Ganzi Proposal 1999

PROPOSAL FOR THE GANZI TIBETAN AUTONOMOUS PREFECTURE ECOTOURISM PROJECT FOR NATURE CONSERVATION AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DRAFT PROPOSAL JOHN STUDLEY

FEBRUARY 1999

INDEX 1 BACKGROUND : CSF & GANZI PREFECTURE 2 INTRODUCTION: COMMUNITY FORESTRY & ECOTOURISM 3 THE DANGERS OF TOURISM 4 ECOTOURISM 5 THE BIODIVERSITY OF GANZI 6 PROPOSALS FOR THE GANZI TAP ECO-TOURISM PROJECT (for forest conservation & community development) APPENDIX 1 : BASELINE STUDIES : “PROJECT DENGKE 99" APPENDIX 2 : CONTACTS & PARTICIPANTS APPENDIX 3 : PROVINCIAL LEVEL DEPARTMENTS APPENDIX 4 : PROJECT GUIDELINES APPENDIX 5 : CHECK LIST FOR LODGE/FAMILY SELECTION

The Ganzi Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture Ecotourism Project : (for Nature Conservation and Community Development) During the summer of 1999 the Care and Share Foundation is planning an “ecotourism project”, as part of “ Project Dengke 1999. It is hoped that the project will be conducted in collaboration with Chinese & Tibetan Colleagues and will lead to the development of a sustainable model project supporting nature conservation and community development.

1 BACKGROUND :CSF & GANZI PREFECTURE 1.01 During the 1994 Care & Share Foundation “Recce” to Ganzi Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture, tourism was identified as a possible area of co-operation, however it was not followed up during Project Dengke 1995.

1.02 As a result of networking between CSF and High Asia Trekking (a US trekking Company) , during 1996 and 1997 the role of eco-tourism (in Ganzi's Nature Reserves) was identified as a possible means of supporting community development and nature conservation. (Note: Ganzi Prefecture has 13 Nature Reserves, which lack staff, infrastructure and a management plan) 1.03 In the Spring of 1998 the world famous field biologist George Schaller visited Ganzi and concluded the “Luoxu Reserve”, had potential for conservation and community development 1.04 In August the CSF returned to Ganzi to explore, among other areas, the potential of eco-tourism co-operation. As a result of discussions with both Prefectural and County (Shiqu) officials it was concluded that there was both interest and potential for ecotourism & eco- lodge adaptation. It was agreed with officials that eco-tourism would be included in “Project Dengke 1999".

1.05 During August and September 1998 China experienced severe floods, especially along the Yangtze River. As a result ,as from 1st Sept 1998 a complete felling ban was introduced in the Upper Yangtze Region (including Ganzi Prefecture) and contractors were asked to remove all felled trees. Although the National Government have transferred funds for re- forestation , to Ganzi, as a result of the disaster, there is a need for other sustainable income streams. Both eco-tourism, combined with agro-forestry provide the potential for nature conservation and community development 1.06 During October 1998 Dr Mel Richardson visited Sichuan Province (Chengdu), where he was able to secure support for the proposed “Ganzi TAP eco-tourist Project” from the “Science & Technology Commission” and Sichuan Provincial Forestry Bureau.

1.07 During October 1998 “China Daily” announced the establishment of 2000 forest parks by the year 2010 and that 1999 was Chinese Eco-Tourism Year.

Page 3

2. INTRODUCTION: COMMUNITY FORESTRY & ECOTOURISM In the last 15 years community forestry (or rural development forestry) has evolved from an emphasis on improving levels and reforestation activities, to looking at viable ways communities can generate income from the management and utilization of forest

resources. It is now widely accepted that if local communities are involved in making decisions regarding resource management and derive benefits from conservation activities, they are more apt to conserve forest resources. A range of collaborative activities from around the world has demonstrated that participation of local communities in the management of forest resources assists in conservation as well as promotes rural development. Ecotourism is one such emerging activity which is generation much interest.

Before we consider ecotourism we need to understand both the background and dangers of tourism at the indigenous and local community level 3 THE DANGERS OF TOURISM 3.01 Tourism & the local community Tourism can mean turmoil for residents of tourist destinations. Social pressures, combined with a changing local environment and economy, increasing numbers of tourists, and the effects of media and technology build up very quickly and change lives and cultures forever. Some communities have become human zoos, where tribal women have been enslaved and brought out only for the tourists (McLaren 1998) or exploited by sex tourism. Indigenous cultures are being devastated by the tourist invasion. At the local level tourism creates its own universe, an artificial world with no place for the local population. It is a struggle for the locals to survive. Given the almost total lack of government control, the absence of industry self-policing, and the increased competition to make a profit, to tourist industry yields increasing power at the community level.

