Reduced Impact Logging in Sabah

Global Forestry Services

1

Reduced Impact Logging in Sabah


Asia- Pacific Workshop Reduced Impact Logging : Challenges, opportunities and strategies in the emerging forest carbon economy

Kota Kinabalu, Sabah 3-4 May 2012

Global Forestry Services (M) Sdn Bhd


Outline

• Global Forestry Services; • Background RIL; • CHP & RIL Checklists • Auditing system • Summary of Compliance : June 2010 - Dec 2011 • Discussion on current Sabah RIL standard • Conclusions

2


3



GFS provides market oriented programs and services to support improved forest management, provide investment opportunities in forest restoration & fight climate change through carbon & REDD.

GFS also provides programs & services to support due diligence to verify legality of timber and wood products to meet USA Lacey Act & EU Timber Regulations.


4


GFS operates support programs for companies working towards certification as well as to support investment and carbon credits.

• Carbon Credit Support Program; • Forestry Support Program • Training & Support Services; • Wood Tracking Program • Forest Investment Services

Programs & Services


Background

5

Historically forests have been logged without regards for resource sustainability, or protection of environment and social issues as they have been seen as a “free good” to be exploited as part of the development process. Forest degradation is common result of conventional logging systems due to short term logging licenses that do not provide incentives for long term forest management.


Background

6

Conventional logging systems value timber as a windfall; revenue stream without any long term asset value. Objective of logging is to maximize revenue by cutting as much valuable timber as possible with minimal costs. Conventional logging does not consider the residual forest quality for resource sustainability that is a future asset in SFM. Basic result is a significant decline in forest quality throughout tropical forest regions.


Reduced Impact Logging (RIL)

Sabah Forestry Department has seen a sharp decline in forest logging revenue as the forest areas are being continually depleted of commercial Dipterocarp species SFD had the foresight to require all logging licensed areas under selective logging systems to implement Reduced Impact Logging based on RIL guidelines issued by the SFD.

7



• RIL in Sabah is based on the RIL Operation Guide Book “Code of Practice for Forest Harvesting in Sabah Malaysia”

• Developed by the Sabah Forestry Department

• 3rd edition dated March 2009

8



Reduced Impact Logging Vs

Reduced Income Logging

RIL objective - higher quality residual forest to support

sustained yield management & environmental protection

Works for long term

management not basic logging systems

9



The critical element to reduce impacts of harvesting and support sustainability of resources and the

environment is planning.

Comprehensive Harvest Plan (CHP)

10


Comprehensive Harvest Plan

Planning involves knowledge of the forest resources and environmental issues in the harvest unit

Know what & how much to extract Know what to protect from felling and

extraction Know how to fell & extract

11


RIL Implementation

RIL Implementation is based on trained staff that follows the CHP & complies to the RIL guideline standards for roads, skid trails, water crossings, directional felling, logging waste, etc

12


RIL Monitoring

• GFS has been appointed to monitor RIL implementation in Sabah starting June 2010

• RIL in Sabah is based on the RIL Operation Guide Book v03 March 2009

• GFS has supported the development of the CHP & RIL Implementation checklists to reflect compliance to the RIL Guide Book.

13


CHP & RIL Checklists

• The criteria were developed based directly on the RIL Guidebook March 2009 and divided into 2 key elements Comprehensive Harvest Planning (CHP) and RIL Implementation;

• GFS developed a working draft that was presented to the SFD for comment and revision;

• The revised checklists (G110-005b CHP; G110-006b RIL) were submitted for approval and use in the field.

• Workshop #1 is to obtain comments from FMU and stakeholders for revisions to the CHP & RIL checklists.

14


CHP Checklist

The CHP checklist consists of 6 main sections : Section 1: Contractor & Harvest Coupe; Section 2: Forest Resources; Section 3: Roads, Skid Trails & Log Landings; Section 4: Environmental attributes and mitigation measures; Section 5 : Comprehensive Harvest Plan Section 6: CHP Map

15


CHP Checklist

Section 1: Contractor & Harvest Coupe; 1.1 CHP Contractor has a valid registration by the SFD with trained leading supervisor.

