin et at., 1991; Gutierrez, 1992). 
Although there is abundant legislation (over 20 legal 
texts) referring to national parks, it is disperse, 
ambiguous and contradictory (Gutierrez, 1992), and 
there is no consolidated law to cover national protected 
areas (Araya and Cunazza, 1992). 

The first legislation to make provision for protected areas 
was the 1925 Forests Law (Ley de Bosques), Decree 
Law No. 656, which authorises the creation of national 
parks and forest reserves. This was amended by the 193 1 
Forests Law, Supreme Decree No. 4363, which provides 
for the expropriation of private land for protected areas, 
and the estabhshment of national tourist parks and forest 
reserves to conserve national natural beauty and certain 
tree species. Land set aside for protection cannot be used 
for any other purpose. The Agriculture and Livestock 
Service (Servicio Agricola y Ganadero) (SAG) is 
assigned responsibility for management of protected 



Decree Law No. 1939 (1977) on the Acquisition, 
Administration and Disposition of State or Fiscal 
Property (Adquisici6n, Administracion y Disposici6n 
sobre los Bienes del Estado o Fiscales) replaces Decree 
Law No. 701 (1974) of the same name, and makes 
provisions for managing state property including parks 
and reserves. Trees may only be felled with prior 
authorisation from the National Foresffy Corporation 
(Corporaci6n Nacional Forestal) (CONAF). CONAF is 
an autonomous state corporation, under the Ministry of 
Agriculture, responsible for forests and protected areas. 

CONAF manages the National System of Wild Protected 
Areas (Sistema Nacional de Areas Silvestres Protegidas 
del Estado) (SNASPE). Definitions are given for the 
protected area categories of national park, natural 
monument, national reserve and wilderness reserve, and 
provisions made for reclassifying protected areas 
accordingly. Forest reserves are now known as national 
reserves (CONAF, 1989). No wilderness reserves have 
been declared. CONAF is obliged to develop a 



management plan for each protected area in the 
SNASPE. 

In 1988, Law No. 18768 formally transfers 
administrative responsibiUties for nauonal parks and 
forest reserves from the SAG to CONAF. In practice, 
transfer had already taken place several years earlier 
following an agreement between the two institutions 
(CONAF, 1989). 

Improvements in legislation for protected areas and 
natural resource management took place in 1 984 with the 
promulgation of two new laws: Law Nos. 18348 and 
18362 (CONAF, 1989). However, for administraUve 
and financial reasons they have not come into effect yet 
(Stutzin et al., 1991; Guuerrez, 1992). Uw No. 18348 
provides for the creation of the National Corporation for 
Forests and the Protection of Natural Renewable 
Resources (Corporaci6n Nacional Forestal y de 
Proteccion de Recursos Naturales Renovables) (also 
known as CONAF), as an autonomous state institution. 
This new institution would be part of the Ministry of 
Agriculture, controlled financially by the General 
Auditor of the Republic (Controlaria General de la 
Republica). Some of the conservation, protection and 
natural resource regulation activities that were 
previously assigned to the SAG would be transferred to 
the new CONAF, including forest exploitation and 
regulation enforcement. Professionals from appropriate 
fields can be deployed to assist in research projects. The 
new Corporation that would be formed under this 
legislation takes over all responsibilities and property 
from the former National Forestry Corporation. From 1980 
onwards, CONAF advocated a single law. No. 18362, to 
consolidate all aspects of protected area legislation. This 
law, promulgated in 1984, but not yet in effect, provides 
for the creation of a new, coherent National System of 
Wild Protected Areas (SNASPE). The five conservation 
objectives of the SNASPE are given as: maintaining 
areas unique in character or representative of national 
ecological diversity for continuity of natural processes 
and pubUc education; maintaining natural resources and 
ensuring their sustainable use; maintaining the 
productive capacity of soils and hydrological systems; 
and preserving natural scenic beauty and cultural 
heritage. Protected area designations are given (see 
Annex). 

International Activities Chile signed Convention 
on Nature Protection and Wildhfe Preservation in the 
Western Hemisphere (Convenci6n sobre la Protecci6n 
de la Rora, de la Fauna y de las Bellezas Esc^nicas 
Naturales de los Raises de America) (Western 
Hemisphere Convention) in 1940, and ratified it in 1967. 
However, national legislation transgresses the Western 
Hemisphere Convention, particularly in the case of 
mineral resource exploitation within protected areas 
(Gutidrrez, 1992; Astorga, n.d.). Chile ratified the 



219 



Protected Areas of the World 



Convention Concerning the Protection of the World 
Cultural and Natural Heritage (World Heritage 
Convention) on 16 January 1980 (through Decree No. 3056 
of 1979), but no natural sites have been inscribed. Chile 
ratified the Convention on Wetlands of International 
Importance especially as Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar 
Convention) on 27 July 1981 (through Decree Law 
No. 3485 of 1980 and Supreme Decree No. 771 of 1981) 
and one wetland has been listed. Chile also participates in 
the Unesco Man and the Biosphere Programme, and has 
seven biosphere reserves. In 1979, the Convention for 
the Conservation and Management of Vicufla (Con venio 
para la Conservacidn y Manejo de la Vicufla) was signed 
by Argentina, Bolivia, ChUe, Ecuador, and Peru, and was 
ratified in Chilean legislation in 1981. 

The United Nations Development Programme and the 
FAO carried out a study on protected areas in arid and 
semi-arid zones, with a view to improving their 
management and identifying further areas for protection, 
between 1986 and 1988. Among the recommendations 
made was the inclusion into SNASPE of several areas in 
the northern regions. 

Support for conservation projects and training park 
guards is received from several international 
organisations including WWF, WCI-NYZS, the World 
Monument Fund, the FAO, United Nations Environment 
Programme and Unesco (CONAF 1989). 

Administration and Management Legal 

responsibility for protected areas is assigned to the 
Ministry of Agriculture (Ministerio de Agricultura), 
which delegates all aspects of administration and 
management to the National Forestry Corporation 
(CONAF). 

Financial and policy-making responsibiUties are divided 
within the central administration of CONAF. The 
Executive Director (Director Ejecutivo) is responsible 
for the internal administration of CONAF, and all 
financial matters. The Executive Council (Consejo 
Directivo), comprising the Minister of Agriculture, the 
Executive Director of CONAF, the Executive Director 
of SAG, the Vice-president of the Institute for 
Agricultural Development (Instituto de Desarrollo 
Agropecuario) and the Director of the Office of 
Agricultural Planning (Oficina de Planificaci(3n 
Agn'cola), develops conservation policies and 
implements projects which are annually reviewed and 
modified where necessary. 

CONAF comprises four departments: Wild Heritage 
(Patrimonio Silvestre) responsible for protected areas 
management. Forest Control, Fire Control and Fire 
Management (Ramirez, pers. comm., 1991). CONAF 
has offices in each of the country's 13 regions. Seven 
professionals are employed in central administration and 
27 regionally, including forestry engineers, biologists 
and agricultural technicians. Regional offices are 
responsible for protected areas management By 1989 
there were 350 park guards distributed among 59 of the 



75 protected areas in the SNASPE, and seven national 
training courses had taken place. A fiirther 160 technicians 
and administrative personnel are employed (CONAF 1 989). 
CONAF is also responsible for wildlife management 
within the SNASPE. By 1989, 17 projects had been 
undertaken to study wildlife and implement management 
plans for certain species such as the vicufla and chinchilla 
(CONAF 1989). 

CONAF's administrative faculties are not sufficient for 
it to adequately carry out its duties. Infringement of 
protected areas by private timber and mineral companies 
isamajor problem (Stutzinera/., 1991; Gutierrez, 1992). 
This is due to lack of resources, and also because of 
CONAF's status as an autonomous state corporation. Its 
powers are further limited by the fact that infringements 
are not defined in the legislation (Gutierrez, 1992). By 
1989, 14 of the country's protected areas were occupied 
(Cunazza, 1989). On a general level, national and 
regional policies do not put sufficient importance on 
either conservation or sustainable development; areas 
designated for protection are often also designated for 
other incompatible uses by other government 
institutions (Stutzin et al., 1991; Araya and Cunazza, 
1992; E. Astorga, M. Stutzin and H. Verscheure, pers. 
comm., 1992). 

Recently, CONAF has turned to industry as a source of 
additional financial support for its work. 
Non-governmental conservation organisations (NGOs) 
also fund specific aspects of CONAF's work, such as 
environmental education and research (Stutzin et al., 
1991). 

In the northern region of Chile an NGO, the Rora and 
Fauna Defense Committee (Comite Nacional Pro 
Defensa de la Flora y la Fauna) (CODEFF), supports 
protected areas, and works towards increasing 
environmental protection and preventing pollution 
(Guerra, pers. comm., 1991). It has sections in seven 
cities, and manages a private reserve in the south of 
Chile. The Austral Ecological Defence Initiative 
(Iniciativa de Defensa Ecologica Austral) (IDEA) woiks 
on issues related to protected areas in the south of Chile. 
The National Network for Ecological Action (Red 
Nacional de Accidn Ecol6gica) (RENACE) Unks NGOs 
throughout the country via a monthly news bulletin, 
Ecoprensa. 

Systems Reviews Chile extends 4,200km from 17S to 
56S, with an altitude range from sea level to 7,000m, and 
includes oceanic islands. A number of distinct 
ecosystems are found, with a high degree of biodiversity 
(Mark, 1984; Ormazibal, 1986a). To obtain a better 
understanding of the country's vegetation formations 
and ecosystems, and to assess the degree of protection 
afforded by the SNASPE, CONAF initiated the Basic 
System of Classifying Chilean Native Vegetation 
(Sistema B^ico de Clasificacidn de la Vegetaci6n 
Nativa Chilena) in 1985 (Ormazabal, 1986b). The 
System identifies 8 ecological regions, 17 



220 



Chile 



sub-regions and 83 different vegetation formations 
(Ormazdbal, 1986a, 1986b). 

The two main mountain ranges are the Cordillera de los 
Andes, extending the length of the country, and the 
Cordillera de la Costa along the northern coast. Chilean 
territory includes Easter Island, Sala y Gomez Island, 
and the Juan Fernandez Islands. Tropical coastal desert 
and high desert grassland (puna), located in the far north, 
include the Atacama desert where average rainfall is less 
than 1mm per year. 

Predominandy scrubland vegetation lies to the south, 
where annual precipitation varies from 100mm in 
northern areas to 1000mm further south. This is the most 
productive agricultural land in the country and includes 
the capital metropolitan area. Two-thirds (66%) of the 
population lives in this region, which occupies only 
10% of the total national territory, a situation that has 
resulted in extreme environmental degradation 
(Weber, 1983). 

A SOOkm-long stretch of Araucaria forest intervenes 
between the scrubland and the Valdivian mixed 
temperate rain forest, which is characterised by the 
presence of bamboo in the understorey. True Ciiilean 
Nothofagus beech forests extend 2,000km to the south, 
and Patagonian steppe with tussock grassland and 
shrub vegetation extends down to the Magellan Straits 
(Mark, 1984). Cattle ranching is concentrated in this 
region. 

The first national park was declared in 1926, with the 
objective of protecting natural beauty and resources and 
allowing for tourism, without endangering the 
livelihoods of the local inhabitants (Contreras et ai, 
1979; Ormaz^bal, 1986b). A further 12 parks were 
established between 1935 and 1945 with the objective of 
protecting particular tree species. Between 1958 and 
1979, 36 more protected areas were established. During 
the 1 970s, management plans were compiled, describing 
the infrastructure, research and educational projects 
required (Contreras et al., 1979). By 1990, there were 
30 national parks, 36 national reserves, and 10 natural 
monuments, totalling 13,600,000ha or around 18% of 
total land area (Poblete, pers. comm., 1990). 

The principal fault with the protected areas system is the 
considerable difference in coverage between different 
regions of the country, with some ecosystems absent 
from SNASPE altogether (Ormazabal, 1986a, 1986b). 
The majority of the area under protection, 82%, is 
located in Aysen and Magallanes regions at the southern 
tip of the country. Both these regions have nearly 50% 
of their territory within the SNASPE. Less than 1% of 
Antofagasta is protected, despite being of similar size to 
both of the southern regions. The desert, Patagonian 
steppe, Matorrales and sclerophyll wood regions are also 
considered to be inadequately protected (Ormazabal, 
1986b). Of Chile's 17 ecological sub-regions, eight are 
well or adequately represented within the SNASPE, five 
are poorly represented, and four are not represented at 



all (Valencia et al., 1987). Studies carried out as part of 
the native vegetation classification project found that 
approximately 30 of the 83 different vegetation 
formations described are not represented in any 
protected area (Valencia et al., 1987; Ramirez, pers. 
comm., 1991). Lack of protection is most pronounced in 
the Central Zone, and the northern regions, Antofagasta 
and Atacama (Ormazabal, 1986b). 

National parks have not always been created in 
accordance with stated national objectives. Some were 
declared in order to stop agricultural colonisation or for 
political reasons, such as improving the country's 
international image (Contreras et al., 1979). Therefore, 
several national parks do not fulfil the appropriate legal 
designation (Anon., 1983; Ormazabal, 1986b). hi 1972, 
five national parks were established under provisions of 
Law No. 17699, but with no specified boundaries, 
management plans, or consideration of the fact that most 
of the land was privately owned (Anon., 1983). 

Chile participates in the FAO Latin American 
Network programme (Red Latinoamericana de 
Cooperaci6n T6cnica en Parques Nacionales, Otras 
Areas Protegidas, Flora y Fauna Silvestres) through 
CONAF. According to the definition provided by the 
network, Chile has developed a comprehensive national 
system (Ormazdbal, 1988; FAO, n.d.). 

Owing to the country's geographical diversity and the 
great differences between each protected area, there is 
no single solution to the problems of SNASPE 
(Ormazabal, 1986b). Special priority is given to 
incorporating under-represented ecosystems into 
SNASPE. This includes the Central Zone where 
degradation is most accelerated (CONAF, 1989; 
Ormazabal, 1986b). Incorporating more aquatic 
ecosystems into SNASPE, increasing staff salaries and 
providing more training opportunities are amongst the 
current aims of CONAF (CONAF, 1989). 

Addresses 

Departamento de Patrimonio Silvestre, Corporaci6n 
Nacional Forestal y de Recursos Naturales 
Renovables (CONAF), Av. Bulnes 259, Oficina 604, 
SANTIAGO (TeL 2 699 6677/1257; FAX: 2 715881; 
Tbc: 240001 CONAF CL) 

Comit6 Nacional Pro Defensa de la Fauna y Flora 
(CODEFF), Santa Filomena 185, Casilla 3675, 
SANTIAGO (Tel: 37729O\7771607; FAX: 2 377290) 

Comit6 Nacional Pro Defensa de la Fauna y Flora 
(CODEFF), Universidad de Antofagasta, Av. 
Universidad de Chile S/N, Casilla 170, 
ANTOFAGASTA (TeL 242160 exL 226; FAX: 247786; 
Tbc 325054 UANTOF CK) 

Iniciativa de Defensa Ecol6gica Austral (IDEA), Jos6 
Nogueira 1161, Casilla 527, PUNTA ARENAS 
(FAX: 61 247839) 

Red Nacional de Acci6n Ecoldgica (RENACE), Casa de 
la Paz, Antonia Lope de BeUo 024, SANTIAGO 
(Tel: 2 374280) 



221 



Protected Areas of the World 



References 

Anon. (1983). Las Araucarias de Ralco-Lepoi. Chile 
Forestal. May. Pp. 20-22. 

Araya, P. and Cunazza, C. (1992). Habitantes de los 
parques nacionales de Chile: caracteristicas y 
problemas. In: Amend, S. and Amend, T. (Eds), 
iEspacios sin Habitantes? Parques Nacionales de 
America del Sur. lUCN and Editorial Nueva 
Sociedad, Caracas. Pp. 139-158. 

Astorga, E. (n.d.). R6gimen juridico sobre ireas 
sUvestres protegidas. 2 pp. (Unpublished) 

Brooks, H. (1987). Chile: a country profile. Prepared for 
the Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance, 
Agency for International Development, Department 
of State, Washington D.C., USA. 99 pp. 

CONAF (1983). Representaci6n de las provincias 
biogeogrdficas per las reservas de la bi6sfera en 
Chile. Acci6n presente y futura de la Corporacion 
Fwestal Nacional. Boletin Ticnico No. 10. Corporacion 
Nacional Forestal, Ministerio de Agricultura, Santiago. 
23 R). 

CONAF (1985). Parque nacional Torres del Paine. 
Nandu 7(18). Corporaci6n Nacional Forestal, Punta 
Arenas. 24 pp. 

CONAF (1989). La proteccidn del patrimonio 
ecoldgico. Corporaci6n Nacional Forestal, 
Ministerio de Agricultura, Santiago. 75 pp. 

Contreras, M., L de la Maza, C, Merino, R., 
Morales, A., Barros, P. and Weintraub, A. (1979). 
Evaluacidn econdmica de parques nacionales: el 
sistema de parques nacionales en Chile, Resumen de 
metodologtas. Investigacion y desarroUo forestal. 
CONAF/FAO, Santiago de Chile. 74 pp. 

Cunazza, C. (1989). Predios privados y ocupantes 
del Sistema Nacional de Areas Silvestres 
Protegidas del Estado: diagn6stico y altemativas 
de soluci6n. In: Actas Reunidn Nacional del 
Programa de Patrimonio Silvestre. CONAF. 
(Unseen) 

FAO (n.d.). La Red Latinoamericana de Cooperaci6n 
Tecnica en Parques Nacionales, Otras Areas 
Protegidas, Flora y Fauna Silvestres. Oficina 
Regional de la FAO para Am6rica Latina y el Caribe, 
Santiago. 8 pp. 

FAO (1983). Informe de la mesa redonda sobre parques 
nacionales, otras ^eas protegidas, flora y fauna 
silvestres. Santiago de Chile 8-10 June. FAO 
Regional Office for Latin America and the 
Caribbean, Santiago. Pp. 26-30. 

FAO (1990). Investigaci(5n y desarrollo de ireas 
silvestres en zonas ^das y semi^das: resultados y 



recomendaciones del proyecto. United Nations Food 
and Agriculture Organization and United Nations 
Development Programme, Rome, 1990. 27 pp. 

Gutierrez, D. (1992). Legislaci6n chilena sobre parques 
nacionales: uso de los recursos naturales. In Amend, S. 
and Amend, T. (Eds), ^Espacios sin Habitantes? 
Parques Nacionales de America del Sur. lUCN and 
Editorial Nueva Sociedad, Caracas. Pp. 159-172. 

Mark, A.F. (1984). Impressions of the national parks 
system in Chile. Forest and Bird 15(2): 33-37. 

Ormazibal, C. (1986a). El sistema nacional de Sreas 
silvestres de Chile. Flora Fauna y Areas Silvestres 
1: 10-15 

Omiazdbal, C. (1986b). Preservaci6n de recursos 
fitogen6ticos in situ a trav6s de parques nacionales y 
otras dreas protegidas. Importancia, avances, 
limitaciones y proyeccion futura. Boletin Ticnico 
No 16. Gerencia T6cnica, Corporaci6n Nacional 
Forestal, Ministerio de Agricultura, Santiago. 32 pp. 

OrmazSbal, C. (1988). Sistemas nacionales de Areas 
silvestres protegidas en America Latina. Basado en 
los resultados del taller sobre Planificacion de 
Sistemas Nacionales de Areas Silvestres Protegidas, 
Caracas, Venezuela, 9-13 junio 1986. Proyecto 
FAO/PNUMA sobre manejo de ^eas silvestres, 
^eas protegidas y vida silvestre en America Latina 
y el Caribe. Oficina Regional de la FAO para 
America Latina y el Caribe, Santiago, Chile. Pp. 20-23. 

Ormaz^bal, C. (1990). The conservation of biological 
diversity in ChUe. Second draft. School of Forestry 
and Environmental Studies, Yale University. 60 pp. 

Ormaz^bal, C. and Saavedra Perez, M.E. (1985). 
Representaci6n ecol6gica del sistema nacional de 
dreas silvestres protegidas del estado en relacion a la 
clasificacion de Udvardy. Departamento Areas 
Silvestres Protegidas, CONAF, Santiago, Chile. 23 pp. 

Stutzin, M., Verscheure, H., and Astorga, E. (1991). El 
Sistema Nacional de Areas Silvestres Protegidas del 
Estado de Chile (SNASPE): carencias y 
potencialidades. CODEFF, Santiago. 1 1 pp. 

Valencia et al. (1987) Sistema de ^eas de conservacion 
en Chile. Proposiciones para un esquema ecol6gico 
inlegrai. Ambiente y Desarrollo. Vol. III. N. 1 and 2. 
Pp. 139-159. (Unseen). 

Wetterberg, G.B., Jorge Padua, M.T., Tresinari, A., 
Ponce del Prado, C.F. (1985). Decade ofprogressfor 
South American National Parks. National Park 
Service, US Department of the Interior, Washington, 
DC. 123 pp. 



222 



Chile 



ANNEX 

Definitions of protected area designations, as legislated, 

together with authorities responsible for their administration 



Title: Act No. 18362 crea un Sistema 
Nacional de Areas Silvestres Protegidas del 
Estado (to create a National System of State 
Protected Wildland Areas) 

Date: 8 November 1984 (but not in force) 

Brief description: Unifies all previous 

protected area legislation by redefining designations 
and stating conservation objectives. 

Administrative authority: Ministerio de 

Agricultura (Ministry of Agriculture), acting through 
the Corporaci6n Nacional Forestal y de Protecci6n 
de Recursos Naturales Renovables (National 
Corporation of Forests and the Protection of 
Renewable Natural Resources) (CONAF) 

Designations: 

Parque Nacional (National Park) An area, 

usually of considerable size, where ecosystems are 
found that are unique as representative of the natural 
ecological diversity of the country, and have not been 
spoilt by human interference. Research, educational 
and leisure activities are the only permitted uses. 



Monumento Natural (Natural Monument) 

An area, usually of no great extent, where native 

species of flora or fauna are found, or geological sites 

of educational, cultural, scientific or scenic 

importance. 

Reserva de Regidn Virgen (Wilderness Reserve) 
Any area where primitive natural conditions of 
wildlife, fauna, or human habitation exist, with no 
roads for motorised traffic and where all commercial 
exploitation is prohibited. These areas will remain 
untouched as far as possible, except for authorised 
scientific research and inspection by the Corporation. 
For all the above designations, hunting, killing or 
chasing wildhfe specimens, destroying vegetation 
and nest sites and removing floral or fauna specimens 
are prohibited. 



National Reserve Any area where resource 

conservation is required and special care exercised in 
their use. Flora and fauna may be used according to 
sound principles of sustainability . 



Source: Original legislation 



223 



Protected Areas of the World 



SUMMARY OF PROTECTED AREAS 



Map 


Nationall international designations 


lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 


notified 




National Parks 








1 


Alberto de Agostini 


n 


1,460,000 


1965 


2 


Alerce Andino 


n 


39,255 


1982 


3 


Archipifilago de Juan Femindez 


n 


9,109 


1935 


4 


Bernardo O'Higgins 


n 


3,525,901 


1969 


5 


Bosque Fray Jorge 


n 


9,959 


1941 


6 


Cabo de Homos 


n 


63,093 


1945 


7 


Chiloe 


n 


43,057 


1982 


8 


Conguillio 


n 


60,832 


1950 


9 


El Morado 


n 


3,000 


1974 


10 


Homopir6n 


n 


48,232 


1988 


11 


Huerquehue 


n 


12,500 


1967 


12 


Isla Guamblin 


n 


10,625 


1967 


13 


Isla Magdalena 


n 


157,640 


1983 


14 


La Campana 


n 


8,000 


1967 


15 


Laguna San Rafael 


n 


1,742,000 


1959 


16 


Laguna del Laja 


n 


11,600 


1958 


17 


Las Palmas de Cocalin 


n 


3,709 


1972 


18 


Lauca 


n 


137,883 


1970 


19 


Nahuelbuta 


n 


6,832 


1939 


20 


Pali-Aike 


n 


3.000 


1970 


21 


Pan de Aziicar 


n 


43,754 


1986 


22 


Puyehue 


n 


107,000 


1941 


23 


Queulat 


n 


154,093 


1983 


24 


Rapa Nui (Easter Island) 


n 


6,666 


1935 


25 


Ri'o Simpson 


n 


40,790 


1967 


26 


Tolhuaca 


n 


6,374 


1935 


27 


Tones del Paine 


n 


181,414 


1959 


28 


Vicente Perez Rosales 


n 


226,305 


1926 


29 


Villarrica 


n 


61,000 


1940 


30 


Volc^ Isluga 
National Reserves 


n 


174,744 


1967 


31 


Alacalufes 


IV 


2,313,875 


1969 


32 


Alto Bio-Bio 


rv 


35,000 


1912 


33 


Cerro Castillo 


rv 


179,550 


1970 


34 


China Muerta 


IV 


9,887 


1968 


35 


Coihaique 


rv 


2,150 


1948 


36 


Isla Mocha 


rv 


2,368 


1988 


37 


Katalalixar 


rv 


674,500 


1983 


38 


La Chimba 


IV 


2,583 


1988 


39 


Lago Carlota 


rv 


27,110 


1965 


40 


Lago Cochrane 


rv 


8,361 


1967 


41 


Lago General Carrera 


IV 


178,400 


1974 


42 


Lago Jeinimeni 


IV 


38,700 


1967 


43 


Lago Las Torres 


IV 


16,516 


1969 


44 


Lago Palena 


IV 


41,356 


1965 


45 


Lago Pei^uelas 


IV 


9,094 


1952 


46 


Lago Rosselot 


IV 


12,725 


1968 


47 


Laguna Parrillar 


rv 


18,814 


1977 


48 


Las Chinchillas 


IV 


4,229 


1983 


49 


Las Guaitecas 


IV 


1,097,975 


1938 


50 


Las Vicufias 


IV 


209,131 


1983 


51 


Llanquihue 


IV 


33,972 


1912 


52 


Los Flamencos 


IV 


73,987 


1990 



224 



Chile 



Map 


Nationall international designations 


lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 


notified 


53 


Magallanes 


IV 


13,500 


1932 


54 


Malalcahuello 


rv 


17,530 


1931 


55 


Malleco 


rv 


17,371 


1907 


56 


Nalcas 


IV 


13,775 


1967 


57 


Ntuble 


IV 


55,948 


1978 


58 


Pampa del Tamarugal 


IV 


100,650 


1988 


59 


Ralco 


IV 


12,421 


1972 


60 


Ri'o Blanco 


IV 


10,175 


1932 


61 


Rio ClariUo 


IV 


10,185 


1982 


62 


Rio de Los Cipreses 


IV 


38.582 


1986 


63 


Valdivia 


IV 


9,727 


1929 


64 


Villarrica 
Natural Monuments 


IV 


60,005 


1912 


65 


Alerce Costero 


m 


2,308 


1964 


66 


Salar de Surire 


m 


11,298 


1983 




Biosphere Reserves 










Araucarias 


DC 


81,000 


1983 




La CampanaPeiluelas 


DC 


17,095 


1984 




Parque Nacional Fray Jorge 


IX 


14,074 


1977 




Parque Nacional Juan Fernandez 


DC 


9,290 


1977 




Parque Nacional Laguna San Rafael 


IX 


1,742,448 


1979 




Parque Nacional Lauca 


DC 


358,312 


1981 




Parque Nacional Torres del Paine 


IX 


184,414 


1978 




Ramsar Wetland 










Santuario Carlos Anwandter 


R 


4,877 


1981 



225 



Protected Areas of the World 




Protected Areas of Chile 



226 



Chile 




Protected Areas of Chile 



227 



Protected Areas of the World 




Protected Areas of Chile 



228 



Chile 




66° 



51°- 



52"^ 



SS"" 



54'^ 



55'^ 



-56° 



56°^ 



76° 

_i_ 



74° 



72° 



70° 



68° 



66° 

I 



Protected Areas of Chile 



229 



COLOMBIA 



Area 1,141,748 sq. km 

Population 32,978,000 (1990) 
Natural increase: 1.85% per annum 

Economic Indicators 

GDP: US$ 1,316 per capita (The Economist, 1991) 
GNP: US$ 1,240 per capita (1988) 

Policy and Legislation National conservation 
objectives are stated in legislation, with detailed 
definitions of management categories, allowing for the 
creation of a coherent national system of protected areas 
(Ormazdbal, 1988). However, a comprehensive national 
conservation strategy (estrategia nacional para la 
conservacidn) that would reinforce the legislation and 
national system has not yet been formulated 
(INDERENA-DPN, 1991). 

In 1987, the government initiated a poUcy of Opening of 
Parks (Apertura de Parques) to increase funding and 
public awareness of the national system of protected 
areas. Various projects have been implemented to 
encourage scientific research and recreation, to train 
students and professionals in conservation and protected 
area management, and to strengthen national support A 
state-run Voluntary Park Guard Service (Servicio de 
Guardaparques Voluntarios) programme augments the 
regular body of park guards with seasonal workers and 
students (Castai^o, 1989; INDERENA-DPN, 1991). 

Colombia participates in the FAO Tropical Forest 
Action Plan (TFAP), an international strategy for 
maximising the contribution of forestry sectors to 
national economic and social development while 
maintaining conservation principles. In 1989, the 
National Planning Department (Departamento Nacional 
de Planeacidn) presented a Forest Action Plan (Plan de 
Accidn Forestal) (PAFC). It interprets the global designs 
of the TFAP into a national plan according to Colombia' s 
particular biological characteristics and objectives. A 
Special Secretariat (Secretaria Especial) was created 
within the National Planning Department to implement 
the PAFC, which contains 70 projects to develop, protect 
and improve forested areas. Four projects specifically 
involve protected areas in the natural national paries 
system, and include a proposal to enlarge the national 
system to incorporate more forest ecosystems 
(INDERENA-DPN, 1991; C. Castaflo and H. Sdnchez, 
pers. comm., 1991; C. Romero, pers.comm., 1991). The 
plan is in the process of implementation. 

The fu-st environmental legislation was the 1959 Law of 
National Forest Economy and the Conservation of 
Renewable Natural Resources (Ley Sobre Economi'a 
Forestal de la Nacidn y Conservaci6n de los Recursos 
Naturales Renovables) which provided the general 
principles of conservation still in practice 
today(H. Sinchez, pers. comm., 1992). The 



Ministry of Agriculture (Ministerio de Agricultura) is 
empowered to define areas which might later be 
developed as national parks, including all permanently 
snow-covered mountains and their surrounding areas. 
Over 55 million ha of forest reserves (reservas forestales) 
are declared under provision of this Law 
(INDERENA-DPN, 1991; Sdnchez, 1990, cited in C. 
Castaflo and H. S^chez, pers. comm., 1991). 

Decree No. 2420 (1968) provided for the creation of an 
organisation specifically responsible for natural resource 
management, the National Institute of Renewable 
Natural Resources and the Environment (Institute 
Nacional de los Recursos Naturales Renovables y del 
Medio Ambiente) (MDERENA), and all protected area 
responsibilities were transferred to it. Decree No. 133 
(1976) restructured INDERENA, expanding its range of 
responsibilities. 

The principal current legislation is the National Code of 
Renewable Natural Resources and Protection of the 
Environment (C6digo Nacional de los Recursos 
Naturales Renovables y de Protecci6n al Medio 
Ambiente), Decree No. 281 1 of 18 December 1974. All 
natural resources are declared as state property, private 
rights to which are subject to specific conditions. Private 
land may be expropriated for the creation of protected 
areas, where necessary. The Code provides the basis for 
natural resource protection, scientific investigation, and 
environmental education, by stating national 
conservation objectives. Regulations for natural 
resource use are detailed, and provision made for forest 
reserves. The system of national parks (sistema de 
parques nacionales) is defined as a conjunction of areas 
of exceptional national value established to conserve 
flora, fauna, ecosystems, cultural or historical 
specimens, and collectively attain national conservation 
objectives. Definitions are given of the six management 
categories employed in the system (see Annex). Further 
details of protected area management and prohibitions 
will be given in regulations pertaining to the Code. 

Decree No. 622 (1977) regulates all articles of the Code 
relating to the national parks system, referring to it as the 
natural national parks system (sistema de parques 
nacionales naturales), and provides specific guidance for 
administration and management. Provision is made for 
protected areas to be subdivided into management zones 
providing different degrees of protection: these range 
from intangible to high density use (see Annex). A 
masterplan, giving details of development, management 
and conservation objectives, must be drawn up for each 
area, following the zonation system. The regulations 
state that national parks and other protected areas are 
compatible with indigenous reserves and resguardos, 
and where indigenous groups occupy areas in the 
national system, an agreement will be reached between 
the respective agencies to allow coexistence and 



231 



Protected Areas of the World 



compliance with established conservation aims (see 
Systems Review). An extensive list of prohibitions is given, 
including all forms of natural resource exploitation except 
under authorisation ftom INDERENA. 

Prohibited activities and penalties imposed for illegal 
exploitation of natural resources and colonisation in 
protected areas are also given in the General National 
Penal Code (C6digo General Nacional Penal), 1981. 
Penalties include imprisonment and fines. 

Colombia acknowledges indigenous rights of land 
ownership, and has adopted a series of legal measures 
following these principles. Legislation defines two types 
of indigenous areas: resguardos are traditionally 
inhabited lands communally owned by indigenous 
peoples through a legal title (C. Romero, pers. comm., 
1992), and indigenous reserves (reservas indi'genas) 
which are territories provisionally assigned to a 
particular indigenous community for their own use but 
the actual ownership of the land and its subsoil remains 
in the hands of the state (C. Romero, pers. comm., 1992). 
Current environmental legislation and policy providing 
for the establishment of protected areas is compatible 
with the system of resguardos and indigenous reserves; 
in most cases, the indigenous communities use natural 
resources on a sustainable basis (Castafio, 1989; 1992). 

Although the legislation details national conservation 
objectives, the lack of a national conservation strategy 
providing for their implementation gives rise to conflict 
between governmental institutions over land use and 
ownership rights (INDERENA-DPN, 1991). These 
conflicts of interest are one of the most serious threats to 
the protected area system. A national conservation 
strategy would allow for land ownership and be given 
priority and political support by the government 
(INDERENA-DPN, 1991). 

International Activities Colombia signed the 

Convention on Nature Protection and Wildlife 
Preservation in the Western Hemisphere (Convencion 
sobre la Protecci6n de la Rora, de la Fauna y de las 
Bellezas Esc6nicas Naturales de los Parses de America) 
(Western Hemisphere Convention) in 1940. It is one of 
the eight countries with territory in the Amazon region 
that signed the Amazon Cooperation Treaty (Tratado de 
Cooperaci6n Amaz6nica) on 3 July 1978, an agreement 
to regulate and promote cooperation in natural resources 
management The Convention for the Protection and 
Development of the Marine Environment of the Wider 
Caribbean Region (Cartagena Convention) and the 
related Protocol Concerning Co-operation in Combating 
Oil Spills in the Wider Caribbean Region were both 
signed by Colombia on 24 March 1983 and ratified on 
3 March 1988. The second protocol. Protocol 
Concerning Specially Protected Areas and Wildlife 
(SPAW), was signed by Colombia in June 1991, but 
has not yet been ratified. 

