Evaluating the Implementation Process of the Certification
Guidelines in Local Communities of the Peruvian Amazon
(Tahuayo – Blanco and Yavari - Miri)
By CLAUDIA C. RIOS RENGIFO
MSc International Wildlife Trade and Conservation
Durrell Institute for Conservation and Ecology
University of Kent
United Kingdom
2008
ii
Acknowledgment
I would like to start by thanking my supervisor Dr. Alison Rosser and Dr. Richard
Bodmer who provided important academic advice and valuable comments and
suggestions for my analysis and writing.
Furthermore I would like to thank Tula Fang, Zina Valverde and Kelly Moya who
share information about the peccary pelt certification programme and also gave me
valuable friendship support. Miguel Antúnez and Pedro Perez who shared information
about the wildlife population in Tahuayo – Blanco and Yavari – Miri.
Also I would like to thank the Wellington Linares and Gilberto Flores who are
government authorities that allowed developing the survey in their communities,
My parents Fidel Rios and Soledad Rengifo and my brother Renzo who provided their
support every time.
Also I would like to thank the Peccary Pelt Certification Programme and Darwin
Initiative which financed the survey and also allowed the training of the biologists
from the Peruvian Amazon in the International Wildlife Trade and Conservation
Programme in the Durrell Institute for Conservation and Ecology, University of Kent.
Furthermore, this training encourages me to develop more practical advices in the
process of the peccary pelt certification programme and also in future conservation
programme. Finally, I would like to thank WCS-Peru and Amazon Eco which
provided me logistical support during the field work.
iii
ABSTRACT
The collared peccary (Tayassu tajacu) and white lipped peccary (Tayassu pecari) are
important in local Amazonian communities as bush meat for food and to the economy
through meat market sales; their pelts are sold on the international market under
CITES Appendix II. In 2005, the Peccary Pelt Certification Programme (PPCP) was
developed in the Peruvian Amazon. Four communities of the Tahuayo – Blanco
(Buena Vista, El Chino, San Pedro and Diamante 7 de Julio) and one community of
the Yavari- Miri (Nueva Esperanza-Carolina) have been setting up the certification
guidelines in the hope of gaining the certification for sustainable bushmeat hunting.
This study assesses the implementation of certification guidelines in the local
communities aforementioned. The methods used in this study included consultation
with communities of the Tahuayo – Blanco and Yavari – Miri, examination of
independent data on species population density and catch per unit effort.
Questionnaires, discussion groups, hunting registers and censuses of wildlife
population were also used in this study.
Results showed that the five communities studied supported the incorporation of four
certification guidelines as a part of their wildlife agreements. However, the PPCP still
requires improvement of some technical issues concerning the certification guidelines,
technical training for participatory in hunting register, and also technical assistance to
clear the purpose of the certification programme within the communities studied. The
results also showed that mainly male, older respondents above 41 years of age, and
had secondary school education were more likely to know about the wildlife
agreements; whilst overall farmers and handicraftsman acknowledged the PPCP.
