There are many non-wood forest products in Cameroon that are traded at local, national regional and/or international levels. For instance, in a single market, New-Bell, Douala in the humid forest zone of Cameroon, the annual commercial value of a highly traded NWFP such as Ricinodendron heudelotii was estimated at US$ 248700 in 1998 and US$ 464235 in 1999 (Ngono et Ndoye, 2004). The annual value of the African plum market in Cameroon was estimated at over US$ 7 million and exports to the expatriate African community in Europe and the USA were valued at over US$ 2.2 million (Awono et al. 2002). The total commercial value of Irvingia trade in the year 2000 in ten major markets in the forest zone of Cameroon stood at over US$ 825714. The local markets of NWFP were estimated at US$ 1.6 million during the first six months of 1996 in the humid forest zone of Cameroon (Eyebe et al, 1999).
Regional trade remains an important aspect of NWFP economy in Cameroon. For example, the value of Irvingia spp. trade to Gabon, Equatorial Guinea, Nigeria and Central African Republic was estimated at US$ 260000 in 1997 (Ngono and Ndoye, 2004). These high market values are repeated in Rio Muni, in Equatorial Guinea, where Sunderland (1998) reports that Irvingia spp. seeds are sold more widely than any other forest product. Border trade in Irvingia spp. kernels between Cameroon and Gabon (Abang-Minko Market) increased by over 320 % between 1999 and 2000. Between Cameroon and Equatorial Guinea (Kye-Ossi market) the volume of trade increased by about 8%. This indicates a growing regional as well as international market for Irvingia spp. Sales of processed kernels to the United Kingdom, USA, and Europe are reported, with about 100,000 potential consumers in these markets (Lesley and Brown, 2001).
At an international level, France and Belgium import annually over 100 tons of Gnetum spp. (a leafy vegetable) worth 2.0 billion FCFA (USD 3.07 million) in the French and Belgian markets (Tabuna, 2000). In 1999, the value of Prunus africana used in the treatment of benign prostate hyperplasia in Europe and North America was estimated at over US$ 700 thousand to Cameroon and US$ 200 million to the pharmaceutical companies. Similarly, the export value of the bark of Pausinystalia johimbe, used as an aphrodisiac in Europe and America, was US$ 600 thousand in 1998 (CARPE, 2001).
The economic importance of NWFP in the livelihoods of forest-dwellers in Cameroon should not be underestimated. Examples include: It is estimated that 70% of the total population of the Takamanda Forest Reserve (TFR) area collects NWFP for consumption and sale. This represents an estimated income of US$ 714286 per annum to some 15707 people living in 12 villages within and around the TFR (Sunderland et al., 2002). The harvesters of Prunus africana bark around the Mount Cameroon Area get about 70% of their annual cash income from the activity (Ndam, 2004). Villagers adjoining the Campo Ma’an National Park in Cameroon earn a monthly income of US$ 45 for collectors of oil palm and raphia wine, US$ 60 for manufacturers of rattan chairs and US$ 45 for collectors of bush mango per household per season (Sonne, 2001). Still in the humid forest zone of Cameroon, the average monthly income to harvesters of edible palm weevil larvae is about US$ 71 and US$ 50 to retailers of roasted larvae sold in snacks and along roadsides or bars. Such income is significantly higher than that obtained by unskilled workers in town or by the producers of cocoa (US$ 28) (Dounias, 2004).
Socially, NWFP play crucial roles in reducing social tensions within rural households by providing cash income for the purchase of basic needs such as soaps, kerosene, meat and most importantly sending their children to school. This has been confirmed by over 80% of the households selling NWFP in the humid forest zone of Cameroon. In terms of gender equity many of the key commercial NWFP are gathered, processed and marketed by women and children, thus, forming a secure source of employment for them. For example, women form 94% of the traders in NWFP in the humid forest zone of Cameroon (Ndoye et al., 1997). In the absence of such commodities women and children engaged in NWFP activities might be involved in social vices.
In addition to the current contributions of some NWFP to rural household revenues, their economic potentials for local income generation and poverty reduction are currently higher than from traditionally known cash crops such as cocoa and coffee in Cameroon (Ndoye and Tieguhong, 2004). For example, Ndoye and Tieguhong (2004) observed the average prices of a kilogram of Irvingia spp. and Ricinodendron heudelotii in the humid forest zone of Cameroon to be more than 200% higher than the average price of the same quantity of cocoa beans between 1996 and 2003. In Southern Cameroon, Fondom and Titi Manga (2000) found that household average annual income from the sale of Gnetum africana, a leafy vegetable, was US$ 2630. An economic analysis by Gockowski et al. (2004) found that the sum of net returns associated with non-cocoa trees from a 0.5 ha cocoa agroforest was 1.3 times higher than revenue from cocoa, a traditional cash crop in the humid forest zone of Cameroon.
