World Rainforest Movement Bulletin #51

WORLD RAINFOREST MOVEMENT
MOVIMIENTO MUNDIAL POR LOS BOSQUES
International Secretariat Maldonado 1858, CP 11200 Montevideo Uruguay
Ph +598 2 403 2989 Fax +598 2 408 0762 
E-mail: wrm@wrm.org.uy 
Web page: http://www.wrm.org.uy
October 29, 2001

THE FOCUS OF THIS ISSUE: MANGROVES AND SHRIMP FARMING

Shrimp farming is being widely promoted throughout the tropics, severely impacting on mangrove ecosystems and on local people's livelihoods. Given the importance of the problem, we decided to produce a WRM Bulletin entirely focused on mangroves and shrimp farming, and to request the collaboration of people and organizations involved in this issue. We wish to thank all those who provided information and analysis and particularly the Industrial Shrimp Action Network people, with whom we worked very closely to produce this bulletin.

In this issue:

OUR VIEWPOINT

Mangroves and shrimp farming: deeds, not words

MEMORIAL DAY

Memorial Day of Korunamoyee Sardar

MANGROVES AND SHRIMP FARMING

Mangroves and their uncertain future

Mangroves are life, long live mangroves

Unsustainable versus sustainable shrimp production

Environmental, social and economic impacts of shrimp farming

The pillars of increased global shrimp trade

Shrimp aquaculture in international environmental treaties

LOCAL STRUGGLES AND NEWS

AFRICA

Madagascar: Mangrove importance and threats

Nigeria: People protect mangroves against shrimp farming

Tanzania: The death of the Rufiji Delta Prawn Project

ASIA

Bangladesh: The struggle to protect the Sundarbans

Indonesia: Mounting tensions over industrial shrimp farming

Malaysia: Each prawn produced represents a teardrop

Philippines: Shrimp Farming and Mangrove Decline

Thailand: Uncertain future for the world number 1 exporter?

Vietnam: Shrimps, mangroves and the World Bank

LATIN AMERICA

Colombia: Local communities affected by shrimp companies

Ecuador: Mangroves and shrimp farming companies

Honduras: Shrimp farming destruction

Mexico: Growing opposition to industrial shrimp farming

MANGROVE RELATED NETWORKS

MORE ON MANGROVES AND SHRIMP FARMING

OUR VIEWPOINT

Mangroves and shrimp farming: deeds, not words

There are clearly two conflicting international agendas, one positive and another negative. The former, officialized in international fora such as the 1992 Earth Summit and its related conventions and processes, is aimed at the sustainable use of resources for the benefit of the present and future generations. But there is another international agenda, aimed at increasing production, trade and consumption of all types of products, regardless of their sustainability, for the benefit of private business and governments. Industrial shrimp farming constitutes an example of how local people try desperately to implement the former agenda, while governments, corporations and international financial institutions support the latter.

The importance of the environmental services provided by mangroves is undisputed and so is the need to ensure their conservation and rehabilitation. At the same time, they constitute a vital economic resource for local people, whose livelihoods are directly dependent on this ecosystem. It would thus seem obvious that governments and international agencies that have committed themselves to environmental protection and to poverty alleviation should ensure the conservation of mangroves. Unfortunately, this is seldom the case.

On the contrary, many tropical country governments are strongly supporting the development of industrial shrimp farming, as a means to increase exports and thus obtain much needed hard currency. This necessity is on its part linked to pressures from international creditors and institutions such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, that promote export-oriented economies to ensure payment of external debt servicing. As a result, increasing areas of mangroves are destroyed and local people become either poor or poorer. While the macroeconomy grows and corporations increase their profits, the local economies are negatively impacted or destroyed.

Differently from governments and international agencies, many local communities are truly committed to protecting the mangroves on which they depend. Throughout the tropics, they are trying to halt the spread of a destructive shrimp farming system that provides unnecessary food to the well fed and takes the food away from the table of the hungry.

In this struggle, the answer has in too many cases been repression. People have been killed, injured, imprisoned, displaced. Among those who have fallen, we would like to pay homage to Korunamoyee Sardar, a brave woman killed in Bangladesh on November 7, 1990, for defending local land rights against their appropriation by an industrial shrimp farmer. Korunamoyee has become a symbol of resistance and her example is being followed by increasing numbers of people throughout the world.

At the same time, Korunamoyee is a symbol of consistency between words and deeds. When declaring that mangroves and local peoples' rights need to be protected, then the only possible course of action is, regardless of the consequences, to work for the achievement of those objectives. This is what she did. Governments have not only expressed their commitments: they have signed relevant international agreements. The World Bank has not only said this orally: it has included environmental protection and poverty eradication in its own mandate. It is now their obligation to make deeds coincide with words. They therefore need to halt further support to an activity such as industrial shrimp farming, which is clearly contradictory with international environmental treaties and with the stated aim of eradicating poverty.

MEMORIAL DAY

Memorial Day of Korunamoyee Sardar

Every November 7th, the Korunamoyee Memorial Day takes place in Harinkhola. Korunamoyee Sardar has become a symbol of the struggle for land rights and against shrimp farming among the landless people in Bangladesh. I asked some people to tell me what happened that day, ten years ago.

"On that 7th of November in1990, a rich man, called Wazed Ali Biswash with some guards landed by boat in Horinkhola in polder 22. He had planned to clear land for shrimp cultivation. It was 10 o'clock in the morning when we heard the news. We organised ourselves and together we went to Horinkhola. When we reached Horinkhola the shrimp owners shot and hurled bombs at our procession. Korunamoyee was hit by a bullet in her head and died immediately. Another 46 of our people were seriously injured and were hospitalised in Khulna or Dhaka. The incident lasted for one hour before Wazed Ali Biswash and his men took all the boats and left. Before leaving, however, they had cut up Korunamoyee's body into pieces and thrown these into the river to clear all the evidence.

We found it hard to reach hospital because Biswash and his men took all the boats; but when we finally reached it, the musclemen had advised the doctors against helping us. After two months all of us were back in polder 22, but some of us still have disabilities as a reminder of that day. Anuaria for example lost her eye.

The case has been taken up in Paikgacha Union Parishad, the district administration office in Khulna and at the government level in Dhaka, but without results. There are yet 45 unsolved cases and Wazed Ali Biswash is still free.

The 7th of November 1991, the shrimp farm owners came to disturb the Memorial Day, but since then they have honoured her in peace. A mosaic monument and a stone have been erected in Korunamoyee's honour in Horinkhola. The script of the stone is: "life is struggle, struggle is life."

The 7 of November this year I will participate to show my respect for the landless people in Bangladesh who suffer from the violence caused by the land conflicts and the shrimp farms. We at Nijera Kori would appreciate if all of you in your own way give this strong woman a thought on this memorial day, so that international support can be felt within Bangladesh.

(Note: The landless people have built a beautiful mosaic monument in Horinkhola in respectful memory of Korunamoyee. This is really a monument to all the countless victims for their continuing struggle against the greed and the violence which has too often been a tragic associate of the shrimp aquaculture industry.)

By: Asa Wistrand, Nijera Kori, e-mail: nkshrimp@agni.com

MANGROVES AND SHRIMP FARMING

Mangroves and their uncertain future

Mangroves are the coastal equivalent of tropical forests on land. There are various types of mangroves: coastal mangroves, growing without the input of fresh water from inland and that can extend for various kilometres, mangroves growing mainly at the mouths of rivers or deltas, that may be very extensive, and coral reef mangroves that grow on coral reefs above sea level. But they all have something in common, they are very special, fragile and endangered "salt water forests".

Mangroves are characterised by the woven maze of trees and roots, that are in fact an orderly forest mass, growing in bands according to their differing degree of resistance to periodic flooding by tides and therefore, to salt.

They grow on protected river estuaries and banks in equatorial, tropical and subtropical coastal zones, adapted to tide flow. At high tide, their canopy is barely apparent above the water. At low tide, their respiratory roots are visible, capturing oxygen and transmitting it to the buried roots. This adaptation enables them to survive in soils without oxygen and with a high saline concentration, their leaves also adapt to the scarcity of fresh water and are able to eliminate excess salt.

Mangroves are an irreplaceable and unique ecosystem, hosting incredible biodiversity and among the most productive ecosystems in the world. They house a wide variety of life: migratory birds, marine creatures and reptiles in addition to associated species of flora.

In spite of the fact that at world level there are some twenty species of mangroves, the basic structure of individual mangroves is usually formed by between 3 and 8 species. A wide variety of representatives of the plant kingdom live on them, over 100 fungus, and under them, up to 70 aquatic plants.

The aerial roots of their trees form a web, hosting a multitude of animal species (fish, molluscs, crustaceans) and they operate as zones for mating, refuges and nursery areas for a large number of species, many of them of importance as human food, which has made it possible for populations to settle around them, having their subsistence in resources generated by this ecosystem. Herons, cormorants, eagles and kingfishers find their source of food in mangroves.

When the tide goes down, some mammals approach the beach to eat, such as the wild boar and shrimp-eating monkeys. In the canopy, other primates feed on mangrove leaves and they shelter iguanas, parrots, doves and waders such as spoonbills, ibis, etc. that return to the canopy every night to roost.

Mangroves, in addition to protecting the coasts from erosion caused by hurricanes that periodically scourge these tropical zones, have, for many centuries, provided a multitude of resources to the local population. The most common uses of mangroves and their ecosystems are extraction of firewood, material for housing, and more importantly, fishing and harvesting of sea products, including many crustaceans.

However, thousands of kilometres from this unique ecosystem, so rich in biodiversity, at the tables of the European countries, Japan and the United States, we find the origin of the progressive loss of this balance: consumption of shrimps grown in ponds by the shrimp industry. This consumption has risen over the past years and thousands of hectares of mangroves have been transformed into breeding ponds, where created economic interest is very strong.

The shrimp industry benefits from mangrove conditions to breed shrimps, converting into "ponds" millions of hectares of fundamental habitats for local economies and for biodiversity. Thanks to the support of governments and grants from bodies such as the World Bank and with the support of FAO, today shrimp industries are increasingly being installed in tropical countries.

This activity has disturbed the population living off these ecosystems. Mangroves do not produce enough to support extractive activities by artisan fishers and at the same time the shrimp industry that is considerably undermining the ecosystem's capacity for production, in most cases, degrading it in an irreversible way. One single company competes with the resources providing subsistence to a population. Over the years, the shrimp ponds drown in their own contamination, and are subsequently abandoned leaving a destroyed ecosystem and local communities impoverished to extreme limits.