Therefore, these results suggest further work should be done with hunters to reenforce the implementation of the certification guidelines. Since the PPCP was
initiated, the population density indicated a stable population of T. tajacu, Mazama
americana and Lagothrix poeppigi. However, there were no sightings of T. peccary
and Agouti paca on the density transects. Similarly the catch per unit effort (CPUE)
showed that these species remained at a stable population amongst 2004 to 2007,
except for CPUE of T. tajacu and M. Americana, which has decreased in San Pedro
and Diamante 7 de Julio respectively. Although the PPCP should influence the
increase of these species, it is necessary to continue monitoring the population density
and CPUE to provide more conclusive evidence. Keywords: peccary pelt certification
programme, certification guidelines, Tahuayo–Blanco, Yavari–Miri, wildlife agreements.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgement ......................................................................................................... iii
Abstract .......................................................................................................................... iv
Table of contents ............................................................................................................. v
List of figures .................................................................................................................. viii
List of tables .................................................................................................................... ix
CHAPTER I
1.1Certification in context .............................................................................................. 1
1.2 Bushmeat conservation ............................................................................................. 3
1.3 Peccary pelt certification programme in the Peruvian Amazon ............................... 4
1.4 Aim and Objectives................................................................................................... 5
CHAPTER II
2.1 Study area.................................................................................................................. 8
2.1.1 Tahuayo – Blanco .................................................................................................. 8
2.1.2 Yavari – Miri........................................................................................................ 11
2.1.3 A Brief history of the peccary pelt certification programme .............................. 13
2.2 Methods................................................................................................................... 15
2.2.1 Questionnaire design ........................................................................................... 15
2.2.2 Data collection ..................................................................................................... 16
2.2.3 Communities ........................................................................................................ 16
2.2.4 Certification guidelines discussion group ............................................................ 17
2.2.5 Hunting registers .................................................................................................. 17
2.2.6 Interactive dialogues ............................................................................................ 18
2.2.7 Data processing and analysis ............................................................................... 18
CHAPTER III:
Results ........................................................................................................................... 20
3.1 General introduction about local knowledge of wildlife agreements ..................... 20
3.2 Local knowledge and attitudes about certification guidelines ................................ 22
3.2.1 Local knowledge concerning the vulnerability of species to overharvest ........... 22
v
3.2.2 Local attitudes concerning the first certification guideline: vulnerable and nonvulnerable species ........................................................................................................ 24
3.2.3 Local attitudes concerning the second certification guideline: hunting register
and hunting quota .......................................................................................................... 25
3.2.3.1 Local knowledge concerning of the hunting register ........................................ 25
3.2.3.2 Use of hunting registers in communities from 2006 – 2008 ............................. 25
3.2.3.3. Local attitudes about including hunting register and hunting quota under
wildlife agreements ....................................................................................................... 26
3.2.3.4 Local attitudes concerning the third certification guideline: Hunting and non
hunting area (Source – Sink area) ................................................................................. 27
3.2.3.5 Local attitudes concerning the fourth wildlife guideline: habitat conservation 28
3.3 Local knowledge concerning the peccary pelt certification programme ................ 30
3.3.1 Local suggestions for improving the peccary pelt certification programme ....... 31
3.4 Wildlife management within the peccary pelt certification programme ................ 32
3.4.1 Attitudes toward the development of the wildlife management .......................... 32
3.5 Hunting effort and population density of hunting species in the communities
studied ........................................................................................................................... 37
3.5.1 Catch Per Unit Effort (CPUE) in Buena Vista..................................................... 37
3.5.2 Catch Per Unit Effort (CPUE) in El Chino .......................................................... 38
3.5.3 Catch Per Unit Effort (CPUE) in San Pedro ........................................................ 40
3.5.4 Catch Per Unit Effort (CPUE) in Diamante 7 de Julio ........................................ 41
3.5.5 Catch Per Unit Effort (CPUE) in Nueva Esperanza – Carolina........................... 43
3.6 Wildlife density in Tahuayo – Blanco (2004 and 2008) and Yavari Miri (20052007) ............................................................................................................................. 45
3.6.1 Wildlife density in Tahuayo – Blanco .............................................................. 45
3.6.2 Wildlife density in Yavari – Miri...................................................................... 45
3.6.3 Comparison of the CPUE and density data....................................................... 46
CHAPTER IV
Discussion ..................................................................................................................... 48
4.1 Local Knowledge of wildlife agreements ............................................................... 48
