THE VEGETATION OF THE WESTERN PACIFIC CHALLENGES, ISSUES and THE WAY FORWARD. ROBERT JOHNS and VIDIRO GEI -

Transcription

1 THE VEGETATION OF THE WESTERN PACIFIC CHALLENGES, ISSUES and THE WAY FORWARD ROBERT JOHNS and VIDIRO GEI - mountjaya1@yahoo.com

2 A Regional Perspective Papua New Guinea has the largest area of forests in the study area. The Forests of New Guinea (Papua and Papua New Guinea) are very important internationally for biodiversity, as a major Carbon sink, and for conservation.

3 Forest Areas Extensive areas in NG are at higher altitudes. These are very important as protection forests, and also for biodiversity and conservation, and as a carbon sink. They could be greatly impacted by climatic change, especially El Nino related events. They also conserve large amounts of carbon. PM Sum Phi Bor Jav Sul Mal NG m m m t t m t - t

4

5

6 Standard Classification Mangrove Forests Lowland Swamp Forests (LSF) Lowland Tropical Rain Forest (LTRF) sea level to [300 ] 700 m Lower Montane Forest (LMF) [500 ] (-2200 m) Mid Montane Forest (MMF) [1700 -] M Upper Montane Forest (UMF) M Subalpine Forest (SAF) above 3200 to forest margin.

7 Vegetation Classification No standard system has yet been accepted for the classification of the vegetation of PNG. Systems are adopted for many reasons : mainly economic, practical, etc. Most reflect the available resources and the objectives of the classification. Early classification systems were developed by Lane Poole (in PNG) and H.J. Lam (in Papua) based on their expeditions. Source: Shearman et al (2008).

8 Hammermaster s system is the basis for most subsequent classifications of forests which are based on remote sensing. There is little correlation between the system used by Hammermaster (1995) based on remote sensing and standard systems based on structure, physiognamy, and floristics. It has been adopted because: i. It is much cheaper and more rapid to do mapping from aerial photos and remote sensing data; ii. iii. The expense of a structural / floristic based classification is very high; We do not have the detailed knowledge to identify many of the forest species.; PROBLEM There has been little success reported on research which can relate forest types to a classification based on remote sensing. (This is important to relate carbon to vegetation types) There are problems because the different forest types cannot be distinguished. Forest has also been mapped as merchantable or unmerchantable.

9

10 Comparison of Vegetation Types Hammermaster Low alt. forest on plains and fans, below 1000 m. 1. Large, medium, small crowned forest. Open forest. Standard LTRF Low alt. forest on uplands to 1000 m alt. 2. Large or medium crowned forest. (to m) LTRF 2. Large or medium crowned forest. (above m) LMF Mixed forest composition many Lauraceae LMF 2. Small crowned forest with: LMF Araucaria, Castanopsis, Casuarina, Eucalyptopsis, Agathis Forest above 1000 m alt. (Hammesmaster as Lower Montane Forest) 3. Small crowned forest or very small crowned forest. MMF Nothofagus, conifers, mixed Forest above 1000 m alt. (Hammermaster as Lower Montane Forest) 4. Small and very small crowned forest. UMF Nothofagus forest (N. pullei). Conifers (Papuacedrus, Phyllocladus, Dacrycarpus). 5. Very small crowned forest above 3000 m alt.. (Hammermaster - Montane Forest) Conifers SAF

11 Regional Vegetation Classification - 1 The proposed development of a detailed regional classification based on structure and physiognamy will provide an interface between vegetation classification based on remote sensing and a classification based on ground truth. We will collect structural/physiognomic data from a series of plots using a modified proforma as developed by Webb et al. This data will be used to generate a classification of the forest vegetation which can then be superimposed on existing vegetation maps. These results can then be used for forest management, and the production of maps (and estimates) of carbon and possibly for assessment of conservation values.

12 3 Savanna SF 38 Hot Springs LTRF 40 LTRF - Hoskins 5,18,19 Nothofagus MMF 41, 42, 44 Deciduous 10, 22, 36 Mixed LTRF 26 Secondary, early LMF LTRF 35 Mixed LTRF disturbed. 43 Deciduous LTRF 23, 24 Araucaria LMF 1, 11, 33, 34, 37, layered LMF 4, 16, 17, 27 Mixed LMF Mixed LTRF 28, 29 Castanopsis / Alstonia LMF 20, 22 Mixed LMF 32 Eucalyptus deglupta 21 A. hunsteinii LMF 6, 7 LTRF swampy Hoskins. Levee. 2, 8, 14, 15 9, 13, 30, 31 seasonally LTRF A. cunninghamii LMF swampy LTRF The classification using the Webb prop forma gives a detailed classification of the forest types based on the structure and physiognamy of the forest.

