{"id":22301,"date":"2019-08-10T18:34:17","date_gmt":"2019-08-10T09:34:17","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.birdskoreablog.org\/?p=22301"},"modified":"2019-08-11T21:42:05","modified_gmt":"2019-08-11T12:42:05","slug":"draft-biodiversity-conservation-in-the-dmz-as-part-of-the-solution","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.birdskoreablog.org\/?p=22301","title":{"rendered":"Draft 2: Biodiversity Conservation in the DMZ as Part of the Solution"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Dr Nial Moores, Birds Korea, August 11th<\/sup> 2019<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Every year there are multiple meetings held to discuss the future of the DMZ. The DMZ is a hugely complicated, multi-faceted and sensitive set of issues. We therefore usually avoid posting much about it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, I have been asked to participate in two major meetings about the DMZ in the next six weeks: the first on August 28th and 29th, at which I have been invited to be a discussion panelist; and the second on September 19th and 20th, at which I will be a presenter – and for which I have been asked to prepare a 5-10 page “full text” essay and a Powerpoint.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Below is the second draft of this essay, which I have been told should be sent to organisers latest on about August 15th. I am posting this draft in the hope (please) of receiving feedback and suggestions on how to improve it: What do you like? What do you disagree with? What have I got wrong? What have I omitted? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

If you were able to send me comments (posted on Facebook; or to the comments section on this blog; or sent directly to me by email) before midday on Monday August 12th I would greatly appreciate it. Thank you so very much!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Abstract<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The heavily militarized Korean DMZ lies\nwithin the inner border area of Korea between the Republic of Korea (ROK) and\nthe DPRK. Although poorly researched, the DMZ is already known to have high\necological importance. Set within a densely populated region where most lowland\nand coastal areas have already been profoundly degraded by human activities,\nthe DMZ preserves a living archive of biodiversity; it contains internationally\nimportant areas for wildlife; and it includes diverse ecosystems which have\nbeen undergoing natural regeneration for six decades. The DMZ also has a high\nsymbolic and cultural value. Although the DMZ\u2019s ecological values can potentially\nbe learned and benefitted from more or less equally by the ROK and the DPRK,\nits symbolic and cultural meaning is likely to be perceived differently by\npeople in either nation. These differences need to be understood and addressed.\nCurrently, however, there is enormous interest in the ROK on planning for the\nfuture of the DMZ as part of the peace process, with many unilateral development\nproposals being made. The ecological impacts of these proposals are poorly\nunderstood and it is unclear whether or not they have sufficient popular understanding\nand support yet in the ROK either. Moreover, it is also unclear whether the\nDPRK welcomes these proposals or will have the opportunity to modify them if needed.  In the interests of reducing mistrust and\nwinning support from more stakeholders, it would seem wise at this time to\navoid making any unilateral development proposals which might affect any part\nof the DMZ.  Instead, the ROK should take\nimmediate advantage of its substantial technical and economic capacity to buy\nup land and to support farmers in the Civilian Control Zone (CCZ) which borders\nthe DMZ and in other areas close to the inner border of Korea. Through providing\nproper compensation payments and investment, farmers and landowners could and deserve\nto benefit economically from managing these lands and waters in ways which maintain\nand increase biodiversity and enhance their natural ecosystem services.  This \u201cWise Use of the CCZ\u201d approach should also\ninclude the appropriate designation of Protected Areas and Ramsar sites, and\nthe testing of new strains of rice and fishery practices which might be helpful\nin moving toward organic, climate-friendly and wildlife-friendly agriculture throughout\nthe ROK and the DPRK. Monitoring programs throughout the CCZ and inner border\narea should also be expanded to measure the success of each management approach\nwith the results being made public in the ROK and also shared with counterpart\nagencies in the DPRK. Over time, as conditions allow, coordinated inter-Korean\nand regional joint projects, initially focused on e.g. rice-strains and key\nspecies like the Red-crowned Crane could then be conducted to improve upon this\ninitial research and to help refine understanding of shared needs and shared\ngoals.  