Colombia ratified the Convention concerning the 
Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage 



(World Heritage Convention) on 24 May 1983, but no 
natural sites have been inscribed to date, and participates 
in the Unesco Man and the Biosphere Programme with 
three biosphere reserves inscribed in 1979. 

Colombia has signed an agreement with the Venezuelan 
government to protect El TamS Transfrontier National 
Park. Further details are not yet available. 

Since 1992, the National Planning Department has been 
collaborating with INDERENA, autonomous regional 
corporations and local non-governmental organisations 
(NGOs) to obtain international support for the protected 
area system by means of a programme comprising 200 
environmental projects (M. Kelsey, pers. comm., 1992). 

Administration and Management Since its 

creation in 1968, INDERENA has been responsible for 
formulating conservation policies and managing natural 
resources and protected areas. INDERENA is part of the 
Ministry of Agriculttu'e, and comprises a Directive 
Committee (Junta Directiva) at its head, with the General 
Management (Gerencia General) below. Witiiin the 
General Management are four sub-managements: 
finance and administration; environment; development; 
and forests and waters, under which is the National Parks 
Division (Divisi6n de Parques Nacionales) (DPN), the 
department responsible for the actual management of 
protected areas in the national natural parks system. 

The DPN implements the policies of INDERENA and is 
responsible for planning, coordinating and regulating the 
programmes of the national system of protected areas. 
The total number of personnel employed in the national 
system is 287, comprising professionals, administrative 
and technical staff and labourers, including park guards. 
The responsibilities of INDERENA with respect to the 
national system were established by decree in 1989, and 
include the declaration and delimitation of protected 
areas, and their regulation and administration via the 
DPN (INDERENA-DPN, 1991; C. Castafio and 
H. Sdnchez, pers. comm., 1991). 

Forest reserves are managed by INDERENA under the 
1959 legislation (FAO, 1991). The Colombian Institute 
of Agrarian Reform (Institute Colombiano de la 
Reforma Agraria) (INCORA) is responsible for 
establishing the system of indigenous reserves known as 
resguardos, and for regulating forest resource use in 
these areas (FAO, 199 1). Forest reserves do not form part 
of the national system of protected areas. 

INDERENA is responsible for natural resource 
management at the national level, but there are 
autonomous regional corporations (corporaciones 
regionales) throughout the country, responsible for 
resource regulation in their particular regions. Where 
this occurs, an agreement is reached between 
INDERENA and the regional corporation to coordinate 
the management of protected areas in the region. Some 
administrative functions may be delegated to the 
regional corporation, although INDERENA remains the 



232 



Columbia 



ultimate administrative authority (C. Castafio and 
H. Sanchez, pers. comm., 1991; C. Romero, pers. 
comm., 1991). For example, the Cauca Valley 
Autonomous Regional Corporation (Corporacidn 
Aut6noma Regional del Valle del Cauca) (CVC) 
manages around 25% of Farallones de Cali Natural 
National Park in conjunction with INDERENA (Anon., 
1989; C. Castano and H. Sanchez, pers. comm., 1991). 
Regional corporations carry out other conservation 
activities in their region involving parts of the national 
system. Similiar agreements may also be reached 
between INDERENA and NGOs. 

There are a number of NGOs working in environmental 
issues. Among the largest is the Nature Foundation 
(Fundaci6n Natura), established in 1985, which has 
signed an agreement with INDERENA to cooperate in 
the management of some protected areas 
(INDERENA-DPN, 1991). Through an agreement with 
a private national company, the Nature Foundation 
shares ownership and management of a scientific 
reserve, and three national parks as well as managing 
several private reserves (Fundaci6n Natura, 1990; 
C.Romero, pers. comm., 1991,M.Kelsey, pers. comm., 
1992). The Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta Support 
Foundation (Fundacidn Pro-Sierra Nevada de Santa 
Marta) is also directly involved in protected area 
management, concerned with promoting scientific 
research, training programmes and inter-institutional 
support for Sierra Nevada de Santa Maita Natural 
National Park (lUCN/ITTO, 1991; Maldonado, pers. 
comm., 1991). The Green Heritage Foundation 
(Fundacidn Herencia Verde) works closely with 
autonomous regional corporations in buffer zone 
management, and also in the Choc6 (M. Kelsey, pers. 
comm., 1992). The Foundation for Higher Education 
(Fundaci6n para la Educaci6n Superior) (FES), in 
conjunction with WWF, established a community nature 
reserve in 1982 for educational and conservation 
purposes, which it now manages (Orejuela, 1985; 
Samper and Orejuela, n.d.). 

A regional Conservation Data Centre (Centre de Datos 
para la Conservaci6n) has been established within the 
Cauca Valley Autonomous Regional Corporation to 
compile and process information on the biology and 
distribution of endangered plant and animal species, and 
the current situation of protected areas in the south-west 
This information enables conservation programmes to 
be formulated at the species or at the regional level 
(Z. Pifleros, pers. comm., 1991). 

Problems with protected area managementarise from the 
internal organisation of INDERENA. The subordinate 
position of the DPN within INDERENA has reduced its 
operative ability, and given rise to conflict between central 
administration and regional offices (INDERENA-DPN, 
1991). In response to these problems and the weak 
management of natiu^ resources, the government is 
working in coordination with the National Planning 
Department and INDERENA to create a Ministry of the 
Environment (Ministerio de Medio Ambiente) 



specifically responsible for formulating environmental 
policies and managing natural resources. The Ministry 
of the Environment will include a National Parks 
Directorate (Direccidn de Parques Nacionales) to 
improve the efficiency of protected area administration 
and management (Castafio, 1992; C. Castafio and H. 
Sanchez, pers. comm., 1991). At present, lack of funds 
reduces administrative capacity by a shortage of human 
resources and equipment (lUCN/ITTO, 1991). 

The DPN has proposed a project to improve 
conservation measures in the Pacific region, principally 
by strengthening protected area administration 
(INDERENA-DPN, 1991). Decentralisation of 
INDERENA is recommended, together with 
implementing the proposed internal restructuring and 
increasing training programmes for personnel. 

Systems Reviews Colombia is a country of great 
geographical contrast, resulting in a diversity of 
ecosystems, species richness and endemism (Castano, 
1989; Gonzilez et al., 1989). A number of major 
waterways are found in the country, including the 
Orinoco and the Amazon river systems. As a result of its 
varied topography, with altitudes ranging from sea level 
to 5,755m, and coasts on both the Caribbean Sea and the 
Pacific Ocean, Colombia has one of the highest levels of 
species diversity in the world (Carrizosa, 1990, cited in 
lUCN/ITTO, 1991; INDERENA-DPN, 1991). 

The country may be divided into five main 
biogeographical regions or provinces: Orinoquia, 
Amazonia, Andes, Caribbean and Choc6 (C. CastaiSo 
and H. SSnchez, pers. comm., 1991). The Orinoquia 
province covers the lowlands of the Orinoco River 
drainage system, with elevations from 100m to 500m. 
Most of this region is covered by nattu^al savanna 
grassland, and the occurrence of fu-es, both natural and 
man-made, is the most significant factor causingchanges 
in vegetation composition and soil degradation. The 
Amazonian province is an aUuvial plain with a relatively 
uniform relief, an annual rainfall of 2,5(X3mm and annual 
temperature of more than 24°C, which accounts for 
around one-third of total land area (C. Castafio and 
H. Sinchez, pers. comm., 1991). The Amazonian region 
is crossed by a complex of waterways, and is very rich 
in species diversity. 

The Andean Complex is characterised by typical floral 
and faunal species found throughout the central and 
southern Andes. Three main mountain ranges run 
parallel from north to south, producing distinct regions 
separated by valleys and the rivers Cauca and 
Magdalena: the Western Cordillera, the lowest; the 
Cordillera Central, the oldest and highest in altitude; and 
the Eastern Cordillera or Real del Ecuador. Some of the 
species present in die three Cordilleras are similar but a 
high degree of endemism is found in each (C. Castafio 
and H. Sinchez, pers. comm., 1991). 

The Caribbean complex and Massif of the Sierra Nevada 
de Santa Marta comprise a province that contains several 



233 



Protected Areas of the World 



different vegetation types, from montane forest to 
mangroves (C. Castailo and H. Sdnchez, pers. comm., 
1991). The massif of Santa Marta is the highest coastal 
range in the world and is completely isolated from the 
other mountain ranges (Adams, n.d.). With altitudes 
ranging from sea level to 5,775m, the Santa Marta 
moimtains contain all of the altitudinal zones found in 
the country, and has a biota related to that of the Andes, 
but with a highly endemic component 

The Choc6 province in the Pacific coastal region, where 
17% of the total population is located, is characterised 
by humid rain forest, except in the south where there are 
periods of drought. Representatives of most of the 
ecosystems found in the country are present here, 
including mangrove forests and coral reefs. Some 
species are similar to those of the Amazonian region, and 
it is thought that many of these plant and animal species 
originated in the Choc6 region and migrated outwards. 
A high degree of endemism is found (C. Castaflo and 
H. Sdnchez, pers. comm., 1991). 

Natural resource protection was initiated by Colombia's 
participation in the 1940 Western Hemisphere 
Convention, as a result of which hunting and fishing in 
the Mufla River was prohibited in 1943. The first 
protected area, a natural reserve, was declared in 1948, 
but it was not until 1959, when the first piece of 
environmental legislation was passed, that conservation 
principles and regulations for natural resource use were 
described and a legal framework for the establishment 
of national parks provided (INDERENA-DPN, 1991; 
C. Castaflo and H. Sinchez, pers. comm., 1991). 
Several parks were declared during the 1960s by the 
Colombian Institute of Agrarian Reform (INCORA) and 
are managed by autonomous regional corporations. 
Following the creation of INDERENA in 1968, 
protected area management was unified into one 
organisation (Gonzilez et al., 1989; C. Castaflo and H. 
S&chez, pers. comm., 1991, 1992). 

Colombia has a coherent and coordinated national 
system of protected areas, following the defmition given 
by the FAO Latin American Network (Red 
Latinoamericana de Cooperaci6n T6cnica en Parques 
Nacionales, Otras Areas Protegidas, Flora y Fauna 
Silvestres). This stipulates that protected areas should be 
unified by comprehensive legislation, stating national 
conservation objectives and giving detailed definitions 
of the management categories used, and that there is 
coordination between the administration of each area so 
that they may collectively attain national objectives 
(Ormaz^bal, 1988). Colombia is the Regional 
Coordinator of the Latin American Network programme 
(C. Castaflo and H. S^chez, pers. comm., 1991). 

By 199 1 , the national natural parks system comprised 42 
conservation units, covering 9,016,893ha or 8.6% of the 
total land area (INDERENA-DPN, 1 99 1;C. Castaflo and 
H. Sdnchez, pers. comm., 1991). The protected area 
system contains 44% of the country's ecosystems 
(fuCN/ITTO, 1991). There is a high representation of 



mountain areas, particularly the Andean region and 
the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta (Castaflo, 1989; 
C. Castaflo and H. Sanchez, pers. comm., 1991). The 
Choc6 biogeographical province in the Pacific region is 
the most under-represented of all the provinces. As part 
of the Forestry Action Plan, the DPN proposed a project 
to strengthen and expand the system of national parks 
and protected areas in the Pacific region 
(INDERENA-DPN, 1991). 

As well as the national system of protected areas, 
Colombia has a system of indigenous reserves known as 
resguardos which are community-owned areas and 
cannot be sold. Since 1968 the government, through the 
Colombian Institute of Agrarian Reform (INCORA), has 
established over 300 resguardos and reserves totalling 
around 26 million ha (C. Castaflo, pers. comm., 1991). 
The 1977 Regulations state that protected areas and 
resguardos are compatible, and can coordinate 
management to attain conservation objectives. In fact, 
20 of the 42 units which comprise the protected area 
system contain indigenous communities (Castaflo, 
1992). An important step in protecting the Amazonian 
region was taken in 1988 by INCORA, by declaring 
6 million ha of rain forest as an indigenous reserve. 
Together with the national parks in the area, 
5.3 million ha of Amazonian rain forest is now under 
protection either as indigenous land which cannot be 
exploited by government concessions, or as part of the 
national system of protected areas (Bunyard, 1989). 

However, the integrity of protected areas is threatened 
by a lack of state control in rural areas, and civil unrest, 
guerrilla activities and drug trafficking. The lack of 
trained personnel in the national park system and 
shortage of funds available exacerbate the problem 
(lUCN/ITTO, 1991). 

Addresses 

Divisi6n de Parques Nacionales, Institute Nacional de 
los Recursos Naturales Renovables y del Medio 
Ambiente (INDERENA), Carrera 10, No. 20-30, 
Aptdo Adreo 13458, SANTA FE DE BOGOTA 
(Tel: 2 832598/2 830964; FAX: 1 2868643) 

Centro de Datos para la Conservaci6n, Corporaci6n 
Aut6noma Regional del Valle del Cauca (CVC), 
Carrera 56, No. 11-36, Aptdo A6reo 2366, CALI 
(Tel: 23 396671) 

Fundaci6n Herencia Verde, Aptdo A6reo 32802, CALI 
(Tel. 23 808484; FAX: 23 813257) 

Fundacidn Natura, Carrera 12 No. 70-96, Piso 3, Aptdo 
A6reo 55402, SANTA FE DE BOGOTA 
(Tel: 249 7590/310 0026; FAX: 210 4515) 

Fundacidn Pro-Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta, 
Edificio los Bancos, Oficina 602, SANTA 
MARTA (Tel: 34697/3 1746)/Calle 74 No. 2-86, 
Aptdo A6reo 5000, SANTAFE DE BOGOTA 
(Tel: 1 217 3487; Fax 1 218 3256) 

Fundacidn para la Educaci6n Superior, Calle 4, 
No. 1- 19, Aptdo A6reo 5744, CALI (Tel: 23 822524) 



234 



Columbia 



References 

Adams, M. (n.d.). Trapped in a Colombian Sierra. The 
Geographical Magazine 49(4): 250-254. 

Anon. (1989). Areas protegidas en el territorio 
de jurisdicci6n de la CVC Colombia. Silvestres 
3(11): 20-22. 

Bunyard, P. (1989). Guardians of the Amazon. New 
Scientist 16 December. Pp. 38-41. 

Castafio, C. (1989). Guta del sistema de parques 
nacionales de Colombia. Instituto Nacional de los 
Recursos Naturales Renovables y del Medio 
Ambiente, Bogoti. 198 pp. 

Castafio, C. (1991). Marco de accion y estrategias para 
la definici6n de poli'ticas en el Sistema de Parques 
Nacionales y en la conservaci6n de la diversidad 
bioldgica y cultural. Etocumento preliminar para la 
conferencia de medio ambiente y desarrollo, Brazil. 
(Unseen) 

Castafio, C. (1992). Ocupaci6n humana en parques 
nacionales de Colombia: poli'tica y perspectivas. In 
Amend, S. and Amend, T. (Eds) iEspacios sin 
Habitantes? Parques nacionales de Amirica del Sur. 
International Union for the Conservation of Nature 
and Natural Resorces and Editorial Nueva Sociedad, 
Caracas. Pp. 177-191. 

DNP (n.d.). Plan de acci6n forestal para Colombia. 
Departamento Nacional de Planeaci6n, Bogoti. The 
Economist (1991). Pocket World in Figures. 
Hutchinson, London. 

FAO (1973). Food and Agriculture Legislation 
29(22): 110-115. 

FAO (199 1). Recursos forestales de Colombia: resumen 
de informacidn existente. FAO, Rome, Italy. Draft 

Fundaci6n Natura (1990). Annual Report 1990. 
Fundaci6n Natura, Bogoti. 20 pp. 

Gonzalez, E., Guillot, G., Miranda, N., Pombo, D. (Eds) 
(1989). Perfil ambiental de Colombia. US Agency 
for International Development, Washington DC, 
USA. 348 pp. 

Herndndez, J., Sdnchez, H., Castafio, C, (n.d.). 
Protecci6n y conservacidn en la Amazonia 
Colombiana. (Unseen) 

rUCN/ITTO (1991). Conserving biological diversity in 
managed tropical forests. Proceedings of a workshop 
held at the lUCN General Assembly, Perth, 
Austraha, 30 November- 1 December 1990. Latin 
American Draft Report. 84 pp 

INDERENA (1976). Preselecci6n del sistema de 
parques nacionales naturales de Colombia. Divisidn 
de Parques Nacionales, Bogoti. (Unseen) 



INDERENA (1984). Colombia: Parques nacionales. 
OP GrSficas, Bogoti. 262 pp. 

INDERENA (1987). Poli'tica para la planificaci6n, el 
desarrollo y manejo del sistema de parques 
nacionales naturales y ireas protegidas de Colombia, 
Bogoti. (Unseen) 

INDERENA (1988). Memorias del simposio 
intemacional ECOBIOS Colombia 1988. Biblioteca 
Andreas Posada Arango, Bogoti. (Unseen) 

INDERENA (1989). Memorias del simposio 
intemacional de investigaci6n y manejo de la 
Amazonia. Biblioteca Andreas Posada Arango, 
Bogoti. (Unseen) 

INDERENA (1991). Diagn6stico global del sistema de 
parques nacionales naturales de Colombia. Divisi6n 
de Parques Nacionales, Bogoti. (Unseen) 

INDERENA-DPN (1991). Colombia - proyecto de 
manejo forestal y proteccion del medio ambiente. 
Conservacidn de la diversidad biol6gica a trav6s de 
parques nacionales naturales del Pacifico. Divisi6n 
de Parques Nacionales. Draft. 84 pp. 

Orejuela, J. (1985). Project La Planada Nature Reserve. 
Annual report 1984. Cali. Pp. M. 

Ormazibal, C. (1988). Sistemas nacionales de dreas 
silvestres protegidas en America Latina. Basado en 
los resultados del taller sobre Planificacidn de 
Sistemas Nacionales de Areas Silvestres Protegidas, 
Caracas, Venezuela, 9-13 junio 1986. Proyecto 
FAO/PNUMA sobre manejo de ireas silvestres, 
ireas protegidas y vida silvestre en Am6rica Latina 
y el Caribe. Oficina Regional de la FAO para 
Amdrica Latina y el Caribe, Santiago, Chile. 
Pp. 20-23. 

Salinas, P.J. (1981). Parques nacionales naturales yotras 
ireas protegidas de Colombia. Universidad de los 
Andes, Facultad de Ciencias Forestales, Centro de 
Estudios Forestales de Postgrado, Merida, 
Venezuela. 30 pp. 

Samper, A. and Orejuela, J. (n.d.). La Planada. A private 
nature reserve for nature conservation and 
community development. Foundation for Higher 
Education and WWF-US. 1 1 pp. 

Sinchez, H. (1990). International handbook of natural 
parks and nature reserves. C.W. AUin (Ed.), 
Greenwood Press, New York/Westport, 
Connecticut/London. (Unseen) 

Sinchez, H., Hernandez, J., Rodriguez, J.V., Castafio, 
C. (1991). Colombia: Nuevos parques nacionales. 
DMDERENA/OP Graficas, Bogoti. 



235 



Protected Areas of the World 



ANNEX 

Definition of protected area designations as legislated, 

together with authorities responsible for their administration 



Title: Codigo Nacional de Recursos 
Naturales Renovables y de Proteccidn al 
Medio Ambiente (National Code of Renewable 
Natural Resources and the Protection of the 
Environment), Decree Law No. 2811 

Date: 18 December 1974 

Brief description: Natural resources and the 
environment are the property of the state, and their 
protection is in the pubUc interest The system of 
national parks (sistema de parques nacionales) is 
described as a union of protected areas with the 
objectives of conserving examples of outstanding 
ecological, historical, cultural or scenic value, and 
promoting the continuity of natural processes and 
maintaining biological diversity. Management 
categories employed in the system are defined. 

Administrative authority: Instituto Nacional 

de los Recursos Naturales Renovables y del 
Ambiente (National Institute of Renewable Natural 
Resources and the Environment) (INDERENA), 
within the Ministerio de Agricultura (Ministry of 
Agriculture) 

Designations: 

Parque Nacional (National Park) An area that has 
not been significantly altered by man and contains 
floral or faunal species, geological formations, 
cultural or historical examples of scientific, 
educational or national importance. 

Must be large enough to allow the continuation of 
natural ecological processes 

Only conservation, research, educational or 
recreational activities are permitted, with prior 
authorisation from INDERENA. 

Reserva Natural (Natural Reserve) An area 

containing floral or faunal species that, owing to its 
natural characteristics, is suitable only for 
conservation and scientific research purposes. 

Only activities relating to conservation, scientific 
research or education are permitted, with prior 
authorisation from INDERENA. 

Area Natural Unica (Unique Natural Area) 
An area containing singular examples of floral or 
faunal species or of exceptional natural scenic 
beauty. 

Only conservation, scientific research or educational 
activities are permitted, with prior authorisation from 
INDERENA. 



Santuario de Flora (Floral Sanctuary) An area 
set aside for the conservation of flora species or 
communities 

Only activities relating to conservation, scientific 
research, education or management, with the aim or 
recuperation, are permitted. Prior authorisation from 
INDERENA required 

Santuario de Fauna (Faunal Sanctuary) 

An area set aside for the conservation of species or 

communities of wildlife 

Permitted activities as for Floral sanctuary 

Via Parque (Parkway) An area bordering a road 
that contains ecosystems, or historic or cultural 
examples of national interest 

Conservation, educational and recreational activities 
are permitted. 

Source: Original legislation 



Title: Decree No. 622, Reglamento parcial del 
Decreto Ley No. 2811 de 1974 sobre el Sistema 
de Parques Nacionales, la Ley 23 de 1973 y la 
Ley 2a de 1959 (Partial regulation of Decree 
Law No. 2811 of 1974, of Law No. 23 of 1973 
and Law No. 2a of 1959) 

Date: 16 March 1977 

Brief description: The conservation objectives 
of the national natural park system are restated and 
detailed regulations for protected area management 
are given. The six categories of protected area 
described by Decree Law No. 2811 are to be 
sub-divided into different management zones, as 
defined under these regulations. A master 
management plan is to be drawn up for each 
protected area, following this system of zonification. 
General prohibitions are given. National natural 
parks are compatible with indigenous reserves and 
indigenous communities will not be removed from 
protected areas, but an agreement will be reached 
between the respective administrative authorities to 
comply with the state conservation objectives. 



Administrative authority: 

within the Ministry of Agriculture 



INDERENA. 



236 



Columbia 



Designations: 

Parque Nacional Natural (Natural National Park), 
Reserva Natural (Natural Reserve), Area Natural 
Unica (Unique Natural Area), Santuarios de 
Fauna y Flora (Floral and Faunal Sanctuaries) 
and V(a Parque (Parkway) Shall be 

sub-divided into the following management zones: 

Zona Primidva (Primitive Zone) Zone Unaltered 
or only minimally altered by human intervention and 
remains in its natural state 



Zona Intangible (Intangible Zone) Area in which 
the environment has maintained its integrity, 
although there may be some human intervention 

Zona de Recuperacidn Natural (Natural 
Recuperation Zone) Area which has been 

substantially altered and is to be restored, by suitable 
methods, to its natural state. Once recovered, the 
zone wiU be assigned to the appropriate category. 



Zona Histdrico/Cultural (Historical/Cultural 
Zone) Area where archaeological or historic reUcs 
are found, or where cultural events of national 
importance occurred. 

Zona de Recreacidn General Exterior (General 
External Recreation Zone) Area which, owing 
to its natural characteristics, offers certain 
recreational facilities, without requiring or causing 
significant alteration to the environment 

Zona de Alta Densidad de Uso (High-Density Use 
Zone) Area where natural characteristics and 
location allow recreational and educational activities 
to take place, producing the least amount of 
environmental alteration as possible 

Zona Amortiguadora (Buffer Zone) An area 

in which the human intervention in the surrounding 
zones is diminished, to prevent such activities 
causing disturbances or alterations to ecosystem and 
wildlife of those areas. 

Source: Original legislation 



237 



Protected Areas of the World 



SUMMARY OF PROTECTED AREAS 



Map 


National/international designations 


lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 


notifled 




Natural National Parks 








1 


Amacayacii 


U 


293,000 


1975 


2 


Cahuinari 


II 


575,500 


1987 


3 


Catatumbo-Bari 


U 


158,125 


1989 


4 


Chingaza 


11 


50,374 


1977 


5 


Chiribiquete 


11 


1,280,000 


1989 


6 


Corales del Rosario 


u 


19,506 


1977 


7 


Cordillera de los Picachos 


n 


439,000 


1989 


8 


Cueva de los Guicharos 


n 


9,000 


1960 


9 


El Cocuy 


11 


306,000 


1977 


10 


EI Tuparro 


n 


548,000 


1970 


11 


Farallones de Cali 


II 


150,000 


1968 


12 


Isla Gorgona 


II 


49,200 


1984 


13 


Isla de Salamanca 


II 


21,000 


1969 


14 


La Paya 


II 


422,000 


1984 


15 


Las Hermosas 


II 


125,000 


1977 


16 


Las Oiquideas 


II 


32,000 


1974 


17 


Los Kati'os 


II 


72,000 


1973 


18 


Los Nevados 


II 


58,300 


1959 


19 


Macuira 


II 


25,000 


1977 


20 


Munchique 


II 


44,400 


1977 


21 


Nevado del Huila 


II 


158,000 


1977 


22 


Paramillo 


II 


460,000 


1977 


23 


Pisba 


II 


45,000 


1977 


24 


Purac6 


II 


83,000 


1968 


25 


Sanquianga 


II 


80,000 


1977 


26 


Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta 


II 


383,000 


1964 


27 


Sierra de la Macarena 


II 


630,000 


1989 


28 


Sumap^z 


11 


154,000 


1977 


29 


Tami 


11 


48,000 


1977 


30 


Tatami 


11 


54,300 


1987 


31 


Tayrona 


II 


15,000 


1964 


32 


Tinigua 


II 


201,785 


1989 


33 


Utria 

Natural Reserve 


II 


54,300 


1987 


34 


Laguna de Sonso 

Fauna and Flora Sanctuaries 


IV 


2,045 


1979 


35 


Ci6naga Grande de Santa Marta 


IV 


23,000 


1977 


36 


Galeras 


IV 


17,600 


1985 


37 


Iguaque 


IV 


6,750 


1977 


38 


Los Colorados 


IV 


1,000 


1977 


39 


Los Flamencos 

Natural National Reserves 


IV 


7,000 


1977 


40 


Nukak 


I 


855,000 


1989 


41 


Puinawiiai 

Special Management Areas 


I 


1,092,000 


1989 


42 


Ariari-Guayabero 


vni 


1,022,339 


1989 


43 


La Macarena Norte 


vni 


467,010 


1989 


44 


La Macarena Sur 
Forest Reserves 


vm 


33,200 


1989 


45 


Amazonia 


vm 


32,632,920 


1959 



238 



Columbia 



Map Nationid/international designations 
ref. Name of area 



lUCN management Area 

category (ha) 



Year 
notiFied 



46 
47 
48 
49 
50 
51 



52 
53 
54 
55 
56 
57 
58 
59 
60 
61 
62 
63 
64 
65 
66 
67 
68 
69 
70 
71 
72 
73 
74 
75 
76 
77 
78 
79 
80 
81 
82 
83 
84 
85 
86 
87 
88 
89 



90 
91 
92 
93 
94 
95 
96 
97 
98 
99 



Central 


vni 


1,619,800 


1959 


Pacifico 


vm 


7,398,075 


1959 


Ri'o Magdelena 


vni 


2,107,750 


1959 


Serrani'a de Los Motilones 


vm 


477,978 


1959 


Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta 


vm 


600,000 


1959 


Sierra del Cocuy 


vra 


579,250 


1959 


Protection Forest Reserves 








Bosque Oriental de Bogota 


V 


17,625 


1976 


Cafios La Esperanza, Negro y la Lindosa 


V 


5,600 


1982 


Cerro Quinini 


V 


1,800 


1987 


Cuchilla Penas Blancas 


V 


1,630 


1983 


Cuchilla Sucuncuca 


V 


1,710 


1989 


Embalse El Peflol-Rio Guatape 


V 


13,100 


1985 


Escarpas Occidental y Malpaso 


V 


3,160 


1982 


Frontera Colombo-Panamefia 


V 


62,375 


1977 


1 .ago Sochagota 


V 


8,150 


1986 


Laguna La Cocha y Cerro de Patascoy 


V 


8,500 


1973 


P^amo El Atravesado 


V 


3,044 


1971 


P^amo Urrao 


V 


4,000 


1975 


P^amo de Chingaza 


V 


20,000 


1971 


Paramo de Sumapaz 


V 


30,000 


1971 


Predio La Bolsa 


V 


2,700 


1990 


Predio La Planada 


V 


1,667 


1984 


Predio Rio Sucio 


V 


1,360 


1987 


Quebrada La Tablona #1 


V 


1,420 


1981 


Quebrada La Tablona #2 


V . 


2,700 


1991 


Quebrada Mutati 


V 


1,500 


1985 


Quebrada Piedras Blancas 


V 


11,825 


1970 


Ri'o Algodonal 


V 


8,200 


1984 


Rio Blanco-Olivares 


V 


4,900 


1989 


Rio Cravo Sur 


V 


5,000 


1985 


Rio Las Ceibas 


V 


6,370 


1983 


RIoL6on 


V 


29,000 


1971 


Rio Mocoa 


V 


34,500 


1984 


Rio Nembi 


V 


5,800 


1984 


Rio San Francisco 


V 


2,880 


1981 


RioSatocd 


V 


4,200 


1989 


Rio Tame 


V 


1,900 


1985 


Rio Tejo 


V 


2,500 


1984 


Rios Blanco y Negro 


V 


11,925 


1982 


Rios Chorreras-Concepci6n 


V 


4,450 


1991 


Rios Escalerete-San Cipriano 


V 


5,400 


1982 


Serrania de Coraza y Montes de Maria 


V 


6,370 


1983 


Sierra El Peligro 


V 


1,650 


1988 


Zona Musinga-Carauta 


V 


4.000 


1975 


Indigenous Reserves 








Afilador 


vn 


9,325 




Alto Rio Guainia 


vn 


477,200 




Alto y Medio Rio Inirida 


vn 


2,762,500 




Bajo Rio Guainia y Rio Negro 


vn 


759,200 




Barranc6n 


vn 


2,500 




CaimSn Nuevo 


vn 


7,500 




Carraipia 


vn 


5,115 




Corocito Yopalito Gualab6 


vn 


8,257 




Cuiari-Isana 


vn 


926,500 




El Unuma 


vn 


1,273,600 





239 



Protected Areas of the World 



Map 


NaAonall international designations 


lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 


notiHed 


100 


LaFuga 


vn 


8,360 




101 


La Sal 


vn 


3,275 




102 


Luz6n 


vn 


2,500 




103 


Macucuana 


vn 


5,700 




104 


Medio Ri'o Guainia - Serrania Naquen 


vn 


853,320 




105 


Motil6n Ban 


vn 


83,000 




106 


Paujii 


vn 


52,120 




107 


Rio Atabapo 


vn 


513,720 




108 


Rio Verde 


vn 


9,200 




109 


Rigs Muco y Guarrojo 


vn 


84,000 




110 


San Jos6 de Lipa 


vn 


18,500 




111 


San Rafael, AbariM, Ibibi 


vn 


61,525 




112 


Santa Rosa de Sucumbi'os 


vn 


5,129 




113 


Santa Rosa del Guamuez 


vn 


3,750 




114 


Tauretes Agua Blanca 


vn 


8,000 




115 


Yarina 
Resguardos 


vn 


9,813 




116 


Aduche 


vn 


370,100 




117 


Agua Clara y Bella Luz del Rio Ampora 


vn 


9,850 




118 


AguaNegra 


vn 


2,000 




119 


Aguanegra 


vn 


1,474 




120 


Almid6n-La Ceiba 


vn 


40,960 




121 


Alta y Media Guajira 


vn 


959,104 




122 


Alto Rio Bojayd 


vn 


50,160 




123 


Alto Rio Buey 


vn 


13,151 




124 


Alto Rio Cuta 


vn 


22,362 




125 


Alto Rio Tagachi 


vn 


21,260 




126 


Alto del Rey 


vn 


1,244 




127 


Amenanae o Chaico del Niiio Dios 


vn 


6,990 




128 


Arara 


vn 


12,300 




129 


Aihuaco de la Sierra Nevada 


vn 


195,900 




130 


Arquia 


vn 


2,343 




131 


Arrecifal 


vn 


4,560 




132 


Atana Pirariami 


vn 


48,800 




133 


Avirama 


vn 


2,518 




134 


Bachaco Buena Vista 


vn 


73,280 




135 


Bajo Rio Vichada o Santa Rita 


vn 


424,320 




136 


Barranco Ceiba y Laguna Araguato 


vn 


24,940 




137 


Barranquito Laguna Colorado 


vn 


19,132 




138 


Belaicazar 


vn 


6,000 




139 


Bellavista y Uni6n Pitalito o Rio Siguirisua 


vn 


29,260 




140 


Bet6, Auro Betd y Auro del Buey 


vn 


11,580 




141 


Buenavista 


vn 


4,500 




142 


Buruj6n o La Uni6n San Bernardo 


vn 


6.960 




143 


Cabeceras o Puerto Pizario 


vn 


2,920 




144 


Caimanero de Jampapa 


vn 


1,742 




145 


Calenturas 


vn 


3,066 




146 


Calle Santa Rosa 


vn 


21,320 




147 


Campoalegre y Ripialito 


vn 


7,815 




148 


Cailamoho 


vn 


1,036 




149 


Cailo Bachaco 


vn 


6,074 




150 


Caiio Bocon Brazo Amanaven 


vn 


10,085 




151 


Caflo Cavasi 


vn 


36,000 




152 


Caflo Guiripa 


vn 


7,705 




153 


Caflo Jab6n 


vn 


9,040 




154 


Caiio La Hotmiga 


vn 


4,327 




155 


Caiio Mochuelo - Hato Corozal 


vn 


94,600 





240 



Columbia 



Map National/internationaldesignations 
ref. Name of area 



lUCN management Area 

category (ha) 



Year 
notified 



156 


Caflo Negro 


vn 


1,833 


157 


Cafio Ovejas o Betania-Corocito 


vn 


1,720 


158 


Caflo Zama 


vn 


73,380 


159 


Cafios Cuna Tsepajibo Warracafla 


vn 


56,000 


160 


Caranacoa-Yuri-Laguna Morocoto 


vn 


45,840 


161 


Carpintero Palomas 


vn 


40,680 


162 


Carrizal 


vn 


9,870 


163 


Chachajo 


vn 


2,240 


164 


Chagpi6n-Tord6 


vn 


22,460 


165 


Chami Margen Izquierda R S Juan 


vn 


7,030 


166 


Chamf Ri'o Garrapatas 


vn 


15,730 


167 


Chamii Ri'o San Juan Margen Derecha 


vn 


17,770 


168 


Chaparral-Barronegro 


vn 


14,230 


169 


Chimborazo 


vn 


2,112 


170 


Chimurro y Nedo 


vn 


13,185 


171 


Chololobo-Matatu 


vn 


6,385 


172 


Chuscal y Tuguriducilo 


vn 


5,122 


173 


Coayare-El Coco 


vn 


11,840 


174 


Cobaria 


vn 


45,400 


175 


Coconuco 


vn 


3,424 


176 


Colimbs 


vn 


1,600 


177 


Comeyafu 


vn 


19,180 


178 


Consejo 


vn 


4,500 


179 


Coquiona 


vn 


6,239 


180 


C6rdoba 


vn 


4,000 


181 


Corocoro 


vn 


33,500 


182 


Coropoya 


vn . 


