Trees and forests in and around towns

Urban and semi-urban forestry does not receive the attention it deserves from the forestry community, given that urban populations in countries all over the world are constantly increasing, very rapidly in developing countries, especially in Asia and Africa. There are many reasons for this neglect; the most important reason is that town councils and local and regional assemblies are responsible for managing towns and surrounding areas, and not ministries concerned with forestry. In effect, successes in urban forestry have often resulted from mayors who were convinced of the improvements in local standards of living that good tree and forest management could bring about. Urban forestry is also neglected because foresters tend to have less influence than they should, less than landscape designers and gardeners.

As in many other fields, the factors and problems encountered in urban forestry vary according to a country's level of economic development. Urban people in wealthy countries mainly demand recreation and pleasure (in all their forms) from trees and forests. In their special paper on urban forestry, Nilsson and Randrup (1997) underlined the priority that should be given to inventories and to the monitoring of trees and their health (which is even more important when the trees grow in difficult conditions and when numbers of them are old), and also emphasized the attention that should be given to soil characteristics and the use of environmentally friendly production techniques (for example less use of pesticides and heavy machinery). In view of the reduction of public finances and of the high cost of land in towns and their suburbs, in his voluntary paper, Konijnendijk (1997) poses the question as to whether the management of new green spaces should be entrusted to bodies other than town and local councils. The degree of consensus on the management of green spaces within urban communities varies; the values, perceptions, interests and importance attached to the trees and forests of a town can be very different from one community to another. At the same time, successful examples of tree planting and the establishment of green spaces to commemorate festivals or special days demonstrate that it is possible to involve urban communities in this issue.
In poorer countries, rural people who have moved to the city have immediate requirements for basic products: fuelwood, low-priced building materials, food and water for drinking and domestic use. Less essential, yet necessary to improve their quality of life, are the services that trees and forests can yield in and around towns: recreation and pleasure obviously, as in wealthier countries, but even more important, protection against water and wind erosion (and against dust-and sand-carrying winds), and protection of catchment areas around towns which supply water and enable urban wastes to be disposed of safely. To meet the requirements of these rapidly expanding city populations, foresters should cooperate with urban authorities and communities and all the nongovernmental organizations involved as far as their often limited resources allow, participating more than they did in the past in designing and implementing relevant projects in this area. Foresters could contribute to specific projects, i.e. systems for purifying and recycling waste-waters, which could be used to irrigate plantations, green spaces and forest belts, and the development of semi-urban agroforestry. Concerning this last point, it is important that foresters take part in the current research and development efforts by agronomists to increase agricultural production around towns, and that they promote the use of multiple-use forest trees in town environs to provide food products, forage and fuelwood

The evolution of forestry information requirements

It may seem obvious that the objectives of forest resource assessment and surveillance programmes and their information should match the requirements of potential users. Nevertheless, assessments continue to be based on available resources rather than on objectives that have been clearly defined in advance. The importance of including surveys in planning and decision-making processes cannot be overemphasized

The state of the world's forests

In 1995, it was estimated that (natural, "semi-natural" and planted) forests covered an area of 3.454 billion ha, that is some 26.6 percent of the total land mass (excluding Greenland and Antarctica); in 1990, other "wooded areas" (areas of bush, scrubland, heath, fallow land, etc.) covered an additional 1.68 billion ha. About 57 percent of the world's forests ( 1.961 billion ha) were in developing countries where the proportion of forest cover was the same as in the developed world (with 1.493 billion ha of forest) and therefore the same worldwide. Forests in temperate and boreal regions were a little less extensive (48.5 percent of the total land mass) than those of the humid and dry tropics. More than two-thirds of the world's forests were in seven countries: the Russian Federation, Brazil, Canada, the United States, China, Indonesia and former Zaire, in descending order. In 29 countries (including 21 tropical countries), more than half the land was covered by forest; while the proportion given over to forestry was less than 10 percent in 49 other countries (mainly small, unwooded, island states and territories) and in several entire subregions, including Saharan Africa (7.5 percent), non-tropical southern Africa (6. 8 percent), the Near East ( 1.9 percent) and North Africa ( 1.2 percent).
Natural forests cover a negligible area in Europe, significant areas in the rest of the developed world and the majority of the humid tropical countries (dense forests). These are forests which have not been used for production or silviculture (unlike the so-called "semi-natural" forests) and which are generally characterized by a complex structure, a range and allocation of species that are unique to the site, a wide range of ages and the presence of dead or dying trees.
Although it is often difficult to distinguish plantations from other forests in the developed world, they cover an estimated total of about 80 million to 100 million ha. In 1995, their estimated total area in developing countries was about 81 million ha, more than 80 percent of which were in the Asia and the Pacific region and more than 40 percent in China alone (which was followed in importance by India, Indonesia, Brazil, Viet Nam, the Republic of Korea and Chile, each with more than I million ha of plantation). In tropical countries as a whole, the proportion of large industrial plantations has decreased in favour of afforestation at village, farm and agroforestry levels, especially in the Asia and Pacific region (some of this new forestry supplies the industrial wood markets); three genera (eucalyptus, pines and acacias) and one species (teak) account for about half of all plantations. To complete the list of trees that are planted, "non-forestry" plantations should also be mentioned; these include rubber plants, oil- and coconut palms in tropical countries, as well as the trees used along hedgerows, the sides of roads and in urban gardens. Although these trees are only partially registered or not registered at all, they contribute (to a greater or lesser extent, depending on the country) to the production of forest goods and resources.
From 1990 to 1995, the area covered by forests (including plantations) in industrialized countries (excluding the Russian Federation) increased annually by about 1.75 million ha ( 0.39 million ha were in Europe and 0.76 million in North America). At the same time the area covered by natural or semi-natural forests in developing countries decreased every year by 13.7 million ha (12.9 million ha of which were in the tropics). This reduction was partly compensated by the 0.7 million ha planted every year (0.3 million ha in tropical countries), but the net annual reduction in forests was still 13 million ha. Every year during this period, the earth lost a total of 56.3 million ha of forest (equivalent to an area the size of France), that is 0.33 percent of total forest cover (or I percent every three years), with the annual loss in developing countries being 0.65 percent.
The FAO study on changes to tropical forest stands in the 1980s (FAO, 1996) has made it easier to identify the deforestation processes and factors in that part of the world. For example, the study showed that 40 percent of the dense tropical forest converted to other uses was completely cleared, mainly for agriculture and animal breeding, 10 percent was partially cleared or "fragmented" for the same reasons, 26 percent was transformed into bush for nomadic agriculture with short fallow periods, 20 percent transformed into light or mosaic forest for nomadic agriculture with long fallow periods, and 4 percent was converted into agricultural or forestry plantations. It is obvious that the various forms of agriculture - permanent with annual crops or perennial plantations. or nomadic with long or short periods of fallow - are the main deforestation factors in tropical countries, where most deforestation in developing countries takes place ( 12.9 million of the total 13.7 million ha deforested each year). The interaction of forests and agriculture is at the heart of the deforestation problem and preliminary solutions lie in finding a better way of integrating conservation and forest exploitation in rural development