From the above few statistics, many of which are underestimated, any development worker involved with the NWFP sector may be correct to proclaim that NWFP may have great impacts on poverty alleviation given the right institutional and resource environments. The right institutional environments may give way to better policy and legal frameworks that are pivotal in resource allocation and investments for development in processing and marketing of NWFP. In this light, this paper gives special attention to the trade-related instruments that may create an overall conducive environment for the harvesting, collection, production, processing, trade and marketing of NWFP in Cameroon.
Two NWFP including Prunus africana and African Grey parrots were selected from Cameroon as case studies to analyze how trade-related instruments influence the trade of NWFP as well as assess their contributions to rural livelihoods and poverty alleviation. The criteria for selecting these products include:
• High local, national/international trade values,
• Threatening of sustainable production by poorly/uncontrolled production.
• Existing institutional interventions at national and international levels
• The potentials to develop the products and its market in producing country,
• The potentials of sustainability in the light of proper utilisation of trade-related instruments governing their trade.
• The potentials for poverty alleviation at the local level following better trade arrangements and
• Available published and grey literature
Prunus africana and the African grey parrot have been identified as priority species of international value for conservation and development because it has been observed that uncontrolled trade is already threatening their sustainable production from the wild (Ndam, 2004; Tamungang, 1997). For example, the existing wild stock of Prunus africana in the mountain ranges of Cameroon are already facing over-exploitation calling for some regulatory measures, as well as measures to complement natural regeneration. Over 3500 farmers are already engaged in planting Prunus africana in the Northwest Province of Cameroon (Cunningham et al, 2002).
Prunus africana is a large evergreen tree that grows in afromontane regions of Africa. It has pendulous branches with thick, oblong-shaped, leather-like, mat-colored leaves and creamy white flowers. The fruit (drupe) resembles a cherry when ripe. The seeds are believed to be recalcitrant. The dark-brown to grey bark of the trunk is the part used for medicinal purposes. The wood is durable and has been used in household goods. The tree is present in highland mountain forests in Africa and Madagascar, occurring in Afromontane forest "islands" from 4,500 to 6,000 feet (Prunus Net Und).
Prunus africana is the only species of Genus Prunus native to Africa and can grow to a height of up to 40 metres and has been reported in 22 countries, most on the eastern side of the African continent. From eastern Africa, the range extends westward into central Africa (Katanga, DRC, Congo-Zambzi River Basin Divide). Further west, there are disjunct populations in West Africa (Bioko, Cameroon/Nigeria and Sao Tome) and Angola. Populations in Comoros and Madagascar are also disjunctive. In Cameroon, Prunus africana trees are distributed on the mountain regions of the Southwest, West and Northwest provinces ranging from 700 m to 3000 m altitude (Achoundong, 1995 cited by Ndam and Tonye, 2004).
In Cameroon, the harvesting of Prunus africana takes place around Mount Cameroon, Mount Kupe, and in the Bamenda highlands, including Mount Kilum/Ijim in Oku, Kom and Nso. For the most part, this exploitation has been unsustainable, with trees being felled, rather than harvested according to established sustainable techniques. Bark harvesting is hard work, requiring collectors to climb Prunus trees and carry 30-70 kg loads of bark through mountainous forest. This makes the activity suitable for strong young men (Ndam, 2004; MOCAP, 2004). The average yield of bark per mature tree is about 75kg (Acworth et al. 1998). About 400 kg of fresh bark, representing 200 kg of dried bark, are needed to make 1 kg of extract (Cunningham et al.1997).
Prunus africana leaves and bark have been used in traditional remedies for centuries and they continue to play this role today. The bark was traditionally powdered and drunk as a tea for genito-urinary complaints, allergies, inflammation, kidney disease, malaria, stomachache, and fever, among other uses. Folkloric use in Africa attracted the attention of European researchers, such that in the late 1960s the potentials of Prunus africana for modern western medicines was discovered, particularly for the treatment of older men suffering from the inflammation of the prostrate, a disorder that leads to urination difficulties (Ndam, 2004). This disorder is generally referred to as enlarged prostate gland hypertrophy or benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH), which affects more than 50% of men over the age of 50 in Europe and North America (ICRAF, 2000). Commercial exploitation started in 1972 (Schippmann 2001) with extracts from the pulverised bark being incorporated into capsules and sold under various trade names, including Pygenil, produced in Italy, and Tadenan, produced in France (WWF, ud). Cameroon is the biggest exporter of Prunus africana bark and bark extract with annual average exports of 1.5 million kg of bark during the 1980s. This rose to 2 million kg in the early 1990s. Even in 1990/1, with an official ban on exports in force by the Cameroonian government, 3.9 million kg were exported (Cunningham, 1997). This indicates a high level of corruption in the production zone and/or the entry of a new corps of lawless exploiters into the production and trade chain.
