Paper Title: Recognising the contribution of Sacred Natural Sites for biodiversity conservation.

Authors: Rob Soutter1, Yaa Ntiamoa-Baidu1, John Smith2 and Devendra Rana3,

Presented at the World Parks Congress in Durban, South Africa, September, 2003

Summary:

This paper draws on examples of the protection of sacred forests and groves in Africa to explore the concept of sacred sites and their potential contribution to biodiversity conservation and protected area management. The term sacred natural site is used to describe a variety of contexts, including sacred rivers, lakes, mountains, marine areas and forests. For the purposes of this paper, the term sacred natural site is limited only to sacred forests and groves, with a particular focus on Africa. The paper describes the involvement of WWF, the conservation organisation, and ARC (Alliance of Religions and Conservation) in Sacred Natural Sites (SNS) and engagement with local communities in the protection of their sites. The experiences gained in this work are discussed while presenting an overall view that sacred natural sites and their impact on conservation objectives have remained relatively understudied despite the apparent conservation benefits they offer. The paper ends with a proposal for a region-wide initiative in Africa for the promotion and support of Sacred Natural Sites in order that a) the concept and mechanisms are better understood b) their conservation value is identified and c) they are more readily considered by governments, donor agencies and conservation organisations in their protected area work, especially when working in the larger conservation landscape.

_____________________________________________________________________

1 WWF-International, Avenue du Mont Blanc, 1196 CH, Gland, Switzerland2 ARC - Alliance for Religions and Conservation, 3 Wynnstay Grove, Fallowfield, Manchester, M14 6XG, UK3 Independent Consultant, PO Box 1635, Kathmandu, Nepal

Introduction

Sacred natural sites are found throughout the world, and among many world and indigenous faiths. The term is used widely to describe a number of contexts, including sacred rivers, lakes, mountains, marine areas and forests. For the purposes of this paper, the term sacred natural site is limited to sacred forests and groves, and focuses particularly on sacred forests and groves and their contribution to biodiversity conservation in Africa.

The origins for this paper come out of a longstanding partnership beween WWF and the Alliance of Religions and Conservation (ARC) dating back to the mid-1980s when the leaders of five major faith traditions were brought together by WWF to discuss conservation issues at Assisi, Italy. From this meeting came a number of initiatives -- including the Assisi Declarations, where each faith made a statement on the environment -- and led to the creation of ARC in 1995, at that time with nine, and more recently eleven faiths as members. WWF and ARC now engage with faith communities across the world on a range of environmental conservation programmes and projects, including sustainable forest management, climate change and a broad programme on Sacred Sites.

There are two broad, overarching reasons for WWF and ARC’s involvement in sacred forests and groves:

the importance of such areas for biodiversity conservation, and for spiritual and cultural values.

This paper looks at sacred forests and groves because of: The link between protection of sacred groves and biodiversity conservation; The relevance of sacred forests and groves within larger scales of conservation

interventions, such as landscape-level forest protection and management; WWF and ARC’s wide experience of the variety of SNS practices - especially in

Africa, Asia and Europe;

It is difficult to give an all-encompassing definition of a sacred forest/grove as the understanding of the concept varies between different belief systems, peoples and communities. One study defines sacred groves as "clusters of forest vegetation that honour a deity, provide sanctuary for spirits, remind present generations of ancestors or protect a sanctified place from exploitation. They are treated as sacred by virtue of their location, cultural meaning and history" (Lebbie and Freudenberger, 1996). In this paper we use sacred groves or forests interchangeably to refer to specific areas recognised by peoples and communities as having special spiritual, religious, cultural and historical significance. Some common attributes include: access restricted by taboos and management codes; restricted uses and activities that are highly regulated and maintained by customs, and although less tangible but still important is a desire to maintain the status quo (often referred to as balance) between humanity and the forest ecosystem as a statement of the status of the belief system itself.

