141

Restoring Rice Paddy Wetland Environments andthe Local Sustainable Society– Project for Achieving Co-existence of Rice Paddy Agriculture with
Waterbirds at Kabukuri-numa, Miyagi Prefecture, Japan –Masayuki KURECHI
Japanese Association for Wild Geese Protection
Minamimachi 16, Wakayanagi, Kurihara, Miyagi 989-5502, Japane-mail: son-goose2@ybb.ne.jp

Abstract
Over the past century, Japan’s wetlands have been greatly impoverished, and 61% completely lost.
Miyagi Prefecture, in particular, lost 92%, most of which were converted to rice paddies. Ibaraki, Chiba andother prefectures have similar histories. Better productivity and efficiency have further fueled constructionof paddies so as to eliminate their remaining wetland value by keeping them dry in winter, particularly on
Japan’s drier Pacific coast. This has seriously impacted many wetland-dependent species, driving someclose to extinction. This paper takes a 100-year perspective in discussing enhancement of rice paddies’ value
as wetlands as a way of restoring wetland environments and sustainable local communities. It presents thecase of the Ramsar site, “Kabukuri-numa and the surrounding rice paddies,” where co-existence of rice
agriculture with over-wintering geese is being sought through restoration of some paddies back to wetland
and winter-flooding of others still under cultivation.
A proposal to dredge the Kabukuri-numa wetland became an opportunity for stakeholders to initiate amovement towards wetland protection and co-existence of wildlife with agriculture. Landholders agreed tore-convert of 50 hectares (ha) of paddy fields back to wetlands in 1998. The number of geese using
Kabukuri- numa as a roosting site increased, illustrating that the restoration augmented the site’s wildlife
carrying capacity. Farmers and others cooperated to implement a winter-flooding regime for nearby cultivated paddies. The project was examined from various standpoints, including as an application of theRamsar Convention, and achievements and issues were identified.
Normally, once a wetland is destroyed, restoration requires huge commitments of time and money, but
restoration through the managing of rice paddies under cultivation as “agricultural wetlands” can be a realistic and effective method for restoring natural wetland environments in Asia.
Key words: Kabukuri-numa, Ramsar Convention, wetland restoration, White-fronted Goose,
winter-flooded rice paddy

1. Introduction
The Senpoku alluvial plain is located in the catchment of the Hasama River, a tributary of the KitakamiRiver in northern Miyagi prefecture. According toTogashi and Kato (1994), 100 years ago it was a large,
low-lying wetland dotted with about 40 lakes and ponds,of which 37 were reclaimed, 31 completely and six, including the Izunuma and Kabukuri-numa Ramsar sites,
reduced by about half. Thus, over the last 100 years thewetland environment of north Miyagi was devastatingly
impoverished (Fig.1).
According to a Geographical Survey Institute (2000),
Global Environmental Research
12: 141-152 (2007)
printed in Japan

61% of Japan’s wetlands disappeared during the lastcentury. In the early 20th century, Miyagi Prefecture
ranked 3rd in wetland area, but lost 92%, Japan’s top
rate of loss. Thus, Miyagi experienced the most extremechange in wetlands in the nation. In that era of increasing demand for food, most reclaimed wetlands wereconverted into rice paddies and low-lying alluvial plains
were actively targeted. Chiba and Ibaraki Prefectures,
which also have alluvial plains, lost about 90% of theirwetlands (Figs. 2-1, 2-2).
The rice paddies that replaced the natural wetlands
have also been changing. Those reclaimed earlier on aremostly “wet” paddies, but those reclaimed in the last©2007 AIRIES142

M. KURECHI

Fig. 1 Changes in wetland habitat in the northern plains of Miyagi Prefecture (1914-2002).
(modified from Geographical Survey Institute data)

708.67

Hokkaido

1771.99

12.18

Aomori pref.
Miyagi pref.

80.78
4.83
61.67
5.85

Ibaraki pref.

52.43
2.92

Chiba pref.

30.09

Tochigi pref.
Iwate pref.

Area; Present

Niigata pref.

Area; ca.100 yrs ago

Akita pref.

area (km2）

Fukushima pref.
0

20

40

60

80

100

area (km2)

Fig. 2-1 Changes in wetland area over the past 100 years in Japan(ten prefectures most abundant in wetlands 100 years ago).
(modified from Geographical Survey Institute data)-61

All over Japan

Miyagi Pref.

-92

Chiba Pref.

-90

Ibaraki Pref.

-89

Aomori Pref.

-85

Hokkaido-60

Iwate Pref.

-58
-35

Niigata Pref.

-15

Akita Pref.

15

Fukushima Pref.

78

Tochigi Pref.

-100.00 -80.00-60.00-40.00-20.00Decrease

0.00

20.00

40.00

60.00

Increase

80.00%

Fig. 2-2 Ratio of Wetlands lost over the past 100 years in Japan(ten prefectures most abundant in wetlands 100 years ago).
(modified from Geographical Survey Institute data)

quarter of the 20th century are qualitatively different.
Civil engineering technology development and agricultural policies favoring efficiency and productivity resulted in paddies built or re-built with excellent drainage,
to allow use of large-scale machinery and conversion to
dry fields for non-rice crops. This trend continues today.
For example, in Miyagi in 2000, 77.5% of a total of
21,883 hectares (ha) undergoing agricultural improvement at 104 sites were transformed into dry-field
convertible paddies (Chiba K., unpublished data). The
area of abandoned fields is also growing. According to
the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries(2005), there were 384,800 ha of abandoned fields inJapan, about double the 2000 figure and equal to 10.1%
of all arable land, making abandoned fields a serious
national issue. These losses of natural wetlands andqualitative changes in rice paddy environments have had
major negative impacts on wetland-dependant species
groups. Most paddies were created by destroying natural
wetlands to feed humans. However, they differ significantly from other agricultural fields in that they areflooded to grow the wetland plant, rice, and thus function as wetlands; they can also be continuously cultivated for a long time without impoverishing the soil.
Appropriate water management is required to activate the wetland functions of rice paddies. Traditionally,
water was retained in paddies during winter, so theyfunctioned as semi-natural but still important habitat for
wetland-dependent wildlife. However, in modern times
the practice of letting fields dry out completely during
winter has spread rapidly, robbing paddies of wetland
functions and helping drive many wetland species towards extinction, for example the Japanese Crested Ibis
and the White Stork, both extinct in the wild in Japan.
Waterbirds such as geese, swans and ducks use thesewetlands in winter and feel these impacts most strongly.
Yamamoto et al. (2002) found a significant correlation