Once success has been attained in\nthe development of management approaches, exchange visits to managed areas in\nboth the ROK\u2019s CCZ and in the DPRK itself could be organized, with the focus throughout\non enhancement of shared natural resources so that both nations can better attain\nthe UN\u2019s Sustainable Development Goals.  Perhaps\na decade or more will be needed to develop appropriate management skills;\nimprove information-sharing; and to build trust and support, within the ROK and\nbetween the ROK and the DPRK and regional partners. Based on this kind of firm\nfoundation, however, better-informed discussions could then take place, aimed\nat developing a genuinely sustainable conservation plan for the DMZ and inner\nborder area as part of the all-Korea peace process, firmly integrated into both\nnations\u2019 sustainable development plans.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Introduction<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The 2019 Gyeonggi DMZ Forum has three main aims: (1) to redefine the meaning and significance of the DMZ as a symbol of integration, life and peace; (2) to suggest solutions for building a framework for peace on the Korean Peninsula; and (3) to support cooperation between the Republic of Korea (ROK) and the DPRK, and between the Korean Peninsula and the rest of Northeast Asia.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Birds Korea is a small and specialized NGO\nbased in Busan which is dedicated to the conservation of birds and their\nhabitats in Korea and the wider Yellow Sea Ecoregion work. We are non-political\nand work throughout the ROK and regionally with the aim of supporting progress\ntowards environmental sustainability, as envisioned by national laws, international\nconservation conventions and the UN\u2019s Sustainable Development Goals (UN 2015).  We have more than 15 years of experience\nworking close to the inner border region of Korea: near to the NLL, and close\nto and within the Civilian Control Zone (CCZ) which lies immediately south of\nthe DMZ. In the west of the inner border, we have conducted several years of research\non Baekryeong Island in the ROK part of Ongjin County, and developed a series\nof proposals aimed at reducing biodiversity decline while increasing ecosystem\nfunction and improving the livelihoods of local communities (Birds Korea 2019).\n We have also conducted surveys in the\nCCZ in Gimpo City (Hanns Seidel Foundation 2019) and in Yeoncheon and Cheorwon\nCounties in the ROK part of central Korea.  In the east of the inner border area, we have also\nsurveyed waterbirds and seabirds, both south and north of the DMZ, in Goseong\nCounty (Moores et al. 2017).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the DPRK, since 2014 we have conducted a\ndozen surveys of birds and wetlands, from the West Sea barrage near Pyongyang\nin the southwest to Rason in the northeast (Moores 2017); conducted in-field\ntraining of government and State Academy of Science researchers; and presented\nat several local and national workshops relevant to biodiversity\nconservation.  Initially, our research\nvisits were organised to support revision of the DPRK\u2019s Wetlands Inventory and\nto encourage DPRK accession to the Ramsar Convention. This process was\ninitiated and led by the Ministry of Land and Environment Protection (MoLEP,\nDPRK), and supported especially by the Hanns Seidel Foundation (Korea office)\nand the Ramsar Secretariat. As part of our work, we have also participated in\nmeetings with DPRK officials in Hong Kong, mainland China and Cambodia; and\nreviewed substantial bodies of literature on the biodiversity of the DPRK.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

This essay will first explain observations from\nour work which we consider relevant to the future conservation and wise use of\nthe DMZ; and then list eleven proposals which, respectfully, we consider could\nbe useful as small steps to take toward meeting the Gyeonggi DMZ Forum\u2019s three larger\naims.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Main\nEcological Values of the DMZ<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Korean Peninsula is largely\nmountainous, with a very high human population density, especially in lowland\nareas. Most lowland habitats are therefore heavily modified and exploited. The\nDMZ remains poorly researched because of severe access restrictions. However, almost\nthe entire 4km-wide land-based corridor has escaped recent development\npressures, and therefore likely preserves much of the fauna and flora typical\nof central Korea prior to industrialization that took place in the 1960s and\nsubsequently. This living archive therefore likely contains many species which are\nnow assessed as nationally or globally threatened and which have already been\nextirpated from most areas outside of the DMZ.