Trees, forests, wild animal species and spirituality

The vast majority, if not all, faiths and belief systems have a close and intimate link with the natural world. Testimony to these spiritual links is found in the writings of the major faiths – Bible (Christianity), Bhagavad Gita (Hinduism), Qu’ran (Islam) and Torah/Talmud (Judaism) as well as in their practices and rituals along with indigenous and non-literal faith traditions. The spiritual link is illustrated most graphically by the presence of sacred trees, groves and forests in the landscapes of faith communities around the world. Many African people and communities have spiritual, religious and cultural associations with wildlife. Certain plant and animal species are revered; in some cases these may not be touched, destroyed or eaten. An example of this is the tradition of totem animals in the traditions of the Akan people in Ghana, where several clans have a wild animal or plant species, ranging from the raffia palm Raffia hookeri, to the leopard Panthera leo as their totem (Ntiamoa-Baidu, 2002). Traditionally, such species were protected by members of the clan. It is also common in many rural African communities to find small patches of forests set aside as sacred and accorded strict protection under customary laws. Reasons for this status vary, ranging from forests which constitute the royal burial grounds and forests along the banks of major rivers supplying water to a village community, to forests with historical significance in the culture of a group of people, or patches of forest that support totem species.

Other examples include: the ancient Yew trees Taxus baccata found throughout the churchyards of Britain and whose presence often refers to earlier pre-Christian religious belief and practises but whose significance has carried on to the present day; the Bo trees Ficus religiosa that are revered throughout Asia as the tree under which Lord Buddha gained enlightenment; the Kapok tree Ceiba pentandra that the Huarorani tribe of the Amazon basin consider as their creation tree; the trees around Shinto temples in Japan, which are now often the only surviving ancient trees in the lowlands; and the sacred burial groves of the Dayak people in Borneo. In terms of forests and groves, examples include: the Holy Hills revered by the Dai people of Yunnan Province, China; small religious forests dharmic ban are scattered throughout the mid-Hills of Nepal; and the Karanga people of southern Zimbabwe hold particular trees and woodland areas as sacred due to their association with ancestral spirits.

Such sites have three important characteristics. First, the sacredness of particular trees or groves often crosses religious and temporal divides. The yew trees in English churchyards, mentioned above, link back to pre-Christian beliefs (and the oldest yew trees are thought to have been planted before the arrival of Christianity). Christianity in Africa has also not noticeably reduced interest in sacred groves. In Ethiopia, as elsewhere, sacred forests and waters remain a potent symbol of present day spirituality as they have done for centuries. In other countries, as new faiths have emigrated into other areas they have often adopted the customs of the existing faith practices. In Turkey, the worship of sacred trees was not affected by the arrival of Islam (Akcicek and Ozturk, 1997). Similarly, the protection of sacred groves in Tamil Nadu, India, probably predates the arrival of Hinduism. Once trees or forests assume spiritual importance for

communities this significance is often not noticeably affected by the belief framework within which it exists.

Secondly, sacredness does not necessarily imply that such trees or forests have no mundane uses and indeed in some examples the products of the forests have been an essential part of the spirituality that has developed around them. In Orissa the production of the chariots which carried Lord Jaganeth from the forest to the temple were of a longstanding and particular construction formula, with each tree species of the forest supplying a prescribed part of the chariot. In part this ensured no single species was overexploited and in part recognised the importance of every species. Most sacred groves also have practical day-to-day benefits, such as providing sources of food, or fuel. The tembawang groves of the dayak people in Kalimantan, Borneo are simultaneously burial sites and fruit gardens (and now incidentally the richest repositories of biodiversity in many areas where forests have been cleared for rice, oil palm and Acacia). The kaya forests of Kenya, described below, are recognised and valued sources of food as well as being of spiritual importance.

Third, many groves are actively managed to maintain their values – where “manage” may in some cases be a decision to leave well alone. Monks in Thailand decorate trees and have used this as a way of protecting important forests. Shinto temples, Hindu priests, Lutheran ministers and baka tribespeople all make active efforts to manage the forests that they care about. The Boabeng Fiema-Monkey sanctuary in Ghana, provides an example of a sacred grove that has not only been protected by customary law, but also by modern legislature under District Council by-laws and is managed as a wildlife sanctuary. The grove is considered sacred because it supports populations of black and white colobus monkey Colobus vellerosus and Mona monkey Cercopithecus mona, both of which are revered and strictly protected as sons of the gods of the people of Boabeng and Fiema villages (Akowual et al 1975, Ntiamoa-Baidu, 1987; Fargey 1991). So strong is the belief surrounding these monkeys that in the past, when a monkey died, the corpse was given the same respect and funeral rites as would be accorded to a human being. Because of the effectiveness of the protection, this small forest (ca 196 ha) supports the highest density of the two species of monkeys anywhere in Ghana (163 black and white, 347 Mona according to a 1997 census; Kankam, 1997).

