2 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

Disclaimer

This study was conducted in an independent manner. The views expressed in this study do not present the official position of the NWFP Forest Department and the funding agency (SDC) but those of the Study Team

ISBN: 969-9082-02-x

Parts of this publication may be copied with proper citation in favour of the Authors and the publishing organization Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 3

This publication is based on 15 months continuous engagement of the team in collecting data, analyses and documentation by the study team.

Initiated by: Pak-Swiss Integrated Natural Resource Management Project (INRMP) on request of the NWFP Forest Department in the first yearly planning workshop of the project, to conduct an independent study

The Study Team and Authors: Dr. Knut M. Fischer (Team Leader) Muhammad Hanif Khan Alamgir Khan Gandapur Abdul Latif Rao Raja Muhammad Zarif Hamid Marwat

Publication editing: Arjumand Nizami Syed Nadeem Bukhari Fatima Daud Kamal

Layout: Salman Beenish

Printing: PanGraphics (Pvt) Ltd., Islamabad

Available from: Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC) Intercooperation Delegation Office Pakistan INRMP / NWFP Forest Department, Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation Circle, Peshawar

Cover photographs: Aamir Rana Amina Ijaz Arjumand Nizami Irshad Ali Mian Roshan Ara Tahir Saleem

Technical cooperation:

Intercooperation Head Office Berne, Switzerland and Pakistan

Pak-Swiss Integrated Natural Resource Management Project (INRMP)

GIS lab of Forest Planning and Monitoring Circle, NWFP Forest Department

Published by Intercooperation Pakistan through Pak-Swiss Integrated Natural Resource Management Project (INRMP). INRMP is funded by Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC) 4 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

About Intercooperation

Intercooperation (IC) in Pakistan and worldwide has been actively engaged in forestry sector right from its inception in 1982. In Pakistan, IC began its development career when Kalam Integrated Development Project (KIDP) was mandated to the newly founded organization by Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC). Since then, IC remained engaged in forestry at various levels with several stakeholders in the sector including NWFP Forest Department, communities and civil society. For many years, SDC and IC remained active players in Forestry Donors’ Coordination Group which took policy decisions on supporting institutional reforms in NWFP Forest Department. Beside these direct supports extended to forestry sector in NWFP, IC believes that people’s livelihoods are deeply attached with forestry resources and hence any management practices and regimes have a direct influence on people living in and around forests. During its three decades of long tenure in Pakistan, Intercooperation has implemented over twenty development projects in Pakistan, particularly in the fields of natural resource management, mainly for SDC.

About Integrated Natural Resource Management Project (INRMP)

INRM project is funded by Swiss Government (SDC) and Government of NWFP and is jointly implemented by NWFP Forest Department and Intercooperation. The project aims at collaborative working between different NRM players (e.g. forestry, agriculture, livestock) for an integrated planning and management of natural resources in a village. The project was founded on the interventions and lessons learned during the previous forestry development projects (KIDP, Siran SFP, FMC, FSP), which had a major impact on reform process of NWFP Forest Department. The project incepted in 2006 and will continue till June 2011. The project operates in districts Lower Dir, Haripur and Mansehra of NWFP. Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 5

List of Abbreviations

ADB Asian Development Bank AJK Azad Jammu & Kashmir BL Barren Land CBD Convention on Biodiversity Conservation Cbm Carbon Budget Model CCD Convention on Combating Desertification CCF Chief Conservator of Forests CIR Colour Infrared CTA Chief Technical Advisor DFFW Department of Forestry, Fisheries, and Wildlife DFO Divisional Forest Officer DFP Draft Forest Policy ECOSOC The Economic and Social Council EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EPS Environmental Protection Society ERTS Earth Resource Technology Satellite EU The European Union FAO Food and Agriculture Organization FC Forestry Commission FCS Forest Co-operative Societies FD Forest Department FDC Forest Development Corporation FDCG Forestry Donors Coordination Group FDF Forest Development Fund FMC Forest Management Centre FSMP Forestry Sector Master Plan FSP Forestry Sector Project FY Fiscal Year GDP Gross Domestic Product GIS Geographic Information System GPS Global Positioning System GTZ Deutsche Gesellschaft fuer Technische Zusammenarbeit Ha Hectare HESS Household Energy Strategic Study HUJRA Holistic Understanding for Justified Research and Action IC Intercooperation IEE Initial Environmental Examination IFM Intensive Forest Management IGF Inspector General of Forests IIED International Institute for Environment and Development INRM Integrated Natural Resource Management Project ITC Institutional Transformation Cell IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature JFM Joint Forest Management JFMCs Joint Forest. Management Committees KfW Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau KIDP Kalam Integrated Development Project KIFMP Kaghan Intensive Forest Management Project LPG Liquefied petroleum gas 6 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

MACP Mountain Areas Conservancy Project MAF Million Acre-Feet MAP Medicinal and Aromatic Plants MD Moderately Deep MDGs Millennium Development Goals MEA Multilateral Environmental Agreements Mill Million MoE Federal Ministry of Environment MSS Multispectral Scanner NAs Northern Areas NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration NCS National Conservation Strategy NEP National Environmental Policy NGOs Non-Governmental Organizations NLBI Non-Legally-Binding Instruments NWFP North-West Frontier Province PE&DD Planning, Environment and Development Department PEPA Pakistan Environmental Protection Agency PFRI Provincial Forest Resource Inventory RF Reserve Forests RFO Range Forest Officers RGB Red, Green and Blue RL Range Land RNE Royal Netherlands Embassy SAFI Sarhad Awami Forestry Ittehad SDC Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation SF Social Forestry SFDP Siran Forest Development Projects SPCS Sarhad Provincial Conservation Strategy THBS The Timber Harvesting Ban Study TM Thematic Mapper UNCED United Nations Conference on Environment and Development UNCTAD United Nations Conference on Trade and Development UNDP United Nations Development Programme UNEP United Nations Environment Programme UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change VDCs Village Development Committees VDP Village Development Plans VLUP Village Land Use Planning VOs Village Organizations WEHAB Water, Environment, Health, Agriculture and Biodiversity Program of the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) WFP World Food Programme WOs Women Organizations WP Working Plans WPI Wholesale Price Index WSSD World Summit on Sustainable Development WWF World Wide Fund for Nature Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 7

Table of contents

FOREWORD 11 SUMMARY 12

Chapter 1 16 INTRODUCTION

1.1 THE PROBLEM 16 1.2 THE STUDY 17 (1) Study Concept 17 (2) Study Team 17 (3) Accomplishment of the Study 18 (4) Study Contents 18

Chapter 2 19 Forestry and Forest Situation prior to THE Harvesting Ban

2.1 FORESTRY 19 2.1.1 Forest Policy, Forest Laws, and Forest Administration 19 (1) Evolution of National Forest Policies 19 (2) Impacts of Forest Policy 20 (3) Forest Laws 20 (4) Organization of the Forest Department 21 (5) Summing Up 22

2.1.2 Multiplicity of Demands 22 (1) Demands Resulting from Legal Rights 22 (2) Factors of Illegal Commercial Exploitation 23 (3) Environmental Demands 23 (4) Summing Up 23

2.1.3 Initiatives to Improve Forest Planning and 24 Management prior to the Ban (1) Donor-funded Projects 24 (2) Relevant Major Studies 25 (3) Summing Up 25

2.1.4 Timber Harvesting Systems Prior to the Ban 25 (1) Early Harvesting System 25 (2) Forest Development Corporation (FDC) 26 (3) Forest Co-operative Societies (FCS) 26 (4) Summing Up 26

2.2 FORESTS 1996 27 2.2.1 Data Sources, Baseline Study, and Basic Data 27 (1) Provincial Forest Resource Inventory (PFRI) and 27 Study Approach (2) The Study-Area 1996 27 (3) Population and Households 1996 28 (4) General Land-Use 1996 29 (5) Population Density 1996 29 8 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

2.2.2 Total Forest Area and Stock 29 (1) Total Forest Area 1996 29 (2) Area Distribution of Forests 1996 29 (3) Distribution of Forests by Density Class 29 (4) Forest Stock 1996 31

2.2.3 Features of Forest Conditions 1996 32 (1) Status of Forest and Wood Utilization 32 (2) Status of Regeneration 33 (3) Forest Health and Vitality 33 (4) Biological Diversity 33 (5) Soil Depth and Humus 33

2.2.4 Wood Consumption/Supply Gap 1996 33 Introduction 33 (1) Timber and Fire-wood Consumption Estimate 1996 34 (2) Timber and Fire-wood Supply Estimate 1996 35 (3) Estimate of Wood Supply from Forests 36 (4) Wood Consumption/Supply Gap 1996 36 (5) Summing Up 37

Chapter 3 Timber Harvesting Ban – Directives, Compliances, AND 38 Effectiveness

3.1 BACKGROUND TO THE TIMBER HARVESTING BAN 38 3.2 INITIAL BAN PERIOD: SEPTEMBER 1993 TO APRIL 1997 38 3.2.1 Directives 38 3.2.2 Compliances and Effectiveness 1993 to 1997 40 (1) Initial Donor Activities to Forest Sector Reforms 40 (2) Other Donors and Projects in the Forest Sector 41 (3) NGO Involvement 42 (4) Further Donor Support to the Sector Reform 42 (5) Initiation of the Reform Process 43 (6) Summing Up 44

3.3 FIRST EXTENSION OF THE BAN APRIL 1997 TO DECEMBER 1999 44 3.4 SECOND EXTENSION OF THE BAN IN JANUARY 2000 AND BAN 45 RELAXATION FOR 2001 3.4.1 Directives 45 3.4.2 Compliances and Effectiveness 2000 to 2001 46

3.5 THE BAN JANUARY 2002 TO 2008 46 3.5.1 Directives 46 3.5.2 Compliances and Effectiveness 2002 to 2008 46 (1) NWFP Forest Ordinance 2002 46 (2) Forestry Commission and Round Table 47 (3) Re-organization of the Forest Department 47 (4) Forest Planning 48 (5) Participatory Forest Management 48 (6) Forest Development Fund 48 (7) Forest Force 48 (8) Donors’ Response 49 Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 9

3.5.3 Forest Staff and Forest Stakeholders’ Perceptions 49 (1) Forest Staff Perceptions on Forest Sector Reforms 49 (2) Perceptions of Stakeholders on Harvesting Ban 49

