Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Mountain forests in a changing world


Published on

Covering over 9 million square kilometres of the Earth’s surface, mountain forests represent a remarkable
23 percent of the Earth’s forest cover. They play a key role in mountain areas, providing goods and
services essential to the livelihood of both highland and lowland communities. Freshwater streaming
down from mountains is accessible to more than half of the world’s population and available for the most
varied needs, such as drinking, cooking and washing, farming, hydropower, industry and transportation.

Published in: Education, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

Mountain forests in a changing world

  1. 1. Mountain Forests in a Changing World Realizing values, addressing challenges
  2. 2. Mountain Forests in a Changing World Realizing values, addressing challenges 2011 Published by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, FAO with the support of the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation, SDC
  3. 3. The designations employed and the presentation of material in this information product do not implythe expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of theUnited Nations (FAO) concerning the legal or development status of any country, territory, city or areaor of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The mention of specificcompanies or products of manufacturers, whether or not these have been patented, does not implythat these have been endorsed or recommended by FAO in preference to others of a similar nature thatare not mentioned.The views expressed in this information product are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflectthe views of FAO and SDC.ISBN: 978-92-5-107076-5All rights reserved. FAO and SDC encourage the reproduction and dissemination of materialin this information product.Non-commercial uses will be authorized free of charge, upon request. Reproduction for resale or othercommercial purposes, including educational purposes, may incur fees. Applications for permissionto reproduce or disseminate FAO copyright materials, and all queries concerning rights and licenses,should be addressed by e-mail to or to the Chief, Publishing Policy and SupportBranch, Office of Knowledge Exchange, Research and Extension, FAO, Viale delle Terme di Caracalla,00153 Rome, Italy.© FAO 2011Editors: Martin F. Price (UHI), Georg Gratzer (BOKU), Lalisa Alemayehu Duguma (BOKU), Thomas Kohler(CDE), Daniel Maselli (SDC), Rosalaura Romeo (MPS)Concept: SDC, CDE, MPS/FAOLayout: Gordon Low, Ptarmigan Design, Dundee, UKPrinted on FSC paper by Schläfli and Maurer, Interlaken, SwitzerlandCitation:Price, Martin F, Georg Gratzer, Lalisa Alemayehu Duguma, Thomas Kohler, Daniel Maselli, and RosalauraRomeo (editors) (2011). Mountain Forests in a Changing World - Realizing Values, addressing challenges.Published by FAO/MPS and SDC, Rome.This publication is available from:publications-sales@fao.orgElectronic version can be downloaded and www.mountainpartnership.orgCover photo: Dolomites, Italy (Martin F. Price)
  4. 4. Contents PageForeword 51 Why focus on the world’s mountain forests? 62 Sources of fresh water 12 Key issues, and Case Studies from the USA, Colombia, Myanmar, and Mexico3 Protection against natural hazards 20 Key issues, and Case Studies from Pakistan, Switzerland, Ethiopia, and Austria4 Values of biodiversity 28 Key issues, and Case Studies from Europe, Ethiopia, Ecuador, and Kyrgyzstan5 Places for health and wellbeing 36 Key issues, and Case Studies from the Himalaya, Sweden, Cameroon, and Korea6 Sources of wood 44 Key issues, and Case Studies from Canada, Lebanon, Italy, and Iran7 Managing cultural landscapes 52 Key issues, and Case Studies from Bhutan, Russian Federation, Ethiopia, and India8 Climate change 60 Key issues, and Case Studies from Vietnam, Argentina, Nepal, Austria and Germany9 Proactive ways forward 68 Key issues, and Case Studies from Eastern Africa, Austria, and India Moving towards action References 80 Authors and contributors 82
  5. 5. 4
  6. 6. ForewordCovering over 9 million square kilometres of the Earth’s surface, mountain forests represent a remarkable23 percent of the Earth’s forest cover. They play a key role in mountain areas, providing goods andservices essential to the livelihood of both highland and lowland communities. Freshwater streamingdown from mountains is accessible to more than half of the world’s population and available for the mostvaried needs, such as drinking, cooking and washing, farming, hydropower, industry and transportation.The biodiversity stored in healthy mountain forests provides a range of products, such as timber, fuel,medicinal and aromatic plants, fodder and a wide variety of foods that ensure the well-being of localpopulations. Mountain forests also occupy a crucial position in terms of climate change, representingfundamental ecosystems for the health of the planet. As a matter of fact, they protect the Earth andcontribute to shielding the atmosphere from CO2 emissions. Moreover, mountains covered by green,thick and healthy forests are undeniably one of the most outstanding visions offered on Earth. Humanspirituality and culture as well as tourism have always drawn on these landscapes.Nevertheless, these beautiful and profitable landscapes are under threat. Deforestation has been widelypracticed with a view to short-term profits and without paying due attention to long-term impacts.Population growth and the expansion of intensive agriculture have forced smallholder farmers tomove higher towards marginal areas or steep slopes and therefore caused the clearing of forest areas.Furthermore, the conservation of healthy forests often may not be the main priority for private business.Crucially, mountain forests perform a protective function against natural hazards, so that when theforest cover is lost and the land is left unprotected, runoff and soil erosion increase, provoking landslides,avalanches and floods, to the detriment of villages, transport systems, human infrastructures and of thefood security of vulnerable populations.This publication is intended to raise awareness of the global importance and the need for sustainablemanagement of these unique ecosystems. It was prepared in 2011, to coincide with the world’scelebration of the International Year of Forests as well as of the International Mountain Day on December11th, dedicated this year to the theme of mountain forests. To mark these occasions, the MountainPartnership Secretariat at the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and theSwiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC) have jointly issued this volume, the fourth ofa series, including Mountains and Climate Change, Mountain Biodiversity and Global Change, andHighlands and Drylands. We thus hope that, through this publication, communities, scientists and policymakers at national and international level will support the creation and implementation of long-termpolicies in order to conserve and protect these fundamental ecosystems and to benefit and improve thelives of their people for the benefit of both mountain people and inhabitants of adjacent lowlands. Maya Tissafi Eduardo Rojas-Briales Deputy Director General Assistant Director-General Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation, SDC Forestry Department – FAO 5
  7. 7. J Monarch Butterfly Biosphere Reserve, Michoacán State, Mexico. Photo: Olivier Chassot
  8. 8. *; (1%75 10 6*914.5 /1706#+0 (14565` K
  9. 9. *; (1%75 10 6* 914.5/1706#+0 (14565` Robert Mc Morran and Martin F. Price84 6* 2#56 691 %#5X 5+0% 6* +1 #46* 7//+6 +0 EMMFX 6*4 *#5 $0+0%4#5+0) ).1$#. #9#4055 1( 6* +/2146#0% 1( 6* 914.5 /1706#+0 #4#5X9*+%* %184 # 37#464 1( 6* #46*5 .#0 574(#%X #4 *1/ 61 #0 +)*6* 1( 6*914.5 212.X #0 2418+ +845 )115 #0 548+%5 61 9.. 184 *#.( 1( 6* #46*5 K $+..+10 212.T #0; 1( 6*5 )115 #0 548+%5 4+8 (41/ /1706#+0(14565X 9*+%* %184 # 37#464 1( 6* ).1$#. /1706#+0 #4#TForests cover a significant proportion of most mountain regions, broadleaved forests (Figure 1). Evergreen needleleaf forests areexcept those that are particularly dry or cold year-round. In Europe, particularly dominant in North America and parts of Europe andfor instance, forests cover 41% of the total mountain area – over Asia, while deciduous needleleaf forests are more common in Russiahalf of the Alps, Balkans, Carpathians, and Pyrenees – and are the and Asia. Deciduous and coniferous boreal forests are absent in thedominant land cover except in the Nordic mountains which extend Southern hemisphere, due to the lack of land within the appropriatewell into the Arctic. Other mountain regions with particularly high latitudinal zone. Boreal broadleaved forests have a relatively wideproportions of forest cover include the Appalachians, the Australian global distribution, while tropical mountain forests mainly occur inAlps, the Guiana Highlands, and the mountains of Central Africa, South and Central America, Australasia and Africa. The altitude ofSoutheast Asia, Borneo, and New Guinea. Particularly in tropical the climatic treeline – beyond which trees fail to grow in significantcountries, these mountain forests are vital for the livelihoods of density and number – varies widely, depending on both latitudelarge numbers of people. and climate: from 700m or below in the far North, to over 4500m in parts of the sub-tropical Andes.Mountain forests are found from the Equator to quite high latitudes,north and south, and include both coniferous needle-leaved and Figure 1. Major forest types in mountain regions. © United Nations Environment Programme – World Conservation Monitoring Centre.L