Article based on information from: Greenpeace Espana, "S.O.S. manglares en peligro de extincion", http://www.greenpeace.es/manglares/manglar0.htm

Mangroves are life, long live mangroves

At present, mangrove forests cover an area of 181,000 km2, distributed in over 100 countries, but during the past 50 years, over 50% have been lost. Some direct activities are destroying mangroves or are degrading them, including substitution by other activities such as shrimp farming and agriculture, forestry, salt extraction, urban development, tourist development and infrastructure. Furthermore, other impacts include deviation of river water and contamination, caused by heavy metals, oil spills, pesticides and other products.

The establishment of shrimp farms has been the main cause of mangrove loss in many countries over the past 30 years. In Vietnam, a total of 102,000 hectares were converted to aquaculture between 1983 and 1987; in Honduras between 1986 and 1994, over 12,000 hectares were destroyed for the construction of shrimp ponds; in Ecuador over 180,000 hectares of shrimp ponds were built in mangrove areas; in Thailand, between 1961 and 1993, over 80,000 hectares of mangroves were destroyed to turn them into shrimp breeding ponds.

This loss of mangroves in the tropics has been facilitated on a major scale by international financial support, mainly provided by the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank. The International Financial Corporation approved, between 1997 and 2000, loans amounting to 82 million dollars for the development of aquaculture in Latin America. The "beneficiary" countries have been Belize, Mexico, Honduras, Ecuador and Peru.

One of the forces behind the mass loss of mangroves over the last decade has been the inability of economists to recognise the value of natural products and ecological services produced by this ecosystem. This has led to mangroves being considered as lands with no use, with no value and wasted and therefore subject to conversion to uses such as shrimp farming, generating products with a market value.

However, mangroves generate a wide range of natural resources and ecosystem services. Some of these services, such as protection against hurricanes and floods, reduction of erosion and maintenance of biodiversity, are key functions that sustain economic activities in tropical coastal areas. Forest products from mangroves, such as building materials, charcoal, tanin, drugs and honey are vital to subsistence and provide a commercial base for local and national economies. Coastal subsistence economies in many developing countries are strongly dependent on fishing from mangroves.

It has been established that each hectare of mangrove generates between 1,100-11,800 kgs of fisheries catches. This productivity is much higher than the 10-370 kg/ha/year found for coral reefs. In developing countries, the annual value of the fish market depending on mangroves varies between US$900 and US$12.400 per hectare of mangrove. It should be stressed that this value is based on a single good from the mangrove, that is to say, only fisheries. Additional efforts to estimate the economic value of forest resources and ecological services generated by mangroves, will demonstrate the significant value of this ecosystem and its support to subsistence and to local and national economies.

While this recognition regarding the value of mangroves and support by the authorities for their conservation is yet to be achieved, over the past few years, coastal communities have gone through one of the most critical times in all their history. Following decades or centuries of use of these ecosystems without any major conflicts, they are now facing the daily fact of seeing how two, twenty or sixty bulldozers, arrive on a "bad day" to destroy, in less than two weeks, what had been their subsistence and economy for generations. At the end of two months, all that is left are memories and an enormous amount of shrimp-breeding ponds.

Mangroves are being lost for ever and with them, the economies of hundreds of coastal communities, mainly coastal artisan fishers. This destruction is being extended day by day through all countries in the world having tropical coasts. In Latin America, from Mexico to Peru and Brazil, the shrimp industry does not stop. The efforts by coastal communities to defend their mangroves have cost the life of various artisan fishers in Mexico, Guatemala and Honduras. Presently grassroot movements are growing and to co-ordinate and detain the scourge, the "Mangrove Network" has been set up, aimed at providing all the coastal communities with a mechanism to co-ordinate efforts. During its first assembly held in September this year, the Mangrove Network achieved membership from organisations in ten countries of Latin America, with the objective of struggling with a single voice, Mangroves are life, long live mangroves. Justice for mangroves.

By

Elmer Lopez Rodriguez, Greenpeace. e-mail: elmer.lopez@dialb.greenpeace.org

Unsustainable versus sustainable shrimp production

Most people that eat shrimp are unaware of where it comes from and about the impacts its production implies. Most of the commercial shrimp is either caught wild using destructive fishing methods, or produced in industrial shrimp ponds, which constitute the main cause of mangrove destruction.

According to FAO figures, 50% of the world's fisheries are already depleted. Jacques Diouf, General Director of FAO, has just alerted the delegates of more than 70 countries at a conference recently held in Iceland that oceans are over exploited and that it is urgent to guarantee their sustainable use. According to FAO data, in 1950 the total production of fish was 19 million tonnes. Fifty years later, a slightly higher amount (20 million tonnes) was wasted in the process of producing a total of 130 million tonnes.

Shrimp trawlers are among the most wasteful fishing boats in the world: they produce less than 2 % of the world's seafood, but are responsible for a third of the wasted fish bycatch. Up to 14 pounds of fish and other marine life are destroyed and discarded for each pound of shrimp harvested. Shrimp trawlers kill more turtles than all other human means combined in US waters.

This needless destruction is not much better in the case of shrimp farming. Shrimp aquaculture ponds are located in the most biologically productive and undervalued areas on earth: coastal estuaries, mangrove forests and wetlands, where shrimp naturally grows. Pond construction begins by cutting down the mangrove forests and digging diked ponds. Then, they are stocked with post larvae, mostly from hatcheries and nurseries at high stocking densities. In order to force the shrimp to feed continuously, the pond is lit all night. It is fed with formulated protein pellets and supplementary artificial feeds. To prevent from diseases, a number of chemical inputs as antibiotics, pesticides and detergents are also added. Pumped exchanges of water to remove wastes and to add clean oxygenated water is crucial to accommodate the high density stocking. This results in accumulation of wastes and degradation in the surrounding ecosystems leading to severe and irreversible problems.

In the short term, intensive shrimp farming is highly profitable for the companies. However, it is clearly unprofitable for the local communities living in the area where it is established, which results in major environmental and economic losses for the local people.

This destructive and polluting system can be avoided. Aquaculture has not always inflicted environmental harm. In fact, integrated fish and rice farming has been the backbone of traditional agriculture in Asia for centuries. This traditional system offers enormous potential for local food security and household nutrition. They also take advantage of the services that coastal ecosystems provide, such as filtering and purifying water, cycling nutrients, removing contaminants and buffering the land from coastal storms and severe weather. A study of the Matang mangrove in Malaysia revealed that its value for coastal protection alone, exceeded the value of farmed shrimp by 170 percent.

Silvofishery, an ancient coastal resource management concept might prove invaluable as alternative management. Silvofisheries is a low input sustainable aquaculture form of integrated mangrove tree culture with brackish water aquaculture. This integrated approach to conservation and utilization of the mangrove resource allows for maintaining a relatively high level of integrity in the mangrove area while capitalizing on the economic benefits of brackish water aquaculture.

However, it is important to underscore that the issue is not a technical one and that there are basically two ways of producing shrimp. One is based on the appropriation and destruction of mangrove areas, the pollution of the same and neighbouring areas and high corporate profitability at the expense of local peoples' territories and livelihoods. The other approach aims at the sustainable use of natural resources --among which shrimp is but one-- for the benefit of local communities. If environmental protection and social advancement is to have a meaning, the latter system is clearly in the right direction.

Article based on information from: ISA Net Report. Prawn to Trade Prawn to Consume

http://www.shrimpaction.com/SHRIMP%7E1.PDF; Sustainable Development Alternatives for Mangrove Forests, Mangrove Action Project, http://www.earthisland.org/map/sstal.htm; Rocking the boat: Conserving Fisheries and Protecting Jobs by Anne Platt McGinn, Worldwatch Paper 142, June 1998, Worldwatch Institute; Noticias, October 2, 01, Biodiversidad en America Latina, http://www.biodiversidadla.org/prensa2/prensa394.htm

Environmental, social and economic impacts of shrimp farming

The destruction of mangrove forests implies the loss of unique species. Mangroves link the tropical forests with the coral reefs, providing a critical transition between terrestrial and marine ecosystems. They also protect shorelines from erosion, capture sediments --thus protecting coral reefs-- and are the spawning grounds for the majority of tropical commercial fish. They also protect coastal lowland rainforests from tropical storms. They are critical to local biodiversity, harbouring plants and animals totally unique to mangrove ecosystems. They are also used for recreation and tourism. They are extremely biologically productive and for local communities mangroves are an important source of fuel, medicines, food, fodder, etc.

Apart from the fact that vast areas of mangroves are cut, another consequence of industrial shrimp farming is that there is a vast volume of waste produced inside the ponds by the shrimps. Feed eaten by shrimps but not retained in their body ends up as waste. As the waste piles up, bacteria flourish and consume the available oxygen. This can suffocate the shrimps and reduce their growth. Intermediate waste products --both of shrimp and microbes-- such as ammonia and nitrite, are toxic to shrimp, fish and other animals. Shrimp weakened by waste and lack of oxygen is more susceptible to disease. In order to avoid this problem, the water from inside the ponds is regularly removed out and the ponds are filled in with clean water. This system results in the pollution of the neighbouring surface waters.

This activity also provokes the salinization of coastal aquifers and agricultural lands. When the ponds are abandoned due to disease or other causes, the area is often left as a wasteland and the soils contain high levels of salinity, acidity and toxic chemicals, which make other uses practically impossible.

Another consequence of industrial shrimp farming is the use of antibiotics, pesticides, fungicides, parasiticides, and algicides. To guard against diseases farmers also use a large amount of antibiotics during production as well as toxic chemicals between harvests to sterilize the ponds. The result is that human consumers of tropical shrimps produced in this way are eating food containing high levels of antibiotics. Many of the substances used in this activity are prohibited in some countries due to their carcinogenic effects. Regarding antibiotics, some of the ones that are used in shrimp farming are the ones used in humans, which might decrease the effectiveness of antibiotics against diseases. It is important to highlight that in many of the producer countries there are no regulations limiting the amount of chemicals used.

In the quest for profits, the idea of using genetically modified shrimps is already being taken on board and Thailand --the world leading producer-- has started research in this area. The idea is to develop a super-shrimp. If this were to succeed, consumers --apart from eating antibiotics, pesticides and other chemicals-- would be also eating GM Shrimps.

Among the social and economic impacts of this activity, the destruction of mangroves entails the destruction of an ecosystem which is of great importance for local communities, which of course do not share the profits! Aquaculture is said to be a viable response to the problem of food resources especially in the poor countries. This is clearly not the case of shrimp farming. It is also said that it is a source of much needed foreign exchange, enabling shrimp producing countries to import lower cost protein thus ensuring food security. This argument present two problems. Firstly, that there is no evidence that the foreign exchange earned by shrimp farmers will be used to purchase cheap imported protein. The foreign exchange is earned not by the poor but by the rich shrimp farm owners who decide on how to spend it. Secondly, dependence on imported food reduces food security in times of currency instability.

