Status of Protected Area Systems in the Wider Caribbean Region	Report Contents
	CEP Technical Report No. 36 1996	All CEP Technical Reports

3. STATUS OF PROTECTED AREAS SYSTEMS

3.1. Overview

The region's protected areas have been established to conserve representative samples of natural ecosystems, conserve endangered species of flora and fauna, provide watershed protection and ensure water supplies, opportunities for education and research, recreation for local populations, provide sustainable supplies of timber and other renewable resources and to protect traditional land tenure and resource use of indigenous communities. These objectives are being partially achieved, but the lack of institutional capacity together with the assortment of environmental problems that affect the region endanger the future of our protected areas and the benefits they should provide to our societies.

TABLE 6. CONSERVATION AGREEMENTS AND PROGRAMMES

P = Participant, S = Signatory, CP = Contracting Party, M = Member Country
Party through other State: Netherlands (N), United Kingdom (UK), France (FR), United States (US)

Echoing the recommendations made at the IVth World Parks Congress in Caracas (1992), it is clear that the challenges are too great for any one institution to solve single-handedly. Institutions involved with protected areas are usually small, understaffed, and under-trained. Although many difficulties exist, co-operation within the conservation sector, and with other relevant stakeholders is increasing. No magic formulae for success can be offered, but the traditional dedication which has characterised conservationists, the emphasis on increased professionalism, and the development of partnerships with other sectors of society are signs that the protected areas movement is advancing.

According to Dourojeanni (1994), the major problem that faces protected area management in Latin America is the contradiction between the lack of experience at the institutional and individual level versus the extremely complex ecological, social and economic challenges that managers face. Protected area management in the US has had more than 100 years to develop institutions, policies, research ecological and cultural resources, and implement professional park management, and still confronts many serious problems. The rest of the Wider Caribbean Region and Latin America, in general, have only a handful of areas under management for more than 10 years.

The very success they have had in establishing protected areas has been a double edged sword, as the expansion of coverage and responsibilities has usually not been matched by increased funding, staff, or facilities.

As of mid-1994, 1,307 protected areas covering over 116 million ha in the Wider Caribbean Region had been established by national and state governments (Table 7)). Nearly 25% of them contain marine or coastal habitat, especially the insular territories of the region. Protected areas have been established in all 8 national management categories recognised by the IUCN, as well as the international categories of Biosphere Reserve, World Heritage Sites, and Ramsar Sites. The reviewed information does not allow comparisons on types of habitat protected nor their extension.

Over 40% of the total area corresponds to Resource Reserves, Indian Reservations and Multiple Use Areas. The next largest area corresponds to National Parks, which cover nearly 26 million ha. Nearly 20 million ha have been recognised by UNESCO as Biosphere Reserves, while 3 million ha are classified as World Heritage Sites and 1 million ha as Ramsar Sites.

South America has the greatest number of protected areas (469), as well as the greatest overall extension (88 million ha) and average size (188,000 ha). Central and North America together account for 24 million ha. The extension of protected areas in the Caribbean accounts for just 3% of the regions total, but includes 39% of the areas with marine or coastal resources and 21% of all protected areas. Both here and in country summary tables, totals for different management categories don't close due to adjustments made for double counting of multiple category areas (i.e. Everglades National Park, Biosphere Reserve & Ramsar Site).

TABLE 7. WIDER CARIBBEAN PROTECTED AREAS SUMMARY

 

KEY: Areas = Number of Protected Areas;  MZA = No. Areas with Marine or Coastal Zones; Ha = Extension in hectares

3.2. Marine and Coastal Conservation

The need to improve management and conservation of marine and coastal resources first became apparent in the 50's and 60's. Over the years numerous recommendations and action plans have been announced, but the situation is still unsatisfactory. Major threats include pollution, species and resource depletion, conflicting uses and habitat destruction.

Near shore environments are usually the most intensively used marine areas, and at the same time most suitable for the development of marine protected areas (MPA's). Integration with land use practices and terrestrial conservation should be the ideal. Large multiple use MPA's covering complete ecosystems are a mechanism for sustainable management of coastal marine areas (IUCN 1992).

Guidelines for establishing MPA's have been developed and discussed (Kelleher & Kenchington 1991). They analyse the Selection of Areas, Legal Aspects, Guidelines for Planning and the application of the Biosphere Reserve concept in marine environments. Suggested selection parameters include naturalness, biogeographic importance, ecological importance, economic importance, social importance, scientific, international or national significance, and feasibility. Common guidelines and criteria for the identification, selection, establishment, and management of protected areas for the Wider Caribbean have also been developed under the SPAW Regional Programme of CEP (see above).