  10. 10. Much of the high biodiversity that is characteristic of mountain In mountain areas, poor communities, both rural and urban,areas is in their forests. As the diversity of tree species generally tend to be heavily dependent on their forests to provide themdecreases with altitude and also with increasing latitude, species with a diverse range of services, including fundamentals suchrichness is tropical forests is up to ten times greater than in as fuel, food, clean water, and protection from natural hazards.temperate forests. Primary forests, particularly tropical moist The ecosystem services provided by mountain forests are also offorests, are some of the most species-rich ecosystems and comprise critical importance for rural and urban lowland populations.a higher proportion of the forest cover in mountain areas than forthe Earth as a whole. These forests are particularly important for Ecosystem services may be divided into three main categories:protecting fragile slopes from soil leaching and erosion, as well as provisioning services (e.g., timber extraction); regulating andacting as reservoirs of biodiversity from which to establish new supporting services (e.g., carbon sequestration); and culturalareas of habitat and resettle new species. However, rates of loss of services (e.g., the role of forests in local belief systems andprimary forests, largely due to selective logging and other human customs). Mountain forests provide diverse ecosystem services,activities, are particularly high in tropical mountain areas: tropical delivering a range of both private and wider public benefitsupland forests have disappeared at a greater rate than forests in any (Table 1). Productive functions are particularly well recognized dueother biome (major ecosystem type). Thus, most mountain forests to their role in contributing to lowland and highland economies.are semi-natural or naturally regenerating forests which, through However, regulating and supporting services such as reliable waterforest management activities, provide diverse ecosystem services supplies, protection against natural hazards, mitigation of climateand livelihood opportunities. Forest plantations are also on the change often represent the most important functions of mountainincrease, particularly in temperate areas, though the proportions in forests to communities living within and around mountain regions.mountain areas are not easily identified. In addition, cultural services are vital for both mountain people and many others, particularly as recreation and tourism increase inIn recent decades, there have been two distinct trends in the area importance for the population of our increasingly urbanized world.covered by mountain forests, as for forests around the world:continual loss in developing countries (particularly in tropicalregions) and gradual expansion in industrialized countries. InEurope, widespread reforestation has occurred in many mountainregions, in conjunction with agricultural land abandonment anddeclining deforestation, accounting for about two-thirds of landcover changes from 1990 to 2006. Over a longer timescale, the area 0 /1706#+0 #4#5X 2114of forests in Switzerland, for example, has increased by 60% sincethe main period of deforestation ended in the 1860s. However, in %1//70+6+5X $16* 474#.some industrialized countries, the expansion of mountain forestshas been offset to some extent by losses due to epidemics of #0 74$#0X 60 61 $diseases and pests, or fire. *#8+.; 2006 10 6*+4* +/2146#0% 1( %15;56/ 548+%5 (14565 61 2418+ 6*/2418+ $; /1706#+0 (14565 9+6* # +845 4#0) 1(Mountains are fragile and often remote regions, whose humanpopulations are often highly vulnerable to environmental, economic 548+%5X TTTand social changes at all scales from local to global. Ninety percentof mountain people live in rural areas in developing countries.Levels of ethnic diversity and poverty in these communities aretypically high. Globally, 90 million mountain people live in poverty. Table 1. Ecosystem services provided by mountain forests worldwide. Adapted from the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Chapter 21; Forest and Woodland Systems and Chapter 24: Mountain Systems ( Provisioning Timber for use in buildings and infrastructural initiatives; fuelwood (critical for local populations); Services Non-timber forest products (NTFPs), including wild game, foods (mushrooms, berries, edible plants etc.); the availability of grazing for subsistence farming. Regulating and Critical stability/protection function – forest cover enables soil retention and acts as a barrier to the supporting impacts of avalanches and rockfalls on valley communities; mountain forests (particularly cloud forests) services have high water retention capacity, intercepting and storing water from rainfall, mist and snow and releasing it gradually, thereby maintaining hydrological cycles at large scales – limiting peak stream flow rates, reducing soil erosion and the severity of avalanches and downstream flooding; mountain forests represent a major carbon sink, with ongoing carbon sequestration a critical component of climate change mitigation; due to their relative isolation and contrasting climates, mountain forests are high in endemism and commonly represent global hotspots for biodiversity, which is linked to tourism, recreation, hunting and fishing benefits. Cultural services Mountain forests have intrinsic spiritual and aesthetic values; their characteristics allow for considerable recreational opportunities globally; the customs and belief systems of many mountain communities are intricately linked with forest ecosystems. M
  11. 11. 455+0) 6* -; %*#..0)5This report has been produced in the International Year of Foreststo draw attention to the many values of mountain forests and thechallenges they face. These forests face ever growing demandsfrom local and regional users, as well as national and internationalmarkets. Population growth and associated demands for food andfuel within and outside mountain regions are increasing pressureson mountain forests, threatening their resilience and integrity.Primary forest cover continues to be fragmented and decreaserapidly. The development of infrastructure also contributes to thefragmentation and loss of forest cover and the destabilization ofunderlying rocks and soils. Further pressures include encroachingurbanization, more frequent wildfires, development projectssuch as roads, dams and hydropower plants, the development oftourism infrastructure, and the transformation of primary forest toother land uses. The establishment of plantations does not fullycompensate for such ongoing losses. Planting in tropical countriestypically occurs in humid mountains, where slower growing naturalhardwoods are often replaced with faster growing hardwoods.Such changes can lead to higher levels of water extraction andassociated reductions in catchment yields – a key issue in the Andesand South Africa. Large-scale plantations of single species alsoexclude wild and domestic animals, which can lead to increaseddensities of herbivores and a shift in habitat selection towardsremaining fragments of primary or semi-natural forest – resultingin the further loss and fragmentation of these habitats fromovergrazing. They are also often highly prone to erosion and soildegradation.In many regions, population expansion has led to increasingmigration from urban to rural areas, resulting in the intensificationof lowland farms and the displacement of lowland farmers.Displaced farmers commonly move to higher, steeper ground, oftenclearing areas of forest to establish new smallholdings. In areasof high population density with high food demand from nearbyurban settlements, fallow periods are often neglected, which canlead to irreversible losses of soil nutrients and topsoil, resulting ina decline in ecosystem integrity and further loss of forest cover.Such unsustainable practices, combined with the long-term lossof forest cover, can have detrimental effects on the functioning ofriver catchments and the overall stability of mountain systems, andresult in decreases in, or even losses of, biodiversity and fuelwoodavailability. Excessive levels of disturbance in mountain forests canalso lead to the spread of invasive species, which can have furthernegative impacts on ecosystem integrity.All of these trends need to be considered in the context ofclimate change, which will bring many new challenges for thosedepending on and managing mountain forests worldwide. Thus,after addressing the diverse values of, and challenges for mountainforests, this report concludes with a discussion and presentationof proactive approaches, and desirable actions by the manystakeholders involved, to ensure that mountain forests continue toprovide vital goods and services in future decades.EN
  12. 12. Uttarakhand Himalaya, India. Photo: Martin Price EE
  13. 13. EF Stream in Tapanti National Park, Macizo Cerro de la Muerte, Costa Rica. Photo: Olivier Chassot
  14. 14. 174%5 1((45* 9#64 EG