Regarding employment generation shrimp aquaculture --due to its industrial nature-- employs fewer people than agriculture or other fishing activities.

In many cases, shrimp farming has resulted in serious human rights violations, including murder, physical injuries, eviction of villagers, detention of workers in shrimp farms, violation of shrimp farm workers' rights, and confiscation of land, forest and water resources.

Displacement of local communities is common in shrimp exporting countries, where politically connected investors turn highly productive complex ecosystems into a single use private domain. The many poor people who depend on mangrove and coastal fisheries for their livelihoods are eventually displaced. Conflict over land tenure rights are at the core of the conflicts related to shrimp farming.

Shrimp farming is a profitable business for a small group of people, and it is profitable because liberalized trade does not take into account the so called "externalities". This means that those who make the profits do not pay for the destruction of the ecosystem, while tremendous costs are being unwillingly absorbed by local communities at whose expense the industry makes its profits.

In sum, industrial shrimp farming is not only not a solution, but aggravates socioeconomic disparities within the framework of environmental destruction.

Article based on information from: "Prawn to Trade, Prawn to Consume", Industrial Shrimp Action Network.

http://www.shrimpaction.com/SHRIMP%7E1.PDF

The pillars of increased global shrimp trade

Globalisation has encroached upon our table. Foods are trailed all along the seas, from South to North and from East to West. The farther, the better (for transnational companies) because that implies trade, packing, conservation processes, tariffs, importers, exporters, and so on.

Nowadays, there are tropical fruits available in cold countries' markets, or fish and seafood in landlocked regions. And the list goes on. This is shown as a sign of progress and more choices for the people...

Actually, it's just global trade. More precisely, the internationalisation of "free" trade, with reduced tariffs, quotas and non-tariff trade barriers to provide exotic products to lucrative markets. And the World Trade Organization (WTO) --the global institution chartered to regulate global trade-- together with international agencies and banks (FAO, World Bank, etc.) behind all that, fostering an intensive production-demand pattern. Developing countries become the suppliers through increased loans and credits from lending institutions, which typically finance intensive monoculture production systems.

Such is the case of the shrimp trade. Shrimp consumption is quite expanded in the US, Europe and in some Asian countries. The landings of wild shrimp from "capture" fisheries have hovered between 2 to 3 million tons a year. For some developing countries, the trade in seafood products is greater than that of coffee, tea, rubber, and banana combined.

In the 1980s, the development of shrimp aquaculture --which has meant the conversion of huge parts of tropical mangrove forests into aquaculture ponds-- allowed a dramatic increase of shrimp consumption as well as plummeted shrimp prices. For example, many US restaurants now offer cheap all-shrimp menu and all-you-can-eat shrimp bars of what was once an expensive delicacy.

Intensive export-led shrimp farming --with a short term, high rate of return on investment-- and cheap supply --at the expense of degraded environment, displaced communities, loss of traditional livelihoods, human rights violations-- are then the pillars of a global shrimp trade which on the other hand has also implied overfishing and depletion of the seas. In between there is a full battery of vested corporate interests.

The promoters of global trade maintain that trade is neutral with respect to the environment, society, sustainable management and economic efficiency. But nothing more distant from reality. Trade can have positive or negative effects but cannot be sustainable without sustainable production. Export-oriented industrial shrimp farming has already proven to be socially and environmentally unsustainable and must therefore be stopped before it results in further damages to people and their coastal ecosystems.

Article based on information from: Isabel de la Torre (ISA Net), and David Batker (APEX), "Prawn to Trade, Prawn to Consume", http://www.shrimpaction.com/SHRIMP%7E1.PDF; "Engineering the Blue Revolution", GRAIN, www.grain.org/publications/dec973-en.cfm; "Rocking the Boat: Conserving Fisheries and Protecting Jobs", Anne Platt Mc Ginn, WorldWatch Paper 142, June 1998; "The devastating delicacy", Greepeace/USA,

http://www.greenpeaceusa.org/reports/biodiversity/shrimp/shrmp02.html

Shrimp aquaculture in international environmental treaties

The ecological and social impacts of shrimp aquaculture have been brought to the attention of two international environmental treaties that have been developing policies and programmes for the sustainable management of coastal and other ecosystems. These are the RAMSAR Convention on Wetlands and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).

The Forest Peoples Programme, an ISA Net member organisation, made an intervention highlighting the impacts of shrimp farming on coastal and marine ecosystem and local communities at the Conference of the Parties 4 (COP4) of the CBD in May 1998 in Slovakia.

The following year several ISA Net members participated in the 7th Conference of the Parties of RAMSAR and at a workshop on Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities' Participation in Wetland Management during the 13th meeting of the Global Biodiversity Forum (GBF) which preceded the RAMSAR meeting (San Jose, Costa Rica, 7-18 May, 1999). The presentations made by four representatives of local communities were well received at the GBF and ISA Net's recommendations were discussed at the RAMSAR Conference. As a result, a paragraph was added to one of the final resolutions (Resolution VII.21, Enhancing the conservation and wise use of intertidal wetlands), calling for the suspension of the promotion, creation of new facilities, and expansion of unsustainable aquaculture activities harmful to coastal wetlands until measures aimed at establishing a sustainable system of aquaculture that is in harmony with the environment and local communities are identified.

ISA Net members also participated in discussions and amendments of the Guidelines for establishing and strengthening local communities' and indigenous peoples' participation in the management of wetlands, which were eventually adopted as Resolution VII.21 and VII.8 of the COP.

Getting useful language into international conventions, however, can only be considered an achievement if they become effective tools to be used by local organisations in their efforts to protect their environment and livelihoods. NGOs and CBOs in Ecuador and Honduras have so far tried to use the paragraph on aquaculture of RAMSAR Resolution VII.21 in order to stop further expansion of shrimp farming in ecologically sensitive coastal ecosystems. So far, it seems that the RAMSAR language might have been helpful in supporting the effort of Ecuadorian NGOs trying to stop the introduction of new policies that would have included the privatization of parts of the coastline for the benefit of shrimp farmers. On the other hand, it does not seem to have been particularly useful in the Gulf of Fonseca, Honduras, despite the fact that part of the Gulf is a RAMSAR site. Effective follow-up needs to be organised to make sure that language developed in RAMSAR does not remain empty words.

Meanwhile, a programme under the CBD, namely the Jakarta Mandate on Coastal and Marine Biodiversity, has developed a 3-year work plan for the conservation and sustainable use of marine and coastal biological diversity. This includes a section (programme element 4) on mariculture, whose main operational objective is to assess the consequences of mariculture for marine and coastal biological diversity and promote techniques that minimise adverse impact. How effective the work plan is going to be still remains to be seen.

By

Maurizio Farhan Ferrari (Forest Peoples Programme), e-mail: mfferrari@pd.jaring.my

LOCAL STRUGGLES AND NEWS

AFRICA

Madagascar: Mangrove importance and threats

Located to the East of Africa, Madagascar is the largest island in the Indian Ocean and its fauna and flora are highly endemic. Mangrove forests cover an area of 327,000 hectares, composed of seven tree species accompanied by an extremely diverse fauna.

The Baly Bay case is useful to understand the situation of mangroves in this country. The Baly Bay is located to the west coast of Madagascar. In 1997, 69,350 hectares were classified as a National Park, but including less than 500 hectares of mangroves, which in the region comprise a total of 7,200 hectares. Many species of animals use this habitat as nesting, roosting and feeding areas. Among the nine threatened and endemic Madagascar waterbirds species, five are recorded inside the mangrove (Ardea humbloti, Anas bernieri, Threskiornis bernieri, Haliaeetus vociferoides and Charadrius thoracicus). For mammals, two species are recorded inside the bay as the Madagascar bat Pteropus rufus, roosting on mangrove trees and Delphinus sp. In addition, mangroves constitute an important habitat for invertebrates. The most economically important is the crab Scylla serrata and two shrimp species: Penaeus indicus and P. monodon.

Those mangroves are an important source of income, not only for the country but also for the local population. The mangrove trees are used in building and to a lesser extent as firewood. The traditional and industrial fishing activities are practised inside the bay mainly based on the two shrimp species. The collection of crabs is carried out all year round to feed the local needs. The local population has for many years been involved in these activities, which have resulted in very low impacts on the ecosystem.

In recent years, shrimp has become one of Madagascar's main exported sea products. As a result, the Baly Bay region has become involved in this new tendency by establishing 600 hectares of a semi-intensive shrimp farming industry since 1998.

Compared to others ecosystem types (e.g. forests, lakes), mangroves are one of the less studied habitats in Madagascar, while the increase of the communities' needs and especially the development of shrimp farming are at a critical level. Although the impacts of these activies on mangroves are still difficult to identify due to lack of information, fishermen using traditional methods recorded that the proportion of catches of the two shrimp species (Penaeus monodon and P. indicus) jumped from less than 1/ 10 before 1998 to 1/ 4 in 2000. The causes of this change and other unexpected effects need to be identified and addressed to limit their impacts on biodiversity.

In Madagascar, the exploitation of mangroves for shrimp farming has increased considerably during the last ten years. At the same time, the strong demographic growth in the Malagasy western area may accentuate the ecosystem's degradation, thus simultaneously threatening biodiversity and the riparian community's livelihoods. Studies should be conducted to improve understanding of the relationship between exploitation and biodiversity conservation in order to avoid ecological disasters. Actions such as the ecological monitoring carried out in the Baly Bay region in 2000, require strong collaboration between the company, local communities, academia and relevant authorities, in order to achieve the conservation and sustainable use of resources. The reinforcement of the applied Malagasy decree related to the compatibility of investments with the environment (MECIE), followed by the implementation of ecological monitoring in areas under strong exploitation are essential. In addition, the priorisation of research programmes should be focused on understanding the ecosystem's functioning as the starting point to achieve conservation.

By: Rabarisoa Rivo, e-mail: takatra@dts.mg

Nigeria: People protect mangroves against shrimp farming

The Nigerian area of saline mangrove swamps stretches through the coastal states with 504,800 hectares in the Niger Delta and 95,000 hectares in Cross River State. The mangrove forests of Nigeria rank as the largest in Africa and as the third largest in the world.

The Niger Delta has provided the best conditions for the thriving of vegetation on the Nigerian coast. Many of these areas are truly representative of untouched mangrove forests, as well as being reserves that protect unique and threatened valuable species. By some estimates, over 60% of fishes caught between the Gulf of Guinea and Angola breed in the mangrove belt of the Niger delta.

Typically, these are fragile ecosystems which can be easily destroyed by unsustainable human interventions such as oil exploration, exploitation and transportation processes.

The inhabitants of historical settlements in the Niger Delta depend on fish and other mangrove resources for their livelihood. Mangrove wood is still a multi-purpose resource for fish stakes, fish traps, boat building, boat paddles, yam stakes, fencing, carvings, building timber and fuel.