At the local and regional level, comprehensive coastal zone management is seen as being the only viable mechanism to guarantee conservation of marine environments and biodiversity while at the same time optimising economic and social development. The Caribbean Environment Programme of UNEP has developed comprehensive guidelines for Integrated Coastal Area Management (ICAM) for the Wider Caribbean and assist governments of the region with their implementation (UNEP 1996). The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority in Australia is mentioned as an example where fishing, recreation, tourism and biodiversity conservation function on a sustainable basis within this type of integrated management.

The OAS (1988) conducted a study of MPA's in the Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico, covering 135 areas. Key findings included:

1) Accelerated growth in establishment of MPAs over past 20 years.

2) Management capacity lags far behind establishment, and the resulting resource degradation is widespread.

3) Geomorphically, 45% of the areas were classified as coastal, 28% as marine, 15% as insular and 12% as upland areas with a coastal sub-component.

While protection was considered complete in 18 MPAs in southern Florida, similar levels of protection were found in only 15% of the 95 MPA's in the rest of the Caribbean. Fifty-one percent of the remaining areas were classified as partially protected, while 32% were classified as unprotected.

MPA's were found to provide or host a range of values and uses: wildlife habitat (78 areas), recreational values (68), fishing income (54), research activities (53) and protect endangered species (16). These often overlapping uses can be in conflict if not adequately planned for and managed (e.g. depletion of local fisheries vs. tourism and biodiversity conservation).

The 307 protected areas with marine or coastal resources registered in this report represent an increase of nearly 230% in relation to the 135 documented in the 1988 OAS inventory. Even discounting the 41 areas located in the Gulf of Mexico that were not included in 1988 the increase in coverage is an impressive 200%.

The impacts of human settlements, over fishing, hunting, and chemical and thermal pollution were the top 3 problems for MPA's. Other problems included tourism and mechanical damage to reefs, solid waste, sedimentation and nutrient loading. Only 3% of the areas had problems with aggressive introduced species.

While no other region wide studies have been carried out to update the OAS report, these issues are illustrated by case studies from Bonaire Marine Park (BMP) in the Netherlands Antilles and Corales de Rosario National Park in Colombia. The Bonaire Marine Park was analysed (Dixon et al 1992) in terms of economic impact and ecological sustainability. Conclusions from the study include:

· Marine parks can protect biodiversity and permit direct non-consumptive use when management planning and controls are effective.

· Large scale damage is usually preceded by localised degradation, which can be used as an early warning indicator.

· The costs of establishment and park management (US$670,000) are small in relation to gross benefits (US$32.1 million) associated with and dependent upon the park.

· User fees are logical means to finance management activities but are resisted by stakeholders. Marginal pricing could be an effective means to reduce congestion and degradation of popular sites.

· Incentives should be designed and implemented to ensure that a larger share of economic benefits remain in local markets.

· Current use of BMP (200,000 dives/year) may be close to the actual carrying capacity of the area, and the 10% annual growth in diving could soon lead to resource degradation. Improvements in management and diver education might raise the carrying capacity 50-100% over current levels.

Grip (1993) evaluated the current situation in Corales de Rosario National Park (20,000 ha) in Colombia and proposed overall actions to reduce resource degradation and increase management effectiveness. Major environmental issues identified were:

1) Illegal presence of permanent and recreational housing on the islands,

2) Coastal pollution from Cartagena and other coastal cities,

3) Potential for unrestrained tourism development in Zona Franca on Baru Island, and

4) Destructive practices used by local and non-resident fishermen.

Economic and administrative problems identified were:

1. Co-ordination between the central and regional offices of INDERENA are insufficient,

2. The actual limits are inadequate given the inter-relations between terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems and activities, no zoning plan has been developed to regulate activities within the park.

3. Inadequate staffing and operational resources, transfer of park generated funds to other areas, and

4. Travel agencies, hotels and restaurants benefit from presence of park, but do not contribute to management.

The major recommendations for resolving the situation included:

· Develop a viable zoning plan identifying areas for strict conservation, recuperation, transportation corridors, recreation and an outer buffer zone.

· Involve local and regional officials, park visitors, cruise ship owners, pilots, pleasure boat owners and the aquarium owner in a revision of entrance fee collection procedures and policies. Differential fees for foreigners and nationals should be considered.

