WABU CREEK KAURI FOREST a Fijian success story

Forest and Bird, Volume 23, Issue 1, 1 February 1992, Page 35

WABU CREEK KAURI FOREST a Fijian success story

Sean Weaver

Forest and Bird’s Pacific rainforest campaign took the society to Fiji in 1988 in an effort to assist in the conservation of Fiji’s tropical rainforests. Many of the country’s native forests are threatened by

logging.

looks at one

particular forest with an interesting story. The problems that surrounded the efforts to protect it shed light on some of the central issues faced by forest conservationists in the Pacific.

HE FIJI KAURI FOREST of the Wabu [pronounced Wambu] Creek catchment covers some 4,000 hectares in an enclosed unmodified valley perched high in the mists of central Viti Levu, the largest of Fiji’s islands. Of all the unspoilt landscapes in Fiji, Wabu stands among the finest. Less than half of Fiji’s two million hectares is forested. Of this forest most is either secondary growth indigenous forest or exotic plantations. Very few areas of unlogged rainforest remain. The forests of Wabu Creek are among the few that have escaped 150 years of logging activity and they have an exceptionally high conservation value.

As the last remaining example of dense old growth Fijian kauri (Agathis macrophylla to scientists, dakua makadre to the locals), it survives as a remnant of a forest type that was formerly widespread in the island group. OST of Fiji’s rainforests, including this one, are owned by indigenous Fijian mataqali or clans. A matagali can vary in number and often consists of a group of families which form part of a village population. A village may contain up to five mataqali. But the mataqali which owns the Wabu Creek kauri forest is represented by only a single living member. If this person were a man then the ownership of this forest

could be shared by his children. A woman, however, is unable to do this as her children (if she is married) inherit the land owned by her husband’s mataqali. The matagali that owns Wabu faces extinction because its last surviving member is a woman. That woman’s name is Litiana. When she dies, Litiana’s land will revert to the State or be subject to claim by a neighbouring mataqali. A tin and thatch shack no bigger than the average New Zealand garage is home for Litiana and her family. In recent years she has been courted by a number of prospective logging companies wishing to gain access to the valuable kauri timber within her forest. Such a development in the Wabu Creek catchment would have a great impact on the life of the landowner as well as the forest itself. A massive improvement in the landowner’s wealth and standard of living would occur but Fiji would lose yet another magnificent forest. Through an interpreter (as she speaks no English) Litiana explained how she wished to derive an income from her forest inheritance and use it to build a new house and help provide for her family. These were not grandiose aspirations by any standards, but they comprise a key to the fate of the Wabu Creek forest. In their natural state the majestic stands of Fijian kauri that sit beside Wabu Creek and adorn the flanks of Mt Tomanivi are a long way from providing Litiana with an income. She would prefer not to have the forest felled but logging would provide a simple way to translate her legacy into a livelihood. An agreement was reached some years ago between Litiana and a logging company. The arrangement involved a housing project in addition to the payment of royalties on timber extracted from the forest and rent on the land. An application for a logging licence was then lodged with the Fiji Native Lands Trust Board, and the Ministry of Forests in 1988. In the same year, however, both these government bodies were approached jointly by Forest and Bird and the Maruia Society with proposals for the protection of the forest as a national park. The Fijian departments were interested but insisted that the landowner be able to receive ongoing economic benefits from the forest. Here lies the problem. The area cannot simply be confiscated and the landowner wishes to use this forest to gain an income. The task for those seeking the protection of the Wabu Creek forest has been to find a way for this landowner to make a living from the forest without logging it. In the eyes of Litiana this forest is a commodity and her interest is essentially