Tourism promotes the same colonial tendencies that agricultural export companies and others perpetuated in earlier centuries. Colonizing is not new, but tourism development as a form of colonizing is new and growing at tremendous rates.

3.02 The problem with mass tourism Evidence supports the concern that mass tourism development, while bringing economic benefit to a region, can undermine the culture, livelihoods and environment of rural populations (Cronin 1990, Vassiliou 1990, WWF 1990 etc) 3.03 Sociological cycles of tourism development Tourism's emergence in host communities follows a typical 4 stage pattern:Stage 1 : Euphoria Stage 2 : Apathy Stage 3 : Antagonism (as competition accelerates between locals and tourists for transportation, sanitation, food security, money, space, environment cultural integrity).

Stage 4 : Self-Rejection & cultural rejection Page 4

Tourism often results in stratification between rich and poor , tourist and local, that is fuelled by the new consumer culture. Locals invariably begin to regard themselves as “poor�. When a community loses its self-reliance and depends on foreign wages,

necessities like food and shelter become unaffordable. The globalization of the economy transforms the local and self-sufficient (tribal, farming, hunting) community into a consumer-orientated and dependent society. Convinced that internationally manufactured goods are superior, they reject their own, locally produced goods, and try to make ends meet in the seasonal monetary economy. They lack wealth and status in the new tourist society and often descend into self- rejection.

3.04 Economic myths Tourism is praised as a source of employment in host destinations. It is seen as a highly labour-intensive industry that can offer employment to the semiskilled and unskilled. In regions where there is high unemployment, tourism is said to provide moderately quick relief. In reality most of the positions in management & catering are filled by foreigners and the majority of locals are left with low wage seasonal jobs, few opportunities for management training and no escape from a life of service jobs. Most tourist facilities are foreign-owned, so the money spent by the tourist does not stay where it is spent. In fact much tourism is owned by foreign “corporate alliances” and increasingly by Transnational Corporations which minimise the amount received by the host community.

3.05 Human rights, migration and displacement Tourism development has fostered human rights abuses and supported oppressive governments. In some cases the locals are seen as a nuisance to tourists, and the military patrols areas to keep local vendors away. In countries with records of human rights abuses, the government has displaced local people and sometimes even enslaved them as workers to build hotels and other sites. Sometimes government tourism officials prevent locals from having contact with tourists. ( Kelly nd, Keefe 1995, Chee Yoke Ling 1995, 3.06 Loss of traditional culture Multiple problems arise from the clash between Western technological cultures and traditional cultures. Technologies used in the travel industry and that support tourism (water, sewage, construction, agriculture, communication, transportation) downsize job opportunities for locals. Other more subtle problems arise over the concept of time and value. Workers are often exploited by tourists and the industry who consider their economic value only. The shift from traditional lifestyles to a technological world represents a shift from ethical values that encourage an empathetic and compassionate relationship with all that lives toward a value- free objectivity that has no ethical foundation. The most important breakdown of traditional society is caused by the psychological pressure to modernize. Traditional societies were self sufficient prior to tourism and development. Introduced development ideologies, technologies, and outside influences, such as tourists and the media, represent consumerism's most exaggerated features. “Development” undermines self-esteem and eventually becomes essential. The psychological pressure to modernize and the promise of economic gain are potent rationalizations for tourism development (Smith 1989, Norberg- Hodge 1992a,1992b) Page 5

3.07 Indigenous peoples In many places around the world, conflict between the tourist industry and Indigenous people is coming to a head. Any analysis of these problems must avoid lumping all Indigenous peoples into one ethnic group with the same values ,worldview and concerns. Each group should be viewed within its own set of circumstances, and concepts about land use and development according to its own right to self-determination.

An estimated 90 percent of Indigenous peoples in the Americas died after exposure to infectious diseases imported by Europeans and now millions of people in tourist destinations face health risks from tourists.

3.08 Ecological impact Tourism development, even in ecotourism destinations, is often at odds with both ecological preservation and local use. The large numbers of tourists going to these places greatly exceed the carrying capacity1 and the facilities required to accommodate them divert resources from local people, puts heavy stress on the environment and are at odds with wildlife and the natural world.