Restoring Rice Paddy Wetland Environments and the Local Sustainable Society

between numbers of mallards visiting the KatanoKamoike Ramsar site (Kaga City, Ishikawa Prefecture)and the cumulative area of rice paddies in Kaga kept dry
in winter. Dry paddies are almost useless to wetland
wildlife, particularly in Miyagi and other prefectures
along Japan’s Pacific coast, which receive less precipitation in winter than the Japan Sea coast.
The loss of almost all wetlands over the past 100
years and the loss of rice paddy wetland functions useful
to wildlife threw these environments rapidly off balance,
seriously impacting wetland species. This was recognized by the Ministry of the Environment (MOE) (2002)
in the “National Strategy for the Conservation andSustainable Use of Biological Diversity” as an example
of one of the categories of threat involving changes in
production methods in rural areas affecting species formerly supported by human activities. Restoration of thebiological diversity of impoverished wetlands will be amajor, unavoidable challenge in creating a sustainable
society.
This paper introduces efforts at Kabukuri-numa to
restore the wetland value of rice paddies as agricultural
wetlands and achieve co-existence with environmentally-sensitive geese, consciously referring to the wetland
environment of 100 years ago. It discusses ways, including application of the Ramsar Convention (2006), to
restore wetlands and sustainable local societies.

2. Action for Co-existence of Waterbirds and
Wet Rice Cultivation at Kabukuri-numa
and the Surrounding Rice Paddies
The Ramsar site “Kabukuri-numa and the Surrounding Rice Paddies,” in northern Miyagi Prefecture, is the
1,545th wetland on the “List of Wetlands of International Importance” of the international Ramsar Convention dedicated to the conservation and wise use of
wetlands. Added to the list in November 2005, it was thefirst Ramsar site to expressly include surrounding ricepaddies as an agro-wetland buffer zone to an open-water
wetland. Paddy fields can help maintain a wetland
ecosystem, although normally they impose an environmental burden due to intensive agricultural methods,
indifference to wetlands, etc. To reduce or eliminate thisburden, the first requirement is awareness and agreement among the local community that rice paddies arevaluable buffer zones for wetlands. At Kabukuri-numa,
incentives for meeting this requirement have included
discussions and agricultural/environmental policies designed to reduce environmental burdens and activate thewetland functions of paddies. A consensus reached by
local farmers to apply the Ramsar Convention as aframework for allowing wildlife to share wetland benefits led to the area’s designation and addition to the list.
2.1 Birds of Kabukuri-numa
Kabukuri-numa has a diverse environment ofmarshes and open water and is high in biodiversity; it isparticularly important as one of Japan’s foremost

143

wintering sites for wild geese (Miyabayashi, 1994). So
far, birds of 219 species, 43 families and 16 orders havebeen recorded at Kabukuri-numa (Tohoku regional
nature protection center (TRNPC) for MOE, 2005;
TRNPC for MOE & Kabukuri Wetlands Club, 2003).
The Anatidae, including geese, are dominant (Tojima,
1999) but many other species groups are present. In all,there are 126 species of wetland-dependent birds (58%)
and 93 “terrestrial” species (42%) attesting to the site’s
diversity (Nakashio, 1998) (Table 1). Many of thesebirds are endangered, including six “Natural Treasure”
species (one “special” and five “national”), and (as ofDecember 2006), 42 species included in the “Red List ofJapan” (TRNPC for MOE, 2005: TRNPC for MOE &Kabukuri Wetlands Club, 2003). In all, 85 Passeriformes,
42 Charadiiformes, 27 Anseriformes, 18 Falconiformes
and 14 Ciconiformes were observed: this includes overhalf of all species seen in Japan of Anatidae of theAnseriformes, Accipitridae of the Falconiformes (64%)
and Ardeidae of the Ciconiformes (63%). The presenceof so many top predators attests to its rich biodiversityand variety of supporting habitats.

Table 1 Checklist of the birds of Kabukuri-numa.
(modified from TRNPC for MOE, 2005)
Number of Species
Order

Number of Species

Kabu- Allkuri- over Nk/Njnuma Japan(%)（Nk) （Nj)

Podicipendiformes
Pelecaniformes

2
1

5
13

40%
8%

Ciconiiformes

14

25

56%

Anseriformes

27

52

52%

Falconiformes

18

29

62%

Galliformes

4

6

67%

Gruiformes

8

22

36%

Charadriiformes

42

125

34%

Columbiformes
Cuculiformes
Strigiformes
Caprimulgiformes
Apodiformes
Coraciiformes
Piciformes

1
3
5
1
2
2
4

10
6
11
1
3
9
11

10%
50%
45%
100%
67%
22%
36%

Passeriformes

85

183

46%

Total

219

511

43%

FamilyKabu- Allkuri- over Nk/Njnuma Japan(%)（Nk) （Nj)

Podicipedidae
Phalacrocoracidae
ArdeidaeCiconiidae
Threskiornithidae
AnatidaeAccipitridae
Falconidae
Phasianidae
Gruidae
Rallidae
Rostratulidae
Scolopodidae
Charadriidae
Recurvirostridae
Phalaropodidae
Glareolidae
LaridaeColumbidae
Cuculidae
Strigidae
Caprimulgidae
Apodidae
Alcedinidae
Picidae
Alaudidae
Hirundinidae
Motacillidae
Campephagidae
Pycnonotidae
Laniidae
Bombycillidae
Troglodytidae
TurdidaeSylviidae
Aegithalidae
Paridae
Zosteropidae
Emberizidae
Fringillidae
Ploceidae
Sturnidae
Corvidae

2
1
12
1
1
27
14
4
4
2
6
1
24
7
1
1
1
7
1
3
5
1
2
2
4
1
4
5
1
1
4
2
1
13
13
1
4
1
14
10
2
2
6

5
4
19
2
4
52
22
7
6
7
12
1
52
12
2
3
1
34
9
6
11
1
3
6
11
5
5
13
2
2
6
2
1
31
24
1
6
1
24
18
3
6
10

40%
25%
63%
50%
25%
52%
64%
57%
67%
29%
50%
100%
46%
58%
50%
33%
100%
21%
11%
50%
45%
100%
67%
33%
36%
20%
80%
38%
50%
50%
67%
100%
100%
42%
54%
100%
67%
100%
58%
56%
67%
33%
60%

Total

219

452

48%

144

M. KURECHI

Hasama R.