A possible fourth characteristic is that these activities show few signs of diminishing. The Baltic state of Estonia has around three hundred sacred trees, where people hung prayers written on scraps of paper – a practice that re-emerged almost as soon as the Soviet Union collapsed. At Vientiane airport in Laos, one grove of trees remains on the site amidst rigorously cleared grassland – because it has spiritual importance to some of the local people. Even in countries struggling to present a modernist image, the importance of sacred forests remains remarkably intact.

The close and intimate link between spirituality and nature impacts on biodiversity conservation in the context of sacred areas in a number of ways.

In particular, there is the value and integration into practical management responses of the spiritual dimension of peoples' interaction with nature. For example, in maintaining a faith community’s predominant rights of access to sacred areas, the use of such areas and the resources they hold have generally meant that, traditionally, resource use has been minimised rather than maximised. Further, that the nature, character and atmosphere of the site have deliberately been left largely intact over long periods of time.

Building on this, it can be argued that conservation agencies need to think ‘beyond their normal boundaries’ by integrating conservation needs with people’s beliefs, in much the same way it is recognised to be both essential and routine to integrate peoples' needs with management regimes that conserve biodiversity and support livelihoods.

Such considerations are already being consciously reflected by many protected area authorities, themselves under pressure from their own indigenous communities. In New Zealand, sacred Maori mountains are protected within national parks and are off-limits for casual visitors. Similar restrictions apply in protected areas in parts of Australia where aboriginal sacred sites remain. IUCN category III protected areas, covering natural monuments, perhaps provides a tailor-made form of protection that could, with some additional effort and interpretation, be an ideal vehicle for linking sacred sites and formal protected areas.

However, it may be noted that sacred sites can be categorised in terms of degree of access, use of the area and purpose similar to IUCN PA categories. Thus, for example, a sacred site that is accessible only to a limited number of people, usually priests, and where there is no consumptive use, and the area is left alone, would correspond with IUCN category 1a: scientific reserve.

Case studies from Africa

This paper provides three short case studies from the experiences of WWF and ARC in promoting sacred forest conservation in the Africa region.

Tandroy and Mahafaly sacred forests, South-West Madagascar

Madagascar has lost at least 80% of its original forest cover, and deforestation continues at an estimated rate of 200,000ha annually. Agricultural practice such as slash and burn is one of the chief causes, along with the need for firewood and charcoal by the island’s expanding population. Despite long-term, intensive support from conservation organisations and donors the country’s biodiversity continues to be threatened. Nonetheless, due to local traditions and customs sacred forests continue to survive in one of the world’s biologically richest drylands – the Spiny Forest ecoregion of Madagascar.

The Mahafaly people of south-west Madagascar recognise nine categories of sacred forests with varying degrees of importance. These possess different management regimes, as well as sanctions. The most important category is the forest with a tomb of a king or a

great dignitary called Havilasy. Customary law dictates that only specified persons - usually designated members of the royal family - are allowed to enter this forest, collect products or make fire. Sanctions for ignoring this law range from sacrificing eight zebus for burning, to one zebu for entering. Species such as tortoises and lemurs are protected by local taboos. These local traditions and customs have long prevented the wholesale destruction of such sacred forests (Andriamiarisoa, 2003, Hamilton, 2003, Rebara, 2003)..

For the Tandroy people of the deep south of Madagascar, sacred forests shelter genii, spirits, occult powers and mythical animals which dwell there as absolute owners of the land. The protection and the benevolence of those hosts must be secured as a great many forest resources belong to them. Those beliefs have long prevented problems of overexploitation of forest resources. Nowadays, such customs and values are softening. The growing needs of villagers lead them to progressively encroach on once forbidden forests and show less and less respect towards ancestral beliefs.

In recognition of the strength of local traditions and customs to maintain such sites, WWF undertook an inventory and reconnaissance of all sacred forests in the Spiny Forest ecoregion (these cover a total area of 63,000 ha in the ecoregion). Several of the traditional faith leaders approached by WWF expressed growing concern for the conservation of their sacred forests, especially in the face of increasing migration and their weakening traditional authority on younger generations. WWF thus started to work with both the local communities and the Ministry of the Environment, Water and Forests to identify means of strengthening local cultural norms and beliefs in favour of conservation. This resulted in the handover of the sacred Sakoantovo forest to a local management committee from the neighbouring Mahafaly community. This type of transfer requires that communities organize themselves through a management structure and a dina (customary law or convention) regulating the use of forest resources. The legal transfer provides local communities with the necessary authority to control access to their sacred forests and other ancestral lands apply and enforce sustainable management measures on natural resources.