3.6 HARVESTING, MARKETING, AND REVENUES DURINg 50 THE BAN PERIOD (1) Harvesting 51 (2) Marketing and Timber Prices 52 (3) Revenues 53 (4) Summing Up 54

Chapter 4 The Forests - Demands and Supply 2008 55

4.1 CHANGING ENVIRONMENTAL AWARENESS AND 55 ENVIRONMENTAL DEMANDS (1) Growing Environmental Concerns 55 (2) International Commitments 56 (3) Summing Up 56

4.2 FORESTS 2008 and FOREST CHANGE 1996 to 2008 56 4.2.1 Basic Data 56 (1) Introduction 56 (2) Study Area 2008 56 (3) Growth of Population and Households 1996 to 2008 56 (4) Change in General Land-Use 1996 to 2008 57 (5) Population Density 2008 58

4.2.2 Total Forest Area and Stock 58 (1) Total Forest Area Changes 1996 to 2008 58 (2) Changes in Forest Area Distribution 1996 to 2008 59 (3) Changes in Distribution of Forests by Density Class and 60 Altitude 1996 to 2008 (4) Changes in Forest Stock 1996 to 2008 62

4.2.3 Wood Consumption/Supply Gap 62 (1) Timber and Firewood Consumption Estimate 2008 62 (2) Timber and Fire-wood Supply Estimate 2008 63 (3) Estimate of Wood Supply from Forests 2008 64 (4) Wood Consumption/Supply Gap 2008 64 (5) Summing Up 65

4.2.4 Environmental Impacts 65

Chapter 5 CONCLUSIONS 66

Chapter 6 68 RECOMMENDATIONS

REFERENCES 69 10 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

LIST OF ANNEXES and APPENDICES

ANNEX 1: Concerns of Forest Department 78 ANNEX 2: The Timber Harvesting Ban 82 ANNEX 3: Arguments to lift the Ban 87 ANNEX 4: Terms of Reference THB Study 89 ANNEX 5: Analysis of Forest Policy 94 Appendix: Relevant Sections of the Forest 100 Ordinance 2002 ANNEX 6: Legal Categories of Forest 104 ANNEX 7: Timber Harvesting Systems 107 ANNEX 8: Methodology Forest Area and Stock Analysis 110 Appendix 1: Glossary of Terms 132 Appendix 2: Plantation 134 ANNEX 9: Tables 140 ANNEX 10: Forest Analysis by Working Plan Areas 190 ANNEX 11: Impact of Deforestation on Floods 214 ANNEX 12: JFM Field Study 216 ANNEX 13: Circle Level Workshop 221 ANNEX 14: Stakeholder Analysis 225 ANNEX 15: Field Survey Methodology and Results 226

DOCUMENTATION 1: Extracts from the AGENDA 21 DOCUMENTATION 2: Extracts from the Environmental Guidelines of NWFP EPA (2004) DOCUMENTATION 3: Relevant Points of National Vision 2030 from the Executive Summary Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 11

FOREWORD

Timber harvesting ban was an important policy decision by the government with consequences for the entire forestry sector in the country. Since ban’s imposition, any dialogue on forestry appeared to be influenced by people’s perceptions on positive or negative impacts of the ban which may not have actually occurred. There has been no effort to collect scientific evidence, whether or not the ban was effective in reaching its intended objectives. This concern was raised during the first yearly planning meeting of the Integrated Natural Resource Management Project (INRMP). The ban became central to the discussion on joint forest management. The participants argued that if the forest dwellers are invited to become decision makers on resources through Joint Forest Management, why is it that they are given selective access to few resources? What is the justification for telling them, that they are decision makers with the government on designated forests, but when it comes to timber, it is something for a much powerful agency to decide – the state, controlling through a top down policy measure. Many thought that the ban was resulting in an illegal access to forests in a rather uncontrolled manner, much more damaging than would be in a normal situation when people are not denied a legal access. In their opposing opinions, some believed that the ban had positive impact in terms of protecting forest cover, hence it should be supported and alternate means should be strengthened to meet local needs.

Taking these mixed voices from a multi-logue, a suggestion was floored to study the impact of the timber harvesting ban through a team fully empowered to choose methods justified on scientific grounds. This team was inducted in April 2008 and completed its work in June 2009. The findings of the study lead us to understand that the ban could not achieve the intended objectives for which it was imposed. The degradation trend continued in the forests of NWFP. Hence as a policy measure, the ban was not the solution of the problems faced on the ground. This leads us to think of other dimensions on forestry management in Pakistan. What to do to reverse, or at least stop the current trend of forest degradation? One has to go back into the actual causes of degradation and think of measures which are likely to be more relevant. The study concludes its results on the basis of empirical and secondary data and thorough analyses on the basis of field observation. Yet, we are aware that the study will open debate on theoretical grounds since a direct link between increasing population and resource degradation has been largely contested by many researchers.

As per their ToRs, the study team has provided conclusions and some broad recommendations based on their findings. It is now up to the policy makers, departmental players and other stakeholders to sit together to analyze conclusions and chalk out a more comprehensive way ahead keeping all the ground realities in view. The study confirms that there is no time to lose!!

On behalf of SDC and Intercooperation (IC), I sincerely thank the study team for producing a very useful document and for its patient engagement throughout the study. Particularly I wish to thank Dr. Knut Fischer for providing a high quality leadership to the team and for regular guidance to IC and INRMP in the process. The NWFP Forest Department has been a great asset in providing useful information and GIS facilities for the study for which we extend our profound appreciation. The entire team of INRMP has made crucial contribution to accomplish the study for which every individual deserves gratitude.

The draft study was shared with the NWFP Forests Department in May 2009 and was revised in light of their comments received on various occasions. However, during this one year, the department and the study team could not reach a final agreement on some of the concerns raised by the department. These concerns should be addressed by another study which would require additional time and resources. In order to be fair, the present study documents those concerns in the original form in the Annex 1a for the reader’s reference (letter issued by the department dated April 23, 2010). Followed by this, another letter was issued by the Environment Department (dated June 4, 2010) agreeing on publishing the study as an independent document (Annex 1b).

Intercooperation is hopeful that the study is taken seriously and is practically used as a reference point in further policy discussions about the future of the forests in Pakistan.

Arjumand Nizami Programme Coordinator Pakistan IC Delegation, Pakistan 12 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

SUMMARY

After partition of the Indian sub-continent in 1947 the new state of Pakistan was left with a very small forest endowment of about 7%1 of its total land area. This small forest resource base was even further reduced to less than 5% after the separation of East-Pakistan in 1972.

In today’s Pakistan the majority of all natural forests are located in the two Civil Divisions of Malakand and Hazara of NWFP2. Of the total land area of Pakistan (803,940 km2) NWFP (excluding FATA) covers 9.1% (73,395 km2) and the two Divisions3, Malakand and Hazara constitute 63% (46,138 km2) of NWFP or 5.7% of Pakistan.

The first comprehensive assessment of the total area of natural forests in Pakistan was accomplished in 1990 under the Forest Sector Master Plan study (FSMP). Data of this study were compiled on a very wide analytical grid using methodologically questionable approaches that resulted in substantial inaccuracies. Reliable and accurate data on the area of the forests in NWFP were produced under the Provincial Forest Resource Inventory (PFRI)4. The results of the PFRI study had shown that 6,772 km2 were covered by forests in the Civil Divisions of Malakand and Hazara in 1996. This forest area constituted 9.2% of the total NWFP area or 0.8% of the country’s area. The focus of the present study is on the forests of these two Divisions using the physical definition of forests according to FAO standards5 for that purpose.

In NWFP forest areas have also been classified by legal definitions. These are forest areas that are under the custody of the Forest Department (FD). These forests are regularly covered by forest Working Plans (WP) for management purposes. Their total area is 841,517 ha. Of the total area, 7.6% (63,915 ha) are state-owned Reserved forests, 29.7% (250,106 ha) are Guzara forests owned either by community or private individuals and 62.7% (527,496 ha) are Protected forests6. Much of these forest areas are denuded of trees despite that all these areas are legally classified as ‘forests’. In 1996 all classified forests had tree-stands of different densities on 438,607 ha or 52% of the total area legally classified as forests.

With an ever-growing population and increasing demands for wood and wood-products on a very small forest resource base, all forests in NWFP were under continuous stress and the utilisation of these forests over and above their productive capacities started already many years before the PFRI study in 1996.

During the colonial period, such imbalances were tried to be controlled through rather rigid forest laws and also be partly compensated by the introduction of scientific forest management practices. With the creation of Pakistan, these colonial forest laws were continued with only marginal adjustments. Under these laws, though, the Government of Pakistan issued a number of forest policy documents substantiating forest management objectives and longer term perspectives in forestry. However, under the various civil and military Governments, five different policy documents were produced between 1955 and 1991 that were partly inconsistent in themselves, contradicting each other, and generally over-ambitiously far from reality. Thus, such policies remained wishful while the actual forest management practices were continued under the colonial laws and were based on the colonial Working Plan Code.

1Historical data on natural forest areas prior to fall of East Pakistan are scanty. 2There are a few natural forests also in other parts of Pakistan mainly in Balochistan and there are some forest areas in the Federally Ad- ministered Tribal Areas (FATA) along the border to Afghanistan. These forests are covering only small patches and are scattered over a wide area. 3The term “Division” in this report always refers to Civil Division of the general administration. 4The PFRI was accomplished on the basis of LANDSAT TM satellite data supported by an extensive physical ground survey of 768 sample plots selected on the basis of a standardized random procedure on statistical parameters. 5In the PFRI as well as in the present study forests were identified as any area of more than 10 hectare that has a tree-stand of more than 10% canopy cover. 6Protected forests formerly were under the jurisdiction of the princely states and with the merger of these states into the territory of Pakistan these forests came under the custody of the Forest Department. Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 13

In NWFP about 92% of the legally defined forests are either privately owned or encumbered with rights of and concessions to the local communities. The owners of the Guzara forests and concessionaries of the Protected forests as well as non-right holders depend heavily on forests not only for subsistence (e.g. fire-wood, construction timber, livestock grazing) but also for their livelihoods by cutting trees for additional income. There are also commercial interests to serve supplies to the timber market and to satisfy Government revenues from forestry. Alongside there exists a large scale illegal commercial exploitation of forests by the so-called “timber mafia”7.