Although there is an institutional framework for the management of forests and wildlife, existing legislation is either obsolete or ineffectively enforced. Some areas have been proposed for wetland conservation but none of the proposals have been implemented.

Current problems for mangrove conservation include urban development, coastal erosion, oil pollution, gas flaring as well as the replacement of native mangroves by the exotic palm Nypa fruticans, which has been identified as an ecological disaster deserving urgent attention.

Now, a new menace looms on the Nigerian horizon: industrial shrimp farming. Sponsored by the International Finance Corporation (IFC), a branch of the World Bank, the Shell Petroleum Company of Nigeria Contractors will receive funds to develop this activity with the support of the Nigerian President.

The Mangrove Forest Conservation Society of Nigeria, together with other NGOs and CBOs --Rights Action, Friends of the Earth Nigeria, Eni-Owei _OU-Degema, ECO-out reach, Agape is a birth right, Niger Delta Project for Environment, Human rights and Development (NDPEHRD), Civil Liberty organization, Ijaw Council for Human Right (ICHR), Niger Delta Protect League (NDPL), Okoloma Forum and Kalio-Ama Ecological Foundation-- are opposing the project and propose a rejection/moratorium on the IFC Credit Loan facilities to Shell Contractors without consultation. They will also draw up a programme to reverse presidential or any other support for shrimp farming.

Article based on information from: "Movement Against Shrimp Farming In Nigeria Launched", Mangrove Action Project (MAP), e-mail: mangroveap@olympus.net ; Bjorn Kjerfve, Luiz Drude de Lacerda and El Hadji Salif Diop, "Mangrove ecosystem studies in Latin America and Africa"; "Oil extraction in the Mangroves", Tegantai 10, Oilwatch Network Bulletin, http://www.oilwatch.org.ec/tegantai/english/tegantai10/mangin10.html.

Tanzania: The death of the Rufiji Delta Prawn Project

The plans to build the world's largest shrimp aquaculture facility in the Rufiji Delta of Tanzania have encountered strong opposition from local people (see WRM Bulletin 40).

The Rufiji Delta, located about 150 km South of Dar es Salaam, contains the largest continuous block of mangrove forest in East Africa, comprising some 53,000 hectares. The Delta supports the most important fishery in Tanzania's coastline, accounting for about 80% of all wild-shrimp catches in the country. The Delta is home to approximately 41,000 people, many of whom are small farmers and traditional fishers. It provides important habitat for endangered animals and plants.

In 1997, the government approved a proposal by the African Fishing Company (AFC) to establish almost 20,000 hectares of shrimp farms there. The AFC wanted to use "public" land in the Delta to create shrimp ponds, hatchery, a processing plant, and a feed mill. Thirty-five percent of these facilities would be located within a "mangrove forest reserve", and the hatchery would be located on Bwejuu Island, which is part of the Mafia Island Marine Park.

The driving force behind the proposed project was the harvest of 6,210 kilograms of prawns per hectare per year which would be expected from the farm, with most exports going to Europe and Japan. The business would allegedly produce US$500 million a year in export profits, but social and environmental experts said the damage to the environment would far outweigh the profit.

The National Environmental Management Council (NEMC) --the environmental advisory body of the Tanzanian government-- urged the government to reject the project on the grounds that it would have considerable negative impact on forestry, fisheries and marine environment, land use, water resources, as well as agriculture and wildlife. It would destroy 1,200 hectares of mangroves, including rare species such as Rhizophora and threaten habitats of a variety of endangered species. The proposed aquaculture operations would generate substantial pollution which would cause increased eutrophication, toxicity, and acidification of surrounding water resources.

In spite of NEMC's recommendation and over the objections of Tanzanian and international NGOs and agencies, the Tanzanian Cabinet approved the project. John R. Nolan, the majority shareholder of AFC, had also wanted to set up (in the Rufiji Delta) a fish mill and a fish processing factory all aimed at the Japanese, European and North American markets.

The project was strongly opposed by Tanzanian environmentalists, most notably the Journalist Environmental Association of Tanzania (JET), international environmental organisations, and local residents. From July 1997 to date, JET members have led the discussion on the negative impacts of shrimp aquaculture. Recently, 2,000 Rufiji Delta villagers filed an application with the Tanzanian High Court for permission to sue the Government to challenge the approval of the AFC project, and there is also another case pending in Court, filed by over 2,000 former employees of the company.

Finally, it seems that all those years of resistance to a damaging project have borne fruit. On August 15, 2001, it was announced in the press that the fishing vessels of AFC were to be sold through a tender team supervised by the High Court of Tanzania, apparently to offset part of the company's huge debt, accumulated over the years by the Rufiji Delta Prawn Project as a result of the opposition of local people to its implementation. The liquidation of the company implies that the project has been halted, thus ensuring the survival of Tanzanian mangroves and preservation of their social, economic and environmental services.

Article based on information from: Shrimp centinel on line: National report from Tanzania

http://earthsummitwatch.org/shrimp/national_reports/crtanzan.html; Balinagwe Mwambungu, Chairman "Journalists Environmental Association of Tanzania", e-mail: jet@africaonline.co.tz; Electronic Mail&Guardian, http://www.mg.co.za/mg/news/97jul1/15jul-tanzania.html

ASIA

Bangladesh: The struggle to protect the Sundarbans

On Nov. 7, 1990, Koronamoyee Sardar was killed by an armed gang of hired thugs whose aim was to set up a shrimp farm at Horinkhola Polder 22. The local villagers, led by Koronamoyee, resisted this invasive force. On that fateful day, Koronamoyee became a martyr for her cause, and in the eyes of her people she remains their heroine in their decade long ongoing struggle against the surrounding oppressor.

The supreme sacrifice of Koronamoyee is not forgotten. Every year, on Nov. 7th, there is a great celebration at Polder 22, where thousands of resisters peacefully gather to commemorate this brave woman who led a successful movement of the people against a powerful, unscrupulous industry. Today, Horinkhola Polder 22 is the only remaining shrimp farm-free village in the shrimp farming district of Khulna. A great battle was won, but the war continues.

When Mangrove Action Project's Director visited the Sundarban region last month during the recent Steering Committee meeting of ISA Net, he was especially impressed with two things: the dwindling extent of the largest remaining mangrove forest in the world and the great courage of the farming community of Horinkhola Polder 22 whose stalwart members have been resisting for over a decade the unruly insurgence of the shrimp farming industry surrounding their community. Polder 22 is like a war zone --an island of steadfast resistance in a tumultuous sea of industrial greed and corruption. Polder 22 is that last bastion of brave combatants who will fight to the very last soldier in this winless war upon our Mother Earth.

Horinkhola Polder 22 is both an inspiration and a blessing in this earthly existence we call life. Without such resistance against such open tyranny, what worth is there in future? In the study of biology, three of the chief factors defining if something is alive are growth, movement and the survival instinct. At Horinkhola Polder 22, we happily witnessed a growing movement whose very existence will determine whether this community survives or not. Though the resistance is strong at Polder 22, the shrimp aquaculture industry is also determined to inundate this last vestige of traditional farmland.

The question remains: how long can they resist, and how long will we remember their struggle burning like a fire among many fires?

Quote from Khushi Kabir of Nijera Kori in Bangladesh, May 2001 "In Horinkhola polder 22, the shrimp thugs under the instigation of the local MP beat up three of my colleagues. There are armed thugs in the area and we are under severe pressure and threat. The local people, including farmers, even though they support us, are terrified to come out in open support. Luckily the landless groups and our staff are courageously remaining in the polder and ensuring the polder does not become a shrimp field..."

Article based on information from: Alfredo Quarto, Mangrove Action Project (MAP), e-mail: mangroveap@olympus.net

Indonesia: Mounting tensions over industrial shrimp farming

Shrimp farming has been practised in Indonesia for hundreds of years. Shrimps were traditionally cultivated in paddy fields or in ponds combined with fishes, without significantly altering the mangrove forest. Due to recent increase in market demand, the method has been changed into intensive and semi-intensive, with much less respect to local ecosystems and people.

The introduction of modern technology started in 1971, when the Indonesian government built the first hatchery in South Sulawesi. With the support of the FAO and UNEP, the government set up The Brackishwater Aquaculture Development Center (BPPP) in Jepara (Central Java) in 1974. By 1989, more than one hundred hatchery units had been established in the country.

In 1984 the Indonesian government initiated a national program, known as INTAM (Intensify Tambak --shrimp pond), to intensify shrimp farming and at the same time to expand shrimp ponds in new locations. Between 1983 and 1984, the Asian Development Bank and the World Bank financially assisted several major shrimp farming projects. By the end of the 1980s, the Nucleus Estate Smallholders Scheme (NESS, see below) was introduced into shrimp farming and very large scale shrimp farms started to be planned and developed. The area covered by ponds increased from 174,600 hectares in 1977 to 231,460 in 1989 and 305,500 in 1998.

In recent years, single shrimp farms covering up to 170,000 hectares have been planned and the government said that 860,000 hectares of mangrove forests (about 25% of Indonesian mangrove forest) are available to be converted into shrimp ponds. According to the government program Protekan 2003 (Program to Increase Fishery Export), the Agricultural Department intends to achieve an export volume of approximately 677,800 tonnes by 2003 against 97,228 tonnes in 1989 and 117,847 tonnes in 1998. One reason for such expansion is that shrimp exports earned precious foreign currency to Indonesia during the financial meltdown of 1997-98, so the government wants now to exploit as much as possible the foreign currency potential of shrimp farming, while ignoring the severe impacts on the local environment and people that are associated with industrial shrimp farming.

While traditional ponds were mostly located in Java Island, most of the new ventures are being developed in the outer islands of Sumatra, Kalimantan, Sulawesi and Irian Jaya, often associated with controversial transmigration programmes. The main markets of Indonesian shrimp have been Japan, Hong Kong, Singapore, Malaysia and USA, but new markets might be emerging in Europe.

While traditional ponds were individually or communally owned, new ventures tend to concentrate ownership into the hands of few companies. Currently, the three biggest shrimp breeding companies that are operating through the NESS model are PT Central Pertiwi Bratasena (PT.CPB), PT Dipasena Citra Darmaja (PT.DCD) and PT Wahyuni Mandira (PT.WM). PT.CPB, which is 31% owned by the shrimp multinational Charoen Pokphand from Thailand, owns an area of 10,500 hectares and has plans to expand by a further 15,000 hectares in the same location. PT. DCD and PT.WM are owned by Gajah Tunggal Group, located in South Sumatra and Lampung with an area of 16.500ha and 30,000ha (6,000ha are in operation) respectively. In 1996, PT.CPB exported 17,000 tonnes of shrimp with a value of US$114 million. Meanwhile, in the same year, PT.DCD produced 19,853 tonnes, of which 13,423 tonnes were exported. PT.WM started operating at the end of 1996 and has just started its maximum production stage. Each of these three big companies contribute 20-30% of Indonesian's shrimp export. It can be said that almost 70-80% of Indonesian shrimp export is in the hands of three companies (PT.DCD, PT.WM, PT.CPB).

