Adaptive management can increase ecological, social and economic resilience from restored areas in

Atlantic Forest, Brazil

Vera Lex Engel veralex@fca.unesp.br

Colaborators:

John A. Parrotta; Danilo S. Ré; Lauro R. Nogueira Jr.; Diego Soto Podadera; Liz Mio Otta; Rodrigo Minici de

Oliveira

According to our forest legislation, in properties were the native vegetation (besides the riparian buffers and other permanent protection areas) is under 20%, the legal reserve must be restored

Legal deadline: 30 years, starting in 2001

But Brazilian landowners • Aim at short term benefits • Lack a forest tradition • See the forest as a barrier to development • Believe that the way they the land today is a consequence of past governmental contradictory policies and resist to adequate themselves to current legislation •Are not willing to pay for “loosing” part of their land

In many situations, socio-economical and cultural constraints are more relevant for forest restoration than the ecological ones!

Around 71% of landowners are “outlaw” and have erosion problems in their properties

Social constraints

23%

8%

46%

23%

Factors hampering restoration of legal reserves and permanent

protection areas

Manutenção Informação Custo Falta de Interesse

maintenance

Lack of information

Lack of concern

costs

How are can we overcome barriers to forest restoration?

Most degradation is resulting from human interference in the ecosystems;

We are concerned to restore not only ecosystems, but Social Ecological Systems (SES, Bryian & Meyers, 2004);

SESs resilience needs to incorporate all three dimensions (Lamb, this conference)

A research project conceived since 1995 to test alternatives to concealing biodiversity restoration with provisioning stakeholders goods and services .

John A. Parrotta

Understanding and managing resilience

Edgardia Experimental Farm, UNESP campus

Treatments (plantation models) -after 10 years Control

(T1)

Direct seeding of five fast growing species (T2)

Agroforestry systems with 20 tree sp: annual crop production + medicinal and fruit trees (T3)

Mixed comercial species planting (25), divided in 2 growth groups

High diversity (41 sp.) planting using different functional and silvicultural groups (T5) Neighbor forest

fragments (references)

Reference sites: seasonal semideciduos tropical forest.

Reference sites: Basal Area = 20.8 to 38.4 m2. ha-1

Seed rain :46 (site 1). 56 and 82 sp. (site 1) (33 families). Tree species richnees76 . 82 and 112 Seedling density: 20.453 ind./ha (Pires& Engel. 2009). Seed bank density: 482.16; 588.6 and 800.3 seeds.m-² ) ; Nakayama (2009); Martins & Engel (2007 ). Seed deposition density :126.27 ( site 1);155.2 seeds. m-² (site 3); 256.48 seeds.m-² (Site 2)

Are these models liable to be acepted by small and medium

landholders?

•Must be as simple and easy as possible •Money input as low as possible •Maximum direct and indirect benefis:

high opportunity cost of land in developed parts of country; low land tenure in less developed regions

Are these restoration systems ecologically resilient?

In some aspects, yes: Trees over passing early filters are doing well (around 50%

in all treatments); Structure (including canopy stratification in the more

complex systems) and physiognomy are forest like; Natural regeneration of more than 100 tree species, most by

zoochory; Other life forms are beginning to colonize the plots:

epiphytes; lianas; forbs, understory trees; Invasive grasses have disappeared in some plots; A litter layer is overspread Functioning seems to follow normal trajectories

But some ecological surprises arise

Direct seeding untill two years ago

Canopy stratification, colonization by other life forms than trees

Nowadays: high mortality of Enterolobium trees due to fungal disease; Schizolobium monodominance: necessity of adaptive management: thinings + enrichment plantings?

And grasses are still there! (edge effect)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Control DirS AfS Mix A Mix B HDiv A HDiv B Forest

other

grasses

76 bird species after 5 years(15 families)– 11 % strictly frugivores;

Responsible for bringing 9.111 seeds/ha at DirS treatment and ; 37.889 seeds/ha at Hdiv system (only 12% autoctonous). (Rosa, 2003)

10 medium and large mammal species are using the restored areas (Caes, 2009) against 3 in the pastures

“Field of dreams” hypothesis (Palmer et al., 1997)

Medium and large mammals similarity between restored sites, native forest and passive restoration (Caes, 2009)

Restored areas: + similar to reference ecosystems in composition; + similar to pastures in density (low) densidade; -mammals foraging and sheltering habitats, but they still don’t support resident populations

0 5

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

Frag Pasto Rest

Nu

mbe

r of

Spe

cies

Treatments

n° species observed n° expectded richeness for 100 individuals sampling

Fisher’s α- = 10.11 H’= 2.776

H’= 2.34 Fisher’s α = 6.773

Fisher’s α = 13.08 H’ = 2.807

a a

b

Frugivore butterflies associated to restored areas (Furlanetti, 2010)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

RES FRG PAS

Treatments

Abun

danc

e

“If you build it, they will come” Big fish!