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In addition, in recognition of the growing twin\ncrises of accelerating climate change and biodiversity loss, there have been sustained\ncalls to conserve and restore ecosystems. These include Target 15 of the Aichi\nBiodiversity Targets, which calls for all contracting nations to the Convention\non Biological Diversity to increase ecosystem resilience and to enhance the contribution\nof biodiversity to carbon stocks by 2020 \u201cthrough conservation and restoration<\/em>, including\nrestoration<\/em> of at\nleast 15 per cent of degraded ecosystems\u201d(CBD 2010).  Because the\nDMZ contains a high diversity of habitats and many of these habitats have been\nundergoing natural ecological succession for more than six decades, research on\nthis succession should be of immense value to both the ROK and the DPRK in\nplanning and enacting large-scale restoration projects in other parts of the\nKorean Peninsula, both north and south of the DMZ.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The land-based DMZ also provides a largely\nundisturbed stopover site for migratory bird and insect species. We already\nhave evidence of a sanctuary effect in the daily-cycle of some migratory bird\nspecies. Based on satellite tracking projects started in the 1990s and on\ndirect observations, we know that many individuals of the globally Endangered\nRed-crowned Crane Grus japonensis<\/em> and\nglobally Vulnerable White-naped Crane Antigone\nvipio<\/em> roost overnight through the winter in the DMZ, and then fly out into\nadjacent areas to feed (e.g. Chong et al. 1994). More recently, our research in\nGoseong County confirmed that several thousand Pelagic Cormorants Phalacrocorax pelagicus <\/em>commute each day\nin winter from rocks off from Haekumkang in the DPRK part of the DMZ, used for\novernight roosting, to marine waters off from the Geojin headland in the ROK,\nused for feeding during the day (Moores et al. 2017). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Marine areas of the inner border of Korea (extending west to the NLL in the Yellow Sea; and east into the East Sea) similarly provide a year-long sanctuary for marine life. Research in other parts of the world suggests that if appropriately-managed, the presence of no-fishing zones can contribute to the recovery of fish populations and help to maintain fisheries outside of the protected area itself (Roberts et al. 2005; de Leo & Micheli 2015). \u00a0While more research in Korean waters is needed, based on the evidence available to us it seems reasonable to assume that the DMZ and many areas in and close to the inner border are a de facto<\/em> sanctuary for both land-based and marine species in which they can maintain their populations and out of which they can potentially also expand their ranges. However, any expansion (i.e. reoccupation of former range) can only realistically be sustained if habitats and other threats to biodiversity in these adjacent areas are appropriately managed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Our assumptions are supported by our observations of birds in the CCZ and in substantial parts of the inner border area of Korea. \u00a0Based on still-limited research, the CCZ and inner border area appears to support a disproportionate number of individuals of nationally and globally threatened bird species when compared with similar-looking landscapes outside of the inner border region (e.g. Moores et al. 2017; Hanns Seidel Foundation 2019). Examples are many. They include the Grey-capped Woodpecker Yungipicus canicapillus<\/em>, a largely sedentary species of mature forests; and several species of goose and crane. The apparent greater abundance of these species in the CCZ and inner border area than outside of it seems to us likely due to a combination of less disturbance and development pressure within the CCZ and near border areas (at least until recently) and the sanctuary effect of the DMZ.\u00a0 <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Further support for this assumption is suggested by data from the Ministry of Environment\u2019s annual winter bird census (e.g. MOE 1999-2017) and surveys and monitoring programs conducted by experienced researchers. Data confirm that several species of geese and crane regularly form concentrations in several parts of the DMZ and CCZ which meet Ramsar criteria used to identify internationally important wetlands (Ramsar 2019).\u00a0 These internationally important wetlands, some of which are entirely within the ROK and some of which are shared with and extend deep into the DPRK, include much of the Han-Imjin Estuary and lower river stretches (in the ROK, including Ganghwa Island\u2019s tidal flats; the Han Estuary in Gimpo City; the Han and Imjin lower river stretches and much of the adjacent rice-fields and wetland habitats at least upstream as far as the Janghang Wetland and Yeoncheon County) and much of the CCZ in Cheorwon County. \u00a0Along the East Sea coast too, central Goseong County meets criteria for identification as a Marine Important Bird and Biodiversity Area (Moores et al. 2017). \u00a0Close to the inner border too, there are several internationally important wetlands located along the Hwanghaenam coast of the DPRK (DPRK 2018) and also one wetland on Baekryeong Island which is internationally important based on Ramsar criteria.