Foreign investment is present but not in directly running the farms, apart from Charoen Pokphand in Bratasena and a French company in Sulawesi. Most of foreign investment in the shrimp industry is into shrimp feed, medicine and technology. Charoen Pokphand, Cargill, Comfeed are the biggest supporting industries.

Since 1992, shrimp production has been affected by virus attacks as in many other countries. Many ponds have been abandoned in Java and South Sulawesi, and shrimp investors are looking for new places to exploit. As a respond to virus attack, the government decided to import the species Penaeus Vannamei from South America, a controversial decision given that not enough studies have been conducted on the potential impacts of introducing a new species in the country.

Concerning the main environmental impacts of shrimp farming, documentation collected by NGOs and academics point to uncontrolled shrimp farming as a major threat to mangrove forests (due to conversion into ponds) and even to productive paddy fields and fruit orchards (due to freshwater salinisation). Shrimp farming has also been causing coastal erosion, sedimentation, and water pollution, thereby affecting coral reefs, seagrass beds and the productivity of coastal waters. Rehabilitation of abandoned ponds due to soil acidification is too costly for local people and government units.

Regarding social impacts, shrimp farming has generated severe tensions and conflicts between local people and outside workers, within communities, and between local people and investors/companies. One of the main reasons for conflict has been land grabbing and stealing. Supported by government agencies and police, companies force the local people to give up their land with inappropriate compensation or even with no compensation at all.

One of the unique characteristics of shrimp farming in Indonesia is the application of the 'Inti-Plasma' or NESS (Nucleus Estate Smallholders Scheme). A company converts large tracts of land (often mangroves or other wetland ecosystems) into shrimp ponds and then sets up agreements with smallholders, who buy all the input for farming one or a few ponds from the company and then sell the harvest to the company. Theoretically, the smallholders are expected to pay back their debt to the company within 7-8 years and to become independent owners of the pond and a small home. In reality, all the conditions and prices are set by the company, the accounts are kept by the company and the smallholders get trapped into a vicious cycle of poverty and debt. Even the social lives of the smallholders become totally controlled by the company: they can leave the 'shrimp estate' only for a few days per year and only for certain reasons approved by the company, they are penalised if they are late to return. When a shrimp harvest fails all the burden falls on the smallholders, who sink into even deeper debt. Smallholders live in a state of total dependency of unfair and shady company practices and in condition of semi-slavery.

The application of the NESS model to large-scale shrimp farming has caused severe social conflict and human rights violations. A geographical concentration of shrimp farming conflict is in South Sumatra. Three of the largest shrimp farming operations are located in adjacent areas in Sumatera (Wahyuni Mandira in South Sumatera, Dipasena and Bratasena in Lampung). All of them are facing strong protests by local people due to land rights issues and human rights violations.

Wahyuni Mandira Co. now possesses 30,500 hectares and is planning to expand to 170,000 hectares. Prior to its operations in 1997, part of the land belonged to the local people and the other was a conservation area. 2,200 farmers were forced to give up their land for very small compensation, as the Provincial Government claimed that the land was a government asset and the local people didn't have land rights. Only 10% of them were invited to become smallholder farmers and the others were asked to migrate. More than one thousand resisted and stayed on in neighbouring land and in mangrove areas.

Then, in November 1998, about 1,600 farmers (smallholders) protested against the conditions imposed by the company. Frustrated by lack of response by the company, the National Parliament in Jakarta, the Regional Government of South Sumatera, and the National Commission on Human Rights, the farmers started to demonstrate in front of the farm management office and the situation went out of control, degenerating into riot. Minutes after the riot started, the farm was surrounded by military, while the farmers were trapped inside the farm with no food for several days. At the end, more than 30 farmers were arrested, 16 of them sentenced to prison for periods from 6 months to 5 years. The court never considered that there was strong evidence that the riot was set up by the company.

In order to expand the farming operation to 170,000 hectares, during the year 2000 the company built water canals through local people's lands, creating further tensions and conflict. Some of the local people run traditional shrimp farming. The company moved in with the protection of the army and police.

Similar stories have been unfolding in Dipasena Farming, a nearby shrimp farm under the same holding company, where more than 1,700 farmers (smallholders) protested for the same reason and the same demand, and in Shrimp Banggai Sulawesi farm, a 100 hectare joint venture between an Indonesian and a French company. The local people have filed a case against the companies, but are still waiting for a response from the Lower Court. Other well-documented similar cases have taken place in Maluku, Papua, and other locations in Sumatera. Resistance from the communities is not only related to land rights, but also to environmental impacts. The community in Bengkulu, Sumatera, opposed the construction of a shrimp farm in their area because of environmental concerns.

More recently, on August 15, 2001, Central Pertiwi Bahari (CPB), also known as Bratasena Farming, in Lampung Provinces was recently charged by 147 local people for land rights conflict over 347 hectares of land. The local people claimed that their land had been occupied by the company in 1995 without any compensation. The local people complained about the case to the company, local government and National Parliament at that time, but there was no response. The company now insists that it will respond to the claim if asked to do so by the government.

The NESS system is also very biased against women. In large-scale shrimp farming only adult and educated men can hope to get a job. In case of death or inability to work of the smallholder males, women must leave the farming estate, leaving behind all the assets that they had been paying for by credit instalment.

Impact on health and education can also be considered serious, particularly on children. During the El Nino of 1999, malaria spread in South Sumatera partly due to abandoned shrimp ponds, which became an optimal environment for larva of Anopheles mosquito. The lack of drinking water has caused a number of people in Wahyuni Mandira Farm, Sumatera, to suffer of pneumonia due to drinking rain water.

In conclusion, the change from traditional to industrial shrimp farming that is rapidly taking place in Indonesia might in the short term benefit the government and the large-scale shrimp investors due to foreign currency generation, but the environmental and social costs associated with the industry by far outstrip the benefits. Local communities are particularly marginalised and exploited in large-scale NESS farms and local social structures are threatened by growing tensions and conflicts.

By

P. Raja Siregar, e-mail: radja@walhi.or.id, edited by Maurizio Farhan Ferrari, Forest Peoples Programme, e-mail: mfferrari@pd.jaring.my

Malaysia: Each prawn produced represents a teardrop

The shrimp industry in Malaysia has developed rapidly since the early 1980s after the so-called successes experienced in neighbouring Thailand, Indonesia and Philippines. Malaysia, however, is not one of the major producers of cultured marine prawn in the world, as the area under marine prawn culture is about 5,100 hectares (2,627 hectares in 1995). Despite this, the Government of Malaysia is very proud to claim that the country's average production (metric tonnes per hectare) is the third highest in the world, after Taiwan and Thailand. And plans for intensification and expansion have been drawn up.

Based on the Food Production Action Plan (Fisheries Sector) that was formulated by the Fisheries Department, forecasted production of marine prawn (White Prawn, Penaeus penicillatus and Tiger Prawn, Penaeus monodon) in the year 2010 will be 129,100 metric tonnes. This amounts to a jump in production by about 13 times from the 1998 level of 9,835 metric tonnes.

In the early 1990's, the government identified 110,000 hectares of mangrove forest suitable for tiger prawn rearing and allocated RM15.38million for aquaculture development in the Sixth Malaysia Plan. State governments and related agencies were quick to alienate very valuable mangrove and peat swamp forests for this ecologically destructive activity and had even acquired very productive paddy lands for this purpose. Little thought had been spared for the impact of such destruction would have on the environment and the communities who depend on mangroves for their livelihood.

The major environmental impacts resulting from shrimp farming have been mangrove loss, water pollution and fisheries decline in coastal waters.

Mangroves form only about 3% (some 650,000ha) of the total land area in Malaysia. Most of the ponds opened during the 1980's and early 1990's involved the clearcutting of mangroves. Local fisherfolk are severely concerned about the increased loss of mangroves as this has led to decrease in wild stocks and extinction of several commercial fish species in some places. The Penang Inshore Fishermen Welfare Association states that its survey revealed that 34 species of fish have become extinct and another 50 or more are becoming rare in the waters off Penang.

The destruction of coastal mangroves has also brought about coastal erosion. The coastal villages are susceptible to critical erosion, battered by strong waves and storms. Their life and property is at stake as the raging sea is slowly swallowing the coast. Some ponds have been abandoned due to the erosion, acid sulphate soil conditions and occasional mass mortality of prawns due to disease outbreaks. The culturists do not make any effort to rehabilitate the degraded mangroves and again the coastal communities are victims of such development.

Although prawn farming is still a small industry in Malaysia, the social impacts have already become evident. Among the most worrying are the loss of livelihood and income of small coastal fisherfolk due to mangrove loss and fish decline, negative changes in agricultural practices, and human rights violations.

The most controversial shrimp project in Malaysia is in Kerpan (Kedah). Samak Aquaculture was approved as a joint venture company in 1993, and 60% is owned by a Saudi firm named Saudi Ben Ladin, 10% by the Kedah State Government and 30% by a company set up to represent the interest of the landowners and farmers. Government support for commercial aquaculture has helped companies like Samak immensely. However, the most reprehensible aspect of the whole project is that land already owned by local farmers was expropriated by the State in order to serve corporate interests.

Initially the State government and Samak began to woo farmers and landowners in Kerpan to sell, lease their land or join in the venture. Some of the landowners agreed to join the project but most of the bigger landowners and farmers, totaling 800, refused. Thus, the State invoked the Land Acquisition Act to take over the 1,000 acres of paddy land. The Act allows the State to acquire any privately owned lands if it deems that the development projects started there will be economically beneficial to the country.

The State offered a compensation between RM18,000 and RM24,000 (RM3.8 = US$1) per acre, but the landowners refused to accept the menial compensation. In January 1995, about 100 farmers gathered at the entrance of the project site to stop excavators from moving into the site. Farmers held vigil in makeshift tents. In the next few days, police battalions gathered at the project site. A week later, heavy machinery moved into the project site. Rice farmers watched helplessly as bulldozers and heavy machinery began to tear up their paddy during harvest season.

Farmers, both men and women couldn't bear to watch and lay down on the road to prevent vehicles from moving in. The police arrested 33 of the protestors, comprising of 10 women and 23 men. The women were released after three days whilst the men spent seven days in jail. One of those detained lamented that "The tragic of the day is that we are the victims and we were arrested for defending our rights".