  15. 15. 174%5 1( (45* 9#64Georg Gratzer, Lalisa Alemayehu Duguma and Herbert Hager1706#+05 2418+ JNhLN† 1( 6* 914.5 (45*9#64 45174%5 52+6 %184+0)10.; FH† 1( 6* #46*5 574(#%T 0 4)+105 9+6* 4; %.+/#65X /1706#+05 %184GN† 1( 6* #4# $76 %1064+$76 JK† 1( 6* +5%*#4)Y +0 6* 6/24#6 10X6* 452%6+8 2412146+105 #4 HG† #0 JE†T 1706#+05 19 6*+5 5+)0+(+%#0641. +0 6* 914.5 *;41.1); 61 141)4#2*+% ((%65U #5 #.6+67 +0%4#55X 51 1524%+2+6#6+10X 9*+. 8#214#6+10 %4#55T 14184X +0 /#0; /1706#+0 4)+105X2#46 1( 6* 24%+2+6#6+10 (#..5 #5 5019 #0 +5 5614 +0 5019(+.5 #0f14 ).#%+45X/.6+0) 51 6*#6 +6 +5 #8#+.#$. #6 # 6+/ 9*0 +6 +5 /156 0TMountain forests strongly influence both the quantity and quality scales, such changes greatly modify hydrology: as forests haveof water supplies to mountain and lowland communities and higher evapotranspiration and better surface infiltration, theirindustries. Many capital cities depend heavily on mountain water: clearing leads to increased surface flows, steeper discharge peaks,for example, 95% of the water for Vienna, Austria comes from the and lower base flows, especially in the dry season. The steepnessmountain forests of the Northern Alps; almost all the water used of slopes and the infiltration characteristics of soils influence suchin the dry season for drinking and hydroelectricity generation for changes; if water infiltration after forest clearing is strongly reducedDar Es Salaam, Tanzania, comes from the cloud forests of Uluguru and slopes are steep, water runs off quickly and reduces the waterMountain; 40% of the water for Tegucigalpa, Honduras, comes recharge of soils.from the cloud forests of La Tigra National Park. At larger scales, theTibetan plateau acts as a water tower for around 3 billion people In contrast, afforestation leads to decreases in overall water Asia; the entire population of California, USA relies on mountain A global synthesis of data from 26 watersheds converted fromwater; and in Kenya, water from Mount Kenya generates 97% of the grassland, shrubland or pasture to tree plantations showed thathydroelectric power and provides water for drinking and domestic runoff in over a fifth of the catchments decreased by at least 75%purposes to over 7 million people. for a year or more; and, in over a tenth of the catchments, by 100%. Decreases in runoff lasted for 30 years where grasslands had been.#065 4+8 *;41.1); planted, with maximum reductions in 15-20 year old plantations. On average, runoff was reduced by at least 30% in afforested grass-The hydrology of mountain areas is strongly influenced by their and shrublands. While reductions in water yields from afforestationvegetation cover, in terms of both base flows driving the continuity can be beneficial, they can, especially in dry areas, enhance waterof water supplies and peak flows which often cause floods in both shortages and cause severe socio-economic problems.headwaters and nearby lowlands; though these may also derivefrom heavy rains in lowland areas. Plants intercept precipitation Forest ecosystems not only influence water quantity but canwhich either drips to the ground or evaporates from leaf surfaces. improve water quality through soil infiltration and phyto- andThey consume water through transpiration and shade the ground, bioremediation of water. For example, forest buffers alongand thus reduce evaporation from the soil. They delay snow melt agricultural fields can reduce nitrate concentrations in runoffand influence infiltration into the soil through rooting, as well as from fields by 5-30% per meter width of the forest. In contrast,through the associated soil fauna and decomposer communities. erosion and large peak flows resulting from the loss of forests, as well as roads and associated drainage systems, act againstMountain forests play major roles in preventing erosion and these improvements of water quality and may cause large waterreducing the risk of floods. For example, maximum surface runoff treatment costs.during heavy rain in the Austrian Alps is 40-80% lower in foreststhan pasture. The root systems and decomposer macrofauna #64 h # /#0#)#$. 45174%of many tree species contribute to the increased infiltration ofwater into soils. Deep-rooted trees remove more soil water for The management of water is complex: different managementtranspiration, creating a larger soil water storage buffer, which objectives such as preventing erosion or producing drinking watermay contribute to reducing peak runoffs. Particularly in drier areas, call for different and often competing interventions. Yet even atrees redistribute water through their root systems vertically and single hydrological attribute can be influenced by differing andhorizontally to areas of lower soil moisture at night. often competing hydrological processes. For example, while deforestation can increase water yield, the associated decreases -; 45174% (14 .+( in soil infiltration may lead to water scarcity in dry seasons; while forests intercept much snow, they delay snow melt and reduceThe conversion of land from forest to agriculture has major impacts, the early spring peak flows which often lead to floods. Responsesdecreasing evapotranspiration and increasing runoff. At watershed of the hydrology of watersheds to the same land use vary greatly,EH
  16. 16. Río San Antonio, Selva de Florencia Natural National Park, Colombia. Photo: Julián Infantedepending on climate; soil conditions, especially soil depth;slope morphology and geology; and the characteristics, age, anddensity of plants. Consequently, site-specific watershed-based
  17. 17. 19 645 +064%26management is essential. #0 75 9#64The complexity and challenges of adaptive water management lie Tree canopies enhance exchanges of waternot only in the specifics of hydrology but also in the multitude of vapour with the atmosphere because of theirhuman demands. The provision of water is an environmental service high aerodynamical roughness and throughfrom upstream land users for lowland areas: land use in headwater evapotranspiration. Their structure, seasonalityareas influences water quantity and quality downstream, where the and density determine how much is lost bymajor users are located. As poverty levels in mountain headwatersare often high, and the degrees of freedom for choosing a certain interception. Conifer forests intercept 30–50%land use are low, payment schemes based on public funding of precipitation, temperate broadleaf forests 15–are often not sufficient to induce the necessary management 30% during the vegetation period, subtropicalactivities. This calls for Integrated Water Resource Management evergreen broadleaf forests 10–30%, and tropicalapproaches which promote “the coordinated development and forests 15–30%. In contrast, agricultural cropseconomic and social welfare in an equitable manner without intercept less than 10%. Trees also interceptcompromising the sustainability of vital ecosystems”. One example snow, which is partly lost through sublimation;is the green water credit programme: a compensation scheme and reduce winter snowmelt and delay springfor upland management activities geared towards soil and water snowmelt, which can offset the interceptionconservation, such as mulching or strips along contour lines losses.covered by permanent vegetation. Pilot projects are currentlybeing implemented in countries including, Canada, China, Kenya,Morocco, and the USA. Such coordinated land management The volumes of water that trees use to grow andschemes, which conserve valuable ecosystems and habitats, and return to the atmosphere through transpirationcan mitigate potential water scarcities and avoid high costs for are considerable, thus modifying the hydrologicaltechnical measures downstream, are so far practiced in only a few cycle. Trees use 170–340 kg of water for eachriver basins, but as the idea is spreading, the outlook for the future kg of biomass they accumulate. Because of theis hopeful. height of trees, their rooting depths and rough canopies, forests consume more precipitation than other vegetation types. Temperate forests transpire 300-600 mm per year, montane tropical forests 500-850, and tropical tree plantations 1000-1500. Comparably, agricultural crops in temperate areas transpire 400 – 500 mm of precipitation per year. EI
  18. 18. * (14565 1( 6* #65-+..1706#+05X U #645* (14# /)#.121.+5#4.; *#.( 1( 9 14- 6#65 2127.#6+10X +0%.7+0) L /+..+10 +0 914- +6; #0 E /+..+10 7256#6 45+065X 4.; 10 *+)*g37#.+6; 9#64(41/ 6* (1456 #65-+.. 1706#+05 (14 4+0-+0)X $#6*+0)X %.#0+0) 14176114 9#64+0)T #%* #;X 6*5 /1706#+05 2418+ 184 I $+..+10.+645 1( 70(+.64 9#64 (14 1/56+%X %1//4%+#. #0 +07564+#. 755g 241$#$.; 6* 914.5 .#4)56 70(+.64 9#64 5722.; 5;56/T Ashokan reservoir, Appalachian mountains. Photo: Josh Dick New York City. Photo: Karen WrightToday, watershed protection is a major concern of land management in the Catskills. However, Authorin the 1700s, the forests were heavily exploited. During the 1800s, large areas were converted tofarmland, though much was abandoned after 1870. Recreational resorts became important from Lawrence S. Hamilton, Emeritus Professor,the early 1900s. Cornell University, USAIn 1885, responding to uncontrolled exploitation and increasing concern for water and recreation,the State Legislature designated Catskill Park. Within its 285,000 ha, all State-owned land was setaside as a Forest Preserve, “to be kept forever as wild forest lands”. In 1905, New York City beganto buy land; it now owns about 5% of the Park. Three of its major reservoirs, and part of a fourth,are within the Park. The Preserve has expanded from 13,760 to 117,300 ha; other land in the Parkis privately owned.In 1993, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) called for greater quality safeguards. Oneoption was for the City to build a water filtration plant, estimated to cost $10-12 billion, withannual operating costs of $300 million. Instead, EPA allowed the City to protect its drinking watersupply by developing a comprehensive watershed management and protection programme.Through this, since 1997, the City has spent $1.6 billion to improve water quality, including:land acquisition; conservation easements (agreements to restrict development on land anduse it for conservation purposes); upgrading agricultural practices to control farm pollution;Best Management Practices for private forests; improving residential septic systems; wastetreatment upgrades for villages; riparian and floodplain revegetation. The City’s financialcontribution comes from consumers’ water rate payments - an excellent example of payment forenvironmental services, much cheaper than the option of building treatment facilities.EJ
