Forest rangers – including wildlife officials – risk their lives, safety, and in some cases careers to protect both flora and fauna; they can serve as a bulwark against deforestation, climate change, air pollution, or species extinction. Environmental human rights defenders (EHRDs), as defined by the United Nations, are individuals or collectives working in either their personal or professional capacity to realize basic environmental rights. By the nature of their jobs, all forest rangers should be EHRDs, as their work can help ensure a safe, clean, healthy and sustainable environment. A healthy environment is a necessary precondition for the full realization of many human rights. To clarify the connection between human rights and the environment: what does the right to health mean without clean air or drinking water? Or what does the right to food, work, or even life mean for forest-dependent or indigenous communities that sustainably live off the land, if their source of food or livelihood ceases to exist? Human rights, which include environmental rights, are interdependent, and forest rangers are one part of the puzzle in their realization.
Unfortunately, the role of forest rangers as EHRDs is not universal, but contextual. In some instances forest rangers fulfill that role by enforcing laws that prevent deforestation or forest degradation, or laws that protect wildlife. In others instances, forest rangers are involved in human rights violations or activities that harm conservation efforts. Both the successes and challenges for forest rangers in realizing their potential as EHRDs will be highlighted in the case studies on Sri Lanka and Kenya that follow. Nonetheless, States should lay the groundwork for their success by ensuring that all forest rangers have the necessary resources, training, and incentives to both protect themselves, as well as the environment.
Forest Rangers at Risk
Being a forest ranger is a dangerous profession. The 2016 International Ranger Federation Ranger Roll of Honour recorded 107 global ranger deaths while in the line of duty within a twelve month period. In addition to work-related accidents, common culprits of death included poachers or wild animals. Thus, forest rangers may contend with both the inherent dangers of being exposed to the elements – such as the risk of being trampled or attacked by wild animals or the dangers of operating in rugged and remote places – as well as the law enforcement risks posed by external forces, namely individuals who exploit the forest and its resources.
Broadly speaking, law enforcement could cover a range of crimes in the forest from “slash-and-burn” agriculture to illegal logging to ivory poaching. These activities may be as relatively innocent as a local collecting wood from a protected area to as nefarious as a sophisticated criminal network engaged in the illegal wildlife trade. Both illicit activities and fighting ordinary phenomenon, such as fires, put forest rangers on the frontlines of protecting our natural heritage.
An overwhelming majority of the recorded deaths in the 2016 Ranger Roll of Honour occurred in Asia and Africa. Additionally concerning was the recent rapid assessment surveys by the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) which found that 59% of respondents in Africa and 74% of respondents in Asia did not feel that they were provided with adequate equipment to ensure safety.[1] Though as the WWF surveys disclaim, these findings should not be seen as representative of any particular country, nor the respective continents as a whole, the findings are still troubling and serve to highlight the challenges that some rangers face in being equipped for the job.
Another challenge is basic insurance coverage, which significantly impacts Africa and Asia. Despite the dangers of their job, a 2016 survey[2] published by the WWF and Ranger Federation of Asia (RFA) found that in 40% of countries surveyed in Africa and 20% in Asia rangers had no health insurance. The study further found that in 50% of countries surveyed in Africa and 47% in Asia rangers had no life insurance. Even more rangers in Africa and Asia had no long-term disability coverage with 60% of countries surveyed in both continents reporting no coverage for long-term disability. Thus, there are rangers out there risking it all to protect the environment with no assurances that they will be taken care of medically or financially in case of injury, or that their loved ones will be financially taken care of in the event of the ultimate sacrifice.
Forest and Wildlife Officers in Sri Lanka
Sri Lanka, one of the countries of study for the 2016 – 2017 SAIS International Human Rights Clinic’s project on the human rights of forest defenders, offers a nuanced look at the challenges faced by field officers.
Wild Animals
Elephants are an important part of Sri Lankan society and identity. However, they are also a source of tension for inhabitants of the island. Habitat loss has brought these majestic creatures into more frequent contact and conflict with humans, which has implications for wildlife officers in the field. For example, in 2015 in Wellawaaya, Sri Lanka, a team of wildlife officers responded to a protest by local villagers about a wild elephant. The officers attempted to chase the elephant back into the forest. Unfortunately, the elephant became angry and trampled a wildlife officer to death. The deceased officer was a young man named, Sanjeewa.