The village was still mired in land disputes after seven years, the ponds have been dug, but disease outbreaks, legal wrangles, management problems and conflict over land have meant that in the seven years of existence, the operation has lost millions of dollars and had yet to export any prawns. Meanwhile, the farmers of Kerpan have been living in economic uncertainty for the past seven years and with impending poverty and loss of their self-provisioning lands, they find it difficult to make ends meet. As a farmer in Kerpan states, "Each prawn produced here represents a teardrop that belongs to one of us. That's how much we have suffered".

By

Meenakshi Raman, Consumers Association of Penang, e-mail: meenaco@pd.jaring.my

Philippines: Shrimp Farming and Mangrove Decline

In the 1980s, shrimp farming became an industry when commercial availability of new technology from Taiwan, along with attractive export prices, led to the Shrimp Fever that swept the country and the rest of Asia. Filipino farmers shifted from milkfish (Chanos chanos) to shrimp, as well as intensified their culture systems from traditional and extensive to higher stocking densities.

Rising domestic prices and consumptio1n of shrimp, moreover, encouraged many sugarcane planters in Negros Occidental to convert to the monoculture of black tiger prawn (Penaeus monodon), setting up expensive aquaculture facilities and boosting Philippine shrimp production in the process. An increase in foreign aid for aquaculture development, coupled with reforms in Philippines' investments policies initiated under the Aquino administration in the late 80s, provided further support to the nascent shrimp industry resulting in an impressive and steady rise in production until the mid-90s.

However, the widespread outbreak of luminous bacteria in the Western Visayas --largely the result of poor farming and environmental practices-- led to a spectacular collapse in shrimp production, particularly in Negros Occidental. By 1996, it was estimated that only one of ten shrimp farms in this province --once the center of intensive shrimp culture in the country-- was operating.

Primavera, in "Development and Conservation of Philippine Mangroves: Institutional Issues" (1998), discussed the "intertwined histories of Philippine mangroves and aquaculture ponds", singling out the decline of mangrove ecosystems and the loss in goods and services derived from same resources, as one of the major impacts of shrimp farming.

She likewise pointed out the correlation between fish production and shrimp and mangrove areas: over the years, as mangrove areas declined, so did production from fish caught nearshore; in contrast, brackishwater pond area increased, as did the aquaculture sector's contribution to total Philippine fish production.

Moreover, "national policy encouraging brackishwater pond culture has been premised on the belief that mangroves and other wetlands are wastelands", Primavera added.

The Bureau of Fisheries and Aquaculture Resources (BFAR) --the lead agency tasked to ensure the protection and management of inland and marine resources-- insists that its new thrust, the Aquaculture for Rural Development (ARD) program, departs sharply from the old paradigm that focused too much on technology and production.

However, despite its claims of being "mass-based with emphasis on simple environment-friendly technology" and geared towards solving "the perennial problem of poverty in the countryside", it appears that the ARD is still the same dog given a new collar: it aims to increase aquaculture production through such schemes as the establishment of mariculture parks, and "conversion of wastelands", such as "sand dune areas, lahar lands, sunken/flooded areas, mountainous areas, (and) marshlands/swamplands" into more "productive aquaculture areas".

With its history of favoring big business over small fisherfolk, combined with weak and vague national fisheries policies that obfuscate rather than enlighten, BFAR is inexorably paving the way for a repeat of the social and environmental mistakes of the Blue Revolution in the 70s, when some 200,000 hectares of mangroves were converted to fishponds --all in the name of so-called 'development' and 'progress'.

By

Gilbert Sepulveda, Tambuyog Development Center/ Aurora Support Group/ and ISA-Net, e-mail: gilsep@hotmail.com

Thailand: Uncertain future for the world number 1 exporter?

Thailand has been the world's No. 1 producer and exporter of farmed shrimp for a number of years, with the shrimp boom starting in the early 1980's. The country's total shrimp output reached 300,000 tonnes last year, higher than the annual average of 200,000 to 250,000 tonnes, thanks to a supply shortage in the world market. Despite this, during 2001, shrimp farmer and exporter associations have asked the government to speedily implement a national policy encouraging shrimp farming to prepare for tougher export competition from neighbouring countries. India and Bangladesh together produce 60,000 to 80,000 tonnes; Indonesia 60,000 to 80,000 tonnes; Vietnam 50,000 to 70,000 tonnes; the Philippines 30,000 tonnes; and Malaysia 10,000 tonnes. According to shrimp exporters, due to government support and new policies, these countries now had greater potential to increase capacity and Thailand could be pushed out of the export market if a national policy to boost the sector was not developed.

The shrimp exporters are clearly vocal about the need to further support the shrimp industry, but they are mute concerning the tremendous environmental and social impacts of the industry. According to the Thai National Economic and Social Development Board, about 253,000ha of the country's 380,000ha of mangrove forests have been destroyed by shrimp farms. In several coastal provinces, many of these farms were located close to paddy fields, which have been impacted by saltwater contamination. The livelihood of farmers and fishermen communities close to shrimp farming areas have been very badly affected. Due to self-pollution, virus attacks and land degradation, many ponds along the coast have been abandoned and the industry has moved on to other areas, leaving behind large tracts of wasteland.

One of the targeted areas in recent years has been the inland rice bowl of the country in the central plains. This move generated heated opposition by rice farmers, NGOs and academics to the point that the government instituted a ban on inland farming of black tiger prawns two years ago. Due to the insatiable nature of the shrimp industry, the ban came under heavy attack during the year 2001 and there were strong rumours that the ban would soon be lifted. But due to pressure from civil society groups and academics, and advice from a sub-committee, the National Environment Board eventually decided to let the ban stand and urged promotion of environmentally-friendly and sustainable shrimp cultivation. Latest news report that inland prawn farmers in rice growing provinces would switch to a less profitable but more environmentally-friendly freshwater prawn known as koong kam kram (a freshwater prawn). Meanwhile, a policy prohibiting the cutting of mangroves and promoting the rehabilitation and reforestation of abandoned ponds has yet to be developed.

Local people have had a difficult time to voice opposition to the expansion of shrimp farming, as the police, the army and the justice system generally stand in support of those with money and political connections. In this state of affairs, the shrimp investors feel free to do what they like, sometimes going far beyond what is acceptable. In January 2001, Mr Jurin Rachapol, 49, a conservationist and advocate of community forestry in Phuket was assassinated while harvesting nuts on his farm. His family and friends believe that Jurin's activism against shrimp farming and destructive fishing gear was the reason he was gunned down. Even the Bangkok Post published strong articles on this subject casting the conflict as one of conservation and wise use and management against, in the words of newspaper, "over-exploitation of natural resources" and "greed" of shrimp farmers.

The end of 2001, however, is not bringing good news to the shrimp industry. With forty-eight per cent of Thailand's shrimp exports going to the US, the industry will have to try new markets given the decline in US shrimp imports after the September 11 attacks. Latest news also report that Thai prawn farmers warned of contamination derived from improper cultivation that have resulted in products laced with anti-biotic substances that may be banned in European countries.

By

Maurizio Farhan Ferrari, Forest Peoples Programme, e-mail: mfferrari@pd.jaring.my

Vietnam: Shrimps, mangroves and the World Bank

Governments in Southeast Asia have promoted shrimp farming as a means to earning foreign exchange. The beneficiaries of this expansion are private companies such as the Thai agribusiness company, Charoen Pokphand. In Thailand, the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank, Charoen Pokphand and the Thai government worked together to set the scene for expanding the shrimp industry. Companies setting up shrimp farming operations in Thailand were offered generous subsidies including tax breaks, tariff-free imports, tax holidays and export credits.

During the 1990s, Charoen Pokphand expanded its operations to Vietnam. In 1993 Charoen Pokphand exported shrimp from Vietnam worth US$96 million --about 40 per cent of Vietnam's shrimp sales that year. Charoen Pokphand also operates shrimp-feed plants in Vietnam.

In the last 40 years, the area of mangrove forest in Vietnam has shrunk dramatically. For example, in the province of Ca Mau at the southernmost tip of Vietnam, an area of 60,000 hectares of mangrove forest was lost between 1983 and 1992. Causes include defoliation during the American war, logging, expansion of rice farming as a consequence of government agricultural policies, and influx of people, especially in Ca Mau province. In the last decade, government-promoted shrimp farming has increasingly become a major cause of mangrove loss. The role of mangrove forests in providing thatching for roofs, firewood, charcoal, medicinal plants and honey, as well as mangrove's role in protecting the coastline, has been lost in many places.

Shrimp farming tends to be a short term activity. Many farmers moving into shrimp farming without sufficient technical skill or money for the necessary infrastructure have found the land is useless after as little as three years. Shrimp farming is also at risk from disease. In 1994-95, a virus wiped out almost the entire shrimp harvest in Vietnam.

Although in Vietnam most shrimp farming is extensive, the Ministry of Planning and Investment has recommended intensifying production. Intensive shrimp farming uses antibiotics and chemical additives to increase production. Eventually the shrimp ponds and surrounding water systems are so poisoned that the land can only be abandoned.

Two years ago, a project funded by the World Bank and Dannida (the Danish government aid agency) started in mangrove areas of four provinces in the Mekong Delta. Titled the Coastal Wetlands Protection and Development project, the six-year project will involve a 470 kilometre-long stretch of coastline.

One of the studies produced for the project notes, "many occupants appear to be well aware of the need for reforestation as illustrated by individual and voluntary tree planting activities which can be observed at various locations." Yet, under the project, more than two thousand families are to be evicted so that mangrove trees can be planted. The people to be moved are not only shrimp farmers but include farmers, forestry workers, salt producers, tailors, mechanics, handicraft producers, shopkeepers, fishers, and labourers.

Many of these people were encouraged to move to the area by local authorities, to grow shrimp or as forestry workers. The Bank's Resettlement Action Plan argues that the project will improve villagers' livelihoods through "community development support, including social infrastructure and services (health, household water supply and primary education)".

Rather than examining the role of government policy in promoting shrimp farming, Ronald Zweig, the World Bank task manager for the project, puts the blame for mangrove loss on villagers. Zweig says, "The rural poor in the project area have had few income-generating opportunities other than exploiting coastal forest resources to the point where the benefits from them have seriously eroded."

Of course, the US$31.8 million World Bank loan for the project will have to be repaid. To do this the Vietnamese government will require foreign exchange. To raise this the government will promote the export of cash crops --such as shrimp. In February 2001, Vietnam's aquaculture industry announced a five-year plan, a key aim of which is to increase the area of shrimp farming in the country from 226,000 hectares to 330,000 hectares. Deputy Minister for Fisheries, Nguyen Viet Thang, promised governmental financial assistance for shrimp farms of over 100 hectares.