Prunus africana is one of the most highly commercialized NWFP from Cameroon with an increasing international commercial value. Prunus africana has a growing annual export market value of over US$ 220 million (CARPE, 2001). Prunus is traded in the form of dried bark and as bark extract. In Cameroon, a harvester collecting 30 kg of bark per day can earn an average of 260 FCFA kg-1 (US$ 0.4 kg-1) around mount Cameroon area (MOCAP, 2004), 80 FCFA kg-1 (US$ 0.12) in Oku and Vekovi and 100 FCFA kg-1 (US$ 0.15) in Kom (at exchange rate of 1US$=650FCFA). The harvesters are generally not happy with the current prices offered for their products. The harvesters around mount Cameroon believe that if buyers could offer 300 FCFA kg-1 (US$0.46 kg-1) of fresh bark and 600 FCFA kg-1 (US$ 0.96) of dried bark, they would be happy. On the other hand, producers from Oku, Vekovi and Kom villages believe that a price of 200 FCFA kg-1 (US$0.31) of fresh bark would be considered very fair, because they understand that the roads are in bad conditions and their villages are very far from the port of export located in Douala.
Prunus africana is exported mainly to Europe, where France is the biggest importer followed by Spain. Extracts are re-imported from France, Spain and Italy. At least four European companies have interests in Prunus africana bark for medicinal purposes: Laboratoires Debat (France) and its subsidiary company Plantecam Medicam in Cameroon; Madaus (Germany, Spain); Prosynthese (France); lnvemi della Beffa and Indena Spa (Italy). Bark is bought for US$ 0.3-0.41 kg-1) in Cameroon at the factory gate (Ndam and Tonye, 2004) and for US$ 2 kg-1 from Kenya (WWF, ud). Capsules filled with 25 mg to 50 mg of the bark extract are marketed in Europe, a 15-tablet box costing US$ 7-8. Extract in tablets or capsules are marketed under two main trade names: ‘Tadenan", produced by Laboratoires Debat (France) and "Pygenil produced by Indena Spa (Italy) (WWF, ud).
For the harvesters living around Mount Cameroon area, bark collection accounts for about 70% of their total household income (Ndam, 2004). About 60% of the households in this area are involved in the production-to-consumption system of Prunus africana (Ndam and Tonye, 2004). This area is inhabited by 300000 people distributed in 51 villages with an annual population growth rate of 3-6%. Around the Oku Mountain region, it was estimated that a third of the over 11000 people living in four frontline and six background villages to the forest supplement their income by collecting the bark of Prunus africana. In addition to revenues that accrue to individuals, there are benefits that are enjoyed by the general community through development projects such as water, roads, bridges and school projects in places such as Oku and villages around Mount Cameroon.
In the Oku region, there are 18 forest user groups (FUGs) and six forest management institutions (FMIs). FUGs are formed at the village level with the collaboration of village chiefs and traditional councils. FMIs are legally established community groups that have acquired community forest to manage in a sustainable manner. The six FMIs in Oku have an umbrella organization that coordinates their activities in consultation with traditional authorities (TA), popularly known as Ngumba or Nkwifon. This organization is known as the Association of Oku Forest Management Institutions (ASSOFOMI), which links all FMIs with the government services and other NGOs. The Ngumba works to ensure the proper functioning of ASSOFOMI. In Oku all exploitation of Prunus is under one of the FMI operating in a community forest. For example, the Emfveh-Mii community forest has an area of 909 ha divided into 13 compartments, 9 of which are rich in Prunus africana. Prunus africana is considered a community resource that is of benefit to every member of the community.
The average price per kilogram of Prunus africana sold is 80 FCFA. Individual harvesters, considered as labourers for the community are paid 30 FCFA per kilogram of Prunus harvested and brought to collection point, while a government tax of 10 FCFA/kg is also paid. The remaining 40 FCFA/kg is managed by the community forest management institution. Last year (2003), total revenue of 3.3 million FCFA (US$ 5078) was raised for the community institution from the sales of some 42 tons of Prunus africana. The money is usually saved in a credit Union account, subject to distribution according to agreed rules. The money was divided as follows:
• 35% for the running of the management of FMIs,
• 50% for community development, and
• 15% for regeneration and training on forest conservation (Emfveh-Mii CIG, 2001).
