VZCZCXYZ0003
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUEHBO #2329/01 2041702
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 231702Z JUL 09
FM AMEMBASSY BOGOTA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 9901
INFO RUEHBR/AMEMBASSY BRASILIA 9037
RUEHCV/AMEMBASSY CARACAS 2503
RUEHPE/AMEMBASSY LIMA 7800
RUEHLP/AMEMBASSY LA PAZ JUL PANAMA 3918

UNCLAS BOGOTA 002329 
 
SIPDIS 
SENSITIVE 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: SENV SNAR EAID ECON CO
SUBJECT: COCA CULTIVATION IN COLOMBIAN NATIONAL PARKS 
 
REF: BOGOTA 384 
 
¶1. (SBU) SUMMARY.  The GOC National Parks Unit (NPU) insists 
that coca -- despite its presence in 15 parks -- is less of a 
concern than invasion of licit crops and that manual 
eradication is effective at controlling cultivation.  Coca 
exists in an estimated 30 percent of parks, which make up 11 
percent of Colombia's territory, with illegal communities 
present in more than half. The UN estimates that the amount 
of coca in parks numbers has decreased over the last few 
years, but many local experts are skeptical of those numbers 
and are concerned about continued progress unless the NPU 
increases is analysis and prioritization of the issue.   Law 
enforcement presence is minimal.  The NPU says its limited 
resources prevent it from addressing underlying social 
issues, specifically land reform, that intertwine with parks 
management.  The NPU promotes strategies for sustainable 
licit agriculture, but until the GOC allocates more resources 
to the NPU, its focus will remain on conservation strategies 
and not on providing alternative economic opportunities for 
local communities.  USAID Colombia has a USD 11 million 
protected areas program, targeted at strengthening NPU 
capabilities.  END SUMMARY. 
 
Coca A Concern, But Not The Priority 
------------------------------------ 
 
¶2. (SBU) National Parks Director Julia Miranda told us that 
NPU regards coca as any other illicit crop and that it is 
"very far from being the NPU's main problem," noting that 
coca exists in less than 1 percent of total parks territory. 
She added that the GOC strategy is focused on manual 
eradication, involving both voluntary and forced eradication. 
 The voluntary program entails local inhabitants destroying 
their coca plots in exchange for being given land outside 
park limits.  Miranda displayed 2009 UN figures estimating 
that coca inside parks decreased from 6,100 to 3,445 hectares 
during 2005-2008 (NOTE:  While cultivation is down, experts 
point out that parks containing coca increased during the 
same timeframe, from 12-15.  The hectare reduction is 
principally the result of a 54 percent decrease in one park, 
Sierra La Macarena, which has been a GOC and USG priority 
consolidation and eradication area.  END NOTE.)  Overall, 
coca production increased in 9 parks in 2008 and declined in 
5, with parks in the departments of Guaviare, Meta and 
Antioquia containing the most coca. 
 
Criticism:  Lack Of Focus On Coca Short-Sighted 
--------------------------------------------- -- 
 
¶3. (SBU) Miranda was emphatic in insisting that the USG/GOC 
eradication program, including spray, did not lead to 
increased cultivation in parks.  Not all observers agree. 
Carlos Ramirez, director of environmental NGO Tropenbos, 
criticized the NPU for its lack of research regarding issues 
such as the involvement of paramilitary and guerrilla groups 
in coca cultivation and processing, the effects of spray on 
nearby parks, and the make-up of communities inhabiting 
parks.  Ramirez said the NPU had no concrete sense as to 
whether or not park inhabitants were originally from park 
territories, or moved into the areas to exploit the 
territories' unique status.  World Wildlife Foundation 
Advisor Emilio Rodriguez added that "we all know fumigation 
programs are directly linked to the movement of many 
communities and coca growing to parks, but have no specific 
numbers to point to."  Miranda said NPU resource limitations 
prevented it from having such data. 
 
Limited Enforcement Capability 
------------------------------ 
 
¶4. (SBU) NPU Technical Director Gisela Paredes said the NPU 
has only 400 officials to manage Colombia's parks, which 
total 11 percent of territorial Colombia.  Despite a dramatic 
budget increase in recent years (reftel), the NPU's resources 
remain limited, leaving it dependent on the Colombian 
National Police (CNP) for law enforcement. (Note:  Miranda 
said financing secured by the government of Ireland in 2008 
now ensured that NPU had at least 4 officials or contractors 
in each park.  END NOTE.) 
 