Kabukuri-numa.
iR

Ishinomaki Bay

Before 1604

1610

Hasama R.

Kitakami

Kabukuri-numaR.

R.

(1932-39)(1617-20)

Kitakami

Hasama R.

L.Izunuma

Kabukuri-numa(1609-10)

m
ka
ta
Ki

.
iR

Ishinomaki Bay

L.Izunuma(1605-08)(1911-34)(1616)(1627-22)(1623-26)

Ishinomaki Bay

Ishinomaki Bay

1622

1939

Fig. 3-1 Changes in the course of the Kitakami River system towhich Kabukuri-numa belongs (since 1604, modified
from Hasama Town History).
[Numbers in parentheses indicate years of new river course
construction]

Kabukuri-numa

1955
Kabukuri-numa

1969

Kabukuri-numa

m
ka

1914

L.Izunumata
Ki

Kabukuri-numa

L.Izunuma

Hasama R.

2.2 Wetland transitions around Kabukuri-numa
and the 100-year Restoration Plan
A rich natural environment remains at Kabukurinuma, but it formerly had a larger area of open water
when it was a natural reservoir for the Kitakami River’s
floodwaters. When the Kitakami was canalized,
Kabukuri-numa became part of the catchment of its
tributary, the Hasama River, which was also canalized,
placing Kabukuri-numa in the catchment of the former
Hasama River. A parallel development was reclamationof much of the wetland area, leaving only 100 ha ofopen water, a major reason for the present intensive
concentration of natural habitat, for example, of geese(Figs. 3-1, 3-2).
The “Hundred-Year Open-Water Restoration Plan”
was designed to restore balance to these wetland
environments.
Over the last 100 years, many of Japan’s lakes,
ponds, marshes and other wetlands were reclaimed as
paddy land, and much of that was further transformed
into paddies that are completely dried out in winter. The
Hundred-Year Plan’s main purpose is to take the next
100 years to restore these wetlands to an approximationof their former status through water management andrice cultivation that allows paddies to function as wetlands. Specifically, the project educates local stakeholders and proposes a flooding regime to keep water in
paddies as long as possible to activate their wetland
functions. Its fundamental principles are:1) Abandoned rice paddies should be amalgamated andrestored as natural wetlands;

Kabukuri-numa

2002
Notes:

Fig. 3-2 Changes in wetland habitat around Kabukuri-numa Marsh (1914-2002).
(modified from Geographical Survey Institute data)

River or Lakes

Reed bed, etc.

Restoring Rice Paddy Wetland Environments and the Local Sustainable Society2) Fallow paddies should be flooded year-round andmanaged as wetlands;
3) Paddies with good water retention should be managed under a “winter-flooding” regime;4) These activities should be undertaken with the support of all stakeholders in agriculture, environmental
protection, water management, etc.
Implementing these principles required a revolution
in the consciousness of farming families, and theestablishment of a system of incentives and guidance bygovernment authorities.
Actions that anticipated this project were already under way. The “Kabukuri-numa Retarding Basin Project”
was a flood control measure first undertaken by Miyagi
prefecture in 1970 that targeted 582 ha of Kabukurinuma and its vicinity for retaining floodwater overflows.
In 1996, a plan was revealed that called for the entire
area to be dredged by one meter; it had supposedly become shallower from sediment accumulation. This
proposal ended up providing an opportunity to protect
Kabukuri-numa – environmental studies preceding its
implementation led to a complete reconsideration of the
project. Lessons were learned about considering only
flood-control factors and not releasing information
regarding retarding-basin construction plans. How toconserve a rich natural environment while maintaining
flood control functions was discussed by an informal
deliberative council, the Kabukuri-numa Round Table
Meeting, set up by Miyagi Prefecture’s Rivers Department at the request of environmental conservationgroups and others (Matsugane, 1997; Kurechi, 1998).
The Round Table pursued constructive discussions andactions to carry out the consensuses reached bystakeholders, including fundamental changes in theoverflow embankment plan to include environmental
concerns. These concepts were included in the“Kabukuri-numa Basic Environmental Management
Plan,” based on the Round Table’s discussions andsummarized below (Miyagi prefecture, 2000):
1) Maintain Kabukuri-numa’s function as a floodwater-retarding basin in a way that allows it to fulfill its
other roles and functions;2) Protect the river environment as habitat for its diverse, precious wildlife;3) Create and use the area as a place for humans to relate with the natural environment;
4) Manage Kabukuri-numa with residents and authorities acting as a single entity.
2.3 Effects of the Shiratori restoration on
Kabukuri-numa’s environmental carrying
capacity
One of the most important developments was returning paddies in the Shiratori area within the Kabukurinuma retarding basin to wetland status, as this increased
the carrying capacity of the wetland overall. In a context
of various actions for revitalizing natural wetland functions, in 1997, farmers cultivating the 50 ha Shiratori

