Cross-breeding the Asiatic Wild Water Buffalo

[Guest guest]

In Nepal. wildlife park authorities authorities killed some 80 roaming

domestic buffaloes for two years in a row, in order to avoid cross-breeding

with the Asiatic Wild Water Buffalo. Now, with the support of the World

Bank, IUCN will do exactly that, only now it's well paid - US$ 194.000. No

doubt the authorities will be happy with some extra bucks coming in....and

it appears conservation efforts will be further compromised. Once again

it's done in the name of the poor, who tend not to benefit from schemes

such as these.

 

Does anyone have experience with cross-breeding projects such as these? Do

they make sense?

 

The Himalayan Times

KATHMANDU, MARCH 20, 2004, Chaitra 07, 2060

 

Conservation: This 'merger' is not on, argue bio experts

Shree Ram Subedi

 

Kathmandu, March 19:

A proposed move to cross-breed wild buffaloes with domesticated ones

through artificial insemination at Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve has irked

conservationists.

 

The World Conservation Union (IUCN), Nepal, under the assistance of the

World Bank, has proposed to use semen of wild buffaloes in domesticated

buffaloes to produce a more hardy and valuable cross.

 

The reserve is home to over 150 threatened Asiatic Wild Water Buffaloes.

The project, titled 'Reduce Land Use Conflicts through Local Incentives',

seeks to conserve biodiversity and prevent overgrazing by creating

incentives for poor farmers to reduce livestock pressure to wildlife inside

the Reserve, according to information posted on the World Bank website.

IUCN-Nepal bagged the US$ 194,000 World Bank project under the Global

Environment Facility funding through global competition. Proponents of the

project argue the project is innovative in many ways. If implemented, they

say, it would be the first example of the use of any wild animal's genetic

material as an incentive for biodiversity conservation in Nepal.

They also argue that the project will tackle the challenge of reducing

cattle population in Nepal's socio-cultural context.

 

However, there are others who do not buy the argument. The project may be

an innovative one, but proper legislation should be formulated before

embarking on such an issue as it would have long-term policy implications,

argues Dr Ravi Sharma Aryal, a law expert of the Convention on

International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna (CITES).

" It is illegal to move ahead with such a project without framing the legal

basis, " he said. " The extraction of semen is to exploit wildlife and there

is no law that governs the process. "

 

He sees no justification that the project will contribute significantly in

poverty reduction of the local people. Baffaloes are kept by relatively

well-off famlies; so this has little to do with the poor, and artificial

insemination, as claimed by the proponent of the project, does not boost

milk production, he reasoned.

 

The project, according to the project document, is expected to raise the

income of at least 200 households by 20 per cent, and improve the

relationship between the protected area authority and local communities. It

would also cause a 15 per cent decline in the number of domesticated cattle

inside the park.

 

Dr Aryal also argued that the move will not address the conflict between

the park and the people, since it does't address the grazing problem. " We

need to do lots of study to establish the biological, scientific and social

basis of such programmes, " said Dr Dinesh Bhuju, an ecologist with the

Resources Himalaya, a non-profit organisation.

 

" The impact on wildlife and its genetic pool should be properly studied

before launching such a project, " he said.

 

Sameer Karki, an official at IUCN-Nepal, argues that the project was just a

" pilot test. " " We will follow guaranteed and precautionary measures to make

sure there is no adverse impact on wildlife. " The government is likely to

take a decision on the matter soon. Said Narayan Poudel, deputy director

general at the Department of National Park and Wildlife Conservation: " We

have as yet not approved the project. "

 

 

----------