¶5. (SBU) The Coordinator for CNP's Environmental Unit Miguel 
Tunjano said the CNP only has a physical presence in two 
parks -- La Macarena and Sierra Nevada -- and does not have 
the resources or manpower to expand presence.  Local police 
are responsible for managing the rest of the parks, even 
though they sometimes reside hours away from the nearest CNP 
outpost.  While military installations also exist near the 
majority of parks, systematic patrols occur only in the 
handful of parks developed for international tourism. 
Tunjano said unlike the U.S. system, park officials do not 
have law enforcement authority. 
 
Parks: Social Problems Toughest To Tackle 
----------------------------------------- 
 
¶6. (SBU) Miranda said Colombia's fundamental park challenge 
involved providing land to and relocating these communities, 
as well as restoring environmental damage caused by licit 
crops.  The NPU estimates that 48,000 indigenous and 
Afro-Colombian families legally inhabit 18 of the country's 
54 parks and protected areas.  Additional peasant 
communities, however, are illegally present in 80 percent of 
those areas. (NOTE:  Over 25 percent of indigenous and 
Afro-Colombian reserves overlap with parks and while those 
communities have the right to live there, they are required 
to consult with environmental authorities before economically 
exploiting park resources.  Non-indigenous or non-Afro 
communities are considered illegal.  The GOC's policy is to 
relocate these peasant communities.  END NOTE.)  Ramirez said 
the indigenous have an expression, "we went to sleep in our 
land and woke up in a national park." 
 
Environmental Effects Far-Reaching 
----------------------------------- 
 
¶7. (SBU) The adverse environmental effects of coca growing 
and processing are extensive:  chemical dumping, 
deforestation, soil erosion, water pollution, and 
biodiversity loss.  However, coca growing and related 
activities in the cocaine processing chain are not the only 
threats to the biodiversity of parks.  For Miranda, the 
environmental effects of cattle ranching and other licit 
cultivation practices are more detrimental to the environment 
than coca, highlighting that increased deforestation caused 
by those activities is "devastating" the parks.  Aerial 
eradication is not permitted in national parks -- 
authorization to spray in Macarena in 2006, occasioned by the 
deaths of manual eradicators, generated a huge controversy 
and has since been revoked.  Paredes added that the GOC 
opposed aerial eradication in parks not only because of 
alleged environmental effects of spraying, but also because 
it would not address the underlying causes - principally lack 
of land - of coca cultivation.  She said if the GOC allows 
spraying, the communities will "simply move to another area 
of the park." 
 
Plans for Way Forward -- Sustainable Practice Within Parks 
--------------------------------------------- -------------- 
 
¶8. (SBU) Rodriguez said the NPU must learn how to make 
environmental conservation coincide with traditional 
indigenous life.  Presently the NPU has signed agreements 
with five park communities, helping them design strategies 
for sustainable cultivation.  Paredes said the NPU hopes to 
develop these agreements in all parks but does not have a 
timeline for their completion.  The NPU often complains that 
it is forced to address issues such as agricultural reform 
and access to credit, without having the appropriate budget 
and policy authority to make needed reforms. 
 
¶9. (SBU) USAID Colombia supports a USD 11 million protected 
areas program designed to reduce the threats to biodiversity 
and climate change in Colombia's protected areas by working 
with the NPU to improve environmental governance and promote 
environmentally sustainable livelihoods for parks' 
communities.  Strengthening environmental governance not only 
preserves and contributes to the long-term environmental 
sustainability of Colombia's natural resources and 
biodiversity wealth, but also improves security and leads to 
the stabilization and consolidation of a permanent state 
presence with large amounts of environmentally-sensitive, but 
traditionally weakly-governed areas. 
 
Comment:  Treating Coca Like Yuca, A Sustainable Policy? 
--------------------------------------------- ----------- 
 
¶10. (SBU) Both legal (indigenous/Afro-Colombian) and illegal 
(peasant) communities have historically lived in areas that 
are present-day parks.  The strict conservation strategies of 
the parks frequently prohibit the communities from legally 
exploiting the areas' natural resources, labeling many 
communities as "illegal" without rights to government 
services such as loans or technology transfer programs. 
Thus, even though coca numbers are down, several local 
experts are concerned that the GOC's strict environmental 
legislation and lack of prioritization of coca eradication 
may increasingly force park dwellers to turn to coca. 
Miranda insists that manual eradication has been a huge 
success, and decreasing coca cultivation in parks supports 
her statement, but time will tell if that strategy alone is 
enough to keep coca numbers down. 
 
Brownfield