145

reclaimed-rice-paddy area on the eastern border of
Kabukuri-numa proper agreed with local and prefectural
authorities to withdraw it from cultivation. Based on anagreement between conservation groups and the rivermanagement authority, a regime for normally keeping
this area under water (up to 81 cm deep) in such a way
as to prevent impairment of its floodwater retarding
function was adopted in the spring of 1998. Thus,
Shiratori was restored as a natural wetland and became
an integral part of Kabukuri-numa, increasing its area by
1.5 times to 150 ha (Fig. 4-1). At first the river authority
perceived the constant flooding regime as a threat to thearea’s floodwater retention capacity and withheld theiragreement. With expert assistance, volunteers took
simple ground height measurements at 171 points.
Although the cross-sectional map used to plan theretarding basin put the entire area’s ground height at
3.0 m above sea level (Takada, 1999), the measurements
revealed that the great majority of points were actually
lower (Fig. 4-2).
The total number of White-fronted Geese winteringin Japan has been trending upwards, more markedly inthe 1990s. This is reflected in numbers overwintering in
northern Miyagi, which accounts for about 80% of thenational total, as it has several overnight roosting sites
such as Izunuma (including Uchinuma) and Kabukurinuma. The greatest number used to roost at Izunuma,
but this began to change after restoration started
at Kabukuri-numa. Figure 5-1 summarizes use of
Kabukuri-numa by White-fronted Geese before andafter the restoration project. Before a voluntary ban on
gun hunting in Kabukuri-numa was adopted in the winter of 1994/95, a relatively low proportion of geeseroosted there, but afterwards their numbers started torise, and in the second winter after the Shiratori restoration (1999/2000), rose higher than at the previous top
site, Izunuma, a trend that has been sustained. Figure
5-2 shows this trend in relation to the status of the
Shiratori area. The peak number roosting at Kabukurinuma the winter before the restoration (1997/98) was
32,000. The first winter after the restoration (1998/99) it
rose to 35,000, with 25% using Shiratori. The second
winter after restoration, the peak number rose to 41,275,
with about 50% using Shiratori, topping the number at
Izunuma (Kurechi et al., 2007; Miyagi Prefecture,2001).
Most importantly, the increase in geese roosting at
Shiratori to a maximum of 29,643 was not accompanied
by an increased maximum for Kabukuri-numa proper(the Original Kabukuri-numa), where numbers actually
declined, indicating that the increase was due not to enhanced carrying capacity in the Original Kabukuri-numa,
but to the Shiratori restoration and the creation of more
open water (Kurechi et al., 2007) (Figs. 5-1, 5-2, Tables
2-1, 2-2). A series of surveys showed no significant
change after the proportion of geese roosting at Shiratori
reached about 50%. A stand of reeds divides Shiratori
into two open water sections, north (20 ha) and south(30 ha). White-fronted Geese use both, but a difference

146

M. KURECHIA

Numasaki
Rice
Paddies

（ｍ）
0.40
0.20
0.00

Noyachi
Rice
Paddies

-0.20
-0.40
-0.60
-0.80

Yonbunku
Rice
Paddies

Original
Kabukurinuma
Wetland(100 ha)-1.00

Shiratori

Height from the bottom of water
control management level

Restored
Wetland(50 ha)B

Shinpo Rice
Paddies

Maximum Number

Roosting number / Maximum of all Miyagi Prefecture

Fig. 4-1 Shiratori rice paddies restored to wetlands in 1998.

Fig. 4-2 Height of the ground in the Shiratori area (A）and
Shiratori area after being flooded up to the levelstipulated by water control management authorities (B).

Maximum Number

Fig. 5-1 Trends in Maximum Number of White-fronted Geese (Anser albifrons) in Miyagi
Pref. and the roosting ratio at Kabukuri-numa and Izunuma. (88/89-99/00: JAWGP
data, 00/01-02/03: Miyagi Pref. data, 03/04-05/06: WfG Joint Res. Data)(1994 November)(1998 Spring)

Fig. 5-2 Trends in ratio of roosting White-fronted Geese at Original Kabukuri-numa or the
Shiratori Restored Wetland. (88/89-99/00: JAWGP data, 00/01-02/03: Miyagi Pref.
data, 03/04-05/06: WfG Joint Res. Data)

Restoring Rice Paddy Wetland Environments and the Local Sustainable Society

147

Table 2-1 Trends in the maximum roosting number of White-fronted Geese(Anser albifrons) at the Original Kabukuri-numa and Shiratori
Restored Wetlands.
* = data of Shiratori Monitoring Research by Japanese Association for Wild Geese
Protection were used.
* = data of 1997/98 and 2000/01were from the Annual Census of Waterfowl by Miyagi
Prefecture.
* = data of 2003/04 was from the Fundamental Research Report on the Environment of
Kabukuri-numa (TRNPC for MOE & Kabukuri Wetlands Club, 2004).

Original Kabukuri-numa(a)Winteringyear

Maximum
number1997/98

32,000Rise or fall（comparison
with 97/98 ）Shiratori Restored Wetlands(b)(restored in the spring of
1998）
Rise or fall（comparison
with 97/98 ）Maximum
number-Whole area of
Kabukuri-numa(a)+(b)0

Rise or fall（comparison
with 97/98 ）Maximum
number*-32,000-1998/99

25,000▲7,00013,77013,77035,0003,000

1999/00

30,190▲1,81029,64329,643

41,2759,275

2000/01

-

-

-

-

46,096

14,096

2003/04

35,71020,864

20,86443,60011,6003,710

Table 2-2 Roosting density of White-fronted Geese (Anser albifrons) at theOriginal Kabukuri-numa and Shiratori Restored Wetlands.
* = data of 98/99, 99/00 were from Shiratori Monitoring Research by the Japanese
Association for Wild Geese Protection.
* = data of 2003/04 were from the Fundamental Research Report on the Environment of
Kabukuri-numa (TRNPC for MOE & Kabukuri Wetlands Club, 2004).
a)Original
Kabukurinumae) area (ha)b)
Shiratori Restored Wetlands
b-1
b-2
Total of
North
South
Shiratori
open
openb-1)+b-2)
water
water

Whole areaof
Kabukurinuma(a)+(b)d)Frequencyofresearch

100

20

30

50

150

1998/99

250,030

9,788

62,266106,154356,184

35

Total 1999/00
numberof
2003/04
recordedgeese Total

110,340

50,11558,356

108,471

218,811

8

112,925

20,83558,43879,273

192,19810473,295

80,738179,060

293,898

767,193

53

89

76

113

111

97

f)

Average density (bird/ha)〔f/(e×d）〕

emerged in their use as overnight roosts. As shown in
Table 2-2, the largest number use Shiratori south
overnight, followed by the Original Kabukuri-numa andShiratori north. We can conclude that a group of Whitefronted Geese takes at least two years to get used to a newroosting site, and that they will use a 20 ha area of open
water, but to a lesser extent than a 30 ha area, suggesting
they may feel insecure in a 20 ha area.
One problem is managing water level and quality. An
embankment surrounds the restored area and no natural
streams flow in or out; a pumping station installed for
irrigation and flood management is used. Water management authorities and other stakeholders agreed tocommission the local environmental non-profit organization to manage pumping and draining of the area.