3,923 


183 


Cota 


vn 


1,859 


184 


Cuaiquer o Awua del Alto Albi 


vn 


4,760 


185 


Cuambi -Yaslambi 


vn 


3,000 


186 


Cuayuyaco 


vn 


1,260 


187 


Cumaral Brazo Amanaven 


vn 


23,355 


188 


Cumbal 


vn 


8,000 


189 


Cusay la Colorada 


vn 


1,200 


190 


Docord6-Balsalito 


vn 


4,140 


191 


Egua Guariacana 


vn 


15,390 


192 


El Doce Quebrada Borboll6n 


vn 


1,185 


193 


EI Duya, San Juanito y Paravare 


vn 


21,300 


194 


ElHacha 


vn 


6,637 


195 


El Quince 


vn 


1,200 


196 


El Saladillo 


vn 


1,595 


197 


El Suspiro Rinc6n del Socorro 


vn 


1,978 


198 


El Tablero 


vn 


4.336 


199 


El Unuma 


vn 


418,840 


200 


El Veinte, Playalta y El Noventa 


vn 


3,334 


201 


El Venado 


vn 


34,160 


202 


El Zaino, Guayabito, Muriaytuy 


vn 


1,175 


203 


Gabarra Catalaura 


vn 


13,300 


204 


Gaflo Claro 


vn 


1,633 


205 


Giro Brazo Amanaven 


vn 


20,310 


206 


Guacamayas-Mamiyare 


vn 


18,700 


207 


Guachavez 


vn 


1,052 


208 


Guachicono 


vn 


13,932 


209 


Guachucal 


vn 


3,000 


210 


Guaco Bajo y Guaco Alto 


vn 


49,660 


211 


Guaguando 


vn 


13,260 


212 


Guambia 


vn 


18,529 



241 



Protected Areas of the World 



Map 


National/internationaldesignations 1 


[UCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 


notified 


213 


Guangui 


vn 


24,100 




214 


Guayabal de Partad6 


vn 


4,376 




215 


Honduras 


vn 


21,121 




216 


Huila 


vn 


41,402 




217 


Iguana 


vn 


10,900 




218 


Inff 


vn 


4,200 




219 


Inga de Nineras 


vn 


3,394 




220 


Ipiales 


vn 


5,156 




221 


Iroka 


vn 


8,600 




2?.?. 


Jagual-Rio Chintado 


vn 


28,175 




223 


Jambaio 


vn 


23,476 




224 


Jirijiri 


vn 


4,960 




225 


Jurad6 


vn 


16,700 




226 


Kananeniba 


vn 


9,150 




227 


Kildmetro 6 y 11 - Carretera Leticia-Tarapaca 


vn 


7,500 




228 


La Esmeralda 


vn 


2,762 




229 


LaLlanura 


vn 


74,000 




230 


La Montana 


vn 


20,300 




231 


LaPascua 


vn 


19,120 




232 


La Samaritana 


vn 


4,185 




233 


Laguna Anguilla-La Macarena 


vn 


16,130 




234 


Laguna Curvina-Sapuara 


vn 


3,350 




235 


Laguna Negra y Cacao 


vn 


18,480 




236 


Macuare 


vn 


24,000 




237 


Mallama 


vn 


1,281 




238 


Mataven Fruta 


vn 


84,453 




239 


Mayasquer 


vn 


3,000 




240 


Merey La Veraita 


vn 


3,107 




241 


Ministas Miralindo 


vn 


40,200 




242 


Miriti-Paran^ 


vn 


1,162,500 




243 


Mocagua, Macedonia, El Vergel y Zaragoza 


vn 


16,750 




244 


Mondo-Mondocito 


vn 


1,232 




245 


Monochoa 


vn 


376,800 




246 


Morocoto Buenavista 


vn 


49,940 




247 


Mosoco 


vn 


12,025 




248 


Muellanues 


vn 


2,000 




249 


Murcidlago-Altamira 


vn 


7,960 




250 


Napipi 


vn 


21,910 




251 


Na7^reth 


vn 


1,300 




252 


Nunuya de Villazul 


vn 


142,620 




253 


Opogadd 


vn 


29,020 




254 


Panam 


vn 


4,000 




255 


Pancitara 


vn 


9,636 




256 


Papayo 


vn 


2,460 




257 


Parte Oriental del Vaupes 


vn 


3,354,097 




258 


Pioya 


vn 


1,600 




259 


Pirayo 


vn 


5,000 




260 


Polines 


vn 


2,538 




261 


Potosi 


vn 


1,800 




262 


Predio Putumayo 


vn 


5,230,552 




263 


Puad6, Matare, La Lerma Y Terdo 


vn 


12,662 




264 


Pueblo Nuevo Laguna Colorada 


vn 


44,845 




265 


Pueblo Nuevo 


vn 


5,000 




266 


Puerto Alegre y la Divisa 


vn 


22,365 




267 


Puerto Cordoba 


vn 


39,700 




268 


Puerto Libre-Rio Pepe 


vn 


2,069 




269 


Puerto Naranjo, Penas Rojas, Cuerazo y El D. 


vn 


3,000 





242 



Columbia 



Map National/international designations 
ref. Name of area 



lUCN management Area 

category (ha) 



Year 
notined 



270 


Puerto S^balo y los Monos 


vn 


303.700 


271 


Purac6 


vn 


6,203 


272 


Quebrada Cafiaveral Rio San Jorge 


vn 


2,815 


273 


Quichaya 


vn 


1,500 


274 


Quizgo 


vn 


10,000 


275 


Remanzo-Chorro Bocon 


vn 


73,680 


276 


Rio Bebarama 


vn 


8,875 


277 


Rio Blanco 


vn 


5,000 


278 


Ri'o Curiche 


vn 


8,965 


279 


Rio Domingodd 


vn 


24,590 


280 


Rio Ich6 y Quebrada Baratudo 


vn 


5,342 


281 


Rio Jarapet6 


vn 


5,583 


282 


Rio Mumbii 


vn 


3,000 


283 


Ri'o Murind6 


vn 


18,270 


284 


Rio Negu5 


vn 


5,463 


285 


Rio Nuqui 


vn 


9,500 


286 


Rio Orpua 


vn 


22,290 


287 


Rio Pangui 


vn 


7,870 


288 


Rio Pichimd 


vn 


9,024 


289 


Rio Quiparad6 


vn 


9,860 


290 


Rio Siare o Barranco Undo 


vn 


47,320 


291 


Rio Taparai 


vn 


14,212 


292 


Rios Catni y Dubasa 


vn 


48,980 


293 


Rios Junibida, Chori y Alto Baudo 


vn 


80,350 


294 


Rios Lanas o Capi 


vn 


6,400 


295 


Rios Pato y Jengado 


vn 


3,162 


296 


Rios Tomo Weberi 


vn 


60,540 


297 


Rios Uva y Pogue 


vn ' 


47,500 


298 


Rios Valley Boroboro 


vn 


21,020 


299 


S. Andres de Sotavento 


vn 


6,219 


300 


Salaqui-Pavarando 


vn 


107,000 


301 


San Andr6s de Pisimbaia 


vn 


3,365 


302 


San Antonio del Fragua 


vn 


1,400 


303 


San Francisco I 


vn 


15,064 


304 


San Jos6 


vn 


11,037 


305 


San Luis del Tomo 


vn 


25,100 


306 


San Matias o Jai-Dukama 


vn 


1,371 


307 


San Sebasti^ 


vn 


1,300 


308 


Santa Maria de Pangala 


vn 


9,500 


309 


Santa Rosa 


vn 


1,587 


310 


Santa Rosalia 


vn 


5,700 


311 


Santa Sofia y el Progreso 


vn 


4,200 


312 


Santa Teresita del Tuparro 


vn 


180,000 


313 


Saracure y Rio Cadi 


vn 


174,000 


314 


Sejalito-San Benito 


vn 


4,823 


315 


Sibundoy Parte Alta 


vn 


3,252 


316 


Sokorpa 


vn 


25,000 


317 


Sta Cecilia Quebrada Rio Choco 


vn 


5,723 


318 


Suin 


vn 


10,533 


319 


Tacueyo 


vn 


27,885 


320 


Tahami del Andigueda 


vn 


50,000 


321 


Tarena 


vn 


4,888 


322 


Tigres y Monchique 


vn 


8,254 


323 


Tiosilidio 


vn 


4,560 


324 


Toez 


vn 


7,687 


325 


Togoromi 


vn 


8,640 


326 


Toribio 


vn 


9.018 



243 



Protected Areas of the World 



Map 


National/international designations 


lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 


notiFied 


327 


Totoro 1 


vn 


4,161 




328 


Totoro II 


vn 


1.906 




329 


Trapiche-Ri'o Pepe 


vn 


1,008 




330 


Trupiogancho y la Meseta 


vn 


2,309 




331 


Tumbichucu6 


vn 


4,300 




332 


Tunebo de Angostura 


vn 


3,282 




333 


Uni6n Choc<5-San Crist6bal 


vn 


21,400 




334 


Valdivia 


vn 


3,985 




335 


Valle del Sibundol 


vn 


3,252 




336 


Vitonco 


vn 


7,245 




337 


Wayiiu de Lomamato 


vn 


1,572 




338 


Wiiora 


vn 


67,200 




339 


Yaigoje-Rio Apaporis 


vn 


518,320 




340 


Yanguillo 


vn 


4,230 




341 


Yuquiva 


vn 


16,380 




342 


Yuri Brazo Amanaven 


vn 


15,836 






Biosphere Reserves 










Cinmrdn Andino 


IX 


855,000 


1979 




El Tuparro 


IX 


928,125 


1979 




Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta 


IX 


731,250 


1979 



244 



Columbia 



-6° 



-4° 




78° 



76° 



74° 

_J 



72° 



70° 

I 



68° 



Protected Areas of Colombia 



245 



ECUADOR 



Area 272,045 sq. km 

Population 9,648,189 (1990) 
Natural increase: 2.25% per annum 

Economic Indicators 

GDP: US$ 1,069 per c^ita (United Nations, 1987) 
GNP: US$ 910 per capita (Banco Central del Ecuador, 
1991) 

Policy and Legislation No national conservation 
policy providing for the protection of natural resources 
has been staled (Cabarle et al., 1989). In 1974, the 
Preliminary Strategy for the Conservation of 
Outstanding Natural Areas in Ecuador (Estrategia 
Preliminar para la Conservaci6n de Areas Silvestres 
Sobresalientes del Ecuador) was initiated by the 
Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock (Ministerio de 
Agricultura y Ganaderia) (MAG) in collaboration with 
the UNDP and the FAO (Cifuentes et al., 1989). The 
Preliminary Strategy was published in 1976 and sets out 
what may be considered a national conservation 
objective, but in very general terms. It also includes an 
inventory of natural areas (DINAF, 1988; Putney, 1976). 
It is cited in subsequent legislation as the foundation for 
protected area definition and establishment 

One of the primary objectives of the strategy is to 
coordinate government planning at the national and 
regional levels. However, the 1985-1988 national 
development plan does not specify objectives for natural 
resource protection, and current development policies 
are oriented more towards exploitation than 
conservation (Cabarle et al., 1989; Cifuentes et al., 
1989). 

The government participates in the FAO Tropical Forest 
Action Plan (TFAP), an international strategy for 
maximising the contribution of forestry sectors to 
national economic and social development while 
maintaining conservation principles. In 1987, a national 
Forestry Action Plan (Plan de Acci6n Forestal) was 
formulated, adapting the principles of the TFAP to suit 
national objectives (Cabarle et al., 1989; DINAF, 1988; 
MAG, n.d.). A coordinating committee was established 
to supervise the implementation of the plan in 
conjunction with the National Development Council 
(Consejo Nacional de DesarroUo) (CONADE). Details 
of the extent of implementation are currently not known. 

The 1971 National Parks and Reserves Law (Ley de 
Parques Nacionales y Reservas), Decree No. 1306, was 
the first law to provide for protected area establishment 
at the national level. Parks and reserves are selected by 
the MAG, and designated by inter-ministerial accord. 
The law also gives regulations for visitors to parks and 
reserves, but definitions of these two management 
categories are not given. 



With reference to Decree No. 1306, the MAG and the 
Ministry of Industry, Commerce and Finance 
(Ministerio de Industrias, Comercio e Integraci6n) 
signed the Interministerial Agreement No. 322 in 1979. 
This agreement declares that the PreUminary Strategy 
for Conservation of Outstanding Natural Areas 
constitutes the fundamental policy for natural resource 
conservation. Provision is made for the creation of four 
national parks, three ecological reserves, two national 
recreation areas and one faunal production reserve, and 
comprehensive definitions for these four categories of 
protected area are given (see Annex). 

The main law providing for protected area establishment 
and resource use currently in effect is the 1981 Law of 
Forestry and the Conservation of Natural Areas and 
Wildlife (Ley Forestal y de Conservaci6n de Areas 
Naturales y Vida Silvestre) No. 74, which consolidates 
much of the earlier legislation relating to wildUfe and 
protected areas. Previous forestry legislation is repealed. 
All forested land is regulated under this law, but the state 
recognises private ownership rights. A natural area has 
distinctiveconservation, scientific, educational orscenic 
importance, and is state-owned. State forests and natural 
areas are inalienable, and ownership rights cannot be 
acquired. Provision is made for expropriating private 
land for the creation of protected areas where necessary. 
Definitions are given for production and protection 
forests and forest reserves, and for the seven categories 
of protected area which comprise the State Heritage of 
Natural Areas (Patrimonio de Areas Naturales del 
Estado) (see Annex). Management plans are to be drawn 
up for each area Encroachment on state-owned land, or 
damage to ecosystems, is prohibited and a series of 
penalties are prescribed. Wild fauna also belongs to the 
state, and provision is made for its protection and rational 
use. 

Problems arise over the definitions of management 
categories given in the 198 1 Law. No clear distinction is 
made between the designations of national park and 
ecological reserve, which gives rise to conflict over their 
management. Two categories are named in the 
legislation but are not defined or used in practice: 
wildhfe refuge (refugio de vida silvestre) and hunting 
and fishing area (area de caza y pesca). On the other 
hand, geobotanical reserve (reserva geobot^ica), whilst 
not mentioned in any official legislation, does exist in 
practice and even forms part of the protected areas 
system (G. Oviedo, pers. comm., 1992). One other 
category is used, namely marine resource reserve 
(reserva de recursos marinos) although it is not included 
in the system of protected areas, and not covered by the 
1981 Law. Thus, the protected areas sub-system is 
currently made up of six active categories of protected 
area: national park, ecological reserve, biological 
reserve, faunal production reserve, national recreation 



247 



Proctected Areas of the World 



area and geobotanical reserve (G. Oviedo, pers. comm., 
1992). 

Decree No. 1529, (1983) General Regulation under the 
1981 Law of Forestry and the Conservation of Natiual 
Areas and WildUfe (Reglamento General de Aphcaci6n 
de la Ley Forestal y de Conservacidn de Areas Naturales 
y Vida Silvestre), gives further details of natural resource 
management, general conservation objectives, and 
activities permitted within protected areas. All 
commercial exploitation of natural resources is 
prohibited. Permission for other activities may only be 
granted by the MAG. Administration of protected areas 
must follow the management plans specific to each area, 
and visitors are obhged to abide by the regulations 
established in the 1981 Forest Law. 

Legislation is inconsistent and uncoordinated, and as a 
result, no coherent legal framework exists by which 
national conservation objectives may be implemented 
(Cabarle et al., 1989; DINAF 1988). The lack of policy 
and legislation has resulted in conflicts between 
government sectors over resource use. In many cases, the 
policies of the MAG have been overridden by other 
sectors, and state-aided colonisation and migration, 
together with mineral exploitation, have been 
encouraged, particularly in forested areas (Cabarle et al. , 
1989) 

For example, the 1988 Hydrocarbon Law (Ley de 
Hidrocarburos) No. 1743, an interministerial agreement 
between the MAG and the Ministry of Energy and Mines 
(Ministerio de Energia y Minas) (MEM), regulates 
environmental rehabilitation during oil and gas 
exploration, and extraction in national parks and other 
protected areas. This is clearly in conflict with the 1981 
Law of Forestry and the Conservation of Natural Areas 
and Wildlife prohibits all commercial activities in 
designated protected areas. The Hydrocarbon Law is 
also in confUct with existing legislation, which declares 
that an activity explicitly prohibited by law cannot be 
regulated by an interministerial agreement (MAG, n.d.). 
This agreement has led to exploitation by oil companies 
in several protected areas, and fundamentally 
undermines the legal protection of Ecuador's natural 
resources (MAG, n.d.). 

International Activities Ecuador signed the 

Convention on Nature Protection and Wildlife 
Preservation in the Western Hemisphere (Convencion 
sobre la Protecci6n de la Flora, de la Fauna y de las 
Bellezas Esc6nicas Naturales de los Paises de America) 
(Western Hemisphere Convention) in 1940, with 
subsequent ratification. Ecuador signed the Amazon 
Cooperation Treaty (Tratado de Cooperacion 
Amazonica) on 3 July 1978, an agreement between the 
eight countries with territory in the Amazon region, to 
establish regulations for managing natural resources, and 
to propose conservation-directed alternatives to the 
management of multinational projects. The Convention 
for the Conservation and Management of Vicuna 
(Convenio para la Conservaci6n y Manejo de la Vicuna) 



was signed by Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Ecuador and 
Peru in 1979. 

Ecuador participates in the Unesco Man and the 
Biosphere Programme, with two sites accepted as 
biosphere reserves, and ratified the Convention on 
Wetlands of International Importance especially as 
Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar Convention) on 
7 September 1990 with two sites inscribed. Ecuador 
ratified the Convention Concerning the Protection of the 
World Cultural and Natural Heritage (World Heritage 
Convention) on 16 June 1975. Two natural sites have 
been inscribed on the World Heritage list. 

Administration and Management Throughout 

the various legislative acts, the Ministry of Agriculture 
and Livestock has been responsible for resource 
management through its different departments (MAG, 
n.d.). The first division within the MAG vested with this 
responsibility was the Forestry Service (Servicio 
Forestal), created in 1952. Since then, there has been 
much restructuring of the Ministry, and the scope of its 
responsibility has grown (MAG, n.d.). 

The Forestty Service, in collaboration with the National 
Tourist Office (Oficina Nacional de Turismo) and the 
General Fisheries Directorate (Direccion General de 
Pesqueria), was responsible for national parks and 
reserves from the enactment of the 197 1 National Parks 
and Reserves Law until 1981. In 1973, the Department 
of Natural Areas and Wildlife (Departamento de Areas 
Naturales y Vida Silvestre) (DANVS) was created as 
part of the Forestry Service to manage protected areas 
and wildlife. The DANVS was instrumental in 
developing the 1976 Preliminary Strategy for the 
Conservation of Outstanding Natural Areas in Ecuador 
(MAG, n.d.). In 1981 , the Forestry Service was replaced 
by the National Forestry Programme (Programa 
Nacional Forestal) (PRONAF), and the DANVS was 
transformed to a division (Division de Areas Naturales 
y Vida Silvestre) within it. The PRONAF and the 
DANVS are declared responsible for forest and other 
natural resources under the provisions of the 1983 
Regulations to the 1981 Law of Forestry and the 
Conservation of Natural Areas and WildUfe. 

Further restructuring of the MAG took place in 1990, 
raising the forestry sector to the level of Subsecretariat 
of Forests and Natural Resources (Subsecretan'a Forestal 
y de Recursos Naturales Renovables) (SUFOREN), 
under the Ministry of Agriculture. The operative level 
within SUFOREN is composed of the National Forestry 
Directorate (Direccion Nacional Forestal) (DINAF), 
which replaces the former PRONAF. The DINAF is 
responsible for implementing the policies of the MAG, 
and comprises three divisions, one for each of its 
functions: reforestation, investigation and training; 
management and utilisation; natural areas and wildlife 
(DANVS). At the local level, there are 2 1 district forestry 
districts (distritos forestales) under the respective 
provincial stockbreeding directorates (direcciones 



248 



Ecuador 



provinciales agropecuarias). DANVS employs 275 
people, 198 of whom are park guards (Figueroa, 1992). 

There are numerous other governmental organisations 
with interest in forests and natural resources, but ultimate 
responsibility for formulating forest policies and 
coordinating the activities of the various organisations 
lies with the SUFOREN. Policies are implemented by 
the DINAF and its respective divisions; the DANVS is 
responsible for managing national parks and reserves, 
whereas most national forests are the responsibiUty of 
the DINAF itself. Most protection forests are 
privately-owned and are the responsibility of private 
individuals or institutions, including non-governmental 
conservation organisations, although administrative 
assistance is provided by the DINAF. The Traditional 
Land of the Awa Indigenous Community is managed 
jointly by the Equadorian Technical Unit of the AwS 
Plan (Unidad T^cnica Equatoriana del Plan Awa) 
(UTEPA) and the indigenous Awa community (Cabarle 
et al., 1989; Cifuentes et al., 1989; G. Oviedo, pers. 
comm., 1992). 

There are around 50 non-governmental organisations 
(NGOs) working in environmental issues, the majority 
of which were created since 1978 (Cabarle et al., 1989; 
G. Oviedo, pers. comm., 1992). Some concentrate on 
specific regions of the country, such as the Charles 
Darwin Foundation (Fundacion Charles Darwin) which 
focuses on the Galapagos Islands. Others work at the 
national level, such as EcoScience (EcoCienca) which 
was founded in 1989 by a group of biologists and is 
active in conducting scientific research for conservation 
purposes in several protected areas, and promotes 
environmental education programmes (L. Suarez, pers. 
comm., 1991). Ecological Action (Accion Ecologica) 
monitors and campaigns against mineral exploitation in 
protected areas, one of the most serious threats to 
Ecuadorian ecosystems. One of the largest national 
NGOs, the Natura Foundation (Fundacion Natura), was 
established in 1978, and in 1989 signed an agreement 
with the MAG to participate in protected area 
management (MAG, n.d.). The Natura Foundation has 
managerial responsibility for two protected forests, and 
is involved in others (G. Oviedo, pers. comm., 1992). 
The Foundation also runs important training 
programmes for protected area staff (Figueroa, 1992). 
In 1988, the Natura Foundation (aided by WWF and 
TNC) realised a debt-for-nature swap to the value of 
US$ 10 million (Oviedo, 1991). Funds are being used 
for the "conservation of biological diversity in situ 
through the management of natural areas according to 
the principles of sustainable development". A large part 
of the programme is directed at the national system of 
protected areas, and management is carried out in 
conjunction with the state. Five national parks, three 
ecological reserves and one faunal production reserve 
are the first protected areas to benefit from the 
programme, which comprises a broad range of activities 
from environmental education and research to 
legislation and area management (Oviedo, 1991). 



To improve protected area planning and management, 
a Conservation Data Centre (Centro de Datos para la 
Conservacion) (CDC) was estabUshed in June 1990 
within the National Council of Science and Technology 
(Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnologia) 
(CONACYT), under an agreement between the Natura 
Foundation, The Nature Conservancy and CONACYT. 
The CDC collects information on natural areas to assess 
their protection needs, and on the current situation of 
existing protected areas including the effectiveness of 
their administration (L. Suarez, pers. comm., 1991). 

Protected area management is hampered by lack of 
equipment, trained personnel, and inter-institutional 
cooperation, as well as confusion over land tenure 
(Cifuentes et al., 1989; Figueroa, 1992). These problems 
are a direct result of a lack of high-level governmental 
support and the subsequent lack of funding, restricting 
the efficiency of protected area management (Cabarle 
et al., 1989; Cifuenteser al., 1989; Figueroa, 1992). The 
protected areas system is self-financing by means of 
revenue from tourism, particularly from Galapagos 
National Park. Thus, tJie state pays only 60% of salaries 
and services, leading to a severe lack of economic 
resources for management (Figueroa, 1992). There is 
little communication between regional management and 
central administration, which prevents adequate 
coordination. Increasing the autonomy of regional 
offices would greatly improve their administrative 
ability (Cabarle et al., 1989; DINAF, 1988). Owing to 
lack of management resources, production forests could 
not be regulated, and the government no longer issues 
concessions for timber extraction in specified reserves. 
Exploitation takes place in unreserved forest areas with 
no legal management status, resulting in degradation of 
forest resources across the country (Suarez, 1990). 

Systems Reviews Topographically, Ecuador 

consists of three distinct regions: Western Ecuador or 
coastal plain; inter-Andean or Sierra; and Eastern or 
Amazonian (Cabarleei a/., 1989; Cifuentes era/., 1989). 
National territory also includes the Galapagos Islands in 
the Pacific Ocean. The geographical contrast, from sea 
level to 6,310m, gives rise to a number of distinct 
ecosystems, and a high degree of biodiversity . Following 
Holdridge's (1967) ecological classification system, 25 
life zones are represented (Cabarle et al., 1989). 

The western region, or coastal plain encompasses the 
area between the foothills of the Andes and the Pacific 
Ocean, accounting for 24.7% of total land area (MAG, 
n.d.). Annual precipitation varies from 2000mm in the 
south, to 8800mm in the north-east where the most 
important remaining tropical humid forests are found 
(Cabarle e/ a/., 1989; MAG, n.d.; Cifuentes era/., 1989). 
The coastal soils of the alluvial plain are the most fertile 
and farming is intense, producing almost all the nation's 
crops. The region is also the centre of industry, and 
population growth in coastal cities is the highest in the 
counU7. Deforestation in the western region has been 
substantial, with estimates of remaining forest cover 
varying from 6% (Cabarle et al., 1989) to 24% (DINAF, 



249 



Proctecled Areas of the World 



1988). Extensive destruction of mangrove forests along 
the coast has led to serious coastal erosion (Cabarle 
et ai, 1989). 

The Sierra region comprises the highlands, above 900m 
in altitude, and accounts for 24% of total land area. Two 
chains of the Andes mountains run parallel down the 
length of the country, creating a system of valleys which 
are farmed intensively. Volcanic activity has shaped 
much of this region, and soils are derived from volcanic 
ash. Precipitation is 750mm per year, and forests range 
from premontane dry forest, to montane rain forest 
(MAG, n.d.). Only around 9% of the total area of the 
Siena region remains covered by natural vegetation 
(Cabarle et al., 1989). Cultivation methods are not suited 
to the varied and difficult terrain, and soil erosion in this 
region is the worst in the country, with around 15% of 
the area affected (MAG, n.d.). 

The Eastern or Amazonian region, accounting for 48% 
of total land area, extends from the eastern base of the 
Andes to the Peruvian and Colombian borders, below 
900m in altitude (MAG, n.d.). Agricultural development 
is greatest at the base of the mountains (Cabarle et ai, 
1989). Around 51% of the eastern region remains 
forested. 

Natural resource protection began in 1936 with the 
declaration of the Galapagos Islands as a protected area. 
Further protected areas were declared across the country, 
but a lack of continuity in their selection and 
management restricted their effectiveness (Paucar, 
1984; Ponce, 1982). The Preliminary Strategy for the 
Conservation of Outstanding Natural Areas, completed 
in 1976, identified priority areas and provided guidehnes 
for their management. This formed the basis for 
developing a coordinated national system of protected 
areas (Cifuentes et at., 1989; Ponce, 1982). 

The national system (sistema nacional) is to be 
established in two stages. Nine priority areas were 
identified initially to form the Minimum System of 
Conservation (Sistema Mi'nimo), with a further 20 for the 
Extended System (Sistema Ampliado). The first nine 
areas were estabUshed under provision of the 1979 
Interministerial Decree, and a minimum infrastructure 
for effective protection implemented. Management 
plans for each area are obligatory to ensure a coherent 
system. The DINAF intends to increase the number of 
protected areas to include the Extended System over a 
period of 12 years, on condition that the budget for 
administration will increase by 30% annually (DINAF, 
1988). Ecuador participates in the FAO Latin American 
Network programme (Red Latinoamericana de 
Cooperacion T6cnica en Parques Nacionales, Otras 
Areas Protegidas, Flora y Fauna Silvesffes) through the 
DINAF (FAO, n.d.). Following the FAO definition, 
Ecuador has a coherent national system (Ormazabal, 
1988). 

The non-governmental sub-system arose as a result of 
private sector response to alarming rates of deforestation 



(G. Oviedo, pers. comm., 1992). Areas of natural 
vegetation and forest that had not been included in the 
national system were taken on by private individuals and 
institutions for conservation purposes (Cabarle et ai, 
1989). 

By 1989, the national system comprised 15 natural 
protected areas under the administration of the DINAF, 
covering 3,173,915ha, or 11.73% of total land 
area (Fundacion Natura and SUFOREN, 1992). 
Of the 1 5 areas, nine have management plans, three 
have preliminary plans and the remaining three do not 
have either (MAG, n.d.). Only one management plan has 
been evaluated, and none has been updated (Figueroa, 
1992). Lack of funding and support from central 
government results in many protected areas being 
severely under-staffed, reducing the effectiveness of 
protection. Some areas do not have any staff and private 
reserves face pressure from agricultural encroachment 
(Cabarle et ai, 1989). 

Assessments of the protected area coverage indicate that 
the current system has serious gaps in coverage, and does 
not provide adequate protection for representative 
examples of native flora and fauna (Cabarle et al., 1989; 
Cifuentes et al., 1989). Five of Ecuador's 25 life zones 
are not represented in protected areas (Figueroa, 1992). 
The most under-represented of all regions is the coastal 
plain, with only three protected areas. The mangroves 
and reefs found in this region are vital to the prevention 
of coastal erosion and are severely under-represented 
(Cabarle et al., 1989; Figueroa, 1992). The largest 
number of protected areas is located in the Sierra region. 
The DINAF intends to extend protected area coverage 
by including the 20 areas proposed in the Extended 
System. Lack of funds, however, seriously restricts 
implementation of the system (DINAF, 1988; Ponce, 
1982). 

In 1989, an extensive study of the existing protected 
areas was undertaken by the DINAF and Fundacion 
Natura, with international assistance, to initiate the 
implementation of the second phase in developing the 
national system. Existing areas were reviewed in detail, 
and recommendations made to improve their 
conservation effectiveness. The study proposed more 
comprehensive management categories with clear 
definitions, introducing three new categories: natural 
monument (monumento natural); indigenous territory or 
bio-anthropological reserve (territorio indigena/reserva 
bioantropologica); and biosphere reserve (reserva de la 
biosfera) (G. Oviedo, pers. comm., 1992). The study also 
proposed new areas for inclusion in the extension of the 
national system: it recommends a minimum system 
(sistema minimo) comprising 24 protected areas, and an 
optimum one (sistema optimo) made up of 32. 
Conservation objectives are given in detail, and high 
level governmental support for the national system is 
sought (Cifuentes et al., 1989). 

Limitations of the protected areas system are lack of 
political support in the higher levels of government. 



250 



Ecuador 



inadequate institutional coordination, poor training, lack 
of participation of rural communities in decisions over 
protected areas and their management, inadequate 
economic resources, lack of environmental education, 
and the absence of monitoring and follow-up (Cabarle 
et ai, 1989; Figueroa, 1992). Figueroa (1992) cites 
development projects carried out without environmental 
considerations as the most serious threat to the protected 
area system. Transnational oil and mining companies 
violate protected area legislation (Cabarle et ai, 1989; 
MAG, n.d.; Figueroa, 1992). Oil companies are involved 
in exploration and extraction inside two protected areas, 
and mining activities are carried out in five areas. Further 
developments within protected areas are planned. The 
concessions for these activities were issued with no 
coordination with protected area administration. 
However, they are condoned by the 1988 Interministerial 
Agreement (MAG, n.d.). The infrastructure associated 
with such exploitation invariably leads to colonisation 
and, in some cases, 30% of the affected protected area 
has become occupied (MAG, n.d.). Many protected 
areas, including four of Ecuador's six national parks, are 
affected by commercial logging. Other problems include 
hunting and illegal colonisation (Figueroa, 1992). 

Addresses 

Departamento de Areas Naturales y Vida Silvestre 
(DANVS), Direccidn Nacional Forestal (DINAF), 
Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganaden'a, QUITO 
(Tel: 548924 541988 541955) 

Centro de Datos para la Conservacidn (CDC), Av. Patria 
y 10 de Agosto, Edif. Banco de Pr6stamos, Oficina 
601, PO Box 17-21-1332, QUITO (Tel: 560678; 
FAX: 560678) 

Acci6n Ecol6gica, Casilla 246-C, QUITO (Tel: 502540; 
FAX: 440 11 3) 

EcoCiencia, Av. 12 de octobre y Roca. Edif Mariana de 
Jesus, Oficina 701, Casilla 17-12-00257, QUITO 
(Tel: 548752; FAX: 502409) 

Fundaci6n Ecuatoriana para la Defensa de la Naturaleza 
(Fundaci6n Natura), Av. America 5653 y Voz 
Andes, Casilla 253, QUITO (Tel: 447341/2/3/4; 
FAX: 434449) 

Fundaci6n Charles Darwin, Estaci6n Cientifica Charles 
Darwin (ECChD), PUERTO AYORA, Isla Santa 
Cruz, Galapagos/Casilla 3891, QUITO 

Grupo Ecol6gico Tierra Viva, Calle Italia No. 832 y 
Mariana de Jesiis, QUITO 

References 

Butland, G.J. (1977). Latin America, a regional 
geography. Longman, London. 

Cabarle, B.J., Crespi, M., Calaway, H.D., 
Luzuriaga, C.C, Rose, D. and Shores, J.N. (1989). 
An assessment of biological diversity and tropical 
forests for Ecuador. Prepared for US-AID/Ecuador 
as an Annex to the Country Development Strategy 
Statement 1989-1990. 110 pp. 



Cifuentes, M., Ponce, A., Albdn, F., Mena, P., 
Mosquera, G., Rodriguez, J., Silva, D., Suirez, L., 
Tobar, A., and Torres, J. (1989). Estrategia para el 
sistema nacional de dreas protegidas del Ecuador, 
II Ease. DINAF-MAG/Fundaci6n Natura, Quito. 
196 pp. 

DINAF (1988). Plan de accidn forestal. Direcci6n 
Nacional Forestal, Quito. 126 pp. 

FAO (1982). Food and agricultural legislation 
31(1): 74-99. 

FAO (n.d.). La Red Latinoamericana de Cooperaci6n 
Tecnica en Parques Nacionales, Otras Areas 
Protegidas, Flora y Fauna Silvestres. Oficina 
Regional de la FAO para America Latina y el Caribe, 
Santiago, Chile. 8 pp. 

Figueroa, S. (1983). Imponancia y conservacidn de la 
vida silvestre ecuatoriana. MAG/PNF, Quito. 33 pp. 

Figueroa, S. (1992). Patrimonio de dreas naturales en 
Ecuador. In: Amend, S. and Amend, T. (Eds) 
iEspacios sin Habitantes? Parques Nacionales de 
America del Sur. lUCN and Editorial Nueva 
Sociedad, Caracas. Pp. 207-222. 