The Emfveh-Mii community forest has 4 frontline and 6 background villages that benefit from the revenue generated from the exploitation and sales of Prunus africana in this forest. Out of the 3.3 million FCFA generated in 2003, each frontline village was allocated 225000 FCFA for development. Apart from Elak that was allocated 50000 FCFA, the other five background villages were allocated 40000 FCFA for development works. The impact of the money on community development cannot be underestimated. For example, in one of the frontline villages (Ngashie), 140000 FCFA was used to sponsor a water project and the surplus was used to buy roofing sheets to support a primary school building project. A background village such as Elak has recently been supported with construction materials for a bridge worth 50000 FCFA. The Emfveh-Mii CIG has recently carried out repairs on the Oku Rural Radio worth 43000 FCFA. A financial package of 250000 FCFA was given to the traditional authorities (Ngumba) as compensation for their serious engagement in the management of forests. Before the Forestry Law of 1994, the Ngumba was the sole custodian of the forest and they are still playing the role today in close collaboration with ASSOFOMI.
The revenue from Prunus africana production is collected and partly shared among communities in the Mount Cameroon area. The bark of this plant was worth US$ 700000 to Cameroon in 1999 and US$ 200 million to the pharmaceutical companies in consumer countries (CARPE, 2001). The share of revenue to local communities over a nine months period was US$ 35700 (5.1%), of which US$ 2260 (6.3%) was earmarked to a village development fund, 1530 (4.3%) to group functioning costs and US$ 31920 (89.4%) divided among 60 members of the Mapanja Prunus Harvesters Union (Ndam and Tonye, 2004). This implies each member of the Union received US$ 532. This is more than the GDP per capita of US$ 500 for Cameroon in year 2000. Union members get 749% higher revenues than non-members in the Mount Cameroon area, as the average household income from Prunus harvesting is just US$ 71 (Ndam and Tonye, 2004).
This union is a community-based organization in the Mount Cameroon area that has developed their own local benefits sharing system to guide and ensure equity in the revenue generated from Prunus africana harvesting. The major reason for success is that union members cut off intermediaries/middlemen from the trade chain. They also have greater access to market information and are less likely to be duped by dubious traders. The major lesson to be drawn is that when local people are organized, they make greater income from NWFPs activities.
The African Grey belongs to the Genus ‘Psittacus’. In the Genus Psittacus, there is only one species, which is erithacus, and two subspecies, plus a questionable third. The first is the “Congo” Grey, Psittacus erithacus erithacus; the second is the Timneh Grey, Psittacus erithacus timneh; and the third, which is believed by many aviculturists to be a variation of Psittacus erithacus erithacus, instead of separate subspecies, is called Psittacus erithacus princeps, which originates in equatorial Africa (Wright, ud; Wright, 1996). The Timneh African grey comes from Western Africa: Sierra Leone, Guinea, Liberia and western Ivory Coast. Both subspecies make wonderful companions. They are good talkers, and with the exception of size and appearance, there is little difference in their personalities (Pattison, ud). When people refer to Ghana, Togo, Cameroon, Congo and Angola Greys, they are referring to the region or country from which these parrots originated. These names are ‘street names’ or simply variations of the same subspecies based on the areas in which they live. The Congo African grey parrot (Psittacus erithacus erithacus) has a black beak and bright red tail. The Timneh African grey (Psittacus erithacus timneh) is a darker grey, with a brownish-to-maroon colored tail and horn-colored upper beak.
In Cameroon, the African grey parrots are common in the Lobeke National Park (LNP) and its environs. The Lobeke National Park (LNP) covers an area of 2,125 Km² and is situated in the Boumba and Ngoko Division, Southeast Cameroon. One of the fundamental reasons for the immediate designation of Lobeke as a protected area (PA) is the broad range of activities that threaten to subvert the integrity of the forest irrevocably. Most of these are commonplace in many parts of Cameroon, but it is the increasing scale of the threats that singled out Lobeke for immediate attention. It is also important to note that any one of these activities may be considered a sufficient ground for government intervention, but the existence of all of these issues in Lobeke simultaneously serve to highlight the need for urgent action (Anon, 2001). The main threats to the forest and African grey parrots therein include:
• Destruction of nesting sites as a result of selective felling of the larger trees
• Corruption and illegality in the pet trade
• Weak legislation and poor enforcement of laws where they do exist
• Increasing commercial timber exploitation and agricultural encroachment
• Unmanaged parrot trapping and unsustainable subsistence hunting
• Insecurity and weaker legislation in neighbouring countries
LNP is a dense semi-deciduous forest, characterized by a patchwork of high forest, secondary forest and low-lying swamp interwoven with a mosaic of maranthaceae forest, mono-dominant stands and forest clearings (Low, 2002; Ngenyi, 2002). The vegetation was fully described by Gartlan (1989), although summarized as being swamp /transitional-closed forest, part of the evergreen Cameroon-Congolese forest types. Whilst much of the habitat is natural, logging over the past 30 years has contributed to the opening of the canopy in several areas of the forest. This patchwork of the forest types promotes a high diversity and an abundance of mammals in the region. The large marshy forest clearings that characterized Lobeke forest eco-system are locally known as "bais". They are characterized by saline soils and/or riparian vegetation associated with marsh or dry grassland habitat, notably the Cyperaceae. Owing to their rich saline soils, the bais attract a lot of forest fauna including the African grey parrots.