On top of these demands on the already declining forests, new demands have surfaced from the growing awareness of the environmental functions of healthy forests in the larger societal interests reinforced by international commitments of Pakistan towards Multilateral Environmental Agreements.

With the forest visibly deteriorating, certain quarters of the general public and also some politicians at the federal as well as at the provincial level started blaming the Forest Department for mismanagement. Also from the Guzara owners, claims were raised that the harvesting system under the FD using contractors is inadequate for their requirements. In order to comply with public and political demands, the harvesting system was taken out of the Forest Department and reorganised under a new para-statal Forest Development Corporation (FDC) in 1976. Later on, the management of the Guzara forests was also transferred to the Guzara owners who organised themselves into Forest Co-operative Societies (FCS).

These attempts were meant to improve forest management, but failed on two counts. (1) the disentanglement of forest management and harvesting by establishing the FDC did not succeed as the FDC largely re-employed the contractors it was meant to replace and (2) the forest management through co-operative societies of Guzara forest owners fell into the hands of a small group of larger owners who heavily over-exploited the Guzara forests and simultaneously embezzled funds of the smaller owners.

A devastating flood occurred in NWFP in September 1992, causing tremendous physical damages and loss of lives. Major factions in the general public attributed the severity of the flood damages to the deteriorated forests in the catchment areas of the main rivers. Rightly or wrongly – the blame was placed on the Forest Co-operative Societies for their alleged malpractices and on the mismanagement of the forests by the Forest Department. In light of the real situation of the forests and to follow-up public pressure, the federal Government imposed a general ban on commercial timber harvesting throughout Pakistan in September 1993. The ban was accompanied by an action plan addressing issues to be rectified in forestry with the ultimate objective to contain or even reverse the process of forest deterioration. NWFP, having the largest natural forest area, was the main focus of the ban. With several renewals and a one-year relaxation in 2001, this ban is in force up to the present.

To explain the reasons for the declining forests, the PFRI study already identified that the recorded commercial harvesting accounted for only about 2.2% of the total wood consumption, whereas local consumption for fire- wood accounted for 80.0%, and other unrecorded out-takes accounted for 17.8%. According to the PFRI, thus, the forest deterioration was mainly resulting from the fire-wood consumption of the local people. The PFRI study concluded that with an ever-growing population the forest will continue to deteriorate as the forest cannot be protected against the subsistence needs of the local people. Thus, the ban on commercial timber harvesting was addressing an issue that was only marginally contributing to the continuous deterioration of the forests.

The ban, however, had other positive effects in that its action plan requirements accelerated the process of

7The term “timber mafia” is a colloquial term used throughout NWFP to qualify a group of people engaged in illegal timber harvesting for commercial purposes. This group, in various constellations, include local timber smugglers, Guzara owners, former harvesting contractors, local timber-traders, sawmill owners, and - at times – forestry staff and local politicians. 14 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

forest sector reforms in NWFP finally leading to a provincial forest policy, a comprehensive revision of the colonial forests laws, and a restructuring of the forest administration. In its basic features the forest sector reform not only followed suit of what the ban directives were demanding. The new policy also integrated almost all major demands of the federal Government and the international donors regarding participatory forest management under multiple forest functions in a conservation and environmental protection perspective.

In the perceptions of the Forest Department staff responsible to implement these structural reforms, the new policy frame for action was far too wide to fit into their implementation capacities. Though new policies and management strategies have been phrased out and new administrative structures created, field level operations continued along the traditional lines up to the present day. Much of what was initiated by the new policy was reluctantly absorbed by the traditional structures of the FD and the persisting esprit de corps among its staff. The policy also only had a limited impact because of its inadequate acknowledgement of realities regarding tenure issues and local firewood consumption.

At a small scale legal harvesting continued during the ban period under several relaxation clauses e.g. harvesting of “dry and wind-fallen trees”. As a result of the ban, legal harvesting and marketing declined but illegal harvesting, both recorded and unrecorded, took over and illegal trade expanded in response to growing demand. The volumes of such unrecorded illegal harvesting and marketing that was already prevalent prior to the ban continued in a dimension more than ten-times larger than the timber out-take recorded by the FD.

During the study period from 1996 to 2008, the forest cover8 in NWFP decreased from 677,230 ha to 570,221 ha. Thus, 107,009 ha (15.8%) area moved to less than 10% density which according to FAO definition is not Forest but remains an area under the management of Forest Department. In addition to the change in forest area, the density also reduced in remaining forest. Altogether the forests reduced by 46.656 mill.m3 of their growing stock or almost 25% when compared to the base-year. Forests located in areas below 2000m were most heavily affected by downward shifts in density, loosing almost 33% of their stock. The decrease of 107,009 ha (15.8%) need to be seen on two grounds:

As mentioned earlier, legal definitions, i.e. areas under the custody of the Forest Department (FD) which are regularly covered by forest Working Plans (WP) for management purposes, the total area under Forest Department management is 841,517 ha. Of this, 7.6% (63,915 ha) are state-owned Reserved forests, 29.7% (250,106 ha) are Guzara forests owned either by community or private individuals and 62.7% (527,496 ha) are Protected forests. Hence during the study period, of the total change in land use from forest, 69,000 ha (64.5%) are from legal categories covered by the Forest Department while the rest (35.5%) is not directly under the management of the Forest Department. Area-wise fragmentation and details are given in Table 22 (and Annex 9) in this report while the changes in density classes are provided in Table 23.

Secondly, though all these areas (841,517 ha) are legally classified as ‘forests’, much of these forest areas are already denuded of trees. In 2008 all classified forests had tree-stands of different densities on 44% (or 369,303 ha) of the total area legally classified as forests as oppose to 52% in 1996 as mentioned above. Which means that legally defined forest areas under tree cover was reduced by 8%, i.e. from 52% to 44%.

During the same period the total wood consumption was 52.2 million m3, of which 13.9 million. m3 were justifiably extracted from yields of the declining but still remaining forests. Commercial harvesting and fire- wood consumption contributed to the decline of growing stock to the extent of 38.3 million m3 in the study- period. 2% of this is attributable to recorded commercial harvesting and 84% to fire-wood consumption. The remaining stock of 8.3 million m3 or about 14% is from unrecorded harvesting attributed to other factors.

These “other factors” relate to harvesting by (1) the local people to supplement their meagre incomes for

8Land spanning more than 0.5 hectares with trees higher than 5 meters and a canopy cover of more than 10 percent, or trees able to reach these thresholds in situ. It does not include land that is predominantly under agricultural or urban land use Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 15

subsistence and (2) by organized gangs of timber smugglers (“timber mafia”) engaged in large scale clear- cuts for the illegal commercial timber trade. Since these activities are of covert and unrecorded nature, the proportions between these two other factors cannot be identified.

During the ban period as it was the case in the pre-ban period, the change in the condition of the forests was basically caused by socio-economic factors, i.e. the growth in human population, widespread poverty, lack of alternative economic opportunities, livelihood strategies being pursued by forest owners and forest dependent communities at the expense of the forests and lack of alternative energy and wood sources. The present study concludes on sound empirical facts that with 84% contribution to the forest decline resulting from fire-wood consumption of the local people, the decline of the forest will continue.

Despite these known facts about the rapidly disappearing forests and its underlying causes, the changes in forest administrative structures, management and policy were always based on the assumption that the forests in NWFP will flourish again if only an appropriate technical and socially acceptable forest management system would be introduced. Thus, the sector reform and forest policy discussions at the national and at the provincial level have not been addressing the real problems in forestry, i.e. the fire-wood consumption requirements of the local people and the illegal cutting for income and commercial purposes. In addition to this, the implementation of policies and sector reforms remained inadequate and lagged behind their objectives.

From the results, it can be concluded that the ban was largely ineffective in its primary objective to contain forest deterioration. Still the ban has had some impact on accelerating the promotion of a new, technically and socially refined forest policy in NWFP and has also contributed to enhance environmental awareness among larger segments of the population. Its overall impact, though, was marginal and adversely affected the transformation of the new forest management approach into actual practice by prohibiting the important harvesting element in the forest management cycle.

The results of the present study indicate that future forest policy and management will have to take a perspective which addresses the obvious factors responsible for forest degradation, i.e. the fire-wood/energy supply issue and the uncontrolled illegal commercial harvesting. 16 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 THE PROBLEM

Since the 1980s a growing awareness about the importance of forests for the well being of the nation developed within various quarters of the society while simultaneously the public, scientists and national policy makers took note of the continuously deteriorating forests in NWFP. This awareness evoked questions as to what are the causes for the decline of forests, what are the consequences if these developments continue and what needs to be done to get these processes stopped or even reverted.

In light of these problems the federal Government initiated two large scale national studies on forestry9 and wood energy supply problems10 in Pakistan that were accomplished in the early 1990s. The studies contributed in raising awareness on the importance of the appropriate management of natural resources, primarily the forests in NWFP. On the request of NWFP Forest Department such issues were substantiated for practical application and donors were requested for funding several forest development projects in the 1980s and 1990s. The project documents for these projects identified the major causes for the decline of forests in a composite of social and economic demands and inadequate forest management practices.

In September 1992 Pakistan – particularly NWFP – was hit by a flood catastrophe and the public discussion on forestry matters culminated in placing responsibilities for the severity of the flood damages on the mismanagement of the forests. These common reservations on the management practices of the forest agencies in NWFP were reinforced by accusatory reports on exploitative harvesting practices of the Forest Co-operative Societies (FCS) in NWFP.

Triggered by the flood catastrophe and in light of the on-going public queries on the FCS coupled with accusations regarding the mismanagement of the forests, the federal Government issued a directive to abolish the FCS. Together with the abolishment of FCS a ban on commercial timber harvesting11 was imposed on 30th September 1993. With the major forests located in two Divisions of NWFP, this province is most affected by the ban and – except for a one year relaxation of the ban in 2001 – the ban continued to be in force till the present.

