Park rangers as protectors of the natural and cultural heritage in La Araucanía

From large ancient trees to small bushes that resist wind forces in the heights; volcanoes, lakes, glaciers, güiñas, mushrooms and pudúes. The biodiversity that makes up the more than 53 thousand hectares of the Villarrica National Park, in La Araucanía region, changes along its trails, as do the tasks that take place in this protected area. “Here no day is the same as another,” says park ranger Felipe Ortega, who recently participated in the tireless search for a lost mountaineer, one of the many tasks he has carried out since 2017, along with the creation of environmental education campaigns, generation of links with the Mapuche-Pehuenche communities, construction of roads, monitoring of species and promotion of citizen participation.

We spoke with Felipe on the day in which we celebrate World Ranger Day, about how to intertwine scientific and ancestral knowledge; ways of integrating the sacred dimension of nature; incentives for community participation and various adaptations to face the socioecological crisis.

 Fundación Mar Adentro (FMA): How has your role in Villarrica National Park transformed since you started working in this protected area in 2017?

Felipe Ortega (FO): A few years ago there was a more inward culture. We built trails and did education inside the park, among other tasks, but at a certain point, we organized with the team to think about the park we wanted and the skills we needed to achieve it. Thus, we think of the Park as a territorial articulator in terms of natural and biocultural phenomena. Here there are volcanoes and water sources that nourish the basin. At the same time, we realized the need for inclusion in terms of environmental democracy and in terms of people with disabilities. For this reason, these years we have trained and also generated alliances with various institutions that handle specific knowledge, such as the Universidad de la Frontera (UFRO) or FMA, acquiring tools that range from monitoring wildlife to understanding conservation and citizen participation foci. It has been central to understand that the conservation of a protected area like this requires more people and, therefore, the generation of networks. In this sense, in recent years there have been instances to recognize ourselves among neighbors and that has implied a transformation. Today, we are more prepared for effective and binding participation with Mapuche communities, and we continue to acquire skills.

FMA: Among the work you have done, you have been part of environmental education initiatives. How do you think this area has evolved and what value has it been given as a tool for conservation in the last decade?

FO: There is an area of environmental education that encourages outdoor activities in connection with protected areas. Here, for example, we have a school for park ranger children in an educational institution in the area. It has been a permanent work. In fact, during the pandemic we continued making videos to bring nature closer to people. Another relevant line is conservation education. The difference is that it is based on open standards [1]as a Conaf strategy in relation to various threats we encounter, in order to execute plans to recognize invasive species alongside communities, for example. Thus, environmental education in both modalities is related to management plans. However, here we lack indicators to know and evaluate the effectiveness of educational messages and the perception regarding the information received by the communities. In this regard, I have investigated [2]the perception of the Park’s ecosystem services and observed that people perceive the park mainly as a recreational space, which shows that we have not managed to massify the information about the ecosystem services provided here, in relation to the filtration of the water that is purified in this wild area, or the air that is breathed thanks to the existence of this place, as well as the carbon captured by these forests. This is due, in part, to the low number of park rangers, since today there are ten of us distributed in different locations in the park.

 FMA: In this regard, if we think about the various roles of the park in the territory, in terms of the conservation of ecosystem components at different scales, for example, at the landscape, cultural, historical or geological scale, what initiatives are you currently developing to achieve that these areas enter into dialogue?

FO: A relevant line, as I have mentioned, has been inclusion, which we have developed with organizations such as Pro Pucón, UFRO and the Group of Disabled People of Pucón (ADIPU), to bring nature closer to people with disabilities. In terms of research, we have also worked with the Universidad Católica of Villarrica to encourage citizenship education in elementary students with photo monitoring of camera traps; while with the foundation (FMA) we have developed various projects, including supporting the research processes of artists in the Bosque Pehuén Residencies, seeking to deliver our vision as a national park. On the other hand, we collaborate with university internships and co-create spaces with Mapuche communities around co-management and governance to generate integrative views on conservation.

FMA: In these terms, and thinking about the tasks that you have tackled so far, what is the current role of park rangers in Chile and what changes or challenges are projected in light of the implementation of the SBAP law? 