4 ECOTOURISM Over the last three decades there has been growing debate on tourism in developing countries and its problematic implications for local communities and the environment. Many efforts have been made to find solutions to the dilemmas created by mass tourism which has become the subject of increased criticism. To tackle the serious problem resulting from large-scale tourism development, numerous initiatives emerged that provided the basis for new forms of tourism. These included “alternative”, “responsible”, “low-impact”, “soft” tourism , just to mention a few (O'Grady 1990, Pleumaron 1990, Smith/ Eadington 1992). The search for less or non-destructive forms of tourism began long before the concept of “sustainable development” arrived on the agenda in the late 1980's and “ecotourism” became popular.

4.01 Definitions The question of defining what ecotourism is about, and what it is trying to achieve already appears to be a problem. The various definitions (see below) put forward reflect the different perspectives, values and interests of various parties addressing tourism, and clearly indicate different priorities. For those who want to attract as many tourists as possible, for example, ecotourism is primarily an activity to enjoy natural beauty and authentic culture. Conservationists tend to put emphasis on environmental education and raising awareness. Community developers stress the need for local economic benefits, the well-being of local people and occasionally, people's participation in ecotourism projects. a)Purposeful travel to natural areas to understand the culture and natural history of the environment, taking care not to alter the integrity of the ecosystem, while producing economic opportunities that make conservation of natural resources beneficial to local people. (Ecotourism Society 1991) __________ 1 The amount of people a land can accommodate without ecological degradation

Page 6

b)Environmentally sound tourism sustainably implemented in a given ecosystem to yield equitable social and economic benefits and to enhance the conservation of natural and cultural resources (Santiago 1997) c)Responsible travel that conserves the natural environment and sustains the well-being of local people (The Ecotourism Society (TES) 1993, Epler Wood 1996) 4.02 Principles of Ecotourism Expanding on definition c) TES (Epler Wood 1996) has developed seven basic principles of ecotourism 1)Avoids negative impacts that can damage or destroy the integrity or character of the natural or cultural environment being visited.

2)Educates the traveller on the importance of conservation 3)Directs revenues to the conservation of natural areas and the management of protected areas.

4)Brings economic benefits to local communities and directs revenues to local people living adjacent to protected areas.

5)Emphasizes the need for planning and sustainable growth of the tourism industry, and seeks to ensure that tourism development does not exceed the social and environmental “carrying capacity”.

6)Retains a high percentage of revenues in the host country by stressing the use of locally-owned facilities and services.

7)Increasingly relies on infrastructure that has been developed sensitively in harmony with the environment - minimizing use of fossil fuels, conserving local plant and wildlife, and blending with the natural environment.

4.03 Integration of conservation and development Before ecotourism, development of “wilderness” areas usually involved extraction of natural resources for a country's economic development. Logging, grazing, mining and agriculture all involve extractive use of land. Many countries view ecotourism as either an adjunct or an alternative to those industries. Catering to ecotourism involves building the needed infrastructure to accommodate tourists. This infrastructure development includes transportation, lodging, food and activities for the tourists. Low-impact housing such as small lodges, bed and breakfast inns, or rooms in village homes is usually preferred by ecotourists. These lodges also are beginning to use renewable resources, such as solar energy, to help avoid the pitfalls of modern development which would deplete the very resources that ecotourism has set out to protect. These renewable technologies need to be made more available to developing countries and incorporated into the planning stages of site development.

Economic benefits from tourism should be distributed to the local people around a protected area, as well as to government and park agencies. Through income generation, ecotourism can provide improved health care and education to the local inhabitants, as

well as employment in the tourism industry. Demonstrating the economic benefits of conservation to the local population is one key to the successful protection of an area.

Page 7

4.04 Ecotourism & agro-forestry Developing an area solely on the basis of tourism is also a risky proposition. Tourism is a fluctuating industry, often with a very short season. It is dependent on uncertain influences such as weather, foreign-exchange rates, and political stability. Tourism may not attract sufficient visitors, quickly enough to generate the revenue needed to meet the expectations of the community. This can result in a decreased likelihood that the community will make efforts to protect park resources (Pederson 1990). Development of ecotourism needs to be accompanied by sustainable development of the natural resources adjacent to protected areas, such as agro-forestry, and the development of agro-forestry cottage industries. This will not only provide an supplementary income stream to ecotourism, but provide substitutes for previous practices of grazing, wood cutting and agriculture within the parks. These measures take pressure off park resources by alleviating the need for community members to enter the park to extract needed resources, and they may demand less from the ecotourism program (Pederson 1990).