2.4 The Winter-flooded Rice Paddy Project
Monitoring the Shiratori area during and after
restoration suggested that, given the appropriate circumstances, shallowly flooding rice paddies in winter could
create new goose roosting sites. This led to the Winterflooded Rice Paddy Project, started in the winter of
1998/99 in Tajiri Township (now Ohsaki City), where
Kabukuri-numa is located. With the cooperation of
farmers owning and cultivating rice paddies within the
habitat range of geese roosting at Kabukuri-numa, thepaddies were flooded during winter to create newroosting sites and disperse over-concentrated waterbird
populations (Iwabuchi et al., 2001; Kurechi, 2005;
Iwabuchi, 2006). In flooded paddies, mostly surroundedby dried-out paddies, swans by day and ducks at night
were frequently seen, and in time even extremely shy

148

M. KURECHIWhite-fronted Geese were occasionally seen. This
showed that winter-flooded rice paddies could attract
White-fronted Geese and other birds, offering anefficient way to extend habitat (Kurechi et al., 2007;
Iwabuchi et al., 2001) and alleviate over-concentration,a serious issue for geese. The geese do not feed, but rest,
drink and preen in these paddies: given an absence ofdisturbances, they will stay the entire day in an areawith winter-flooded paddies (Fig. 6), though normallynot at night. Stronger efforts by farmers, better national
networking and support systems and an increase in thescale of projects could create many new goose roostingsites (Fig. 7). Specifically, each site would need anamalgamated area of winter-flooded rice paddies of atleast 20 ha and the removal of disturbances to geeseroosting behavior, such as the presence of natural
predators and especially human activities such as
hunting, road traffic, etc.
Winter-flooded rice paddies benefit not only overwintering waterbirds, but also those using the paddies insummer. Rice paddies in the Shimpo area next to
1400

Dried
Dried rice
rice paddies
paddies

1200

NumberKabukuri-numa where farmers flood a concentrated
group of rice paddies in winter were monitored over two
years (2005, 2006) for benefits to waterbirds, with theassistance of a Ministry of the Environment subsidy forpromoting the development of environmental technology (Kurechi et al., 2007; Kagawa & Saito, 2007).
These surveys showed benefits to over-wintering geeseand other waterbirds, and also clear and significant
benefits to herons, Ardeidae, in summer, when thepaddies were cultivated as usual. The main Ardeidae
visiting the area are Intermediate Egret, Great Egret,Cattle Egret, and Gray Heron, which use it mainly tofeed. Depending on the water level, they catch loaches,
frogs, or red swamp crayfish (Procambus clarkii)(Kurechi et al., 2007). The concentration of Ardeidae in
winter-flooded paddies was 3.6-3.8 times more than inother paddies; Great Egret (2.7-5.0 X) and Intermediate
Egret (3.0-4.0 X) clearly and consistently selected
winter-flooded paddies (Fig. 8) (Kurechi et al., 2007),
where the concentration of loaches and tubificid worms,
eaten by loaches, were about five times greater than in

1000

Winter
Winter flooded
flooded rice
rice
paddies
paddies

800

Total ofofWf
WfGeese,geese, A
Total
A.
albifrons
albifronsA
Disturbance bylight air craft

600
400
200

B

100%

social contact

resting
75%

16:30

16:25

16:00

15:30

15:00

14:30

14:00

13:30

13:00

12:30

12:00

11:30

11:00

10:30

9:30

10:00

9:00

8:30

8:00

7:30

7:00

0

movingalert

sleeping
50%
feeding
drinking

25%

flapping
preening

0%

Fig. 6 Selection of winter-flooded or dried rice paddies (A) and time budget at ricepaddies (B) of White-fronted Geese, (A. albifrons). (Dec. 22, 1999)
Dried
Dried
Rice
RicePaddies
Paddies

Dried
Dried
Rice
RicePaddies
Paddies

Roosting
Roostingsite
site((Natural
Naturalwetlands)
wetlands)

Winter Flooded
Rice Paddies

Dispersing
Roosting
Sites by
WFRP

Dried
Dried
Rice
RicePaddies
Paddies

ExtendingFeeding
Sites

Dried
Dried
Rice
RicePaddies
Paddies

Dried
Dried
Rice
RicePaddies
Paddies

Dried
Dried
Rice
RicePaddies
Paddies

Dried
Dried
Rice
RicePaddies
Paddies

Dried
Dried
Rice
RicePaddies
Paddies

Winter Flooded
Rice Paddies
Dried
Dried
Rice
RicePaddies
PaddiesFig. 7 Dispersing goose roosting sites by creating winter flooded ricepaddies to extend habitat.

Restoring Rice Paddy Wetland Environments and the Local Sustainable Society

149

Fig. 8 Winter-flooded rice farming and heron density in summer.
(Average of summers of 2005 and 2006, n=1,980)

Table 3 Condition of winter-flooded rice paddies
based on a questionaire survey of farmers
involved. (modified from Ishida et al., 2004)
Prefecture

Area
(a)

Prefecture

Area
(a)

Miyagi

2,046

Nagano

Akita

340

Gifu

5

Yamagata

288

Mie

56

Fukushima

416

Shiga

320

Ibaraki

693

Hyogo

46

Tochigi

145

Nara

Chiba

807

ShimaneNiigata(Sado I.)440

Ishikawa
Fukui
Yamanashi

20

25
1,000

Hiroshima

98

Saga

17

1,670

Kumamoto

44,154

Kagoshima

275

Total

12,87510
Total* data of December 2003

other paddies (Hirai et al., 2006). These results indicatethat winter-flooded paddies have higher biodiversity andgreater biomass in both winter and summer, leading tohigher concentrations of top predators such as Ardeidae.
Winter-flooding is attracting attention as a new
agricultural method that brings the rice-paddy ecosystem to life (Iwabuchi, 2006; Ito, 2006), and more
farmers are applying it or showing an interest (Ishida
et al., 2004) (Table 3). Also, Kobayashi et al. (2003)
suggest that White-fronted Geese shuttling between ricepaddies and open water may contribute to the local
material cycle.
We can summarize winter-flooded rice paddy functions as follows:
1) They restore habitat for biota that naturally inhabit
wet rice fields, enhancing biodiversity from microorganisms to waterbirds, and could help restore themigratory flyway of geese.

2) Proliferation of tubificid worms from winterflooding creates a soil layer composed of worm feces,
etc., that controls weeds. Waterbirds fertilize the paddy,
helping decompose rice straw. Higher concentrations ofinsectivorous spiders, frogs, etc., employ the paddy’s
ecosystem power to assist agriculture.
3) They help create a sustainable, recycling local
society based on co-existence/symbiosis between nature
and agriculture.