Fundaci6n Natura and SUFOREN (1992). Parques 
nacionales y otras dreas naturales protegidas del 
Ecuador. Fundaci6n Natura, Quito. 132 pp. 

lUCN (1981). Conserving the natural heritage of Latin 
America and the Caribbean: the planning and 
management of protected areas in the Neotropical 
Realm. Proceedings of the 18th Working Session of 
WCNICNPPA, Lima. lUCN/UNEP/Unesco/WWF, 
Gland, Switzerland. 324 pp. 

MAG (n.d.). Diagn6stico - Plan de accion forestal 
1991-1995. Subsecretaria Forestal y de Recursos 
Naturales, Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganaderia, 
Quito. 126 pp. 

Ormazdbal, C. (1988). Sistemas nacionales de dreas 
silvestres protegidas en America Latina. Basado en 
los resultados del taller sobre Planificacidn de 
Sistemas Nacionales de Areas Silvestres Protegidas, 
Caracas, Venezuela, 9-13 junio 1986. Oficina 
Regional de la FAO para Am6rica Latina y el Caribe, 
Santiago, Chile. 

Oviedo, G. (1991). Lineamientos y acciones de 
conservacidn confondos de canje de deuda externa. 
Fundacidn Natura: Programa de Conservacion. 
15 pp. 

Oviedo, G. (n.d.). Areas Naturales del Ecuador: la 
importancia y las estrategias de su conservacidn. 
Programa de Conservacidn, Fundaci6n Natura. 7 pp. 

Paucar, A. (1984). An evaluation of the situation of 
national parks and equivalent reserves in the repubUc 
of Ecuador, based on the National Development 
Plan, 1980-1984: a regional perspective. 
Unpublished report 12 pp. 

Ponce, A. (1981). Parques nacionales, reserves naturales 
y vida silvestre. Cap. IX. Diagndstico de la situacidn 
del medio ambiente en el Ecuador. Tomo II. 
Fundacidn Natura, Quito. 12 pp. 

Ponce, A. (1982). Ecuadorian Strategy for the 
Conservation of Wildlands and WildUfe. Workshop 



251 



Proctected Areas of the World 



paper presented at the World National Parks 

Congress, Bali, Indonesia. 
Ponce, A. and Huber, R.M. (1982). Ecuador's active 

conservation program. Parks 6(4): 7-10. 
Putney, A.D. (1974). Una estrategia preliminar para la 

conservacidn de las dreas natwales y culturales 

sobresalierues. UNDP/FAO-ECU/7 1/527. Documento 

deTrabajoNo. 12. 
Putney, A.D. (1976). Informe final sobre una estrategia 

preliminar para la conservacidn de dreas silvestres 

sobresalientes del Ecuador. Prepared in cooperation 

with the Departamento de Parques Nacionales y Vida 

Silvestre, Direccion General de DesarroUo Forestal. 

UNDP/FAO-ECU/71/527. Documento de Trabajo 

No. 17. 
Suirez, L. (1990). El papel de la actividad forestal en la 

conservacidn de la diversidad bioldgica del Ecuador. 

Unpubhshed report (Unseen) 



Suarez, L. (n.d). La Fragmentacion de los Bosques y La 
Conservacidn de la Fauna Silvestre en las Areas 
Protegidas. EcoCiencia (Unpublished). 15 pp. 

Terborgh, J. and Winter, B. (1983). A method for siting 
parks and reserves with special reference to 
Colombia and Ecuador. Biological Conservation 27: 
45-58. 

Wetterberg, G.B. (1982). Ecuador - Forestry project. 
Wildlands and Wildlife component. USDI National 
Park Service, Washington. 

Wetterberg, G.B., Jorge Padua, M.T., Tresinari, A. and 
Ponce del Prado, C.F. ( 1 985). Decade of progress for 
South American national parks. International 
Affairs, USDI National Park Service, Washington, 
DC. 125 pp. 



252 



Ecuador 



ANNEX 

Deflnitions of protected area designations, as legislated, 

together with authorities responsible for their administration 



Title: Acuerdo Interministerial 
(Interministerial Agreement) No. 0322 

Date: 1 November 1979 

Brief description: Between the Minister of 

Agriculture and Livestock (Ministro de Agricultura 
y Ganaderi'a) and the Minister of Industry, 
Commerce and Finance (Ministro de Industria, 
Comercio y Integracidn) that defines and declares 
reserved zones and national parks, with reference to 
Decree No. 1306, 1971. The National Strategy for 
Conservation of Outstanding Natural Areas is cited 
as the basis for the conservation policies and 
objectives of this Law. Provision is made for the 
creation of four national parks, three ecological 
reserves, two national recreation areas and the one 
fauna production reserve, giving comprehensive 
details of their exact location and boundaries. 

Administrative Authority: Provision is given 
for the national government to designate the 
administrative body responsible for each protected 
area. For national parks, the National Park Service 
(Servicio del Parque Nacional) is named. For 
reserves, responsibility is simply vested in "the 
respective governmental organisation". 

Designations: 

Parque Nacional (National Park) An area 
extending over a minimum of 10,000ha, with one or 
more ecosystem remaining in its natural state and 
possessing ecological diversity, floral or faunal 
species or geological formations of national, 
scientific and educational importance. 

Visitors are permitted entry solely for educational, 
recreational or investigative purpose. 

Zona de Reserva (Reserve Zone) Reserva 
Ecoldgica (Ecological Reserve) An area 

extending over a minimum of lO.OOOha, with 
wild floral or faunal species of national 
importance, particularly those in danger of 
extinction, or geological formations or natural 
areas of national interest. 

Natural resources are to be maintained in their 
natural state. Exploitation or occupation of any 
type is prohibited. Only educational, 
investigative and recreational activities are 
permitted. 

Reserva de Produccidn Faun(stica (Faunal 
Production Reserve) Area of no less than 

l,000ha with wildlife species of commercial 
value, including those areas that have 



traditionally been used for subsistence by 
indigenous communities 

The administrative organisation responsible will 
regulate the use of wildlife species and promote 
scientific investigation in order to allow 
continuing propagation. 

Visitors are allowed to hunt or collect specimens 
following the established regulations. 

Area Nacional de Recreacidn (National 
Recreation Area) An area of not less than 
l,000ha characterised by scenic beauty, 
resources of touristic or recreational importance, 
whose ecosystem is natural or semi-natural and 
which allows easy access for the public. 

Hunting is allowed, following management 
regulations. 

Source: Original legislation 

Title: Ley Forestal y de Conservacion de 
Areas naturales y Vida Silvestre (Law of 
Forestry aqd the Conservation of Natural 
Areas and Wildlife) No. 74 

Date: 14 August 1981 

Brief description: Defines seven categories of 
protected area and four of forested area: state 
permanent production forest, private permanent 
production forest, protection forest and special 
forest Protected areas under these given categories 
collectively comprise the State Heritage of Natural 
Areas (Patrimonio de Areas Naturales del Estado). 
All forested land and the wildlife therein constitutes 
the State Forest Heritage (Patrimonio Forestal del 
Estado). The Law declares natural areas inviolable 
and inalterable and to which no rights may be 
acquired. Private forest reserves are recognised and 
are given governmental assistance to comply with 
this law. 

Administrative Authority: The Ministerio de 
Agriculnira y Ganaderia (Ministry of Agriculture 
and Livestock) (MAG) is responsible for 
state-owned forested land and nature areas. 

Designations: 

Bosque Protector (Protection Forest) Forested 
area, either natural or man-made, which j)ossess one 
or more of the following characteristics: its principal 
function is soil or wildlife conservation; important as 
a watershed or is adjacent to an important water 
source; functions as a windbreak, or strategic zones 



253 



Proctected Areas of the World 



for national defence; forms part of a protected area; 
or is important for forest research 

Reserva Forestal (Forest Reserve) Forested 

area that, owing to its location, species composition 
or national importance, is to remain in its natural state 
so that it may be brought into the integrated 
development of the country at some future, though 
not immediate, date. 

Parque Nacional (National Park) An area 

extending over a minimum of lO.OOOha, with one or 
more ecosystem remaining in its natural state and 
possessing ecological diversity, floral or faunal 
species or geological formations of national, 
scientific and educational importance. Visitors are 
permitted entry solely for educational, recreational 
or investigative purpose. 

Reserva Ecoldgica (Ecological Reserve) An 

area extending over a minimum of lO.OOOha, widi 
wild floral or faunal species of national importance, 
particularly those in danger of extinction, or 
geological formations or natural areas of national 
interest Natural resources are to be maintained in 
their natural state. Exploitation or occupation of any 



type is prohibited. Only educational, research and 
recreational activities are permitted. 

Refugio de Vida Silvestre (Wildlife Refuge) An 
area of any size, essential for ensuring the continued 
existence of resident or migratory wildlife, for 
scientific, educational or recreational purpose. 

Reserva Bioldgica (Biological Reserve) An 

area of any size, whose ecosystem remains in its 
natural condition and is set aside for wildlife 
conservation. 

Area Nacional de Recreacidn (National Recreation 
Area) An area of no less than l,000ha in size, 
which contains scenic, tourist or recreational 
attractions in their natural state. The area must have 
easy public access. 

Reserva de Produccidn Faunistica (Faunal 
Production Reserve) Named as a classification 
for state nature area, but no definition is given 

Area de Caza y Pesca (Hunting and Fishing Area) 
Named as a classification for stale nature area, but no 
defmition is given 

Source: FAO (1982) 



254 



SUMMARY OF PROTECTED AREAS 



Ecuador 



Map Nationallinternadonal designations 
ref. Name of area 



lUCN management Area 

category (ha) 



Year 
notified 





National Parks 


1 

2 
3 


Cotopaxi 

Galdpagos 

Machalilla 


4 
5 
6 


Podocarpus 

Sangay 

Yasuni 


7 
8 
9 


Ecological Reserves 
Cayambe-Coca 
Cotacachi-Cayapas 
Manglares-Churute 


10 


Biological Reserve 
Limoncocha 




Faunal Production Reserves 


11 


Chimborazo 


12 


Cuyabeno 




Marine Resource Reserve 


13 


Callages 




Geobotanical Reserve 


14 


Pululahua 



n 


33,393 


1975 


n 


727,800 


1959 


n 


55,000 


1979 


n 


146,280 


1982 


n 


517,725 


1975 


n 


982,300 


1979 


I 


403,103 


1970 


I 


204,420 


1968 


I 


35.042 


1979 



Forest Reserve Zone 
15 Asentamiento Trad, de la Comunidad Indigena Awa 



IV 



vn 
vn 



IV 
V 

vn 





Protection Forests 


16 


Agtiallaca 


17 


Bosque Petrificado de Puyango 


18 


Bosque Puyango 


19 


Canta Gallo Jipijapa 


20 


Carrisal Chone 


21 


Cashca Totoras 


22 


CeiTOS Guinzales 


23 


Chilanes Bucay 


24 


Cintur6n Verde Loja 


25 


Cintur6n Verde de Quito 


26 


Com una Loma Alta 


27 


Cordillera Chongon 


28 


Cordillera de Cutucu 


29 


Cordillera de MoUeturo 


30 


Cuenca Alta del Guayllabamba 


31 


Cuenca Daule Peripa 


32 


Cuenca Rio Coca y Panza 


33 


Cuenca Rio Cube 


34 


Cuenca Rio Paute 


35 


Cuenca Rios Atacames 


36 


Cuenca del Ri'o Portoviejo 


37 


ElGuabo 


38 


Hollin Loreto Coca 


39 


Ingenio Santa Rosa 


40 


Jeco 


41 


Jima Limitada 


42 


La Floresta 



4,613 

58,560 
655.781 

7.990,000 

3,383 

101,000 



1985 



1987 
1979 



1986 



1978 



1988 



vm 


1,724 


1988 


V 


2,658 


1987 


vm 


2,658 


1987 


vm 


8,170 


1989 


vm 


75,700 


1988 


vm 


6,537 


1988 


vm 


3,338 


1985 


vm 


1,857 


1989 


vm 


9,373 


1988 


vm 


21,929 


1988 


vm 


1,858 


1989 


vm 


2,000 


1989 


vm 


311,500 


1990 


vm 


28,100 


1968 


vm 


13,800 


1989 


vm 


220,835 


1987 


vm 


6.630 


1979 


vm 


4.925 


1990 


vm 


195,161 


1985 


vm 


10,620 


1990 


vm 


17,500 


1972 


vm 


2,213 


1988 


vm 


110,046 


1987 


vm 


2,410 


1987 


vm 


2,324 


1987 


vm 


2,104 


1991 


vm 


3,122 


1988 



255 



Proctected Areas of the World 



Map 


National/internationaldesignations 


lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 


notifled 


43 


Loma del Coraz6n y Bretana 


vm 


7,081 


1990 


44 


Manglares 


vm 


362,802 


1987 


45 


Maquipucuna 


vm 


2,700 


1989 


46 


Matiavi Salinas 


vm 


1,857 


1988 


47 


Mindo Nambillo 


vm 


19,200 


1988 


48 


Mindo y Nambillo 


vm 


19,200 


1988 


49 


Napo, Area Boscosa 


vm 


235,000 


1978 


50 


Parque Jerusalem 


vm 


1,110 


1989 


51 


Pasochoa 


vm 


3,196 


1982 


52 


Pichincha 


vm 


8,096 


1983 


53 


Presa Tahuin 


vm 


14,911 


1989 


54 


Santa Rita 


vm 


2,145 


1988 


55 


Santa Rosa y Yasquel 


vm 


2,597 


1987 


56 


Shishimbe-Chillanes 


vm 


1,064 


1987 


57 


Subcuenca Ri'o Blanco 


vm 


5,410 


1990 


58 


Subcuenca Ri'o Dudahuayco 


vm 


2,000 


1982 


59 


Suiza-Pucara 


vm 


1,000 


1980 


60 


Sumaco 


vm 


100,045 


1987 


61 


Sun Sun Yanasacha 


vm 


3,850 


1982 


62 


Toachi Pilaton 


vm 


212,000 


1987 


63 


Toaza 


vm 


1,247 


1989 


64 


Volcan Pichincha 


vm 


8,096 


1985 


65 


Zarapullo 

National Recreation Areas 


vm 


21,585 


1986 


66 


Cajas 


V 


28,808 


1979 


67 


El Boliche 


V 


1,077 


1979 




Biosphere Reserves 










Archipi6Iago de Col6n (Galdpagos) 


IX 


766,514 


1984 




Yasuni 


IX 


679,730 


1989 




Ramsar Wetlands 










Machalilla 


R 


55,000 


1990 




Manglares-Churute 


R 


35,000 


1990 




World Heritage Sites 










Galapigos 


X 


766,514 


1978 




Sangay 


X 


271,925 


1983 



256 



Ecuador 



78° 



"~1 — 
77° 



—1 — 
76° 




100 



200km 



77° 

_1 



76° 

I 



Protected Areas of Ecuador 



257 



FRENCH GUIANA 



Area 84,000 sq. km 

Population 114,600(1990) 
Natural increase: 5.8% per annum 

Economic Indicators 

GDP: No infonnation 

GNP: US$ 6,700 (1989) (ECO-ATLAS, 1991-92) 

Policy and Legislation The first French settlement 
in the area currently known as French Guiana was 
established in 1604. The region became a French 
possession in 1643 (although occupied by Britain from 
1809 10 1817). On 19 March 1946 its status changed to 
an overseas department of France, and in 1974 it also 
became an administrative region. The region is covered, 
therefore, by French policy and legislation. There is 
currently no environmental policy for the region 
(Hughes, 1992). However, on a recent tour to French 
Guiana, the French Environment Minister unveiled 
plans for the conservation and responsible development 
of the country. The plans split the country into three 
areas; the first, a coastal strip dedicated to economic 
development; the second, an inland band reserved for 
tourism and managed hunting; and the third, an 
inviolable sanctuary for forest wildlife and people in the 
remote interior (Lewis and Wood, 1991). 

A complete list of legislation concerning protected areas 
under French jurisdiction is given with the country sheet 
for France (see Volume 2). The first protected area 
within the region. La Mirande, was created by decree of 
4 July 1942. Further legislation relevant to French 
Guiana's protected areas is contained within Law No. 
76/629 concerning Nature Protection (Loi no. 76/629 
relative ^ la protection de la nature) (see Annex). Decrees 
Nos 77-1298 to 77-1301 of 25 November 1977 relate to 
the implementation of this Act. Law 76/629 provides, 
amongst other things, a definition of nature reserve 
(reserve naturelle), and allows for the preservation of 
biotopes of plant and animal species by means of 
prefectural orders called biotope protection orders 
(arretds de protection du biotope), which provide for a 
very low level of protection. Kaw Reserve was protected 
under Biotope ftotection Order No. 1-964 ID/4B of 
4 September 1989. 

State biological reserves (reserves biologiques 
domaniales)(RBD) were the subject of a convention 
between the Ministry of the Environment, the 
Ministry of Agriculture and the National Forest 
Office. Two types of RBD are to be established: strict 
(int6grale) RDB, in which all human intervention is 
excluded, and managed (dirigde) RDB, in which 
conditions necessary for the survival of species in need 
of protection are maintained, whilst at the same time 
the areas may be inhabited, and intervention by 
foresters is permitted. Zones cunently proposed for 
establishment belong to the secondcategory, but may 



include strictly protected zones ( J. J. de Granville, 
pers. oomm, 1992). 

"Espaces du Conservatoire" are areas in which all forms 
of urbanisation are prohibited. They are open to the 
public, and management is undertaken with the 
cooperation of local collectives (JJ.de Granville, pers. 
comm., 1992). 

Under the seventh tide of the Forest Code Legislation 
and Regulations, in conformity with Article 73 of the 
French constitution, the Forest Code is applicable to 
overseas departments, subject to modifications and 
adulations listed under this title. The first (legislative) 
section of the French Forest Code, given in Law No. 
85-1273 of 4 December 1985, contains a clause (Article 
L. 172-1) which states that certain parts of this law are 
not applicable to French Guiana. Similarly, although 
most of the second (regulations) part of the Forest Code 
is relevant. Articles R. 172-1 to 172-5 and 562-1 list 
those parts which do not apply in this department of 
France. 

The forest regime was first established under a law 
(arrete) of 1926, although the first forest service within 
the territory was not established until 7 February 1931. 
Under a law of 27 March 1 93 1 , the Bureau of Mines was 
responsible f6r the Forest Service, there not yet being an 
agent for the Water and Forests (Eaux et Forets) 
department, within the region. A further law of 2 June 
1932 provided for the separation and reorganisation of 
the Mines department from that of Water and Forests. 
Following diis, a law of 12 May 1934 provided for state 
forests (forets domaniales) to be managed by the Water 
and Forest service, as well as for the establishment of 
state concessions, and for the duties of forest agents 
(Valeix and Mauperin, 1990). 

The legislative and regulations sections of the Forest 
Code both provide for the current responsibilities of the 
National Forest Office (Office National des Forets). 

International Activities Conventions to which 

France is a member, which are of relevance to French 
Guiana, include the Convention for the Protection and 
Development of the Marine Environment of the Wider 
Caribbean Region and Protocol Concerning 
Cooperation in Combating Oil Spills in the Wider 
Caribbean Region (both of which were ratified by France 
on 13 November 1985) and a second Protocol 
Concerning Specially Protected Areas and Wildlife, 
signed by France in 1991. Together, the Convention and 
associated protocols are known as the Cartagena 
Convention. 

Administration and Management The French 

governmental body responsible for the establishment of 
parks and reserves (and setting hunting regulations) is 
the Department of Nature Protection (Direction de la 



259 



Protected Areas of the World 



Protection de la Nature), originally part of the Ministry 
of the Environment (Ministfere de I'Environnement). 
Since 1991 the Ministry of the Environment has been 
represented in the region by a Regional Department for 
Architecture and the Environment (Direction Rdgionale 
de I'Architecture et de rEnvironnement) (DRAE), 
created in 1990, which has been responsible for 
proposing protected areas, including a coastal regional 
national park (J.J.de Granville, pers. comm., 1992; 
D.Girou, pers. comm., 1992). 

The National Forest Office (Office National des 
Forets)(ONF), was first established in the region in 1965 
for the establishment of paper industries. The ONF is 
currently under the supervision of the Ministry of 
Agriculture (Ministfere d' Agriculture), but was 
previously under the Ministry of Colonies (Ministfcre des 
Colonies), which later became the Ministry of France 
Overseas (Ministfere de la France Outre-Mer). The ONF 
is now responsible for managing forested land and land 
to be reforested (listed in Decree No. 86-154 of 
30 January 1986), as well as state biological reserves 
(reserves biologiques domaniales) (J.J.de Granville, 
pers. comm., 1992). Since 1978 the ONF has undertaken 
an important experimental programme, the emphasis of 
which is on the protection and regeneration of natural 
forest, whilst at the same time establishing plantations of 
fast growing species (Groene, 1990; Sarrailh, 1990; 
Valeix and Mauperin, 1990). 

All of France's main national research institutes have 
projects and stations in Guiana, and scientific research 
there has been widespread and longstanding. However, 
little or no pressiu^e for a conservation policy has been 
exerted by scientists (Hughes, 1992). ORSTOM, the 
French Scientific Research Institute for Development 
through Cooperation (Institut Frangais de Recherche 
Scientiflque pour le D6veloppement en Cooperation), 
recendy secured the creation of the first two nature 
reserves, but the government is proceeding slowly with 
future plans for national park development, due to 
concern for its present programme of economic 
development (Lewis and Wood, 1991). 

SEPANRIT, the Society for the Study, Protection and 
Management of Nature in Inter-Tropical Regions 
(Soci6t£ pour I'Etude, la Protection et I'Amdnagement 
de la Nature dans les Regions Inter-Tropicales), and 
SEPANGUY, the Society for the Study of Protection and 
Management of Nature in Guyana (Soci6t6 d'Etude de 
Protection et d' Am6nagement de la Nature en Guyane), 
are very active locally (JJ.de Granville, pers. comm., 
1992). 

The universities of Paris, Montpellier, the French 
Antilles and French Guiana and the Paris Museum of 
Natural History are active in conservation (research 
includes fauna and flora, marine resources and 
pollution). The Conservatory for the Littoral Zone 
(Conservatoire du Littoral), which is responsible for 
"espaces du conservatoire", has profwsed to "buy" 
13,000ha of land between the rivers Counamama and 



Yiyi to create a protected zone (K. Wood, pers. comm., 
1992). The CNES (Centre National d'Etudes Spatiaux) 
(the space port at Kourou) proposes to close access to 
Malmanoury Creek, which will effectively create a 
reserve along 40km of coast that belong to the space 
base, but still needs to negotiate with the Ministry of 
Marine Affairs so that a reserve can be created which 
would include the tidal mudflats (K. Wood, pers. comm., 
1992). 

The "Arrets de Biotope", under which Kaw Reserve is 
gazetted, is not only a very weak measure, but also little 
respected. Fires set in the marshes have led to several 
hundred hectares being burnt (K. Wood, pers. comm., 
1992). 

Systems Reviews Located slighdy north of the 

equator, French Guiana is the smallest and least 
populated territory in South America. The climate is 
equatorial, with two brief dry seasons. Annual mean 
precipitation is generally greater than 2000mm, although 
in some areas it exceeds 8000mm. Three ecosystems 
predominate: littoral, river conidors and rain forest The 
littoral region is exceptional in comparison with other 
countries in the north of South America, as it is the only 
coast where the granitic massif of the Guyanan plain 
reaches the sea. Mangroves occupy approximately 80% 
of the coast Large (c. 200,000ha) areas of swamp 
occupy the land immediately inland from the coast (de 
Granville and Sanit6, 1992). 

More than 80% of the country is covered in rain forest, 
less than 5% of which is secondary forest The country 
is characterised by a fairly high level of species diversity, 
the flora comprising an estimated 6,000 species. 
Currently, 12 species new to science, and 200 species 
new to French Guiana are described each year (de 
Granville and SanitS, 1992), and an estimated 10% of 
tree species remain to be described (Sabatier and 
Prevost 1989). In general, forest exploitation has not 
occurred more than 50km from the coast (Groene, 1990). 
However, in percentage terms there is as much 
destruction of primary forest as in the Amazon (Hughes, 
1992). Only the coastal alluvial strip, where most of the 
country's inhabitants Uve, is exploited agriculturally, the 
soils of the interior being too poor to support anything 
other than shifting agriculture (K. Wood, pers. comm., 
1992). 

Until Kaw Reserve was gazetted in 1989, the only 
protected area was one forest reserve, Mirande, 
classified as a nature reserve in 1942 (de Granville, 1975, 
1985). This was transferred to the state forest domain in 
1967 (de GranvUle and Sanit6, 1992). 

Establishment of further protected areas has been 
discussed many times since 1967. In 1970, a proposal 
was made for a 5,000ha reserve to be established along 
the estuary of the Cascades and Tonn6grande. This 
would have been partly strictly protected and partly op)en 
to the public. At the same time a proposal was made for 
a large reserve to be established inland, adjacent to the 



260 



French Guiana 



southern border. In 1972, SEPANRITand SEPANGUY, 
with scientific help from ORSTOM and the Natural 
History Museum, proposed establishment of two coastal 
bird reserves near Organabo and Sinnamary . A year later 
development of a further bird reserve was proposed by 
ORSTOM, near Mana (de Granville and Sanitd, 1992). 
From 1974-1975, an ecological study was made of 
coastal areas, with a view to creating nature reserves, 
under the auspices of the Ministry of the Environment 
and ORSTOM. As a result of this study, classification of 
five protected zones was proposed (Condamin 1974, 
1975; de Granville and Sanit6, 1992). Again in 
1975, soon after this coastal areas project, a series 
of 1 5 reserves, comprising inland forested sites as well 
as the previously proposed five coastal areas, was 
proposed. In 1976, following a visit by the Secretary of 
State for the Environment, the need to upgrade reserves 
to national park status was acknowledged, with priority 
being given to Basse Mana, Sinnamary-Iracouba, Saul 
and Kaw. Later, the Regional Delegate for the 
Environment made a case for all the southern part of the 
country to be established as a national park, followed, in 
1979, by similar cases being made for Basse Mana and 
S innamary Iracouba being established as nature reserves 
(de GranvUle, 1986). 

By 1983 none of these proposals had got past the 
planning stage. In 1985, the regional department of the 
National Forest Office, with technical assistance from 
ORSTOM, developed a project for the creation of eight 
state biological reserves to cover 213,665ha. These 
included the eight most threatened of the fifteen reserves 
proposed in 1975, in the northern part of the country, 
with the proposed reserve at Kaw being extended to 
include part of Kaw Mountain. The category of state 
biological reserve had been the subject of a recent 
convention between the Ministry of the Environment, 
the Ministry of Agriculture and the National Forest 
Office (de Granville, 1986). However, permission for 
development of the reserves was refused, as the land was 
deemed necessary for economic development (Valeix, 
n.d.). 



The most recent propositions concerning protected 
areas were presented in a "Schema d'Am^nagement 
Regional" (D. Girou, pers. comm., 1992). These 
comprise the establishment of 16 nature reserves, 
including a national park in the south, three 
newly-proposed state biological reserves in the north 
and a coastal regional nature park (pare naturel 
regional) in the north (J.J. de Granville, pers. comm., 
1992). 

Legislation has been drawn up for Grand 
Conn6table Nature Reserve, and awaits signature. 
The documentation has already been accepted in 
practice by the local municipality and General and 
Regional Consul (de Granville and Sanitd, 1992). 
Six other reserves are due to be established in 1992 
(JJ. de Granville, pers. comm., 1992). 



A comprehensive description of both the country 
and the protected areas system is described in detail 
by de Granville and Sanit6 (1992), in the chapter 
concerning French Guiana in ^Espacios sin habitantes? 
Parques nacionales de America del Sur. They conclude 
that the country has been relatively unspoilt to date, due 
to the low {X)pulation pressure, but that there is now a 
pressing need for the development of national parks to 
ensure the future conservation of the country. 

Threats to the proposed protected areas system come 
from numerous sources. According to Lewis and Wood 
(1991), much of the current environmental degradation 
has been financed by French money, which has poured 
into the country during the past 20 years during the 
establishment of the Kourou space base. Development 
of the new launch-pad has led to areas of forest being 
flattened, while the waste products of test-launching 
have been dumped indiscriminately. The French 
authorities are currently constructing a large dam on the 
River Sinnamary to generate electricity for Kourou, 
which will flood 310 sq. km of dense, unbroken rain 
forest, although this is in contradiction to official 
government support for forest protection. Three other 
dam projects are planned, although again no 
environmental impact assessments have been made 
(Anon., 1992; Hughes, 1992; Pearce, 1991). New roads 
are opening up the country in all directions. A new 
coastal road through mangroves is likely to precipitate 
an influx of Brazilian slash-and-bum colonists. A new 
centralised capital is planned at Saul, previously an 
isolated town of 56 inhabitants, in the heart of the rain 
forest, with a new road Unking this to the coast. In the 
past, state-sanctioned gold mining was responsible for 
pouring mercury into the rivers, most of the raw mercury 
dating from the 1865-1940 period. Fortunately this now 
seems to be under control. However, mining still remains 
a problem indirectly, due to the hunting practised by gold 
miners around their camps, which has led to local 
extinction of many forms of wildlife. In general, 
extensive hunting occurs throughout the country, aided 
by outboard motors, generators, freezers and the 
growing road network and encouraged by the booming 
population (Hughes, 1992; Kempf, 1991; K.Wood, pers. 
comm., 1992). There is little enforcement of hunting 
regulations. In 1991, the Guianese Regional 
Environment Congress reported a 50% drop in numbers 
of bird species, concluding that hunting is already 
depleting wildlife to such an extent as to endanger whole 
ecosystems (Lewis and Wood, 1991). 

Of the 600 or so rain forest species in Guiana, 70 are 
exploitable commercially. Management has led to 
non-commerical tree species being killed chemically, a 
process which causes more forest damage than logging. 
A new, intensive rice-field programme in the lowlands 
has engulfed over-wintering grounds of numerous 
migrant bird species. The EDF (E16ctricit^ de France) is 
already prospecting sites for a second dam, either on the 
River Mana, the Approuage or the Oyapock (K. Wood, 
pers. comm., 1992). 



261 



Protected Areas of the World 



Addresses 

Centre ORSTOM de Cayenne, BP 165, 97323 

CAYENNE Cedex (Tel: 594 302785; Tlx: 910608 

FG; Fax: 594 319855) 
Direction Regionale ^ 1' Architecture et ^ rEnvironnement 

(DRAE), 28 Boulevard Jubelin, BP 411, 97300 

CAYENNE (Tel: 594 378982; Fax: 594 378981) 
Direction de TAgricuIture et de la Foret (L'Ing6nieur en 

Chef du G6nie Rural des Eaux et des Forets), BP 

5002, 97305 CAYENNE (Tel: 594 302905; 

Tlx: 910576F; Fax: 594 302939) 
SEPANGUY (Soci6t6 d 'Etude de Protection et 

d'Amdnagement de la Nature en Guyane), BP 411, 

97307 CAYENNE 
Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales, Centre Spatial 

Guyanais, BP 6 973 10, KOUROU 

References 

Anon. (1992). Opposition to a dam in French Guiana. 

Naturopa 92-1: 3 
Behra, O. (1990). Kaw Swamp becomes a black 

caiman sanctuary. Crocodile Specialist Group 

Newsletter 9: 14. 
Condamin, M. (1974). Etude icologique du littoral 

guyanais en vue de la criation de riserves naturelles. 

Rapport de situation et d'dtude. ORSTOM, Cayenne. 

73 pp. (Unseen) 
Condamin, M. ( 1975). Pro jets de riserves naturelles sur 

le littoral guyanais. ORSTOM, Cayenne. 95 pp. 

(Unseen) 
Granville, J J. de (1975). Projets de reserves botaniques 

et forestiferes en Guyane. ORSTOM, Cayenne. 29 pp. 
Granville, J J. de (1986). Le projet de reserve biologique 

domaniale de Kaw. Pp. 161-178. In: Le Littoral 

Guyanais Fragility de I'Environnement, ler Congrfes 

Rdgional de la Sepanguy, Xe CoUoque Sepanrit 

Cayenne 27-29 avril 1985. 



Granville, JJ. de (1989). Priority conservation areas in 
French Guiana. ORSTOM, Cayenne. 24 pp. 

Granville, J.J. de and Sanit6, L.P. (1992). Areas 
protegidas y actividades humanas en Guyana 
Francesa. In: Amend, S. and T. (Eds), iEspacios sin 
habitantes? Parques nacionales de America del Sur. 
lUCN, Gland, Switzerland. Pp. 262-287. 

Groene, D. (1990). La foret et le milieu naturel et human 
de la guyane fran^aise. Bois et forets des tropiques. 
219:7-12. 

Hughes, S. (1992). France under pressure to conserve 
Guiana rainforest New Scientist 1805: 21. 

Johnson, T.H. (1988). Biodiversity and conservation in 
the Caribbean: Profiles of selected islands. ICBP 
Monograph 1. International Council for Bird 
Preservation, Cambridge, UK. 144 pp. 

Kempf, H. (1991). La Guyane en Sursis. Science et Vie. 
October. Pp. 65-73. 

Lewis, D. and Wood, K. (1991). Cayman k I'Orange. 
Geographical Magazine 65(6): 17-20. 

Pearce, F. (1991). Rainforest wrecked for satellite 
launches. New Scientist 1791: 9. 

Sabatier, D. and Pr6vost, M.-F. (1989). Quelques 
donndes sur la composition floristique et la diversite 
des peuplements forestiers de guyane fran^aise. Bois 
et forets des tropiques 219: 31-55. 

Sarrailh, J. (1990). Mise en valeur de I'ecosysteme 
forestier guyanais. Operation ECEREX. INRA,Paris 
and CTFT, Nogent-sur-Mame. 273 pp. 

Valeix, M. (n.d.). Les rdserves forestiferes. Rapport 
national sur I'amenagement des forets naturelles 
tropicales humides en Amerique Latine. 
Unpublished FAO report P. 38. 

Valeix, M. and Mauperin, M. (1990). Cinq siecles de 
I'histoire d'une parcelle de foret domaniale de la terre 
ferme d'amerique du sud. Bois et Forets du 
Tropiques 219: 13-29. 



262 



French Guiana 



ANNEX 

Deflnitions of protected area designations, as legislated, 

together with authorities responsible for their administration 



Title: Loi no. 76-629 relative a la protection 
de la nature 

Date: 10 July 1976 

Brief description: Provides definition of nature 
reserve, including biotope protection order 



Administrative authority: 

Nature Conservation 



Directorate for 



Designations: 

Biotope protection order (ArrSti de protection de 
biotope) Intended to protect the habitat of 

endangered species of flora and fauna, individual 
orders are declared by the prefect after consultation 
with the farmers' professional organisation 
(Chambre d6partmentale d'agriculture). Regulations 
vary but typically restrict human activities, 
particularly agricultural practices such as the use of 
pesticides and the burning of vegetation. 

Nature reserve No definition given 

Sources: Original legislation in French 



SUMMARY OF PROTECTED AREAS 



Map 
ref. 



Name of area 



lUCN management Area 

category (ha) 



Year 
notified 



State Biological Reserve 
1 Monts lucifers et Dekou Dekou 



vni 



108,000 



263 



GUYANA 



Area 214,970 sq. km 

Population 796,000(1990) 
Natural increase: 0.81% per annum 

Economic Indicators 

GDP: US$ 346 per capita (1987) 
GNP: US$ 340 per capita (1989) 

Policy and Legislation Guyana gained full 
independence from Britain in 1966, and the present 
constitution was instigated in 1979. 