FO: We park rangers were romantically considered the protectors of protected areas, but we did not have a legal basis on which to enforce our role when it came to ban unviable behavior in a national park, such as lighting fires, damaging the flora, disturbing the fauna or walk dogs. Today, we have the power as inspectors and the power to manage wildlife, something that was previously distributed in other services. The SBAP law makes it easier to collaborate with the private world of conservation, since categories are unified and the protection of biodiversity is concentrated in a single service. Historically, the institution with the most knowledge in conservation has been the National System of State Protected Areas (SNASPE), it is from there that relevant information will emerge for all protected areas, including private ones. On the other hand, actions can be promoted with the UNESCO biosphere reserves recognized in this law, to promote sustainably inhabited territories. Nature funds could also help us promote projects to work in buffer areas – adjacent to watercourses– and what involves buffering threats in wild areas, such as fires or irresponsible pet ownership. SBAP elevates nature’s importance through legal hierarchies and that changes the conditions in a binding way.

FMA: Faced with the triple planetary crisis, that is, climate change, loss of biodiversity and pollution, what signs of these phenomena have been present in the Villarrica National Park? And, how have Conaf and the department of wild areas addressed it?

FO: A while ago I took a course on adaptation to climate change, as a way to recognize these phenomena. Although fires have always existed, an example of this aspect of the crisis are the mega fires that occur today. This is something that affects the world and a clear sign that we have to adapt to the risks, by being more responsible with the use of fire and waste management. We recently went to a meeting to develop community plans as well. Regarding extinction, here we must make timely progress in responsible pet ownership. Thanks to camera traps we find species that are a conservation focus, but dogs also appear as a threat. We must continue to instill community monitoring. On the other hand, the work of people who protect ecosystems such as wetlands is important, since when there are phenomena such as floods, these natural systems cushion these climatic events.

FMA: The region of La Araucanía presents great biodiversity and endemism, being a territory of historical and territorial complexity. Could you delve deeper into how you have sought to integrate intercultural knowledge and practices and generate bridges with the Mapuche-Pehuenche communities? 

FO: Working with indigenous peoples opens our vision of nature, not only from biological classifications, but also by expanding logic that enhances dialogue, such as when we ask the forest for permission to enter or to climb a mountain. In that sense, it is necessary to apologize in these contexts, for not having worked together before, since we have understood that we have a common view on the need to protect nature, even considering it sacred. Today, incorporating Mapuche culture into conservation is a pleasant challenge, because we are nourished by the ways of naming, connections, co-construction and participation in ceremonies in the park. We have declared joint protection of these sites, because they are vital to keeping this culture alive. These communities are permanent subjects of law, beyond specific administrations, since as part of the institutions, we must be guarantors, even more so when there is a historical debt. Upon entering the park, I decided to encourage joint work with the indigenous peoples, since I had previously worked on territorial planning plans with a Mapuche perspective. Now, after a long journey of demands by the communities, there are mechanisms such as the Indigenous Consultation. The only way is to open up to dialogue and enjoy how enriching it can be to work together. Now, as park rangers, our focuses are biocultural.

Thus, by protecting an araucaria we are not only taking care of the tree, but also a sacred element for a culture. The role of the park ranger is daily, we must soak up this culture and pray for nature, ask permission from the local people when we are going to give a talk and incorporate these visions from the heart as part of the management of a protected area. I believe that this should permeate all the protected areas of the country in a way situated with the communities. In the north, for example, there are communities that live within protected areas. It is an arduous topic, but motivating.

Felipe Andrés Ortega Saavedra.– Biologist in natural resource management from the Catholic University of Temuco (UCT), graduate in geographic information systems and remote sensing, and master’s degree in territorial planning and management from the UCT. He has worked in the management of natural resources, highlighting the importance of environmental education. In the field of territorial planning, he worked on the development of the regional territorial planning plans of Maule, Valparaíso, O’Higgins and Atacama, in addition to the Pladeco of Pucón and Puerto Natales, among others. In the area of conservation, he has developed various ASP management plans for the La Araucanía Region, and the creation of private protected areas in Patagonia and development of methodologies for public use in protected areas. He has worked as a park ranger in the Villarrica National Park since 2017.

Reference:

[1] Methodology that allows addressing the complexity of socio-ecological systems to guide effective conservation processes at multiple scales, under an integrative and adaptive approach.

[2] Topic of his thesis in the Master’s degree in territorial planning and management at the Catholic University of Temuco.