Our Community Forests Look Healthy, But Are They Really?

Introduction

Community forest can be defined as a forest protected, managed and utilized by local forest user groups. A forest user group is a group of people having right to manage, protect and use a forest area. The objective of community forestry is: develop and manage forest resource through the active participation of individuals and communities to meet their basic needs. The strategy to achieve this is phasing handover of all accessible hill forests to the communities to the extent that they are willing to manage them (MFSC, 1989).

According to department of forest the objective is; to achieve sustainable management of forest resources by converting accessible national forests into Community Forests on a phase wise manner. To achieve this objective the strategy developed is; handing over of accessible forest areas as Community Forests to the Forest User Groups for management and utilization of forest resources.

Development Scenario

The initial phase of community forestry was geared towards assigning responsibilities and rights of local forest management to the village level political bodies. It was based on protecting and planting trees to meet the forest product needs of the local people based on the principle of 'gap analysis'. The master plan for forestry sector identified it as a primary program.

First national level workshop on community forestry held in 1987 laid the foundation for handing over forests to groups of traditional forest users so that they could meet their basic forest product needs and at the same time conserve these forests. Reorientation of foresters was also considered essential for the sustainable management of these community forests. The MPFS further stressed that participation of local communities in decision-making and benefit sharing was essential for the conservation of forest management.

The second national workshop on CF, held in 1993, contributed considerably in the formulation of new forest legislation.

The third workshop was held in 1998. It drew new vision–poverty alleviation through community forestry, based on the four pillars–social justice, equity, gender balance and good governance. The workshop identified action areas not only for the government but also for other stakeholders. Thus, the workshop stressed the need of action from different actors to attain the vision set out in the workshop.

The 4th national workshop held on 2004, identified three thematic area based on decision of FSCC. Forestry Sector Coordination Committee (FSCC) stressed that the community forestry program needs to resolve the second generation issues–livelihood promotion, good governance and sustainable forest management.

The 5th national workshop held on 2008 again identified three new thematic areas governance, economic contribution and payment for environmental services on community forestry.

Achievements:        

The community forestry of Nepal is a unique example that, in an appropriate environment (policy and legal and others) how user can collectively organize and take over the management of natural resources. Over the past decade there have been remarkable growth in the number of community forest user groups and size of forest area manage by them.

Source: www.dof.gov.np, 21 August 2009.

The success of CF in Nepal shows that the effectiveness of user group management of natural resources depends on resource policy, need and importance of resources, awareness of the program and household characteristics of users.

Impacts of Community Forests

The overall impact on forest condition is large and visible. A general observation is that CFUG are able to check the further degradation of forest and also reversal of past trends of degradation. Most of the community forest which are most degraded at the time of handover have shown improved forest cover and increased biomass. It reduced the forest encroachment and conversion of forest area into other land uses. The result have been increased access to forest products, improved water quality and increased water quantity from micro-watershed, reduced surface runoff, reduced the frequency of natural disasters, soil erosion, land slides etc and increased productivity of neighboring agricultural lands. The wildlife has increased and bio-diversity is conserved in community managed forest areas.

In social sector there is an opportunity of community development. It leads to real decentralization process. Most of the CFUG use there funds on community development activities like school, drinking water, irrigation channels, operating health posts etc. Women, poor and the disadvantaged group are empowered through awareness, advocacy, literacy programs and different income generation activities.

What is about Forest Health?

Forest regeneration is a good measure of forest health. When a forest can produce enough young trees to replace the canopy trees when they are cut, blown down, or die, it provides a sustainable and healthy forest. A healthy forest can maintain and replace itself. The important concerns for forest health are amount of light reaching the forest floor, soil conditions, diseases, pests, forest fire, grazing and competitive vegetation. For example, the amount of light reaching the forest floor can substantially affect the number of seedlings in a forest. Fewer young trees are found under a closed canopy than under a more open canopy. Changing soil conditions can also affect regeneration (US, Game commission 2009).

When forests are repeatedly high-graded, that is, when the best trees are cut and the rest are left to grow, the results are forests dominated by low-grade species, poor quality trees of grade species, and cull trees of all species.  Such forests would probably have been better off if they had been clear cut because then at least the poor quality trees would have been removed (www.davis.com, 2009).

Reports from Rupandehi

The total growing stock of forest in Rupandehi is 164 cubic meter per hectar (5 year plan of Rupandehi) and average trees per hectar is 80-90. This shows over stocking than general forest. Majority of tree are over 40 cm diameter are mature and fall down even in a small wind. An observation on fallen trees shows that almost all heart wood is already decayed, which indicates towards decreasing trends on both CAI and MAI.