The National Environmental Policy was formulated and 
approved in 1990 by Cabinet. The policy states that, in 
order to conserve and improve the environment, the 
government of Guyana will endeavour to maintain 
ecosystems and ecological processes essential for the 
functioning of the biosphere. The government will 
endeavour to preserve biological diversity, and to 
observe the principle of optimum sustainable yield in the 
use of renewable natural resources ecosystems, both on 
land and the sea. In addition, the government will ensure 
that conservation is treated as an integral part of the 
planning and implementation of development activities 
(S. Griffith, pers. comm., 1992). 

Guyana participates in the FAO Tropical Forest Action 
Plan (TFAP), an international strategy to promote the 
development of forestry sectors in participating 
countries, allowing greater contribution to national 
economy while maintaining conservation principles. 
The National Forestry Action Plan was completed in 
1989 by the Guyana Forestry Commission, and the 
Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA), 
to interpret the global designs of the TFAP into specific 
national needs (GFCATIDA, 1989). The plan comprises 
several projects, including a revision of forestry policy 
and legislation, and developing a protected area system 
(GFC/CIDA, 1989; Hanif and Ravndal, 1988). 
However, the National Forestry Action Plan does not 
take mangrove forests into account as it does not 
consider them to be part of the state forest domain. No 
measures are taken for their management or 
conservation (Hussain, 1990). Information on the extent 
of implementation of this plan is currendy not available. 

As a policy, Guyana aims to set aside not more than 10% 
of its forested areas, or 4 million ha, as a protected area 
system (D.A. Black, pers. comm., 1992). 

Two distinct poUcies regarding forestry use currently 
exist, one drafted by the State Planning Commission and 
the other by the Guyana Forestry Commission in 1988 
(GFC/CIDA, 1989; Hanif and Ravndal, 1988). From the 
perspective of the State Planning Commission, forest 
resources are to be used to provide a source of food and 
materials, and emphasis is placed on increasing 
exploitation without taking sustainable use into 



consideration (GFC/CIDA, 1989; W. King, pers. comm., 
1 99 1 ). The national forestry policy proposed by the GFC 
includes measures: to protect certain forested land with 
the objective of conserving genetic resources and 
promoting research; to protect mangrove forests; to 
establish a wildlife reserve and a bird sanctuary within 
die state forest; and to maintain natural habitat to protect 
endangered species. Increased forest resource 
exploitation is also emphasised, but in compUance with 
the protection objectives (Hanif and Ravndal, 1988). 
None of the objectives of the national forest policy has 
been implemented, although some conservation 
measures are incorporated into the National Forestry 
Action Plan as proposed projects (GFC/CIDA, 1989; 
Hanif and Ravndal, 1988). 

The Forest Act, 1973 defines state forest, and gives 
regulations for issuing leases and sales agreements for 
forest resources exploitation. The Forestry Service is 
declared responsible for implementing these regulations. 
In 1979, the Guyana Forestry Commission Act No. 2 
provided for the establishment of the Guyana Forestry 
Commission as the organisation responsible for 
administering forested land within state forest, replacing 
the Forestry Department. 

Three pieces of legislation deal with protected areas. The 
National Parks Commission Act, 1977 gives the 
National Parks Commission, within the Ministry of 
Public Works, responsibility for designating, 
maintaining and regulating the use of national parks and 
other protected areas (Hanif and Ravndal, 1988). A 
national park is established by publishing a notice in the 
newspaper following consultation with the local 
govCTnment authority. No legislation exists to provide 
for the establishment of protected area categories other 
than national park or biosphere reserve (Hanif and 
Ravndal, 1988). The other two pieces of legislation are 
the 1973 Laws of Guyana, Chapter 20:02 of which 
provides for the establishment of Kaieteur National Park, 
and the Draft Guyana Biosphere Reserves Bill, 1983. 

The land ownership rights of native communities was 
recognised by Act No. 6, 1976 which describes 65 areas 
to be set aside for the exclusive use of Amerindians 
(Persaud and Stewart, 1988). 

Legislation concerning environmental management and 
conservation is incomplete, and does not allow the 
objectives given in the national forestry policy to be 
carried out (GFC/CIDA, 1989). No clearly defined 
regulations regarding natural resource use are stated in 
any legislation, and the relevant legal measures that do 
exist are not fully implemented owing to the lack of 
institutional capability (Hanif and Ravndal, 1988; 
Persaud and Stewart, 1988). Three new legislative acts 
are currently in the jjrocess of being formulated; the 
Environmental Protection Bill, Fisheries Act, and the 



265 



Protected Areas of the World 



Wildlife Conservation Act. The Environmental 
Protection Bill reflects the underlying principles of the 
National Environmental Policy. It will provide for the 
preservation, protection and improvement of the 
environment, the prevention or control of pollution, and 
the assessment of the environmental impact of economic 
development and the sustainable use of natural resources 
(S. Griffith, pers. comm., 1992). 

Other pieces of environmental legislation which are still 
pending include the Guyana Biosphere Reserves Bill, 
1983, and the Conservation of Wildlife Bill, 1987 
(S. Griffith, pers. comm., 1992). 

The Guyana Agency for Health Sciences Education, 
Environment and Food Policy (GAHEF) was created 
under the Public Corporation Act in June 1988. 

Legislation is briefly reviewed in the Environmental 
Policy of Guyana (Anon., n.d.). According to this, a 
thorough review of all existing legislation relating to the 
environment should be undertaken as first priority, with 
a view to determining overlaps, inconsistencies and 
deficiencies. The necessary comprehensive legislative 
reforms should then be formulated. 

Environmental legislation is also reviewed as part of the 
Sector Plan fOT the Conservation of Tropical Forest 
Ecosystems, part of the Tropical Forestry Action Plan 
(Hanif andRavndal, 1988). 

International Activities Guyana has not signed 

the 1940 Convention on Nature Protection and Wildlife 
Preservation in the Western Hemisphere (Convenci6n 
sobre la Protecci6n de la Flora, de la Fauna y de las 
Bellezas Esc6nicas Naturales de los Pai'ses de America) 
(Western Hemisphere Convention). Guyana joined the 
Caribbean Conservation Association (CCA), a regional, 
non-governmental, non-profit organisation dedicated to 
promoting policies and practices which contribute to 
conservation, protection and wise use of natural and 
cultural resources, in 1976. Guyana has not yet signed 
the Convention for the Protection and Development of 
the Marine Environment of the Wider Caribbean Region 
(Cartagena Convention) and the related Protocol 
Concerning Co-operation in Combating Oil Spills in the 
Wider Caribbean Region and Protocol Concerning 
Specially Protected Areas and Wildlife (SPAW). 

Guyana is one of the eight countries with territory in the 
Amazon region, that signed the Amazon Cooperation 
Treaty (Tratado de Cooperaci6n Amaz6nica) on 3 July 
1978, an agreement to establish regulations for 
managing natural resources in Amazonia, and to propose 
conservation directed alternatives to the management of 
multinational projects. 

Guyana ratified the Convenfion Concerning the 
Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage 
(World Heritage Convention) on 30 June 1977, but no 
sites have been inscribed to date. Guyana is not a party 
to the Convention on Weflands of International 
Importance especially as Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar 



Convention), neither does it participate in the Unesco 
Man and the Biosphere Programme. 

Administration and Management Lack of 

environmental legislation has precluded the development 
of an institutional framework to administer natural 
resources in a structured process. No organisation 
specifically undertakes the conservation or management 
of natural resources. A number of different 
governmental departments participate in activities 
concerning natural resources and forested areas, but only 
within their field of interest. This has resulted in a lack 
of coordination, and, in some cases, conflict of interest 
between organisations (GFC/CEDA, 1989; Persaud and 
Stewart, 1988). In total, four ministries, two institutions 
and one state corporation have natural resource 
management responsibilities to some extent (Hanif and 
Ravndal, 1988). 

The Guyana Forestry Commission was created in 1979 
as part of the Ministry of Forest, and is the organisation 
responsible for administering forested land within the 
state forest. The GFC has been concerned almost 
exclusively with the administration of logging activities 
for the domestic and foreign maricet, and very little forest 
management is acoially practised (Hanif and Ravndal, 
1988). In January 1989 the GFC was placed under the 
responsibility of the Guyana Natural Resources Agency 
(GNRA), an institute that has been concerned primarily 
with mining activities and only touched on 
environmental issues as far as they related to their 
interests (GFC/CIDA, 1989). Inadequate funds, 
personnel and facilities have reduced the GFC's 
activities to the allocation of harvesting rights, the 
control of timber export and revenue collection. It has 
been unable to implement the conservation measures 
given in the National Forestry Policy it formulated 
(GFC/CIDA, 1989). 

The Ministry of Agriculture is responsible for 
administering state lands, comprising all land outside 
state forests, Amerindian land and privately-owned land 
(GFC/CIDA, 1989). 

The Guyana Agency for Health Sciences Education, 
Environment and Food Policy (GAHEF) (previously the 
Ministry of Medical Health, Environment and Food 
Policy) is responsible for the development of national 
environmental policy, environmental monitoring, 
coordination and training. The Environmental Division 
within GAHEF, which currently has a staff of 11, was 
created in 1988 (Hanif and Ravndal, 1988; S. Griffith, 
pers. comm., 1992). The main objectives of the 
Environmental Division are to develop environmental 
education programmes, and to monitor environmental 
activities of other organisations tiiroughout the country. 
GAHEF is advised by an Advisory Environmental 
Council, chaired by the Executive Chairman of the 
GAHEF, and comprising representatives from 
ministeries and agencies which have some responsibility 
for the environment (Anon, n.d.). 



266 



Guyana 



The National Parks Commission, which presently falls 
within the GAHEF (S. Griffith, pers. comm., 1992), is 
responsible for maintaining all national parks and city 
recreational parks, the zoo and botanical gardens in 
Georgetown. However, the Commission lacks the 
expertise to administer protected areas, and has a very 
limited budget which restricts its activities (Hanif and 
Ravndal, 1988). 

The two institutions involved with natural resource 
management are the University of Guyana, which is 
introducing a course in forestry management, and the 
Institute of Applied Science and Technology. The latter 
is the main research institute, with an Environmental 
Research and Information Unit providing advice to 
decision-makers regarding sustainable use of natural 
resources, conservation and management (Hanif and 
Ravndal, 1988). A state corporation, Demerara Timbers 
Ltd (formerly Demerara Woods Ltd), is also involved in 
resource management. The corporation has recently 
completed a management plan for activities in its timber 
concession, which takes into consideration the possible 
environmental consequences of logging. The plan was 
completed with the assistance of TROPENBOS, a Dutch 
ecological study unit presently operating within Guyana 
(S. Griffith, pers. comm., 1992). 

During 1988, the government changed its policy 
regarding non-governmental organisations (NGOs), and 
now supports their existence. There is currently one 
active NGO in Guyana, the Guyana Biodiversity Society 
which was formed in 1991 and is still in its infant stage 
(S. Griffith, pers. comm., 1992). No information is 
available concerning its activities. 

The lack of a capable administrative structure severely 
restricts the implementation of environmental 
legislation. Many institutions lack clear policies 
regarding their responsibilities and function in natural 
resource management (Hanif and Ravndal, 1988). A 
shortage of personnel is a problem for almost every 
sector, as the country has experienced large-scale 
emigration in recent years. The country's one national 
park is under constant pressiu"e from itinerant miners, 
who continue to exploit the mineral resources illegally 
(mainly gold and diamonds) from the streams and rivers. 
The larger forms of wildlife, both terrestrial and avian, 
have practically been exterminated by hunting parties 
which supply wild meat to dredging crews upstream of 
the waterfall (Hanif and Ravndal, 1988). 

The Programme for Sustainable Tropical Forestry in 
Guyana was proposed two years ago, but process has 
since been stalled due to lack of funds (Sullivan, 1990). 
Recently, the programme, due to run for five years, was 
adopted by the Global Environment Facihty, a fund 
established by the World Bank and the UN Development 
Programme (Pearce, 1992). The programme has four 
main objectives, including: establishment and 
maintenance of a wilderness reserve in the centre of the 
counU7; to maintain a segment of the forest in a pristine 
condition, to be zoned for scientific research; and 



establishment of an international research and training 
centre. 

As part of the Tropical Forestry Action Plan, a proposal 
for the conservation of forest ecosystems was form dated 
by Hanif and Ravndal (1988). Among the 
recommendations made to improve protected area 
management was the transfer of such responsibilities 
from the National Parks Commission, under the Ministry 
of Communications and Works, to a new Protected Area 
Commission, under the Ministry of Medical Health, 
Environment and Food Policy. The Ministry of 
Communications and Works has since had its name 
altered to the Guyana Agency for Health Sciences 
Education, Environment and Food Policy (S. Griffith, 
pers. comm., 1992). Hanif and Ravndal (1988) further 
recommend that to clarify governmental policy the two 
existing forest policies should be incorporated into one. 

Systems Reviews Guyana consists of five main 

biogeographical regions: coastal plain; sandy rolling 
lands; tropical savanna; Pre-Cambrian lowlands; and the 
Pakarima mountain range (GFC/CIDA, 1989; Persaud 
and Stewart, 1988). 

The coastal plain is a narrow alluvial belt, comprising 
around 5% of total land area, that runs the length of the 
coast, and extends inland from 15km to 60km (Hilty, 
1982; Persaud and Stewart, 1988). The plain lies 
between 0.5m and 1.0m below sea level, and is therefore 
subject to frequent flooding. Protection barriers have 
been erected along the coast since the days of Dutch 
colonisation in the late 16th century. Rainfall in the 
coastal region ranges from 2000mm to 2500mm. This is 
the most important agricultural region in the country , and 
over 90% of the population lives here (GFC/CIDA, 
1989; Hilty, 1982; Hussain, 1990). However, owing to 
the shifting of sand banks, large- scale erosion along the 
coast is taking place (Hussain, 1990). Coastal 
ecosystems are also threatened by pollution and 
exploitation of critical resources such as mangroves 
(Hanif and Ravndal, 1988). 

Little information is available on the current extent of 
mangrove vegetation in the country, but mangroves once 
stretched along the length of the coast. There has been a 
serious depletion of mangroves in the past 30 years, due 
to the joint effect of natural causes such as wave action 
and human use for fuel (Hanif and Ravndal, 1988; 
Hussain, 1990). Mangrove vegetation could play an 
important role in protecting the coastal region against 
erosion, except where wave action is very intense and 
the width of the mangrove belt very narrow. Although 
the national forest policy makes provision for their 
protection and regeneration, mangrove vegetation is not 
considered part of the state forest, and no conservation 
measures have been implemented (Hussain, 1990). 

Just south of the coastal plain, in the north-east of the 
country, sandy rolling plains stretch inland (Persaud and 
Stewart, 1988). This region is gently undulating with 
altitudes varying from 5m- 120m above sea level and 



267 



Protected Areas of the World 



vegetation types from savanna grasslands to forest. The 
white, sandy soil is permeable and low in nutrients, and 
forms the most vulnerable ecosystem in Guyana (Hilty, 
1982; Persaud and Stewart, 1988). 

Tropical savanna covers around 1 1 % of total land area, 
extending in the west from the southern part of the sandy 
rolling plains to the Rio Branco savannas of Brazil. The 
main grasslands are known as the Rupununi savannas, 
characterised by intense dry periods (Hanif and Ravndal, 
1988; Hilty, 1982). Two different savanna types may be 
distinguished within the Rupununi region: the north 
savanna, associated with a 6,000m deep rift valley; and 
the south savanna, associated with the Pre-Cambrian 
plain, and interspersed with rock formations up to 900m 
(Persaud and Stewart, 1988). The Pre-Cambrian lowland 
region extends from the coastal plain throughout the 
length of the country to the Akarai mountains in the 
south. The region is gently undulating and varies from 
90-120m in the north to 180-210m in the south, with 
intruding ridges 300-900m high which form waterfalls 
when they cross a river. The vegetation is dominated by 
tropical rain forest (Persaud and Stewart, 1988). 

The Pakaraima mountain region was created by the uplift 
of the Roraima formation and elevation varies from 
500m in the south of the range to the highest peak 
Mt Roraima (2,773m) in the north. The Pakaraima 
mountains, Pre-Cambrian lowlands and tropical savanna 
together comprise the interior region and account for 
84% of total land area (Hilty, 1982). The interior is very 
sparsely populated, principally by native Amerindian 
communities, which total around 5% of the papulation 
of the whole country (Persaud and Stewart, 1988). The 
government has set aside considerable areas of forested 
land for exclusive use of native communities, in which 
they maintain their traditional liveUhoods. The Forestry 
Action Plan includes proposals to train Amerindians in 
natural resource management, and to encourage the 
commercial production of non-timber forest products in 
both native and non-native communities (GFC/CIDA, 
1898). Major threats to forest ecosystems arise from 
logging, uncontrolled fires, soil erosion and over 
exploitation of wildlife resources (Hanif and Ravndal, 
1988). 

Around 76% of total land area remains forested (Persaud 
and Stewart, 1988; W. King, pers. comm., 1991). The 
extent of intact natural ecosystems results more from the 
low population density and lack of population pressure 
than from any systematic conservation planning 
(GFC/CIDA, 1989; K.S.FuUer, pers. comm., 1991). 
Development plans for the near future and large 
investments by multi-national timber and mineral 
corporations threaten to reduce the forest cover 
drastically (GFC/CIDA, 1989; Lewis, 1991). 

There is only one legally established protected area, 
Kaieteur National Park. A proposal exists to extend the 
park to 400,000ha (D.A. Black, pers. comm., 1992). This 
is controversial as it will compete with mining activities. 
There are no permanent park guards to prevent migration 



into the park, and the wildlife and ecosystems are under 
constant threat from the activities of gold and diamond 
miners (Hanif and Ravndal, 1988; K.S.FuUer, pers. 
comm., 1991). 

Sixty five Amerindian reservations have been set aside 
for native communities, covering a total area of 
1.39 million ha. Amerindian land is managed and 
regulated by the resident communities, and no formal 
distinction between production and protection areas is 
made (Persaud and Stewart, 1988; D.A. Black, pers. 
comm., 1991). However, more than twice the total land 
allotted to Amerindians has been conceded to foreign 
organisations for logging (K. Wood, pers. comm., 1991). 

A report dating from 1980 identifies two areas suitable 
for establishment as biosphere reserves, and a further 
two as World Heritage sites (Putney, 1980). However, 
there is no evidence that these recommendations have 
been acted on. 

An area of 300,(XX)ha of virgin tropical rain forest has 
been set aside as the Commonwealth-Government of 
Guyana Iwokrama Rain Forest Project, part of which 
will be kept as a wilderness preserve and part for research 
into sustainable use. This area currently lies within state 
forest but will be excluded from it by legislation in due 
course (D.A. Black, pers. comm., 1992). 

A new road, which borders Kaieteur National Park, and 
which runs from Brazil to the Guyana coast, is due to be 
opened by the end of 1992. It is feared that the road will 
pose a serious threat to the park. The government is 
handing out logging licences to landless farmers and 
gold miners for many forests which neighbour the park, 
and it is feared that the park will inevitably be invaded. 

Addresses 

Guyana Fwestry Commission (GFC), 1 Water Street, 
PO Box 1029, GEORGETOWN (Tel: 2672715; 
Tlx: GY 2262; Cable: Wallaba) 

Guyana Agency for Health Sciences Education, the 
Environment and Food Policy, Liliandaal, 
GREATER GEORGETOWN (Tel/Fax: 592 57523) 

Guyana Natural Resources Agency, 41 Brickdam and 
Boyle Place, Stabroek, PO Box 1074, 
GEORGETOWN (Tel: 56720, 66549. 56111; 
Tlx: 3010 GNRAGY) 

References 

Anon, (n.d.) Environmental Policy of Guyana. 8 pp. 
GFC/CIDA (1989). National forestry action plan 
1990-2000. Guyana Forestry Commission and 
Canadian International Development Agency, 
Kingston, Georgetown. 77 pp. 

Hanif, M. and Ravndal, A.V. (1988). Tropical Forestry 
Action Plan - Sector plan for the conservadon of 
tropical forest ecosystems. Institute of Applied 
Science and Technology and United Nationals 



268 



Guyana 



Development Programme, Georgetown. Draft. 32 pp. 

Hilty, S.L. (Ed.) (1982). Environmental profile on 
Guyana. Department of State and Agency for 
International Development, Washington DC, USA. 
1 14 pp. 

Hussain, M.Z. (1990). Restoration and expansion of the 
mangrove belt in Guyana. A report prepared for the 
Hydraulics Division of the Ministry of Agriculture 
of Guyana, by the FAO, Rome, Italy. 31 pp. 

Lewis, D. (1991). The rape of the rainforest. The 
Guardian. 1 November. P. 33. 

Pearce, F. (1992). Race to save Guyana's rainforests. 
New ScienHst 1813: 15. 



Persaud, C. and Stewart, M. (1988). Tropical Forestry 
Action Plan - Forestry and land use. Ministry of 
Works and Canadian International Development 
Agency, Georgetown. Draft. 32 pp. 

Putney, A.D. (1980). Guyana. Identification of Potential 
Biosphere Reserves and World Heritage Sites 
Natural). Report prepared for the Government of 
Guyana by the United Nations Educational, 
Scientific and Cultural Organisation. 43 pp. 

Sullivan, F. (1990). Proactive conservation in Guyana. 
WWF Reports, August/September. Pp. 10-12. 



SUMMARY OF PROTECTED AREAS 



Map National/international designations 
ret. Name of area 



lUCN management Area 

category (ha) 



Year 
notified 



National Park 
1 Kaieteur 



58,559 



1929 



269 



Protected Areas of the World 




Protected Area of Guyana 



270 



PARAGUAY 



Area 406,752 sq. km 

Population 4,277,000(1990) 
Natural increase: 2.69% per annum 

Economic Indicators 

GDP: US$ 1,155 per capita (1987) 
GNP: US$ 1,030 per capita (1989) 

Policy and Legislation The 1%7 Constitution was the 
first in Paraguayan history to acknowledge the 
government's responsibility to protect the environment 
It declares that the state will conserve forest and other 
renewable natural resources in the country, and will 
establish regulations for their rational use. Since this 
declaration, there has been a profusion of legal measures 
regarding environmental protection. No coherent 
conservation poUcy has been stated, but constitutional 
provisions have precedence over all other laws (Anon., 
1985). 

The first national legislation for natural resource 
protection was the 1973 Forestry Law (Ley Forestal) 
No. 422 which declares it in the public interest to protect 
and conserve forest resources. Objectives include 
conserving and improving forested land, protecting 
watersheds, and incorporating the forestry sector into 
national economic development Definitions are given 
for permanent, protected and special forest reserves 
(Annex). The exploitation of resources in these areas is 
decided by the state. The 1973 Forestry Law makes 
provision for the creation of the National Forestry 
Service (Servicio Forestal Nacional) (SFN) within the 
Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock (Ministerio de 
Agricultura y Ganaderia), and an Advisory CouncU 
(Consejo Asesor). The Council comprises 
representatives from the Ministry of Agriculture and 
Livestock and other governmental organisations with 
interests in rural affairs, to assess the activities of the 
SFN and ensure compliance with objectives stated in the 
legislation. 

Regulation of the Forestry Law (Reglamento de la Ley 
Forestal), Decree No. 1 1.681, 1975 gives further details 
of natural resource protection and management. 
Provision is made for the creation of the Department of 
Forest, National Parks and Wildlife Management 
(Departamento de Manejo de Bosques, Parques 
Nacionales y Vida Silvestre) within the SFN, to be 
responsible for natural resources, including the selection 
and administration of national parks. AU responsibilities 
assigned to former governmental organisations for forest 
and wildlife administration, are transferred to the SFN. 
The 1975 Regulation refers to the creation and 
administration of national parks, but does not give a 
detailed designation. 

Decree No. 18.831, Environment Protection Law 
(Protecci6n del Medio Ambiente), 1986 reinforces the 



principle of the 1 973 National Forestry Law that rational 
resource use is in the public interest. Both private and 
state-owned land is subject to regulation under this Law 
which declares protected forests and natural reserved 
zones inviolable, and gives general regulations for 
natural resource conservation. A lOOm-belt of protected 
forest is to be left on both sides of rivers, streams, water 
sources and lakes, and may be increased according to the 
importance of the water source. 

In 1987, Decree No. 19.165 provided for the creation of 
an organisation specifically responsible for protected 
area management, namely the National Parks and 
Wildlife Office (Direcci6n de Parques Nacionales y 
Vida Silvestre) (DPNYS). The DPNVS is under the State 
Subsecretariat of Natural Resources and the 
Environment (Subsecretaria de Estado de Recursos 
Naturales y Medio Ambiente) of the Ministry of 
Agriculture and Livestock. 

The lack of clear definitions for protected area 
designations in national legislation gives rise to 
confusion over regulations and management 
(DPNVS/CDC, 1990; Wetterberg et ai, 1985). Decrees 
establishing individual protected areas may give more 
details of their designation, but a single legislative act, 
to coordinate protected area regulations and state 
national conservation objectives, is needed (C. Acevedo, 
pers. comm., 1991). 

International Activities Paraguay signed the 

Convention on Nature Protection and Wildlife 
Preservation in the Western Hemisphere (Convenci6n 
sobre la Protecci6n de la Flora, de la Fauna y de las 
BeUezas Escenicas Naturales de los Paises de America) 
(Western Hemisphere Convention) in 1940, which has 
since been ratified. Paraguay ratified the Convention 
Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and 
Natural Heritage (World Heritage Convention) on 28 
April 1988. No sites have been inscribed to date. 

In June 1991 an agreement was signed between the 
Mois6s Bertoni Foundation, the Paraguayan 
government, the United Nations and The Nature 
Conservancy (TNC) in the United States for the purchase 
of 57,510ha of tropical forest. This is known as 
Mbaracayu Natural Forest Reserve (Reserva Natural 
Forestal Mbaracayu) and does not form part of the 
national system. Three of Paraguay's protected areas 
participate in TNC's Parks in Peril Program (Acevedo 
and Pinazzo, 1992). 

Administration and Management Protected 

areas come under three administrative groups according 
to land tenure: state-owned; privately-owned; and 
others, primarily Itaipu Binatcional Company (C. 
Acevedo and J. Pinazzo, pers. comm., 1991). 



271 



Protected Areas of the World 



Since 1987, protected areas on state-owned land have 
been the responsibility of the DPNVS, as described in 
the legislation. Prior to the creation of the DPNVS, 
protected areas were included in forestry administration 
and were the responsibility of the SFN. Forests remain 
under the SFN, whose functions include formulating 
forest policies, conducting inventories, and regulating 
conservation of forest resources. It comprises a central 
directorate and technical department, and district 
forestry units (distritos forestales) and Centres of 
Training and Forest Research (Centros de Capacitacion 
e Investigacidn Forestal) throughout the country. Each 
district forestry unit has a regulation enforcement service 
comprising inspectors, sub-inspectors and two levels of 
forest guards. 

The DPNVS comprises five departments, one for each 
area of responsibility: protected area administration and 
development; wildlife; environmental education and 
information; Conservation Data Centre; and biological 
inventories (C. Acevedo, pers. comm., 1991; E. 
Bragayrac and R. Villamayor, pers. comm., 1991). At 
the local level, there is a total of eight administrators and 
36 park guards working in maintenance and regulation 
enforcement in protected areas (E. Bragayrac and R. 
Villamayor, pers. comm., 1991). 

The Conservation Data Centre (Centre de Datos para la 
Conservaci6n)(CDC) was established in 1986, to collect 
and process information on biological diversity and the 
situation of protected areas. At its creation, the CDC was 
an office of the Minister of Agriculture and Livestock, 
but became a department within the DPNVS in 1990. It 
provides information to national and international 
conservation organisations. 

Four protected areas that were established by the Itaipu 
Hydroelectric Project in 1983 are managed by the Itaipu 
Binational Company. The areas have been declared by 
law and legally designated as biological reserves and 
biological refuges. There is little coordination between 
tiiis management and the DPNVS (DPNVS/CDC, 1990). 

Management of privately-owned reserves is the concern 
of the land owner, and may take place in conjunction 
with non-governmental organisations (NGOs) or 
cooperatives. The areas do not receive protection by 
means of a legal designation (C. Acevedo and J. Pinazzo, 
pers. comm ., 199 1 ). One of the largest NGOs, the Moises 
Bertoni Foundation for the Conservation of Nature 
(Fundacion Moises Bertoni para la Conservaci6n de la 
Naturaleza), was established in 1988 to support 
conservation and protected areas, and is actively 
involved with the management of private reserves. The 
foundation works closely with international 
organisations and the government, to secure areas of land 
for protection, particularly in the eastern region (Gauto, 
1989). 

Systems Review Paraguay is a fiat, land-locked 

country with many waterways, all of which drain into the 
Parani River and on to the Rio Plata system, hence 



providing access to the Atlantic Ocean (Ri'os and 
Zardini, 1989). The highest point in the country does not 
exceed 800m (DPNVS/CDC, 1990). 

The two main biogeographical regions are divided by the 
Paraguay Riven the western region or Chaco and the 
eastern region. The climate is continental sub-tropical, 
with precipitation varying from 400mm in the extreme 
north-west of the Chaco, to 18(K)mm in the eastern 
region. 

The Chaco is a large, alluvial plain, extending over 
247,000 sq. km with extreme variation from humid to 
dry conditions. Much of the area is flooded and swampy 
due to impermeable subsoils (DPNVS/CDC, 1990). The 
eastern region covers 159,(XX) sq. km and is the centre of 
most economic activities in the country, particularly 
agriculture and forestry (CDC, 1990; Rios and Zardini, 
1989). Most of this region was once covered in warm, 
moist forest (Holdridge, 1969), or subtropical humid 
forest (Hueck, 1978). Forests cover 45% the total land 
area, 33% of the eastern region, and 46% of the Chaco 
(Anon., n.d.). 

Few studies have been done on biological diversity, and 
tiiose tiiat exist are now very old (DPNVS/CDC, 1990). 
Holdridge (1969) identified two life zones; temf)erate 
humid forest and temperate dry forest. Hueck (1978) 
classified the country into four vegetation regions: 
central Chaco forest, including the western Chaco; 
eastern Chaco forest extending from dry to semi-humid; 
deciduous subtropical and mesophytic forest including 
the eastern region near Brazil; and park land along the 
eastern margin of the Chaco (SNF, 1982). 

Population distribution is very unequal, with 98% 
concentrated in the eastern region, and only 2% in the 
Chaco (Kohler, 1989). As a result, the eastern region has 
been substantially deforested and suffered general 
ecological degradation (Kohler, 1989). By the late 
1980s, 63% of the population still Uved in rural areas, 
and agriculture accounted for 43% of the employment 
(Anon., n.d.). Many changes have taken place since the 
coup in February 1988 which ended the Strossner 
dictatorship. Most significandy , additional land was put 
under production, and many forests have been severely 
overexploited as a result (Anon., n.d.). 

Natural resource protection dates from the 1931 Rural 
Code (C6digo Rural), which prohibited the hunting of 
many wildlife species. Areas have been protected under 
the designation "reserve" since 1945, when a decree was 
passed declaring reserved zones along all roads in the 
country (DPNVS/CDC, 1990; Villamayor, 1988). 
Several other reserved zones were subsequently formed, 
but suffered modifications and no longer exist 
(Villamayor, 1988). It was several years before a 
governmental organisation was established to manage 
protected areas (DPNVS/CDC, 1990). 

In 1966, the first area of sufficient size to fulfil its 
protection objectives was created under the designation 



272 



Paraguay 



of faunal reserve (DPNVS/CDC, 1990). In 1973, the 
Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock initiated the legal 
process of protecting areas, passing decrees for the 
creation of several national parks. The National Forestry 
Service and the first protected forest were also created 
in 1973 (Villamayor, 1988). Following the creation of 
the DP^^VS, the majority of protected areas established 
were designated national parks. A national conservation 
system (sistema nacional de conservaci6n) was declared, 
unifying protected areas under the one management 
organisation (Villamayor, 1988). Since 1987, private 
reserves have been created, particularly in the eastern 
region. They make a significant contribution to the 
national system of protected areas (DPNVS/CDC, 
1990). 

By 1990, a total of 2.75% of the total land area was under 
protecuon (DPNVS/CDC, 1990; Villamayor, 1988). 
Two new national parks were created during 1990 (E. 
Bragayrac, pers. comm., 1991). Four more protected 
areas may also be included in the system, although they 
are managed by the Itaipii Binational Company; two 
biological reserves and two biological refuges. 
However, the lack of a clear definition of these 
designations at the governmental level has impeded the 
development of the areas in compUance with national 
conservation objectives (DPNVS/CDC, 1990). 

Paraguay participates in the Latin American Network 
programme (Red Latinoamericana de Cooperaci6n 
Tecnica en Parques Nacionales, otras Areas Protegidas, 
Flora y Fauna Silvestres) through the DPNVS (FAO, 
n.d.). Following the definition given by the FAO Latin 
American Network programme, Paraguay did not have 
a national system of protected areas by 1986, but was in 
the process of developing one (Ormazibal, 1988). 

The distribution of protected areas is very unequal. In the 
Chaco, 4.45% of the total area is protected, whereas in 
the eastern region, only 0. 1 3% is protected (Villamayor, 
1988). Therefore, the national system does not protect 
all representative ecosystems (DPNVS/CDC, 1990; 
Ri'os and Zardini, 1989). 

Reviews of the protected area system have been carried 
out by Villamayor (1988) and the DPNVS and the CDC 
together (1990), the latter concentrating on potential 
protection for the eastern region. The main problem is 
the lack of clear definitions of the designations used 
(DPNVS/CDC, 1990). Without standard criteria for 
classification and regulations that reflect a national 
conservation objective, the establishment of an effective 
national system is prevented (DPNVS/CDC, 1990). 

Addresses 

Servicio Forestal Nacional, Tacuary 443 c/ 25 de Mayo, 
Edificio Patria, StoPiso, ASUNCION (Tel: 443971) 

Direcci6n de Parques Nacionales y Vida Silvestre, 25 de 
Mayo 640 c/Antequera, Edificio Garantia Piso 12 A, 
ASUNCION (Tel: 494914/495568; FAX: 495568) 



Subsecretaria de Recursos Naturales y Medio Ambiente, 
Ministerio de Agricultura, Tacuary 443 c/25 de 
Mayo, Edificio Patria 4to Piso, ASUNCION (Tel: 
492901) 

Centre de Datos Para la Conservacion de Paraguay 
(DPNVS/CDC), 25 de Mayo 640 c/ Antequera, 
Edificio Garantia, Piso 12B, CC 3303, ASUNCION 
(Tel: 498089; FAX: 212386/495568) 

Fundaci6n Mois6s Bertoni para la Conservacion de la 
Naturaleza, 25 de Mayo 2140, CC 714, ASUNCION 
(Tel: 25638; FAX: 212386) 

References 

Acevedo, C. and Pinazzo, J. (1992). Areas protegidas 
paraguayas y su relacion con la poblacion. In: 
Amend, S. and Amend, T. (Eds) ^Espacios sin 
Habilantes? Parques Nacionales de America del 
Sur. International Union for the Conservation of 
Nature and Natural Resources and Editorial Nueva 
Sociedad,Caracas. Pp. 291 6304. 