Being most affected by the ban, the NWFP Forest Department (FD) as a revenue generation agency and generally responsible for the management of an area of 841,000 hectare being legally defined as forest, it is quite reasonable that many initiatives were taken by the Government of NWFP to get the ban lifted. Apart from legal considerations questioning the jurisdiction of the federal Government on the provincial forests and thus the validity of the ban, the major arguments were raised in lieu of forest management. Harvesting is always a major part in the scientific forest management cycle. If that element is taken out of the cycle, the whole management system is undermined and sustainable forest management becomes impossible12.

Initiated by the Government of NWFP, supported by various donor funded projects and accelerated by the directives of the ban, a lot of changes were adopted in forest policy, laws, administration and in new participatory forest management strategies during the ban period. However, all these efforts were made without much recognition of the true dimensions in the decline of forests in NWFP and its causes, in spite of the fact that – at least partly – such information remained buried in the major studies of the early 90ies (FSMP and HESS). Thus, the policy and administrative super-structures in forestry changed considerably during the ban period but the forest continued deteriorating.

9Forest Sector Master Plan (FSMP), published in 1992 10Household Energy Strategy Study (HESS), published 1993 11See Annex 2: The Timber Harvesting Ban 12See Annex 3: Arguments to lift the Ban Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 17

1.2 THE STUDY

(1) Study Concept: In view of the above situation it was suggested to INRMP13 to commission a study on the impact of the timber harvesting ban.

In the course of conceptually preparing this study it turned out that the impacts of the ban cannot be disentangled from the various other forces that the forests in NWFP were and are exposed to. Hence, the study concept was developed along the following questions:

(1) What are the forces the forests are exposed to? (2) What happened to the forests during the ban? (3) What caused the change in the forests during the ban period? (4) In how far the ban has contributed to that change?

With this focus on the forest in totality it also became necessary to analyse which other restrictions or demands are placed on the forests apart from the ban. Such other restrictions and demands are primarily resulting from the wider framework of forest laws, legal rights and concessions, forest policies of both the national and the provincial Governments and additional environmental requirements. Most importantly, though, it was necessary to identify the real dimensions of forest deterioration and to attempt identify the real reasons.

The accomplishment of the present study was favoured by the existence of a baseline-study on the size and condition of the forests in NWFP relating to an early date after the imposition of the ban. This study was accomplished by an international team of consultants and was based on satellite images of 1995/96 and an extensive ground survey of the forests in NWFP held in 1996/97. This “Provincial Forest Resource Inventory (PFRI)”, though accomplished three years after the imposition of the ban and published in 2000, provided a scientifically sound and reliable basis for the present study. Consequently, the study concept took advantage of that rare situation of having a baseline-study and it was decided to repeat the PFRI study approach on satellite images of 2008 applying the same methods and analytical concepts that were used in the baseline- study. This analysis resulted in a comprehensive comparison of the forest areas and the distribution of stock density classes within these forest areas for two points in time, i.e. the base-year 1996 and the study-year 2008 covering a twelve year period under the harvesting ban.

The second step was a comparison of the utilisation of the forests in terms of timber and fire-wood and area conversions from forests to other land-uses was accomplished for the base- and the study-year. For this the forest area and forest density information of the satellite image analysis were to be converted into standing stock volumes. The data were then combined with information from other sources i.e. on the actual volumes commercially harvested and the volumes of fire-wood and other timber extractions during the ban period.

On the basis of that general approach, the Terms of Reference14 for the present study were elaborated in April 2008 and the study team formed.

(2) Study Team: The members of the study team were:

Muhammad Hanif Khan, Forestry Expert, Rtd. Conservator of Forest, Forest Department NWFP: assigned for policy and institutional analysis.

Alamgir Khan Gandapur, Forestry Expert, Conservator of Forests, Forest Department NWFP: assigned for analysis of forest conditions and harvesting.

13The Integrated Natural Resource Management Project (INRMP) is a bilateral project funded by the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation and the Government of NWFP, being implemented by Intercooperation (IC) and NWFP Forest Department. 14See ANNEX 4: Terms of Reference 18 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

Abdul Latif Rao, Environmental Expert, Consultant, former Country Representative of IUCN-Pakistan: assigned for the analysis of environmental aspects.

Raja Muhammad Zarif, Economist, Director, Pakistan Forest Institute (PFI): assigned for socio-economic analysis.

Hamid Marwat, Chief Forestry and Wildlife, P&D Division, Government of Pakistan: assigned for satellite imagery analysis

The accomplishment of the satellite imagery analysis was technically supported by the staff of the GIS laboratory of the Forest Management Centre, Peshawar.

Dr. Knut M. Fischer, Consultant, former CTA to the Siran Forest Development NWFP, and Team-Leader of the study, assigned to provided overall methodological guidance for the team, to accomplish the whole data analysis and to compile and edit the individual contributions into a consistent text and data frame.

(3) Accomplishment of the Study: The study – with various set-backs and delays primarily resulting from problems in the procurement and analysis of the satellite imagery – was factually started in August 2008 and finalized in March 2009.

(4) Study Contents: The study is presented in four chapters and a number of Annexes15, Appendices and a Documentation of relevant texts in the context of the study.

Chapter 2: deals with forestry and the conditions of the forests prior to the ban. Here the situation in forestry relating to forest policies, forest laws, and the forest administration is analysed together with the conditions that lead to the imposition of the timber harvesting ban. Also in this chapter the area and conditions of the forests as of 1996 are presented resulting from a review of the baseline information as contained in the PFRI study.

Chapter 3: presents analysis of the action plans as contained in the initial timber harvesting ban of September 1993 and the various renewals of the ban with their changing perspective over the years until 2008. In this chapter the compliance with and the effectiveness of the various action plans are analyzed including the impact of the ban on timber harvesting and revenue generation from forests during the ban period.

Chapter 4: contains the additional demands that were placed upon the forests resulting from a growing awareness amongst the wider public on the environmental importance of the sustained existence of the forests, reinforced by Pakistan’s commitments to global agreements on environmental issues. Here the analysis of the changes in forest area and forest condition resulting from the base- and study-year comparison is presented.

Chapter 5: presents the conclusions covering the whole study.

The Timber Harvesting Ban Study (THBS) was designed and accomplished to identify and analyse the development of the forests during the period of the ban in an objective and independent manner. Therefore, the study does not formulate recommendations towards the concerned agencies in the national and provincial Governments. The team suggests forwarding the study to the policy makers and the representatives of the relevant agencies as it is in their interest and responsibility to develop practical solutions for the issues identified in the present study.

15Annexes have been prepared as integral part of the whole study and contain detailed explanations referred to in the main text. In particu- lar concerning methodological issues and the presentation of facts and figures summarized in the main report, the annexes are essential to substantiate the line of argument of the study and to provide scientific proof for its results. Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 19

Chapter 2 Forestry and Forest Situation prior to THE Harvesting Ban

2.1 FORESTRY 2.1.1 Forest Policy, Forest Laws, and Forest Administration

(1) Evolution of National Forest Policies16: After partition of the Indian sub-continent in 1947, the land area under forests in the newly formed state of Pakistan was less than 5% as compared to about 20% under forests in colonial India. Even such a small percentage of area under forests in Pakistan contained considerable non- commercial forests comprising of scrub vegetation, grazing land, and even barren wastelands. The major part of all forests was and still is, located in two Civil Divisions of Malakand and Hazara in NWFP.

The first national forest policy was adopted in 1955 with the major objective to increase the areaunder forests. The 1955 policy also included preparation of management plans and management of private forests. Most importantly, the policy gave precedence to the protective function of forests over commercial interests. However, the policy did not address the real problems of hill forests that had started deteriorating.

The merger of the four provinces into one unit of West Pakistan in 1956 and the imposition of Martial Law in 1958 led to another forest policy statement in 1962. This policy gave more definite instructions on increasing the forest area primarily along the same lines as those in the policy of 1955. There was, however, a fundamental change in the basic premise of the policy directive. The new policy gave precedence to the commercial aspects of forestry over all other aspects. Another departure from the previous policy was the approach to the problem of the rights and privileges of the local population for free grazing in the forests and other uses of forest resources. The new policy recommended that provincial Governments should progressively undertake acquisition of such rights.

In December 1971, the East wing of Pakistan was separated and a new civilian Government was established in West Pakistan in March 1972. In this changed milieu, a new forest policy was formulated and adopted in 1975. The policy marked an important departure from the first two policies in that the management of Guzara forests was to be entrusted to owners themselves, with the Government taking only supervisory responsibilities. The policy recommended the formation of “owners’ cooperative societies” but recommended that forest harvesting should be carried out entirely by public sector agencies.

In 1977 the then civilian Government was again replaced by a military Government which started a process of analyzing the conditions of the forests, rangelands and other natural resources. This resulted in a new forest policy which was notified in 1981. Recognizing and stressing the inadequacy of forest areas, shortage of fuel wood and timber, and the deplorable condition of watersheds and rangelands, it provided a listing of general statements on the future direction of forestry. The policy suggested various improvement measures, including the planting of fast growing species and fuel-wood plantations outside public forests, involvement of people in tree plantation, nature conservation through motivation, coordinated development at provincial and national levels, establishment of national parks, departmental forest harvesting on scientific lines and production of medicinal herbs on wild lands.

In 1988 the new civilian Government constituted a National Commission on Agriculture, which also made some recommendations on forestry. Most of the recommendations of the Commission were finally incorporated in the 1991 forest policy. The main objectives of this policy were to meet the country’s environmental needs and requirements of timber, fuel-wood, fodder and other products by raising the forest area 10% during the coming fifteen years, promote social forestry programs and conserve biological diversity and maintain ecological balance through conservation of natural forests and wildlife habitat improvement.

16See ANNEX 5: Analysis of Forest Policy 20 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

(2) Impacts of Forest Policy: The various forest policies from 1955 to 1991 are primarily an indication that such policies have been changing with the shifts in the Governments mainly to adjust to their political manifestos. There was no consideration of the fact that forestry is a long-term enterprise and that any shift in the policies at such frequent intervals can neither practically be implemented nor promote the sustainable management of forests. In addition, the five national forest policies in certain aspects were not only internally inconsistent but in many other aspects contradicting each other.