\u00a0 This density and near-continuity of internationally important bird habitats along much of the inner border area of Korea appears on current understanding to be unique on the Korean Peninsula.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In any discussion of this kind it is essential\nto recognize that the Ramsar criteria are based on decades of scientific\nresearch. Birds are valuable in themselves, and for the many ecosystem services\nwhich they provide, including helping to fertilise rice-fields; predation of\nharmful insects and crop-pest species; for pollination; and as natural agents\nof seed dispersal, helping in the natural restoration of forests (Kurechi 2007;\n\u015eekercio\u011flu 2017).  The Ramsar criteria make explicit that birds\nhave great value as bio-indicators too. Internationally important concentrations\nof waterbirds help to reveal the natural health, productivity and diversity of\na given ecosystem; and changes in population and distribution of the same\nspecies revealed by monitoring programs is an efficient way of measuring the\nsuccess or failure of conservation initiatives, and of gauging ecosystem\nresilience. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bird\nConservation and Green Diplomacy <\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Approximately 90% of bird species recorded\non the Korean Peninsula are migratory, moving seasonally along a broadly North-South\nAxis.  The vast majority of bird species\nare therefore shared by both the ROK and the DPRK.  Several of these have outstanding cultural\nvalue, including the Red-crowned Crane. This species adorns artwork in PR\nChina, Japan and the Korean Peninsula as a symbol of longevity, and also adorns\nthe cover of the DPRK\u2019s Wetland Inventory (DPRK 2018).  A wetland-dependent species, the Red-Crowned\nCrane has undergone remarkable declines over the past century, largely because\nof wetland degradation and loss.  Currently\nthe species is assessed as globally Endangered, with a total population of only\n1,830 mature individuals in the wild (IUCN 2019).  Remarkably, more than half of these spend the\nwinter in the inner border area of Korea. The Red-crowned Crane has already\nbeen the focus of active conservation work throughout North-east Asia.  Coordinated research and conservation\nprojects focused on this species in and close to the inner border area of Korea\nby both the ROK and the DPRK offer one politically-neutral way forward for collaboration\ntoward meeting shared goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Lessons\nfrom Our Work in the ROK and the DPRK<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the ROK, despite the best efforts of GO\nand NGO conservation bodies and a slew of legislation, our research continues\nto document extensive habitat degradation and loss, both outside and inside of\nthe inner border area of Korea. This includes tidal flat reclamation; the\ninfilling of natural freshwater wetlands and the replacement of soft-banked\ndrainage channels in rice-fields with steep-sided concrete drains, even within\nthe CCZ (e.g. in Gimpo and Cheorwon). We also continue to document an increase\nin damaging disturbance to wildlife caused e.g. by a growth of the road and\ncycle network through sensitive areas and by logging in summer months. In\nworking landscapes (e.g. in agricultural areas, managed forests and in tidal\nflat areas), we have encountered very few habitats managed for the conservation\nof biodiversity. Moreover, we remain unaware of any recent major development\nproject anywhere in the ROK that has incorporated appropriate measures to\nconserve biodiversity and to reduce greenhouse gas emissions at either the\nlocal or the national level.  Instead,\neven recent Environmental Impact Assessments continue to under-report the\npresence of threatened species; and to assert that there will be minimal\nimpacts (see e.g. the review of the Bijarim Ro road-widening project on Jeju Island\nin Moores 2019). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

As a result of the current development\nmodel and lack of suitably managed areas, a substantial proportion of the ROK\u2019s\nregularly-occurring bird species are in steep decline, especially in wetlands\nand in agricultural landscapes (Moores et al. 2014).  Similarly steep declines in other species\ngroups and in the health of ecosystems can also be inferred (see e.g. ROK 2014).\nAn obvious conclusion is that although the ROK has been a leader in forest\nrestoration, there is a severe lack of experience of managing other habitat\ntypes appropriately in order to address the ongoing climate and biodiversity\ncrises. There is therefore insufficient experience and administrative capacity at\nthis time within the ROK to maintain the ecological integrity of the CCZ; and\nfollowing reunification, of the DMZ either.