4.05 Ecotourism and the local community It needs to be said that neither the tourism community or development community have addressed how tourism can work within the local community, and that there has been inadequate funding to address this issue in the past (Lash 1997). Most foreign (non local) plans for ecotourism development include community involvement, but view this involvement from a frequently inappropriate Western worldview, not necessarily from the traditional cultural framework and cognition of the local residents (Escobar 1995, Ferguson 1994). Community values and specific cultural beliefs are rarely integrated into development plans. Community involvement is often only discussed in terms of secondary benefit for local residents, the primary goal being either conservation or profit.

Participatory approaches that empower local people are not common. It is time that developers form equal partnerships with local communities, and help provide much needed funding for community ventures to empower community residents to control their own destiny (Brandon 1993) Page 8

5. THE BIODIVERSITY OF GANZI PREFECTURE 5.01 China China is still described as a “megadiversity� country with more than 30,000 species of higher plants and 2100 terrestrial vertebrates Several hundred animals are endemic to

China, the most famous being the giant panda. Much of this variety is found in SW China (West Sichuan, N Yunnan, Tibet) where in a few locations the untouched climax ecosystems are among the most diverse living assemblies in Asia. Since 1950, however the forests have been indiscriminately cut reducing forest cover reduced from 30% to 14% threatening biodiversity and causing drastic declines of mammal and bird counts.

5.02 Ganzi Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture Ganzi Tibetan Autonomus Prefecture is situated in Western Sichuan. It extends over 153,000 km2 comprising the rugged mountains and steeply rolling uplands of Western Sichuan. The area, which is part of the Tibetan Plateau, has a mean elevation of over 3500m and is sparsely settled (5.4 people/km2). About 11% is covered by old growth forest (Picea, Abies & other), 16% with scrub and 73% of rangeland, rock & glacier. It is bordered to the north by Qinghai Province, and to the west by the Tibetan Autonomous Region, being separated by the Yangtze River.

5.03 Flora & Fauna (endangered species in bold type) Eastern Ganzi (east of Kanding & Gongga Shan (7556m), is warmer & moister than the west. Both Evergreen (Abies faberi, Picea brachytyle, Tsuga Chinensis, Larix potaninii) , broadleaf (Catanopsis Schima, Lithocarpus, Lindera, Quercus, Populus, Betula, Acer etc), and bamboo (Sinarundinaria fangiana) are common at low elevations.

Certain large mammal are confined to the forests of Eastern Ganzi namely Takin (Budorcas taxicolor), tufted deer, barking deer , Red panda (Ailuandrus fulgens) and Giant panda(Ailuropoda melanoleuca), where most of their habitat has been destroyed by agriculture and logging.

Western Ganzi is dominated by spruce (Picea balfouriana, P. likiangensis) and fir (Abies squamats, A georgei) and birch (Betula utilis, B. platyphyla , and on dry exposures juniper (Juniperus spp) and evergreen oak (Quercus semecarpifolia, Q. Aquifoliodes ) up to an elevation of 4300m.

Although human density is low, people are pervasive. Roads penetrate most larger valleys, villages are scattered throughout at lower elevations, with fields up to 3800 m, and the high pastures are used heavily by livestock at least seasonally. This has an impact on wildlife in that few undisturbed habitats persist and animals are readily accessible to hunters. Consequently, wildlife is generally sparse and shy, and moderately large populations remain in only a few locations.

5.031 Ungulates Serow (Capricornis sumatraensis) and Goral (Naemorhedus goral) remain widespread and Sambar deer and wild pig in forests below 3500m. White lipped deer (Cervus albirostris) and Sichuan Red deer (Cervus elaphus wallichi ) have an extensive distribution favouring forest/alpine meadows and scrub land. Musk deer(Moschus sefanicus, M. Fuscus, M. Cephalophus) also have a wide range but their numbers are low due to heavy poaching of musk from the males. Blue Sheep Page 9

or bharal (Pseudois nayaur) are the most abundant of the wild ungulates, favouring high and rugged terrain.

Roe deer are confined to a few widely scattered areas of scrub land and Argali sheep (Ovis ammon hodgsoni) are only found in NW Ganzi (Shiqu County).

Three species are confined to the high uplands, the Tibetan gazelle (Procapra picticauddata), the Wild Ass or Kiang ( Equus hemionus kiang) and the wild yak (Bos grunniens). The wild ass and wild yak mainly occur in Shiqu County. A herd of 200 wild yak are believed to exist in Shiqu and as the last surviving population in SW China these animals are of special importance for conservation.