  19. 19. 0574+0) 6* 2418+5+10 1( 08+410/06#.548+%5 (41/ .8# .140%+##674#. #6+10#. #4-X 1.1/$+#.8# .140%+# #674#. #6+10#. #4-X +0 6* %064#. 1.1/$+#0 05X +5 10 1( 6* %17064;5IJ 0#6+10#. 2416%6 #4#5X %.#4 +0 FNNIT %+8+0) /14 6*#0 KXNNN // 1( 4#+0(#.. #;#4X 6*+5 +06#%6 %.17 (1456X 10.; ENEM *# +0 #4#X +5 5506+#. (14 9#64 4)7.#6+10T 146*#0 JNXNNN 212. 4.; 10 6* 9#64 +6 2418+5X #0 +6 #.51 *#5 *+)* .8.5 1( $+1+845+6;X+0%.7+0) 0#0)4 52%+5 1( 6* 11%#42#%# #0 #74#%# (#/+.+5 #0 6* )4#656%10%064#6+10 1( (41)5 +0 6* %17064;T Selva de Florencia Natural National Park. Photo: Julián Infante. Cloud forest: Julián Infante.As rain falls year-round, there are no marked dry periods, which is a comparative advantage for Authorthe provision of drinking water, agricultural production and the development of hydroelectricprojects. In 2002, the Miel I power plant, with an installed capacity of 396 MW, began production; Andrés Felipe Betancourth López, Consorcio para el Desarrollo Sostenible13 other sites have also been identified. de la Ecorregión Andina (CONDESAN),The mountain forests of the Colombian Andes are under continual pressure from the expansion of Lima, Perusmall-scale agriculture, mainly for subsistence, and urban sprawl; for example, Bogota is growingat 5.5% per annum. However, for Selva de Florencia, at least 20 years of constructive interactionbetween academia, civil society organizations and communities, coupled with National Parkdesignation, have led to clear conservation objectives and management plans that reconcile theinterests of conservation with the development of the region’s economy.The challenge remains for government agencies to capitalize on the benefits from conservation– such as environmental goods and services, transfers and compensation for natural resourcesuse – and to distribute resources equitably. To ensure the protection of mountain forests and theenvironmental services that they offer, it is necessary for mountain people to be able to meettheir basic needs in a sustainable manner. This requires the development and implementationof policies that lead to comprehensive land planning and to strategies for the delivery ofenvironmental services in this area, as well as in other mountain forest areas in Colombia. EK
  20. 20. 12# 1706#+0 #4-U 0 1#5+5 10 6* 4; 2.#+051( ;#0/#41706 12# jEIEL /k +5 #0 :6+0%6 81.%#01 +0 %064#. ;#0/#4T 4170 +6X 4;X 120 %17064; :605 (14 /14 6*#0 ENN -/ +0 84;+4%6+10T %#75 1( +65 *+)*6X 6* /1706#+0 4%+85 *#8;4#+0(#.. #0 6*4(14 +65 %.+/#6 #0 8)6#6+10 #4 37+6 +56+0%6(41/ 6*15 1( 6* 5744170+0) %17064;T Farm at the foot of Mount Popa. Photo: Naw May Lay Thant Mount Popa. Photo: Naw May Lay ThantThe forest types include thorn forest, deciduous forest, and semi-evergreen forest in the volcanic Authorcrater, providing habitat for one of Southeast Asia’s rarest endemic species, Phayre’s leaf monkey(Trachypithecus phayrei). The mountain is also famous for its herbal plants. In 1902, Mount Popa Naw May Lay Thant, Myanmarwas legally notified as forest reserve. However, during and after World War II, with the breakdownof law and order, local people gradually encroached into the reserve for farming. From 1995 to1984, the Forest Department, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the Foodand Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) undertook reforestation programmes,which have been successful – and once-depleted natural springs have been restored. In 1989,Popa Mountain Park (176 km2) was declared to conserve wildlife and to protect the catchment ofKyet-mauk-taung reservoir, used since 1967 mainly for irrigation.Generally, water resources are very limited in central Myanmar. Most streams are rain-fed and,even after heavy rain, some only flow for a few hours due to relatively low rainfall and sandy soils.Access to groundwater is difficult because most aquifers are comprised of thick layers of sandand clay, with high concentrations of magnesium salt. However, people around Mount Popa canutilize its almost 100 permanent natural springs, which occur on all sides of the mountain and arethe main source for Kyet-mauk-taung reservoir. The nearest town of Kyauk-pa-daung, 10 km away,also receives regular water supplies from the springs.As Mount Popa can be seen from every direction from at least 40 km, indigenous knowledgerecognizes it as a weather forecast post. Whenever fog shrouds the mountain, local people realizethat rain is likely, and they prepare their farms to catch rain in time.EL
  21. 21. * 241215 #8#8+ 4# (14416%6+10 1( .14# #0 #70#X1014#X :+%1* +44# #4 %%+06#. +0%.75 /#0; Z5-; +5.#05X /1706#+0 4#0)5 8#4;+0)+0 #.6+67 (41/ EXLLN 61 FXJHJ /T * 9#64 6*#6 (#..5 10 6*5 /1706#+05 (56* #0 41 +84X 5*#4 $690 :+%1 #0 6* X #0 /156 1( 6* 4+8451( 6* 56#6 1( 1014# +0 :+%1T * 1014# +84 5722.+5 # 5+)0+(+%#06 2#46 1(6* 9#64 75 (14 #)4+%7.674#.X 1/56+%X +07564+#.X #0 4%4#6+10#. 2742155 +06* 56#6X +0%.7+0) GH 61905 #0
  22. 22. 4/15+..1X 1014#5 %#2+6#. %+6;T Sierra de los Ajos, Ajos Bavispe Forest Reserve and Wildlife Refuge. Photo: Angeles Mendoza Sammet Rio Bavispe, Mexico. Photo: Sergio AvilaIn 1936, the Mexican government established the Ajos-Bavispe Forest Reserve and Wildlife Refuge Authorto protect five sky islands because of their high biodiversity: their juniper, oak, pine, and arroyoforests provide habitat for a wide range of mammals, butterflies and, particularly, birds. Until the Angeles Mendoza Sammet, Protected Areas, the Refuge did not have management; wood harvesting and grazing were widespread. Calgary, Alberta, CanadaThe Refuge has large copper and other mineral deposits whose exploitation, sometimes illegallydone in the Refuge, caused air and water pollution, which have affected the forests and theirspecies, as well as water quality.In 2002, Mexico’s National Commission of Natural Protected Areas and the Secretariat of theEnvironment and Natural Resources proposed to the Federal Government that the Ajos-BavispeRefuge and other well-preserved forest and grassland patches in the region should become theMavavi Area for Protection of Flora and Fauna. While the proposal has not yet been approved,it is of international interest because of the area’s border location and its hydrologic relevancefor wildlife and people in both Mexico and the USA. In 1988, the USA created a 70 km RiparianNational Conservation Area along the upper San Pedro River. This recognizes that this ripariansystem, located in the Sonoran and Chihuahuan deserts, is a key habitat for more than 400resident and migratory bird species, almost half of the USA’s bird species. Yet the conservation ofbiodiversity is only one reason to create Mavavi: its forests sustain socio-economic developmenton both sides of the international border. EM
  23. 23. FN Lötschental, Valais, Switzerland. Photo: Martin Price
  24. 24. 416%6+10 #)#+056 0#674#. *##45 FE
  25. 25. 416%6+10 #)#+0560#674#. *##45Lalisa Alemayehu Duguma and Georg Gratzer1706#+0 #4#5 #4 1(60 :215 61 0#674#. *##45 h 57%* #5 415+10X/7(.195X 41%-(#..5X #8#.#0%*5X .#05.+5X $4+5 (.195 #0 (.115 h 9*+%* %#0#/#) 566./065X 64#052146 #0 4%4#6+10#. +0(4#5647%674 #0X 70(14670#6.;X%#75 .1555 1( .+(T 1706#+0 (14565 2.#; %47%+#. 41.5 +0 $16* #%6+8 #0 2#55+82416%6+10 #)#+056 0#674#. *##45T %6+8 #0 2#55+8 2416%6+10 forests were to disappear, the cost of ensuring protection against avalanches using permanent avalanche defense structures wouldIn active protection, forest trees act as physical obstacles or barriers be about US$111 billion. Thus, the natural protection measuresthat impede downslope mass movements such as rockfalls, provided by forests are gaining growing attention mostly due to:landslides, debris flows, and avalanches. Tree roots also stabilize the first, the multiple services and functions they provide; second,soil and prevent the occurrence of landslides and erosion. Mountain the relatively minimal cost they require, compared to mechanicalslopes covered by forests remain stable for longer than open defense structures; and third, the aesthetic values of the and other vegetation types; for example, only 5% of slopefailures leading to erosion occurred in mountain forests in Western In tropical and subtropical mountains, the protective functionsAustria, but 35% in open pastures. Forests in the source zones of of mountain forests against erosion and landslides are veryavalanches and debris flows also reduce the risk of such hazards by significant where there are high levels of rainfall; and mechanicalstabilizing the movement of snow and debris. The role of forests in measures to minimize the impacts of natural hazards are typicallyminimizing the formation of snow avalanches is also enhanced by lacking. However, in these parts of the world, such roles oftheir canopies, as they intercept a considerable amount of snow. mountain forests are threatened by the clearing of the forests forThis reduces the formation of large snow masses and prevents agricultural expansion, and timber harvesting for both subsistencethe formation of large homogeneous snowfields in which large and commercial purposes, often to the last accessible points inavalanches can start. For example, in the mountainous maritime the mountains. As a result, the frequency and scale of naturalclimate of Oregon, USA, forest canopies intercept about 60% of the hazards are increasing. For example, mountain areas in Uganda