financial. If this forest can be used to provide income for her she will be happy. If this means cutting it down then so be it. T FIRST GLANCE it would seem that timber extraction is the only way of bringing development to this forested landscape. But there are alternatives. Not all industries use landscape resources in destructive ways and, in fact, some are close allies of conservation. Tourism is Fiji’s biggest industry. However, Fiji’s tourist industry is currently having problems with falling visitor numbers and, of course, falling profits and Government revenues. The industry itself is calling out for a diversification in visitor attractions in order to build a firmer base to maintain tourist flows. For the last 20 years Fiji has sold itself as a realm of white sand, blue sea and lazy, leaning palm trees. But Fiji has much more to offer. It has rainforests, unique wildlife and dramatic landforms that lie there awaiting appreciation. Not only are these landscapes spectacular, they are also safe. There are none of the "unpleasant" features shared by the most of the other rainforests of the world. Fiji has no crocodiles, leeches, malaria or other dangerous animals. As Fiji’s tourist industry begins to realise the potential of having the world’s most accessible tropical forests, development in these areas will begin to take on a new meaning. Natural environments are common tourist attractions in many other countries, a fact demonstrated by the number of international travellers wishing to see what is left of wild and natural places. The use of New Zealand’s national parks by the tourism industry here is a good example. North Queensland tempts its visitors with a tropical forest paradise and people are flocking there. Costa Rica widely advertises an experience in its rainforests, while Kenya puts the Serengetti National Park at the forefront of its tourist promotion. Within the context of Fii’s potential as a nature tourism destination the development options for places like Wabu Creek suddenly broaden. There is, however, a distinct economic contrast between nature tourism and large scale logging, and here was a crucial missing link in the conservation equation at Wabu. The short-term financial gains likely from a tourist operation in the Wabu Creek forest cannot compete with the short-term gains that large scale logging can offer. Income generated from tourism is likely to comprise smaller amounts than logging but spread over a

* Wabu Creek +

long sustained period. For this reason nature tourism alone would not be able to match the landowner’s expectations of immediate large cash returns from logging. ITIANA’S STORY has a happy ending. During 1991 the Fiji Ministry of Forests found the finance necessary to compensate her and- is currently in the process of formally protecting the Wabu Creek forest. Proposals to develop sensitive nature tourism in this area are now underway in what is to become the next phase in securing the long term protection of this magnificent forest. Other nature tourism projects have been operating in Fiji over the last few years where forest conservation and community development has combined to provide Fiji with development alternatives for some of its remaining intact rainforests. The most notable example is the Bouma project on Taveuni Island. Here landowners have been selling a rainforest experience to tourists instead of cutting their forest down as a means of ongoing income. This project is a success partly due to assistance provided through New Zealand government aid.

ANY FIIANS desperately want to be included in the development process where perceived improvements to their welfare can be made. Tribal owners of tropical forests in Fiji invariably see their forests as a foundation on which to build their economic future. Denying them this opportunity altogether could be perceived as sentencing them to socio-eco-nomic stagnation and confiscating their inheritance. Development of one form or another is going to continue in the forest lands of Fiji, irrespective of the wishes of conservationists in New Zealand. Many of us have long forgotten that our lifestyle is riddled with the kind of gadgetry that the average Pacific Island villager could never hope to have. What are regarded as basic essentials to many of us lie in the dreams of many Fijians. And it is these "basic essentials" that we take for granted — fridges, ovens, electricity and hot water — which stimulate the desires of people in places like Fiji who may look to their forests as a means to these ends. Conservation efforts in Fiji, and in many other countries (including New Zealand) must address the fundamental social and economic issues that drive the development process which is so often

responsible for environmental degradation. It is not the business of outsiders to question the legitimate aspirations of indigenous peoples to a higher standard of living with improved health care and educational opportunities. If they wish to translate their natural resources into a livelihood it may be more appropriate for conservationists to help them achieve this in ways that do not destroy the conservation values of their resources. Nature tourism as an alternative to logging is only one option and is only appropriate in certain parts of Fiji. Some areas are unlikely to be as logistically attractive for tourism development as Wabu Creek, and different mechanisms will be needed to protect them. In any case, the pathway to indigenous forest conservation in Fiji is not going to be easy as the circumstances at Wabu testify. But hopefully the case of Litiana and Wabu Creek will demonstrate that conservation programmes in Fiji cannot ignore the process of economic development. They can redirect it but this will require more than merely an understanding of ecology. # Sean Weaver has had a long association with Fiji and is studying forest conservation there for his PhD. He was formerly a researcher for Forest and Bird and has recently worked for the Fiji Government’s National Environmental Management Project.