Anon, (n.d.) Paraguay: a forestry sector profile. Pp. 
11-36. 

Anon. (1985). Environmental profile of Paraguay. 
IIED/Technical Planning Secretariat/US-AID, 
Washington, DC. 162 pp. 

SFN (1982). Plan de manejo: Parque Nacional YbycuL 
Servicio Forestal Nacional, Ministerio de 

Agricultura y Ganaderia. 53 pp. 

DPNVS/qDC (1990). Areas prioritarias para la 
conservacidn en la Regidn oriental del Paraguay. 
Centro de Datos para la Conservacion, Asuncion. 
99 pp. 

FAO (n.d.). La Red Latinoamericana de Cooperacion 
Tecnica en Parques Nacionales, Otras Areas 
Protegidas, Flora y Fauna Silvestres. Oficina 
Regional de la FAO para America Latina y el Caribe, 
Santiago, Chile. 8 pp. 

Gauto, R. (1989). Private conservation programs in 
Paraguay. Conservation Biology 3(2): 120. 

Holdridge, L.R. (1969). Estudio ecologico de los 
bosques de la regi6n Oriental del Paraguay. Project 
SF/PAR/1 5. Working document No. l.FAO. 19pp. 
(Unseen) 

Hueck, K. (1978). Los bosques de Sudamdrica. 
Ecologia, comp)osici6n e importancia economica. 
Sociedad Alemana de Cooperacion Tecnica. 
(Unseen) 

Kohler, V. (1989). Cambios en el uso de las tierras y sus 
consecuencias ambientales en el Paraguay. 
Cuadernos forestales No. 1. Facultad de Ingeniera 
Agronomica, Universidad Nacional de Asuncion. 
21pp. 

Ormazdbal, C. (1988). Sistemas nacionales de dreas 
silvestres protegidas en America Latina. Basado 
en los resultados del taller sobre Planificaci6n de 
Sistemas Nacionales de Areas Silvestres 
Protegidas, Caracas, Venezuela, 9-13 junio 
1986. Proyecto FAO/PNUMA sobre manejo de 
^eas silvestres, ^eas protegidas y vida silvestre 
en Am6rica Latina y el Caribe. Oficina Regional de 



273 



Protected Areas of the World 



la FAO para America Latina y el Caribe, Santiago, 

Chile. 205 pp. 
Rios, E. and Zardini, E. (1989). Conservation of 

biological diversity in Paraguay. Conservation 

Biology 2(2): 118-119. 
Villamayor Oru6, R. (1988). Parques nacionales del 

Paraguay. Document presented at the lUCN General 



Assembly, San Jose, Costa Rica, February 1988. 
29 pp. 
Wetterberg, G., Jorge Padua, M.T., Tresinari, A. and 
Ponce, C.F. (1985). Decade of Progress for South 
American Parks 1974-1984. National Park Service, 
United States Department of the Interior, 
Washington DC. Pp. 42^4. 



ANNEX 

Deflnitions of protected area designations, as legislated, 

together with authorities responsible for their administration 



Title: Ley Forestal (Forestry Law) No. 422 
Date: 22 November 1973 

Brief description: Declares it in the public 

interest to protect and improve forest resources in the 
country and estabUshes regulations for their use. 

Administrative Authority: Under provision of 
this law, the Servicio Forestal Nacional (National 
Forestry Service) is created as part of the Ministerio 
de Agricultura y Ganaderia (Ministry of Agriculture 
and Livestock) to be responsible for natural resource 
administration. 

Designations: 

Bosque de Produccidn (Production Forest) 

Forested areas suitable for annual or periodical 
extractive use 

Bosque Protector (Protection Forest) Forested 
area protection of which is important for water 
regulation, soil stabilisation, public health, national 
defence or as a refuge for protected floral or faunal 
species. 



Bosque Especial (Special Forest) Forested area 
that is to be conserved for scientific, educational, 
historical or touristic reason. 

Source: Original legislation 

Title: Reglamento de la Ley Forestal No. 422 

Date: 6 January 1975 

Brief description: Giving further details of 

forest resource management and use. Makes first 
reference to national parks at the national level and 
assigns administrative responsibility. 

Administrative Authority Servicio Forestal 

Nacional (National Forestry Service), under the 
Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganaderia (Ministry of 
Agriculture and Livestock) is responsible for 
selecting and administering national parks. 

Designations: 

Parque Nacional (National Park) An area 

given inviolable protection and administered 
exclusively by the National Forestry Service. All 
natural resource exploitation is prohibited. 

Source: Original legislation 



274 



SUMMARY OF PROTECTED AREAS 



Paraguay 



Map 


Nationallinternational designations 


ref. 


Name of area 




National Parks 


1 


Caaguazu 


2 


Cerro Cora 


3 


Defensores del Chaco 


4 


Teniente Encisco 


5 


Tinfunque 


6 


Ybycui 


7 


Ybytyruzu 


8 


Ypacarai 




Biological Reserves 


9 


Itabo 


10 


Limo'y 




Biological Refuges 


11 


Mbaracayu 


12 


Tatiyupi 




Forest Reserve 


13 


Capiivary 




Protection Forests 


14 


Nacunday 


15 


Yaku'y 



lUCN management Area 

category (ha) 



Year 
notified 



II 


16,000 


1976 


n 


12,038 


1976 


n 


780,000 


1975 


n 


40,000 


1980 


II 


280,000 


1966 


n 


5,000 


1973 


n 


24,000 


1990 


n 


16,000 


1990 


V 


11,260 


1983 


V 


14,332 


1983 


V 


1,356 


1983 


V 


2,245 


1983 



vni 



IV 

rv 



13,500 



1,000 

1,000 



1987 

1975 
1973 



275 



Protected Areas of the World 




Protected Areas of Paraguay 



276 



PERU 



Area 1^85^20 sq. km 

Population 22 1 ,550,000 (1990) 
Natural increase: 2.5% per annum 

Economic Indicators 

GDP: USS 2,183 per capita (1987) 
GNP: USS 1,010 per capita (1989) 

Policy and legislation A commitment to preserve 

the environment is given in the National Constitution of 
1979, which states that all Peruvians "have the right to 
live in a healthy environment, which is in ecological 
equilibrium, and suitable for the development of life and 
preservation of the landscape and nature". 
Environmental protection is the responsibiUty of all 
citizens, and the state has the obligation to prevent and 
control environmental pollution. 

In 1986 the government began to participate in the FAO 
Tropical Forestry Action Plan (TFAP), an international 
strategy for maximising the contribution of forestry 
sectors to national economic and social development 
while maintaining conservation principles. The National 
Programme for Forestry Action (Programa Nacional de 
Acci6n Forestal) was established by Supreme Decree 
No. 016-88-AG in 1988 to interpret the global designs 
of TFAP into a specific national action plan which had 
been drawn up in 1987 (DGFF, 1987). International 
assistance has been received for implementing many of 
the projects included in the national action plan, such as 
reforestation and education (DGFF, 1991). 

In 1988, a proposal for a national conservation strategy 
was drawn up by a nongovernmental organisation, the 
Peruvian Foundation for Nature Conservation 
(Fundacidn Peruana para la Conservacion de la 
Naturaleza) (FPCN), to preserve genetic diversity, 
maintain essential ecosystems and ensure sustainable 
use of natural resources. Recommendations include a 
revision of conservation legislation and education 
campaigns to increase public awareness (FPCN, 1988). 
Following this, the government established the National 
Commission (Comisi6n Nacional) by Presidential 
Decree on 5 June 1989, comprising representatives from 
various sectors and the international community, to 
detail and implement the national strategy. The final 
document. Basis for a National Conservation Strategy 
and S ustainable Development (Bases para una Estrategia 
Nacional de Conservaci6n y DesarroUo Sustenable) was 
submitted to the government in 1991 (E. Cardich, pers. 
comm., 1991;G. SudrezdeFreitas, pers. comm., 1991). 
This plan has not been put into action due to lack of 
funds, but it is currendy being reproduced in certain 
regions across the country in the form of regional 
conservation strategies (estrategias regionales para la 
conservaci6n)(G.SuirezdeFreitas, pers. comm., 1991). 



Regulations on natural resource use were first applied 
between 1956 and 1957 by declaring certain areas as 
national forests (bosques nacionales), within which only 
the state, or institutions granted permission by the state, 
may exploit natural resources. Congressional Law No. 
1 3694, 1 96 1 provided for the creation of the first national 
park, and marked the beginning of a legal system for 
designating different categories of protected areas, from 
controlled exploitation to inviolable protection. The 
Agrarian Reform Law (Ley de Reforma Agraria) 
No. 17716, 1969 declared that "national parks, national 
forests, forest reserves and archaeological zones 
declared by law cannot be considered for land 
distribution under agrarian reform." 

Legal relations between indigenous peoples and 
protected areas are established by the Law of Native 
Communities and Agrarian Development for the Jungle 
and Forest Edge (Ley de Comunidades Nativas y 
DesarroUo Agrario de las Regiones de Selva y Ceja de 
Selva), Decree Uw No. 20653, 1974 and No. 22175, 
1978. This law recognises land rights of native 
communities and, where these overlap with protected 
areas, allows them to continue their activities as long as 
these are in keeping with the principles of protected area 
regulations (FAO, 1975; Rios el al., 1986). 

Current regulations for natural resource use and 
definitions of protected area designations in effect were 
established by the Forestry and Wildlife Law (Ley 
Forestal y de Fauna), Decree Law No. 21147 (1975). 
Three management categories of forest reserves and four 
of protected areas, the latter called conservation units 
(unidades de conservacion), are defined (see Annex). 
Individual conservation units are to be declared by 
supreme decree. Provision is made for the expropriation 
of privately-owned land by the state where it is required 
for the estabUshment of new conservation units. The 
Ministry of Agriculture (Ministerio de Agricultura) is 
responsible for all natural resources and protected areas. 

Further details of protected area management relating to 
the 1975 Forestry and Wildlife Law are given in the 
Regulation of Conservation Units (Reglamento de 
Unidades de Conservaci6n) Supreme Decree 
No. 160-77- AG of March 1977. Responsibility for 
formulating conservation policies and administering the 
conservation units is given to the General Directorate of 
Forestry and Fauna (Direccidn General Forestal y de 
Fauna) (DGFF), within the Ministry of Agriculture. The 
four categories of conservation units, as defined in the 
1975 Forestry law, collectively comprise the National 
System of Conservation Units (Sistema Nacional de 
Unidades de Conservaci6n) (SINUC). 

The Regulation of Conservation units requires that a 
management plan (plan maestro) be drawn up for each 
conservation unit and for SINUC as a whole. A system 



277 



Protected Areas of the World 



of zonation is outlined, whereby each protected area is 
subdivided into zones according to the fragility of the 
ecosystems present. No conservation unit is to be used 
for recreational purposes until zonation has been 
implemented (Rios etal., 1986). A SINUC advisory 
board is established, and provision made for the 
formation of local conservation unit committees. The 
forestry police (policia forestal) are responsible for 
enforcing protected area regulations (Rios et at, 1986; 
Wetterberg, 1985). Two further categories of protected 
area, communal reserve (reserva comunal) and hunting 
reserve (coto de caza), are provided in the Regulation of 
the Conservation of Hora and Wildlife (Reglamento de 
Conservaci6n de Flora y Fauna Silvestre), Supreme 
Decree No. 15877 AG of March 1977 also relating to the 
Forestry and Wildlife Law (see Annex). A third 
designation, reserved zone (zona reservada), is 
mentioned but is to be used only as a transitional or 
provisional measure until studies allow a permanent 
designation to be assigned. Reserved zone is not a 
management category (Injoque et al., 1991; Suirez de 
Freitas, 1990a; Su^z de Freitas, pers. comm., 1991). 

The Organic Law of the Agrarian Sector (Ley Orgdnica 
del Sector Agrario) No. 2 1 of April 1981 provides for the 
creation of a decentralised public body, the National 
Forestry and Fauna Institute (Instituto Nacional Forestal 
y de Fauna) (INFOR), to study agroforestry and wild 
fauna, and to implement projects to ensure the rational 
use and conservation of natural resources. Later in 1 98 1 , 
an agreement was reached between INFOR and the 
DGFF whereby the two institutions jointly managed 
conservation units. The division of administrative 
responsibilities and the functions of both INFOR and 
DGFF at the national and regional level are given in this 
organic law. 

Although the 1975 Forestry Law, and regulations 
pertaining to it, still form the basis of all legislation 
regarding natural resource protection, by the mid 1980s 
it became clear that there was no coherent legal 
framework by which to implement governmental 
policies, owing to the large number of acts passed by 
different sectors with interests in resource use (DGFF, 
1987). Major restructuring of the Agrarian Sector of the 
Ministry of Agriculture and changes in resource 
management responsibilities took place between 1987 
and 1990. 

The second Organic Law of the Agrarian Sector, No. 424 
of January 1987, gives the DGFF sole responsibility for 
forest and wildlife resource management at the national 
level, and created agrarian units (unidades agrarias) to 
represent the Ministry of Agriculture at regional level. 
INFOR was dissolved and all responsibilities previously 
assigned to this institute and to its regional offices were 
incorporated into the DGFF and the agrarian units, 
respectively. Provision was made for the creation of 
three Vice-Ministers, including the Vice-Minister of 
Natural Resources and Rural Development (Vice 
Ministro de Recursos Naturales y DesarroUo Rural) at a 



high level in central administration to whom the DGFF 
is itself responsible. 

In March 1990, Supreme Decree No. 010-90-AG made 
provision for the creation of the National System of State 
Protected Natural Areas (Sistema Nacional de Areas 
Naturales Protegidas por el Estado) (SINANPE), 
comprising SINUC and all other categories of state 
protected area such as: national forest (bosque nacional), 
protection forest (bosque de proteccidn), communal 
reserve and hunting reserve. Provision is also made for 
the creation of the National Programme of National 
Parks and Other State Protected Areas (Programa 
Nacional de Parques Nacionales y Otras Areas 
Protegidas), known simply as National Parks-Peru 
(Parques Nacionales-Peni), to be the organisation 
responsible for managing SINANPE (Injoque et al., 
1991). 

The Organic Law No. 424 was replaced in 1990 by the 
Law of Organisation and Function of the Agrarian Sector 
(Ley de Organizaci6n y Funciones del Sector Agrario) 
No. 565, which finalised the structure of the public 
agrarian sector and the Ministry of Agriculture. The 
positions held by the three Vice-Ministers are abolished 
and their functions amalgamated into one, the 
Vice-Minister of Agriculture (Vice Ministro de 
Agricultura), who now supervises the DGFF. A 
regulation of this Law, Supreme Decree 
No. 048-900-AG, (1990), ratified the creauon of 
National Parks-Peru and declared the DGFF responsible 
for its administration and management (DGFF, 1991; 
Injoque et al., 1991). 

On 7 September 1990, the Environment and Natural 
Resources Code (C6digo del Medio Ambiente y Los 
Recursos Naturales) Legislative Decree No. 613, first 
proposed in March 1983, was passed to simplify the legal 
situation by consolidating all previous policies regarding 
conservation and resource use into one act. The 
objectives of protected areas are restated and native 
communities' land ownership rights acknowledged. 
Their participation in managing natural resources is 
encouraged where such communities are found within 
protected areas, but natural resource use is limited to 
comply with the conservation objectives of the 
designation (Injoque et al., 1991; G. Suirez de Freitas, 
pers. comm., 199 1 ; ). The Code does not replace existing 
environmental legislation but draws on past experience 
to form a coherent national management plan. The Code 
also repeals a previous law that seriously threatened the 
integrity of the Amazon region, the Law for the Basis of 
Rural Development of the Peruvian Amazon (Ley de 
Bases para el DesarroUo Rural de la Amazonia) No. 
24994 of 1989, which promoted extensive agricultural 
development in the Amazon basin (Su^ez de Freitas, 
1990c; G. Su^ez de Freitas, pers. comm., 1991). 

Environmental legislation has not been able to stop 
informal development, such as spontaneous agricultural 
settlement, which threatens the ecosystems of many 
regions (Ferreyros, 1988; SuSrez de Freitas, 1990d). 



278 



Peru 



Threats to natural resource protection also arise from 
within the legal system itself. The mechanisms for 
establishing conservation units by supreme decree, as 
provided by the 1975 Fores&y and Wildlife Law, can be 
undermined by laws of other sectors such as fisheries, 
mining or tourism because a supreme decree does not 
carry as much legislative weight as a law. A simple 
method of establishing conservation units by law is 
sought (Ferreyros, 1988). 

International Activities Peru signed the 

Convention on Nature Protection and Wildlife 
Preservation in the Western Hemisphere (Convencion 
sobre la Proiecci6n de la Flora, de la Fauna y de las 
BeUezas Esc6nicas Naturales de los Pai'ses de America) 
(Western Hemisphere Convention) in 1940, and it has 
since been ratified. The Convention for the Conservation 
and Management of Vicufla (Convenio para la 
Conservacion y Manejo de la Vicufla) was signed in 
1979 by Bolivia, Chile, Ecuador, Argentina and Peru. 

Three agreements which deal exclusively with 
protecting Amazon regions have been signed by Peru. 
The Agreement for the Conservation of Fauna and Flora 
of the Amazon Regions of Peru and Brazil (Acuerdo para 
la Conservacion de la Fauna y Flora de los Territories 
Amazonicos de la Repiiblica del Peru y de la Repiiblica 
Federativa del Brazil) was signed in 1975; a similar 
agreement with Colombia in 1979; and the Amazon 
Cooperation Treaty (Tratado de Cooperaci6n 
Amaz6nica) on 3 July 1978. The latter o-eaty was signed 
by the eight countries with land in the Amazon Basin to 
establish regulations for managing natured resources and 
to propose conservation directed alternatives to the 
management of multinational projects. 

Peru ratified the Convention concerning the Protection 
of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (World 
Heritage Convention) in 1982. Four natural sites were 
inscribed in 1983, 1985, 1987 and 1990. Peru 
participates in the Unesco Man and Biosphere 
Programme, having had three biosphere reserves 
accepted in 1977, and signed the Convention on 
Wetlands of International Importance especially as 
Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar Convention) and has three 
sites inscribed. 

Peru participates in the Latin American Network 
programme (Red Latinoamericana de Cooperacion 
T6cnica en Parques Nacionales, Otras Areas Protegidas, 
Flora y Fauna Silvestres) through the DGFF (FAO, n.d.). 

Administration and Management The Ministry 

of Agriculture has been vested with the ultimate 
responsibiUty for managing natural resources since the 
1950s. The first institute created within it specifically for 
this purpose was the Forestry and Hunting Service 
(Servicio Foreslal y de Caza) in 1961. The Ministry of 
Agriculture took on its present structure with the passing 
of Decree Law No. 565 of April 1 990. It has a broad field 
of responsibiUty and function covering agricultural and 
non-agriculniral land, forests and protected areas. The 



1975 Forests and WildU fe Law and its related Regulation 
assigned responsibility for conserving forest and wildlife 
resources and regulating their use, to the General 
Directorate of Forestry and Fauna (DGFF) within the 
Ministry of Agriculture. 

Until the 1987 Organic Law took effect, protected area 
management was carried out by the DGFF together wiUi 
the National Forestry and Fauna Institute (INFOR). In 
1987 INFOR was dissolved and the DGFF took over its 
responsibiUties under the Vice -Minister of Agriculture 
(Injoque e/ a/., 1991). 

Within the DGFF are five sub-directorates, including the 
National Parks Directorate (Direccion de Parques 
Nacionales), the Flora and Wildlife Directorate 
(Direcci6n de Flora y Fauna Silvestres) and the Forest 
Management and Reforestation Directorate (Direcci6n 
de Manejo Forestal y Reforeslacion) (DGFF, 1987). 
National Parks-Peru was established within the DGFF to 
improve the administration of protected areas by 
unifying them within SINANPE, and allow them to 
better contribute to regional and national development 
(IXjFF, 1991). 

At the local level, the former regional organisations of 
the DGFF and INFOR, district forestry units (distritos 
forestales) and forestry development centres (centres de 
desarollo forestal), respectively, have been integrated 
into 12 Agrarian Units. These are now the sole regional 
offices of the Ministry of Agriculture and have greater 
autonomy and responsibiUty for activities relating to 
forests and natural resources than previously, as part of 
the governmental process of decentralisation (DGFF, 
1991; Injoque et al., 1991). Enforcement of protected 
area regulations are carried out by park guards 
(guardaparques), part of National Parks-Peru: 93 were 
employed in the SINANPE in 1991 (Injoque et al., 
1991), compared with 143 in 1990 (WWF-US, 1990). 

The National Office for Natural Resource Evaluation 
(Oficina Nacional de Evaluacion de Recursos Naturales) 
(ONERN), a governmental organisation estabUshed in 
1962, is responsible for identifying and evaluating 
natural resources and for commissioning projects to 
evaluate their conservation and use for socio-economic 
development. Since 1976, with funding from USAID, 
ONERN has been using Landsat imagery to formulate 
maps of natural resource distribution, and "Ufe zones" 
using the Holdridge method. 

There are around 80 non-govemmental organisations 
(NGOs) concerned with ecology, wildlife conservation, 
protected areas and environmental issues, at local, 
national and international levels who are coordinated by 
the Peruvian Environmental Network (Red Ambiental 
Peruana) (E. Cardich, pers. comm., 1991). NGOs have 
contributed considerably towards improving the 
effectiveness of protected area management in the past 
decade, and often have more professionals working for 
them than the DGFF (DGFF, 1 987 ; Injoque etal., 1991). 
In particular, they have increased the number of qualified 



279 



Protected Areas of the World 



personnel available, equipment, research and 
environmental education. Among the largest national 
level organisations are the Peruvian Foundation for 
Nature Conservation (Fundacion Peruana para 
Conservacion de la Naturaleza)(FPCN) established in 
1985, which supports at least eight of the 25 areas in 
SINUC, including four of the seven national parks 
(G. Suarez de Freitas, pers. comm., 1991), and APECO, 
the Peruvian Association for Conservation (Asociacion 
Peruana para la Conservacion). The Conservation 
Association for the Southern Rainforest (Asociacion de 
Conservacion para la Selva Sur) (ACSS), founded in 
1984, works specifically towards the protection of the 
southern region of rain forest. The Pachamama Society 
(Sociedad Pachamama), founded in 1990, is involved in 
sustainable development projects concerning protected 
areas, particularly in marine regions and dry tropical 
forest (E. Cardich, pers. comm., 1991). 

The Conservation Data Centre (Centro de Datos para la 
Conservacion del Peru) (CDC) at La Molina National 
Agrarian University (Universidad Nacional Agraria La 
Molina), formed in 1983 to provide information required 
for a management plan for SINUC, maintains a data base 
of biological diversity in Peru and runs a continual 
assessment of the effectiveness of resource conservation. 
It provides information for the FPCN, the DGFF, 
WWF-US, FAO and WCMC. 

Protected area management has suffered from 
continuous changes within the Ministry of Agriculture 
and the lack of communication between central and 
regional administration. Combined with severe lack of 
funding owing to the economic situation, the 
effectiveness of natural resource regulation has been 
greatly reduced (DGFF, 1991). Amalgamating INFOR 
into the DGFF resolved some of the previous problems 
of divided responsibilities, but the reorganisations since 
1987 have reduced the number of personnel working in 
central administration. The present government intends 
to reduce the number further, as part of a radical 
decentralisation process (DGFF, 1991). The lack of 
personnel is reflected in the fact that many areas do not 
have park guards. Only those conservation units in 
SINUC may be considered to fulfil some of the criteria 
for protected areas; the majority of the other areas that 
comprise SINANPE are only protected on paper 
(Injoque et al., 1991). 

A review of the current situation of protected area 
administration with proposals for institutional planning 
was carried out by Injoque et al. (1991). This study 
mentions that administrative problems have arisen partly 
from the fact that there has never been an autonomous 
institute responsible for protected areas whose sole 
objective is their administration and management, but 
this responsibility has always been assigned to 
institutions within a larger organisation (Injoque et al., 
1991). Among the suggestions to improve management 
is the creation of a school for training park guards, and 
the elaboration of a master plan to provide pohcies and 
guidelines for detailed planning within National 



ParksPeru. Fortunately, some training courses for park 
personnel are run by the Peruvian Foundation for Nature 
Conservation (FPCN) in conjunction with the National 
Agrarian University and National Parks-Peru. Since 
1989 they have received support from WWF-US 
(WWF, 1990). 

Suarez de Freitas (1990b) cites inconsistencies in the 
designation of protected areas as another factor 
contributing to administrative inefficiency. For 
example, areas evaluated as locally important may not 
receive sufficient support from central government. A 
cohesive national system and compliance with 
intemationallyrecognised protected area designations is 
needed to prevent local exploitation of resources. Closer 
working relations between the DGFF and NGOs should 
improve local administration (DGFF, 1987). The 
systems of SINUC and SINANPE are afforded low 
priority by the government, resulting in inadequate 
salaries and training and a continuing reduction in the 
number of personnel (Ferreyros, 1988; Suarez de Freitas, 
1990d; Injoque and Suarez de Freitas, 1992). 

Reviews of protected area systems conducted by 
CDC-Peni (1991), Suarez de Freitas (1990a) for the 
FPCN, Ferreyros (1988), and Dourojeanni (1985) with 
particular reference to Andean regions, all cite 
administrative complexity as a major problem. 

Systems Review Topographically, Peru consists 

of three district regions; costa (coastal), sierra (central 
Andean Mountains) and selva (lowland slopes of 
Amazonian drainage basin). The climate is strongly 
affected by the Andean Mountains inland and by the 
Peruvian, or Humboldt, current which warms the coastal 
regions, giving rise to a number of distinct ecosystems 
across the country. As a result, Peru may harbour the 
richest biodiversity on earth and 84 "life zones", of the 
103 proposed by Holdridge (1967) for the world, have 
been identified (Dourojeanni, 1985; Lamas, 1979). 

The major ecosystems were originally defined in a 
classification system devised by Brack, and given in 
Ferreyos (1988) as: tropical Pacific Ocean; coastal 
desert; dry equatorial woodlands; paramo (dry 
altiplano); puna (mountain plains) and high Andes; high 
jungle; low jungle and the Pampas del Heath (wet 
grassland on the border with Bolivia). Two of these 
regions, coastal desert and the high Andes above 
3,000m, are naturally non-forested, the others having 
been subjected to human interference (Gentry, n.d.). 
Around 60% of the country is still forested, with the 
largest tracts of forest (96% of the remaining forested 
land) found in the Amazonian lowlands (Burley, 1987). 
The major threat to the forest ecosystems in these regions 
is from widespread use of slash and bum agricultural 
techniques. Since the early 1970s migration to the 
Amazonian lowlands has taken place on a large-scale 
(Burley, 1987; Gentry, n.d.; Suarez de Freitas, 1990d). 
Despite this, nearly 90% of the Peruvian Amazonian 
forest remains intact (E. Cardich, pers. comm., 1991). 



280 



Peru 



Much of the land is unsuitable for intensive agriculture, 
being too dry, steep or poorly drained for crops and only 
3% is cultivated (Burley, 1987). Some 40% is only 
suitable for forestry, but the uneven distribution of the 
population, 90% of which lives in the Sierra and Costa 
regions which comprise only 40% of the total area, has 
put severe pressure on the environment. Deforestation, 
over-grazing and nutrient depletion through agriculture 
result in soil erosion and desertification in those regions 
(Suarez de Freitas, 1990d). The most seriously affected 
are the central valleys which have been farmed since 
pre-Hispanic times. Agricultural productivity is 
generally very low. 

Resource management began with the declaration of 
national forests in the 1950s, and the first national park 
was established in 1961 (Dourojeanni and Roche, 1984; 
Injoque et al., 1991). However, without preliminary 
studies to develop a management plan or designate clear 
boundaries, it was largely ineffective. However, the 
event did lead to extensive research to identify important 
ecosystems around the country, with a view to their 
protection (Ferreyros, 1988). Since then, protected areas 
have been declared under various designations from 
those allowing regulated exploitation, to inviolable 
protection accordingly. 

SINUC, the National Network of Conservation Units, 
was established in 1975, and incorporated into the 
National System of State Protected Areas (SINANPE) 
in 1990. By 1991, SEWC comprised 25 conservation 
units (national parks and reserves, historical and national 
sanctuaries) covering 5,5 1 3,425ha or 4.29% of total land 
area (CDC-Peni, 1991; Suirez de Freitas, pers. comm., 
1991). SINANPE comprised the 25 conservation units 
of SINUC covering 13,265,1 llha, or 10.32% of total 
land area (DGFF, 1991; Injoque, et al., 1991). The 
number of national forests has been reduced 
considerably from 17 in 1975, reflecting disinterest and 
inefficiency in forestry management (Suarez de Freitas, 
1990d). The wealth of biological diversity present makes 
it difficult to extend protection to all types of life zones 
described. The marine and coastal region, particularly 
the tropical and temperate Pacific deserts, is one of the 
most notably underrepresented regions in the 
protected area system. The fragile ecosystems of the 
high altitude Puna also require urgent protection 
measures (CDC-Peni, 1986, 1991; E. Cardich, pers. 
comm., 1991;). 

Following the definition given by the FAO Latin 
American Network programme, Peru has a coherent 
system (Ormazdbal, 1988). 

Many areas are not managed according to their legal 
definitions and within each category practical 
management regimes vary considerably. The majority of 
areas that comprise SINANPE are only protected on 
paper. Only those areas in the SINUC comprise what 
may be considered criteria for protected areas (Injoque 
et al., 1991). Reserved zone (zona reservada) has been 
applied permanently to five areas, but it is not a 



management category, but rather a transitory 
classification to be used only until further studies 
indicate the degree of protection if any required. The 
five areas subsequently lack a legal basis for protection 
(CDCPeni, 1986, 1991; Suarez de Freitas, 1990d). 

Human settlement is a threat to the whole SINUC 
system. This is most apparent in the heavily populated 
Andean region (Dourojeanni, 1985) and in regions 
where coca is grown intensively such as the Huallaga 
Valley (E. Cardich, pers. comm., 1991). The production 
of coca for cocaine has caused serious social and 
environmental problems such as soil erosion, forest 
destruction and large amounts of pollufion from 
fertilisers and chemicals used in processing. Increasing 
lawlessness in these regions makes environmental 
regulations difficult to implement Some areas within 
SINUC (Tingo Maria and Junin) have been abandoned 
owing to subversive activities and the unstable social 
situation in the country (Injoque, et al., 1991). 

Land tenure threatens the implementation of 
conservation strategies in some regions (Dourojeanni, 
1985). Peruvian legislation requires that national park 
land is state-owned, although the Act on Native 
Communities (1974 and 1975), and the Environmental 
Code (1990) acknowledge the right of indigenous 
communities to land ownership. In the Andean region, 
where most of the land is privatelyowned by 
individuals or communities, the sustainability of 
protected ^eas depends on the benefit that local 
people derive from them. Here, resources are 
protected by the designation of national reserves 
within which sustainable exploitation is carried out by 
the local people themselves (Dourojeanni, 1985). The 
problem of native community land rights is 
particularly apparent in the Peruvian Amazonian 
region where existing management systems have 
largely ignored rights. Increasing the extent to which 
native communities are involved in managing the 
Amazon region will help to improve the effectiveness 
of protection measures (E. Cardich, pers. comm., 
1991). 

Addresses 

Direcci6n General Forestal y de Fauna (DGFF) (Director 

de Parques Nacionales), Ministerio de Agricultura, 

Av. Natalio S^chez 220 (3er piso. Of. 907), Jesus 

Maria, LIMA 1 1 (Tel: 14 323150; FAX: 14 232789; 

Tlx: 20053) 
Oficina Nacional de Evaluacidn de Recursos Naturales 

(ONERN), Calle 17 No. 355, Urb. CORPAC, San 

Isidro, Aptdo 4992, LIMA 
Centro de Datos para la Conservaci6n (CDC), 

Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina, Aptdo 

456, LIMA 100 
Asociaci6n de Conservaci6n para la Selva Sur (ACSS), 

Av. Sol 627B, Oficina 305, CUSCO 
Asociaci6n Peruana para la Conservaci6n (APECO), 

Parque Jos6 de Acosta 187, Altos, Magdalena del 

MarJLlMA17 



281 



Protected Areas of the World 



Fundaci6n Peruana para la Conservacidn de la 
Naturaleza (FPCN), CP 181393, Los Resales 
255, San Isidro, LIMA 27 (FAX: 14 427853; 
Tel: 426616/426706/422149/422796) 

Sociedad Pachamama, Av. Camino Real 479, 8 piso, 
LIMA 27 (FAX: 14 41 1990; Tel: 438948/438951) 

References 

Burley, W. (1987). Draft of Peru case study. Critical 
Ecosystems Paper. Unpublished manuscript. 8 pp. 

CDC-Peru (1986). Ecosistemas criticos del Peru: 
Informe al World Resources Institute (WRI). Centre 
de Datos para la Conservacidn, Lima. (Unseen) 

CDC -Peru (1991). Plan director del Sistema Nacional 
de Unidades de Conservacidn(SINUC): Una 
aproximacidn desde la diversidad bioldgica. 
Propuesta del Centro de Datos para la Conservacion, 
Lima. 190 pp. (Unseen) 

CIDA (1986). Tropical forestry action plan Peru. 
Forestry sector review. Terms of reference. 
Canadian International Development Agency, Hull, 
Canada. Pp. 1-14. 

DOFF (1987). Plan Nacional de Accidn Forestal 
1988-2000. Ministerio de Agricultura, Direccion 
General de Forestal y Fauna, Lima. 87 pp. 

DGFF (1991). Informe sobre progreso forestal 
1988-1990 del Peru. 17th meeting of the Laun 
American forestry commission-COFLA, Venezuela, 
18-22 February 1991. Ministerio de Agricultura, 
Direcci6n General de Forestal y Fauna, Lima. 22 pp. 

Dourojeanni, M.J. (n.d.). Gran geografia del Peru, 
naturaleza y hombre. Volumen IV. Recursos 
naturales, desarrollo y conservacion en el Peru. 
Manfer-Juan Mejia Baca. Pp. 33-55. 

Dourojeanni, MJ. (1985). Management problems in the 
Andean National Parks and protected areas of Peru. 
In: McNeely, J.A., Thorsell, J.W., and Chalise, S.R. 
(Eds), People and protected areas in the Hindu-Kush 
Himalaya. King Mahendra Trust for Nature 
Conservation and the International Centre for 
Integrated Mountain Development, Kathmandu, 
Nepal. Pp. 159-161. 

FAO (n.d.). La Red Latinoamericana de Cooperacion 
Tecnica en Parques Nacionales, Otras Areas 
Proiegidas, Flora y Fauna Silvestres. Oficina 
regional de la FAO para America Latina y el Caribe, 
Santiago, Chile. 8 pp. 

FAO (1975). Food and Agricultural Legislation 24 

FAO (1976). Food and Agricultural Legislation 
25(1): 66-80 

FAO (1983). Informe de la mesa redonda sobre parques 
nacionales, otras dreas protegidas, flora y fauna 
silvestres. Santiago de Chile, 8-lOjunio 1983. Food 
and Agriculture Organization Regional Office for 
Latin America and the Caribbean, Santiago, Chile. 
Pp. 43-59. 

Ferreyros, A (1988). Situacidn actual de los parques 
nacionales y otras unidades de conservacidn en el 
Peru. Asociaci6n de Ecologi'a y Conservacidn 
(ECCO), Lima. 21 pp. 



