1. THINKING beyond the canopy
FORAFAMA
Carbon storage and logging activities: field
assessment in Central Africa
Denis J. Sonwa1; Shu Gideon Neba2, Njome Daniel3, Djomo Jocelyne3;
Valentina Robiglio4; Sufo Kankeu Richard1; Metet Arnauld3, Moankang Nkal
Noelle Marlene3, Eba’a Atyi Richard1
• 1. Center for International Forestry Research, Yaoundé Cameroon.
• 2. University of Helsinki (Finland)
• 3.University of Dschang (Cameroon)
• 4. IITA –Cameroon (Now ICRAF-Perou)
• Corresponding Email d.sonwa@cgiar.org
Atelier de restitution finale sur le REDD+ dans les concessions forestières d’Afrique centrale et du Brésil (Projet
FORAFAMA : Appui à la Gestion Durable des Forêts du Bassin du Congo et du Bassin Amazonien du Brésil), H
Hôtel Mont Fébé, Yaoundé,18 Juin 2014

2. THINKING beyond the canopy
Plan
§ Background
§ Carbon stock assessment
• ètree-fall gaps
• èAnnual Allowable Cut (AAC)
• èDifferents logging regimes
§ Conclusion

3. * EDF 2008
Main focus:
REDD+ with the
perspective of achieving
sustainable management
of forest stands of the
Congo Basin
Background: Central Africa & Climate Change
Main land uses*
Slash & Burn Agriculture: 438.801 km²
Biodiversity Conservation (Protected Areas): 444.970 km²
Logging (concessions); 595.380 km²
è Several activities on Biodiversity Conservation & REDD+
but Few (including research) on Logging & REDD+

4. Country Production in 2007(m3)
Cameroon 2 296 254
Gabon 3 350 670
Congo 1 330 980
RCA 537 998
DRC 310 000
Equatorial Guinea 524 799
Total Central Africa 8 350 701
Timber production in Central Africa*
*EDF 2008
è Biomass harvested as timber
è On-site logging damage
è Biomass destruction linked to forest management activities around/
periphery of exploitation sites, etc..
Forest exploitation & CC

5. Country Annual
Deforestation
(%)
Annual net
degradation
(%)
Cameroun 0.14 0.02
Gabon 0.09 0.07
Congo 0.02 0.01
RCA 0.06 0.02
DRC 0.20 0.12
Total Central Africa 0.16 0.09
Changes in Central Africa between 1990 and 2000 *
*EDF 2008
è Forest degradation usually linked to forest exploitation,
è But forest exploitation not necessarily the only factor of degradation
è Can also contribute indirectly to deforestation
è Need for more information on carbon stock and forest exploitation
Background: Forest exploitation & CC

6. THINKING beyond the canopy
Carbon Stocks & Forest exploitation
Periphery § Carbon stocks in forest/
agricultural land mosaics
(ASB/IITA, TNS; CED)
§ In agro cocoa forests,
with timber sometimes
occupying an important
place (IITA)
§ In intact forests
(Tropenbos in Cameroon;
WCS/WWF/ CTFS in
ituri-RDC)
§ Etc…
Primary forest
Forest field
(IC/maleHH)
Bush fallow
(IC/maleHH)
Annual mixed
Food crop field
Cocoa
Agroforest
Short fallow
Long fallow
Secondary
forest
Principal land uses in the Southern
forest area of Cameroon*
* ASB (2002)

7. THINKING beyond the canopy
§ Winrock in Congo (CIB) (Carbon
damage C/Ha)
§ GAF, Pilote studies on the effect
of logging in Cameroon (biomas
damage/biomass removed in a certifiied & non-
certified forest concessions
*Certified company (Pallisco) &
*Non-certified Company (SCTB)
§ The work of Nicheu et al. on the
value chain from forest inventory
to the Sawmill (VICWOOD
THANRY),East Cameroon
èfew studies, need for more research!
Carbon stock & Logging
On-site, review !!!*
*Figure de GAF, Rapport REDD Cameroon

8. THINKING beyond the canopy
Table
1:
expression
of
damage
factor
Comment : There is no significant difference between the two damage factors
Possible
justification
:
The
sale
of
standing
volume
(under
conventional
logging
practices
)
and
FMU
(SFM)
are
owned
by
the
same
company.
Carbon
stock
before
logging
(tC)
Carbone
extracted
(tC)
(m3)
Carbon
damaged
(tC)
Damage
factor
Forest
under
SFM
10,91±
5,19
5,05
±
3,07
(20,47
m3
±
10,01) 5,86
±
2,64
1,4
±
0,63
(0,33
±
0,17
tc/m3)
Forest
under
Sale
of
standing
volume
Regime
6,67
±
3,82
2,99
±
1,77
(10,67
m3
±
6,78) 3,70
±
2,64
1,33±
0,70
(
037±
0,20
tc/m3)
Carbon stock: Impact in tree-fall gaps