aresnowfall. frequently affected by landslides which kill hundreds of people and destroy important infrastructure.In passive protection, mountain forests play significant roles mainlyin blocking the movement of solid materials - snow, soil, debris Although mountain forests, in both industrialised and developingor rock - reducing the impact of the hazards on settlements and countries, have important protective functions, they are often notinfrastructure below. Nonetheless, forests are only very effective if able to provide these functions when extreme events occur. Forthe size and scale of the transported material is small to medium, example, mountain forests can protect against shallow landslides,and energy levels are low; material that is large and/or moving with but not against deep landslides caused by the tectonic movementshigh energy can destroy forests and cause sever damage below. or earthquakes that characterize many mountain areas. They may withstand moderate storms but not extreme events such as the ‘stand replacing disturbances’ which cause windthrows and stem* 0 (14 %156g((+%+06 2416%6+10 breakages. Similarly, forests can protect against erosion and landslides under average rainfall intensities, but not against massProtection is one of the most fundamental functions of forests, movements resulting from major storm events, especially at the endmaking it possible for people to settle in mountain valleys. In the of the rainy season when the soils are saturated.Alps, this function was first recognized in local regulations from the12th century, and national legislation from the late 19th century.Today, the main role of 20% of Austria’s forests is protection ; %*#4#%64+56+%5 (14 2416%6+10against natural hazards. In Bavaria, Germany, 63% of the forestshave a protective function against soil erosion, and 42% against Overall, the effectiveness of mountain forests for protection againstavalanches. The importance of this function is immense, particularly natural hazards depends on the type and area of forest cover, thebecause of the cost of building structures to control or mitigate developmental stage of the forest, and the type, scale and durationsuch hazards. For example, in the Swiss Alps, the cost of installing of the hazard. To provide sufficient protection, a forest must havetechnical measures that would achieve similar protection to a diverse species composition, sufficient natural regeneration,forests would be 5–20 times more than maintaining forest. If these and an optimal structure. Forests which are dominated by oneFF
  26. 26. Landslide, Shohall Mazullah watershed, Mansehra District, Pakistan, triggered by the earthquake on 8 October 2005. Photo: Paolo Ceci / FAOspecies and old forests without regeneration have poor protective destabilize permafrost, increasing the level of hazards such asfunctions. In the Alps, major silvicultural challenges with regard to floods, landslides, and rockfalls that could damage or even destroythe protective functions of mountain forests are poor regeneration, forests. A continuing temperature rise could also create favourablea low proportion of medium-aged trees, insufficient instability, and conditions for forest damaging organisms, such as bark beetles,exposure to natural disturbances such as windthrow. Other policy- that can destroy mountain forests or at least change their structure,related challenges with a significant influence on mountain forests diminishing their protective functions. If, as projected, very wetare the poor implementation of regulations that favour the proper winters and dry summers occur, forest fires may become moreutilization and management of mountain forests, and conflicting frequent, severely damaging forests. In the western United States,land use patterns (e.g. hunting and grazing vs. the protective the fire season from 1987 to 2003 was 78 days longer than fromfunctions of the forests in most of the Alpine countries). Similar 1970 to 1986; the number of fires larger than 400 ha increased bychallenges exist in other mountain areas. four times, and the burned area by six times. Such trends clearly have consequences for the hydrology and protective functions of *#..0)5 (41/ %.+/#6 %*#0) these forests.Climate change is likely to have serious impacts on the protective Even though climate change may generally appear to havefunctions of mountain forests, as climate significantly influences negative impacts on the protective functions of forests, it maythe phenology, distribution and physiology of plants, and changes also have a positive impact as the trees in many mountain areasin climatic variables result in changes in the distribution of plant are migrating upwards, so that the areal coverage of forests mayspecies. For example, surface temperatures in the Alps increased increase. Such changes may, however, be offset by the anticipatedby 1.5 °C over the last century, almost double the global average. higher frequency of events causing natural hazards, including highThough it is difficult to forecast future climates in mountain areas, winds and heavy snow- and rainfalls.the continuation of this trend could increase glacial melt and FG
  27. 27. 156g+5#564 4%105647%6+10+0 #-+56#0 75+0) # 9#645*/#0#)/06 #2241#%*0 L %61$4 FNNIX # /#,14 #46*37#- 5647%- 0146*#56 #-+56#0X#((%6+0) GgH /+..+10 212.X -+..+0) 184 LNXNNNX #0 %#75+0) 5+)0+(+%#06 .#056#$+.+#6+10T #,14 .#05.+5 #0 6*175#05 1( .#05.+25 #((%6 #$176EN† 1( #4#$. .#0X (14565 #0 4#0).#05T 190564#/X 41%-5 #0 $4+5$.1%- 9#64 %*#00.5X 41#5 #0 2#6*5T .#5* (.115 #0 /75.+55641; #)4+%7.674#. .#0 #0 (47+6 64 2.#06#6+105T Meeting of the Watershed Management Committee, Danna Galli Landslide, Shohall Mazullah Watershed, Watershed, Muzaffarabad District. Photo: Thomas Hofer Mansehra District, triggered by the 8 October 2005 earthquake. Photo: Paolo Ceci/FAOThe Government of Pakistan established the Earthquake Reconstruction and Rehabilitation AuthorAuthority which, with the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, executed amulti-sectoral project, funded by the Swedish International Development Agency, to Thomas Hofer, Forestry Department,implement the livelihood component of the rehabilitation plan. The control of hydrogeological Food and Agriculturehazards through collaborative watershed management at the village level was a key activity, Organization of the United Nations,implemented in 17 watersheds in close collaboration with the District Forest Offices and the Rome, ItalyInternational Centre for Integrated Mountain Development. In each watershed, the projectcomprised: watershed delineation; damage, hazard and resource mapping; Participatory RuralAppraisal; establishment of a Watershed Management Committee; participatory preparation ofan integrated watershed management plan; implementation of prioritised activities; capacitybuilding. Forestry activities received priority attention, including bioengineering interventions,forest regeneration, and establishment of tree nurseries and fruit tree orchards.Institutional innovations were introduced and tested. Traditionally, District Forest Offices (DFOs)planned and implemented forestry-related interventions. Through Watershed ManagementCommittees, communities now plan and prioritise their activities; DFOs provide support inimplementation. The Forest Department has endorsed this participatory approach and considersit as key to success for projects aimed at restoring natural resources and livelihoods.Though the July 2010 floods again created significant damage in the region, communitiessupported by the project were well prepared to cope. Flood damage in the project watershedswas comparatively low because of the protective function of the introduced forests and trees.Through the participatory approach, the project has generated significant community ownershipand capacity. The communities have gained confidence in their own ideas and skills, and feelownership of the positive changes in their environment and livelihoods. Through the watershedmanagement committees, they are now organized and have a voice to request technicalassistance and support from line agencies and donors.FH
  28. 28. * Z*.64+0) 1456 1( #44;4X #)05X 9+64.#012. +0 6* .25 70456#0 6*#6 (14565 *#8 #.9#;5 5*.646*+4 8+..#)5T 6 (1456 #/+0+564#6145 1(60 (+0 +6 +((+%7.6 61%108+0% 6*/ 61 7046#- 24g/26+8 +064806+105 61 /#+06#+014 5640)6*0 6* 2416%6+8 ((%6 1( 56#05 1( 645T 1 %*#0) 6*+5 5+67#6+10X5%+06+565 #0 #/+0+564#6145 *#8 914- 61)6*4 (14 EI ;#45 61 $66470456#0 (1456 ;0#/+%5X (+0 6* +#. 5647%674 1( 5*.64+0) (14565X #0+0(14/ .1%#. 212. #$176 6* 0 61 914- 619#45 6* )1#. 1( /#+06#+0+0) 6*/ h80 6*17)* +6 /#; 6#- #6 .#56 GN ;#45 61 #%*+8 6* 5+4 457.6T Looking down landslide path to Sarreyer. Photo: Roland Métral Simulation of rock falls above Sarreyer with intact forest. Rockyfor3D model: Sylvain DupireScientists and administrators from France, Italy and Switzerland are carrying out a pilot project Authorof this kind in the forest of Sarreyer. This forest covers only 27 hectares, but is divided into 80parcels, divided among 60 private landowners. After a century without maintenance, large trees Roland Métral, Service des Forêts et du Paysage,(diameter over 60 cm) are unstable. If they collapsed, the boulders they would dislodge would Martigny, Switzerlandcause considerable damage to houses. Modelling (Rockyfor 3D from Cemagref, Grenoble) andfield research have shown that trees with a diameter of at least 24 cm can slow down and evenstop falling boulders of 1m³; for any given diameter, broad-leaved trees are more effective thanconiferous trees; stumps and deadwood increase soil stability and the protective effect of theforests; and dense forests act as green barriers.Following an information session chaired by the mayor of Bagnes, almost all owners agreedto interventions implemented jointly by the local authorities and forest wardens. Openingswere made in the forests, especially where trees were near collapse, so that the increased lightincreased the foliage on branches. This eliminated unstable trees and increased soil stability,particularly in transportation corridors. While the work is expensive, the long-term costs are less,and the results are just as effective as protective work by civil engineers. Sarreyer is now muchsafer for the next 30 years. Nevertheless, had this work been done 50 years earlier, it would havetaken half as long, and been more effective. FI