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In combination, our experiences have also confirmed\nthat there is substantial pressure on lowland bird habitats within the DPRK too,\nincluding large-scale reclamation of tidal flats, forest cutting and\necologically-destructive dredging of rivers. There are also very high levels of\ndisturbance even within protected areas.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Notably, however, officials within MoLEP\n(DPRK) have repeatedly demonstrated a profound understanding of conservation\nissues. Although there are obvious financial and technical limits to the DPRK\u2019s\nconservation capacity (e.g. Kim 2015; Moores et al. 2019), and there are\ncontradictions between some of the policies being pursued by ministries, the\nofficials we have met with understand the importance of healthy forests and the\ncontributions of functioning ecosystems in helping the DPRK meet the UN\u2019s Sustainable\nDevelopment Goals. Moreover, these Goals do not appear to be tangential to conservation\naims: instead, they appear to be deeply-integrated. Sustainable Development Goals\nthat we have discussed explicitly with MoLEP (DPRK) in the context of wetland\nconservation include reducing poverty (Goal 1) and reducing hunger (Goal 2)\nthrough increasing production of fish and rice and other harvestable species in\nwetlands; helping with the provision of clean water (Goal 6); climate action,\nby conserving vegetated tidal wetlands, as at Mundok (Goal 13); and of course,\nthe conservation of life in water and on land (Goals 14 and 15).  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is apparent too that MoLEP (DPRK) also\nrecognizes the need to develop new Partnerships (Goal 17). In our experience, the\nDPRK appears to welcome and to be responsive to new information and ideas.\nHowever, as in many parts of the world (including here in the ROK), deep\nsuspicions sometimes need to be overcome. \nPartnerships therefore work best when mutual respect is shown and when information\nclearly addresses the needs of the DPRK, rather than being pre-determined by\noutside bodies. As in the ROK, progress can be very rapid once a plan has\nformed. In only four years (2015-2018), the DPRK completed a revised National\nWetlands Inventory (DPRK 2018); acceded to the Ramsar Convention, designating\ntwo globally important Ramsar sites (Mundok on the west coast in Rason in the\nnortheast) (Ramsar 2018); and joined the East Asian-Australasian Flyway\nPartnership (EAAFP) (EAAFP 2018), an international partnership dedicated to\nmigratory bird conservation with the Secretariat housed in Incheon City. MoLEP\n(DPRK) also became a partner organization of the IUCN, and is also currently\ndeveloping management plans for key sites while also working towards the\ndevelopment of a Wetlands Conservation Law and a National Wetlands Centre\n(Moores et al. 2019).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is notable too that Partnerships in\nenvironmental issues between the DPRK and international bodies have a long\nhistory and include multiple examples of successful collaboration (Kim 2015). For\nexample, collaborative research on cranes by DPRK and Japanese researchers\nstarted in the early 1990s. Satellite transmitters were used to identify key\nareas used by cranes during migration.  Based\non the results, several new protected areas were designated.  Later, an integrated management plan was then\ndeveloped for a small part of one of these areas in northern Gangwon Province\nwith the support of the Hanns Seidel Foundation (Korea office), which included\nenhanced rice production; an agroforest; and habitat managed specifically for\nmigrant cranes (Chong et al. 1994; Higuchi 2001; State Academy of Sciences\n2016).  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Perceptions<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Conservation science, as defined by Kareiva\n& Marvier (2012), explicitly recognizes the tight coupling of social and\nnatural systems.  As\nsuch, any discussion of the conservation of the DMZ needs to consider a number\nof extraordinarily sensitive social and political realities in addition to\necological values. Paramount among these is that the DMZ is a zone that extends\nfor two kilometers either side of the Military Demarcation Line which separates\nthe ROK and the DPRK. It has for over six decades been a militarily controlled\nzone, during which time both the ROK and the DPRK, cleaved from a single\nculture, have continued to identify themselves (and often only themselves) as\n\u201cKorea\u201d. Since 1953, both nations have also remained technically at war with\neach other, and many additional lives have been lost in conflicts. Both nations\nhave therefore found themselves pulled and pushed to evolve in near-opposite\ndirections, in an often conscious response to war and the influence of war-time\nallies. As such the ROK and the DPRK now have very different political frameworks,\neconomic realities and cultural reference points from each other.  A generation of mistrust, one perhaps wider\nand deeper than the DMZ, has grown up. This mistrust needs first to be understood\nand then addressed, if true lasting peace is to be achieved.