The loss of Vietnam's mangrove forests is a complex issue. To blame the farmers who are clearing mangroves whilst ignoring government policy and an expanding aquaculture industry is to blame the victims. In the context of ever increasing shrimp exports, simply moving villagers and planting mangrove trees is unlikely to solve the problem.

By: Chris Lang, e-mail: chrislang@t-online.de

LATIN AMERICA

Colombia: Local communities affected by shrimp companies

From 1982 onwards, the shrimp industry has been settling in the Cispata bay, an ecosystem harbouring one of the most exuberant mangroves in the Colombian Caribbean. Presently there are four shrimp industries fully established in this site, covering an extension of approximately 700 hectares. The semi-intensive productive system these farms apply has a daily water recharge in its ponds, reaching an average of up to 15% of its volume, leading to a daily dumping into the estuary of large quantities of water saturated by organic waste.

After 14 long years of carrying out this practice uninterruptedly, in 1996 the Soledad marshes, one of the most important bodies of water associated to the estuary, started showing the first signs of unbalance: the appearance of filamentous blooms of algae and the subsequent death of fish and shell-fish. This phenomenon was to be expected if we consider that the estuary of Cispata bay, due to its hydrodynamic characteristics, has a low level of daily replenishment of its waters, particularly in the extreme south-west of the estuary. Evidently the shrimp industry located in the area was most affected, as its production dwindled, but the serious prejudice to local artisan fishers should not be forgotten.

The shrimp industry's response was quick to come. Far from generating a change of attitude regarding the considerable dumping of waste water into the estuary, it promoted and started to build, with the endorsement of the environmental authorities, an artificial channel that was to communicate the Soledad marsh directly to the Caribbean sea, in order to increase its daily replenishment of water based on high and low tides. There is no doubt that the water quality conditions in this part of the estuary would improve, giving the shrimp industry peace of mind. However the greater inflow of salt water directly from the sea involves a disproportionate amount of salinity in the estuary and therefore the imminent penetration of a saline band (through the water table) towards neighbouring agricultural zones, sustaining almost 2,500 families that live in nine rural communities.

Such a blunder caused the local communities to complain about the situation to the local and regional authorities, without achieving any attention on their part. The power of the shrimp industries involved was such that the works not only had a permit from the environmental authority without any prior technical assessment but were also using public machinery. Once all the possible legal mechanisms had been exhausted, and in view of the imminence of the work, the communities resorted to force to stop the construction, achieving their purpose after various days of struggle, in which about 400 peasants took part. Faced by the public scandal caused by the peasant protests, the shrimp companies halted the project.

It is worthwhile stressing the misleading arguments used by the shrimp companies to convince the authorities and local leaders of the soundness of their project. They talked of "restoration of the drainage system" to improve the operation of the estuary as an ecosystem, and of the generation of hundreds of jobs that would benefit the poor local communities. None of this was true, given that the underlying interest of the project was to get rid of organic waste that was being dumped every day into the estuary.

On having to abandon the project for a channel to the sea, they were obliged to improve their internal systems for the management of organic waste, having to build an artificial wetland as a bio-filter. In spite of the considerable investments made and an aggressive advertising campaign leading to a national prize for ecology, the environmental situation of the Soledad marsh and the rest of the estuary grows worse every day.

Five years after the first attempt at increasing the flow and ebb of water in the estuary, the shrimp companies are insisting again with their project. What happened to the bio-filter that won the prize? The project is essentially the same "Restoration of the drainage system," with the same Good Samaritan purposes: generation of employment and improvement of ecosystem functions. The major difference now lies in the fact that the project managers are no longer the shrimp industry, but the environmental authority itself, in this case the Regional Autonomous Corporation of the Sinu and San Jorge Valleys (CVS) and the municipality of San Antero.

"We have about 800 million pesos (approximately 348,000 dollars) to restore the drainage system in the estuary," explained a CVS official to the peasant and fisher communities, as part of the permanent invitation to participate in the project.

Should the project be implemented, its effects on the peasant agri-systems in the nine rural communities located in the municipalities of San Antero, San Bernardo del Viento and Lorica, will be devastating, as the regulation of the Sinu river channel by the URRA I hydroelectric plant has significantly decreased the flow of fresh water towards the estuary. Faced by this new regional scenario, the salinity of land used by the local communities for agricultural and animal husbandry activities will be hastened, inducing the displacement of thousands of families to the neighbouring urban zones.

Presently the interest of the shrimp industry is not only to increase the capacity for water flow and ebb in the estuary, but to expand towards agricultural zones that have become saline due to the effect of the URRA I hydroelectric project and the "drainage system restoration" promoted by the environmental authority.

For this reason, the peasant and fisher communities, members of ASPROCIG, who have ancestrally used the lands in the Sinu river delta, are calling all people, NGOs and grass-roots organisations throughout the world to join in their struggle and to state their rejection of the project to the Colombian authorities. (see request for action in: http://www.wrm.org.uy/shared/alerts/october01.html#3).

Article based on information from: Asociacion de Productores para el Desarrollo Comunitario de la Cienaga Grande del Bajo Sinu, e-mail: asprocig@colnodo.apc.org.co, http://www.asprocig.org.co

Ecuador: Mangroves and shrimp farming companies

Over 30 years ago, the destruction of mangroves was started in order to build ponds in beaches and bays. According to data from the former INEFAN and the National Aquaculture Chamber, in January 2000 there were 207,000 hectares or 170,000 hectares respectively of shrimp ponds, of which 50,454 hectares were operating legally. The rest are illegal. In the province of Esmeraldas, where the best conserved and tallest mangroves in the world are to be found, over 90% of the ponds installed there are illegal. Official information from CLIRSEN shows that in 1984, there were 89,368 hectares of shrimp ponds, indicating that the expansion of shrimp breeding over 16 years increased by 117,631 hectares.

The shrimp companies not only benefit from the Ecuadorian's natural heritage, but also from the weakness of their official policy. In June 1985, the government declared the conservation of mangroves to be of public interest. In September that same year, the Under-Secretariat for Fisheries suspended the granting of licences to carry out fish-farming in mangrove regions. In November 1986, the Government declared 362,742 hectares of mangroves and saline pampas to be protected forests. But legal regulations have no weight as in the period between 1984 and 1999 more mangroves were lost and more shrimp ponds were established than at any other time.

During this period of mangrove depredation, thousands of families that traditionally had depended on this ecosystem have been affected by the loss of their culture and of the environment that made their social and economic reproduction possible. For over 30 years now there has been impunity and violation of the laws in force in the country.

Over the past two years, the shrimp industry has complained about the problems affecting this activity, blaming all its economic ills on the White Spot virus for the reduction in shrimp production. What is not said and what is not recognised is the irresponsible way of acting to favour the shrimp companies getting richer, and provoking the destruction of mangroves.

Today the shrimp companies are getting ready to make another assault on nature with the installation of shrimp ponds on the high lands, which would cause salinity of agricultural lands and fresh water. If this undertaking is permitted, in a very short while Ecuador will be facing environmental disasters, such as the loss of agricultural lands due to soil salinity, the contamination of surface and groundwater, changes in the physical, chemical and microbiological structure of the soil, loss of terrestrial and aquatic biodiversity, in the name of salvaging the shrimp sector.

The national press, farmers, higher educational centres, local authorities, peasants and citizens from various sectors have voiced their protest and rejection of this activity which goes against the environment and have claimed the farmers' legitimate right to maintain their activities without the competition and prejudice caused by the shrimp companies.

Attention should also be drawn to the social impact that would be generated by competition between fish-farmers and agricultural farmers, together with problems in the use of water for human consumption and agriculture. Privileging economic issues, aimed at satisfying the demand of developed countries, over the production of food for the consumption of the Ecuadorian people, is equal to an attack on national food sovereignty.

The United States is the greatest consumer in the world. Shrimp consumption rose from 0,2 pounds per person to over 3 pounds in 1999 and has been constantly increasing since 1996, when the annual average was 2,50 pounds.

Regarding impacts on health, Greenpeace Austria, together with Greenpeace Germany sent the mass media a publication denouncing the effects of antibiotics applied to shrimps and particularly that of Chloramphenicol that, independently from its concentration, may cause strong effects, even causing death.

In showing up the various elements involved in aquaculture, an abominable picture of this activity appears:

Destruction of mangroves to build ponds in beaches and bays

Shrimp industry ponds operating illegally

Thirty years of impunity and of violation of the laws in force in the country

Installation of shrimp ponds in high lands

At attack on the food sovereignty of the peoples

Impacts on consumer health

In this context, the Ecuadorian environmental organisation, Accion Ecologica is promoting the non-consumption of shrimps produced in captivity in tropical countries as a way of protecting actively and in solidarity, mangroves and the peoples that depend on them.

By: Alfonso Roman, Accion Ecologica, e-mail: manglares@accionecologica.org

Honduras: Shrimp farming destruction

The waters of the Pacific Ocean penetrate the territory of Honduras, Nicaragua and El Salvador through a 35 km entry, forming a water mass of 3,200 kms2 known as the Gulf of Fonseca, with a 261 km coastline.

Different types of wetlands are to be found along the coast, such as mangroves, periodically irrigated by the tides. A forest inventory made in 1987, showed that in the Honduran sector of the Gulf, there were 47,000 hectares of mangroves that year.

At the beginning of 1973, the shrimp industry was launched in the Gulf wetlands, within a system of semi-intensive cultivation, with a density of between 10 and 30 post-larvae per square metre, including fertilisation in laboratories and harvesting in ponds.

This "closed cycle" reproduction system did not last many years. It was substituted by the capture of wild shrimp post-larvae in the wetlands and marshes. In 1995, 3,000 people, mainly children were involved in collecting post-larvae for shrimp farms. However the supply was not enough to cover the increasing demand for post-larvae and nurseries were established to satisfy it.

It was thus that shrimp farming started, a private undertaking that had the financial support of the International Development Agency (USAID), the World Bank and the Government of Honduras. The shrimp "boom" had started.

Between 1973 and 1989, the industry grew very quickly. However, in 1989, only 5 million pounds of shrimps were exported, instead of the 9 million pounds expected, coinciding with the appearance of the "Seagull Syndrome" which struck down the shrimps. Between 1990 and 1995, industrial exploitation rose to 12,000 hectares, but exports descended --from 20 million pounds in 1993 to 15 million in 1995-- attributed to the "Taura virus." In 1998, expansion reached 16,000 hectares but exports continued at 15 million pounds.

In 1999, the "white spot virus," coming from Asia appeared in the Gulf, causing havoc to shrimp production. Between 1999 and 2000, thousands of hectares of shrimp farms were abandoned, various shrimp packing plants closed down and unemployment was rampant. Nearly all the small fish farms closed down their operations and were on the verge of loosing their goods due to their debts with the banks. However the large shrimp companies saved their situation thanks to multimillion dollar loans from the World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank, among others.

