Pubdate: Sat, 03 Feb 2001
Source: New Scientist (UK)
Section: Opinion, Pg 42-45
Copyright: New Scientist, RBI Limited 2001
Contact:  Reed Business Information Limited, 151 Wardour St, London W1V 4BN, 
England
Fax: +44-20-7331 2777
Feedback: http://www.newscientist.com/letters/reply.jsp
Website: http://www.newscientist.com/
Author: Ehsan Masood interviews Cristian Samper
Note: Names of interviewer/guest inserted for MAP formatting purposes 
throughout article
Note: Further reading: Colombian biodiversity: can science and politics 
share the same habitat, Cristian Samper's lecture to the UK Darwin 
Initiative on the Survival of Species www.nbu.ac.uk/darwin

LIVING DANGEROUSLY

INTRODUCTION  Cocaine, murder, insurrection. That's the image of Colombia 
pretty much everywhere. But as Colombian ecologist Cristian Samper will 
tell you, the hype misses the real story. True, the country is ripped apart 
by the 37-year war against drugs and a revolutionary army in revolt against 
a right-wing government. But the nation also teems with pristine forests, 
rare plants and animals. It's a paradise for scientists like Samper, 
director of Columbia's premier research centre, the Humboldt Institute for 
Biological Resources in Bogota. His researchers work in dangerous areas-the 
ones controlled mainly by the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Columbia 
(FARC). And they come to no harm. In fact, his team now represents one of 
the few unifying forces in the country. Samper has come up with a bold 
scheme to exploit this advantage. Ehsan Masood met a man with a plan

Masood: How did a biologist like you ever get into something so very 
political? Was it intentional?

Samper: I studied at the University of the Andes in Bogota and then did my 
masters and PhD at Harvard University. I've done most of my work in 
evolutionary ecology, particularly habitat disturbance. I was also a 
lecturer for a couple of years at Harvard, and faced a dilemma that you run 
into sometimes in life. Should I pursue an academic career in the US, or go 
back to Colombia? I opted for the latter. For several years I worked as the 
director of the largest non-government environmental organisation in the 
country. I was also heavily involved in discussions for the Rio Earth 
Summit of 1992 as well as setting up the Ministry of the Environment and 
the research it does. I have been director of the Humboldt Institute for 
the past six years. Among other things, we provide scientific and technical 
advice to the environment ministry.

Masood: The ministry asked you for advice on an American plan to spray coca 
fields with a fungus-an issue at the heart of Colombia's drugs problems. 
What did you advise?

Samper: This was a hard one. The proposal came through the UN Drugs Control 
Programme. One of our main concerns is that there's no guarantee that the 
fungus-it's called Fusarium oxysporurn won't spread into neighbouring areas 
where native coca plants are being used. Remember, coca is just one of many 
members of the Erythroxylum genus. Quite a few of the other species contain 
alkaloids that have been used for thousands of years by indigenous people. 
They take coca leaves, heat them, mash them into a fine powder, mix them 
with lime, and then chew the mixture like tobacco. It acts as a stimulant 
that is known to enhance the endurance of people doing physical work. 
Another is a plant known as "the vine of the soul" and is used for rituals. 
There are a whole spectrum of plants used by indigenous people as part of 
their culture.

Masood: Did you have other worries about spraying coca fields with fungus?

Samper: The UN drugs programme wants to use a strain of F oxysporum that 
targets just one species of coca. But even highly species specific strains 
are known to attack other healthy plants. Another unanswered question is 
that of the fungus's mutation rate. How quickly will it adapt to local 
conditions and therefore become ineffective?

Masood: Has the plan been shelved?

Samper: There was very strong opposition from local people and from the 
environmental movement. Some people argued that it would go against the UN 
biological weapons convention and treaties. To be honest, 1 am pleased with 
the decision not to go ahead with it. But I'm concerned that 
environmentalists have led people to think that biological control is 
automatically bad. Biological control can be an important tool in other 
ways. In Colombia we use it to control pests in coffee, for example. It's 
very successful.

Masood: Much of Colombia's biodiversity is located in areas where the 
government has little control and which are run by FARC. How do scientists 
do fieldwork there?

Samper: The violence in Colombia has got a lot worse over the past 10 years 
because of the drugs trade. It's a challenge for all Colombian scientists, 
particularly when you're trying to go into a new and interesting area. One 
option is to say it's too dangerous, I'll stick to doing research in 
Bogota. Or you find ways. We've developed an approach that works 
surprisingly well. We prepare a small brochure that describes who we are, 
what the institute is, where we've worked and who with, and a complete list 
of the people who are going. We send an advance scouting party into the 
local town. They'll spend a couple of days at the local bar and talk to 
everyone they can get hold of, handing out copies of the fliers at the same 
time. The fliers are important because we want to make sure that the 
message reaches everyone. This could include a FARC leader, a local army 
commander, the priest, or the director of a hospital.

Masood: Isn't that a bit risky? Couldn't you adopt a low profile?