5.032 Carnivores Several carnivores occur. The Black bear (Selenarctos thibetanus), which is quite widespread in forested areas, and the Brown bear (Ursus arctos pruinosus) , which occurs sparsely in alpine rangelands. Wolves (Canis lanniger) , and wild dogs are widely distributed but leopards (Neofelis nebulllosa ) are limited to to a few limited forest areas.

Snow leopard (Panthera uncia) are widely distributed, but their distribution has shrunk in recent decades, because they have been hunted and they can only survive when their prey, blue sheep remain abundant.

The prefecture still has remarkable diversity with 92 mammal species, 358 bird species, 28 reptile and amphibian species and 875 vascular plants. Of note are 10 pheasant species, and some 330 mushroom species (256 have importance for food and medicine). This biodiversity needs stressing because the prefecture has been overlooked by the conservation community, who have focussed on the giant panda. Other species (many of them endangered ) and habitats deserve attention. There are 13 reserves in the prefecture which range from a few km to the 10,604 km2 Shiqu Reserve. However all these reserves lack status, staff, infrastructure and management plans.

Page 10

6.00 PROPOSALS FOR THE GANZI TAP ECO-TOURISM PROJECT (for forest conservation & community development) 6.01 Project Aim To assist the Peoples Government of Ganzi Prefecture to develop a model project using ecotourism and agro-forestry as a means of supporting nature conservation and community development.

6.02 Study Area Initial research will begin around the “Luoxu Nature Reserve (LNR)�, Shiqu County, Ganzi Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture (GTAP), Sichuan Province, PR China. The

reserve which comprises ca 420km2, is close to the Yangtze River, and to the town of Bengda and approximately 80km NW of Dengke (Luoxu). It is hoped that the model developed for LNR can be replicated in the 13 reserves in Ganzi Prefecture.

6.03 Research Teams It is hoped that Chinese & Tibetan experts will collaborate with Western experts to develop a model project.

The Care and Share Foundation, a UK organisation, will provide expertise in a range of disciplines related to ecotourism.

Sichuan Provincial (SP) and Ganzi TAP Forestry Departments will be invited to provide collaborative expertise with possible assistance from :- SP Poverty Alleviation Commission, Sichuan Academy of Social Science, Sichuan Forestry Research Institute, Sichuan Forestry Exploration & Design Institute, SP & GTAP Tourism Department & SP & GTAP Building Department 6.04 Eco-tourism Project Timetable Spring 1999 a)Read background info on Ganzi Prefecture and Tibetan culture b)Read papers & surveys on ecotourism and Lodge impact (General) c)Study survey methodology for -----------"-----------d)Study :-papers on Tibetan buildings, photos, previous surveys, traditional building processes, & community culture. e)Read papers on suitable AT for Lodges and collaborate with appropriate technology centres in UK & China f)Prepare brief for lodge adaption allowing for varying options of “comfort� g)Prepare drawings of Lodge adaptation h)Prepare training materials for conservation/tourism/maintenance I)Fully discuss , in principal , all aspects of the groups activities with Ganzi/Shiqu/Local officials. j)Send an invitation request letter to Shiqu County via Mr Deng -Make sure that all the relevant Provincial offices* are included on the invitation request letter. (SP Forestry Bureau, SP Tourism Bureau, Sichuan Academy of Forestry Research, Sichuan Academy of Social Science, Poverty Alleviation Commission, SP Construction Bureau, Sichuan Forestry Institute of Page 12

Exploration & Design, etc) * Requesting the Provincial offices to secure the cooperation of their representative offices in Ganzi (Kanding) and Shiqu k)Request funding from sponsors etc (Rolex etc)

Phase 1 ; Baseline Studies: during “Project Dengke 1999" 15/7- 20/8/99 (See Appx 1) During phase 1 the research team will conduct baseline and feasibility studies around the “Luoxu Nature Reserve” to assess the viability of ecotourism and agro-forestry. The research will be sub-divided into the following eight studies :- Wildlife studies, Botanic & Ethnobotanic studies, Eco-tourism Impact assessment & Feasibility Studies, Outdoor Pursuits studies, Building research & adaption, Agro-forestry & bio-composite studies, Marketing studies & Training (conservation/tourism/lodge maintenance). All these groups will contribute to a report and a project management plan & maps (paper & GIS digital) for the next three years.