WWF and the local Water and Forests service are now working with the communities to develop a management plan for the Sakoantovo sacred forest. The true challenge is to ensure that these local communities will have the capacity to effectively manage these resources and the sacred forests for the long term, in a modernising world and increasing human needs. Long term mentoring will be necessary to ensure that such capacity effectively develops.

In similar fashion the sacred Vohimasio forest was handed over to the Tandroy community. WWF anticipates that such legal recognition of sacred forests will strengthen spiritual beliefs and local traditions of conservation and inspire other communities to conserve Madagascar’s unique biodiversity.

Kaya forests of Kenya The Kaya forests are relict forest patches situated in the coastal plains and hills of Kenya that are regarded as sacred by the coastal Mijikenda community. These forests constitute some of the few patches of undisturbed vegetation in an increasingly densely populated landscape, representing what is left of the once extensive and diverse lowland forest of Eastern Africa. The Kenyan Coastal forests, like the rest of the Eastern African coastal forests and woodlands, have undergone significant fragmentation. Only two indigenous forest vegetation blocks (Arabuko Sokoke and the Shimba Hills System) cover a greater area than 6000 hectares. The rest of the forest patches range from 1500 ha to less than 10 hectares. Over two thirds of these are Kaya forests. The Kaya forests are small in size, ranging from 10 to 400 ha in area. To date, over 50 have been identified in the contiguous districts of Kwale, Mombasa, Kilifi and Malindi.

The Kaya forests owe their existence directly to the beliefs, culture and history of the Mijikenda people, consisting of nine ethnic groups who speak nine closely related Bantu languages. According to local traditions, the forests historically sheltered small, fortified villages of the various groups when they first arrived in the region three or more centuries ago from their northern homeland. The word 'Kaya' means homestead in many Bantu languages. It is presumed that as conditions became more secure, especially since the late 1800s, the communities left their forest refuges and began to clear and cultivate away from them. However the sites of the original settlements, often marked by forest clearings, were maintained by the groups as burial grounds and places of worship. The secret protective magic of each community was hidden deep in these forests. Community elders acted as the guardians of the sacred sites and cutting of trees or destruction of vegetation around them was prohibited. (Nyamweru, 1998; Githitho and Luke, 2001). The Kaya sites have remained as forest patches while the surrounding areas were gradually converted to farmland as a result of the traditional beliefs and respect attached to them by Mijikenda people.

For many Mijikenda, the Kaya forests are still a source of cultural identity and strength, and are essential to the lives of the Mijikenda people, especially the local communities living near them. They serve as a source of many forest products including firewood and poles as well as non-timber products such as herbal medicine, wild fruits, vegetables and fibre. Ponds and springs within the Kaya forests are often the only accessible source of clean water for neighbouring communities.

WWF and the National Museums of Kenya have collaborated in undertaking surveys of the Kaya forests. These surveys included a review of species data, listed known Kaya, their locations and status of conservation noted and assessed local people's attitudes towards them as well as a compilation of a checklist of all known vascular plants of the coastal districts. The data resulting from these surveys showed that the Kaya forests are botanically diverse and have a high conservation value despite their comparatively small collective area. Using a measure of relative conservation value developed by the survey which combined the known geographic range and rarity values, 7 out of the 20 coastal sites with the highest value were Kaya forests despite the fact that the total area covered

by the Kayas is only ca. 3 % of the total coastal forest of Kenya (Githitho and Luke; 2001). More than half of Kenya's rare plants are found in the coast region, and many of these are endemic to the Kaya forests. To date, over 3,000 plant taxa have been recorded in the Kaya forests, 30 of which are new to science and some 74 are new to Kenya. Four Kaya forests qualified as globally important bird areas based on the bird communities they support.

Over the past three or four decades, there has been a progressive decline in local knowledge and respect for the traditional values of the Mijikenda. This is the result of the rapid socio- economic and cultural changes occurring in Kenyan society, like many other places in Africa, which has affected the values and cohesiveness of local communities. The erosion of traditional values, especially among the youth, has rendered the Kaya forests vulnerable to encroachment, overexploitation and desecration. This coupled with growing human needs for forest products and land for agriculture, mining and tourism has led to the illegal appropriation and destruction of many Kaya forests and groves, resulting in decline and in some cases complete disappearance of some Kaya forests.