4.2 Attitude concerning certification guidelines ........................................................... 49
4.3 Peccary pelt certification programme .................................................................... 52
vi
4.4 Attitude concerning wildlife management .............................................................. 52
4.5 Impact of peccary pelt certification programme on wildlife population in Tahuayo
– Blanco and Yavari Miri ............................................................................................. 54
4.6 Overview of the peccary pelt certification programme and its certification
guidelines ...................................................................................................................... 55
Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 57
References ..................................................................................................................... 58
Annex 1. Questionnaire about the implementation process of the certification
guidelines in local communities of the Tahuayo – Blanco and Yavari – Miri ............. 66
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
1. Study area map showing the Communities studied in Tahuayo – Blanco and
Yavari – Miri....................................................................................................... 9
2a. Percentage of respondents who acknowledged having wildlife agreements in
their communities.............................................................................................. 20
2b. Local knowledge of wildlife agreements .......................................................... 21
3. Percentage of respondents who identified particular species as vulnerable or not
to overhunting in Tahuayo – Blanco and Yavari – Miri ................................... 23
4. Percentage of respondents who supported the inclusion of a list of vulnerable
and non-vulnerable species as a part of wildlife agreement ............................. 24
5. Proportion of respondents who had knowledge of the hunting register in
Tahuayo – Blanco and Yavari – Mirin ............................................................. 25
6. Number of participants in the hunting registers within each community over a
period of three years.......................................................................................... 26
7a. Proportion of respondents who agreed with the establishment of hunting
register as a part of wildlife agreements ........................................................... 26
7b. Proportion of respondents who agreed with the establishment of hunting quota
as a part of wildlife agreements ........................................................................ 27
8. Proportion of respondents who agreed with the establishment of hunting and
non-hunting areas (source – sink) as a part of the wildlife agreement ............. 28
9a. Proportion of respondents who agreed with the establishment of habitat
conservation as part of the wildlife agreement ................................................. 29
9b. Proportion of respondents who suggested measures for conserving palm trees
as strategy of habitat conservation .................................................................... 30
10. Proportion of respondents who acknowledged the peccary pelt certification
programme. ....................................................................................................... 31
11. Proportion of respondents who mentioned conservation benefits from the
wildlife management ......................................................................................... 33
12. Proportion of respondents who mentioned economic benefits from the wildlife
management with economic incentives ............................................................ 32
13. Catch per Unit Effort of Agouti paca in Buena Vista ....................................... 37
14. Catch per Unit Effort of Tayassu tajacu in Buena Vista .................................. 38
viii
15. Catch per Unit Effort of Tayassu pecari in Buena Vista ................................. 38
16. Catch per Unit Effort of Agouti paca in El Chino ........................................... 39
17. Catch per Unit Effort of Tayassu pecari in El Chino ...................................... 39
18. Catch per Unit Effort of Tayassu tajacu in El Chino....................................... 40
19. Catch per Unit Effort of Agouti paca in San Pedro ......................................... 40
20. Catch per Unit Effort of Tayassu tajacu in San Pedro..................................... 41
21. Catch per Unit Effort of Agouti paca in Diamante 7 de Julio ......................... 41
22. Catch per Unit Effort of Tayassu tajacu in Diamante 7 de Julio ..................... 42
23. Catch per Unit Effort of Mazama americana in Diamante 7 de Julio ............. 42
24. Catch per Unit Effort of Tayassu tajacu in Nueva Esperanza – Carolina ........ 43
25. Catch per Unit Effort of Tayassu pecari in Nueva Esperanza – Carolina ........ 43
26. Catch per Unit Effort of Mazama americana in Nueva Esperanza – Carolina 44
27. Catch per Unit Effort of Lagothix lagotricha in Nueva Esperanza – Carolina 44
ix
LIST OF TABLES
1. Peccary pelts certification guidelines.................................................................. 5
2. Results of a logistic regression to identify which factors best explain
local knowledge of wildlife agreements ........................................................... 22
3. Results of a logistic regression that determined the group of respondents who
acknowledged the peccary pelt certification programme ................................. 31
4. List of suggestions concerning of the peccary pelt certification programme
named by communities studied ........................................................................ 32
5. Results of a logistic regression that determined which variables could explain
the respondents attitude to wildlife management.............................................. 33
6. Group of respondents who were interested to wildlife management with salary
........................................................................................................................... 34
7. Group of respondents who were confident with biologist adviser to wildlife
management ...................................................................................................... 35
8. A summary of the questionnaire results............................................................ 36
9. Density of four hunting species in Tahuayo – Blanco amongst 2004-2008 ..... 45
10. Density of four hunting species in Yavari – Miri amongst 2004-2007 ............ 46
11. Summary of the results from Catch per Unit Effort and Density amongst
communities studied ......................................................................................... 47
x