Phase 2 : Pilot Model Development (1/9/99-31/8/2002) It is hoped that Chinese & Tibetan colleagues will be in a position to implement the management plan, and develop a replicatable model, with some input and resources from Care & Share Foundation.

Phase 3 : Model Replication (1/9/2002) It is hoped that if the Pilot Project proves a success. The model can be replicated in all the nature reserves in Ganzi TAP Page 13

APPENDIX 1 PHASE 1 BASELINE STUDIES : “PD99" 15/7-20/8/99 These will include 1)Wildlife Studies a)Identifying the main animal species in & around the nature reserve b)Identifying very rare or endangered animal species in & around the reserve c)Identifying animal species of importance to the local people (using RA techniques) d)Identifying sites suitable for viewing wildlife or for hunting. e)Quantifying optimum population sizes (and cull required) f)Demarcating areas of the reserve where the wildlife requires protection or conservation g)Identifying measures required to enhance wildlife conservation h)Providing input for a Reserve management plan i)Providing input for conservation training j)Providing input for a report 2)Botanic & Ethnobotanic studies a)Identifying the main plant & tree species & communities in the nature reserve. b)Identifying very rare or endangered species in the reserve c)Identifying species suitable for commercialization, close to the reserve d)Identifying species of importance to the local people (using Rural Appraisal techniques) e)Identifying (in conjunction with the pharmacologist) species that have medicinal potential, in or close to the reserve f)Demarcating areas of the reserve that need

protection, or conservation. g)Identifying measures to enhance tree or plant conservation h)Providing input for a Reserve management plan i)Providing input for conservation training j)Providing input for a report.

3) Ecotourism Impact & feasibility studies a) Conducting an Ecotourism feasibility study (using RA techniques) b)Conducting a “conservation ethic” study c)Conducting Tibetan House Research (based on further discussion with Ganzi, Shiqu officials & local village groups) d)Conducting Lodge impact assessment (RA techniques) e)Providing input for a Reserve management plan. f)Providing input for a report 4)Outdoor Pursuits (OP) Studies a)Identify the suitability of a range of OP's in and around the Park b)Assess the socio-environmental impact of a range of OP activities c)Identify (and demarcate) suitable paths , trails, rivers and locations for trekking, pony trekking, camping, rafting etc d)Develop a "rotational use plan" to allow sensitive areas of park to recover e)Identify potential OP equipment (eg rafts, kayaks, bikes, tents, climbing equipment etc) that the project might need f)Identify “emergency” equipment, procedures and means of evacuation Page 14

g)Identify OP training needs for park staff, lodge owners h)Input for OP training i)Input for the park management plan j)Input for report 5) Eco-Lodge Adaption studies a) Lodge/family selection (check list - see Appendix 5) b) Lodge Adaption using AT c)Providing input for Reserve management plan d)Providing input for a report 6)Agro-forestry studies a)Conducting a Fibre source study (Bamboo, hemp, flax, cereal, Salix, Populus) b)Identifying areas suitable for growing fibre crops c)Demarcate areas suitable for fibre crop production d)Conduct Bio-composite production studies e)Identify potential sites for bio-composite production f)Conduct Impact assessment

g)Provide input for Reserve management plan h)Provide input for report 7)Marketing Studies a)Feasibility of ecotourism and agro-forestry, on the basis of “green accounting” and a socio- cultural cost benefit analysis. b)Identify international & national markets for ecotourism c)Identify national markets for wood “substitutes”. d)Identify ways of equitable benefit sharing from the project e)Identify mechanisms to ensure income (x%) is recycled into nature conservation or community development. f)Quantify start-up funding required for project and possible break-even point. g)Input for park management plan h)Input for report 8) Training a) Conservation b) Tourism c) Lodge Maintenance d) OP & First Aid Page 15

APPENDIX 2 CONTACTS & POSSIBLE PARTICIPANTS

1) Wildlife Reference a)Dr George Schaller

. .

FAX 0018603541634

. .

World Conservation Soc

a_rocha@compuserve.com b)Barbara Mearns

A Rocha rodjackson@mountain.org Snow Leopard Specialist.

c)Dr Rod Jackson Team a)Marc Foggin

. . c/o fogginp@ere.umontreal.ca

b)Peng Jitai

0836 2832542

. .

Rangeland & Wildlife Specialist Director: Ganzi FB

& Sichuan Wildlife Assoc.

2)Plants/Trees/ Ethnobotany Reference a)Prof Sir G Prance

. .