Most of the national forest policies were developed in isolation by the federal Government. The stakeholders, including the provincial forest departments, were not consulted adequately. Some of the targets e.g. increasing the forest cover to 10% were unrealistic even in the long term. After promulgation, these policies were not taken seriously for implementation by the forest department and remained the intent of the federal Government. However, the policy documents were used by the forest departments in gaining public sector and donor funding for some of the forest functions that remained relegated in the past e.g. watershed and other plantations.

The translation of these policies into actual practices in fact aimed at saving public forests, increasing forest area through acquiring lands, merger of princely states and placing these acquired lands under the management responsibility of the Forest Department as well as generating more revenue from the forests. Although the concept of community participation was always advocated as rhetoric, in reality the communities were never given such rights to participate in forest management. In 1981 forest management rights and obligations were given and assigned to Guzara owners but still not to communities.

There was and still is a visible divergence in the approach of the policy makers and the concerns of the local stakeholders (owners and non-owners, right-holding users and non-right holding users). Knowing the environmental consequences of the continued deterioration of forests, the national policy makers have reinforced the environmental concerns in the National Forest Policy of 1991 with least consideration of economic and social benefits of the forests, particularly relating to livelihood needs of the local people. The forests in NWFP are under immense pressure for meeting the local needs since the people living in and around forests have no alternatives other than to use the forests for their livelihoods. Forests are also expected to meet the additional and conflicting environmental demands as competing management objectives.

All these policies failed to appreciate that forestry in NWFP is rather different than in the rest of the country. In NWFP 92% of the legally defined forests are encumbered with rights of the local communities for whom the major source of living is the royalty received from the Forest Department resultant from the sale of trees.

The land tenure system in the province is very complex. Almost all productive natural forests are located in areas where ownership rights are neither well defined nor adequately documented in the Government’s revenue records. Wherever settlement of rights has been attempted, primarily in Malakand Division as well as in Agror-Tanawal area of Hazara, the local people have boycotted the proceedings since they disputed the validity of the whole process.

Thus, by and large, the forest policies adopted from time to time were not relevant to the context of the NWFP; lacked requisite institutional, financial and implementation support arrangements; did not have the necessary legal basis for its various provisions; too frequently switched their direction and focus; and at times were also incoherent and contradictory. Given these conditions, the implementation of forest policies remained wishful thinking.

(3) Forest Laws: With the shift in Governments the forest policies have also been changing but attention was not paid to making any adjustment in the existing Forest Acts, so as to provide an enabling legal basis for the policies. Therefore, the policies could not be implemented at the desired level and were frequently disputed on legal grounds. Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 21

The major forest acts were promulgated in the colonial era, their origin dates back to the late 19th century. Such legislation was primarily designed to serve the purpose of the colonial regime to manage the Reserved forests by keeping the people away from the forests, ensuring forest protection through an enforcing and policing role of the forest functionaries and making provisions for and strictly implementing their punitive clauses. Ironically, even after independence, the same set of regulatory laws were not only continued but also extended to Protected forests, Guzara forests and even to privately owned wastelands, without realising that these forest areas are different in user-rights and ownership. For instance, under the forest policies people have been encouraged to raise plantations on their privately owned wastelands and farms through the concept of social forestry and farm forestry. The utilisation of these plantations is subsequently subjected to restrictive forest regulations of the colonial time, thereby discouraging such initiatives by the local people.

The NWFP Forest Department made some attempts to synchronise the legal base with the policy directives by making adjustments under the provisions of provincial Hazara Forest Act 1936. But only in 1981 Guzara forest rules were amended to accommodate the establishment of Forest Co-operative societies, whereas all other provisions and rulings of the colonial forest laws were maintained.

(4) Organization of the Forest Department: The provincial Government through its Forest Department is the custodian of all designated forests and exercises legal powers over them. Since colonial times, in all provinces of the country the forest departments have been structured in a strict line hierarchy with an almost military line of command in the following mode:

Secretary Forests

Chief Conservator of Forests

Conservator of Forests

Divisional Forest Officer

Range Forest Officer

Forester

Forest Guard

Administratively the Secretary is in charge of the Department and is the link between the Department and the Government for policy guidance. The Chief Conservator of Forests (CCF) is the technical head of the Department. Under the CCF there are Conservators of Forests (CF) for each Forest Circle responsible for guiding forest planning, controlling, and monitoring the implementation of forest management in the Forest Divisions. These are the basic units for forest management and are headed by Divisional Forest Officers (DFO). A DFO has to make field level operational planning for the Forest Ranges that are under the administration of Range Forest Officers (RFO) who are responsible for field implementation. The RFOs are guiding Foresters who control Forest Blocks. Forest Guards are the lowest tier of the forest administration and are primarily acting in a forest protection function for Forest Beats.

This kind of organisational structure was devised by the colonial regime and was best suited to their form of Government. Except setting aside parts of the forests for meeting the local people’s requirements, the rest of the state forests were prohibited areas for the local people. The major role of the forest functionaries was harvesting and forest protection of the state forests. 22 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

After independence, such kind of administrative structure was not adequate to translate the changing forest policies into actual field practices. However, this structure remained unchanged until 200217.

(5) Summing Up: Since times immemorial, the few forests located in the western part of India (now Pakistan) have always been seen by the rulers as an asset that had to serve timber requirements of the rulers and of the wider society living in areas not bestowed with any timber resources of their own. Such societal demands were always confronted with the subsistence and income needs of the local people living in and around the forests. The forest laws and the forest administration under the colonial Government were primarily geared towards a definition on how such different – and potentially conflicting – demands between local uses of the forests and societal requirements are to be settled. Under the colonial rule, such laws always favoured the societal demands, i.e. the requirements of the ruling class over the local demands. Until the present day, the development in the forest sector, its policies and administration are characterized by this imbalance of interests and thus prone to conflict between local and societal demands towards the forest, a process that is aggravating with continuously growing demands and declining forests.

2.1.2 Multiplicity of Demands

(1) Demands Resulting from Legal Rights18: In principle, forests in NWFP are defined in two different ways. On the one hand there is a physical definition of forests following the AOF standards:

Land spanning more than 0.5 hectares with trees higher than 5 meters and a canopy cover of more than 10 percent, or trees able to reach these thresholds in situ. It does not include land that is predominantly under agricultural or urban land use.

For purposes of the Forests Department (FD) on the other hand, certain areas have legally been classified as forests. These are under the general jurisdiction of the FD and for such areas forest management plans (Working Plans - WP) are prepared by the FD.

According to the legal definition, the total designated forest area covered by Working Plans is 841,517 ha or 18.2% of the study area (11.5% of the total province). Of that legally defined forest area 7.6% are Reserved, 29.7% are Guzara, and 62.7% are Protected forests. Reserved forests are owned by the state and Guzara forests are owned by communities or in some cases, by private individuals. Protected forests are encumbered with rights claimed by both the state and local communities; these forests are in a transitional stage of land settlement.

At the time of the declaration of Reserved forests, some uses in forest areas such as grazing of cattle, firewood collection, passage through forests etc. by the local population living near certain forests, were accepted as rights and documented as such.

The Protected forests originally belonged to the traditional rulers of the princely states and were transferred into state property in the course of merger of these states into the territory of Pakistan. Such forests are heavily burdened with legally accepted rights of the local population for free grant of construction timber, collection of fire-wood and grazing. Legally, all acts are permitted in these forests unless otherwise prohibited by gazetted notification. In the Protected forests of Malakand Division, the right holders are also entitled for payments of 60 to 80% of the sale proceeds from forest produce.

The Guzara forests are mostly located in Hazara and are meant to meet the subsistence requirements of the local population for fire-wood, construction timber and grazing. Commercial sale of trees is allowed only if the trees are in excess of the local timber requirements. The owners of these Guzara forests are entitled to receive 80% as royalty from the commercial sale proceeds from these forests.

17see Chapter 3.5.2 18see ANNEX 6: Legal Categories of Forests in NWFP Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 23

(2) Factors of Illegal Commercial Exploitation: With the growing scarcity of timber in the wider market in Pakistan, timber prices increased rapidly and illegal harvesting created an additional burden on the forests in NWFP. Gangs, partly in cooperation with larger Guzara owners, contractors, and traders (colloquially termed “timber mafia”) engaged in large scale illegal logging, taking advantage of harvesting contracts that provided opportunities due to deficiencies in the working and governance of the Forest Department.

The salaries of forest staff, especially the field staff in lower ranks, were meagre whereas they were custodians of huge forest wealth. Gangs of illegal timber traders were influential, well equipped, mobile and ready to take risk of damaging, harming, hurting, and even murdering the forest staff, who offered resistance and created impediments in their way. Generally, the field staff did not get the required level of support from the Government in controlling or apprehending the notorious forest offenders. Neither the forest offence cases were adjudicated speedily, nor the punishments awarded by the courts appropriate to their magnitude and seriousness. Moreover, not only did the mechanism of monitoring, detecting, and reporting small forest offences lacked accountability but it also remained weak in the mechanism employed for large scale felling. These were the incubating conditions for connivance and malpractices that were not limited to the forest staff.

(3) Environmental Demands: In the 1970s and 80s, awareness on the limitation of the natural resources to serve the increasing demands of an ever growing human population on the planet emerged on the global scene and soon entered the political arena. In due course, environment, ecology and bio-diversity were promoted by international agencies like IUCN and WWF. Later on these issues became a wider public concern. The first initiatives focused on identifying local environmental problems and their impact on the well-being and future of the nation.

The work on the development of a National Conservation Strategy (NCS) began in 1985. After working for about seven years, the Government of Pakistan approved the NCS in March 1992. The NCS outlined fourteen priority areas that must be addressed if sustainable development was to be achieved in Pakistan. The priority areas relevant to this study included protecting watersheds, supporting forestry and plantations, restoring rangelands and improving livestock quality, protecting water bodies and sustaining fisheries, conserving biodiversity, supporting institutions for common resources and integrating population and environment programs. Strategic priorities, principles, approaches and action programs for all priority areas including the development of sustainable forestry are contained in the NCS.

Additional demands on the forests’ functions and eco-systems were also created by Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEA) ratified in the 70s and 80s and by various other global initiatives in which Pakistan participated on climate change, biodiversity conservation, watershed protection, soil conservation and sustainable use of species and habitats.

