Biology Reference
In-Depth Information
Unlike on her first trip to Wamba years before, when Sally spent nearly three months in the
camp, this time she stayed only a week. Furuichi refused to let her go into the forest. He reconvened
the local trackers and sent them out to look for bonobos. The main goal of the expedition, besides
confirming the status of the Wamba bonobos, had been to see the people, to rebuild relationships
and reestablish the camp. Everything the Japanese had brought over the decades was gone. To fulfill
her obligations as a recipient of the National Geographic Society Expeditions Council grant, Sally
had to gather as much information as possible for the second and third stages of the expedition,
when they would return with more people.
According to Sally, the tension between her and Furuichi lasted throughout the trip. He wanted
her to curtail activities, to stay at the camp and not circulate among the people. She didn't see the
bonobos and hardly renewed her contacts. She could have ignored Furuichi's constraints, but she
chose not to, intending to avoid conflict with him. But from that point on, as she recalls, the walls
went up between the two of them. She had no idea what she could write in the grant report. She felt
that they had accomplished little, and yet she thought it would be impolitic to explain to National
Geographic what had happened.
On the day she returned to Kinshasa, she came down with her first case of malaria. Sick and
sweating, she could hardly leave her rented flat, and when she returned to DC, she finally called
Furuichi and tried to discuss future plans for conservation. He said that he didn't want to get in-
volved with her work, and not long afterward, he contacted the National Geographic Society dir-
ectly and renegotiated the project she'd begun so that he could receive a scientific rather than an
expeditions grant.
With Michael, she talked through BCI's vision, of an organization built on the knowledge and
skills of the Congolese, and that made change from within rather than impose it. Through their dis-
cussions, their plan for BCI became clearer and reinforced their decision to focus on Congolese
partners and community leaders. As Michael wrote to me in an email:
Effective and sustainable conservation is a complex multi-sectoral program requiring hol-
istic approaches and methods. Biological science is only one element in a sound conserva-
tion program. It must include anthropology, sociology, economics, politics, public relations,
community development, healthcare, education and more. Yet historically at least 90% of
conservation programs and projects and organizations are driven by and led by biologists.
He also offered the following explanation of what he has come to term “vertically integrated
philanthropy,” which would connect donors at the top directly with beneficiaries at the bottom—as
opposed to the general trend by which “donors fund intermediaries to implement programs that have
been developed in the US or Europe by 'experts' who often have little connection with people on
the ground.” He gave the example of a philanthropist who goes trout fishing in Montana. This per-
son would hire a local guide to lead him to the best fishing spots, not a PhD ichthyologist from the
University of Miami. He went on to say that though conservation—and its success—is immensely
more complex than fishing, conservationists often neglect to consider or consult local knowledge.
We often miss opportunities to gain valuable and even necessary information because we do
not respect the knowledge and wisdom of local and indigenous people. The questioning of
local hunters and villagers yields almost the same results as standard transects and recces
implemented by scientists. In addition, the active involvement of locals in the process also