The disappearance and loss of the Kaya forests was a source of great concern to Kaya Elders and local leaders who raised the issue at various forums. The increasing protest by conservationists and by the community elders led the Government of Kenya to place these forests under the Antiquities and Monuments Act in 1990, with the gazettement of 23 Kaya forests as National Monuments in 1992 (Githitho and Luke; 2001). The work done under the WWF and the National Museums of Kenya provided vital impetus to this process. Gazettement as National Monuments mandates the National Museums of Kenya to oversee the protection and conservation of these sites as valuable components of the country's natural and cultural heritage.

However, inherent weaknesses in the Act still render the Kayas vulnerable to certain types of misuse, and Kaya forests continue to be degraded or lost. The current legislative framework is inadequate as the Courts have questioned the validity of gazettment of Kayas and their protected area status. This shortcoming -- combined with conflicts within communities, declining respect for traditions, and financially lucrative incentives for expropriation and conversion -- mean that the forces on the side of conservation continue to lose the battle to save the Kaya forests.

Sacred forests of the Orthodox Church and monasteries in Ethiopia. In the landscapes of northern and central Ethiopia, the woodland vegetation of steep slopes or on the hills surrounding a monastery or within and immediately around the churchyards are the remnants of the once extensive forests of Ethiopia. Wherever possible most lands that are not settled are taken over for crop production and/or for livestock grazing resulting in severe forest degradation. Within this landscape the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahido Church, whose foundations date to the 4th Century CE, has maintained a long tradition of forest conservation. The reasons for this are spiritual (symbolism of the presence of angels guarding each church; the appearance of God to

Abraham under a tree) and material (source of fuel wood for church services; as shade for the clergy and the laity during mass and religious festivals) (Bekele et al, 2001; Binggeli, 2001; Teklehaimanot et al., ud). Juniper, Juniperus sps. are the favoured woods for the church’s artefacts. It is more resilient to infestation and rot than most other timbers, was relatively widespread and thus available for such purposes. Its decline, as a result of land clearance, therefore increases the demand on other timber while also increasing the division between traditional and respected practices. It is regarded by many as a sacred tree and is often the preferred plant in church and monastic areas. The woodlands occupied by church and monastic communities are very important repositories for both fauna and flora. In some cases they are important sanctuaries for endangered plant and animal species. As a source of germplasm, and as indicator sites of the original ecological landscape, they provide excellent starting points for the study and practice of in situ forest conservation and restoration ecology.

ARC is involved a partnership with the University of Wales, the Ethiopian Wildlife and Natural History Society and the Ethiopian Orthodox Church sponsored by the United Kingdom’s Darwin Initiative to promote conservation and regeneration of these relict areas of natural vegetation. The first activity under this partnership was to undertake a rapid biodiversity assessment along with socio-economic surveys of representative sites throughout the Ethiopian Highlands. The picture which emerged from both the ecological and social surveys have shown that church woodlands are clearly regarded as sacred and they are often the only remnants of forests in a locality. They are, however, under severe threat and are declining in extent and quality in some areas. But overall in many places with severe deforestation there was a strong desire for restoration of church and monastic forests as a starting point for a wider landscape restoration initiative.

Another contributory factor to landscape degradation and loss of sacred forests appears to be unclear tenure rights following the 1974 revolution that nationalised all church lands. Although this is considered an important issue, maintenance of the forest has nevertheless remained a high priority as longstanding traditions and beliefs have overshadowed most recent changes in society. Finally where old non-Christian beliefs have a presence in the locality these are often accompanied by the presence of sacred groves and where these lay side by side the more common presence of the Orthodox Church it was generally considered that this had a positive impact on forest conservation as little or no friction arose between the communities and each respected the sacred beliefs, practices and sites of the other.

Background to and rationale for WWF and ARC partnership on Sacred Sites

There are two broad, overarching reasons for WWF and ARC’s involvement with the communities

responsible for sacred sites, and especially in sacred forests and groves: the importance of such sites for biodiversity conservation in the larger sense, and for

their spiritual and cultural values.

Biodiversity conservation. Many sites have conserved important biodiversity, as for example the Boabeng-

Fiema Monkey Sanctuary in Ghana. Many are examples of relic floral and faunal communities and populations

previously present in the region. These have great value for historical ecological reasons as reference or indicator sites, as for example the sacred Church and Monastery groves in Ethiopian Highlands.

