18
THINKING beyond the canopy Peat swamp forest degradation: A comparison between the two peat-richest tropical countries Indonesia and Peru Hergoualc’h K, Gutierrez-Velez VH, Menton M, Verchot LV 10 October 2014 – IUFRO World Congress 2014 – Salt Lake City

Peat swamp forest degradation: A comparison between Indonesia and Peru

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Presentation from the 2014 IUFRO World Congress of recent research in peat swamps in Indonesia and Peru on carbon stocks and greenhouse gas emissions from intact and converted wetland forests and associated land uses, ecosystem C dynamics modeling tools, and roles of tropical wetlands in climate change adaptation and mitigation strategies.

Citation preview

Page 1: Peat swamp forest degradation: A comparison between Indonesia and Peru

THINKING beyond the canopy

Peat swamp forest degradation: A comparison between

the two peat-richest tropical countries Indonesia and

Peru

Hergoualc’h K, Gutierrez-Velez VH, Menton M, Verchot LV

10 October 2014 – IUFRO World Congress 2014 – Salt Lake City

Page 2: Peat swamp forest degradation: A comparison between Indonesia and Peru

THINKING beyond the canopy

Introduction

C stored in tropical peat soils 40%

total C stored in woody vegetation in

the entire Tropics

Indonesia & Peru: The 2 peat-richest

countries in the Tropics (Page et al., 2011)

Indonesian peat forests first

described 12 decades ago

/

Existence of peatlands in Peru

documented about 1 decade ago

Page 3: Peat swamp forest degradation: A comparison between Indonesia and Peru

THINKING beyond the canopy

Peatland threats

Indonesia: Extreme degradation and

deforestation for agricultural

expansion. Fires a major concern (Gaveau

et al., 2014)

/

Peru: Increasing pressure from

logging and deforestation for gold

mining

Peat forest degradation poorly

addressed in both countries

Page 4: Peat swamp forest degradation: A comparison between Indonesia and Peru

THINKING beyond the canopy

Peru: Land covers on peat and threat

Variety of land covers in Peruvian

peatlands

Research focused on M. flexuosa palm

dominated peat forest locally known

as ‘dense aguajal’

Major threat: Over-harvesting of M.

flexuosa palm by slashing it.

Purpose: palm fruit and larva (suri)

collection

Page 5: Peat swamp forest degradation: A comparison between Indonesia and Peru

THINKING beyond the canopy

Objectives

State of the art on Indonesian and

Peruvian peatlands’ extent, properties,

C stocks and degradation level

Evaluate potential of satellite data to:

- Distinguish M. flexuosa palm

dominated peat forest (‘dense

aguajal’) from other land covers

- Assess degradation level of ‘dense

aguajales’

Page 6: Peat swamp forest degradation: A comparison between Indonesia and Peru

THINKING beyond the canopy

Case study

Peruvian Amazon, Loreto, Pastaza-

Marañon basin, watersheds Marañon

& Ucayali rivers. Wide pressure

gradient in ‘dense aguajales’

´10

km

Vegetation

- Terra-firme forest (non-flooded)

- Restinga forest (periodically flooded, alluvial soils, dominated by

woody tree species)

- ‘Mixed aguajal’ (seasonally flooded, upland valley, with but not

dominated by M. flexuosa),

- ‘Dense aguajal’ (permanently flooded, depressions, M. flexuosa-

dominated swamp forests)

Page 7: Peat swamp forest degradation: A comparison between Indonesia and Peru

THINKING beyond the canopy

Degradation: 3 levels

Low: Undisturbed ‘dense aguajal’, clear dominance of

M. flexuosa palms, absence of stumps or other signs

of tree-cutting

Moderate: Structural characteristics of an undisturbed

‘dense aguajal’, presence of some stumps, cut trees

or other degradation evidence

High: ‘Dense aguajal’dominated by woody-tree

species rather than M. flexuosa palms as a

consequence of degradation, presence of stumps, cut

trees or other degradation evidence

Page 8: Peat swamp forest degradation: A comparison between Indonesia and Peru

THINKING beyond the canopy

Field data collection

Biomass inventory

Land cover Qty Purpose

Mixed aguajal 14 Groundtruthing land cover map

Dense aguajal

Groundtruthing land cover map &

Biomass inventory

Low degradation 2

Medium degradation 2

High degradation 4

50x50 m plots divided in

Four 25x25 m subplots: trees w/ DBH

> 10 cm; palms w/ H > 3 m

Four 10x10 m miniplots: trees 2.5 <

DBH < 10 cm; palms 1 < H < 3 m

Allometric models for calculating AGB

& BGB in woody trees, M. flexuosa,

M. aculeate, other palms

Page 9: Peat swamp forest degradation: A comparison between Indonesia and Peru

THINKING beyond the canopy

Satellite analysis

Landsat images fused with ALOS-PALSAR data

Database w/ structural data associated w/ each polygon & plot

linked to their geographic information

Terra-firme & restinga forests differentiated visually using a

false composite w/ Landsat bands 4, 5, 7 (non flooded/flooded)

Groundtruthing to differentiate between ‘dense/mixed aguajal’

Random forest algorithm to map ‘dense aguajal’ under

different levels of degradation and other LC

2 separate ‘mixed aguajal’ classes (2 very distinct groups in

the spectral space)