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Within the ROK, many people already\nrecognize that the DMZ has high ecological value.  To the environmental and conservation\ncommunity, the DMZ offers us an almost last chance to conserve biodiversity and\nundisturbed ecosystems. Many of us feel too that the DMZ has become a near-sacred\nsymbol of opposites: of war and of peace; of division and of the yearning for reunification\n\u2013 a natural place of healing given time. But even within the ROK, there are\nmany who are opposed to the current peace process and many others who see the DMZ\u2019s\ngreatest value as economic \u2013 as an expanse of under-developed land, with transportation\ncorridors between Seoul and Pyongyang and east coast centres of population\nwhich needs to be built as soon as possible.  Lacking much consensus on the DMZ within the\nROK, is it reasonable to expect that everyone in the DPRK uniformly perceives\nthe DMZ in the same way as each other or in the same way that we do here in the\nROK? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In our meetings with MoLEP (DPRK), there\nhas in reality been remarkably little interest shown in the DMZ. It seems to be\nviewed as one of very many areas with extremely strict access restrictions.\nMoreover, because it lacks a substantial human population, it really is not a\nconservation priority, yet. Conservation priorities are instead areas and\nissues which directly relate to the needs of people, and which can help the DPRK\nmove toward the better fulfillment of the Sustainable Development Goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

How can this distance between people be\nreduced, so that we can talk with and not talk at each other?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Proposals<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Birds Korea would respectfully like to offer\na linear series of ROK-based proposals for consideration, intended to support\nthe three aims of the Gyeonggi DMZ Forum. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

It seems wise to us, if:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

  1. The ROK were to announce an immediate moratorium on all development proposals within and directly affecting the DMZ, unless these developments have already been agreed to formally with the DPRK. This includes the suspension of all unilateral proposals, even those pertaining only to the ROK side of the DMZ (e.g. the pursuit of designation as a biosphere reserve: ROK 2011) in order to avoid ecological damage and misunderstanding between the ROK and the DPRK;<\/li>
  2. The ROK could from today use its great technical and economic capacity to buy-up substantial areas of land within the CCZ and to support farmers within the CCZ and the ROK part of the inner border area to farm more sustainably, in ways that can reduce our national carbon footprint and which can allow biodiversity to increase. \u00a0To pay for this, funds which are currently allocated to projects that will inevitably result in ecological degradation in the inner border area (e.g. new roads, peace parks, new monuments, hiking trails, industrial-agricultural construction, and the 110 Billion won currently being set aside for the proposed new airport on Baekryeong Island), could be redirected toward land purchase and farmer and fisher support, in order to help the ROK meet the Aichi Biodiversity Target of 15% of land restoration and the Sustainable Development Goals.\u00a0 Substantial additional funds could also be sourced from charging visitors to enter the CCZ and supplemented by e.g. a fund-raising and awareness-raising National Lottery dedicated toward this end;<\/li>
  3. Areas that are internationally important for biodiversity within the CCZ and adjacent areas of the inner border area of the ROK could within this year be appropriately delineated and in 2020 designated as e.g. national Wetland Protected Areas and Ramsar Sites (a year in which global attention is likely to be focused even more intently on the biodiversity and climate crises);<\/li>
  4. Experienced NGOs and community organisers could be identified and properly funded to work with farmers and local communities within the inner border area of the ROK to identify issues of concern and also to generate public awareness-raising materials on the importance of the CCZ and the DMZ to the ROK for ecological sustainability and peace on the Korean Peninsula as a whole;<\/li>
  5. Experienced NGO researchers and GO researchers could be identified and properly funded to monitor biodiversity and other environmental factors throughout the ROK inner border area;<\/li>
  6. Within selected areas of the inner border area, improved farming approaches could include the testing of rice strains and rice-field fisheries aimed at enhancing ecosystem functions and improving local peoples\u2019 livelihoods in both the ROK and the DPRK. Within the same areas, as part of this, habitats could also be managed in order to benefit priority conservation species like the Red-crowned Crane, and the Oriental Stork Ciconia boyciana<\/em> \u2013 the latter species already the focus of a national restoration initiative;<\/li>