Wildlife officers in Sri Lanka not only face the risks of interacting with wild animals, but also may face the fury of local communities. Indeed, the former Wildlife Director General of Sri Lanka, Dr. Sumith Pilapitiya, whose story we will come back to, informed our researchers of instances of wildlife officials being threatened or assaulted by local communities because an elephant attacked that community. The asserted rationale being that the local community imputes ownership of the elephant, and thus, the elephant’s actions, to the Wildlife Department. The human-elephant conflict in Sri Lanka complicates the relationship between wildlife officials and local communities and presents hazards to these officials for acting to protect the community, or perhaps, even just for existing in their professional capacity.
Poaching
A recent death of a wildlife officer further highlights the risks of being in the field. In July 2016, Assistant Wildlife Reserve Officer, Jagath Seneviratne was killed in a confrontation with a suspected poacher. The officer’s firearm discharged during a scuffle with the suspect, as he was trying to flee the scene. Poaching by locals is an issue in Sri Lanka that threatens the work and safety of field officers. Dr. Pilapitiya told our researchers that for some locals, poaching may be their only source of income. As such, there needs to be alternative economic opportunities in these communities to disincentivize poaching and mitigate the risks to wildlife officials and animals.
Whistleblowing and Political Interference
Outside of direct physical harm, there are cases of forest and wildlife officials risking their jobs to do the right thing. A local environmental non-profit informed our researchers that there are many cases of officers calling their organization to report breaches. However, the whistleblowers are reluctant to disclose themselves. Moreover, they do not feel comfortable to report breaches at work for fear that they will lose their jobs. Returning to Dr. Sumith Pilapitiya’s story though as the former Wildlife Director General of Sri Lanka, he was not a rank and file field officer, his experience is relevant to the topic of forest rangers in that 1) it presents a contrast - the unique case of an official in the fortunate financial position to publicly speak out and resign out of principle; and 2) it also highlights a challenge that impacts field officers – the politicization of the public sector.
Dr. Pilapitiya’s resignation followed political interference with his position. For example, there was political pressure to release elephants in the custody of the Wildlife Department for Perahera (a Buddhist festival in which a pageant of elephants plays a significant role). As he told our researchers, high levels of the government proposed exploiting legal loopholes to procure the elephants’ release. However, Dr. Pilapitiiya refused to comply citing ethical concerns. Indeed, he told a senior politician that he would rather resign than follow through on such proposals. Dr. Pilapitiya’s resignation was intended to make a point that the politicians cannot interfere with the duties of public servants.
Unlike many of his colleagues, Dr. Pilapitiya could weather the financial fallout for speaking out and resigning. As a former World Bank employee, he had a pension to rely on. However, as he astutely pointed out to our researchers, if he depended on this job and had no other options, he would not be able to disagree. This points to the rational fear of speaking out when livelihoods are on the line.
With respect to political interference, Dr. Pilapitiya indicated to our researchers that it occurs at both the national and local levels. When taking the office, he committed to protecting Wildlife Department staff from political interference. Indeed, Dr. Pilapitiya told his staff to give any politician interfering in their work his phone number. As such, wildlife officials face an unnecessary barrier to effectuating the Fauna and Flora Protection Ordinance, that of political interference. Unfortunately, these officials are no longer under the leadership and protection of Dr. Pilapitiya due to his resignation.
Logistical Constraints
Unsurprisingly, interviewees reported to our researchers that field officers suffer from low compensation, lack of equipment, inadequate training and staff. Inherently, low compensation may lead to lack of job motivation or make corruption – an issue that will be addressed – an attractive alternative. Lack of equipment, inadequate training and staff can all put field officers in harm's way. For example, a veteran forest department official, working in the field, touched upon the problems of an inadequate staff. He told our researchers that his job can be especially dangerous during forest fires, as they do not have sufficient personnel or resources, so they call in local villagers and the fire department for assistance.