They are also useful sources of genetic materials that can be used for rehabilitating degraded environments, especially in degraded landscapes such as are found in Ethiopia.

They can act as ‘islands of biodiversity’ that by themselves may not be of high biological value, but together and at a larger landscape or ecoregion level are of great value. For instance, 40 sacred groves in Maharastra (India) as a whole, account for most of the plant species found in the Western Ghats

Their sheer number, and by implication, total area around the world is itself important for conservation. For example, it is estimated that there are over 400 Holy Hills of the Dai people covering between 30 – 40,000 hectares in China.

Spiritual and cultural rights Sacred forests are the bedrock for peoples' and communities' religious and

spiritual beliefs and cultural identity. Hence, it is morally unjustifiable to remove the rights of peoples and communities to protect and manage such sites.

Sacred forests and groves have survived for many years and continue to this day throughout the African region despite many pressures (displacement of communities from traditional lands and resources, loss of tenure security, alterations to community social structures, expropriation of community resources, spread of cash cropping practices etc.). This shows the strength of spiritual values for the creation and maintenance of a particular sacred space or species and is a very powerful force for nature conservation.

Engagement with nature, for many people, cannot be just quantified by ‘a set of resources or products’ or explained in scientific terms, but rather through these needs and a mix of other intangible values – a source of pleasure, a creative force, an awe-inspiring feeling and much more.

Recognition of spiritual and cultural rights will ensure that the livelihoods and cultures of indigenous and traditional peoples will not be severely disrupted in pursuit of biodiversity conservation in the future. Respect for these rights will

minimise mistrust and conflict and could open up opportunities for the further development and broadening of the protected areas concept.

Lessons learnt and issues raised by the case studies

Based on experiences from the three case studies, some of the key issues that need to be addressed are outlined below:

How can spiritual and religious perspectives be integrated into conservation principles and practices? While the economic and biodiversity values of conservation are widely recognised and accepted, intangible or non-material values which have long been of priority concern at local community levels are only now becoming more generally recognised. At a global scale we have yet to measure the importance to biodiversity of the practical outcomes of spiritual relationships in landscape management. As we have seen from all the case studies, the spiritual values of peoples and communities are the foundations of their commitment to protect their natural heritage and of their motivation to actively engage in the conservation of sacred forests and other natural sites. This has resulted in successful long-term protection of sacred forests and groves throughout Africa and has stimulated WWF and ARC to support peoples and communities to gain greater recognition of their efforts. However it is difficult at present to generalise about the types of strategies or practices required to ensure respect and support for sacred natural sites that fit easily with the stance taken by most conservation bodies. We are still largely at a case by case approach to the relationship between the faith communities and conservation bodies, and a general recognition of the importance of sacred natural sites is still far from guaranteed. Such recognition however, will encourage a greater depth of study and cooperation between the two perspectives. In turn it may be that a case by case approach has to remain as the most successful strategy but as we come to understand better it may also mean that generalised guidelines, frameworks and templates can be drawn up to assist conservation bodies at international, national and local level as well as help incorporate the faith communities themselves into the centre of the discussions and thus contribute and add to the direction and value of the processes.

WWF believes that integration of spiritual and religious perspectives can only come about when there is better understanding of these perspectives – what are the belief systems that underpin protection of certain sites or species? What is the management system? What are the taboos? Who is responsible? Such an understanding will allow conservationists to discuss the means (how, criteria, etc.) and efficacy (benefits) of recognising such values within either or both the national land tenure systems and the national protected areas systems. At the international level, and specifically, the WCPA level, there is a need to focus discussions on the means of recognising spiritual and religious perspectives/values within Guidelines for the system of IUCN protected areas categories.

What are the crucial legislative and policy support/ recognition required for sacred forests and groves?

From the above and numerous other examples, it is clear that the concept of SNS predates the more formally defined protected areas. While they may not be managed strictly to benefit the protection of biodiversity, they do offer a number of direct and indirect benefits for conservation. From a policy perspective, it is important to note the longevity of the management system underpinning sacred sites, and the strong support for such sites from local communities.