Are the systems economically resilient?

In some of the models the implantation and early maintenance costs may be supported;

Later additional incomes from firewood, timber and NTFP (medicinal plants, food,

honey, seeds)

Implantation costs between US$800.00 and US$2,600.00/ha

�

�����������

����������

2 m

2 m

5 m

Agroforestry System “Taungya” modified

Annual crops

Firewood species(10)

Timber and fruit trees (10)

10 m 1,5 m

corn

Sweet-potato pumpkin

beans

Afs Phase 1: annual crops, one –two cicles/year

Implantation and initial maintenance costs were paid within 4,5 years.

Other incomes: firewood from thinings, NTFP

Phase 2: Enrichment plantings with fruit trees (site 1), native medicinal trees + heart-of-palm trees (Euterpe

edulis, Arecaceae) in site 2

Mixed commercial plantings using two different groups of species according to growth rythms ( 12 anos)

Selective harvesting in two cycles: 15-20 and around 30 years with intermediate thinings

114-135 s.m.ha-1 from thinings at seven years, US$ 20-25.00/s. m.

Plywood and sawmill timber by reduced impact felling techniques

Currente challenge question: how to manage mixed plantings for firewwod and timber preserving natural regeneration?

Volume equations for every plantation model and site; for groups of homogeneous species: defining thinning and harvesting regimes

Timber stock per treatment after 12 years

DirS AfS Mix A Mix B HDiv A HDiv B

Treatment

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

220

Timber stock (m

3 .ha-1

)

Wilks lambda=,10927, F(10, 52)=10,531, p=,00000Vertical bars denote 0,95 confidence intervals

Dark Red Oxisol Ultisol

Site

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

105

110

Timber stock (m

3 .ha-1

)

Wilks lambda=,79235, F(2, 26)=3,4069, p=,04852Vertical bars denote 0,95 confidence intervals

(Volume estimation equations developed by D. S. Ré (this conference))

Timber annual mean yield (m3.ha-1. year-2)

DirS AFs Mix A Mix B HDiv A HDiv B

Treatment

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

Mean anual yield (m

3 .ha-1

.y-2

)

Wilks lambda=,10927, F(10, 52)=10,531, p=,00000

Vertical bars denote 0,95 confidence intervals

Dark Red Oxisol Ultisol

Site

4,0

4,5

5,0

5,5

6,0

6,5

7,0

7,5

8,0

8,5

9,0

9,5

Mean grow

th rate (m3 .ha

-1.y

-2) Wilks lambda=,79235, F(2, 26)=3,4069, p=,04852

Vertical bars denote 0,95 confidence intervals

Adaptive management Mimosa caesalpiniaefolia, exotic nitrogen-fixing

tree, facilitating or inhibiting?

Effect of eradicating this tree: growth, natural regeneration and grass invasion potential. Incomes as firewood

Other possible incomes

Brazilian pepper (Schinus therebintifolius )

5-8 kg of fruits/tree after 3 years

US$ 30.00/kg Market value as a

spice, for cosmetic and pharmacy industry

Non-timber forest products

500 ind./ha were planted in the AFS

Heart of palm, 0.7 kg/tree, U$ 6-8/kg

Fruits with high nutritional value; consumption of 850 ton/year in natura only in São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro States, 4.5-6 kg/tree/year (1.8-2.4 kg of fruit pulp)

Euterpe oleracea, “palmito” tree, an Atlantic Forest keystone species

Future challenges

Adaptive management to increase ecological and economical resilience Phenological patterns and keystone species

concept to guide enrichment plantings Thinings and felling regimes for mixed

plantings

Social resilience remains to be tested: gap of knowlegde

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

FINANCIADORES USDA-FOREST SERVICE

FUNDUNESP CAPES

APOIO: FCA

SEMENTES PIRAÍ ADUBOS VERDES

VIVEIRO BIOVERDE (LIMEIRA)