Corruption
Now to the elephant in the room (unsure whether the pun is intended): corruption. A representative from an international organization told our researchers that the Forest Department is known for their corruption, e.g., paying a bribe for a timber permit. The representative went on to further discuss the public perception of corruption, indicating that the public views wildlife officers as less corrupt than forest officers because forest officers have the authority to issue timber permits and thereby the opportunity for corruption. Another representative from an international organization echoed the corruption in the Forest Department, particularly with respect to illegal felling and transport. As this representative further pointed out, corruption undermines the whole system. Good officers cannot do their jobs in enforcing the forest ordinance if corruption exists. As such, it is important to tackle any culture of corruption, as well as the potential reasons, including low compensation.
Forest and Wildlife Officers in Kenya
Kenya, another country of study for the 2016 – 2017 SAIS International Human Rights Clinic, also offers some insight into the conditions faced by field officers. Kenya stands as the primary purveyor for millions of dollars in illegal wildlife products and timbers each year, trafficked around the world by intricate international criminal syndicate networks. More ivory is shipped out of ports in Mombasa than anywhere else in Africa, bound primarily for Asia – where the surge in demand over the last decade, due to growing affluence in the region, has buoyed the industry. Kenya is desperately seeking to reverse its poor reputation for wildlife management and to protect the remaining 32,000-odd elephants, 1,000 black and white rhinos, and 6.2 percent tree cover. Kenyan forest rangers are at the forefront of this fight.
Forest and Wildlife Management – Stemming the Illegal Wildlife and Timber Trade
Housed within two separate government agencies, forest rangers act in accordance to their agency’s mandate: the Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS) seeks to conserve the country’s diverse flora and fauna, managing the profitable national parks and protecting wildlife in and outside of forestlands, while the Kenya Forest Service (KFS) focuses exclusively on state-owned forests, working with KWS on issues pertaining to wildlife management. The work of forest rangers is vital, now more than ever: African wildlife plays a critical role in maintaining the biodiversity of savannah and forest ecosystems, all the while attracting indispensable tourism-related revenue that bolsters struggling economies.
Risks to Field Officers
As in the case of Sri Lanka, the 2016 International Ranger Federation Ranger Roll of Honour reminds us of the risks to field officers. The list includes two Kenyan forest rangers: Lmeyiouni Lemoyog, who was killed by cattle rustlers while on patrol, and Koyiaso Lekoloi, who was shot by poachers. Like elsewhere, forest rangers in Kenya take on great risk without the proper tools, training, or compensation.
Logistical Concerns
Stemming the network of transnational trafficking necessitates coordinated action. The work of forest rangers in this fight – apprehending small-time poachers and loggers – is fruitless in isolation. The government has made a concerted effort to weed out dealers, traders, shipping companies, businesspeople and government officials that run this multimillion dollar industry – such efforts must be strengthened and enlarged. Yet, given the foundational role played by forest rangers, it is imperative that their need for everyday resources be met.
Lack of equipment and training, in conjunction with the aforementioned life-threatening dangers associated with forest ranger employment and low levels of life insurance coverage, erodes morale. Rangers often see little incentive to put their life on the line when their death would mean a loss of livelihood and wages for their family, maybe even schooling and housing too. As Peter Newland, director of training at 51 Degrees, a private security company in Kenya, said to the New York Times “[d]onors outside of Africa want to see sexy, high-tech solutions like drones and ground sensors, not to hear about the need for warm clothing, boots and better food for rangers.” “Large nongovernmental groups spend huge amounts, yet there are rangers calling me for socks.” By contrast, when rangers are recruited from local communities (and are therefore more invested in its preservation) and taken care of – through insurance, sufficient income, a pension, and resources – rates of poaching and illegal logging drop. The Kenyan government and international community should thus seek to protect and empower rangers to perform their jobs correctly.
Erosion of Public Trust: Corruption and Poor Practices
In Kenya, corruption is endemic and a critical bottleneck to mitigating trafficking. Insufficient pay, training, and resources are universally cited as drivers of corruption; it is no surprise therefore that corruption thrives amongst rangers. For many forest-dependent communities, KFS and KWS rangers embody their most salient relationship with the federal government – corruption and poor practices thus not only diminishes their trust in the proper functioning of those organizations, but also their confidence in the government writ large.