3. Wise Use of Rice Paddies as Agricultural
Wetlands
3.1 Co-existence between waterbirds and rice
agriculture
Both waterbirds and humans inhabit most sites on
the Ramsar List, and so it is worthwhile to highlightco-existence/symbiosis between them. Kabukuri-numa
is one of the most important wintering sites for geese inJapan, making it an attractive and interesting spot. However, local farmers were hostile to geese, considering
them pests harmful to their rice crop. This hostility
doomed several past attempts to have Kabukuri-numa
designated a Wildlife Protection Area, but in 2005 it
attained Special National Wildlife Protection Area
status.
The first step towards this rapprochement was in1996 when the dredging plan surfaced. Conservationists
and farmers joined to oppose this plan and it was cancelled, averting a major threat and creating an opportunity to reconsider the meaning of the geese’s presence atthe site. This was when farmers’ ideas about the geese
started to change. Geese are extremely sensitive to environmental change and require a large area of undisturbed, shallow open water to roost and an extensive
area of rice paddy land on which to feed (Shimada,
2002; Takekawa et al., 2000; Yokota et al., 1980).
Farmers came to appreciate that about 80% of wild
geese over-wintering in Japan choose Kabukuri-numa

150

M. KURECHI

and other northern Miyagi sites, in the sense that geese
choose the richest paddies, which can therefore produce
safe, premium-priced rice. Farmers stopped trying todrive out the geese, and instead started devising ways to
use the geese’s presence as an advantage. These farmers
achieved a change of attitude, but this was significantly
supported by the Winter-Flooded Rice Paddy project
and by a change in the approach towards agriculture
taken by the Ramsar Convention itself.
3.2 The Ramsar Convention as a tool for activating
rice paddies as wetlands
The Ramsar Convention has never drawn distinctions between natural and artificial or permanent andtemporary wetlands, but defined all watery areas, including rice paddies, as “wetlands.” Thus, the Kabukurinuma Ramsar site can include rice paddies as well as
ponds and marshes. Most rice paddies have been createdby humans reclaiming natural wetlands for agriculture,
but unlike many other types of agricultural fields, ricepaddies can be used sustainably for thousands of years
and function as valuable agricultural wetlands providing
habitat for wildlife. Rice paddies also account for thegreatest area of wetlands in the rice-growing countries
of Asia; in Japan alone they cover about 2.6 million ha(2002). Rice paddies have been valued exclusively as
rice production units, but their wetland functions haverecently attracted more attention. Even Japan’s Ministryof Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries has included (stillrather inadequate) provisions in its basic plan for foodand agriculture to support “reduction of environmental
burdens on rice paddies in areas particularly requiring
environmental protection.”
In addition, the 8th Conference of the Parties (COP)to the Ramsar Convention (Valencia, 2002) adopted
Resolution VIII.34 “Agriculture, wetlands and water
resource management,” its first resolution dealing directly with agriculture. This resolution calls upon Parties
to “ensure that management plans for Ramsar sites andother wetlands … duly acknowledge the need for appropriate implementation of agricultural practices andpolicies that are compatible with wetland conservationand sustainable use goals…” and urges them to identify
and enhance positive incentives and replace negative
incentives with ones that contribute to wetland conservation.
This resolution significantly influenced the opinionsof farmers in the Kabukuri-numa area regarding theRamsar Convention. Farmers that formerly perceived it
as “regulatory,” and consequently refused to allow theirland to be included in the Ramsar site, changed theirminds and actively sought designation and applicationof the Convention as the framework for drawing up
environmental policy for agriculture. This change ofheart initiated a movement towards making Japan thefirst country to intentionally designate rice paddy land.
“Kabukuri-numa and the surrounding rice paddies”
was included on the List during the 9th COP (Uganda,
2005), when Japan designated 20 new Ramsar sites,

bringing Japan’s total to 33. Eleven of these are locatedamong or near rice paddies (Table 4), but only at
Kabukuri-numa are stakeholders using the Convention
to add environmental value to agriculture to create a site
comprised of open water and rice paddies.
Developments at Kabukuri-numa attracted attention
at the COP; at Japan’s ceremony to officially designate
its new sites, Peter Bridgewater, then Secretary-General,
warmly welcomed the designation of a site including
agricultural land. Rice paddies surrounding an openwater wetland can play an important role as a bufferzone that helps maintain its distinctive ecosystem, andmanaging the two as a unit can enhance total wetland
functions. Only two of Japan’s eleven sites located nearpaddy land include rice paddies, and only Kabukurinuma expressly includes them. Extending existing
Ramsar sites by including paddy land could be the next
step. For example, rice paddies around Lake Biwa serveas spawning sites for nigoro-buna (Carassius auratus
grandoculis), a carp relative endemic to Lake Biwa.
This Ramsar site is presently limited to the lake surface;extending it to surrounding rice paddies upstream where
this fish spawns could encourage use of the Convention
to promote wise use of this fishery resource. The
Izunuma Ramsar site is also limited to the lake area, but
the area of surrounding rice paddies is an importantfeeding ground for geese and other species, and has
already been designated a Special National Wildlife
Protection Area. With a little more local initiative, thissite could easily be extended.
3.3 International focus on Asia’s largest wetland –rice paddies
Farmers cultivating rice paddies directly south of
Kabukuri-numa agreed to flood an amalgamated area
during winter to activate its wetland functions. Althoughsome unsolved issues with this practice as an agricultural method remain, the biological diversity has definitely increased and the area’s value as an agricultural
wetland continues to grow. The main issue now how tostabilize the business side of producing rice with higher
value due to the sustainability and lower environmental
impact achieved by putting the natural powers of therice paddy as wetlands to use, in the spirit of the Ramsar
Convention. (Organic winter-flooded paddy rice is normally more than twice the price of ordinary rice.) This
will help bring back wetland environments even morefavorable to waterbirds and other wetland-dependent
species groups.
Rice paddies are the representative agricultural landof Japan and the Asian monsoon region, and comprise
its greatest area of wetland. This region has Earth’s richest soils and high levels of precipitation, making it suitable for growing rice, a wetland plant. Because of their
distinctive wetland characteristics, rice paddies canserve as habitat for a variety of wetland-dependent species, and designation of Kabukuri-numa to the Ramsar
List has initiated a reconsideration of the values ofAsia’s rice paddies. Japanese and Korean non-govern-