A great number of African grey parrots and green pigeons frequent the bais for food, especially in the mornings during which parrot trappers make their catch. Generally, many animal species internationally recognized as endangered still thrive in the Lobeke forest and its environs, although they are increasingly threatened by unsustainable exploitation. More than 283 bird species are found in Lobeke forest including the widely commercialized species African grey parrots that are highly sought after in Europe, North America and many other countries as pets (Anon, 2001). Lobeke and its environs is said to be the highest parrot-trapping zone in Cameroon with 80% of parrots from Cameroon caught there (Low, 2002). According to Ngenyi (2002), out of 10 grey parrots exported from Cameroon, 7 originate from the Lobeke and southeast forest region. In other words these estimates suggest that 70-80% of parrots captured in Cameroon come from the East Province of Cameroon, particularly in the Lobeke forest and its environs. The other 20% are trapped from other tropical rainforest ecosystems such as those found in the Korup National Park and Lomie regions.
The international Pet trade has been going on for many centuries. As early as 1865, exotic birds were traded in large numbers in the United States (Traffic international, 1992). Europe was the largest annual supplier of thousand of birds, though most of these birds were brought from Africa, Asia and South America. Since then, people have continued to use wild caught birds in captive environments as a source of meat, feathers, companionship and beauty; an age-old practice known particularly with the early Romans, Egyptians, Greeks and many others. Today, the pastime of keeping wild caught birds in captivity for pleasure varies from one culture to another. However, this practice is common throughout much of the world and it has given rise to international trade in wild caught birds, amounting to five millions birds in captive environments each year. Million of birds are wrenched from their natural habitats to make quick money. The birds are then fed through a chain of middlemen and international dealers to meet the insatiable demands of private collectors in Saudi Arabia; Pet shops in Germany, Japan and the USA; zoos and circuses in Eastern Europe and folk healers in Asia (Traffic International, 1992).
It has been estimated that over 2 600 of the 96 000 described bird species have been recorded in international trade during the last 20 years (Inskipp et al, 1988). The trade has been estimated at US$ 10 million (about 5 billion FCFA) a year (Toufexis, 1983). It is the third largest contraband business after drugs and arms (Tamungang, 1997) . Available information from the United Kingdom, USA and three major exporting countries (Senegal, Tanzania and China shows that the majority of birds in trade are Passerine or song birds (Order Passeriformes). Psittacines (Order Psittaciformes, which consists of parrots) form the largest group of birds in international trade. A net CITES report on trade in Psittacines for the years 1982-1988 ranged from a low number of 476 917 birds per year to a high number of 624 198, averaging 539 701 birds per year (Broad, 2001).
Africa is a major source of wild caught parrots in international trade. Popular African parrots in the trade include the African grey parrot (Psittacus erithacus), lovebirds (Agapornis sp) and members of the genus Poicephalus (e.g. Senegal parrot P. senegalus). CITES data shows that between 1981-1989, about 440 000 African grey parrots were traded internationally. Out of this figure, South Africa imported about 17000 (Inskipp and Corrigan, 1992). In another report Mulliken (1995) compiled figures from CITES Annual Reports and South African provincial permit data, which showed that between 1981-1993, a total of 43 132 African grey parrots were exported from 15 African countries including Cameroon. It has been estimated that over the last 15 years more than 500 000 African grey parrots have been documented in the International trade (Mulliken, 1995 cited by Tamungang, 1997). Therefore, the number of birds in the wild might be declining because of continuous trapping. The European Community, the USA and Singapore are the largest known importers of live birds. Thus, the concern that the International trade in wildlife might drive some species to extinction if not properly controlled remains the main message of CITES (Tamungang, 1997).
The African grey parrot is the most hunted bird in Cameroon (Tamungang, 1997). Thousands of grey parrots are captured each year for local consumption and exports. It is also wildly used in many cultures in Cameroon. Cameroon accounted for 50% of the total specimens exported from all countries in 1995 and is still one of the highest exporters of African Grey Parrots today (Ngenyi, 2002). Prior to 1993, when restrictions on export quotas were decided by CITES at 12000 birds, a yearly average of 14 000 parrots were exported from Cameroon. Official figures do not account for parrots that are smuggled across borders into neighbouring countries, those that are consumed and those that die in the process of trapping, transportation and domestication (Tamungang, 1997).