· Increased funding should be assigned by INDERENA (now the Ministry of Environment) for park management to provide more personnel and equipment.

· A three year action plan should be developed, and administrative and protection functions should be strengthened.

· The regional INDERENA office should be strengthened to support resolution of management problems in the park, and to guarantee increased park income via the implementation of a new fee policy.

The following sections contain the country profiles for the 37 countries and territories of the Wider Caribbean Region, which are grouped in 4 sub-regions: Insular Caribbean, North, Central, and South American Caribbean. Information on sub-regions, unless otherwise indicated is based on the regional reports presented at the World Parks Congress in 1992. The original text for the country profiles came from the 1992 WCMC publication "Protected Areas of the World, Vol. 4", and has been updated with information provided by SPAW Programme representatives and additional secondary references..

Insular Caribbean 24 Countries and territories: Anguilla (UK), Antigua & Barbuda, Aruba (Neth), Bahamas, Barbados, British Virgin Islands (UK), Cayman Islands (UK), Cuba, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Grenada, Guadeloupe (Fra), Haiti, Jamaica, Martinique (Fra), Montserrat (UK), Netherlands Antilles (Neth), Puerto Rico (USA.), St. Kitts & Nevis, St. Lucia, St. Vincent & Grenadines, Trinidad & Tobago, Turks & Caicos Islands (UK) and the US Virgin Islands (USA.).

Central America 6 countries: Panama, Costa Rica, Nicaragua, Honduras, Guatemala and Belize.

South America 5 countries: Colombia, Venezuela, Guyana, French Guiana (Fra) & Suriname

North America 2 Countries, 20 states: Mexico (Campeche, Chiapas, Distrito Federal, Hildago, Mexico, Nuevo Leon, Oaxaca, Puebla, Querétaro, Quintana Roo, San Luis Potosi, Tabasco, Tamaulipas, Veracruz, Yucatan) and USA (Texas, Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi and Florida).

3.3. Insular Caribbean

(Source: Putney 1992)

The potential economic, ecological and social contribution of protected areas in the islands is very high, but their current level of development is at best incipient. Which is leading to a reduced importance at the national level. This is true for terrestrial areas and perhaps even more so for marine and coastal areas.

Management schemes involving co-management and joint financing are very common in the sub-region, but protected areas management remains isolated from other sectors. This is probably due in part to the limited capacity of the institutions involved in protected areas management including national government agencies of the US, UK, Netherlands and France, government agencies of independent countries, quasi-governmental agencies (Trust Funds), NGOs, local communities, private enterprises, and multi-lateral assistance agencies.

Island areas are often limited in space, and this is especially the case in the Caribbean. The population growth and economic development have led to the alteration of most of the natural areas on the islands, and the development of intense and complex relations between local populations and terrestrial and marine ecosystems.

The limited operational capacity of small institutions has frustrated many co-operative efforts in the region. The most viable strategy in this context is to promote effective information flow and the establishment of regional co-ordinating units. At the local level, more emphasis is needed on management implementation and evaluation. Operational and Conceptual plans have proven more effective than detailed management plans.

Although system plans have been or are being developed for 8 countries or territories in the region, only the British Virgin Islands and Jamaica's plans have been officially approved. Gaps in the current protected areas systems should not be judged not only upon biogeographical criteria, but also upon local conservation priorities such as watershed protection, forest management, recreation opportunities and tourism development.

Participation in international programmes and agreements is high (>70%) for more than half of the initiatives surveyed, including the CBD, Cartagena Convention and its SPAW Protocol, CITES, UN Law of the Sea, and World Heritage Conventions. All 37 states and territories participate in the CEP and SPAW programmes, but participation drops significantly for the Ramsar and Western Hemisphere Conventions, and the FAO-UNEP Protected Areas Network, the Tropical Forestry Action Plan and the MAB programme.

Individual countries with lower rates of participation (<45%) include Bahamas, Barbados, Dominica, Grenada, Haiti, St. Kitts and Nevis, and St. Vincent & the Grenadines. High levels of participation (75% or greater) are registered by Aruba, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Jamaica, and the Netherlands Antilles.

A number of NGO and bi-lateral programmes are specifically aimed at the Caribbean, and include the Caribbean Conservation Association, Caribbean Programmes of WWF-USA, The Nature Conservancy, the Protected Areas Programme of the Caribbean Natural Resources Institute (CANARI) and the Eastern Caribbean Programme of the OAS. Putney (ibid.) stated that current programmes are inadequate due to irregular support and short term funding, lack of co-ordination between the numerous project executors and donors, and inefficiencies due to the limited capacity of each project and the frequent duplication of efforts, especially assessments and strategy development.