G.Prance@lion.rbgkew.org.uk

. .

Director, Kew Gardens

100427,1260@compuserve.com b)Dr Gary Martin

Ethnobotanist C.W.Wright@bradford.ac.uk Pharmacologist

c)Dr C Wright

WinklerDaniel@compuserve.com Geographer

d)Daniel Winkler Team

. .

narsisaa@dfid.gtnet.gov.uk or jakepaul@hotmail.com b)Ronit Golovaty ronit.golovaty@plant-sciences.oxford.ac.uk a)Jake Paul

. .

Botany Botany

c)Emilie Flower

emilie.flower@plant-sciences.oxford.ac.uk

Botany

d)Marc Foggin

c/o fogginp@ere.umontreal.ca

Rangeland Specialist

f)Wang Zhun

c/o linglin@mail.sc.cninfo.net Ethnobotanist

3)Ecotourism Feasibility Reference a)Deborah McLaren

. .

RTProject@aol.com

. .

Rethinking Tourism Project

FAX 01803868651 b)Helena Norberg-Hodge c)Henry Osmaston

osmaston@clara.net

ISEC/Ladakh Project

brathay@brathay.org.uk

IALS/Ladakh Brathay Expeditions/Ganzi

d)Brathay Team

. .

. .

a)Keith Richardson b)Graham Barrow ??

Keith_Richardson@compuserve.com

Town Planner

101501,1423@compuserve.com

Planner/Ecotourism

emilie.flower@plant-sciences.oxford.ac.uk

Soc. Anthro./ET

linglin@mail.sc.cninfo.net

Ecotourism Interest Group (S Forestry Dept) (S Poverty Alleviation Commission) (S Academy of Social Science)

c)Emilie Flower c/o --------------------�---------------d) Ling Lin (Forestry) e) Han Way (PAC)

c/o --------------------�---------------FAX 0836 2833777

Director Ganzi TAP Tourism Dp.

f) Xue Way (ASS) g)Bi Shi Xiang 4)Outdoor Persuits Reference a)Lorimer Grey

Team a)David Rutledge

. . enquiries@abernethytrust.org.uk

. .

Director, Abernethy Trust

. . enquiries@abernethytrust.org.uk

. .

Teacher/OP Specialist

Keith_Richardson@compuserve.com b)Keith Richardson

Town Planner FAX 0836 2833777 Director Ganzi TAP Tourism Dp

c)Bi Shi Xiang 5) Lodge Adaption Reference a)Helena Norberg-Hodge b)AT for

. .

FAX 01803868651

. .

ISEC/Ladakh

aptibet@gn.apc.org

AT for Tibetans

Tibetans

bmathur@vita.org

Solar Greenhouses

c)VITA

Tel 0091198253221

Ladakh Eco-Dev. Group

d)LEDG

itdg@gn.apc.org

e)IT

info@catinfo.demon.co.uk

f)CAT

C/o Suzanne Ewing

g)Peter Woods ??

neil.watkinson@member.riba.org

Intemediate Technology Centre for Alternative Tech.

pamlogan@alumni.caltech.edu Architect

h)Neil Watkinson

Kham Aid Foundation

i)Pam Logan

Team a)Suzanne Ewing

. . s.c.ewing@ncl.ac.uk

. .

Architect

FAX 01509 621003

Architect/AT/Nepal

b)Paul Saunders ??

113170,150@compuserve.com

Plumber & Water Services

c)Les Dennis

steve@stevelowe.freeserve.co.uk Carpenter & Joiner

d)Steve Lowe e)Bob Rideout f)Peter Gunner ??

oasiscc@thefree.net until@compuserve.com ??

Tool Maker & Masseur Engineer

g)Mr Wang

Dir., Ganzi TAP Building Dept.

h)CUST ???

AT specialists

6)Agro-Forestry Reference . . biocomposites@bangor.ac.uk a)Dr James Bolton

. .

Dir. Biocomposite Centre

C/o Mel

Team a)Dr Mel Richardson

. .

Mel_Richardson@compuserve.com

. .

Biocomposites

101647,3715@compuserve.com

Agriculture

ronit.golovaty@plant-sciences.oxford.ac.uk

Agro-Forestry

emilie.flower@plant-sciences.oxford.ac.uk

Agro-Forestry

c/o Ronit

Soil Science & Irrig.

linglin@mail.sc.cninfo.net

Project Off, SP Forestry Dept

b)Robin Evans c)Ronit Golovaty d)Emilie Flower e)Joshua Golovaty f)c/o Ling Lin 7)Marketing Team

. . a)James Greener Greener@compuserve.com

b)SASS c/o Ling linglin@mail.sc.cninfo.net Lin 8)Training Team

. .