Quantitative separability analysis using Jeffries-Matusita index

Page 10: Peat swamp forest degradation: A comparison between Indonesia and Peru

THINKING beyond the canopy

Peatlands of Indonesia and PeruIndonesia Peru

Extent (km2) 150,000 50,000

Indonesia Peru

Extent (km2) 150,000 50,000

Location

(% of above

extent)

Sumatra (43%),

Kalimantan (32%),

Papua (25%)

Pastaza-Marañón basin (Loreto, San Martin,

Amazonas) (88%), Madre de Dios (1%)

Coastal & inland Inland

Indonesia Peru

Extent (km2) 150,000 50,000

Location

(% of above

extent)

Sumatra (43%),

Kalimantan (32%),

Papua (25%)

Pastaza-Marañón basin (Loreto, San Martin,

Amazonas) (88%), Madre de Dios (1%)

Coastal & inland Inland

Ecosystem type Variety of swamp

forests dominated by

woody trees

Herbaceous plant-dominated ecosystems

Mixed swamp forests,

Palm-dominated swamp forests (‘aguajal’)

- ‘Dense aguajal’ dominated by M.

flexuosa, permanently flooded

- ‘Mixed aguajal’ dominated by several

palm species, seasonally flooded

Not all ‘mixed aguajales’ grow on peat

Page 11: Peat swamp forest degradation: A comparison between Indonesia and Peru

THINKING beyond the canopy

Peatlands of Indonesia and Peru

Indonesia Peru

Nutrient regime Ombrotrophic mostly Ombrotrophic & minerotrophic

Indonesia Peru

Nutrient regime Ombrotrophic mostly Ombrotrophic & minerotrophic

C stocks

Peat C pool (Gt)

Peat C density

(mg C cm-3)

Vegetation

(Mg C ha-1)

57

64

220 peat swamp forest

4

35 ombrotrophic/26 minerotrophic

115 dense aguajal/88 mixed aguajal

Indonesia Peru

Nutrient regime Ombrotrophic mostly Ombrotrophic & minerotrophic

C stocks

Peat C pool (Gt)

Peat C density

(mg C cm-3)

Vegetation

(Mg C ha-1)

57

64

220 peat swamp forest

4

35 ombrotrophic/26 minerotrophic

115 dense aguajal/88 mixed aguajal

Degradation Logging & drainage

Initial AGB C stock reduced

by 53%

Peat emissions 22 Mg CO2eq.

ha−1 y−1

Logging

NO DATA

NO DATA

Page 12: Peat swamp forest degradation: A comparison between Indonesia and Peru

THINKING beyond the canopy

Case study Mapping of ‘dense aguajales’

degradation and

impact on biomass C stocks

Page 13: Peat swamp forest degradation: A comparison between Indonesia and Peru

THINKING beyond the canopy

Stand structural variables

0

300

600

900

1200

Low Medium High

# total trees/ha

0

300

600

900

1200

Low Medium High

# Woody trees/ha

0

200

400

600

Low Medium High

# M. flexuosa

palms/ha

No significant effect of degradation on the size of trees (DBH

woody trees or H of palms)

Biomass reduced considerably with

degradation

0

50

100

150

Low Medium High

Tree biomass (Mg C/ha)

Page 14: Peat swamp forest degradation: A comparison between Indonesia and Peru

THINKING beyond the canopy

Land covers and degradation of ‘dense aguajales’

Most of degradation in the

North (Tigre river).

Low degradation inside

Pacaya-Samiria reserve

‘Dense aguajales’ with low

degradation had a very

distinctive signature

Main confusion between LC:

‘Mixed aguajal’ overlapping with

spectral signature of ‘dense

aguajal’ with medium and high

degradation

Page 15: Peat swamp forest degradation: A comparison between Indonesia and Peru

THINKING beyond the canopy

Lowland peatlands Indonesia Peru: Knowledge gaps

Indonesia

Body of knowledge considerably improved over the past

decade

Forest degradation dynamics and related trace gas

emissions need much more attention

Peru

Huge knowledge gap: map, land cover description &

peat properties characterization, trace gas exchanges,

current and future extent of degradation

Particularly relevant for REDD+ implementation these

C-rich ecosystems

Page 16: Peat swamp forest degradation: A comparison between Indonesia and Peru

THINKING beyond the canopy

Approach to map peat dense aguajales & their

degradation in the Peruvian Amazon

Suitable to map non/slightly degraded dense aguajales

as the discrimination from other LC high reliable

Potential for degradation temporal monitoring in

non/slightly degraded dense aguajales using a reference

year

Discrimination highly & moderately degraded dense

aguajales & other LC: Moderate, confusion w/ mixed

aguajales. Improvement feasible w/ more field data

Page 17: Peat swamp forest degradation: A comparison between Indonesia and Peru

THINKING beyond the canopy

Approach to map peat dense aguajales & their

degradation in the Peruvian Amazon

Caveats:

- Low sampling intensity,

- Limited knowledge on the land use history in the

degraded areas

Further steps:

- Ground measurements to capture variables explaining

differences in the 2 groups of mixed aguajales

- Evaluation extent to which biomass changes relates to

peat C dynamics

- Application to a larger area and characterization of

additional peat LC

Page 18: Peat swamp forest degradation: A comparison between Indonesia and Peru

THINKING beyond the canopy

CIFOR advances human well-being, environmental conservation, and equity by conducting

research to inform policies and practices that affect forests in developing countries.

www.cifor.cgiar.orgwww.cifor.cgiar.org

Thank youThank you

Questions?Questions?