Biodiversity & Reduced Impact Logging: y p gg g The Sabah - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Biodiversity & Reduced Impact Logging: y p gg g The Sabah Forestry Department Experience Y.F. Lee, Anuar M. 、 A. Y. C. Chung ＆ E. Khoo Forest Research Centre Forestry Department, Sabah, Malaysia

C Contents t t � Sustainable forest management (SFM) in general l � Reduced impact logging （ RIL) as a tool gg g （ p ) � for SFM � S � Some results of research on RIL lt f h RIL � Ongoing research for refinement of RIL g g � Conclusions

Definition of sustainable forest management (SFM) ITTO: “Th “The process of managing permanent forest land to f f l d achieve one or more clearly specified objectives of management with regard to the production of a h d h d f continuous flow of desired forest products and services without undue reduction in its inherent h d d h values and future productivity and without ｕｎｄｕｅ considerable effects on the physical and social id bl ff h h i l d i l environment“

FOREST RESERVES AND OTHER FOREST LAND IN SABAH

Classification of forested areas in Sabah No. Forest types Area (ha) 1 1. Forest Reserves Forest Reserves 3 594 516 3,594,516 2. Plantation forests 150,492 , 3. Parks (under Sabah Parks) 245,172 4. Other forested areas (State 429,820 land, forests allocated for plantation forests, rehabilitated forests) rehabilitated forests) TOTAL 4,420,000

SUSTAI NABLE FOREST MANAGEMENT I N DERAMAKOT FOREST RESERVE

Deramakot Forest Reserve (55,000 Ha) Deramakot Forest Reserve (55,000 Ha)

Forest management practices in Deram akot F Forest Reserve have been assessed by SGS R h b d b SGS under the QUALIFOR programme and certified by Forest Steward Council as a by Forest Steward Council as a w ell-m anaged forest in July 1997. The certificate is valid until 2008

CONDITIONS FOR SUSTAINABLE FOREST CONDITIONS FOR SUSTAINABLE FOREST MANAGEMENT IN SABAH 1. Adequate provisions for planning procedures, implementing guidelines and monitoring task at different levels, i.e. forestry sector, forest management unit and levels, i.e. forestry sector, forest management unit and compartment 2 A forest management plan for a ten ear period that 2. A forest management plan for a ten year period that incorporates multiple-use forest management concept and supported by various studies. 3. Management criteria to categorize major functions of the forest in preparation of forest management plan. forest in preparation of forest management plan. 4. Comprehensive resource inventory to determine the quantities and qualities of timber stocking quantities and qualities of timber stocking.

CONDITIONS FOR SUSTAINABLE FOREST MANAGEMENT IN SABAH 5 S i 5. Scientifically backed growth models, i.e. the Dipterocarp tifi ll b k d th d l i th Di t Simulation Model (DIPSIM) to determine the annual allowable cut (AAC). ( ) 6. Subdivision into operational compartments at the size of 300 600 h 300-600 ha, each of which is assigned specific functions. h f hi h i i d ifi f ti 7. Annual Work Plan and Comprehensive Harvesting Plan 7. Annual Work Plan and Comprehensive Harvesting Plan (CHP) prepared at the compartment level.

CONDITIONS FOR SUSTAINABLE FOREST MANAGEMENT IN SABAH MANAGEMENT IN SABAH 8. Environmentally friendly harvesting system, such as Reduced Impact Logging and Skyline Yarding. 9 Well defined technical guidelines and specifications for 9. Well defined technical guidelines and specifications for both harvesting systems as well as other forest activities such as rehabilitation and silvicultu ｒａｌ ｔｒｅａｔｍｅｎ ｔ . 10 Areas high conservation values (e g high in biodiversity 10. Areas high conservation values (e.g. high in biodiversity, endemism, important watershed) will be identified from the Comprehensive Harvesting Plan and will be set aside as p g protected areas.