Despite the conservation value of these sites and significant local level protection, the potential value of sacred natural sites to biodiversity conservation suffers from a lack of recognition by state agencies, conservation organisations, legislation and wider civil society. The great majority of sacred forests and groves are governed by customary land arrangements of collective entitlements, but many states often do not possess a legal category for communal property. All the case studies have shown that a critical weakness of sacred sites is the lack of legal recognition. For instance, a major underlying cause for the loss of the sacred forests of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church was unclear tenure rights. In Madagascar WWF worked with the Government to establish a legal framework for community-based natural resource management (Gestion Locale Sécurisée and Gestion Contractualisée des Forêts) so that sacred forests could be recognised. On the other hand, legislation by itself is insufficient, as shown by the case of the Kaya forests in Kenya, where the forests continue to be threatened despite being declared as National Monuments legally protected under Kenyan law.

Clearly, the different interest groups would benefit from lessons sharing and learning on legal and policy developments that could support sacred forests and groves in different countries. There may be value in exploring the benefits (protocol, guidance, funds) of linkages between national legislation for sacred forests and international conventions, such as the newly revamped African Convention, and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and frameworks such as poverty reduction strategies to more clearly articulate the values of sacred forests.

Relationship between sacred natural sites and formally recognised protected areas

In light of the above, it is felt that there would be value in exploring a more deliberate relationship between sacred natural sites and protected area systems. Such an initiative might address questions such as possible cooperation between the communities involved with sacred natural sites and the protected area authorities and the staff employed in protected areas; and between the sacred sites themselves and protected areas. There may be opportunities for assisting with management, biodiversity inventories, mapping etc. It may be useful to look at the status of sacred sites where these occur within the boundaries

of protected areas, or are contiguous with the park, especially in the view of the communities responsible for the sacred sites.

This may lead to broader questions such as whether it is possible to expand the size of a sacred site and whether new sacred sites can be created. If so what are the mechanisms and processes involved?

Using a landscape approach to landuse planning and management, there would be value to map sacred natural sites together with protected areas, and other sites of environmental significance, such as wetlands. This can be used to identify possibilities to link sacred sites together with each other and with protected areas, for example by means of "green corridors". Apart from better integrating formal conservation practices with the spiritual and cultural values of neighbouring communities for whom the sites are sacred, this can help improve the overall conservation value of the landscape, by enabling wildlife to move between areas, and providing buffers against the expected impacts of climate change, such as changes in rainfall patterns and the characteristics of formal protected areas and sacred natural sites. This integrated approach may also be of assistance in addressing other issues such as invasive alien species, and in better understanding and responding to the environmental impacts of proposed developments such as dams, roads and housing.

A way forward:

In partnership with the faith communities, WWF and ARC are committed to a long term engagement on sacred natural sites. The partnership is currently in the planning stages for the launch of a region-wide initiative for Africa - with the longer-term aim to explore this concept further in other continents - and we would warmly welcome other collaborators. WWF and ARC hope that this initiative will promote the recognition and role of cultural, religious and spiritual values in biodiversity conservation through the maintenance of sacred forests and groves, especially at the landscape level. This initiative would bring together peoples who have been maintaining and supporting sacred forests and groves in Africa to begin to: Improve understanding of different people’s spiritual and religious values of the

environment and its effect on forest conservation and management. Enhance understanding of institutions and norms that have protected sacred sites. Map and inventory sacred forests and groves in Africa. Better understand the biodiversity and conservation values of sacred forests and

groves, both as individual units and as part of a larger conservation landscape. Assist communities to gain greater statutory recognition of their sacred forests and

groves Engage with faiths for the better conservation management of their sacred forests. Provide a support network for practitioners working on sacred forests by linking this

initiative with other international initiatives. Test and adapt best practice guidelines proposed by the WCPA Non-Materials Value

Taskforce.

In view of the huge number and diversity of sacred sites in Africa, this initiative can only begin the task of gathering information and mapping out the geographic presence of such sites, the various values of such sites and ideas for ways in which these areas can be validated as contributing to conservation, and supported.

Through the experiences of ARC and WWF with SNS, we recognise the huge potential contribution to protected area targets, as identified in the recent World Parks Congress held in Durban South Africa in September 2003, and as agreed in the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), Malaysia, February 2004. These include, in addition to biodiversity conservation, the maintenance of ecosystem services, the provision of benefits to local communities, support for sustainable resource use, and as places which have spiritual and/or cultural significance to one or more groups of people.