  29. 29. )41(14564; +064806+105 6147% 51+. 415+10 +0 6* 0146*40 6*+12+#0 *+)*.#05* 0146*40 6*+12+#0 *+)*.#05 #4 584.; #((%6 $; 51+. 415+10T 5 # 457.6X(#4/45 1(60 :24+0% (11 5*146#)5T 1+. 415+10 +5 /#+0.; #455 75+0)2*;5+%#. /#5745 57%* #5 644#%5 #0 %76g1(( 4#+05X 4#6*4 6*#0 $+1.1)+%#.%10641. /#5745T
  30. 30. 1984X #5 6*5 2*;5+%#. /#5745 #))4#8#6 6* #%76 .#05*146#) 241$./X (#4/45 60 016 61 #126 #0 #22.; 57%* 2*;5+%#. +064806+105h 51 51+. 415+10 %106+075T Eucalyptus woodlots in the Gelda watershed. Gully erosion in the Gelda watershed. Photo: Belayneh Ayele Anteneh Photo: Belayneh Ayele AntenehIn the Gelda watershed, there is a long tradition of retaining trees on farms, even though Authorsthe main aim is to supply fuelwood, construction wood, shade and animal fodder. The mostcommon on-farm tree species include Albizia gummifera, Albizia lahai, Ficus vasta, Ficus sur, Belayneh Ayele Anteneh, Bahir Dar University, EthiopiaCroton macrostachyus, Cordia africana and Vernonia amygdalina. On average, there are about16 scattered trees per hectare on the farms. Eucalyptus woodlots are also becoming popular, Herbert Hager, Lalisa Alemayehuwith an average holding of 200 m² per household. A comparison of farms with and without Duguma,agroforestry interventions showed that the rate of rill erosion in the part of the watershed BOKU - University of National Resourceswithout agroforestry was around five times higher than with agroforestry. The interventions and Life Sciences,more than halved annual erosion rates: from 41m3/ha – which is a remarkable amount of soil Vienna, Austriaconsidering the severe land degradation in the area – to 19m3/ha.Despite such impressive contributions of scattered on-farm trees in reducing soil erosion, thefuture of such practices is in jeopardy due to lack of regeneration, which is mainly hampered byfree grazing and the destruction of seedlings during ploughing. This leaves only old trees onthe farms. If these die off, farms may become bare, enhancing the vicious cycle of aggravatedsoil erosion, food shortage and poverty. To avoid such an undesirable future, farmers should beassisted and encouraged to retain trees on their farms, by planting and protecting tree seedlingsand by managing existing trees properly, particularly on slopes.FJ
  31. 31. * ((%65 1( # /#,14 5614/ 10 6*2416%6+8 (70%6+10 1( (14565 +0 6*#2470 8#..;X 7564+#0 .250 EHgEJ 18/$4 FNNFX 6* 5614/ Z5%*+ #/#) 691 /+..+10 /ç 1( 6+/$4#%4155 5176*40 4/#0; #0 95640 7564+#T *+5 9#5 37+8#.06 61 69+% 6*757#. #007#. *#4856 (14 6* 4)+10T +064 FNNFfFNNG 9#5 :%26+10#..; /+.X9+6* # $.19g#84#) 5019 2#%-X #0 9#5 (1..19 $; # *16 4; 57//4 +0 FNNGT* 457.6 9#5 # .#4) $#4- $6. 176$4#- 9*+%* $%#/ # /#,144)+10#. 241$./T 2002 Forest cover in the Kaprun watershed, 2002 and 2008. Each colour represents a different tree species. Most losses are of spruce forests (dark green)The Kaprun valley after the 2002 storm and subsequent bark beetle outbreaks, Maps: Hubert Hasenauerwith forest road built for harvesting and replanting. Photo: Hubert Hasenauer 2008One area severely affected by the storm was the Kaprun valley, with steep slopes mainly coveredby Norway spruce (Picea abies L. Karst). At the end of the valley is the year-round ski area onthe Kitzsteinhorn glacier. During high season, about 10,000 people travel through the valleyevery day to reach the ski lifts. Thus, any change in the stability of the forests which affects theaccessibility of the glacier strongly influences the local tourist economy.Before the storm, forests covered 1496 ha. The storm destroyed 266 ha (18%) of forests, anddamaged single trees and groups of trees, adding 12.5 ha of loss in forest area. As there was noroad access and winter was approaching, no harvesting was done until spring 2003. In 2003,a further 141 ha (9.5%) of forests were damaged by additional windthrow and the increasingimpact of a severe bark beetle outbreak, which continued. By 2008, 702 ha (47%) of the foresthad been lost.Across the catchment as a whole, the loss of forest cover from 2002 to 2008 led to an increasein annual runoff of about 8% - an additional 3.5 million m³ - significantly affecting the forests’protective function. Consequently, more than 150,000 trees were planted in 2003 and 2004,maintenance roads were constructed, and a wildlife management programme was established, toregain and ensure the protective function of the devastated forests. Author Hubert Hasenauer, BOKU - University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, Austria FK
  32. 32. FL Gunera insignis, Monteverde Cloud Forest Preserve, Costa Rica. Photo: Olivier Chassot
  33. 33. #.75 1($+1+845+6; FM
  34. 34. #.75 1( $+1+845+6;Lalisa Alemayehu Duguma, Georg Gratzer, and Martin F. Price1706#+05 #4 ).1$#. %0645 1( $+1+845+6;Y FI 1( 6* GH ).1$#.$+1+845+6; *1652165 #4 9*1..; 14 2#46+#..; +0 /1706#+05T *; 2.#; #%47%+#. 41. +0 *#4$174+0) # 5+)0+(+%#06 07/$4 1( 2.#06 #0 #0+/#.52%+5 6*#6 #4 +6*4 0/+%X +TT 1%%744+0) 019*4 .5X 14 6*4#60T 1053706.;X /1706#+05 #4 (1%+ 1( .1%#. #0 ).1$#. %10548#6+10 ((1465T 6*+4 1( 6* 914.5 2416%6 #4#5 #4 .1%#6 +0 /1706#+05Y 6*; %184EJ† 1( /1706#+0 .#0TThe high levels of biodiversity in mountains do not derive only 722146+0) .+8.+*115from their remoteness and the resulting lower human pressures interms of intensity of land use. Other factors include high climatic A high level of diversity in mountain forests acts as an insurancevariability along altitudinal gradients and on slopes with different against different pressures and changes, particularly when theorientations, high heterogeneity of rocks and soils, and diverse type and direction of the changes are unknown. Land use bydisturbance regimes. In combination, these factors mean that smallholders is often based on high biodiversity, particularly inmountains provide a multitude of habitats for different species. They homegarden systems, such as the Chagga homegardens aroundalso play a crucial role as corridors and refuge areas, particularly as Mount Kilimanjaro, which contain 520 vascular plant species,climates change, thus acting as species pumps over evolutionary including over 400 non-cultivated plants. Most of these are foresttime scales, so that lowland biodiversity hotspots also tend to species, and the multilayered structure of these homegardensdevelop around mountains. resembles natural tropical montane forests. This is in stark contrast to the very limited biodiversity in large plantations consisting of one#.++0) $0(+65X 4%1)0++0) %*#..0)5 species, which are found in many mountain areas and are increasing in area, mostly in Asia and Europe – a trend that is expected toAmong the different types of mountain forests, cloud forests are continue.critical in terms of both high levels of endemism and the threatsthey face. In the Peruvian Andes, a third of the endemic mammals, Mountain forests are important sources of wood, feed, food andbirds and frogs are confined to cloud forests which are therefore other economically important non-timber forest products. Peopleimportant gene pools. This is also true for domesticated agricultural living in and around mountains rely on their forests for, constructioncrops; these forests harbour particularly high proportions of wild wood and farm utensils, especially in many developing countries,relatives of crops including potatoes (Solanum sp.), tomatoes where remarkable numbers of species have one or many specific(Lycopersicon esculentum), avocado (Persea americana), beans uses. These forests are also important sources of wild edible plants(Phaseolus sp.), cucumber (Solanum muricatum), and pepper and animal products, such as honey and bush meat, consumed(Capsicum sp.). Yet these forests are more susceptible to threats than by many local people, and of traditional medicines where accessother types of forest, as their survival depends particularly on water to medical infrastructure is poor or absent. Thus, many mountainfiltered from fog and clouds by their leaves and stems. The large- people consider their forests as ‘safety nets’ providing consumables,scale felling of the trees removes these filters so that the forests feed, medicines and income, especially during the seasons whencannot re-establish. farm harvests are not enough to sustain families, or in years when crops fail.Generally, the conversion of mountain forests to agricultural land isthe main cause of deforestation. Many biodiversity conservation 2214670+6+5 (14 4#.++0) %101/+% #0efforts focus on this trend, often with negative effects on thelivelihoods of mountain people. However, productive land use %7.674#. 8#.75does not necessarily contradict the conservation of biodiversity. Many high-value products grow naturally in mountain forests.At moderate levels, land uses such as grazing enhance diversity; For example, Arabica coffee (Coffea arabica), one of Ethiopia’sa mosaic of moderate-intensity forest and agricultural land uses most important commodities, accounting for around one-third ofenhances biodiversity at the landscape scale. Such diversity is annual exports, grows in the country’s afromontane forests. Mostimportant for local land users. For example, people living around high-quality timber from central African countries originates fromMount Cameroon strongly value biodiversity, linked not only to the mountain forests. African montane forests are also sources ofusefulness of different sites but also to intangible values such as the important medicinal plants such as Prunus africana, whose bark isforests’ aesthetic and spiritual values and tranquility. highly demanded internationally to treat prostate diseases.GN