9. THINKING beyond the canopy
Reconstitution of carbon stock faster in sustainable management planning than in conventional logging.
Comparaison
of
carbon
stocks
Logging
under
sustainable
management
planning
Forest
under
Sale
of
standing
volume
Regime
0
years
(unexploited)
AAC9
(2011)
10
years
after
exploitation
AAC1
(2001)
0
years
(un
exploited)
VC
04
(2011)
10
years
after
exploitation
VC
02
(2001)
Carbon
pools n
=
16 n
=
9 n
=
14
(1,76
ha) n
=
7
(8,80
ha)
Trees
(tC/ha) 222,52
±
109,04 169,75
±
89,71 238,99±98,22 118,27±
81,45
Roots
(tC/ha) 41,14
±
21,91 32,39
±
18,44 43,82
±
19,97 23,53
±16,93
Undergrowth(tC/ha) 0,65
±
0,17 0,65
±0,13 0,69±0,17 0,47±0,17
Litter
(tC/ha) 1,29±
0,21 1,33±0,08 1,32±0,16 1,33±0,20
Dead
wood
(tC/ha) 35,36
±
35,97 65,69
±
51,05 19,33
±
29,29 19,54±43,52
Soil
(tC/ha) 26,96
±
10,65 50,17±
15,50 28,63±9,53 21,36±
4,15
Total 327,92
±
177,
95 319,98
±
123,86 332,78
±157,34 184,5
±
50
Post-logging carbon evolution
Carbon stock: Impact in tree-fall gaps

10. THINKING beyond the canopy
Results
Supervised classification with ArcGIS 10 & Erdas 2011 permitted to distincttively identify forest roads between
two years. In 2003, only the old primary is still visible but, Landsat 8 image discriminated forest gaps and roads
after forest exploitation in 2013
2003 2013
Impact in an annual allowable cut (AAC)

11. THINKING beyond the canopy
Results:
Log yard Primary roads Secondary roads Tertiary roads Skid trails Tree-felled gaps Quarry Total
BR BE BR BE BR BE Tree
trunk
Tree
crown
Surface area
d e s t r o y e d
(ha)
2.54 7.35 11.09 3.82 5.56 1.95 3.4 16.36 32.41 0.054
84.53
Quantity of
c a r b o n
destroyed t/
ha
169.26 169.26 84.63 169.26 84.63 169.26 84.63 84.63 84.63 84.63 169.26
_
Total carbon
destroyed
(tc)
4299204 1244.06 938.55 646.57 470.54 330.06 287.74 1384.55 2742.86 2742.86 9.14 11226.85
Percentage
(%)
0.16 0.45 0.34 0.24 0.17 0.12 0.10 0.50 1.00 1.00 0.00 4.09
11226. 85 tons of carbon were destroyed by logging activities in this
AAC (i.e. about 4.09% of the AAC).
Natural regeneration was enhanced in this AAC by sylvicultural
activities on 10 of the 16 log yards at the end of the logging using
trees such as Tali, Sapelli, Ayous (650 trees planted, area 5.88 ha)
Carbon damaged
Impact in an annual allowable cut (AAC)

12. Methodology
(1) Quantification of above- ground biomass (AGB) of
the commercial tree species using allometric
equations based on tree volume & biomass
(2) Quantification of AGB damaged by logging
infrastructure using unit area AGB value and field
measured surface areas of logging infrastructures
(3) Correlation and linear regression analysis between
density of logging roads, density of log yards and
above-ground biomass logged,
(4) Correlation and linear regression analysis between
red reflectance, near infrared reflectance (NIR),
middle infrared reflectance (MIR), normalized
difference vegetation index (NDVI), and enhanced
vegetation index (EVI) derived from MODIS 250 m
products and above-ground biomass logged.
Impact in an AAC & GIS Modelling

13. Results AGB destroyed by logging
Harvested trees compared with initial
commercial trees potential
-­‐200
-­‐100
0
100
200
300
400
500
Above-­‐ground
biomass
reference
baseline
Above-­‐ground
biomass
affected
Above-­‐ground
biomass
remaining
Above-­‐ground
biomass
(Mgha-­‐1)
Total AGB affected by logging
compared with the initial AGB

14. Results
Y = 0.835 + 64.882 X
Y = – 0.095 + 62.851X1 – 0.005021X2
Logging roads & NDVI as proxies to determine AGB logged
66 %
73%

15. THINKING beyond the canopy
AAC4-1 UFA 10011
(SFM Logging
Regime)
AAC 2-2 F. Council/
communal forest
Sale of standing
volume
10 01 180
Community
Forestry
Carbon
stock
by
logging
0tle
(tC)
256685.35
211555.60
395875.00
31670.00
Roadbed
1790.94
1713.3
7584.9
/
Log yards
403.79
601.7
1060.9
/
Road-sides clearings
2055.4
994.99
6257.0
/
Skid trails
2474.6
1141.46
3820.9
/
Tree-felled gaps
4256.9
3564.52
28554.6
2372.07
Timber processing areas
/
/
/
566.73
Total
10981.61
8015.7
47278.5
2938.8
Percentage
4.27%
3.78%
11.94%
9.27%
Looking the % of carbon stock pertubation, The Sale of standing volume
regime was more affected following by AAC 41 (respectivelly 11,94% and 9,27%.
Impact in differents Logging regimes
Carbon stock affected

16. THINKING beyond the canopy
Preliminary conclusion
§ Loging activities have an impact on forest carbon stocks.
The current study provides some preliminary information,
further research is required to provide information that will
be useful for the MRV system
§ A MRV system must take into consideration activities taking
place in forest exploitation zones
§ Public-Private partnership are useful for information
generation on REDD+ & Logging in Central Africa

17. THINKING beyond the canopy
www.cifor.cgiar.org
dsonwa@cgiar.org
http://www.cifor.org/forafama/home.html
Thank you!!!!