Business Development Rural Economist

a)Morna Tan

. . tmorna@yahoo.com

. .

PT Teacher

b)Jack Sharples

m.d.sharples@clara.net

Teacher/Engineer

c)Jennifer McHardy

Tel 01279 730711

Teacher/Engineer

Woodlands@parklandschurch.freeserve.co.uk Teacher/Builder d)John Owens 101665,1075@compuserve.com

Teacher/Nurse

e)Rosamund Gerrish

yvonne_seng@yahoo.com

Teacher

f)Yvonne Seng

Cfjh@zetnet.co.uk

Teacher/Interpreter

g)Carey Harmer

Captainwat@aol.com

Teacher

h)Sandra Watson C/o zhengjie@earthlink.net i)HAT (Jon

linglin@mail.sc.cninfo.net

High Asia Trekking Co Ltd

Meisler) j)c/o Ling Lin 9)Admin Team a)Glyn Davies

. . glyn@parklandschurch.freeserve.co.uk

. .

Administrator

Page 18

APPENDIX 3 PROVINCIAL LEVEL DEPARTMENTS INVOLVED (CC on Prefecture invitation) a)Sichuan Province Forestry Bureau (ecotourism/wildlife/forest conservation/survey methodology/training) b)Sichuan Forest Research Academy (ethnobotany) c)SP Forest Design & Planning Institute (maps & inventory) d)Sichuan Academy of Social Science (ecotourism/survey methodology) e)Poverty Alleviation Commission (ecotourism) f)Chengdu University of Electrical Science & Technology (AT & comms) g)SP Tourism Bureau h)SP Building Department APPENDIX 4 ECOTOURISM PROJECT GUIDELINES The Eco-tourism Project will focus on activities:a)based on Sustainability b)that avoid dependency c)in collaboration with Chinese & Tibetan Experts d)that Seek to maintain the external integrity of any adapted buildings e)that Promote local culture, building processes, livelihood patterns, wildlife & environment f)that initially target "middle income" (based on wealth ranking or no. Yak/Ha Land) families as potential lodge owners, but also optimises benefit to the poor. g)that result in capacity building in tourism, conservation and eco-lodge maintenance h)that provide the maximum benefit for the most people (e.g. lodge owner, song & dance group, arts & crafts, pony trekking, trekking, nature walks, hunting, river rafting, mountain bike riding, vegetable sellers, park wardens, lodge maintenance, bus drivers, etc) i)that promote appropriate and sustainable means of income generation j)that use, where possible, locally available appropriate technologies and materials. k)that seek to place "ownership" of eco-tourism with the local people

l)that ensure that prior to the "accessing & transfer" of intellectual property & biological resources the permission of the local people is secured and arrangements made for compensation and benefit sharing (Baalem Declaration 1988, Panama City Declaration 1991, Manila Declaration 1992, WWF 1993) Page 19

APPENDIX 5 CHECK-LIST FOR LODGE/FAMILY SELECTION Location a)Within say 5km of existing Nature Reserve "Core" b)Either part of or within say 2km of existing village c)Within say 1km of a road d)Close to water if hydro power is to be considered Lodge Family Selection Although we want to target the poor because of the financial risks involved at the beginning of this project we feel that the ideal family should:a)be of Middle income (by wealth ranking/average no. of Yak/Average Ha Land) b)be well respected in the village c)be innovative d)be supportive of the aims of CSF e)be supportive of environmental conservation & eco-tourism f)be able to maintain AT (after training) g)posses business acumen h)be willing to involve/teach/demonstrate to others i)have a network of friends (horsemen, guides, hunters, wardens etc) j)be willing to learn some basic western cooking ??? (The Guest House Cook in Dengke has learned some!)

House Adaption The House/Garden should lend itself to adaption to include some/all of the following:a)Dormitories &/or twin/double guest rooms b)Solar and or hydro technologies (light, showers, water purification) c)Running Water (gravity fed) d)Integrated sanitation system e)Greenhouse (Peruvian sunken) - easy to maintain or solar. f)Appropriate Cooking, Space Heating, & ventilation technologies g)Laundry & Clothes drying facility h)Communications ?? (forward and store) Page 20

References A full list is available from the author if required John Studley 5/2/99