  35. 35. Epiphytes in the cloud forest of Selva de Florencia Natural National Park, Colombia. Photo: Julián InfanteThe biodiversity of mountain forests is important not only for itsintrinsic, conservation, livelihood and direct economic values,but also as a component of attractive landscapes, which are an * *+)* 0/+5/ 1( /1706#+05important basis for income generation from tourism, and as habitat #0 6*+4 (14565for animals and birds which are hunted, generating considerableincome as long as populations are maintained at sustainable Mountain areas and their forests have highlevels. Forest animals and birds, often living in sacred forests that degrees of endemism. The Eastern Arc Mountainslocal people considered as the dwelling areas of ‘spirits’ and hencerespect, also have a strong cultural significance. For example, in of Tanzania and Kenya are home to 96 endemicthe Cameroon Highlands, python (Python sebae), leopard (Panther vertebrate species and at least 800 endemicpardus), and civet (Civettictis civertta) skins are used decoratively vascular plants; the Tanzanian part of thisand in ceremonies, and Bannerman’s Turaco feathers (Tauraco mountain chain provides habitat for 30–40%bannermani) and porcupine (Atherurus africanus) quills are signs of of the country’s fauna and flora species. Thehonour given by the local ruler, the Fon. Tropical Andes are home to about 45,000 plant species (of which 20,000 are endemic) and 3,389 vertebrate species, half of which are endemic. In Ethiopia, two-thirds of endemic mammal species and 15 of the 26 endemic bird species live in the mountains. Half of Switzerland’s species are found in the mountain forests, which comprise around 80% of the country’s forest cover. GE
  36. 36. #674# FNNN #0 6* 7412#0 0+105 /1706#+0 (14565 #674# FNNN +5 241$#$.; 6* 914.5 .#4)56 2416%6 #4# 06914-U +65 FJXNNN 5+65 %184 EL† 1( 6* 7412#0 0+105 j k 644564+#. #4#T * 5+65 #4 5+)0#6 #%%14+0) 61 6* 5 24+0%+2#. +05647/065 (14 0#674 %10548#6+10U 6* EMKM +4%6+8 10 +. +45 #0 6* EMMF +4%6+8 10 .14#X #70# #0
  37. 37. #$+6#65 j
  38. 38. #$+6#65 +4%6+8kT Cedrus brevifolia forest, endemic to the Troodos mountains, Cyprus. Photo: Douglas EvansMountains (grey) andsites designated underthe EU HabitatsDirective for at leastone Annex I foresthabitat type (red).Map: European TopicCentre for Biodiversity Negotiations between the European Commission and the EU’s Member States have resulted in Authors a list (Annex I) of 231 habitat types – including 81 forest habitats – to be protected under the Habitats Directive. Both directives also have lists of species to protect, including many from Douglas Evans and Brian MacSharry, European Topic Centre on Biological mountain forests. At the end of 2010, 5,513 sites with forest habitats listed in Annex I covered Diversity, Paris, France 24% (299,359 km²) of the EU’s mountains. This is a higher proportion than for the EU as a whole because mountains usually have low human population densities, so that many habitats and species which have become rare elsewhere survive, and there is less political opposition to the creation of protected areas. In many countries, therefore, Natura 2000 is largely based on existing protected areas, which are often biased towards the mountains; for instance, all but one of France’s national parks are in the mountains. Eighty of the 81 Annex I forest habitat types occur in mountain areas. Although many have only a small proportion of their distribution here, 24 of these habitat types are only found in mountains, and a further 22 have 90-99% of their sites and/or area in mountains. While the sites are distributed throughout the EU, most Annex I mountain forest habitat types occur only in southern Europe, often with limited distributions. Annex I mountain forest habitat types in central and northern Europe tend to have much wider distributions. Although Natura 2000 is considered to be largely complete, it will only be of value if the sites are appropriately managed. Although some are strict nature reserves, most are likely to be exploited, and the European Commission has therefore published guidelines for the management of forested sites. GF
  39. 39. * 9+. %1(( (145651( 6*+12+#* #(# +152*4 548 1( 5176*956 6*+12+# 4#0)5(41/ MNN 61 #./156 HXNNN /645 #$18 5# .8.T 65 +845*#$+6#65 +0%.7 84)40 /1706#+0 (14565 #0 )4#55.#05 #0X/156 :%26+10#..;X (41/106#0 %.17 (14565X *1/ 61 #$176IXNNN 8#4+6+5 1( 9+. 1((# #4#$+%#T *+5 +5 #0 +08#.7#$. )06+%45174%X )+80 6*#6 #$176 MN† 1( 6* %1(( 470- 914.9+ +5 4#$+%# %1((T Sorting wild coffee beans. Photo: Svane Bender-Kaphengst Afromontane cloud forests, Kafa Biosphere Reserve. Photo: Svane Bender-KaphengstIn the forests, giant trees, lianas, epiphytes and ferns form dense vegetation that is home to Authormany plants and animals, mostly endemic, including lions, leopards, monkeys, bush pigs,antelopes, and about 260 bird species. Local people are highly dependent on the forests, Svane Bender-Kaphengst, Africa Program, The Nature andharvesting wild-growing coffee cherries, lianas, commercially-valuable spices, and honey from Biodiversity Conservation Unionwild bees for their own consumption and local sale. (NABU), GermanyFrom 1988 to 2008, 43% of the wild coffee forests were lost due to resettlement and migration,timber extraction, forest grazing, and conversion to agricultural land. In response, German privateand public partners and NGOs, including the German Nature and Biodiversity ConservationUnion (NABU), began an integrative approach to improve coffee quality and marketing,support participatory forest management and family planning, and establish the 760,000 haKafa Biosphere Reserve, designated by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and CulturalOrganization (UNESCO) in 2010. Both politicians and locals recognised the opportunity to fosterregional development by selling wild coffee labelled with the Biosphere Reserve’s brand; it is nowexported internationally.NABU has initiated a project on climate protection and preservation of primary forests – includinglarge-scale reforestation with native tree species and participatory forest management – fundedby the German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safetywithin the International Climate Protection Initiative. Fast-growing community forests andwood-saving stoves are being introduced. The tourist infrastructure is being developed, bytraining rangers and guides and providing micro credits to local people. Thus, living standardsare expected to markedly improve – which will benefit the long-term conservation of the forests.From 2002 to 2010, the deforestation rate was only 5%. GG
  40. 40. #674#. )04#6+10 +0 6*1706#+0 14565 1( %7#1414 %0674+5X 212. +0 6* %7#14+#0 05 *#8 750#674#..;g42417% 5.+0)5 61 2418+ (11X /+%+0X (14#)X(+4911X (0%5 #0 2416%6+8 $#44+45 +0 %7.6+8#6 #4#5T *+5 0#674#.4)04#6+10 5722.+ .1%#. 05 706+. 6* EMKN5X 9*0 6* )1840/06 #05 $)#0 4(1456#6+10 241)4#//5X 61 (#%+.+6#6 2.#06#6+105 1( 0#6+8 52%+5T0 #+6+10X (14564; 5%*11.5 #0 0#674#. 45174% 241,%65 (1%75 10 64 52%+5(14 6+/$4T *+5 64#%6 (41/ 6* 8#.7 1( 0#674#. 4)04#6+10 +0 #)41(14564;61 /6 #+/5 16*4 6*#0 2417%+0) 645 6*#6 #4 57+6#$. (14 75 #5 6+/$4T Agroforestry system with chilca and infiltration channels. The Casillas Castro family and their agroforestry system. Photo: Robert Yaguache Photo: Robert YaguacheToday, the use of plants produced in nurseries has largely replaced the practice of using Authornatural regeneration. However, many communities continue the practice at a small scale. Iffire, agriculture and grazing are eliminated through agreements with the land owners, natural Robert Vicente Yaguache O., Loja, Ecuadorregeneration is possible in all ecosystems, and also contributes to biodiversity conservation anddecreasing pressure on forests. Recent research in the province of Cotopaxi has shown manybenefits of natural regeneration which, unlike nurseries, costs nothing and does not requireprofessionals because rural families collect, transport and manage seedlings.There are other benefits of natural regeneration. First, grasses, bushes and trees can regenerate toform secondary forests. At an altitude of 2400 m, these can grow to a height of about 1.9 m in 10years, allowing organic material to accumulate, thus facilitating the temporary retention of waterand regulating its flow. These forests also contain many valuable non-timber forest products.Second, many naturally-regenerating tree species can grow, on average, 20 cm per year. Infallow areas where these species grow freely, they can be protected to form a forest-pasturecombination and for timber. Third, bands of naturally regenerated vegetation – establishedwith seedlings collected near roads and in fallow areas, thickets, and forests – across slopes andaround fields provide protection from winds and freezing temperatures. The improved growingconditions allow the cultivation of grass which can be used to feed guinea pigs, contributingto food security. Finally, up to 80% of family energy demands can be met by pruning naturallyregenerated trees.GH