FPCN (1988). Estrategia nacional para la 
conservacidn. Una propuesta. Fundacion Peruana 
para la Conservacion de la Naturaleza. 43 pp. 

Gentry, A. (n.d.). Colombia, Ecuador. Peru. Floristic 
inventory of tropical forests. Pp. 1-14. 

Gow, D., Clark, K., Earhart, J., Fujita, M., Laarman, J., 
Miller, G. (1988). Peru: An assessment of biological 
diversity. Development Strategies for Fragile Lands 
(DESFIL), prepared for the US Agency for 
International Development. Washington DC, 
USA. 76 pp. 

INFOR/DGFF (1987). Exposicidn de motivos. Programa 
nacional de parques nacional de parques nacionales 
y areas naturales protegidas. Institute Nacional 
Forestal y de Fauna/Direccion General Forestal y de 
Fauna, Lima. 6 pp. 

Injoque, F. and Suarez de Freitas, G. (1992). Problemas 
en la realizacion de una politica estricta de parques 
nacionales: el caso de Peru. In Amend, S. and 
Amend, T. (eds.) ^Espacios sin Habitantes? Parques 
nacionales de America del Sur. lUCN and Editorial 
Nueva Sociedad, Caracas, Venezuela. Pp. 315-327. 

Injoque, F., Gutierrez R., Manrique L. (1991). Una 
propuesta de criterios para la planificacion 
institucional del sistema de areas protegidas Peruano. 
Documento de Trabajo No. 1 . Programa Nacional de 
Parques Nacionales y Otras Areas Naturales 
Protegidas Por el Estado. Parques Nacionales-Peni, 
Lima. 13 pp. 

Lamas, G. (1982). A preliminary zoographical division 
of Peru based on butterfly distributions (Lepidoptera, 
Papilionoidea). In: Prance, G.T. (Ed.), Biological 
diversification in the Tropics. Proceedings of the V 
International Symposium of the Association for 
Tropical Biology. Colombia University Press. 
Pp. 336-356. 

Library of Congress (1 979). Draft environmental report 
on Peru. Science and Technology Division, 
Washington DC. 109 pp. 

Ormazabal,C. (1988). Sistemas nacionales de dreas 
silvestres protegidas en America Latina. Basado 
en los resultados del taller sobre planificacion de 
sistemas nacionales de areas silvestres 
protegidas, Caracas, Venezuela, 913 junio 1986. 
Proyecto FAO/PNUMA sobre manejo de areas 
silvestres, dreas protegidas y vida silvestre en 
America Latina y el Caribe. Oficina Regional de 
la FAO para America Latina y el Caribe, 
Santiago, Chile. Pp. 20-23. 

Rios, M.A., Ponce, C.F., Tovar, A., Vasquez P.G., 
Dourojeanni M. (1986). Plan maestro, parque nacional 
del Manu. Uni versidad Nacional Agraria de La Molina, 
Lima. Pp. 8-15. 

Roche and Dourojeanni, MJ. (1984). Peruvian case study. 
A guide to in situ conservation of genetic resources of 
tropical woody species. FAO. Pp. 185-196. 

Sudrez de Freitas, G. (1990a). Diagndstico del sistema 
peruano de dreas naturales protegidas y 
recomendaciones para su administracidn. 
Fundacion Peruana para la Conservacion de la 
Naturaleza, Lima. 87 pp. 



282 



Peru 



Suirez de Freitas, G. (1990b). Regionalizaci6n y dreas 
protegidas. FPCNal dla. January-March. Fundaci6n 
Peruana para la Conservaci6n de la Naturaleza, 
Lima. Pp. 1-2. 

Su^ez de Freitas, G. (1990c). Development of the 
Peruvian Amazon Basin. WWF Discussion Paper. 
World Wide Fund for Nature, Gland, Switzerland. 
8 pp. 

Su^ez de Freitas, G. (1990d). Estudio de Pais. Peru. 
Estudio ITTO/IUCN sobre el papel de la actividad 
forestal en la conservacidn de la diversidad 
biol6gica. Fundaci6n Peruana para la Conservaci6n 
de la Naturaleza. 14 pp. 

Vdsquez, P.G. and Barrena, V.M. (1990). Diseno de una 
meiodologla para el morutoreo del impacto de las 



actividades humanas en dreas protegidas de la 
Amazonia Peruana. Centro de Datos para la 
Conservaci6n (CDC) y la Comunidad Economica 
Europea. Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina, 
Lima. 116 pp. 

Wetterberg, G.B., Jorge Padua, M.T., Tresinari, A. and 
Ponce del Prado,C.F. (1985). Decade o/pr<7gr«.s/or 
South American National Paries. International 
Affairs, USDl National Park Service, Washington 
DC, USA. Pp. 47-51. 

WWF-US, (1990). 16230: Training Workshops for Park 
Personnel, Peru. Internal document (grant 
information). 2 pp. 



283 



Protected Areas of the World 



ANNEX 

Definitions of protected area designations, as legislated, 

together with authorities responsible for their administration 



Title: Ley Forestal y de Fauna Silvestre 
(Forestry and Wildlife Law)-Decree 
Law No. 21147 

Date: 13 May 1975 

Brief description: Forests and wild faunal 

resources belong to the public and rights to them 
cannot be acquired. This law provides for the 
establishment of protected areas and the rules 
governing the protection and use of forest and faunal 
resources. 



Administrative authority: 

Agriculture. 

Designations: 



Ministry of 



Bosque nacional (National forest) Forests 
declared by Supreme Decree suitable for continuing 
production of timber, other forest products or wild 
fauna, made use of directly by the state, or by 
individuals with prior authorisation from the state 
and under special regulations and supervision. 
Bosque de libre disponibilidad (Freely disposable 
forest) Forest suitable for continuing production of 
timber, other forest products or wild fauna and used 
by any duly authorised person. Declared by 
Ministerial Resolution. 

Bosque de proteccUSn (Protection forest) Forest 
whose characteristics and situation are conducive to 
soil and water conservation declared, by Supreme 
Resolution, as inviolable for the protection of 
agricultural land, road systems and other facilities. 
All exploitation is prohibited. 

CONSERVATION UNITS 
(UNIDADES DE C0NSERVACI6N): 

Parque nacional (National park) Area of wild 
floral and faunal and scenic beauty allocated for 
inviolable protection. All exploitation is prohibited 

Reserva nacional (National reserve) Area 
allocated to wild faunal species for protection and 
propagation in the nation's interest. Sustainable 
harvesting of wildlife is allowed. The use made of 
products from such reserves shall be a matter for the 
state When a reserve is on agricultural land, the 
Ministry of Agriculture will authorise use of fauna 



by those working the land and prescribe control 
measures accordingly. 

Santuario nacional (National sanctuary) 
Inviolable area allocated for protection of any 
species, communities of plants or animals or any 
nabiral formations of scientific or scenic interest. 

Santuario histdrico (Historic sanctuary) 
Inviolable area allocated for protection of natural 
sites where important events in the nation's history 
took place. 

Source: FAQ, 1976 

Title: Reglamento de Conservacion de Flora y 
Fauna Silvestre (Regulation of the 
Conservation of Flora and Wildlife), Supreme 
Decree 15877AG, relating to the 1975 Forestry 
and Wildlife Law 

Date: 31 March 1977 

Brief description: Regulates the use of natural 
resources and gives defmitions for two protected area 
designations and the possibiUty of a third, temporary 
classification 

Administrative authority: Ministry of Agriculture 

Designations: 

Coto de caza (Hunting reserve) Area suitable 
for wildlife management. Land may be either private 
or publicly owned, and have an adequate 
infrastructure to allow sport hunting activities. 

Reserva comunal (Communal reserve) Area 
set aside to conserve wildUfe for the benefit of local 
populations whose livelihoods traditionally depend 
on wildlife products May be established for native 
or peasant communities, or migrant hunters from the 
mountains, jungle or adjacent jungle 

Zona reservada (Reserved zone) May be 

applied to an area to protect the wildlife and fauna 
present until studies are carried out to determine a 
suitable permanent designation This is not a 
protected area management category and is only to 
be used in a transitory or provisional sense 

Source: Su^ez de Freitas, 1990a 



284 



SUMMARY OF PROTECTED AREAS 



Peru 



Map National/international designations 
ref. Name of area 



lUCN management Area 

category (ha) 



Year 
notined 





National Park 


1 


Cerros de Amotape 


2 


Cutervo 


3 


Huascaran 


4 


Manu 


5 


Rio Abiseo 


6 


Tingo Maria 


7 


Yanachaga Chemillen 




National Reserve 


8 


Calipuy 


9 


Junin 


10 


I ^rhay 


11 


Pacaya Samiria 


12 


Pampa Galeras 


13 


Paracas 


14 


Salinas y Aguada Blanca 


15 


Titicaca 




National Sanctuary 


16 


Ampay 


17 


Calipuy 


18 


Huayllay 


19 


Manglares de Tumbes 


20 


Pampas del Heath 


21 


Tabaconas-Namballe 




Communal Reserve 


22 


Yanesha 




Reserved Zone 


23 


Apurimac 


24 


Laquipampa 


25 


Manu 


26 


Racali 


27 


Tambopata-Candamo 


28 


Udima 




Hunting Reserve 


29 


El Angolo 


30 


Sunchubamba 




National Forest 


31 


Alexander von Humboldt 


32 


Biabo-Coidillera Azul 


33 


Mariscal Caceres 


34 


Pastaza, Morona, Maranon 


35 


Tumbes 




Protection Forest 


36 


Alto Mayo 


37 


Pagaibamba 


38 


Pui-Pui 


39 


San Matias-San Carlos 



n 


91,300 


1975 


n 


2,500 


1961 


n 


340,000 


1975 


n 


1,532,806 


1973 


n 


274,520 


1983 


n 


18,000 


1965 


n 


122,000 


1986 


IV 


64,000 


1981 


vm 


53,000 


1974 


in 


5,070 


1977 


vm 


2,080,000 


1982 


vra 


6,500 


1967 


vm 


335,000 


1975 


vm 


366,936 


1979 


V 


36,180 


1978 


V 


3,635 


1987 


m 


4,500 


1981 


ra 


6,815 


1974 


m 


2,972 


1988 


m 


102,109 


1983 


III 


29,500 


1988 



vm 



34,744 



1988 



VI 


1,669,290 


1988 


rv 


11,347 


1982 


VI 


257,000 


1980 


V 


6,433 


1985 


in 


1,478,942 


1977 


V 


8,469 


1991 


vm 


65,000 


1975 


vra 


59,735 


1977 


vm 


570,800 


1965 


vm 


2,068,500 


1963 


vm 


137,448 


1963 


vm 


375,000 


1963 


vm 


75,102 


1957 


vm 


182.000 


1987 


vra 


2,078 


1987 


vra 


60,000 


1985 


vra 


145,818 


1987 



285 



Protected Areas of the World 



Map Nationallinternadonaldesignations 
ref. Name of area 



lUCN management Area 

category (ha) 



Year 
notiHed 



Historical Sanctuary 

40 Chacamarca 

4 1 Machu Picchu 



V 
V 



2,500 
32,592 



1974 
1981 



Biosphere Reserves 



Reserva de Huascaran 


K 


399,239 


1977 


Reserva del Manii 


IX 


1,881,200 


1977 


Reserva del Noroeste 


K 


226,300 


1977 


Ramsar Wetlands 








Reserva Nacional de Paracas 


R 


335,000 


1992 


Reserva Nacional Pacaya-Samiria 


R 


2,080,000 


1992 


Santuario Nacional Lagunas de Mejia 


R 


691 


1992 


World Heritage Sites 








Parque Nacional Huascaran 


X 


340,000 


1985 


Parque Nacional Manii 


X 


1,532,807 


1987 


Parque Nacional Rio Abiseo 


X 


274,520 


1990 


Sanctuario Hist6rico de Machu Picchu 


X 


32,592 


1983 



286 



Peru 




Protected Areas of Peru 



287 



REPUBLIC OF SURINAME 



Area 163,800 sq. km 

Population 422,000 (1990) 
Natural increase: 1.76% per annum 

Economic Indicators 

GDP: US$ 2,760 per capita (1987) 
GNP: US$ 3,020 per capita (1989) 

Policy and Legislation Provision for the 

establishment of protected areas is made in various 
pieces of legislation. In general, original legislation was 
passed during the time that the region was a colony of 
the Netherlands, and has since been updated, one or 
several times, both before and after independence. 
Suriname gained full independence from the 
Netherlands in 1975, since when the signatory authority 
of the Governor of the then colony has been transferred 
to the President of the Republic of Suriname. 

The first piece of legislation covering the region was 
provided in Article 44 of the Police Penal Code, 
Government Bulletin (G.B.) No. 77, 1915 (updated by 
G.B. No. 152, 1942 with latest amendment in G.B. 
No. 107, 1964) (see Annex). This code contained the 
mechanism to establish areas where hunting or capturing 
of wildlife was only allowed following issue of a written 
permit The first sanctuary was established, under this 
code, following Government Resolution (G.B. No. 12, 
1953) on 15 February 1953. 

Under the Law on the Issuance of State-owned Lands 
(Agarische Wet G.B. No. 53, 1937, updated by G.B. 
No. 53, 1953), later updated by Decreet L-2 of 15 June 
1982, nature parks and multiple-use management areas 
may be created (see Annex) (Baal, 1991). 

In 1948, the Nature Conservation Commission 
(Natuurbeschermingscommissie) was established by 
Government Resolution in order to study conservation 
problems, and to propose legislation for conservation. 
This resulted in the Nature Preservation Law, 1954 
(Government Gazette No. 26), under which the 
principles of nature conservation were first formulated, 
and which provided for the establishment of nature 
reserves by state resolution (see Annex). To date, five 
nature preservation resolutions have been passed, 
relating to this law. The 1986 resolution included a 
provision for the traditional rights and interests of 
indigenous people living in tribal communities, where 
these rights would affect the newly protected areas. 
These traditional rights were subject to various provisos, 
and essentially ensured the following: free choice for the 
settlement of villages; free choice of land for the 
establishment of shifting cultivation grounds; 
permission to hunt, fish and apply for a cutting permit 
(Baal, 1991). 



A planning law (Planwet) of 1973 (G.B. No. 89) 
provides for the establishment of, amongst other things, 
special management areas (bijzondere beheersgebieden) 
(see Annex). However, not all agencies dealing with the 
execution of this law have been estabUshed, and it is not 
yet operational (Baal, 1991). 

Forestry legislation currently comprises the Timber 
Law, 1947 (see Annex) which provides for reserving 
areas for exploration and exploitation, and for placing 
concessions at the disposal of the government The 
Forest Service is authorised to manage certain of these 
areas as forest reserves. By Resolution 2824 of 21 July 
1947 (G.G. No. 108, 1947), the Forest Service (Dienst's 
Lands Bosbeheer) was established to manage forest 
reserves and to ensure sustainable management of the 
nation's forests. A draft Law on Forest Management 
(Concept-Ontwerp Wet Bosbeheer), which will replace 
the Timber Law, currently awaits enactment by 
Parliament. It will distinguish three main categories of 
forest according to land use: permanent forest (blijvend 
bos); conversion forest (eenmalig leeg te kappen bos) 
and provisionally maintained forest (voorlopig in stand 
te houden bos), permanent forest comprises specially 
protected forest (speciaal beschermd bos), protection 
forest (schermbos) and permanent production forest 
(blijvend produktiebos) (Baal, 1991). 

Protected areas legislation has been reviewed recently 
by Baal (1991). Recommendations arising from this 
report include evaluating the provisions in the legislation 
to bring definitions in line with those evolved during the 
IV World Parks Congress. 

Suriname participates in the FAO Tropical Forestry 
Action Plan (TFAP), an international strategy for 
maximising the contribution of forestry sectors to 
national economic and social development while 
maintaining conservation principles. A national action 
plan has been formulated to interpret the global 
objectives of the TFAP to meet specific national 
requirements. 

International Activities Suriname signed the 1940 
Convention concerning the Protection of Rora, Fauna 
and NaUiral Scenic Beauty of the Americas (Convenci(5n 
sobre la Proteccidn de la Rora, de la Fauna y de las 
Bellezas Escenicas Naturales de los Paises de America) 
(Western Hemisphere Convention). Suriname is one of 
the eight countries with territory in the Amazon region 
that signed the Amazon Cooperation Treaty on 3 July 
1978, an agreement to establish regulations for 
managing natural resources and to propose conservation 
directed alternatives to the management of multinational 
projects. 

The Convention on Wetlands of International 
Importance especially as Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar 
Convention) was ratified on 18 March 1985, under 



289 



Protected Areas of the World 



which one site has been inscribed. Suriname is not party 
to the Convention Concerning the Protection of the 
World Cultural and Natural Heritage (World Heritage 
Convention), neither does it participate in the Unesco 
Man and Biosphere Programme. 

Suriname participates in the Western Hemisphere 
Shorebird Reserve Network. Under this network, 
three reserves, Coopenamemonding and Wia Wia 
Nature Reserves and Bigi Pan Multiple-Use 
Management Area, were officially established as 
hemispheric reserves on 4 March 1989. At the same 
time, these three protected areas were twinned with 
two protected areas in Canada, following a 
Memorandum of Understanding of 8 August 1987 
concerning cooperation in the field of conservation by 
the Canadian Wildlife Services and the Suriname 
Forest Service. 

Administration and Management The Ministry 

of Natural Resources (Ministerie van Natuurlijke 
Hulpbronnen) is responsible for policy direction, 
legislation, issuance of permits, budget allocation and 
interministerial coordination, and for all matters relating 
to natural resources. Three sections exist within this 
ministry. Two, the Forest Service and the Bureau of 
Lands, are responsible for protected areas. The third 
section, the Foundation for Nature Preservation, deals 
with sea turtles and nature tourism. The Director 
responsible for the first two sections is also responsible 
for enforcement of the Police Penal Code (under which 
sanctuaries may be established) (Baal, 1989, 1991; Held 
and Reichart, 1991). A high-level advisory body, the 
Nature Conservation Commission, was established in 
1948 to advise the government on environmental and 
conservation issues and to assist in decision-making. 
ResponsibiUties of the commission include supervising 
the implementation of the Nature Preservation Law, and 
selecting areas for designation as nature reserves (Baal, 
1989). 

The Forest Service is in charge of the protection, control, 
and management of the forest resources, and both forest 
protection and production, as detailed in the 1 954 Nature 
Preservation Law. Within the Forest Service, the Nature 
Conservation Division comprises four sections, one for 
each of its functions: nature reserves and wildlife 
management (including trade regulation); research; 
education; and Bureau for Commissions to issue permits 
(Baal, 1989). Regulation enforcement and patrolling of 
protected areas is carried out by forest guards of the 
Forest Service (Schulz, 1968). Nature reserves are 
managed primarily to afford protection for scientific 
research purposes, but tourism and environmental 
education are encouraged increasingly in the more 
accessible areas (Mittermeier era/., 1990; Schulz, 1968). 
A second division within the Forest Service, the Special 
Protection Forest and Protection Forest Section, is 
responsible for formulating the new draft Law on Forest 
Management and for its implementation once passed 
(Held and Reichart, 1991). 



The Bureau of Lands is responsible for long-term lease 
areas, including nature parks and multiple-use 
management areas. 

In 1969, the Foundation for Nature Preservation 
(Stichting Natuurbehoud Suriname) (STINASU), a 
non-governmental organisation, was established to 
assist the Forest Service in managing nature reserves. 
The responsibilities of STINASU have grown, and it 
now plays an important role in conservation in the 
country. It is responsible for nature tourism, promoting 
public environmental awareness campaigns, including 
sponsoring and guiding the development of a Wildlife 
Rangers Club for young people, and conducting research 
on sea-turtles. STINASU also has sole management of 
one nature reserve (Baal, 1989; Mittermeier era/., 1990). 
The Forest Service and STINASU work very closely 
together, and provide mutual assistance for their 
conservation activities. 

A Conservation Action Plan was drawn up in 1990 (by 
WWF-USA, the Ministry of Natural Resources and 
STINASU) as part of the National Forestry Action Plan, 
to provide a framework by which conservation activities 
in Suriname may be amplified and strengthened 
(Mittermeierer ai, 1990). The Conservation Action Plan 
contains projected activities for a period of five years, 
including the formulation of management plans for each 
protected area, and establishment of an ecological 
database to provide up-to-date information on the status 
of ecosystems and species. These measures will assist in 
the administration of existing protected areas and in 
selecting new areas for protection. An increase in 
training opportunities for conservation workers is also 
recommended, such as providing fellowships for further 
education in conservation-related programmes with 
international assistance, at the University of Suriname, 
and foreign institutes (Mittermeier er a/., 1990). Further 
details of the National Forestry Action Plan and the 
extent of implementation are currently not available. 

Management of protected areas is well organised, and is 
generally good. The factor most restricting its efficiency 
is a lack of funds and equipment Five areas, however, 
do have administrative buildings and a guard force. 
Initially, in its enthusiasm to preserve wild habitats, the 
government did not give much consideration to the 
interests of tribal people (Held and Reichart, 1991). 
Despite this, government decisions have generally been 
respected, largely due to the low population pressure, 
and the existence of adequate land outside protected 
areas for tribal uses. Legislation has now been modified 
to take account of the needs of tribal people. In addition, 
the Forest Service and STINASU, when starting to 
manage protected areas, have slrived to maintain good 
relationships with local villagers. Where possible, 
workers for the reserves and park are hired from the 
villages, and villagers are allowed to enter the reserves 
and park to fish, collect fuelwood and medicinal plants 
for personal use, and to perform cultural activities. 
However, the general laws on hunting, fishing, and forest 
exploitation have been complied with (Held and 



290 



Republic of Surinam 



Reichart, 1991). An important exception has been the 
resistance to attempts to reduce the extent of turtle egg 
harvest in Galibi Nature Reserve (Reichart, 1991). 
Conflicts that do arise may be split into three categories: 
Amerindian claims of traditional rights; intensive land 
use on park boundaries; conflicting interests in the 
multiple-use management area (Held and Reichart, 
1991). 

The Forest Service and STINASU have suffered from 
great financial problems, due to the economic recession 
of the country, especially during the last ten years. 
Nevertheless, financial and technical assistance is 
received from some international and foreign 
organisations, such as WWF-USA and WWF-The 
Netherlands, Conservation International, The Royal 
Institute for Nature Management in the Netherlands, the 
Canadian Wildlife Service and the Organisation of 
American States. 

Systems Reviews Suriname has a typical 

tropical climate with average temperature of 27C all 
year, and annual rainfall between 1750mm and 3(XX)mm. 
Four main ecological regions may be distinguished: 
young coastal plain; old coastal plain; savanna belt; and 
the interior region (Mittermeier et al., 1990). The young 
coastal plain lies between Om-4m above sea level and 
consists of clay swamps with a natural vegetation of 
mangrove forests, open herbaceous swamps and several 
types of swamp forest. Just inland of this is the old 
coastal plain, lying between 4m- 1 1 m above sea level and 
consisting of clay swamps, sand ridges covered with 
grass and herbaceous swamps, swamp forests, dry 
forests and large areas of peat swamps (Mittermeier et 
al., 1990). Behind the coastal region lies the savanna 
belt, between 10m-l(X)m, and characterised by white 
sand ecosystems. The natural vegetation is xerophytic 
and mesophytic dry and swamp forests, and dry to wet 
grass and shrub savannas. 

Extending inland from the savannas on the ancient 
Guiana Shield, the interior region covers three-quarters 
of the total area of the country (Mittermeier et al., 1990). 
Altitudes range to 1,230m, and the region is ahnost 
entirely covered with primary tropical rain forest, 
interspersed with small patches of marsh forest along 
rivers and creeks. Around 95% of the total population 
lives in the coastal region where the capital city in 
located, and only around 5% lives in the interior. The 
forest in this sparsely uninhabited region is largely 
undisturbed and the rate of destruction is very low, 
around 0.1% annually (Mittermeier er al.,\ 990). In total, 
nearly 90% of total land area is covered by forest 

Nature conservation activities are based on Dutch 
traditions and began around 50 years ago. The Nature 
Conservation Commission was established in 1948 to 
assist the government in all environmental conservation 
issues. The first attempt at management was the creation 
of the first game sanctuary in 1953, based on the 1942 
Police Penal Ordinance (Baal, 1989; Schulz, 1968). In 
1969 this area became Coppenamemonding Nature 



Reserve, forming part of the first phase of protected 
areas (nine nature reserves and one nature park) that 
were gazetted between 1961 and 1972. Most of these 
protected areas are located in remote areas of the 
country. The second phase was the period after 
Suriname' s independence. The need was felt to 
preserve interesting natural areas in lowland areas 
where the population, and therefore human pressure 
on the ecosystems, was higher. Four new nature 
reserves were therefore gazetted in 1986, and in 1987, 
part of the estuarine zone, Bigi Pan, was put at the 
disposal of the Ministry of Natural Resources, to be 
managed as a multiple-use management area (Held 
and Reichart, 1991). It has been proposed since 1976 
that the whole estuarine area, including Bigi Pan 
Multiple-Use Management Area, could become a 
special management area. Brownsberg Nature Park is 
a long-term lease area issued to the Foundation for 
National Preservation in Suriname, which manages it 
as a national park (Baal, 1991). 

By 1990 there was a total of 13 nature reserves, 1 
nature park and 1 multiple use management area, 
collectively accounting for around 5% of total land 
area (Mittermeier et al., 1990). In addition, two further 
nature reserves, two forest reserves and enlargements 
of existing areas are proposed, which would bring the 
total area under protection to 7%, and include 
representative samples of the majority of Suriname's 
characteristic ecosystems (Baal, 1989; Held and 
Reichart, 1991; Mittermeier et al, 1990). There are, 
however, some protected areas near human 
settlements, where conflicts have arisen, or may arise 
in the near future (Held and Reichart, 1991). 



Nature conservation is generally in good shape. The 
country has a well-planned programme for nature 
conservation and environmental protection, with a 
well managed network of protected a^eas, despite the 
economic problems facing the country since 1983. 
The lack of available funds is the most restricting 
factor in the implementation of these projects (Baal, 
1991; Mittermeier, et al, 1990). However, problems 
do exist. In particular, some parks in the interior have 
had their infrastructure damaged by recent army 
activities, and STINASU is now trying to raise the 
money required to rebuild them (K. Wood, pers. 
comm., 1991). 



Addresses 

Nature Conservation Department of the Forest Service, 
Ministerie van Natuurlijke Hulpbronnen (Ministry 
of Natural Resources), Comelis Jongbawstraat 10-12, 
PO Box 436, PARAMARIBO (Tel: 71316/75845/ 
10256; FAX: 597 7291 1; Tbc: 364 NHE SN) 

Stichting Natuurbehoud Suriname (Foundation for 
Nature Preservation in Suriname) (STINASU), PO 
Box 436, PARAMARIBO (Tel: 75845 ext. 343541) 



291 



Protected Areas of the World 



References 

Baal, F.L.J. (1989). Nature conservation and 
management in Suriname. Suriname Forest 
ServiceJ'aramaribo. 8 pp. 

Baal, F.L.J. (1991). Legal aspects of protected areas in 
Suriname. Presented at IVth World Congress on 
National Parks and Protected Areas, Caracas, 
Venezuela 10-21 February 1992. 30 pp. 

Held, M.M. and Reichart, H.A. (1991). Managing 
protected areas in Suriname. Presented at IVth World 
Congress on National Parks and Protected Areas, 
Caracas, Venezuela 10-21 February 1992. 26 pp. 

Mittermeier, R.A., Plotkin, M J., Werner, T.B., Malone, 
S.A.J. , Baal, F., MacKnight, J., Mohadin, K., 



Werkhoven, M. (1990). Conservation action plan 
for Suriname. Conservation International, 
Ministry of Natural Resources, World Wide Fund 
for Nature, Foundation for Nature Preservation in 
Suriname (STINASU), and University of 
Suriname in collaboration with Suriname Forest 
Service, Paramaribo. 45 pp. 

Reichart, H.A. (1991). The Galibi Nature Reserve. 
Presented at IVth World Congress on National 
Parks and Protected Areas, Caracas, Venezuela 
10-21 February 1992. 15 pp. 

Schulz, J.P. (1968). Nature Preservation in Suriname. 
Unpublished report. 2Ipp. 



292 



Republic of Surinam 



ANNEX 

Definitions of protected area designations, as legislated, 

together with authorities responsible for their administration 



Title: The Police Penal Code, Government 
Bulletin (G.B.) No. 77, 1915 (updated by G.B. 
No. 152, 1942 with latest amendment in G.B. 
No. 107, 1964). 

Date: 1915 

Brief description: Provides for the establishment 
of sanctuaries. 

Administrative Authority: Ministry of Natural 
Resources 

Designations: 

Sanctuary Hunting or capturing of wildlife is only 
allowed following issue of a written permit 

Source: Baal (1989) 



Title: Law on the Issuance of State-owned 
Lands (Agarische Wet G.B. No. 53, 1937, 
updated by G.B. No. 53, 1953), later updated 
by Decree L-2 of 15 June 1982, by which 
nature parks and multiple-use management 
areas may be created. 

Date: 1937 

Brief description: Provides for the 

establishment of nature parks and Multiple-Use 
Management Areas 

Administrative Authority: Bureau of Lands 

Designations: 

Multiple-Use Management Area No 

information 

Nature park No information 

Source: Baal (1991) 

Title: The Timber Law 

Date: 1947 

Brief description: Provides for the creation of 
forest reserves, and for placing concessions at the 
disposal of the Government 

Administrative Authority: Forest Service 



Designations: 

Forest reserve For exploration and exploitation 

Source: Baal (1989); Schulz (1968) 

NB This Forest law is soon to be replaced by the 
existing draft Law on Forest Management 
(Concept-Ontwerp Wet Bosbeheer), which currently 
awaits enactment by Parliament. 

Title: Natuurbeschermingswet (Nature 
Preservation Law) (Government Bulletin 
No. 26) 

Date: 1954 

Brief description: Provides for the 

establishment, by State Resolution, of protected 
areas under the designation nature reserve. 



Suriname Forest 



Administrative Authority: 

Service . 

Designations: 



Nature reserve An area of public land which is 
of scientific, aesthetic or cultural value. The area may 
not necessarily be of exceptional value, but may be 
a representative sample of an important national 
ecosystem. 

The primary management objective of reserves is 
protection for scientific research purposes. 
Recreational and educational activities are possible 
in the more accessible reserves. 

The area is selected for designation by the advisory 
board, the Nature Conservation Commission, created 
in 1948. 

The carrying of firearms is notpermitted, or any other 
means of hunting or capturing wildlife, including 
dogs. 

Article 7 provides for the opportunity to have a 
business within the boundaries of the reserve (in 
accordance to an approved plan) to gather forest 
products, to graze cattle, or to fish when certain 
conditions are complied with. 

Source: Baal (1989); Schulz (1968) 



293 



Protected Areas of the World 

Title: Planning law (Planwet) (G.B. No. 89) Designations: 

Date: 1973 Special management area (Bijzondere 

Behe!ersgd)ieden) 

Brief description: Provides, amongst other Source* Baal (1989) 

things, for the establishment of special management 

areas 

Administrative Authority: Planning Bureau 



SUMMARY OF PROTECTED AREAS 



Map 


Nationall international designations 


lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 


notified 




Nature Reserves 








1 


Boven Coesewijne 


IV 


127,(XX) 


1986 


2 


Brinckheuvel 


rv 


6,000 


1972 


3 


Copi 


IV 


28,000 


1986 


4 


Coppename Monding 


IV 


12,000 


1966 


5 


Eilerts de Haan 


IV 


220,000 


1966 


6 


Galibi 


IV 


4,000 


1969 


7 


Peru via 


rv 


31,000 


1986 


8 


Raleighvallen-Voltzberg 


n 


78,170 


1966 


9 


Sipaliwini 


IV 


100,000 


1972 


10 


Tafelberg 


IV 


140,000 


1966 


11 


Wane kreek 


IV 


45,400 


1986 


12 


Wia-wia 
Nature Park 


IV 


36,000 


1961 


13 


Brownsberg 


n 


8,400 


1969 



Mul Itiple Use Management Area 
14 BigiPan Vm 68,320 1987 



Ramsar Wetland 

Coppename Rivermouth R 12,000 1985 



294 



Republic of Surinam 




Protected Areas of Suriname 



295 



URUGUAY 



Area 186,925 sq. km 

Population 3,094,000(1990) 
Natural increase: 0.53% per annum 

Economic Indicators 

GDP: US$ 2,452 per capita (1987) 
GNP: US$ 2,620 per capita (1989) 

Policy and Legislation No national conservation 
objectives have been stated in Uruguayan legislation or 
constitution (Anon., 1991; Oltremari, 1988). There has 
never been a written policy or defined strategy for 
resource protection and, as a result, environmental 
legislation is confused and dispersed (Nebel and 
Cravino, 1987). Conservation principles are spread 
across a number of legislative acts, but do not provide a 
coherent legal structure on which to base protected area 
establishment (Oltremari, 1988). 

The first legislative act to make provision for the creation 
of protected areas was the 1968 Forestry Law (Ley 
Forestal) No. 13.723. Reference is made to parks and 
reserves, declaring them part of the state forest heritage 
(patrimonio forestal del estado), but definitions for such 
designations are not given. A fiscal forest is that part of 
the forest heritage not declared a national park. 
Exploitation is only possible under a management plan 
prepared by the Forestry Directorate (Direccion 
Forestal) of the MGAP. 

In 197 1 , Law No. 14.053 provided for the creation of the 
Institute for the Preservation of the Environment 
(Instituto para la Preservacion del Medio Ambiente), as 
part of the Ministry of Education and Culture (Ministerio 
de Educacion y Cultura). This institute has a 
commission specifically for wildlife, environment and 
countryside matters. It has now been dissolved (see 
under Administration and Management) (R. Cal, pers. 
comm., 1992). 

The 1968 Forest Law was repealed by the 1987 Forest 
Law (Ley Forestal) No. 15.939, currently in effect, 
which defines state-owned forested land as that which 
is not used for other productive use, and, owing to its 
specific characteristics, is best suited for permanent 
forest coverage. Provision is made for privately-owned 
forested land to be declared by the Forestry Directorate 
as protection or production forest, or unclassified general 
forests. Reforestation by the private owner is obUgatory 
where necessary for conserving or restoring renewable 
natural resources, and provision is made to compel the 
owner to sell his land if he does not comply. The Forestry 
Directorate has been abolished, and its responsibilities 
have largely been transferred to RENARE's Flora and 
Protected Areas Division (Division de Rora y Areas 
Protegidas) (DFAP) (R. Cal, pers. comm., 1992). 



Two regulations under the 1987 Forestry Law have been 
made. Decree No. 450/988, 1988 states the need for a 
national forestation plan (plan nacional de forestacion) 
to be established over a period of five years. Among 
the objectives of this plan is the promotion of forest 
resource renewal and environmental conservation. 
Decree No. 452/988, also of 1988, gives further details 
of regulatory measures and enforcement of the 1987 
Forest Law. The conditions under which forests are 
declared productive, protection or unclassified are 
stated, but no clear definitions are given. It is prohibited 
to fell trees in protection forests. 