Major components of forest j p management system in Sabah Management M Pl Planning i Major components M j level period • Forest policy • State St t 10-20 10 20 L Legislation i l i • years Forest sector plan • Resource assessment (e.g. inventories) • Forest F t 5 10 5-10 F Forest zoning (conservation, production, i ( i d i Management years community, recreation areas) • Unit (FMU) Yield regulation (annual allowable cut) • Silviculture • Compartment Annual Harvesting • • Non timber products Non-timber products • Resource accounting ：ｉｎｐｕｔ ＆ ｏｕｔｐｕｔ

Some management criteria used in categorizing the major functions of forests j Category Management criteria • Areas for timber production confined to flat areas Production p and moderately steep slopes of <25 degrees • Industrial tree plantation may be recommended in poorly stocked or severely degraded areas p y y g • Priority on areas which are of steep slopes (>25 Conservation degrees) • Critical water catchment areas to protect the water Critical water catchment areas to protect the water resources and to prevent soil erosion • Forest area <25 degrees (for conservation of wildlife) wildlife) • Areas with natural esthetic values e.g. waterfalls, Recreation scenic view, etc. that have potential for recreation and ecotourism development and ecotourism development • Areas adjacent to human settlements Community • Areas suitable for traditional community land-use, forestry for example rattan production damar (resin) and for example rattan production, damar (resin) and honey collection

Steps in Reduced Impact Logging (RIL) Steps in Reduced Impact Logging (RIL) i. Pre-harvest operation Comprehensive harvesting plan Detailed road planning & marking Tree marking & directional felling marking

Steps in Reduced Impact Logging (RIL) Steps in Reduced Impact Logging (RIL) ii. Harvesting operation Construction of road, bridge, opening of main skid trails, directional felling and log skidding. Construction of all harvesting infrastructure is in accordance with the specification laid down in the RIL guidelines. h ifi i l id d i h RIL id li iii. Post-harvest operation Cross drain installation bridge and culvert removal and landing Cross drain installation, bridge and culvert removal and landing （ temporary log storage area ） reshaping.

REDUCED IMPACT LOGGING (RIL) VS CONVENTIONAL LOGGING Pinard, Putz, Tay & Sullivan (1995) y ( ) Reduction of damage to soil and residual trees up to 50% Preliminary Studies by Lohuji & Martin (2001) (%the total harvested area): ( ) Skid trails only occupied about 3 - 4% Feeder roads covered about 1.2% Landings covered about 0.7%

REDUCED IMPACT LOGGING (RIL) VS CONVENTIONAL LOGGING Eltz and Bruhl (2001): no clear relationship b t between the severity of the forest disturbance th it f th f t di t b and the magnitude of the effect on stingless bee and ant communities and ant communities Mohd. Fairus (2000): diversity indices on butterflies decreased in more disturbed butterflies decreased in more disturbed habitats Chey( 2002): Moth diversity was higher in the Chey( 2002): Moth diversity was higher in the lightly logged sites; more individuals but fewer species in the heavily logged area species in the heavily logged area

RIL Research Programme funded by RIL Research Programme funded by Malaysian Government 1. The effects of different cutting limits on timber yield, residual stand damage and regeneration in a lowland dipterocarp forest l l d di f Januarius Gobilik & Robert Ong 2. The effects of different cutting limits and slopes on stream river water quality and quantity S Samin Salim i S li 3. The impact of forest harvesting on soil and leaf- p g litter beetle assemblage Arthur Chung

RIL Research Programme funded by RIL Research Programme funded by Malaysian Government 4.The effect of forest harvesting at different slope on soil erosion Jupiri Titin 5 Quantification of nutrient loss under reduced 5. Quantification of nutrient loss under reduced impact logging Noreen Majalap 6. Wood quality in relation to diameter sizes of trees and hill slopes and hill slopes James Josue & Zamrie Imiyabir

Centre for Ecological Research, Kyoto University Disturbance and Recovery of Tropical Forests � Sustainability of biomass and floristic composition in � Sustainability of biomass and floristic composition in Reduced-Impact Logged (RIL) forests Dr Tatsuyuki Seino (Kyoto University) Dr Tatsuyuki Seino (Kyoto University) Dr Shin-ichiro Aiba (Kagoshima University) Dr Masaaki Takyu (Tokyo University of Agriculture) Prof. Kanehiro Kitayama (Kyoto University) Mr. Robert Ong (FRC) Mr. John Sugau (FRC) � Comparative analysis of the nutrient loss between a C i l i f h i l b lightly logged versus an intensively logged forest in the Deramakot Forest Reserve Deramakot Forest Reserve Prof. Kanehiro Kitayama (Kyoto University) Dr Noreen Majalap (FRC) j p ( ) Mr. Jupiri Titin (FRC)