(4) Summing Up: The demands from forest owners, right- and non-right holders for timber, fire-wood, grazing and other non-timber forest produce for subsistence increased significantly with rapid growth in human population, livestock and changes in life styles. Often local demands went beyond legal rights offered by various legal categories of the forests and several de facto demands were added, many of them pursued by illegal means. The ever shrinking forest base especially in the areas where such demands had out-grown disproportionately to the forest resource, created imbalances between sustainable supplies and actual demands for subsistence, income supplements to the local poor and illegal commercial exploitation by the “timber mafia”.

Such growing demands on the forests were further amplified by an increasing awareness of the environmental and ecological functions of the forests. These were subsequently pursued by Pakistan committing itself to a national conservation strategy and by participating in international agreements on environmental concerns, many of which related to forestry. 24 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

2.1.3 Initiatives to Improve Forest Planning and Management prior to the Ban

(1) Donor-funded Projects: In view of the increasing demands placed upon the forests, the provincial Government called for international assistance to improve forest management. Based on project proposals developed by the NWFP Forest Department, various bilateral and multilateral donor organisations started to engage in the NWFP forest sector from the early 1980s.

The two German assisted Projects, namely Kaghan Intensive Forest Management Project (KIFMP) and Siran Forest Development Project (SFDP) focused on the Reserve and Guzara forests. The KIFMP was focusing on improvements from a technical perspective by introducing a new approach for scientific forest management. In the course of which the colonial Forest Working Plan Code was also revised but never officially approved.

The focus of improvement in the SFDP was on social aspects in forestry by combining the concepts of Social Forestry (SF) and Intensive Forest Management under the new umbrella of Joint Forest Management (JFM) in Reserved and Guzara forests. Under this approach, the Social Forestry component was meant to delegate management responsibilities for natural resources including non-forest lands to the local communities. The Intensive Forest Management (IFM) concept was to overcome present forest policy and management deficiencies in a long-term forest conservation and sustainable yield perspective. The SFDP was also working to persuade the provincial Government to expand the controlling and guiding functions of the wider public into the affairs of the forest sector through an independent legal body of civil society representatives.

The two Dutch assisted projects, namely the Social Forestry Project (SFPMD) Malakand-Dir and the Environmental Rehabilitation Project Malakand (ERP), primarily focused on general land-use improvements. The projects aimed at improving planning and management at the village level by introducing the concept of Village Land Use Planning (VLUP) as an integrated planning tool by organising the local communities into Village Development Committees (VDCs) and Women Organizations (WOs). Such committees were supported in the preparation and implementation of Village Development Plans (VDP) to cover agricultural lands, rangelands, adjacent forest lands and areas around village settlements. These plans in turn were aiming at restoring appropriate vegetation to blank and denuded areas (previously covered by forests) through a whole menu of social forestry interventions.

The Swiss funded Kalam Integrated Development Project (KIDP) worked in the Protected forests of upper Swat district and tried to bring about improvements in the planning and management systems of different line agencies, including the Forest Department, the Forest Development Corporation, Agriculture Extension, Agriculture Research and Rural Development. The KIDP attempted to introduce a system of bottom-up planning at the village level, establishing Village Organizations (VOs), linking and networking the VOs to various service providers, building capacities of local community members in various technical, social and managerial skills and changing social practices at the community level besides changing mindsets and organisational practices in the line-agencies.

The multi-donor funded Tarbela Watershed Management Project tried to introduce the concept of public- private partnership in the rehabilitation of denuded lands through large scale plantations on privately owned lands and wastelands in the catchment areas of the Tarbela and Mangla reservoirs. The project had the primary objective to reduce sedimentation of the reservoirs by controlling soil degradation and erosion. The project cooperated with various donors, primarily with the World Food Program (WFP) with the additional objectives on employment generation, food security and poverty alleviation in general.

In addition to their technical support to improve forest management, the Siran, Kaghan and Malakand Projects sought to bring about higher level legal and institutional changes into the NWFP forest sector which were seen as pre-conditions to establishing new operational procedures in forest planning and management. Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 25

(2) Relevant Major Studies: On the initiative of the federal Government and with the assistance of several international donor agencies lead by the ADB, a group of international consultants prepared a Forestry Sector Master Plan (FSMP) in the early 90s that was published in June1992 and subsequently adopted by the federal Government. The study was based on a country-wide wooded area analysis using Landsat MSS satellite images of 1989 coupled with ground surveying throughout Pakistan in 1990/91.

The FSMP recommended some key improvements in forest management such as protecting and developing watersheds, planting on agricultural lands, intensifying management of upland coniferous forests, protecting and managing wildlife and biodiversity, conserving fuel wood, strengthening education, training, and research.

The FSMP contained major strategic perspectives and recommendations for forest management that amounted to a rather comprehensive transformation of the traditional approaches. The FSMP also recommended that forest management practices will have to integrate agricultural, livestock and community development for areas and communities living outside the forest boundaries.

The FSMP study was prepared in conjunction with another important pre-ban study on the energy problems that were and will be facing Pakistan, namely the Household Energy Strategic Study (HESS, published 1993). The HESS was based on a statistical random sample of households throughout Pakistan. It included the physical measurement of energy consumption in the selected households sequentially measured over a full year. While on a number of aspects, prominently fire-wood supply and consumption standards, the HESS produced results that are still valid, indirectly it dealt with the condition of the forests. This study pinpointed to the problem of wood energy resources and their up-coming shortage with increasing population and lacking alternative sources of energy for the majority of the rural people, primarily in NWFP.

The FSMP and HESS were accomplished as national level studies. While the FSMP dealt with specific problems in the forest sector of NWFP, analyses were always placed in the national context and were, therefore, less specific and reliable at the provincial level. In particular the real magnitude of forest depletion in NWFP already visible at the time of preparing the FSMP, was heavily underestimated due to the application of a too-widely framed analytical grid in order to cover the whole of Pakistan.

The first study that analysed the forest decline at a sub-regional level within NWFP as well as at a more detailed analytical grid than applied in the FSMP was the Siran Forest Development Project Preparation Study published in 1990. On the basis of a comparison of satellite imagery data of 1979 and 1989 coupled with an intensive ground survey of the forest conditions, the study identified the rapid decline of forests in the Siran valley and the Agror-Tanawal area. The basic results of that study provoked a discussion on the future of the forests in NWFP, mainly among the international donors active in the forest sector and within some local NGOs. The NWFP Forest Department, though, disputed the validity of the satellite data analysis.

(3) Summing Up: In view of the deteriorating forests and a widened perspective for forest management under multiple forest functions, international donors started in the 80s to assist the Forest Department through various forest development projects. However, these projects were scattered area-wise and their approaches differed substantially not only because of the different conditions found in their respective project areas but also in pursuit of different development aid policies of the various donors. Though these projects were provided an opportunity for testing their own approaches, the Forest Department continued working along the traditional lines.

2.1.4 Timber Harvesting Systems Prior to the Ban19

(1) Early Harvesting System: With the introduction of scientific forest management in the late 19th century, all harvesting was initiated through the Forest Department. Until 1950 the Forest Department itself was responsible for timber harvesting. This was done through petty labour contracts for felling and transportation. In the 1960s,

19see ANNEX 7: Timber Harvesting Systems 26 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

due to funding shortages and some political patronage, the Forest Department turned to selling the standing trees to the highest bidder in open auctions. Successful contractors were then responsible for harvesting as well as transportation and marketing. The system led to serious malpractices and overexploitation of the forests and was abolished in 1974. A Timber Extraction Division was created within the Forest Department to take over these tasks. However, the exploitative approach to forests was not halted.

(2) Forest Development Corporation (FDC): After the failures of the previous harvesting contractor systems and the Timber Extraction Division it was decided to separate the responsibilities of forest protection and forest management from forest harvesting and marketing. Accordingly, the Forest Development Corporation (FDC) was established in 1976 to take care of the harvesting and marketing part of forest management, leaving forest planning, protection, regeneration, and general administration under the responsibility of the Forest Department.

(3) Forest Co-operative Societies (FCS): Under the new system, the Guzara owners were given the right to organise themselves into Co-operatives and manage their forests on their own whereas the Forest Department was given the obligation to prepare the management plans and monitor the implementation process through periodic compliance controls.

The experiment was intended to start in only six Guzara forest areas. But it was soon undermined by political patronage and the co-operative societies were used by the Government as “political bribery” to appease influential Guzara owners/politicians. Thus, by 1993, instead of six, 33 cooperative societies were actively operating in Hazara. The well intentioned experiments of co-operative societies failed mainly because some ambitious and influential owners with large forest holdings manipulated the system to their own advantage. The bureaucratic control became victim to the political influence and/or corruption most obviously showing in:

• The Working Plans prepared for these forests by the Forest Department were defective in many aspects and – in quite a number of cases – prescriptions were manipulated in connivance with large Guzara owners and/or other external pressures. Such Working Plans not only prescribed harvesting volumes far in excess to any sustainable yield but also identified standing stock on actually blank areas. The volumes prescribed for harvesting in these blank areas though were actually harvested in adjoining forests including Reserved forests. Also, in several FCS forests the prescriptions meant for sequential harvesting over the whole planning period were actually cut in the first two years. This defective management planning, coupled with felling in excess of prescribed volumes, accelerated forest depletion.

• Massive irregularities in the use of funds earmarked for operation and development were often misappropriated and hardly any investment in sustainable forestry was made from the sales proceeds. There were also many cases of fraud and embezzlement of funds belonging to the smaller Guzara owners that were captured by the larger owners.

(4) Summing Up: The administrative and political conditions prior to the ban were not conducive for sustainable forests management. The forests administration continued under the laws of the colonial era. Frequent changes in forest policies had no marked impact on practical changes in forest management. Attempts to change the harvesting system failed. All these processes went alongside with continuously declining capacities of forests and the increasing demands of a growing local population. Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 27

2.2 FORESTS 199620 2.2.1 Data Sources, Baseline Study, and Basic Data

(1) Provincial Forest Resource Inventory (PFRI): For 1993/94 – the initial year of the timber harvesting ban – no baseline study exists on the condition of the forests in NWFP. There are, however, studies directly or indirectly providing data and information on the forests relating to an earlier date, namely the FSMP and the HESS. Apart from these national level studies, there is a number of forestry related studies at the local level for various sites in NWFP prepared as project documents for donor funding. From these only the project document for the Siran Forests Development Project contained a more detailed empirical analysis of the forest conditions in the Siran valley and in Agror-Tanawal area. This study, though, was limited area-wise and therefore unsuitable to be used as a baseline for the present study.