There is no single piece of legislation that gives 
definitions for management categories, though a new bill 
is being written by RENARE (R. Cal, pers. comm., 
1992). Definitions may be derived from decrees 
providing for the creation of individual protected areas, 
but these were passed with no national plan or structure 
to follow and are often vague or contradictory. For 
example. Law No. 9718 of 1937 declares Fort San 
Miguel a national monument and the surrounding area a 
national park, but Decree No. 533 of 1970 declares San 
Miguel and Santa Teresa National Parks as wildlife 
reserves (Wetterberg et al., 1985). 

InternatioDal Activities Uruguay signed the 
Convention on Nature Protection and Wildlife 
Preservation in the Western Hemisphere (Convencion 
sobre la Proteccion de la Flora, de la Fauna y de las 
Bellezas Escenicas Naturales de los Pai'ses de America) 
(Western Hemisphere Convention) in 1940, and 
ratified it in 1969. Uruguay ratified the Convention 
Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and 
Natural Heritage (World Heritage Convention) on 
9 March 1989, but no sites have been inscribed; the 
Convention on Wedands of International Importance 
Especially as Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar Convention) 
on 22 May 1984, with one site inscribed; and participates 
in the Unesco Man and the Biosphere Programme with 
one site accepted as an internationally recognised 
biosphere reserve in 1976. 

Administration and Management The Ministry 

of Livestock, Agriculture and Fisheries (MGAP) is 
responsible for natural resource use. Within the 
Ministry, the General Directorate of Renewable Natural 
Resources (Direccion General de Recursos Naturales 
Renovables) (RENARE) is the organisation vested with 
this responsibility. RENARE comprises two 
directorates, one of which is the Soils and Waters 
Directorate (Direccion de Suelos y Aguas). The other is 
the Flora, Fauna and Protected Areas Directorate 
(Direccidn de Rora, Fauna y Areas Protegidas), which 
in turn is spUt into two divisions. The Flora and Protected 
Areas Division (Division de Rora y Areas Protegidas) 
(DFAP) is responsible for the management of protected 
areas and for controlling the felling of native forest; it 



297 



Protected Areas of the World 



also administers and manages all slate-owned forests 
and protected areas, which account for over 60% of the 
protected areas. The Fauna Division (Di visi6n de Fauna) 
manages the conservation and exploitation of native 
wildlife. The Forestry Directorate has now been 
dissolved, and its functions (except for reforestation, 
which is assigned to the national forestry plan, under 
MGAP) have been assumed by RENARE's Flora and 
Protected Areas Division (Division de Flora y Areas 
Protegidas) (DFAP) (R. Cal, pers. comm., 1992). 

The Institute for the Preservation of the Environment, 
established in 1971, used to woric in close association 
with the former Forest Directorate to conserve natural 
resources, but this relationship did not produce any 
significant results (Oltremari, 1988). The Institute has 
now been dissolved and in its place a Ministry of 
Housing, Territorial Planning and Environment 
(Ministerio de Vivienda, Ordenamiento Territorial y 
Medio Ambiente) (MVOTMA) has been created. Its role 
is to decide national conservation policy including that 
concerning protected areas. Its National Environment 
Directorate (Direccion Nacional de Medio Ambiente) 
does not possess protected area specialists and so 
RENARE staff act as consultants (R. Cal, pers. comm., 
1992) 

Although administration appears centralised, there are 
numerous insiimiions that, directly or indirectly, are also 
involved in protected area management (Nebel and 
Cravino, 1 987). The Park Service of the Army (Servicio 
de Parques del Ejercito) (SEPAE), within the Ministry 
of National Defence (Ministerio de Defensa National), 
administers two areas, Santa Teresa and San Miguel 
Historic Monuments and National Parks (Anon., 1991; 
Oltremari, 1988). Some departmental administrations 
(intendencias departamentales), municipalities, and the 
State Insurance Bank (Banco de Seguros Del Estado) are 
involved in others (Oltremari, 1988; Oltremari and 
Nebel, 1988). 

There are at least 30 non-governmental organisations 
(NGOs) working in conservation issues, at both the 
national and the regional level. Among the nationwide 
groups is the Friends of Environmental Preservation 
(Amigos de la Preservacion Ambiental) (APA) which 
supports protected areas and environmental education. 
There is a need for greater cooperation between the 
various governmental and non-governmental 
organisations, in order to attain national conservation 
objectives (Oltremari, 1988), although Cal (pers. comm., 
1992) reports that there is now a satisfactory level of 
cooperation. 

The structure of the RENARE is relatively recent, and 
the divisions lack clearly assigned functions, resulting in 
instability and reduced capability. Following the 1987 
Forest Law, the RENARE is vested with a wide range of 
functions and, therefore, coordination within the 
organisation is essential. In order to develop a plan for 
a coherent protected area system, a stable and strong 



centralised administration with capable personnel is 
required (Oltremari, 1988; Oltremari and Nebel, 1988). 

In 1980, lack of personnel was given as one of the main 
factors Umiting the administrative effecuveness of the 
bodies responsible for protected areas: there were only 
three professionals, three technical staff, four 
administrative staff, five park guards and around 1(X) 
labourers in the entire protected area management 
organisation. Following studies conducted in 1988, the 
situation did not appear to have changed substantially 
(Oltremari, 1988), although there may have been 
improvements with the recent reorganisation of 
protected areas administration (R. Cal, pers. comm., 
1992). 

Systems Reviews Uruguay is primarily a pastoral 
country, with around 75% of the land used for livestock 
farming. Some 42% of the population b ves in the capital 
city (Oltremari and Nebel, 1988; Paxton, 1990). The 
climate is warm temperate, with mUd winters and warm 
summers. Average rainfall in the capital region is 
950mm. 

The wildUfe appears to have been seriously affected by 
the intensity and extension of livestock-raising 
activities, mainly through loss and modification of 
habitat: as an indicator of this, 18% of the country's 
mammal species and 10% of its bird species are 
endangered or threatened (Oltremari and Nebel, 1988). 
A detailed assessment is currently not available. From 
extensive studies carried out during the development of 
a proposal for a protected area system, it appears that the 
south-east region is the richest in biodiversity, and 
contains ecosystems of the greatest national interest for 
conservation (Anon., 1991). The south-eastern region 
is known as the Atlantic plains, and may be divided into 
two sub-regions: the Adantic basin comprising the water 
coiu'ses of several rivers; and the basin of Lake Merin, 
known as Bafiados del Este (Eastern Marshes). 

The Atlantic basin is totally flat, inundated temporarily 
or permanently, with poor drainage. Along the coast are 
extensive sand dunes, and the region is very rich in bird 
species. Except for the state-owned reserves already 
established there, the remaining land is under private 
ownership. CatUe ranching is extensive, and rice is 
grown along the waterways. The Eastern Marshes are 
low-lying, with grassland and palm trees, and rice is also 
grown extensively here. Annual temperatures in the 
south-east region are around 17°C, and rainfall ranges 
between 1000mm and 1100mm. 

Protected area declaration began in 1915, but has been 
random, with no common objective (Oltremari and 
Nebel, 1988). Some 40% of the current protected area 
system was established during the 1960s. By 1988, there 
were 16 protected areas, covering a total of 33,538ha. 
None of the established areas has a management plan nor 
defined objectives clarifying its function. Many areas are 
not of sufficient size to afford protection to their 
resources and require reclassification (Oltremari, 1988). 



298 



Uruguay 



In most cases, protected areas were not given clear 
boundaries in the legislation providing for their creation, 
and conflict over land use has resulted (Anon., 1991). 
The integrity of many protected areas is threatened by 
commercial plantation of rapidly growing tree species. 
For example, exotic trees were planted along coastal 
areas to stabilise the sand dunes, but their popularity with 
tourists attraction has led to planting in further areas 
(Oltremari and Nebel, 1988). However, Cal (pers. 
comm., 1992) states that this has affected only one 
natural monument. Most protected areas are located in 
the Rocha department in the south-east region. 

In 1986, Uruguay began to participate in the FAO Latin 
American Network for Technical Cooperation in 
National Parks, other Protected Areas, Flora and 
Wildlife (Red Latinoamericana de Cooperacion T6cnica 
en Parques Nacionales, Otras Areas Protegidas, Flora y 
Fauna Silvestre), which promotes integrated 
management of protected areas and exchanges of 
information in each participating country. At the time of 
joining, Uruguay was one of only two countries in Latin 
America that neither possessed nor had instigated 
proposals to establish a coherent national system of 
protected areas (Ormazabal, 1988). In 1989, the MGAP 
acknowledged the urgent need for a legal structure to 
improve protected area management, effectiveness and 
coverage, and a National Consultative Network (Red 
Nacional) was established, comprising delegates from 
private and governmental organisations involved in 
resource management, including DFAP, the Fauna 
Directorate and the SEPAE (Larrobla, pers. comm., 
1990; R. Cal, pers. comm., 1992). 

Following this, the National Environment Study 
(Estudio Ambiental Nacional) was initiated in 1990 in 
collaboration with the Organization of American States 
and the Interamerican Development Bank, which states 
the necessity for a coherent system of protected areas 
(Anon., 1991). The current problems are cited as the lack 
of a national conservation objective, the presence of 
several different administrative bodies, and land 
ownership. The cooperation of state, municipal and 
private organisations is required to implement an unified 
system, particularly as proposed areas are often on 
privately-owned land ( Anon. , 1 99 1 ). The study provides 
for the future creation of an environmental information 
system (sistema de informaci6n ambiental) as a later 
stage in the development of a national environmental 
conservation strategy (Anon., 1991). These problems are 
now being tackled and the situation may be improving 
(R. Cal, pers. comm., 1992). 

The main objective of the National Environment Study 
is to identify priority conservation areas and select those 
that wUl form the basis of a national system, ensuring 
tliat all biogeographical regions in the country are 
included. Cultural and historical importance of areas is 
also taken into account. The study identified 36 
important areas, some of which are aheady protected, 
and others which are of potential value. Of these, 16 



priority areas were selected for further investigation and 
drawing up of management plans (Anon., 1991). 

The development of an effective protected area system 
requires, primarily, a legal structure to provide clear 
definitions of management categories and objectives 
(Oltremari, 1988). Detailed studies of individual areas, 
their present situation and biodiversity, have led to a 
comprehensive proposal for a national system of 
protected areas, with detailed definitions of the 
categories to be included (see Annex) (Anon., 1991). 

Three categories of protected areas wiU be used in the 
national system, and definitions are given (see Annex). 
The reserve category can be expanded to include not 
only forests, but all natural resources, and allow varying 
degrees of use. Established areas will be reclassified as 
required, and all areas will remain under the 
administration of the MGAP. The proposed national 
system of protected areas covers 0.7% of the total 
country area, and contains characteristic ecosystems and 
important geological formations. However, the national 
environmental study cites the south-east region as the 
most important for conservation purposes, in terms of 
species richness and biodiversity. Efforts to increase 
protected area coverage have been concentrated in this 
area (Anon., 1991; Oltremari, 1988). 

The proposed areas for the system is by no means a 
closed list, others may be included and the system should 
be flexible enough to incorporate new areas as the need 
arises (Anon., 1991). Details of the extent of 
implementation of the proposed system are not yet 
available. 

Addresses 

Direccion General de Recursos Naturales Renovables 
(RENARE), Ministerio de Ganaden'a, Agricultura y 
Pesca, Cerrito 322, 2do. piso, 1 1000 MONTEVIDEO 
(Tel: 958434/956741/959878; FAX: 956456) 

Ministerio de Vivienda, Ordenamiento Territorial y 
Medio Ambiente(MVOTMA),ZabalaMONTEVIDEO 
(Tel: 950211/950421/963954) 

Amigos de la Preservacion Ambiental (APA), 
Somme 1612, MONTEVIDEO 

References 

Anon. (1988). Temas de conservacidn. "El Yacari". 
Sociedad Zooldgica del Uruguay/Sociedad de 
Conservacidn del Medio Ambiente. P. 30. 

Anon. (1991). Seleccidn de dreas silvestres para 
integrar un sistema nacional de dreas protegidas. 
Uruguay: estudio ambiental nacional. Oficina de 
Planeamiento y Presupuesto (OPP)/OEA/BID. 
134 pp. 

Laffite, A. {\9%Q).lnventario nacional para seleccidn de 
nuevas dreas para parques nacionales. Minislenode 
Educaci6n y Cultura/Universidad de la Repiiblica, 
Facultad de Agronomfa, Montevideo. 



299 



Protected Areas of the World 



Nebel, J.P., and Cravino, J.L. (1987). Situacidn actual 
de las Areas Protegidas en Uruguay. 
MGAP:RENARE, Montevideo. 13 pp. (Unseen) 

Oltremari, J.V. (1988). Eslrategia para el desarrollo de 
un sistema nacional de dreas protegidas en Uruguay. 
Oficina Regional de la FAO para America Ladna y 
el Caribe, Santiago, Chile. 58 pp. 

Oltremari. J.V. and Nebel, J.P. (1988). Las dreas 
protegidas en Uruguay. Flora, fauna y dreas 
silvestres 3(7): 13-22. Oficina Regional de la FAO 
para America Latina y el Caribe, Santiago, Chile. 

Ormazabal, C. (1988). Sistemas nacionales de dreas 
silvestres protegidas en America Latina. Basado en 



los resultados del taller sobre Planificacion de 
Sistemas Nacionales de Areas Silvestres Protegidas, 
Caracas, Venezuela, 9-13 junio, 1986. Oficina 
Regional de la FAO para America Latina y el Caribe, 
Santiago, Chile. 

Paxton, J. (Ed.) (1990). The Statesman's Yearbook 
1990-199]. The MacMillan Press Ltd, London. 
1,691pp. 

Wetterberg, G.B., Jorge Padua, M.T., Tresinari, A. and 
Ponce, C.F. (1985). Decade of progress for South 
American national parks 1974-1984. US National 
Park Service, Washington, DC. 125 pp. 



ANNEX 

Deflnitions of protected area designations, as legislated, 

together with authorities responsible for their administration 



Title: Proposal for a national system of 
protected areas 

Date: 1988 

Brief description: A proposal for a coordinated 
system of protected areas, giving definitions of the 
management categories to be used, that is to be 
established by law. 

Administrative Authority: Ministerio de 
Ganaden'a, Agricultura y Pesca (Ministry of 
Livestock, Agriculture and Fisheries), via the 
Direcci6n General de Recursos Naturales 
Renovables (General Directorate of Renewable 
Natural Resources) (RENARE). 

Designations: 

Parque Nacional (National Park) An extensive 
area where a diversity of unique ecosystems are 
found, or ecosystems representative of the ecological 
diversity of the country, which have not been 
significandy altered by man. 

The floral or faunal species or geological formations 
within the area are of scientific, educational or 
recreational interest, and are to be maintained in their 
natural state. 



Only activities compatible with the continuity of the 
natural process are permitted, such as recreation, 
education or investigation. 

Monumento Natural (Natural Monument) 
An area usually of small size, characterised by the 
presence of native species of flora or fauna or 
cultural, scenic, educational or scientific importance. 
Only educational, recreational or investigative 
activities are permitted. 

Reserva Nacional (National Reserve) 
An area whose natural resources are important to be 
conserved owing to their particular fragility or 
susceptibility to be degraded and for their importance 
for the welfare of the community Particularly 
threatened species of wildlife or fauna, watersheds 
and for studies of sustainable use. 



The concept of reserve may be expanded to include 
a variety of management categories such as multiple 
use reserve and forest reserve, the common factor 
being the preservation of specific resources and the 
obligation of a management plan. 

Source: Oltremari (1988) 



300 



Uruguay 



SUMMARY OF PROTECTED AREAS 



Map 


National/international designations 


lUCN management 


Area 


Year 


ref. 


Name of area 


category 


(ha) 


notifled 




National Parks 








1 


Anchorena 


V 


1,450 


1978 


2 


Arequita 


V 


1,000 


1964 


3 


Franklin Delano Roosevelt 


V 


1,500 


1915 


4 


San Miguel 


V 


1,598 


1937 


5 


Santa Teresa 
Faunal Reserve 


V 


3,288 


1927 


6 


Laguna de Castillos 
Natural Monuments 


IV 


8,000 


1966 


7 


Costa AtMntica 


III 


14,250 


1966 


8 


Dunas de Cabo Polonio 
National Forests 


111 


1,000 


1966 


9 


Islas del Ri'o Negro 


vm 


1,850 


1969 


10 


Islas del Ri'o Uruguay 
Forest Reserve 


vni 


6,660 


1921 


11 


Cabo Polonio 


vm 


6,000 


1942 




Biosphere Reserve 










Bafiados del Este 


IX • 


200,000 


1976 




Ramsar Wetland 










Baflados del Este y Franja Costera 


IX 


200,000 


1984 



301 



Protected Areas of the World 




Protected Areas of Uruguay 



302 



THE REPUBLIC OF VENEZUELA 



Area 912,047 sq. km 

Population 19,735,000(1990) 
Natural increase: 2.36% per annum 

Economic Indicators 

GDP: US$ 2,450 per capita (1989) 
GNP: US$ 2,716 per capita (1987) 

Policy and legislation Responsibility for 

protecting natural resources is given in the 1961 
Constitution. It establishes the state as the main manager 
of resources, allowing sustainable exploitation for the 
benefit of the population (AID/NFS, 1981). 

Major restructuring of the government departments 
responsible for environmental management and policy 
making took place during the 1970s, reflecting increased 
concern with reconciling socio-economic development 
and natural resource conservation (AID/NPS, 1981). A 
ministry specifically responsible for natural resources 
was established in 1976 and began its activities in 1977. 
Through it, the national policy of "development destined 
to meet the basic needs of the present and future 
population through the rational use of natural resources", 
was promulgated (AID/NPS, 1981). 

A national conservation strategy, stating national 
conservation priorities, was drawn up in 1989 by a 
nongovernmental organisation (NGO), the Foundation 
for the Defence of Nature (Fundaci6n para la Defensa de 
la Naturaleza) (FUDENA), and published with the 
support of lUCN and WWF. This sets out specific 
recommendations for utilising and protecting resources 
in accordance with the World Conservation Strategy 
(1980) are given (Anon., 1989). Information on the 
extent of implementation is currendy not available. 

Following signature of the Convention on Nature 
Protection and Wildlife Preservation in the Western 
Hemisphere (Convenci6n sobre la Proteccion de la 
Flora, de la Fauna y de las Bellezas Escdnicas Naturales 
de los Pai'ses de America) (Western Hemisphere 
Convention) in 1940, Venezuela passed a law in 1941 
incorporating the principles of the Convention into its 
own legislation (Anon., 1987). 

Under provisions of the Agrarian Reform Law (Ley de 
Reforma Agraria) Gaceta Oficial No. 611, March 1960, 
land under state protection for conservation cannot be 
used for agricultural purposes, and communities living 
within the area are compulsorily relocated (R. Garcia, 
pers. comm., 1984). The 1943 Forest Law of Lands and 
Waters (Ley Forestal de Suelos y Aguas), revised in 
1955 and 1965, made provision for the 1964 Partial 
Regulations of the Forest Law of Lands and Waters 
(Reglamento Parcial de la Ley Forestal de Suelos y 
Aguas), Decree No. 156. This defines forest reserves and 



regulations pertaining to the exploitation of resources 
within them (see Annex). 

The 1%5 Forest Law of Lands and Waters (Ley Forestal 
de Suelos y Aguas), Gaceta Oficial No. 1004, details 
conservation and utilisation of natural resources, 
including forests and forest products, public and private 
water and soil. National parks, protection areas and 
forest reserves are defmed and their administration is 
assigned to the Ministry of Agriculture (see Annex). 
Provision is made for the expropriation of private land 
to establish national parks. The regulations to the 1943 
Forest Law remain in effect (FAO, 1965). 

The 1970 Wildlife Protection Law (Ley de Proteccion a 
la Fauna Silvestre) declares the creation of faunal 
reserves, refuges and sanctuaries (reservas, refugios y 
santuarios de fauna silvestre) a public utility, and 
provides for the sustainable exploitation of wUd fauna. 
Refuges and sanctuaries are given the absolute 
protection of the State (Gondelles, 1992). 

The Organic Law of the Environment (Ley Organica del 
Ambiente) (1976) institutionalises environmental 
planning as part of the national planning system, and 
establishes committees for the "conservation, defence 
and improvement" of the environment in every 
municipality. The highest responsibility for national 
environmental policy rests with the President of the 
Republic and the Council of Ministers. Provision is made 
for the creation of the National Environment Council 
(Consejo Nacional del Ambiente) to be in charge of legal 
and institutional aspects of environmental management. 

The Organic Law of Central Administration (Ley 
Orgdnica de la Administraci6n Central) passed on 
22 December 1976, assigns environmental planning 
responsibilities to the appropriate bodies. Most 
importantly, it provides for the creation of the Ministry 
of the Environment and Renewable Natural Resources 
(Ministerio del Ambiente y de los Recursos Naturales 
Renovables) (MARNR), to be responsible for all natural 
resources, and for implementing environmental jxjlicy. 

Environmental management responsibilities were 
shifted from the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock 
to the new Ministry of the Environment under provisions 
of the 1977 Regulations of the Forest Law of Lands and 
Waters (Reglamentos de la Ley Forestal y de Suelos y 
Aguas). The National Institute of Parks (Instituto 
Nacional de Parques) (INPARQUES), an autonomous 
institute attached to MARNR, was created to manage 
national parks and natural monuments. 

In 1983, the Organic Law for Territorial Planning (Ley 
Orginica para la Ordenacidn del Territorio) is the most 
effective current protected area legislation (Gondelles, 
1992). The law defines 25 categories of areas thatrequire 
special administration owing to their particular 



303 



Protected Areas of the World 



production, recreation or protection potential, and any 
threats to their integrity. Collectively, these form the 
system of Areas under Special Administrative Regime 
(Areas Bajo R6gimen de Administracidn Especial) 
(ABRAE), and responsibility for their administration is 
to be assigned to the appropriate institutes (Annex). 
Because the ABRAE system comprises a wide variety 
of different categories, not all of which are for 
conservation ends, it is about to be superseded by a more 
modem Natural Protected Areas system (Areas Naturales 
Protegidas) (ANAPRO)(Gondelles, 1992; A. Luy, pers. 
comm., 1992). 

The 1989 Partial Regulation of the Organic Law for 
Territorial Planning pertaining to Administration and 
Management of National Parks and Natural Monuments 
(Reglamento Parcial de la Ley Orgdnica para la 
Ordenacion de Territorio sobre Administraci6n y 
Manejo de Parques Nacionales y Monumentos 
Naturales) Decree No. 276, details the regulations 
governing these two categories of protected area, 
including prohibited activities and measures for ensuring 
compliance with the law. National parks and natural 
monuments are divided into zones according to the 
activities compatible with the different ecosystems 
within them, and definitions are given. Management 
plans are mandatory for each protected area, to be 
revised every five years, and are legislated as 
presidential decrees (decretos presidenciales). 

In January 1 992, the Penal Law of the Environment (Ley 
Penal del Ambiente) was passed. Article 59, referring to 
national parks, establishes fines and arrests for persons 
found hunting wildlife (birds, amphibians, mammals and 
reptiles), or destroying shelter on which it depends. 
Protected areas are also mentioned in Article 58 (A. Luy, 
pers. comm., 1992). 

During 1991, MARNR and INPARQUES formulated a 
proposal for a new and comprehensive Protected Natural 
Areas Law (Ley de Areas Naturales Protegidas), and the 
first draft is currently in revision (Pardo, pers. comm., 
1991). Further details of the contents and objectives of 
this new law are currently not available. 

International Activities The Convention on 

Nature Protection and Wildlife Preservation in the 
Western Hemisphere (Convenci6n sobre la Protecci6n 
de la Flora, de la Fauna y de las Bellezas Esc6nicas 
Naturales de los Paises de Amdrica) (Western 
Hemisphere Convention) was signed by Venezuela in 
1940, and ratified in 1941. Venezuela is one of the eight 
countries with territory in the Amazon region that signed 
the Amazon Cooperation Treaty (Tratado de 
Cooperaci6n Amaz6nica) on 3 July 1978, an agreement 
to establish regulations for managing natural resources 
and to propose conservation-directed alternatives to the 
management of multinational projects. 

In 1977 Venezuela joined the Caribbean Conservation 
Association (CCA), a regional, non-governmental, 
nonprofit organisation dedicated to promoting poUcies 



and practices which contribute to conservation, protection 
and wise use of natural and cultural resources. The 
Convention for the Protection and Development of the 
Marine Environment of the Wider Caribbean Region (the 
Cartagena Convention), and the related Protocol Concerning 
Cooperation in Combating Oil Spills in the Wider 
Caribbean Region, were both signed by Venezuela on 
24 March 1983 and ratified on 18 December 1986. The 
second protocol. Protocol Concerning Specially Protected 
Areas and Wildlife (SPAW), was signed by Venezuela in 
June 1991, but has not yet been ratified. 

The Convention on Wetlands of International 
Importance especially as Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar 
Convention) was signed in 1988, with one site listed by 
1991 . Venezuela ratified the Convention concerning the 
Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage 
(World Heritage Convention) in October 1990, but no 
sites have been inscribed. Venezuela is a signatory to the 
Unesco Man and the Biosphere (MAB) Programme and 
has a national MAB committee, although neither of its 
two biosphere reserves are internationally recognised 
(J .P. Rodriguez, pers. comm., 1992). 

INPARQUES, EcoNatura and Wildlife Conservation 
International (WCI) are currently carrying out a 
US$ 1 million programme for the Consolidation of the 
Venezuelan National Parks System (Fortalecimiento del 
Sistema de Parques Nacionales de Venezuela) with 
support from the European Community (CJ. Sharpe, 
pers. comm., 1992). 

Administration and Management The present 
structure of the protected areas management system 
began with the creation of MARNR in 1 976, and the start 
of its activities in 1977. MARNR is responsible for the 
conservation, protection and regulation of all natural 
resources, and all environmental activities previously 
assigned to the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock 
under the 1%5 Forest Law. It executes work either 
directly or through appropriate institutes, and is, 
therefore, the main agency for devising and 
implementing Venezuela's environmental policy 
(AID/NPS, 1981). 

At the national level, MARNR comprises four Sectoral 
General Directorates (Direcciones Generates 
Sectoriales), a structure which is repeated at the regional 
level in the 24 administrative areas by which MARNR 
divides the country. The regional agencies, although 
autonomous, execute the Ministry's basic programmes. 

Several autonomous management bodies with 
responsibilities to manage forests, wildlife and the 
Amazon Federal Territory were formed in 1989, all 
dependent on MARNR: the Venezuelan Forestry 
Service (Servicio Forestal Venezolano) (SEFORVEN); 
the Wildlife Service (Servicio Aut6nomo para la 
proteccidn, restauraci6n, fomento y racional 
aprovechamiento de la fauna silvestre y acu^tica del 
pais) (PROFAUNA); and the Autonomous Service for 
Environmental Development of Amazon Federal 



3(M 



The Republic of Venezuela 



Territory (Servicio Autdnomo para el DesarroUo 
Ambiental del Territorio Federal Amazonas) 
(SADA-AMAZONAS). 

SEFORVEN is responsible for managing the country's 
forested land, and, in particular, for regulating the 
exploitation of forest resources in compliance with 
current forestry legislation. It does not manage 
protection forests that form part of protected areas in the 
ABR AE system. PROFAUN A regulates the exploitation 
of terrestrial and aquatic wildlife, implements 
conservation programmes, and is responsible for the 
administration of areas that are designated as ABRAEs 
because of their wildlife resources. 

SADA-AMAZONAS is responsible for the 
conservation, protection and improvement of the 
environment in the Amazon region. 
SADA-AMAZONAS coordinates and supervises 
activities in the implementation of the Planning of 
Amazon Federal Territory (Plan de Ordenaci6n del 
Territorio Federal Amazonas), which is based on the 
national Organic Law for Territorial Planning, and 
promotes scientific research in the region to identify 
areas for protection. The respective institutes responsible 
for managing those ABRAEs that are located in the 
Amazon Federal Territory work closely with 
SADA-AMAZONAS to achieve the conservation 
objectives of the region. A Consultative Council 
(Consejo Consultivo) assesses the activities of 
SADA-AMAZONAS. 

All national parks and natural monuments are managed 
by INPARQUES, and, following the 1989 regulations, 
management plans must be drawn up for each area. By 
1991, INPARQUES had formulated management plans 
for seven national parks, which have subsequently been 
approved and passed into the legislation in the form of 
decrees (C. Pardo, pers. comm., 1991). 

INPARQUES has at its disposal two bodies for the 
protecting natural resources and upholding regulations 
pertaining to their use: a body of civilian park guards, 
and the Environmental Guard (Guarderia Ambiental) 
made up of armed forces from the National Guard 
(Guardia Nacional) and officials of MARNR (Anon, 
1987; J.P. Rodriguez, pers. comm., 1992). The 
Environmental Guard is empowered by law to prevent 
and curtail activities detrimental to the environment 
within national parks or natural monuments. Activities 
carried out by the armed forces include: border patrol; 
tourist information and education programmes; building 
and maintaining conservation centres and controlUng 
resource use by enforcing regulations (Anon., 1987; 
lUCN, 1986). 

The institutes responsible for managing other 
categories in the ABRAE system, are selected by 
MARNR (C. Pardo, pers. comm., 1991). 

There are a large number of NGOs concerned with 
conservation and environmental issues. The two largest 



are the Foundation for the Defence of Nature (Fundaci6n 
para la Defensa de la Naturaleza) (FUDENA), 
established in 1975, and the Venezuelan Foundation for 
the Conservation of Biological Diversity (Fundacion 
Venezolana para la Conservacion de la Diversidad 
BioWgica) (BIOMA), established in 1986. FUDENA 
promotes research projects and action plans to protect 
wildUfe and fauna, helps to manage one protected area 
and has formulated a national conservation strategy. 
BIOMA identifies, evaluates and supports the 
administration of protected areas (BIOMA, 1987). In 
addition, BIOMA owns and manages four private 
reserves totalUng 3,225 ha (Romero, 1992b). BIOMA's 
Conservation Data Centre (Centre de Datos para la 
ConsCTvacidn) (CDC) was formed in 1988 to identify areas 
of conservation value within the country (Anon., 1989). 

Among the other NGOs that work in aspects of the 
declaration and/or management of protected areas are 
PROVITA, the Venezuelan Audubon Society (Sociedad 
Conservacionista Audubon de Venezuela), the 
Educational Association for Nature Conservation 
(EcoNatura), and a large number of organisations that 
concentrate their work on a particular region or 
individual national park. In 199 1 , 1 7 NGOs from all over 
the country met to form the Network of 
Nongovernmental Conservation Organisations (Red de 
Organizaciones ConsCTvacionistas No Gubemamentales) 
to encourage an exchange of information and coordinate 
activities (C J. Sharpe, jjers. comm., 1992). 

The increased deployment of armed forces within 
national parks is a reflection of problems and weakness 
in the management of protected areas. Insufficient funds 
for training parte guards and providing equipment results 
in poor administration and encroachment by migratory 
farmers and mining companies in some cases (Anon., 
1987; lUCN, 1986). As a result, INPARQUES called on 
the services of the aimed forces to maintain the integrity 
of the national park system by assisting in their 
management (Anon., 1987; lUCN, 1986). 

The potential for improving the efficiency of protected 
area management was greatly increased by introducing 
the system of zonation, by which activities within 
national parks and natural monuments are consigned to 
suitable zones, as detailed in the 1989 Regulations to the 
Organic Law of Territorial Planning pertaining the 
Administration of National Parks and Natural 
Monuments. Together with the provision for mandatory 
management plans for each area, a coherent structiu-e 
with detailed regulations is being created, on which to 
base all protected area management (MARNR, 1989). 

A System of Computerised Information on National 
Parks (Sistema de Informaci6n Computerizada sobre los 
Parques Nacionales de Venezuela) (SIP ANA) is being 
developed by INPARQUES to improve administration 
of both national parks and natural monuments and allow 
more efficient selection of new areas. Data on the 
integrity of ecosystems; species abundance; equipment, 
personnel and infrastructure; and activities taking place 



305 



Protected Areas of the World 



in each area will allow management plans to be regularly 
updated (M. Bevilacqua, pers. comm., 1991; M. 
Gabalddn and M. Bevilacqua, pers. comm., 1990). 

The role of INPARQUES in declaring and managing 
protected areas is often compromised by the interests of 
superior government bodies, such as the Ministry of 
Energy and Mines (Ministerio de Energia y Minas) and 
other departments and autonomous services of MARNR. 
As aresult, mining concessions have been granted within 
national parks. Protected areas may also be degazetted 
in order to permit mineral and hydrocarbon exploitation 
(Anon, 1992; M.L. Goodwin, 1992; C.J. Sharpe, pers. 
comm., 1992). 

Systems Reviews All the characteristic 

Neotropical biogeographic regions are represented in 
Venezuela: high mountains, coastal ranges, arid and 
semi-arid regions, mangroves and marine coastal 
wetlands, seasonally flooded plains, areas of high 
endemism, very disturbed tropical forest north of the 
Orinoco River, and relatively undisturbed areas to the 
south (Anon., 1989). 

Following Holdridge's classification (1967), 23 life 
zones occur in Venezuela (Anon., 1982). The most 
important ecosystems are: the Caribbean coast (2,8 1 3km 
in length) and islands (more than 1(X) large islands); the 
Atlantic coast with deltas and mangrove forests; the 
Andean mountains which include cloud forests, 
paramos, tundra-like zones, and f)ermanently-snowed 
peaks (up to 5,(X)7m); the cloud forests of the Coastal 
Cordillera; llanos, flat lands with savanna vegetation and 
many seasonal and perennial rivers and lagoons; arid 
zones with xerophytic vegetation, and true deserts with 
moving sand dunes; Amazonian rain forest, the Gran 
Sabana, a grassland area on a 16,(XX) sq. km plateau at 
l,(XX)m with tepuyes or table mountains. Tepuyes are 
also found in the Amazon region (Salinas, n.d.). 

Venezuela has around 4(X),(XX) sq. km of intact natural 
forest, most of which is located in the area south of the 
Orinoco River. This area accounts for around 50% of 
total land area and includes the Amazon Federal 
Territory, itself comprising 20% of the total land area but 
containing only 0.5% of the population (AID/NPS, 
1981; Anon., n.d.; C. Pardo, pers. comm., 1991). Ninety 
per cent of the population lives north of the Orinoco 
River, a distribution that leads to critical environmental 
problems, such as soil erosion and deforestation in the 
Andean and west central regions where agricultural 
activity is intense (Anon., n.d.). Cattle raising is one of 
the most important land uses, taking up nearly one-third 
of the total national territory, and is particularly 
extensive in the llanos region. Only 4% of the total land 
area is used for arable agriculture (AID/NPS, 1981; 
Anon., n.d.). 

The first protected area, a national forest, was declared 
in 1936 and raised to the status of national park in 1937. 
The legal framework for distinct categories of protected 
areas, from controlled exploitation to inviolable 



protection, began with the declaration of the first national 
park in 1937 (Garcia, 1989). By 1991, 39 national parks 
and 17 natural monuments had been declared, accounting 
for around 15.07% of the total national territory. 
Together with other management category designations, 
a total of 44.39% of national territory is under at least 
minimal legal protection in the ABRAE system (C. Pardo, 
pers. comm., 1991). In addition, a small number of private 
reserve