Nobody But Mongolians Can Protect Rangeland of Mongolia

(Translated by Ariungerel)

According to Mongolian scientists’ calculation, 70-80% of the total territory of Mongolia is overgrazed. If we should take into account this figure even though it is somewhat doubtful, we will have no rangeland soon. It is a real danger.

The carrying capacity of rangeland, which is up to 43 million head of livestock, has already been surpassed. This situation makes me want to talk about the future of livestock husbandry. Only herders in local areas practice rangeland protection because they are aware of the facts of this situation. Foreigners have failed to restore our overgrazing and rangeland degradation through implementation of the many projects they have donated.

Nevertheless, rangeland degradation including overgrazing and desertification is increasing through implementation of many projects with nice names such as rehabilitation, coping of desertification, and mitigate degradation, while none of these project donors are worrying about our rangeland future which is a critical issue to be discussed.

Most donors are implementing projects which are mainly related to reducing rangeland degradation and improving rural herders’ livelihood and economic conditions. Currently, the following projects: “Green gold” and “Coping of desertification” (SDC), “Sustainable livelihood” (World Bank), “Land Management for Combating Desertification” and “Community based conservation of biodiversity in Mongolia’s Altai Sayan eco-region” (UNDP) are being implemented. So many projects are being implemented while rangeland degradation and overgrazing is extending and getting worse. In this case, I am not comparing which is better or worse, so please can you (our readers) add your comments on it.

From the results, it seems like we are ignorant, and on the other hand, the donors have not identified the purpose of their project. I remember one phrase that says “don’t seek the mistakes of others, but first seek mistakes within yourself”. I’ve stopped other phrases such as if owner won’t try follow its fate. Therefore, we should worry about our property and protect it.

Once a project ends and the results are disseminated, both their money and minds will disappear. I would like to give you one example; the “Sustainable Grassland Project” of UNDP which was implemented in Bayankhongor, Uvorkhangai and Selenge aimags, between 2002 and 2007. The project implementer organized a tour for representative of donors, and I participated in the tour in the end of August 2007 in Selenge aimag. They set up monitoring plots in the north side of Kharaa river of Selenge aimag and it was exempted from grazing for 2-3 years. In those years, the rangeland recovered and the height of its plant reached up to 1 m high. At the time people were really happy with it and they said that we would have hay plots. When I visited this place again on 28 July, 2009 I did not believe it but this recovered rangeland looked as if it had been cut yesterday.

I would like to make some comments here. We should define a purpose for a project and monitor the implementation of the project along its original purpose. The participation of the local community should be encouraged. Their ideas and opinions should be discussed and reflected in the projects conducted. All the herders, local residents, specialists and scientists need to think about how we can really use these projects in the future and how can we sustain our rangeland for the long-term.

I think all of these projects should do more to change the way people think than to change the rangeland. Our government should make initiatives to disseminate knowledge of rangelands to every herder and not wait for foreign donors’ activities to attempt to solve the problem. We should be stopped before cash becomes obstacles.