Cuba and the Dominican Republic together account for more than 80% of the area (3 million ha) included in protected areas. They are also significant in terms of areas with marine or coastal zones, and absolute number of protected areas. Smaller territories such as Cayman Islands, Dominica, Guadeloupe and Turks and Caicos Islands have significant portions of their territory classified as protected areas, although the percentages are somewhat misleading due to the inclusion of extensive marine areas, e.g. Turks & Caicos (Table 8).

3.4. Central America Caribbean

(Sources: Ugalde & Godoy 1992, Barzetti 1992)

The coverage of national systems has increased significantly over the past 10 years and now includes nearly 13 million ha, or 26% of the sub-region's landmass (Table 9). The selection of new areas has sought to protect watersheds, biodiversity, local recreation use, natural wonders and archaeological sites. Mountainous areas (with extreme limitations for agricultural or forestry development) have been have been favoured over coastal and lowland areas with greater commercial potential. Under represented ecosystems include dry and semi-arid zones, altiplanos and samples of neartic vegetation.

Coastal marine resources are protected, but most often as part of areas where the protection of terrestrial resources is the primary objective. Even so, major areas such as the Belize Barrier Reef, the Bay Islands in Honduras, Miskitos Keys in Nicaragua, Tortuguero in Costa Rica, Isla Bastimentos and the Kuna Yala coast in Panama have been established and are receiving at least some protection.

Three-fourths of Central America's protected areas (60% of the area) are classified as Wildlife Sanctuaries, Resource Reserves, Indian Reserves or Multiple Use Areas, categories where management experience is limited. National Parks and Biological Reserves, categories with greater management experience, account for 20% of the of the areas and nearly 30% of the extension. Sixty-eight percent of the areas are 10,000 ha or less. A large proportion of coverage is contributed by large Biosphere Reserves such as the Rio Platano, Darien, Maya and La Amistad.

TABLE 8. INSULAR CARIBBEAN PROTECTED AREAS SUMMARY

 

1 This table was taken from the IUCN/WCMC Protected Areas of the World, Vol.4 (1992) and might not include the most up-to-date information for all countries.

TABLE 9. CENTRAL AMERICAN CARIBBEAN PROTECTED AREAS SUMMARY

At the national level, the coverage of protected areas (1.8 - 3 million ha) is similar throughout the region, with the exception of Belize (0.8 million ha). In terms of national territory included within protected areas, Costa Rica (44%) and Panama (38%) lead the region. Costa Rica also leads in the number of areas with marine or coastal zones, while Panama has the most extensive coverage of national parks (1.3 million ha).

A recent analysis (Mack 1994) of protected areas policy in Central America concluded that while significant advances have been made in regional co-operation and integration, the rhetoric of government leaders is far removed from the realities of management.

"In some cases, governments and conservationists in the region have succeeded in the creation and consolidation of protected areas without concerted efforts to involve local populations in the planning or, at least initially, the management of the areas. These cases, however, are almost uniformly those where the government has owned or purchased the lands within the area and managed them as its own, rather than attempting to regulate the use of private or indigenous lands. In addition, they often involved sparsely settled lands little suited for agriculture where settlers, if they existed, were often eager to sell. In other cases, however, the declaration of such protected areas usually amidst or near consolidated communities has caused significant conflicts with local populations and lingering distrust of both conservation efforts and the motives of the central government."

Major issues to be resolved in the region include the lack of system and area management plans, personnel and training needs, deficient national land use policies, population growth and resource demand, identification of appropriate methods to promote community participation, and the high degree of dependence upon international technical and financial assistance (Ugalde & Godoy 1992).

Overall participation rates for international agreements and programmes are high. Exceptions include the Migratory Species Convention, Caribbean Conservation Association and the SPAW Protocol, although for the latter, all countries of the sub-region participate in the SPAW Programme. Individually, Panama and Guatemala participate in the greatest number of programmes, followed by Costa Rica, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Belize.

Efforts at regional integration and co-operation have accelerated following the pacification of Nicaragua and El Salvador. The Presidents of the region signed the Central American Convention on Environment and Development and the Convention on Biodiversity and Priority Protected Areas in Central America, each of which calls for the creation of regional councils. In a very recent development, the Presidents of the nations of the region have agreed to form the Central American Alliance for Sustainable Development, recognising the rational use of natural resources as a basic principle for guiding the formulation of development strategies for all of the countries of the region, and establishing short term goals to be met by each (Mack 1994).