More importantly, this form of land use embodies the beliefs, understanding and support of local communities that have been the de facto guardians of these sites. Further, this protection has been in place for generations, if not centuries and longer. In some cases, even after a change of government has forbidden the continued status of an area as 'sacred', this custom has remained, perhaps less overtly, and the depth of local respect for the sanctity of the site has led to a rapid restoration of traditional management after the government has, in its turn, changed. Such support, and respect, for what are often ecologically important areas is priceless. Above all, the system sustains positive perception of the linkages between man and nature, thereby encouraging community support and participation in protected area management.

References:

Akowuah, D.K., Rice, K., Merz, A. & Sackey, V.A. 1975. The children of the gods. J. Ghana Wildlife Soc., 1 (2): 19-22.

Andriamiarisoa, V. 2003. Information on the sacred forests of the Mahafaly Plateau. Internal WWF note.

Barrow, E. 2002. Forest Conservation is Much More than Mere Use. Draft for comments. Nairobi.

Bekele, T, Berhan, G, Zerfu, S and Yeshitela K. 2001. Perspectives of the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahido Church in Forest Biodiversity Conservation. In report of the workshop on the Biodiversity conservation in ancient church and monastery yards in Ethiopia. Addis Ababa, August 2001.

Bharucha, E. 1999. Cultural and spiritual values related to the conservation of biodiversity in the sacred groves of the Western Ghats in Maharashtra. In Posey, DA (ed). Cultural and Spiritual Values of Biodiversity – A complementary contribution to the Global Biodiversity Assessment. Intermediate Technology Publications for UNEP. London.

Binggeli, P, 2001. Workshop Discussions. In report of the workshop on the Biodiversity conservation in ancient church and monastery yards in Ethiopia. Addis Ababa, August 2001.

Fargey, P.J. Assessment of the Conservation Status of the Boabeng-Fiema Monkey Sanctuary. Final Report to the Flora and Fauna Preservation Society: University of Science and Technology, Kumasi, Ghana.

Harmon, D. 2003. Intangible Values of Protected Areas. In Harmon D and Putney A (ed), The Full Value of Parks: From Econonmics to the Intangible.

Hamilton, R. 2003. The Sacred Forest. Article on ‘Gifts to the Earth’ ceremony at Sakoantovo forest in Madagascar for WWF website.

Githitho, A. and Luke Q. 2001 Coastal Forest Conservation Unit, Kenya (CFCU) WWF Project Ke 0074 Completion Report, 47 pp

Jeanrenaud, S. 2001. An International Initiative for the Protection of Sacred Natural Sites and Other Places of Indigenous and Traditional Peoples with Importance for Biodiversity Conservation. A concept note for WWF. Gland.

Kankam, B.O. 1997. The population of black-and-white colobus (Colobus polykomos) and the mona monkeys (Cercopithecus mona) at the Boabeng-Fiema Monkey Sanctuary

and surrounding villages. B.Sc. Thesis, University of Science and Technology, Kumasi, Ghana.

Laird, SA. 1999. Forests, Culture and Conservation. In Posey, DA (ed). Cultural and Spiritual Values of Biodiversity – A complementary contribution to the Global Biodiversity Assessment. Intermediate Technology Publications for UNEP. London.

Negussie, G. ud. Use of Traditional Values in the Search for Conservation Goals: The Kaya Forests of the Kenyan Coast. http://www.earthwatch.org/europe/limbe/tradvalues.htm

Ntiamoa-Baidu, Y. 2002. Indigenous vs. Introduced Biodiversity Conservation Strategies: The Case of Protected Area Systems in Ghana.In Weber, W, L. J. T. White, A. Vedder and L. Naughton-Treves eds: African Rainforest Ecology and Conservation, Yale University Press, New Haven & London pp 385-396.

Ntiamoa-Baidu, Y. 1987 West African Wildlife; a resource in jeopardy Unasylva 39 (2) 27-35.

Nyamweru, C. 1998 Sacred Groves and Environmental Conservation, St Lawrence University, 1998 Frank. P. Piskor Lecture, 27 pp.

Rebara, F. 2003. The Relationship of the Tandroy Communities (Deep South of Madagascar) with their forest environment. Model of the Ifotaky and Tanambao Traditional Terroir. Internal WWF note.

Teklehaimanot,Z, Smith, J, Healey, J, Desissa, D and Binggeli, P, ud. Conservation of Ethiopian sacred groves.

UNESCO. 1996. Sacred Sites – Cultural Integrity, Biological Diversity. Programme proposal. Paris.

World Rainforest Movement. 2002. Ghana: Ancient tradition in community forest management. Bulletin No.60.