In addition to the existing, – but too widely framed – information on forest conditions and fire-wood consumption from the FSMP and HESS studies, the NWFP Forest Department commissioned a Provincial Forest Resource Inventory (PFRI) to an international team of scientists to elaborate a detailed assessment on the real conditions of the forests in NWFP in 1996.

The PFRI was accomplished by combining Landsat TM data of 1995/96 for a forest area analysis with an extensive ground survey on forest stock and forest conditions. Though this study was accomplished three years after the imposition of the harvesting ban, its results present the most scientifically reliable information available for the forests in NWFP at that time which justifies using major parts of the PFRI as baseline for the present THBS.

Methodologically21 the step by step approach applied in the PFRI was also adopted in the present study in the following manner:

Step 1: Identification offorest area data by forest density classes. Step 2: Conversion of stocked area data into stock volume data. Step 3: Estimation of the total consumption of timber and woody bio-mass. Step 4: Estimation of wood bio-mass supplies from non-forest areas. Step 5: Estimation of wood supply from sustainable yields of forests. Step 6: Calculating the consumption/supply differential.

These steps were taken for the data referring to the base-year 1996 and for the study year 2008 and were subject to three data analysis operations in pursuit of the THB study objective:

Operation 1: Comparison of the forest areas by density class in the baseline-study with the forest area by forest density class in 2008, using Landsat TM satellite images.

Operation 2: Time point stock volume assessment for 1996 and 2008 using the PFRI average stock volumes per hectare and density class and then preparing the time-series for the period 1996 to 2008 in conjunction with similar time series elaborated on secondary data (Population Census etc.).

Operation 3: Analysing the causes for the stock development and drawing conclusions on the impact of the harvesting ban.

(2) The Study-Area 1996: The study-area covers the Civil Divisions Malakand and Hazara in NWFP. These divisions extend over a total area of 46,138 km2, which is 62.9% of the total NWFP area. The land area is flat in the lowlands and valleys, hilly in the medium altitudes, and mountainous in the highlands.

20see ANNEX 9: Tables. The same Annex also contains all data and analytical tables referring to Chapter 4.2 on the forest situation 2008. 21for details on the application of that methodology refer to ANNEX 8: Methodology 28 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

SUMMARY TABLE 1: STUDY AREA DETAIL TOTAL AREA ha % TOTAL NWFP (excl. FATA) 7,339,502 100.0

TOTAL STUDY AREA 4,613,766 62.9

- MALAKAND 2,914,350 39.7 - HAZARA 1,699,416 23.2

For details see ANNEX 9, BASE DATA TABLE

(3) Population and Households 1996: The total population in the study area was 7.146 million people in 1996 or 44.2% of the total NWFP population. The degree of urbanisation in the study area with 7.7% was low as compared to the whole of NWFP with 17.1% of the total population situated in urban centres. 92.3% of the population in the study area lived in the rural areas.

SUMMARY TABLE 2: POPULATION 1996 ESTIMATES (data used in PFRI)

POPULATION ESTIMATE DETAIL Urban Rural TOTAL

NWFP CENSUS 1998 3,025,723 14,710,555 17,736,278

NWFP 1996 estm. 2,756,142 13,399,901 16,156,043 - in % 17.1 82.9 100.0

INCLUDED IN PFRI 548,595 6,597,543 7,146,138 - in % of STUDY AREA 7.7 92.3 100.0

For details see ANNEX 9, PARAMETETER TABLE (A) and TABLE 1 (a)

With an average of 7.35 persons/household the overall average household-size was smaller in the study area than in the total of NWFP. Household sizes in the study area differed considerably from those in the whole of NWFP. The urban/rural household size differential indicated a movement of younger families from the rural areas into urban sites within the study area.

SUMMARY TABLE 3: HOUSEHOLDS 1996 ESTIMATES (data used in PFRI)

HOUSEHOLD ESTIMATE DETAIL Urban Rural TOTAL

NWFP CENSUS 1998 418,344 1,906,493 2,324,837

NWFP 1996 estm. 381,775 1,739,838 2,121,613 - av. household size 7.22 7.70 7.61

INCLUDED IN PFRI 72,152 900,425 972,577 - av. household size 7.60 7.33 7.35 For details see ANNEX 9, PARAMETER TABLE (A) and BASE DATA TABLE Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 29

(4) General Land-Use 1996: With 50.7% of the total area open rangelands were the dominant features in the overall land-use pattern of the study-area in 1996. Only 15.3% of the area was under agriculture, implying an overall average of less than 0.78 ha/rural household, which indicates an on average very low agricultural resource endowment for subsistence. Forests covering 14.7% and 19.3% of the total are made-up of open rocks, snowfields and glaciers without any vegetation and are primarily located in the Chitral district of Malakand.

SUMMARY TABLE 4: PFRI-LAND USE by DIVISION 1996 (1) in hectare DETAIL FOREST AGRICULTURE RANGELAND OTHER TOTAL

TOTAL 677,230 706,776 2,339,386 890,373 4,613,765

MALAKAND 360,912 389,319 1,688,966 475,152 2,914,349 HAZARA 316,318 317,457 650,420 415,221 1,699,416

(2) in percent TOTAL 14.7 15.3 50.7 19.3 100.0

MALAKAND 7.8 8.4 36.6 10.3 63.2 HAZARA 6.9 6.9 14.1 9.0 36.8

For details at district level see ANNEX 9, TABLE 2.1 (a)

(5) Population Density 199622: With an overall population density of 155 persons per km2 (192 on vegetated lands) the study area was less densely populated than the total NWFP with 220 persons/km2 indicating a better resource endowment outside the study-area in the other divisions of NWFP.

2.2.2 Total Forest Area and Stock

(1) Total Forest Area 1996: Natural forests in NWFP were and are concentrated in the study-area. In the baseline-study some minor patches of forests were also found in other divisions. These minor patches of forests were neglected in the baseline-study and were also left out in the present THBS.

Forests in NWFP are defined in two different ways. For purposes of the Forest Department (FD) certain areas have legally been classified as forests (see Chapter 2.1) 23. Globally, forests are defined according to the FAO standard. According to this definition, forest areas of varying densities extended over 677,230 hectare or 14.7% of the total study area or 9.2%24 of the total NWFP area in 1996.

(2) Area Distribution of Forests 1996: 53.3% of the total forest area were located in Malakand (Chitral 10.3%, Upper and Lower Dir 23.5%, and Swat/Shangla 17.2%) and 46.7% in Hazara (Kohistan 18.4%, Mansehra 15.4%, Batagram 6.8%, and Abbottabad 5.4%).

(3) Distribution of Forests by Density Class: In both, the baseline study and the present THBS, forest areas were classified in three density classes. These classes are:

• low density forests (crown coverage of 10 to 25%): depleted forests • medium density (crown coverage 26 to 50%): under-stocked forests • high density (crown coverage over 50%): normal and overstocked forests

22see ANNEX 9, SUPPORT TABLE: 1.1 23The forest analysis presented in this chapter and in Chapter 4.2.2 is confined to forests according to the physical definition as perAO F standard. An analysis of the forests as per legal definition and concerning all Working Plan areas is contained in ANNEX 10. 24stocked forest areas only 30 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

In 1996 of all forests in the study area 282,560 ha (41.7%) were in the low density class, 251,541 ha (37.1%) in the medium, and 143,156 ha (21.1%) in the high density class.

SUMMARY TABLE 5: FOREST AREA DISTRIBUTION 1996 by District (1) in hectare FOREST DENSITY CLASS DIVISION/District TOTAL 10-25% cc 26-50% cc 51-100% cc

TOTAL FOREST AREA 282,560 251,514 143,156 677,230

MALAKAND 153,725 136,083 71,104 360,912 Chitral 36,283 30,030 3,625 69,938 Dir (Upper+Lower) 63,180 60,224 35,498 158,902 Buner 9,708 4,866 980 15,554 Swat + Shangla 44,554 40,963 31,001 116,518

HAZARA 128,835 115,431 72,052 316,318 Kohistan 45,587 54,628 24,335 124,550 Batagram 21,367 17,953 6,641 45,961 Mansehra 41,363 31,914 30,697 103,974 Abbottabad 16,503 9,559 10,379 36,441 Haripur 4,015 1,377 0 5,392

(2) in percent TOTAL FOREST AREA 41.7 37.1 21.1 100.0

MALAKAND 22.7 20.1 10.5 53.3 Chitral 5.4 4.4 0.5 10.3 Dir (Upper+Lower) 9.3 8.9 5.2 23.5 Buner 1.4 0.7 0.1 2.3 Swat + Shangla 6.6 6.0 4.6 17.2

HAZARA 19.0 17.0 10.6 46.7 Kohistan 6.7 8.1 3.6 18.4 Batagram 3.2 2.7 1.0 6.8 Mansehra 6.1 4.7 4.5 15.4 Abbottabad 2.4 1.4 1.5 5.4 Haripur 0.6 0.2 0.0 0.8

487,801 ha (72.0%) were located in sites above 2000m; only 189,429 ha (28.0%) were found below the 2000m altitude line.

Dense and medium-dense forests with 297,029 ha (43.9% of all forests) were predominantly situated in the higher altitudes with low potential for regular forest management due to limited accessibility. Dense and medium-dense forests below 2000m and suitable for regular forest management – including commercial purposes in some patches – amounted to only 97,641 ha (14.4%) of the total forest area.

Dense and medium dense forests at lower elevations were concentrated in the districts of Dir (26,290 ha or 3.9% of the total forest area), Kohistan (22,600 ha or 3.4%) and Mansehra (18,961 ha or 2.8%). It was also in these districts where almost all dense forests below 2000m were located i.e. 80% (28,871ha) of the total dense forest area below 2000m. Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 31

In 1996 the forests of NWFP were already generally degraded and under-stocked. Forests with stand density of less than 25% were found on 42% (282,560ha) of the forest area. Only 21% (143.156ha) of the forests have a stand density of more than 50% crown cover, the majority of which are located at higher altitudes.