Cameroon started to export African grey parrots to South Africa in 1993 with 2095 birds reported (Mulliken, 1995). Most of the African grey parrots from Cameroon are exported to the USA and the EU countries with France as transit point (Tamungang, 1997). Poaching of the African grey parrots is very rampant in Cameroon because the government has done very little to enforce anti-poaching laws. People who succeed to have official capture permits have many ways of forging and multiplying them for their close associates, who also become permit owners. Worse still, quotas for live capture are never obeyed. Government officials are accused of conniving with trappers and licensees to exceed official quotas. Law enforcement officers at border posts are seriously corrupt that little bribery by smugglers motivates them to allow parrots across borders to neighbouring countries. However, severe law enforcement may not suffice to curb unsustainable exploitation because the poachers are poor and the income from such activities is very important for many impoverished families. Therefore, the best approach to stop poaching is to educate the people, provide alternative sources of income and show the local people how to take care of the resources themselves (Tamungang, 1997).
There are about seven groups of stakeholders in the African grey parrots trade chain including the government, the licensees, the middlemen, the trappers, the local aids, the importers and the final pet keepers. The Government of Cameroon is the primary agent of the African Grey parrot trade because it issues licenses to individuals to capture and export parrots at a minimum price of 8000 FCFA per bird.
The licensees form the second group of stakeholders and every year they may number up to 20. These licensees generally do not have much field experience of birds to capture and are usually resident in the cities of Yaounde and Douala. Therefore, they enter into contract with a number of middlemen (known in the field as Detenteurs) to go down to the field and arrange for the capture of parrots. The licensees may sell to importers at an average price of 60 000 FCFA (US$ 92) on the low side or 80000 FCFA (US$ 123) on the high side. This seemingly high price is due to the high cost of treating birds in the ‘quarantine’ in Yaounde or Douala. In the quarantine, the birds are fed, dewormed with expensive drugs and subjected to cold climate. This treatment is aimed at producing high quality birds and to enable them acclimatize to the European climate while in Cameroon before they are exported. Trade in African grey parrots is a high-risk business because as many as 50% of birds may die in the ‘quarantine’ before the date for exports. However, treatment reduces the death toll and well-treated birds (high quality birds) attract higher prices from importers.
The third group of stakeholders is the middlemen (Detenteurs), who get direct contact with the trappers. The people that are seen buying parrots in the field from trappers are not the licensed holders; they are merely middlemen between the two groups. There are about 70 middlemen dealing with parrots in Cameroon. They get an average price of 20 000 FCFA (US$ 30.8) per bird bought from them by the licensees in Douala and Yaounde.
The trappers/Capturers form the fourth group of stakeholders. This group of people is fully engaged in trapping the parrots in the field. In the east province of Cameroon alone, there are believed to be between 30-40 parrot trappers, working with 3-4 local aids and having an average household size of seven persons. The trappers sell their birds at prices ranging from 5 000-9 000 FCFA depending on demand, giving an average price of 7 000 FCFA (US$ 10.8). Over 99% of the trappers are from the Centre and Littoral provinces of the country. During the high capture season (January-April) trappers return to the bush twice a month according to demand. On lucky days, the number of birds captured is higher. On good days 60-70 birds may be captured. On bad days 20-30 birds may be captured. During the months of August, September and October, there is no capture of parrots because the rains are high and the ‘bias’ are flooded. The birds are captured using the net method, which does not discriminate the type captured in terms of age or sex. Therefore, all birds that fly are captured. After they are caught, the birds are transferred into bags, baskets, small boxes, or crates in which the trapper will take them home. They can spend days or even weeks in these containers being passed between dealers. Between capture and export, it's estimated that there is a 50% mortality rate (Low, 2002).
The fifth group of stakeholders is constituted by local aids. These are generally local people that assist the trappers in the trapping operation, caring for the birds in the ‘quarantine’ and transporting the birds out of the forest to the nearest road for vehicular transportation. These people are generally paid 10 000 FCFA (US$ 15.4) per trip that may last 10-14 days in the bush. In all there are 90–120 local people assisting in the trapping of African grey parrots in the east province of Cameroon. They have an average household size of seven.
The sixth group of stakeholders is the importers of the parrots who do the big time business in Europe, South Africa or America. In the United Kingdom African greys may be sold for £500 or £600 British pounds per bird in pet shops depending on season (Pattison, ud). On average, importers in Europe sell each bird to the pet keepers in Europe at 500 000 FCFA (US$ 770). In South Africa Mulliken (1995) reported a price range of US$ 300 in July 1992 to US$ 1 167 for a pair in December 1993. The biggest cry with importers is that they are known to transport the birds in very inhumane conditions. The Environmental Investigation Agency estimates that for every wild caught bird that reaches a pet shop, three others have died during capture, confinement, and transportation. It has been reported that birds have spent up to eight months at the holding premises of exporters before transport by air to their final destination. Studies of the conditions in which they are kept found they are overcrowded; show signs of distress; and lack food, water, and light. Symptoms of distress include feather plucking, dirty plumage, wounds, and exhaustion. The filthy conditions, overcrowding, excessive temperatures, and trauma increase disease susceptibility.