The diseases imported by aquaculture not only had an impact on industrial shrimp breeding, but have also severely affected biological diversity and marine fisheries. Additionally, the loss of habitats for native and migratory bird species has been significant and has also harmed other species of fauna.

The catches of shrimp post-larvae to satisfy the billionaire requirements of fattening-up farms together with other species of by-catch, killed following selection by means of chemical products that do not harm shrimps but kill the other species (9 by-catch for each shrimp post-larva caught) also has serious impacts. Industrial demand may well be above 4 billion post-larvae, therefore the number of other species killed could be over 36 billion!

Additionally, the waste from the packing plants is dumped directly into the marshes where the accelerated fermentation processes cause the death of stocks of numerous species. Other wastes are dumped directly on the borders of highways or in fields, causing air contamination.

In various sites, the installation of shrimp farms has implied the prohibition to enter mangroves, lagoons, estuaries and the Gulf. For the local populations, this implies a loss of access to their traditional sources of food, firewood and income, obliging them to "illegally" enter such areas, evading controls established by the companies. The result has been that between October 1992 and May 1998, nine fishers were found shot dead in the mangroves and estuaries near the shrimp farms. Their death has been related to shrimp farm surveillance.

In spite of public demonstrations in protest, of numerous complaints to the respective authorities and to the national press, these murders have never even been investigated and have remained unpunished.

The question generated among the fishers is "we have been evicted from the mountains, we have been evicted from the valleys, and now, if we are evicted from the coasts and the sea, where will we go?

Article based on information from: Jorge Varela Marquez, "Humedales del Golfo de Fonseca, Honduras, amenazas y reacciones", CODDEFFAGOLF, e-mail: cgolf@sdnhon.org.hn

Mexico: Growing opposition to industrial shrimp farming

Shrimp, considered as the country's pink gold, became the focus of Mexico's export-oriented fishing activity because of the importance and economic value of the crustacean in the international --particularly US-- market. Five Mexican states along the Pacific coast (Sonora, Sinaloa, Nayarit, Oaxaca, and Chiapas) and two along the east coast (Tamaulipas and Campeche) have developed shrimp aquaculture.

Sinaloa is currently the state with the largest number of shrimp farms and the highest production levels of cultivated shrimp and where environmental problems associated with the industry's development are most prominent. The rapid proliferation in the number of shrimp farms is affecting the coastal ecosystems and the rural communities that depend on the resources provided by these ecosystems.

Despite existing regulations, there is a consensus that the aquaculture industry is transforming the coastal ecosystems of Sinaloa in a way that is affecting the livelihood and quality of life for residents of the many rural coastal communities.

The coastal lagoons and estuaries that characterize Sinaloa contain a diversity of habitats including mangrove forests, salt-marshes, inter-tidal pools, swamps, freshwater inner lagoons, and brackish and seawater systems. A key environmental concern is the impact of shrimp farm construction on ecosystems. This issue is most prominent in the southern region of the state, where a single lagoon system can contain many shrimp farms. During the rainy season, the region's lagoons are habitats and nurseries for postlarvae and a variety of fishery resources, which form the basis of the commercial fishing activity and are also exploited by the rural coastal communities as common property. When these lagoons dry up with the end of the rains, they have traditionally been mined for salt both by individuals gathering it for home consumption as well as by some cooperatives.

Today, in order to guarantee a permanent water supply to the shrimp farms, canals have been built to connect the lagoons with estuaries or the ocean, leading to permanent flooding. The government has granted concessions, mostly to private investors, to build shrimp farms in these coastal lagoons. Moreover, the concessions have converted a highly diverse coastal ecosystem into a monocrop system. This has resulted in a greater marginalization and displacement of the social sector and in an increased distrust of the government agencies in charge of developing the aquaculture industry. By transforming common-property lagoons into a privately owned resource, the concessions have exacerbated Sinaloa's social conflicts.

The discharge from shrimp ponds is considered to be one of the more recent and serious direct sources of pollution in Sinaloa's coastal waters. Shrimp-farm wastewater contains large amounts of organic material, fertilizers, chemicals, and antibiotics, which cause eutrophication in the lagoons and estuarine systems. In Sinaloa, wastewater from shrimp aquaculture activities has been linked to the formation of phytoplankton blooms, eutrophication, and the development of red tides in coastal marine waters

An additional environmental concern is the impact of the industry on mangrove ecosystems. In Mexico, there are approximately 123 coastal lagoons, most bordered by mangrove swamps. Mexico is home to four mangrove species: red (Rhizophora mangle), white (Laguncunaria racemosa), black (Avicennia germinans), and buttonwood (Conocarpus erecta). Mexico's mangrove forests cover approximately 660,000 hectares. Sinaloa's mangrove forests serve as nesting and feeding grounds for a large number of resident and migratory birds and as nurseries for shrimp, which form the basis of the inshore fishing industry. The trees are also used by the rural population as firewood and lumber. Over time, mangrove ecosystems in Sinaloa have been transformed by mining, agriculture, and the cattle industry. Currently, the shrimp aquaculture industry is also contributing to the ecological transformation of these ecosystems. It has been estimated that by 1994, 10,000 hectares of mangrove forests were destroyed to build shrimp ponds. Untreated shrimp-pond effluents are also contributing to the damage.

The global concern over the negative impact of commercial shrimp farming on the environment and humans has fueled the emergence of various grassroots social movements to resist the expansion of the industry. Among the causes igniting this resistance are local people's concerns with increasing pollution, and the loss of common-pool resources. In Mexico, resistance to the industry's expansion is slowly starting to appear and for the most part, this opposition has been developed by several of the fishing cooperatives in southern Sinaloa and northern Nayarit. Activities of fishing cooperatives in these states have included confrontations with personnel of shrimp farms and negotiations with government agencies in order to limit the expansion of the industry.

Among the most important grassroots organizations to oppose large-scale shrimp aquaculture near fishing grounds is the Federation of Fishing Cooperatives of Southern Sinaloa (The "Guerreros del Sur" --Warriors of the South), which comprises 21 fishing cooperatives with a total of 2,000 fishermen. In 1998, the Guerreros del Sur openly opposed the construction of a shrimp farm in their granted fishing area, claiming that seven cooperatives would no longer be able to fish in the area because the shrimp farm would invade their space. The Federation had previously prevented the construction of a shrimp farm in another nearby community. In that case, the majority of the members of this community supported the effort, and the shrimp farm was not constructed. Members of this Federation have also actively opposed the collection of wild shrimp larvae in coastal areas near their fishing grounds. In some instances, they showed up with truncheons to confront marine biologists and other shrimp farms personnel to demand they stop harvesting shrimp larvae. A number of fishing cooperatives in northern Nayarit have also opposed the construction of a shrimp farm near their fishing areas. In this case the fishermen have accused a private company of destroying large tracts of mangroves with their shrimp-pond operations. The fishing cooperatives were joined by an environmental organization, Grupo Manglar.

As more people become aware of the potential effects of the shrimp aquaculture industry, the fishing cooperatives and community groups opposing the expansion of the industry will get more support. There is no doubt that industrial aquaculture farming has had important ecological and social impacts, which in the long run may lead to the further erosion of the coastal and marine ecology and the ability of rural households to make a living.

Article based on information from: Maria L. Cruz-Torres.- "Pink Gold Rush:" Shrimp Aquaculture, Sustainable Development, and the Environment in Northwestern Mexico, Journal of Political Ecology Vol. 7, 2000 (http://www.library.arizona.edu/ej/jpe/volume_7/Cruz00.pdf)

MANGROVE RELATED NETWORKS

The Industrial Shrimp Action Network, ISA Net, was formed in 1997, to conduct campaigns with and assist non-governmental organizations from Asia, Africa, North and South America, Europe, and Australia addressing the impacts on local communities, economies, and ecosystems caused by the explosive growth of large-scale shrimp aquaculture. Representatives of environmental and community organizations from 14 nations organized ISA Net as an umbrella group that would support and encourage sustainable, responsible shrimp farming. They have led the work, study, discussions and campaigns addressing irresponsible shrimp aquaculture and promoting wetlands conservation efforts in their regions. As a network of Southern and Northern NGOs, ISA Net represents a coordinated strategy among those NGOs to leverage and magnify their individual capabilities. It is based in USA, and can be contacted at: isanet@shrimpaction.org . Web page: http://www.shrimpaction.org/

The Mangrove Action Project (MAP), is dedicated to reversing the degradation of mangrove forest ecosystems worldwide. Its central tenet is to promote the rights of local coastal peoples, including fishers and farmers, in the sustainable management of coastal environs. MAP provides four essential services to grassroots associations and other proponents of mangrove conservation. It coordinates an international NGO network and information clearinghouse on mangrove forests; it promotes public awareness of mangrove forest issues; it develops technical and financial support for NGO projects and it helps publicize within the industrialized countries the basic needs and struggles of Third World coastal fishing and farming communities affected by the consumer demands of the wealthy nations. MAP has been involved in mangrove restoration projects, advocacy work and public educational events. MAP has recently intensified its conservation work by beginning to address other serious problems affecting mangrove forests, such as the logging, oil, charcoal and tourism industries, as well as other developments which threaten the mangroves and coastal communities and strongly supports the bottom up approach as it makes a more effective and lasting difference. It publishes two important news bulletins:"The Late Friday News", a bi-weekly electronic news bulletin and "The MAP Quarterly News" a hard copy mailed to subscribers. MAP can be contacted at: mangroveap@olympus.net . Web page: http://www.earthisland.org/map/index.htm

The Latin American Mangrove Network, REDMANGLAR, has recently been established in Honduras by thirty delegates from 10 Latin American countries. Its main objective is to defend mangroves and coastal ecosystems, to guarantee their vitality and that of the populations who relate with them from hazards and impacts of activities, mainly industrial, likely to degrade the environment. Specific objectives also include working to halt the expansion of inappropriate economic industrial activities in coastal ecosystems, to strengthen the overall development of local communities and their grass-roots organizations, to promote exchange of knowledge and experience, to restore remaining mangrove areas and degraded coastal ecosystems, and to denounce and halt attempts to legalise and internationally fund industrial aquaculture, tourist industries and other destructive activities. The Executive Secretariat of this network is located in Honduras (Coddeffagolf). Those individuals and organizations interested in joining the network may request information from: cgolf@sdnohon.org.hn

MORE ON MANGROVES AND SHRIMP FARMING

We have expanded the WRM web page's section on mangroves and shrimp farming in order to facilitate access to further information on this issue. The section includes all the related articles published previously in the WRM bulletin as well as other relevant analysis, links and photographs. The section is accessible at: http://www.wrm.org.uy/deforestation/shrimp.html Error: Unable to read footer file.