Restoring Rice Paddy Wetland Environments and the Local Sustainable Society

151

Table 4 Ramsar sites and surrounding rice paddies in Japan.
Surround- Rice paddies
ing rice
insideRamsar site
paddies

Aate ofdesignation

Area
(ha)

Hokkaido
Hokkaido
Hokkaido
Hokkaido
Hokkaido
Hokkaido
Hokkaido

2002/11/18
2005/11/8
2005/11/8
1989/7/6
2005/11/8
1991/12/12
1980/6/17

41
624
2,560
1,607
900
510
7,863

○
×
×
×
×
×
×

×
×
×
×
×
×
×

8 shitsugen

Hokkaido

1993/6/10

5,277

×

×

9 Kiritappu-shitsugen
10 Akan-ko
11 Furen-ko and Shunkuni-tai
12 Notsuke-hanto and Notsuke-wan
13 Hotokenuma
14 Izu-numa & Uchi-numa

Hokkaido
Hokkaido
Hokkaido
Hokkaido
Aomori
Miyagi

1993/6/10
2005/11/8
2005/11/8
2005/11/8
2005/11/8
1985/9/13

2,504
1,318
6,139
6,053
222
559

×
×
×
×
○
○

×
×
×
×
×
×

2005/11/8

423

○

○

2005/11/8

8,711

×

×

2005/11/8
1993/6/10
1996/3/23
1993/6/10
2005/11/8
2002/11/18
1993/6/10
2005/11/8

260
40
76
10
1,110
323
65,602
574

×
×
○
○
○
○
○
×

×
×
×
○
×
×
×
×

2005/11/8

8,043

○

×

2005/11/8
2005/11/8

7,652
563

○
×

×
×

2005/11/8

91

×

×

2005/11/8
2005/11/8
1999/5/15
2005/11/8
2005/11/8

60
10
58
353
157

×
×
×
×
×
11

×
×
×
×
×
2

Ramsar site

1 Miyajima-numa
2 Uryunuma-shitsugen
3 Sarobetsu-genya
4 Kutcharo-ko
5 Tofutsu-ko
6 Utonai-ko
7 Kushiro-shitsugen
Akkeshi-ko & Bekambeushi-

Location

Kabukuri-numa and the surrounding
Miyagirice paddies
Fukushima
16 OzeGunma
Niigata
Tochigi
17 Oku-Nikko-shitsugen
Chiba
18 Yatsu-higata
Niigata
19 Sakata
Ishikawa
20 Katano-kamoike
Fukui
21 Mikata-goko
Aichi
22 Fujimae-Higata
Shiga
23 Biwa-ko
Wakayama
24 Kushimoto Coral Communities
Tottori
25 Nakaumi
ShimaneShimane26 Shinji-ko
27 Akiyoshidai Groundwater System Yamaguchi
Kuju Bogatsuru and TadewaraOhita
28
shitsugenKagoshima
29 Imuta-ike
Kagoshima
30 Yakushima Nagata-hama
Okinawa
31 Manko
Okinawa
32 Kerama-shoto Coral Reef
Okinawa
33 Nagura Ampuru

15

mental organizations held a meeting at the Ramsar
COP 9 in Uganda in 2005 to focus attention on the biodiversity and wise use of rice paddies in the Asianmonsoon region, entitled “Rice Paddies–Amazing
Wetlands in Asia.” This meeting strategically anticipatedthe 10th COP, to be held in Korea in 2008, where afurther appeal will be made regarding the potential of
Asia’s rice paddies as agricultural wetlands. The 2005
NGO meeting recognized the following points:
1) Rice paddies are a characteristic Asian wetland typeand important habitat for migratory birds and manyother species;2) Socio-economic changes have caused the rapid degradation and loss of rice paddies;
3) Winter-flooded Rice Paddy projects in Japan and
Korea deserve attention as a method for restoring
rice paddies’ wetland functions;4) A resolution recognizing the wetland value of ricepaddies in the Asian monsoon region should be presented to the 10th Ramsar COP.
Future issues include extending the movement
started at Kabukuri-numa further into the neighboring
wet-rice culture of Korea, and using the 10th Ramsar
COP as a foothold for identifying and following up on
ways to extend it to other East Asian countries.

4. Conclusion
Wetlands were formerly considered wastelands, andpeople strove to convert them into useful land. Japan’s
wetlands were greatly reduced and impoverished during
the last century. People later realized that wetlands are
essential for a wide diversity of living things, including
humans, and appreciation for wetland protection increased, as evidenced by the adoption of the Ramsar
Convention. By that time, however, huge areas of wetland had been lost. The recent enactment of Japan’s Law
for the Promotion of Nature Restoration promoted anumber of incipient wetland restoration projects. However, returning a destroyed wetland to its original state isextremely difficult and normally requires large amountsof time and money. From a variety of standpoints, reviving the wetland functions of rice paddies can be a practical restoration method. Though mostly created bydestroying natural wetlands, rice paddies as agrowetlands can help promote the journey back to a morenatural wetland environment. By appropriately activating their wetland characteristics and taking sufficientaccount of local resources and circumstances, various
routes towards wetland restoration can be identified.
Rice paddies originated in Asia and comprise its

152

M. KURECHI

greatest area of wetlands. Many wetland restoration
methods now rely on knowhow developed by Westerncultures. Asian-style wetland conservation could be
developed focusing on rice paddy agricultural wetlands
that allows continued sustainable use while activating
wetland functions to achieve wetland restoration.