3.5. South American Caribbean

Five of the 13 South American Countries have coastal areas in the Caribbean or adjacent waters of the Atlantic. Over 88 million ha (37% of the total land area) has been classified as protected areas. Nearly one-third of the area was established to conserve biodiversity resources in Biological Reserves, National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries. Most of the sub-region's population is located close to the coast, with the exception of the centrally located population centres of Colombia.

While Venezuela and Colombia have extensive protected areas systems, French Guiana and Guyana have only established one area each.. Suriname has established 14 areas totalling nearly one million ha (Table 10). Both Venezuela and Colombia register very high coverage at the national level, nearly 50 million ha are classified in Categories V-VIII, but management effectiveness is frequently non-existent (Table 7, and country Summary Tables).

Proposals have been made to establish new areas in all 5 countries of the sub-region. The use of differing vegetation classification systems and non-standard management categories makes comparison of ecosystem coverage difficult.

TABLE 10. SOUTH AMERICAN CARIBBEAN PROTECTED AREAS SUMMARY

	No. of Protected Areas		Areas with Marine or Coastal Zones		Extension ha		Percentage of National Territory
Colombia	345	74%	27	54%	50,125,998	57%	48%
French Guiana (FR)	1	0%	0	0%	108,000	0%	1%
Guyana	1	0%	0	0%	58,559	0%	0%
Suriname	14	3%	4	8%	904,290	1%	6%
Venezuela	108	23%	17	34%	37,0027,388	42%	42%
SUBTOTAL	469	100%	50	100%	88,224,235	100%	37%

 

Seven areas, totalling 12 million ha have been approved as Biosphere Reserves. No World Heritage Natural Sites have been approved, and Ramsar Sites are limited to 22 thousand ha. Other categories with little application include Biological Reserves, National Monuments and Wildlife Sanctuaries.

Conservation priorities (Barzetti 1993, IUCN 1992) in the sub-region include:

· Establishment and development of national protected areas policies integrated with sustainable development strategies.

· Analysis of biogeographical and ecological coverage of protected areas in each country, performing biological inventories, and identifying priority areas for protection.

· Increased co-operation in the development of conservation activities.

The countries of the region have a high participation in environmental agreements and programmes. Only the Migratory Species and Western Hemisphere Conventions have less than 40% participation rates. A similar situation exists with regards to regional programmes, where the MAB programme and the Caribbean Conservation Association are the only programmes with less than 80% participation rates. French Guiana has the lowest participation rate in the area, and is the only country not participating in the Amazon Co-operation Treaty.

3.6. North American Caribbean

Sources: (Barzetti 1993, IUCN 1992)

This sub-region borders the Gulf of Mexico and the Caribbean slope of Mexico. Where possible, data are presented at this level, but in other cases national figures are reported. The sub-region contains 20% of the region's protected areas and areas with marine or coastal zones (Table 11). While two-thirds of the areas with marine or coastal zones are located in the US, 90% of the total area protected is in Mexican territory.

Many US sites are considered world class tourist attractions because of their natural beauty, but Mexico is considered one of the world's major hot spots for biodiversity conservation, and has an extensive network of cultural sites.

TABLE 11. NORTH AMERICAN CARIBBEAN PROTECTED AREAS SUMMARY

	No. of Protected Areas		Areas with Marine or Coastal Zones		Extension ha		Percentage of National Territory
MEXICO	110	45%	20	34%	8,816,807	90%	13%
USA	133	55%	39	66%	970,964	10%	1%
Subtotal	243	100%	59	100%	9,787,771	100%	5%

US management agencies often find personnel and facilities stretched to the breaking point by mass tourism. Mexican natural areas often lack even basic services, and are not as important a destination as cultural sites for tourism. In both countries management agencies are being faced with problems not faced previously, and for which progressive policies and increased training are necessary.

In spite of the longer management history and less diverse biota, the lack of systematic scientific data on wildlife populations is considered a major problem facing protected areas in the US. Biodiversity conservation is a new objective, in both Mexico and the US, and managers often find more questions than answers.

Top of Page

Preface | 1. Introduction | 2. Relevant Issues... | 3. Status of Protected Areas Systems | 4. Conclusions... | 5. References | Country Profiles