  41. 41. 8#.7#6+0) 6* 41. 1( $+1+845+6;(14 5756#+0#$. /#0#)/06 1(;4);56#05 9#.076g(47+6 (14565#.076g(47+6 (14565X (170 10.; +0 176*40 ;4);56#0X 424506# 8#.7#$. *165216 1( $+1+845+6; #0 #4 5+)0+(+%#06 (14 .1%#. .+8.+*115T#46+%7.#4.; 5+0% 6* %1..#25 1( 6* 18+6 0+10X 6*5 (14565 *#8 :24+0%)4#6 2455745 7 61 %101/+% 4%55+10 #0 +0%4#5 *7/#0 +/2#%65T *+4/#0#)/06 /756 74)06.; #455 6* 457.6+0) %*#..0)5 4.#6 61 6*%10548#6+10 1( $+1+845+6;X 51%+1g%101/+% ((+%+0%;X #0 .1%#. .+8.+*115T Field assessment of the impacts of management strategies. Walnut fruit forests. Photo: Z Sarymsakov Photo: Gulnaz JalilovaRecent policy options have suggested that local people could meet their long-term demands Authorsby incorporating biodiversity conservation in management practices. To design appropriatemeasures requires knowledge about people’s perceptions towards biodiversity and conservation Gulnaz Jalilova and Harald Vacik, BOKU - University of Natural Resourcesactivities. A study on this topic showed that local people are aware of the concept, but perceive it and Life Sciences,differently depending on the benefits gained from the forests, and on their profession. The study Vienna, Austriafound that people generally have positive intentions for biodiversity conservation, and believethat large state subsidies for income generation, poverty reduction, and public support mayhelp to conserve biodiversity in the long term. However, the study also showed that local people,managers and regional planners need to better understand the importance of functional diversityin establishing a sound conservation and sustainable use strategy, as well as income-generatingactivities.To provide a framework for evaluating action plans, and allow improved cooperation inconserving and utilizing forest resources, six workshops at regional and local (leshoz)levels were undertaken to develop criteria and indicators (CI) to assess sustainable forestmanagement strategies. Stakeholders selected 7 criteria and 45 indicators, and evaluateddifferent management strategies based on their preferences. For various stakeholder groups,biodiversity conservation was the least preferred criterion. In elaborating different managementoptions, the forest tenure system, controlled cattle grazing, and mechanisms to address firewoodconsumption were found to be the most conflicting indicators. In addition, the involvement oflocal stakeholders in decision-making and biodiversity conservation was stimulated by the CIprocess. These findings therefore provide a fundamental basis for developing a new vision for thesustainable management of these unique forests. GI
  42. 42. GJ Taktsang Monastery, Bhutan. Photo: Chris Partridge
  43. 43. .#%5 (14 *#.6* #0 9..$+0) GK
  44. 44. .#%5 (14 *#.6* #0 9..$+0)Robert Mc Morran and Martin F. Price1706#+0 (14565 2.#; -; 41.5 +0 6* 2*;5+%#. #0 /06#. *#.6* #09..$+0) 1( 212. #4170 6* 914.T *; 2418+ /+%+05 (14/1706#+0 212.X #0 /+%+0#. #0 #41/#6+% 2.#065 61 ).1$#. /#4-65X5722146+0) /1706#+0 %101/+5T 1706#+0 (14565 #.51 2418+ /#0;12214670+6+5 (14 4%4#6+10 #0 6174+5/T 0 /#0; 8.12+0) %17064+5X6*; #4 1( )4#6 %7.674#. #0 52+4+67#. +/2146#0%X 1(60 $+0) )+802416%6 56#675T174%5 1( /+%+0#. #0 #41/#6+% 2.#065 collectors and enterprises and more powerful market actors, and the establishment of processing facilities close to product sourcesMountain forests are sources of not only wood products and edible to add value before export are important for developing morespecies, but also medicinal and aromatic plants (MAPs) which equitable supply chains. Despite shifts in many mountain regionssupport the health of mountain people, and have important cultural towards community management of forest resources, local groupsand symbolic values. Many mountain communities depend directly extracting MAPs often remain marginal to policy development.on MAPs for income, particularly as timber is only occasionally Both local and regional institutions could play important rolesavailable for trade, and fuelwood only achieves significant returns in supporting local enterprises and ensuring more sustainableon or near busy trekking routes or market centres. More widely, management of MAPs.MAPs are critical to many mountain economies; in many regions,the sustainable production of these plants and other non- ).1$#. 2.#;)4170timber forest products may bring greater income from mountainforests than timber. For example, MAPs traded in national and Tourism and recreation contribute significantly to the economiesinternational markets annually contribute over US$10 million to of mountain regions around the world, and provide critical sourcesNepal’s economy. of employment and income that can bring greater economic benefit than the harvesting of timber or non-timber forestKey challenges in dealing with MAPs include the lack of stable products. Mountain forests are a key element of the attractivenesspricing, environmental impacts of increasingly commercialised of mountain regions, and their recreational uses are projected toharvesting often leading to the extinction of the species in the grow rapidly. The increasing trend of escape to the mountainswild, and the inequitable distribution of benefits. MAP trading is a has been facilitated by technological developments, including‘buyer’s market’: collectors are usually paid only a fraction of the Global Positioning Systems, off-road vehicles, and mobile phones.prices generated further up the supply chain. High-value MAPs Visitors to mountain forests enjoy diverse activities, including walks,from mountain forests are commonly exported: for example, most trekking, camping, snow sports, mountain biking, fishing, hunting,from Nepal are exported and processed in India. Global market nature-based tourism, horse riding, and photography. Recreationdemand is increasing, and overexploitation often results. Many in mountain forests can have considerable physical and mentalMAPs originate in remote areas from habitats whose conservation health benefits. Yet these uses can represent a double-edged sword:is of international importance, and many are designated by growth in visitor numbers often results in unsustainable levels ofgovernments as protected areas. The resulting restrictions on resource exploitation, increased air and water pollution, damage toresource use and associated economic activity frequently have habitats through changes in land use changes, and disturbance tonegative consequences for mountain communities. Consequently, animals.the development of integrated approaches to the sustainableextraction of MAPs which consider both conservation and Developing sustainable tourism and recreation in mountainsustainable exploitation is essential. forests requires knowledge of levels of recreational use, visitors’ experiences and attitudes, and associated impacts. Zonation-basedLack of knowledge regarding the ecosystems where MAPs grow, approaches to visitor management can facilitate different types orand their relative importance in different mountain communities, intensities of recreation. Experiences in mountain forests can lead tois a key challenge in developing strategies for their sustainable greater environmental awareness among visitors, particularly wheremanagement. Establishing sustainable harvesting levels requires well-planned interpretation communicates the diverse values of theassessment of MAP resources, harvesting levels and techniques, forests. Various types of nature-based ‘ecotourism’ also representand potential employment and income. Overexploited MAPs powerful opportunities for capitalising on emerging markets, whilemay require restorative conservation measures, monitored potentially minimising the impacts of visitors on forest ecosystemsharvesting quotas, or cultivation. Partnerships between local in the longer term. Nevertheless, as tourism-based economiesGL
  45. 45. A guided tour for tourists, Bwindi Impenetrable National Park, Rwanda. Photo: ©FAO/Roberto Faiduttiare vulnerable to global trends and often provide mainly seasonal designation; the protection of larger sacred landscapes may beemployment, it is essential for mountain people to maintain other facilitated through social norms which foster careful use, ratherlivelihood sources. than a complete ban on extractive uses. Frequently, complex sets of myths and beliefs act as guidelines to facilitate sustainable#%4 /1706#+0 (14565 human-ecosystem interactions and protect biodiversity. In eastern Bhutan, for example, Ridam, a long-standing practice founded inIn mountain regions around the world, areas of mountain forest or Buddhist beliefs, prohibits entry to and use of a sacred forest fromwhole landscapes are considered as sacred and are protected, often mid-August to mid-October. This protects young animals and plantswith restrictions of extractive uses of flora and fauna restricted. during the monsoon growing season, and provides socio-economicSacred forests also represent sanctuaries for worship and religious benefits through focusing community attention on importantceremonies. While cultural and religious values are associated with agricultural activities. Such traditional ecological knowledge ismany forest types, mountain forests are often associated with commonly intricately integrated with spiritual beliefs and practicesparticularly strong spiritual values, as these are integrated with and contributes to protecting ecosystem complexity, often throughthose of the wider mountain setting. fostering the development of landscape mosaics.The level of protection or resource use restrictions depends on thescale of the sacred forest. Smaller groves are often accorded strictprotection from extractive uses, including official government GM