New original available for purchase!

Actually, I painted this last year so it's not exactly a new painting, but I have not had it up for sale before so it is newly available!

Nepal

Nepal is endowed with rich and varied biodiversity.Altitudinal variances in short distance give Nepal's biogeography variety that range from lush moist forests and sparse alpine deserts to luxurious grasslands in lowland Terai. The mountainous country also shelters some of the world's most rare animals.Sagarmatha (Mt. Everest) National Park and Chitwan National Park with typical natural, cultural and landscapecharacteristics were listed as World Heritage sites in 1974 and 1984, respectively.

Welcome to FECOFUN

BackgroundThe community forestry concept in Nepal is a courageous, innovative and future oriented approach towards participatory forest management by local people. Community Forestry Program is widely celebrated as one of the most progressive policy examples of devolving control over forest resources to community based user groups, which has established a viable procedure for handing over the forests to actual groups of users with a legal status as autonomous and corporate institutions with perpetual succession.
Genesis of FECOFUN and its status:
Federation of Community Forest Users, Nepal (FECOFUN) emerged out of the idea that forest users from all parts of the country should be linked in order to strengthen the role of users in policy making process. And since its inception in July 1995, it has grown into a social movement organization with about 8 million people- all of whom are forest users. It is a national federation of forest users of across Nepal dedicated to promoting and protecting users’ rights. The memberships of FECOFUN are categorized into two types according to user-groups' involvement in natural resource management and use rights. Community Forest User Groups (CFUGs) organized under the Forest Act-1993 of Nepal (provision relating to formation of CFUG) are eligible to become general member of this federation and any other user groups based on forest resources at grassroots level are qualified to become elementary member. The structure of this Federation is comprised of three tiers like Village or Range post, District, and Central level committees. Furthermore, FECOFUN works to strengthen the institution of users groups and to increase their awareness to reduce poverty of local people through forest resource management.
To date, more than 11,200 CFUGs from across Nepal are affiliated with FECOFUN and it is towards a growing trend. FECOFUN has become an effective mechanism for developing a dialogue between policy makers and users and also, a learning center for user groups to take advantage from forest management.
Vision Statements 2007 - 2010
As a representative organization FECOFUN is inclusive, institutionally effective, self reliant and exercises absolute democracy.
Forest User Groups sustainably manage their natural resources are self reliant and practice social justice and inclusive democracy.
Mission
To promote and protect rights of community forest users through capacity strengthening, economic empowerment, sustainable resource management, technical support, advocacy and lobbying, policy development, and national and international networking and to uphold the values of inclusive democracy, gender balance, and social justice.

Forest nect

Forest Connect’ is a four years program endeavoring to reduce poverty by linking small and medium forest enterprises with national forest programmes, emerging markets and service providers. From 2007 to 2010, the program is being implemented in Burkina Faso, Guatemala, Guyana, Lao PDR, Mali, Mozambique, Uganda, China and in Nepal. Within coordinated efforts made in different countries, Forest Connect Nepal aims to contribute to the goal of Forest Connect as a whole through increasing the visibility of specific Small and Medium Forest Enterprises (SMFE) sector of Nepal; increasing the level of organization and connectedness of ‘Forest Connect’ MFE members to markets, service providers and policy processes; and increasing the viability of ‘Forest Connect’ members in the market.
Starting December 2008, the second phase of the "Forest Connect Nepal" project is being implemented in Nepal by ANSAB, with an obejctive of :
Increasning the visibility of specific Small and Medium Forest Enterprises (SMFE) in Nepal;
Increasing the level of organization and connectedness of "Forest Connect" SMFE members to market, service providers and policy processess; and
Increasing the viability of "Forest Connect" members in the market.
The project within its duration of eight months also aims to connect SMFEs to:
National forest programmes (empowering SMFEs to be heard by policy makers);
Emerging markets (by supporting existing SMFE assotiations); and
Service providers (strengthening their capacity to provide trainings and finance).
Last Updated on: 23 Jan 2009
(c) 2005 ANSAB All Right Reserved Designed by: NCCS