  7. The rationale for and the progress in habitat management in the ROK inner border area needs to be made public throughout, with relevant information also shared with counterpart agencies in the DPRK, in order to build trust and to help identify shared common goals;<\/li>
  8. Based on the identification of shared DMZ-relevant goals, the ROK could then propose coordinated research projects in both the ROK and the DPRK (e.g. if agreed, on Red-crowned Crane conservation and on shorebird species found in tidal areas);<\/li>
  9. Once measurable success has been achieved in land purchase and land management, training workshops could be held, initially in a third country (e.g. PR China), with the support of the host nation and international organisations which already have experience and \/ or formal relationships with the DPRK (including e.g. the Hanns Seidel Foundation, the EAAFP, the IUCN, the Ramsar Centre for East Asia and the Pukorokoro Miranda Trust in New Zealand). Land and water managers from the ROK and the DPRK (from managed areas such as Mundok and Rason) could be invited to share their work and to jointly develop materials relevant to conservation of the inner border area; and the restoration of degraded ecosystems in other areas.<\/li>
  10. If conditions allow, exchanges could also be organized to managed areas and restoration test sites, by ROK specialists to the DPRK; and DPRK specialists to the ROK;<\/li>
  11. Based on this kind of foundation, further conferences could then be held within the DPRK and ROK, and within a third country, focused on the future of the DMZ, as it relates to ecological conservation, including calling for a new \u201cKorean Ecological Civilization.\u201d\u00a0 Such a discussion will work best if it is based on practical examples of collaboration; a clear understanding of each other\u2019s goals; integration of the inner border area into national plans for sustainable development; and joint commitment to the global framework provided by the Sustainable Development Goals.<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n

    References<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Birds Korea. 2019. Recognizing Baekryeong Island\u2019s\nEcotourism Potential. A Birds Korea Report, published by Birds Korea, Busan.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    CBD Secretariat. 2010. COP 10 Decision X\/2 X\/2.\nConvention on Biological Diversity. Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020.\nStrategic Goals and the Aichi Biodiversity Targets. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Chong J-R., Higuchi H., & Pak U-I. 1994. The\nMigration Routes and Important Rest-sites of Cranes on the Korean Peninsula. In\nHiguchi H. & Minton, J. Proceedings of the International Symposium. The Future of Cranes and Wetland<\/em>s. Pp.\n41-50. Published by the Wild Bird Society of Japan.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    De Leo, G. A. & Micheli, F. 2015. The good, the\nbad and the ugly of marine reserves for fishery yields. Philosophical\nTransactions of the Royal Society, Biological Sciences. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

    DPRK. 2018. A Wetland Inventory for DPR Korea.\nPyongyang, DPR Korea, 2018.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    E<\/strong>AAFP. 2018. East Asian-Australasian Flyway Partnership. \u201cWelcoming a new Partner, Democratic People\u2019s Republic of Korea\u201d. Online Press Release, April 13th<\/sup> 2018.<\/h5>\n\n\n\n

    Hanns Seidel Foundation. 2019. Report on Surveys of\nYudo Island and Adjacent Habitats of the CCZ; and of Supplementary Areas.\nCommissioned by Gimpo City.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Higuchi H. 2011. The Journey of Migratory Birds:\nWhere Do They Come From and Where Do They Go?  Keeping Track of Migratory Birds through the\nUse of Satellites . Nature Interface<\/em>,\n16: 15-17. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

    IUCN 2019. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.\nVersion 2019-2. https:\/\/www.iucnredlist.org<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Kareiva, P. & Marvier, M. 2012. What is\nConservation Science? Articles, BioScience<\/em>\n, November 2012 \/ Vol. 62 No. 11. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Kim R.E. 2015. International Environmental Conservation of the Democratic People\u2019s\nRepublic of Korea<\/em>. Report prepared for the DMZ Forum, April 2015. . <\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Kurechi M. 2007.  Restoring Rice Paddy Wetland Environments and\nthe Local Sustainable Society \u2013 Project for Achieving Co-existence of Rice\nPaddy Agriculture with Waterbirds at Kabukuri-numa, Miyagi Prefecture, Japan. Global Environmental Research<\/em> 12:\n141-152 (2007).