13 LOWLAND TROPICAL RAINFOREST - LTRF Lowland tropical rain forest is one of the most diverse of all plant communities. Sustainable management of the LTRF will depend on the recognition of the many fifferent forest types. These are dominated by different tree genera. Each type will require different managemant practises. Amongst the many dominant genera are: Anisoptera, Hopea, Pometia, Pterocarpus, Intsia, Octomeles, Eucalyptus deglupta, and Terminalia brassii, (on swampy sites)

14 LOWER MONTANE FOREST LMF. Lower montane forest occurs at altitudes from 300 m (on isolated coastal mountains), generally starting at c. 500 m, and extending up to the traditional level of subsistence agriculture (1500 m+). It is characterised by Castanopsis which forms often pure stands on drier valley floors in the major mountain valleys. Associated trees are Araucaria, Agathis, Lauraceae, Lithocarpus, Eucalyptopsis, and in some areas ridge top stands of Anisoptera and Hopea. The forest is much poorer in epiphytes than the Nothofagus dominated mid montane forest where the trees are taller, the branches and trunks densely covered with epiphytic mosses, ferns, and epiphytic shrubs.

15 LMF The characteristic LMF species: Castanopsis and Lithocarpus, are often dominant. Others common genera are Araucaria, and Agathis. Photos- Vidiro Gei.

16 LOWER MONTANE FOREST LMF. Ridge LMF dominated by Castanopsis with emergent Araucaria. Source: Shearman et al (2008).

17 MIDMONTANE FOREST - MMF MMF is dominant above 1500, up to 2700 m. Main genus is Nothofagus (S Beech) particularly N. grandis. Usually mixed with podocarps, Lauraceae, Cunoniaceae. Very diverse in epiphytes, orchids, ferns, and also a rich flora of gingers (Riedelia Alpinia) and Rhododendron. A mixture of N, S and endemic elements.

18 MMF Throughout New Guinea - very important Protection Forest in Highlands. Starts Above traditional zone of village agriculture. Disturbed forest areas important for diversity in genera such as Saurauia And Cyathea - the tree ferns.

19 UPPER MONTANE FOREST - UMF The UMF occurs from about 2700 m altitude up to 3200 m. It grades into subalpine forest (SAF). The forest is relatively short, m tall. The trees are densely covered with epiphytes, orchids, ferns, and slender climbers. A relatively low number of species in the UMF compared with MMF. Dominant trees are Dacrycarpus, Papuacedrus, Podocarpus., often with significant numbers of tree ferns.

20

21 Vascular Plant Diversity in NG Analysis of Vascular Plant Records in Database Total Species in database = 17,657 records. 1 collection 9081 spp percent 2 collections 2386 spp percent 3 collections 1251 spp. 6.5 percent 4 collections 867 spp. 5 collections 616 spp. 6 collections 433 spp. 7 collections 348 spp. 8 collections 279 spp. 9 collections 224 spp collections Rest of species (1073 spp.).

22 REDD Program - The program for reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, together with the MRV (measuring, verifying, and reporting systems), are designed to provide the basis for the implementation and funding of deals to combat deforestation. For the effective management of the REDD program it is necessary to have a general classification of forest types based on structure and physiognamy, which is applicable over a wide area. Supporting floristic data from more local areas will be included but identification problems exist. The EU funded project is developing a classification of forests for PNG, Fiji, Solomon Islands, and Vanuatu to provide a base for.

23 SET ASIDE

24 CONSERVATION Forest Typing based on Floristics has little value for management or conservation purposes. Because of the intricate patterns of speciation completely different vascular plant species occur in different communities dominated by a few canopy species. ie. LTRF on Mt Jaya where the same canopy species dominate with an almost complete variation in associated flora.

25 CONCLUSIONS The wider definition of rainforest suitable for preservation under REDD (as a carbon sink) would mean that such areas can function for: i. biodiversity conservation; ii. iii. and also as a iv. species conservation; habitat protection; carbon sink.