An observation on regeneration growth shows that there is high competition on regeneration due to over crowding. High canopy cover due to the presence of over mature trees retards the growth of offspring. Due to the dye back nature of Sal most of the regeneration are coppice origin and easily susceptible to fire, grazing, pest and disease and other disturbances. As a result most of the sapling and pole of Sal have no straight bole. Following table shows the regeneration status in different site.

Concerning on the regeneration health, thinning operation has been done in some CF. Following table 2 shows the pole health (physical health) observed by outer looking. After thinning operation the pole retained is 1000 to 900 in Charpala CF and 1000 to 800 in Jiteswari CF.  In both CF only 50% of retained pole have good health. The reason behind this may be the close canopy of mature tree above the offspring and coppice origin of regeneration due to the dye back of Sal. Annual fire and grazing are the cause of dyeing back.

Table 3 shows the income from tending operation and expenditure for this. This shows that if intensive management is applied for the growth of offspring, it will be helpful to fulfill the forest product for community as firewood and pole are the prime forest products.

The field observation and data shows that all the trees are over mature. The health of regeneration both from seedling and coppice origin has not so well. There is high competition among offspring for food and light. The zigzag bole of sapling and pole may be due to competition for the search of light. The crown covered by over mature trees hinders the light to come.

Some Issues

According to the definition of forest management, in its broadest sense, forest management encompasses the administrative, legal, technical, economic, social, and environmental aspects of the conservation and use of forests. But in present situation the technical aspect of forest is lacking. Similarly the economic aspect of society is highlighted but at the same time no attention has paid on economic aspect of tree and forest Users are reluctant to do tending operation. The perception is that every sapling will be a high tree in future which is wrong. It is necessary to change this perception and convince the community that there should be timely tending and other silvicultural operation has to been done for better health of forest, but this part is lacking now.

In past, only people centered, social aspect of community forestry were concerned. Discussions were held on empowerment of different people and their livelihood. Results were achieved in social sector. People start to apply their use rights. But, what is about the livelihood of forest trees? Sustainable forest management is confined only on annual allowable cut. It will be the some percent of increment and increment is some percent of growing stocks. Only increase ion forest cover is not the way for sustainable management. No field study had been done on CAI and MAI. Theme is developed that Green tree should not cut. No concern about young trees has more energy like man in terms of growth, metabolism and carbon sequestration. No any silvicultural operation has been applied. People are reluctant to silvicultural treatments. They oppose cut green trees and removing unnecessary bole and saplings.

Conclusion:

Healthy forests are essential for sustainable forest management, yet forests, like other ecosystems, are subject to a number of threats that can cause tree mortality or reduce their ability to provide a full range of goods and services. Causes include, but are not limited to, fire, insects and diseases, overexploitation of wood and non-wood forest products, poor harvesting practices, poor management, uncontrolled grazing, invasive species, air pollution and extreme climatic events (e.g. drought, frost, storms and floods). All these cause are persistent to the community forest of Tarai.

In order to control and optimize regeneration, foresters have developed silvicultural systems to regenerate forests of different species mixes and ages.  These systems are designed around the regeneration strategies of the desired species.  They involve manipulation (cutting) of forest stands to influence the seed mix and light/heat conditions on the ground.  Sometimes they also involve manipulation of existing (advance) regeneration and treatment of the seed bed (forest floor).

There is an urgent need for forest regeneration health concerns. As health of people is the energy of Nation, similarly health of forest will be the energy of forest. Healthy forest has good CAI, possess high economic value and high capacity to carbon sequestration. Economic value of forest increases with healthy trees. It is a time to concentrate on active forest management in order to minimize the causes that reduce forest health and vitality. Canopy should be opened uniformly for better growth of offspring. Silvicultural treatments guidelines for community forest should be developed and implemented. Tending operation should be done in time. Forest should be managed on stand-wise through area control system.

References

1. WINROCK, 2002; Policy analysis of Nepal's community forestry program, A compendium of research paper, Winrock International-Nepal.
2. Amatya and Shrestha, 2002; Nepal Forestry Handbook, FORSAP and FAO.
3. DFO Rupandehi, 2065; Five year forest management of Rupandehi.
4. www.dof.gov.np, 21 August 2009.
5. Pennsylvania Game Commission. 2001, Elmerton Avenue, Harrisburg, PA 17110, www.pgc.state.pa.us, 2009.