Acknowledgements
I would like to thank the many people who havecooperated with, participated in and given advice to theproject to restore Kabukuri-numa and its surrounding
rice paddies, the subject of this paper. I would also liketo express my special thanks to Margaret Suzuki forsupporting the English translation.
References
Geographical Survey Institute (2000) Changes in wetland area,
Japan. (in Japanese)(http://www1.gsi.go.jp/geowww/lake/ shicchimenseki2. html)
Hirai, T., M. Kurechi and T. Ito (2006) Verification study of theeffects of Winter- flooded rice paddies for waterbird conservation (1) Winter- flooded rice paddies as a habitat for waterbirds
in summer. Interim report (2005) on outcome of studies fordeveloping environmental technology, 34-36. (in Japanese)
Ishida, K., T. Iijima and T. Mineta (2004) Positive case ofmultilateral functions of winter-flooded rice paddies. Information on studies of the Agri-technology Institute in 2004. (inJapanese)
Ito T. (2006) Challenges in introducing biodiversity into rice
farming. Kagaku, 76:309-313. (in Japanese)
Iwabuchi S. (2006) Winter-flooded rice paddies in the Ramsar site,“Kabukurinuma and Surrounding Rice Paddies.” In: I.
Washitani, ed. Restoring Rice Paddies to Revive Local Communities and Rural Environments, Ie-no-hikari Co., Tokyo,
70-103. (in Japanese)
Iwabuchi, S., M. Kurechi and M. Inaba (2001) Multilateral use of
winter-flooded rice paddies for the co-existence of waterbirds,
rice and man – making the most of nature for weed control andreduced fertilizer use–. Agriculture Technical Outline, 8(23),
Nobonkyo Co., Tokyo. (in Japanese)
Kagawa H. and H. Saito (2007) Verification study on the effectsof Winter-flooded rice paddies for waterbird conservation (1)Winter-flooded rice paddies as nocturnal habitat for Anatidae
waterfowl in winter. Report on 2005 & 2006 study outcomes ofstudies for developing environmental technology, Studies toclarify multilateral functions of winter-flooded rice paddies
co-existent with waterbird, and to establish a model of rice
farming co-existing with nature, 27-44. (in Japanese)
Kobayashi, H., R. Sago, M. Kurechi and S. Iwabuchi (2003) An
Examination of an Approach to Regional Material Transportation Analysis in a Rural Area by Waterfowl as Inferred from
δ15N. Trans. of JSIDRE, 224:145-146. (in Japanese)
Kurechi M. (2005) Steps for winter-flooded rice paddies coexisting with waterbirds. Tohoku Rural Culture Movement,
8:45-50. (in Japanese)
Kurechi, M. (1998) Finding ways for agriculture and nature tocoexist in Kabukuri-numa, No.5 recent conservation efforts.
Watashitachi-no-Shizen, JSPB Monthly Journal Nature, 437:
18-21. (in Japanese)
Kurechi, M., Y. Suzuki, S. Iwabuchi, H. Saito, K. Sasaki, Y.
Miyabayashi, J. Komatsu, A. Uryu and M. Aso (2007)

Verification study of the effects of Winter-flooded rice paddies
on waterbird conservation (2) Winter-flooded rice paddies as
habitat for waterfowl, Anatidae in winter and herons, Ardeidae
in summer. Report on 2005 & 2006 outcomes of studies fordeveloping environmental technology clarifying multilateralfunctions of winter-flooded rice paddies co-existent withwaterbirds, and establishing a model of rice farming co-existingwith nature, 45-75. (in Japanese)
Matsugane, N. (1997) Finding ways for agriculture and nature tocoexist in Kabukuri-numa, No.1 What is Kabukuri-numa?
Watashitachi-no-Shizen, JSPB Monthly Journal Nature, 429:
12-15. (in Japanese)
Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (2005) Summaryof agriculture and forestry census. (in Japanese)
Ministry of the Environment (MoE) (2002) The National Biodiversity Strategy of Japan. (in Japanese)
Miyabayashi, Y. (ed.) (1994) Inventory of Goose Habitat in Japan.
First edition. JAWGP, Wakayanagi, Japan. (in Japanse withEnglish summary)
Miyagi Prefecture (2001) Interim report on research of goose
habitat in Miyagi prefecture in 2001. (in Japanese)
Miyagi prefecture (2000) Environmental Management Plan for
Kabukuri-numa.
Nakashio, K. (1998) Finding ways for agriculture and nature tocoexist in Kabukuri-numa, No.4 Birds other than waterfowl in
Kabukuri-numa. Watashitachi-no-Shizen, JSPB Monthly Journal Nature, 434:18-21. (in Japanese)
Ramsar Convention (2006) The Ramsar List of Wetlands ofInternational Importance. (http://www.ramsar.org/sitelist.htm)
Shimada, T. (2002) Daily activity pattern and habitat use ofGreater White-fronted Geese wintering in Japan: factors of the
population increase. Waterbirds, 25:371-377.
Takada, N. (1999) Finding ways for agriculture and nature tocoexist in Kabukuri-numa, No.9 Aspects as a retarding basin.
Watashitachi-no-Shizen, JSPB Monthly Journal Nature, 443:
8-11. (in Japanese)
Takekawa, J.Y., M. Kurechi, D.L. Orthmeyer, Y. Sabano, S.
Uemura, W.M. Perry and J.L. Yee (2000) A Pacific migrationroute and breeding range expansion for Greater White-fronted
Geese wintering in Japan. Global Environmental Research,
4:155-168.
Tohoku regional nature protection center for the Ministry of theEnvironment (2005) Plan to decide the areas of the Kabukurinuma and the Surrounding Rice Paddies National Wildlife
Protection Area and Kabukuri-numa Special Protected Area. (inJapanese)
Tohoku regional nature protection center for the Ministry of theEnvironment and Kabukuri Wetlands Club (2003) Report on
the baseline environment of Kabukurinuma in 2002. (in Japanese)
Togashi, C. and T. Kato (1994) Drainage of the main wetlands
and provision of irrigation pumps in the Senpoku Plain,
Miyagi prefecture. Science Report of Miyagi Junior College,
42:59-71. (in Japanese)
Tojima, J. (1999) Finding ways for agriculture and nature tocoexist in Kabukuri-numa, No.10 Wild Geese, Ducks andSwans. Watashitachi-no-Shizen, JSPB Monthly Journal Nature,
444:10-13. (in Japanese)
Yamamoto, H., K. Oohata and K. Kuwabara (2002) Feeding
ground of Mallards wintering at Katano-kamoike – A preliminary study for maintaining a stable wintering duck population
at Katano-kamoike.II. Strix, 20:13-22. (in Japanese withEnglish summary)
Yokota Y., M. Kurechi and M. Kosugi (1980) Studies on the
behavior of Wintering Geese II. Feeding areas of Geese
wintering at Lake Izunuma. Tori, 29:7-33. (in Japanese withEnglish summary)(Received 28 June 2007, Accepted 6 September 2007)