1.2 Planning must survey, mark and map the licensed boundary that is geo-referenced.

1.3 Planning must be designed based on a pre-selected harvesting system (Tractor only / Long Distance Cable (Logfisher) / Helicopter)

16


CHP Checklist

Section 2: Forest Resources; 2.1. Planning of RIL harvesting for NFM and for

ITP areas managed as NFM shall be in accordance to license conditions and tree marking rules. All commercial harvest trees shall be clearly marked with tree numbers.

2.2 Records of trees marked for harvesting shall include tree number, species, diameter and location in relation to planned skid trails or feeder roads for tractor & Logfisher extraction.

2.3 The license holder should provide estimates of harvest tree volume/ha based on marked trees including pioneer species.

17


CHP Checklist

Section 3: Roads, Skid Trails & Log Landings; • 3.1 Feeder roads should be planned; surveyed and marked to meet RIL specifications:

maximum gradient 15%. Secondary Road 8-10 m width; corridor 15-20 m; maximum gradient 10%.

• 3.2 Main skid trails should be planned, surveyed and marked to minimize damage and earth works for log extraction. Skid trails shall be limited to a maximum slope of 47%; maximum length of 1200m / trail and occupy less than 6% (120m/ha) of the net harvesting area.

• 3.3 Logfisher trails shall be planned to minimize forest damage using the long cable to pull logs to the skid trail or feeder road according to specifications : maximum slope 47% (25o) and area occupied by logfisher trails is maximum 3% (50m/ha) of harvesting area.

• 3.4 Logfisher platforms shall be planned to minimize damage along ridges or by feeder roads and not exceed 15x30 m with the total area impacted not to exceed 0.7% of the harvest area.

• 3.5 Log landings shall be planned to minimize impacts to the forest and outside buffer zones in accordance to specifications (max 60x30m): Tractor – roadside storage ; helicopter drop area 30m radius & storage area 30x45 m located at least 38m from the drop zone.

18


CHP Checklist

Section 4: Environmental attributes and mitigation measures; • 4.1 Environmental issues such as steep slopes (over 25o >2ha) and riparian

area / stream buffers (30 m) shall be identified in the harvest area and mapped.

• 4.2 Protected trees shall not be marked for harvesting.

• 4.3 Trees planned for harvesting within stream buffer zones must be located and positioned to allow the tree canopy to be felled outside the buffer zone.

• 4.4 Stream crossings shall be planned to use bridge or culverts as appropriate to allow continual water flow.

19


CHP Checklist

Section 5 : Comprehensive Harvest Plan • 5.1 The CHP shall contain information on the licensee & description of planned

logging area • 5.2 Summary information on the forest resources that include : number of trees

marked for harvest; estimated harvest volume; and estimated total forest standing tree volume prior to harvesting (as per strata and FMP or sample plots if available).

• 5.3 CHP shall contain reference to harvesting system (tractor only; logfisher; helicopter) and machinery & manpower requirements appropriate to the harvesting system and compliance to RIL requirements.

• 5.4 CHP must contain a summary of planned feeder roads; skid trails and log landings appropriate to the harvesting system and compliance to RIL requirements.

• 5.5 The CHP shall provide information to limit harvest impacts to comply with the target maximum 30% overall damage based areas occupied by roads & skid trails and reduction in stand volume based on FMP inventory data or compartment sample plot data if available.

20


CHP Checklist

Section 6: CHP Map • 6.1 Approved CHP map shall be of

appropriate scale (1:5000) and legend with adequate geo-reference to identify areas using GPS.

• 6.2 CHP map shall identify all steep

areas, riparian and stream buffer zones for protection

• 6.3 CHP map shall identify feeder roads,

main skid trails, water crossings (culverts & bridges); log landings, drop zones.