Samper: A lot of people tend to say that-that you should sneak in and out. 
We don't do that. We make sure that everyone knows who is going in and what 
we're doing. In six years of working in many areas of Colombia considered 
off-limits to most people, we have never had any security problem. Once in 
a while there is a case where a researcher might be held by FARC for a few 
hours or overnight. Most of the time it's when researchers haven't done a 
good job of letting people know who they are.

Masood: What's your contribution to the peace process in Colombia?

Samper: We're sick and tired of violence. Over the past few months, people 
have started to realise that environmental issues and biodiversity may be 
part of a solution to the political problem. Walk out onto the street and 
ask anyone whether we need to preserve Colombia's biodiversity. I'd be very 
surprised if anyone says: No, I want that to go extinct. So during one of 
the negotiations, we proposed that at least 10 per cent of the 
country-representative of Colombian ecosystems and biodiversity - should be 
a protected area. Everyone agreed. It was a very striking moment, even for 
the government negotiators. Later, one of them told me that in 26 meetings 
with FARC it was the first time that agreement had been reached on 
something from the outset.

Masood: Was this meant to be symbolic, something for the future?

Samper: We proposed to both the government and to FARC that we should reach 
a basic agreement on the environment, and present this as a first result of 
the peace process. We could then pursue the plan to maintain the trust and 
confidence between all sides. When you've had one victory, you can then 
move onto harder issues.

Masood: Do you think the strategy will work?

Samper: We've had mixed reviews, but there's an overall feeling that this 
could be a very powerful strategy. Having said that, we've had a glitch 
that always happens with these processes and which has nothing to do with 
our meetings. Recently, one of the paramilitary groups launched an 
offensive in south-western Colombia. As a result, the formal peace process 
was suspended. In this situation, it's very easy for something to go wrong, 
and that's what's happened. But we're ready to resume at any time.

Masood: How did you get involved in the peace process?

Samper: Some of the FARC leaders approached me for some information on 
environmental management. It was really technical. They had prepared a 
basic guide about fisheries management, and wanted us to peer-review it. It 
contained data on population biology and demography issues, and they wanted 
to make sure that their data was correct. 1 looked it over and made 
scientific comments in the same way 1 would with a paper presented by a 
colleague.

Masood: Do they use science to help them manage their natural resources?

Samper: I don't know. What 1 can say-and I've seen this first-hand in some 
areas-is that many environmental management practices promoted by FARC are 
sound and have had a positive impact on biodiversity. Their scientific 
foundations are usually pretty good.

Masood: Is it true that members of FARC help you in your research?

Samper: No. But we do always try and get local people involved, and some of 
them might have ties with FARC. But certainly it's not part of the overall 
strategy to get them involved because we're very careful not to take sides.

Masood: How do you go about involving local people in your research?

Samper: We're very interested in the potential use of non-timber forest 
products. In the central Amazon and in coffee-growing areas, there's quite 
a tradition of weaving baskets using the roots of plants. The baskets are 
used to harvest coffee. One of these plants comes from the genus 
Philodendron. We have found that the harvesting practices in many areas 
have been unsustainable and that the species is less abundant. This problem 
affects the livelihoods of local people. So we began a joint research 
project with the craftsmen to discover just how abundant the plant really 
was, the level of its natural population, and its yields if we used 
different harvesting methods. The craftsmen did much of the research and 
had the work published in scientific journals.

Masood: Didn't you also work with the local people to help design a 
protected area in south-western Colombia, on the slopes of the Andes?

Samper: Yes. The Kosan Indians there approached us to draw up a 
biodiversity inventory in an area that's well known for its potential for 
oil. They wanted the inventory rubber-stamped by the Humboldt Institute, 
and we agreed to do this. They selected a group of four or five elders and 
some younger people to spend a couple of weeks at our research institute 
learning about Western taxonomy and the Linnaean system of classifying 
plants. People walking round wearing feathers on their heads is quite a 
sight and it created a lot of gossip in the town, as you can imagine. Then 
we sent a group of our researchers to get training with the Kosan Indians 
on their classification system. So we spent a fair amount of time just 
getting to know each other before designing the project.

Masood: What did you find?

Samper: One very interesting finding was that for certain groups of 
species, we have a much finer taxonomy. What the Kosan Indians recognise as 
a single species, we will recognise as four or five. But it can be the 
other way round as well. Anyhow, the report was completed and presented to 
the authorities by the indigenous people and endorsed by the Humboldt 
Institute. As a result, they have set up an indigenous reserve of 150,000 
hectares. It's in a critical area for biological diversity, and the oil 
exploration has now been put on hold.

Masood: Does indigenous knowledge have a future when you can classify a 
plant species using molecular genetics more quickly and more accurately?

Samper: That's a fair question. I've wondered about this myself. But there 
are many kinds of traditional knowledge, and it depends on what we want to 
use it for. Traditional knowledge may not be best for bioprospecting. But 
it's very, very useful for sustainable management of territories and 
protected areas, where you need to go well beyond the lab.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Beth