This problem is particularly evidenced through the forceful evictions carried out by the KFS. By and large, these evictions report to adhere to national guidelines to ensure they are “carried out in a manner that respects the dignity, right to life and security of those affected.” Yet, in some cases, poorly trained rangers have been quick to resort to violence when evictions go awry. Most notably, the Sengwer community of the Embobut Forest has a long history of strained relations with the KFS. For decades, the Sengwer’s ancestral claim to forest dwelling has come into direct conflict with the KFS’s vision for forest conservation – resulting in violent forced evictions, at times involving the burning of homes, shooting at community members, and even death. (This conflict, and the nuances involved, is touched on in greater detail in our forthcoming report to be released on May 16th). While KFS officials maintain that these, lawfully conducted, evictions are needed to protect the forest, their violent nature is not necessary or lawful. Our forthcoming report acknowledges that there are rare occasions when lawful evictions are absolutely necessary; in those cases, greater forest ranger regulations and training are indispensable for guiding a more peaceful process.
While investigating illegal logging in the Mount Kenya region, our researchers were repeatedly told that KFS officers often corruptly facilitate the practice, and that community members and other rangers are unwilling to come forward in fear of their own safety. “Corruption,” they said, “comes from above.” Thus even when whistleblowers are willing to risk their lives to report corruption, most feel that it would accomplish little. Indeed, renowned conservationist and founding chair of KWS, Dr. Richard Leakey said, “The corruption isn’t just in wildlife management, but at the ports, at law enforcement agencies, it’s with the customs, parts of the judiciary, it’s certainly present at many levels in the police force, it’s certainly very real and still is to a certain extent in the KWS.” While the Kenyan government toughened penalties for wildlife-related crimes under the 2013 Wildlife Act, the prevalence of corruption undermines these efforts. Between 2014-15, only 6% of criminals convicted of wildlife crimes received prison time and no high-level trafficker was brought to court.
Whistleblowing
Kenya lacks a comprehensive law on whistleblower safety at the national level – let alone any legislation of wildlife whistleblowers – to encourage and protect those who come forward. In the United States, the National Whistleblower Center’s (NWC) Global Wildlife Whistleblower Program provides a secure and confidential platform for individuals to report wildlife crimes. Under the program, whistleblowers are connected with an attorney and informed of any financial rewards they may qualify for under U.S. law. Positive reinforcements, such as financial reward laws, have proved to be the one of the most effective means for increasing a government’s ability to detect and prosecute crimes. The Kenyan government should seek to implement such safeguards for wildlife whistleblowers. Actions resulting from such a program will add much needed legitimacy to the government’s anti-poaching and illegal logging programs, both internationally and domestically.
Protecting Forest Rangers
Ultimately, to fully realize the right to a healthy environment and all of the essential human rights that depend on its vigor, we need to support and protect those tasked or compelled to defend the environment, including individuals, NGOs, indigenous communities, and forest rangers. In the case of forest rangers, this requires adequate resources – personnel, compensation and benefits that reflect the danger of the job, equipment, and training in self-defense, weapons, and human rights protection. It also requires the space to voice issues that impact their work, including robust whistleblower protections and enforcement of whistleblower laws to protect forest rangers from adverse action for speaking out. Finally, to mitigate the manmade dangers that some forest rangers face, the complicated climate that allows poachers to thrive and flourish must aggressively be addressed by States and the international community. As the father-in-law of fallen Sri Lankan officer, Jagath Seneviratne stated “The government should . . . take serious action against poachers who kill animals. Otherwise people like my son who protect the right[s] [of] animals, would meet with such tragic incidents.”
Conclusion – Remember Forest Rangers
Despite the challenges to the profession, it is important to recognize the sacrifices made by forest rangers. In that vein, we would like to thank the global community of forest rangers for their work in protecting the Earth’s natural beauty and biodiversity. Future generations will see this work on the face of every tree and creature of the world’s forests. In the right conditions, all forest rangers could be a professionalized force of EHRDs.
P.S. Please mark your calendars for World Ranger Day on July 31st.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] The Africa survey included 570 responses from rangers from 12 African counties (including Kenya). The Asia survey included responses from 530 ranger from 11 Asian countries (did not include Sri Lanka).
[2] Kenya was part of the 40 countries surveyed. Sri Lanka was not included in the study.