The last and seemly one of the most important groups of stakeholders is the pet keepers’ (final consumers). These are the people that drive the demand for the African grey parrots. They offer handsome prices for each parrot imported. Summarized below is the schematic representation of the trade in African grey parrots in Cameroon (Figure 1).
Figure 1. Trade Structure of African grey parrot in Cameroon
To what extent does the trapping in Lobeke and its environs supports its stakeholders?
Assuming available estimates of 80% (Ngenyi, 2002) of African grey parrots caught from Cameroon come from this region and taking into consideration the annual quota of 12000 (Dandjouma, 2002), 9600 parrots are caught each year from the East Province of Cameroon. In financial terms, the Cameroon government gets, at least, 8000 FCFA from each parrot sold, meaning that in total the government gets an average revenue of 76.8 million FCFA from the African grey parrot trade each year.
The licensees make an average amount of 60000 FCFA on the low side and 80000 FCFA on the high side per parrot bought and sold. This implies that the gross annual revenue of all licensees that buy the 9600 African grey parrots from East Cameroon may be estimated at between 576 million FCFA and 768 million FCFA. If these amounts are divided among the (20) average number of licensees per year, then, each licensee should have annual gross revenue of between 28.8 million FCFA and 38.4 million FCFA.
There are between 30-40 trappers in the East province of Cameroon, each working with 3-4 aids, who are local people. The average household size for trappers and local aids is seven, meaning that between 630 and 1120 people benefit in one way or the other from the trade of African Grey parrots in the East Province of Cameroon. Each African grey fetches between 5000-9000 FCFA for the trapper. This implies that if 9600 African greys are caught and sold by the trappers in the East province of Cameroon, they would make gross revenue of between 48 million FCFA and 86.4 million FCFA, with each trapper possibly making gross annual revenue of between 1.2 million FCFA and 2.16 million FCFA.
With regards to the local aids, assuming there are nine active months during which parrots are captured in the field and two trips made per month, a total 18 trips are made in a year with each local aid paid 10 000 FCFA per trip (Mr Atangana, per comm.). This implies each local aid gets an annual income of 180 000 FCFA (US$ 277), which is far below the annual gross national income for Cameroon and just about 15% of what the trappers can make or 0.63% of what licensees can make. The major difference here is that the licensee and the trappers incur some costs, which has not been estimated here but the local aids incur no costs out of their own labour.
Assuming the importers sell all the 9600 parrots from East Cameroon at the cited average price of
500 000 FCFA, then they can make gross revenue of up to 4.8 billion FCFA from the Africa grey parrots from the East Province of Cameroon. This is 1000 times higher than what the local trappers get, 62.5 times higher than what the government gets and 6-8 times higher than what the licensees get. At the national level, if the Cameroon quota of 12 000 grey parrots are exported and sold at an average price of 500 000 FCFA, then the international trade in African grey parrots from Cameroon is worth some six billion FCFA.
However, the statistics in this section are just indicative and have not taken into account the transaction costs of business at each level of the trade chain. It is suggested that an in-depth cost/benefit analysis to estimate the actual income accrued to each stakeholder in the trade chain would be very helpful for sound policy statements. Overall, it seems trappers of the African parrots and their local aids make far smaller sums of money than the other stakeholders. Most of the profits of the parrot trade seem to go to licensees and the importers. In this light, it may be erroneous to assume that the trade in African grey parrots is heavily contributing towards the financial support of local communities, meanwhile actually it is depleting local resources and enriching people from afar. This is in accordance with Low (2002), who stated that catching parrots makes very small sums of money for trappers or anyone else in the country of origin; most of the profits of the parrot trade go to already wealthy middlemen in the importing countries.
Every year, an estimated 350 millions animals and plants are traded internationally; amid them are around five million wild birds. In the UK alone, 88% of the nearly 24 000 parrots, parakeets, lovebirds and other hookbills imported between 1995 and 2000 for the pet trade were wild caught birds (Ratty41, ud). A total of 66 species of birds are considered very threatened by the wild bird trade. Imported wild birds are usually cheaper than captive bred birds, and for this reason, people still buy them and they're still traded in such large numbers. Much of the trade of wild species is illegal and is flourishing and becoming increasingly organized. Moreover, there's no sure way of telling if birds in pet shops are captive bred or wild caught. If asked, the staff or manager will not know, lie, or avoid the question (Ratty41, ud).