• 6.4 CHP map shall identify the location of all trees marked for felling

21


RIL Checklist

Section 1: Contractor & Harvest Coupe; Section 2: Roads, Skid Trails & Log Landings; Section 3: Water Crossings & Drainage; Section 4 : Tree Felling Section 5 : Log Extraction (Skidding, cabling, Helicopter) Section 6: Environmental attributes & mitigation measures Section 7 : Training & Safety Section 8 : Compartment close out

22


Monitoring System

GFS conducts RIL monitoring according to a formal procedure (G110-040 Procedure - RIL Auditing). Auditing is conducted using SFD approved checklists for harvest planning (CHP) (G110-005b) and RIL Implementation (G110-006b) that is based on the current RIL guidelines v3.0. Auditing teams consist of 1 lead auditor and up to 4 support staff. Currently GFS operates with 3 lead auditors and 9 support staff. The audit teams travel to the forest on Monday conduct opening meeting followed by field audits of CHP & RIL compartments; conduct a closing meeting draft reports for each compartment and travel back on Friday.

23


Compliance

GFS evaluates compliance to each criteria based on estimated compliance (documentation and field evidence). Audit team looks for objective evidence of compliance to document in each applicable criteria;

Compliance: no clear evidence of non-

compliance Partial Compliance: incidental or occasional

non compliance that is not critical to RIL requirements

Non-Compliance: systematic non-compliance

to a criteria that threatens the RIL activities (felling of prohibited spp; not following CHP; etc)

24


CHP vs RIL (June10 – Dec11)

25

75

80

85

90

95

100

RIL Score

CHP Score

Scoring of average percent compliance for harvest planning & RIL implementation based on a minimum 15 compartments checked each month


Compliance & Monitoring

Overall there has been steady progress in complying to both the CHP and RIL requirements since the start of the RIL monitoring system.

GFS only conducts monitoring in compartments that have an approved CHP

that allows logging contractors to operate. Auditing for harvest planning after approval does not provide an effective system to revise plans prior to harvesting. Thus any non-compliance raised for harvest planning may not be addressed prior to harvesting.

GFS provides monthly compliance reports for each compartment monitored

for which SFD needs to follow up to address non-compliance. SFD sets penalties for non-compliance.

26


Current Sabah RIL Standard

The current RIL guideline limits the effectiveness of reducing impacts due to the lack of clear bench marks regarding protection of stream systems, skid trails and measures for sustained yield of resources.

Key deficiencies : • No limit the number or volume of trees to be cut per hectare to address

sustained yield • No requirement to measure impacts from tree felling to verify reduction • Sabah RIL Guidelines v03 limits protection to 3rd order streams that can

exclude permanent streams and pronounced seasonal streams • Permits extraction in stream buffer zones but requires crowns to fall

outside

27



• No effective benchmarks for excessive earthworks from skid trails, & feeder roads

• Minor skid trails not formally approved by SFD field supervisors

• The standard does not clearly define the identification and use of old skid trails over the creation of new skid trails

28



• Inadequate reference of potential mitigation measures for existing road systems that do not meet the current RIL standard

• Corridors cleared for drying roads are standard maximum size and not oriented to north-south or east-west aspects

• Log landings on road side storage is limited to the physical road surface that can block drainage and be hazardous for driving instead of using cleared corridors

29


Conclusions

Implementation of RIL monitoring has made a big impact in the way forests are harvested in Sabah as it has moved from conventional logging to better control through formal CHP & independent verification that provides the SFD impartial evaluation of compliance for each licensed compartment.

The current version (v03) of the Sabah RIL guidelines needs revision to better

plan, benchmark and measure impacts of harvesting in relation to environmental safeguards and sustainability of forest resources.

Monitoring of harvest planning need to be conducted prior to approval to

enable non-compliance to be addressed before harvesting commences. Implementation of RIL of a good harvest plan simplifies activities

30


Conclusions

RIL is a critical element for long term sustainable forest management and the transition from conventional logging is a process that requires a strong foundation in regards to training of contractors for harvest planning, logging contractors that can implement the CHP including directional felling and minimal impact from extraction.

Use of and planning for new systems including Log-fishers and helicopter

systems needs better expertise to minimize impacts and resduce dependence on tractor logging systems.

Operational monitoring of RIL supports the industry to adopt RIL as the new

standard that is a key tool to improve forest management through preserving better residual forest stands that retain potential crop trees to form the future sustainably managed forests.

31


32

Thank You


33



The GFS Group of Companies GFS Incorporated;

GFS USA;

GFS Malaysia;

GFS Laos;

GFS Investments

GFS RIL

GFS Support

Website : www.gfsinc.biz

Documents

Reduced Impact Logging in Sabah