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    MOE. 1999-2017. Ministry of Environment, ROK. Annual\nReports of the Winter Bird Census<\/em> (in\nKorean).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Moores, N. 2017. Birds and their conservation in\nRason Special Economic Zone, Democratic People\u2019s Republic of Korea. Forktail<\/em> 33: 124-133.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Moores, N. 2019. Report of the Independent Bird\nSurvey, Bijarim Ro, Jeju, June 2019. Produced by Birds Korea, Busan, Republic\nof Korea.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Moores, N., Choi H-A., & Seliger, B. 2017.\nSeabirds in the Inner Border Area of Korea \u2013 Goseong County, Gangwon Province.\nReport by Birds Korea and the Hanns Seidel Foundation (Korea).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Moores, N., Kim, A. & R. Kim. 2014. Status of Birds, 2014<\/em>. Birds Korea\nreport on Bird Population Trends and Conservation Status in the Republic of\nKorea. Published by Birds  Korea,\nSeptember 2014. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Moores, <\/sup>N., Young. <\/sup>L.,\nMillington, <\/sup>S., Xia S., Yu L., Ri K-S., Kim T., Lim J. and Glenk, F.\n2019. National actions and international frameworks for the conservation and\nwise use of tidal flats and other coastal wetlands in the Yellow Sea. Chapter\n7, in Shuqing An and Jos T.A. Verhoeven (Eds), Ecological Studies: Wetlands: Functions, Restoration and Wise Use<\/em>.\nPublished by Springer.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Ramsar 2018. Ramsar\nConvention Secretariat. \u201cThe Democratic People\u2019s Republic of Korea to become\nthe 170th Contracting Party to the Convention on Wetlands\u201d. Online Press\nRelease, February 6th<\/sup> 2018.<\/h6>\n\n\n\n

    Ramsar. 2019. The Ramsar Sites Criteria. Accessed in\nJuly 2019 at:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    https:\/\/www.ramsar.org\/sites\/default\/files\/documents\/library\/ramsarsites_criteria_eng.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Roberts, C., Hawkins, J. & Gell, F. 2005. The\nrole of marine reserves in achieving sustainable fisheries. Philosophical\nTransactions Royal Society, London B Biological Sciences. 2005\nJan 29; 360(1453): 123\u2013132. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

    ROK. 2011. Korea DMZ Biosphere Reserve. Nomination\nsubmission from the Republic of Korea. In English. Accessed online at: <\/p>\n\n\n\n

    http:\/\/www.unesco.org\/science\/doc\/mab\/2012\/kr\/DMZ_Republic_of_Korea.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    ROK. 2014. The Fifth National Report to the\nConvention on Biological\nDiversity. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \u015eekercio\u011flu, C. 2017. How much is a bird worth? Living Bird<\/em>. Summer 2017: 18-20.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    State Academy of Sciences. 2016. Overview of Cranes and its\nconservation in the DPRK. August 12th<\/sup> 2016, Powerpoint presentation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    UN. 2015. Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda\nfor Sustainable Development. The United Nation\u2019s Sustainable Development\nGoals and Targets.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    Dr Nial Moores, Birds Korea, August 11th 2019 Every year there are multiple meetings held to discuss the future of the DMZ. The DMZ is a hugely complicated, multi-faceted and sensitive set of issues. We therefore usually avoid posting much … read more<\/a><\/p>","protected":false},"author":14,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[10,785],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-22301","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-conservation","category-other---"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.birdskoreablog.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22301","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.birdskoreablog.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.birdskoreablog.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.birdskoreablog.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/14"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.birdskoreablog.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=22301"}],"version-history":[{"count":14,"href":"https:\/\/www.birdskoreablog.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22301\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":22320,"href":"https:\/\/www.birdskoreablog.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22301\/revisions\/22320"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.birdskoreablog.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=22301"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.birdskoreablog.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=22301"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.birdskoreablog.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=22301"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}