After habitat destruction, the wild animal trade is one of the main factors aiding the extinction of many species. The habitat loss is more devastating than trapping because all animals in the area may be threatened or they may die or forced to migrate as the ecological web is disrupted. In this light, many wildlife conservationists and animal welfare groups see the international pet trade as an ecological disaster (Low, 2002; Tamungang, 1997). Thousand of grey parrots, for example, die during the process of trapping, transportation and domestication. Crude methods of trapping add to their death toll. Disease associated with caged birds, pose another threat.
The trade in wild-caught parrots is cruel, wasteful and unnecessary. The Environmental Investigation Agency estimates that for every wild caught bird that reaches a pet shop, three others have died during capture, confinement, and transportation. After they are caught, the birds are transferred into bags, baskets, small boxes, or crates in which the trapper will take them home. They can spend days or even weeks in these containers being passed between dealers. It has been reported that birds have spent up to eight months at the holding premises of exporters before transport by air to their final destination. Between capture and export, it's estimated that there is a 60% mortality rate (Low, 2002). Studies of the conditions in which they are kept found they are overcrowded; show signs of distress; and lack food, water, and light. Symptoms of distress include feather plucking, dirty plumage, wounds, and exhaustion. The filthy conditions, overcrowding, excessive temperatures, and trauma increase disease susceptibility (Ratty41, ud). Low (2002) concludes that trapping methods are inhumane and demonstrates the appalling treatment and rough handling of African greys being trapped in nets. This makes it the worst and most wasteful kind of trade because many adult parrots will die of stress after enduring days or weeks or months of intense fear.
Therefore, according to Low (2002) the trapping of adult birds should not be permitted because of the following reasons:
• Many can never adapt to a life in captivity. Wild-caught birds do not make suitable pets and are soon unwanted. Therefore, trapping eliminates populations.
• The breeding population is decimated as there is no discrimination against nesting mothers; and,
• Trapping deprives some mated birds of their partners and probably results in chicks starving to death in the nest.
Trade alone, or trade in conjunction with habitat destruction can and have, resulted in extinction. A number of formerly common parrot species have suffered catastrophic declines due to trapping. For example, the Lesser Sulphur-crested Cockatoo (Cacatua sulphurea sulphurea) is one of the 15 Critically Endangered Parrots of the world- solely due to over-trapping for the pet trade. A study in the late 1990s of the international trade in parrots listed by CITES found that 1.2 million parrots were exported between 1991 and 1996, with the majority of those birds coming from the neotropics. However, these international trade figures do not reflect the actual numbers of birds taken from the wild because they exclude pre-export mortality, which has been estimated to reach 60% of all birds trapped or taken from the nests, the substantial illegal international trade and the equally serious domestic trade (Low, 2002).
Cameroon accounted for 50% of the total specimens exported from all countries in 1995 and is still one of the highest exporters of African Grey Parrots today. With this high export number, two questions come to mind:
• Is the current rate of exploitation of African grey parrots from Cameroon sustainable?
• Apart for trapping and selling the African grey parrots for pets, can these birds in Cameroon be used to meet other economic gains on a more sustainable basis?
The answer to the first question is difficult to come by unless a thorough base line survey is carried out to estimate the population and breeding rate of the bird in Cameroon. This holds true considering that the annual export quota for Cameroon set at 12000 African grey parrots per annum was arbitrarily done and not based on any sound inventory data (Ngenyi, 2002). In order not to fall in an irreversible situation of depopulation of the species to a threatening level, getting answers to the second question might be an urgent and a more rewarding conservation drive even in the shorter-term. In this direction, comparative economic analyses of the current and potential contributions of various economic activities (pet trade, ecotoutrism development etc) involving the African grey parrots to various stakeholders are suggested. This may throw light on the most feasible alternative solution to the current commercial exploitation of the African grey parrots for the pet trade. This alternative should be strategic enough to reduce trapping and provide economic support to parrot trappers and local communities.
The flocks of the African grey parrots in the Lobeke National Park suggest that alternative or complementary uses of the species might be possible and rewarding to both conservation and the development of livelihood opportunities for the adjoining communities.
Looking at the flock of African grey parrots in the photo above, one would wonder if parrot-oriented ecotourism could not be more profitable and more contributive to local livelihoods than trapping for the pet trade in the Lobeke forest. This potential has not been assessed as was done in Peru by Munn (1992). Munn (1992) found that free-ranging parrots could generate more foreign exchange for tropical countries and more local employment for local people when exploited indirectly as tourist attractions than when exploited directly for the pet trade. In this light it would be relevant to carry out further studies on the economic potentials of parrot-oriented ecotourism in Lobeke, especially with the current wave of more stringent laws against any form of trapping parrots in the park.
