Biology Reference
In-Depth Information
boundaries. They had done education, Information Exchange, and numerous surveys, as well as
cassava projects. They had also been developing the capacity of the CREF researchers based in the
region, although, according to BCI, WWF never paid out all of the funds originally designated for
this purpose.
As the second phase of CBFP was about to begin, Sally repeatedly contacted WWF, asking
if BCI would be included so she could negotiate the terms. WWF said that they would, but two
weeks before the proposals were due for the second phase, WWF cut them out, notifying them by
email. The funding for numerous bonobo projects in the landscape suddenly halted.
“Getting relationships started and beginning projects and raising expectations and having no
follow-through is almost worse than nothing,” Sally tells me, explaining that it severely damages
social capital and hurts conservation in general. Of equal importance, WWF's decision raises the
question of how conservation funds are used. Cutting off funding and not finishing projects already
begun is tantamount to wasting three years of funds. Lastly, WWF's decision brings up the ques-
tion as to whether CBFP's mandate (“to promote the sustainable management of the Congo Basin's
forests and wildlife by improving communication, cooperation, and collaboration among all the
partners”) was being honored.
Alden explained to me that in his experience this behavior is typical of the big NGOs: “They'd
play with you until they could establish their own beachhead with their own interests. That's what
WWF did in Lac Tumba. And it's easy to do. If we are the subcontractor, and they're getting the
money, all they have to do is make vague complaints. They don't have to substantiate anything.
'At this stage in the development, we need a different set of skills,' was the verbiage for dumping
us after three years. 'We're at a different phase in the development process.' 'We need a different
set of skills.' All so vague, which to me is the killer.”
I contacted WWF to get more information on their reasoning, and despite my questions, I re-
ceived only very brief answers. Their first email said, “BCI was not included in the second phase
as our consortium thought they were not the right fit at that phase moving forward.” I replied: “I
asked the question to get insight into how WWF's decision-making worked in that particular in-
stance. Saying that an organization was 'not the right fit' can mean anything. Can you be more spe-
cific? Why were they not the right fit? And also, given that BCI had been working on the ground in
that landscape for the first phase, what happened to the projects that they started under WWF? Did
WWF have a stake in that work and continue it in any way?” Here is WWF's one-line response:
“Work on bonobo conservation continues in the landscape, as part of our larger conservation goal.”
180
They had hoped to
In
Myth and Reality in the Rain Forest
, John Oates explains that reserves
shouldn't require great expenses, though recurrent expenditures for guards, vehicles, buildings,
and education are necessary. He explains that such projects can be indefinitely sustainable if the
costs remain low. “Individuals or organizations helping to plan for conservation in developing
countries should therefore consider the
least
expensive ways to meet management goals. This is
the opposite of the way in which many such conservation projects are currently planned.” Oates,
Myth and Reality in the Rain Forest
, 248.
180
Instead of dictating
He believes that the only reason BCI has survived so long with so little
funding is that its staff worked well with the Congolese. Locals saw reserve villages transformed
and those they knew rise to prominence through conservation. They realized that this was available
to them, that their efforts would be respected and not supplanted by outsiders. Cosmas said that
BCI spent months in villages, learning how people thought, but that AWF's staff didn't have the
same level of closeness. But what I heard in Cosmas's words wasn't that one system should re-
place the other, only that they should reinforce each other, so that each could excel at what it did
best.
181
Scherlis explained that communication
John Scherlis wrote to me that Sally and Michael “are
open to other perspectives, rather than being constrained by a priori concepts. . . . But that isn't
