06 January 2002

FORESTRY

Alternatives to national parks should be considered to conserve both forests and people's livelihoods, academics say.

Thirty-six NGOs at a recent seminar to review the Forestry Department's 40-year management of national parks agreed the parks had hurt the lives of people living in and around forests.

Academics at the meeting said an appropriate model for forest conservation should allow for both public use and forest protection.

``The poor in the countryside need to live on resources from the forests,'' said Somsak Sukwong, of the Regional Community Forestry Training Centre for Asia and the Pacific.

Somkiat Pongpaiboon, of the Rajabhat Institute at Nakhon Ratchasima, said national park management had ignored the fact Thailand was an agricultural country.

``Conservation per se, where the state removes the people and takes charge over their land, should be ended,'' Mr Somkiat added.

Suraphol Duangkhae, of Wildlife Fund Thailand, said the Forestry Department should retain management of national parks. Areas outside national parks should be cared for by the public to complement the department's work.

``We have to bear in mind that it will not be easy to keep moving people out of their land. An alliance of people and the department will be the key to better conservation,'' he said.

IUCN-World Conservation Union representative, Piyathip Eaowpanich, said Thailand's management of its forests was at the stricter end of conservation.

She said a combination of different kinds of protected areas other than national parks would allow people to make use of forests.

The academics agreed the proposed Community Forest Act, which is being revised by the Senate, would be one of the keys to better management.