SUMMARY TABLE 6: TOTAL FOREST AREA 1996 by Density Class and Altitude (1) in hectare FOREST DENSITY CLASS DIVISION/District TOTAL 10-25% cc 26-50% cc 51-100% cc

TOTAL FOREST AREA 282,560 251,514 143,156 677,230

- below 2000 m 91,788 61,506 36,135 189,429 - above 2000 m 190,772 190,008 107,021 487,801

(2) in percent TOTAL FOREST AREA 41.7 37.1 21.1 100.0

- below 2000 m 13.6 9.1 5.3 28.0 - above 2000 m 28.2 28.1 15.8 72.0

For details at divisional and district level see ANNEX 9, TABLE 3.1.1 (a and b)

Forest degradation generally shows in the decreasing canopy cover and increasing fragmentation of the forest stands. Both these aspects of forests in NWFP attest to their overexploitation. To identify fragmentation, a standard patch size of 100ha was adopted in the baseline-study. Using this standard, 23.5% of the total forest area are open stands and also highly fragmented. Un-fragmented forests occurring below 2000m are only found in Kohistan (1.7% of total forest area) and Dir (1.3% of total forest area). At higher elevations, above 2000m, such large un-fragmented areas occur in Swat/Shangla (4.0% of total forest), Dir (3.6%), Mansehra (3.2%) and Kohistan (3.2%).

(4) Forest Stock 1996: In the baseline-study, the average stock per hectare and density class was worked out for round-wood stock only. At later stages of the baseline-study it became evident that this restriction was too short-sighted, primarily as it became clear that fire-wood consumption is the major factor for the future of the forests in NWFP. Therefore, stock volume data in the present study always refer to per hectare standards that include round- and branch- wood, except stated otherwise in specific aspects.

With an overall average of 278.60 m3/ha the overall stock situation in the NWFP forests was in the lower to medium range of stock endowments in the sub-Himalayan region. In the study-area this comparatively normal overall stock volume was primarily attributed to the stock volumes in the forests at higher altitudes.

With an average stock volume of 334.8 m3/ha, the medium density class at higher altitudes was normally stocked, while the dense forests in such sites with 577.7 m3/ha were overstocked. The total standing stock in these two classes above 2000m amounted to 125.4 mill.m3 or 66.5% of the total stock in all forests of NWFP. This high stock volume is concentrated in old trees with wide diameters that are growing in over-aged forest stands. Moreover about 50% of the major coniferous commercial species-dominated forests (with Kail, Fir, Spruce, and Deodar) occurred on very steep or precipitous slopes. Thus regular management of such forest areas is hampered due to the altitude, rugged terrain and steep slopes – factors which can only be overcome by high investments in infrastructure, harvesting technology and other high cost management practices.

Low density and heavily degraded forest in altitudes above 2000m were found on 190,772 hectares or on 28.2% of the total forest areas. With an average stock of 104.37 m3/ha, this degraded area had a standing stock volume of 19.9 mill. m3 or 10.6% of the total stock of all forests. 32 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

Thus the total stock in altitudes above 2000m accounted for 145.4 mill. m3 or 77% of the total stock of all forests in the study-area in 1996.

Medium and dense forests below 2000m covered 97,641 ha or 14.7% of the total forest area. 61,506 ha were forest areas of medium density and an average volume of 288 m3/ha making a total of 17.7 mill. m3 standing stock. 36,135 ha are dense forests with an average of 444.3 m3/ha making a total of 16.1 mill. m3. Thus, the stock volume in the medium to dense forest areas below 2000m was 33.8 mill. m3 or 18% of total stock. In 1996, potentially the area of medium to dense forests below 2000m would have been available for regular forest management under an improvement and maintenance perspective with some very limited prospect for commercial harvesting.

Low-density forests below 2000m cover 91,788 ha or 13.6% of the total forest area. With an average of 104 m3/ha, these forests are heavily degraded with a standing stock of 9.6 mill. m3 or 5.1% of the total stock in the forests of NWFP. Under a management perspective these areas were in need of rehabilitation measures only.

SUMMARY TABLE 7: TOTAL STANDING STOCK 1996 by Density Class and Altitude (1) in 000 cubic meter FOREST DENSITY CLASS DIVISION/ALTITUDE TOTAL 10-25% cc 26-50% cc 51-100% cc

TOTAL STOCK 29,465 81,325 77,885 188,675

- below 2000 m 9,556 17,713 16,221 43,491 - above 2000 m 19,909 63,612 61,664 145,185

(2) in percent TOTAL STOCK 15.6 43.1 41.3 100.0

- below 2000 m 5.1 9.4 8.6 23.1 - above 2000 m 10.6 33.7 32.7 76.9

For details at divisional level see ANNEX 9, TABLE 3.2.1

2.2.3 Features of Forest Conditions 199625

(1) Status of Forest and Wood Utilization: Wood utilization for local firewood requirements, illegal felling for income or commercial purposes and grazing were omni-present in all forests, with the former occurring on 66% and the latter present in 82% of the stands. Wood utilization was not limited to gentle slopes but was taking place everywhere. About 45% of the wood utilization was done in areas where it should not have been done with all the negative consequences for the site and structure of the affected forest.

Preferably, trees with smaller diameters are being cut illegally due to the ease in felling and transportation. This practice disturbs the age structure of the stands. Cutting of branches of trees is also very common, which damages the bole of the tree, promotes spread of insects and diseases and reduces the growth rate, all of which negatively affect the quality of timber.

Livestock grazing was a severe problem in all forests. Grazing was not limited to easy slopes. Almost 88% of steep to very steep slope areas are affected by grazing.

25see PFRI, Chapter 3.3 Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 33

(2) Status of Regeneration: Established and secured regeneration occurred on only 7% of all forest areas. Areas with regeneration established on 1/3rd to 2/3rd of the area are about 19%. Thus on the remaining 74% of the forest areas regeneration is either completely missing or is heavily retarded.

Forest areas above 2000m have relatively low percentage of successful regeneration mainly due to the presence of over-mature structure of stands in these areas.

In areas below 2000m, human interference is a major factor resulting in a lack in regeneration: trampling, browsing or fire caused 58% of the damages to regeneration at the seedlings stage.

In the high-hill forests, there are very few examples of timber harvested areas, which have been successfully regenerated by the Forest Department. It is only in the Chir forests where there have been instances of regeneration of the harvested/cut-over areas.

(3) Forest Health and Vitality: No systematic study of the scale and impact of agents like insects, pathogens, parasites, weeds and other processes affecting forest health and vitality of coniferous forests have been carried out in NWFP. However, no major outbreaks have been reported to cause an alarm. The forests, however, are subject to regular cycles of these agents and processes.

(4) Biological Diversity26: The baseline study also analyzed the interrelations between forest types, development stages, and altitudes. The data show that almost all of the standing stock is consolidated in only 7 type/development stage combinations. At higher altitudes (above 2000m) the existing volume is mostly in unevenly-aged forests dominated by Fir, Blue Pine, Deodar and Spruce. At lower elevations, Chir Pine and Blue Pine are dominating.

Depending on the forest type, both coniferous and broad-leaf forest species were found in various combinations along with different shrubs and ground vegetation. Species diversity is higher in dense- and medium-density forests. Some of the species such as Taxus and Fraxinus, are at the risk of not maintaining viable populations for their long term survival.

(5) Soil Depth and Humus: Decreases in forest crown cover has an impact on soil depth and humus depth/ presence which are decreasing with the decline in crown cover densities. Both soil depth and humus layer depth are low in open forests. Also, the proportion of completely blank areas without any vegetation is increasing. The conditions, however, were better in the high elevation forests due to less human interference.

2.2.4 Wood Consumption/Supply Gap 1996

Introduction: In the baseline study (PFRI, Chapter 4), the question was raised as to what caused the deteriorated status of the forest in 1996 and what will happen to the forests if the underlying causes for this deterioration continue.

The fact of continuously deteriorating forest became a focus of public discussions in the mid 80s. The discussion was primarily based on individual, unsystematic observations and on a widespread dissatisfaction with the work of the FD, the FDC, and the FCS but without much substance in provable empirical facts on the overall dimensions of the forest deterioration.

It was only in the late 80s that the magnitude of the energy supply problems in Pakistan and the issue of forests and woody biomass production as major sources of energy supply for the majority of the people reached the focus of policy makers at the national level. In the course of that, two major nation-wide studies the HESS and the FSMP, were initiated to more closely analyze the energy situation and the future of the forests in Pakistan.

26see PFRI, Table 3-3 34 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

While the surveying part in both the studies was accomplished on scientifically high standards, the analytical use of that data particularly in the FSMP, was seriously affected by a major arithmetical mistake in the final result calculation. For NWFP the FSMP identified a gap between the demand for firewood and timber and the growth potential of the various supply sources. However, the actual identification of the magnitude of that demand/supply gap completely went out of proportion basically due to an arithmetical miscalculation in the population estimate for the year 199227.

Obviously with the wrong calculation, the conclusions of the FSMP concerning the forests in NWFP were also wrong. However the existence of a demand/supply gap – though heavily underrated in the FSMP – became an acknowledged part of the discussions on the future of the forests in NWFP. It also became an agreed feature that apart from timber harvesting for commercial purposes, the major source of the demand pressure on the forests resulted from the ever growing local demands primarily for fire-wood but also from tree-cutting to supplement the meagre cash-incomes for the poor. In addition the growing illegal harvesting for larger scale commercial purposes by the “timber mafia” also became a matter of public concern.

In the baseline-study, the issue of demand pressures on the forests was analysed in more detail, primarily using data directly resulting from the PFRI itself (area and stock data) but also using external data from the Population Census 1998, standard data on fire-wood supplies and fire-wood consumption from HESS and other data from official records.

With the new data on forest area generated in the course of the present study it turned out that some of the assumptions used in the baseline study to analyse the above questions could now be replaced by real data resulting from physical measurements. In addition in one aspect (confusion of increment and sustainable yield), the baseline study contained a methodological mistake. Both aspects necessitated to repeat the wood consumption and supply analysis of the PFRI in order to establish a uniform methodological basis for data and result comparability between the baseline-study and the present THBS.

(1) Timber and Fire-wood Consumption Estimate 199628: The major consumers of wood and woody biomass are the households using firewood. Of the 972,600 households in the study area, fire-wood – together with other sources of energy – was used in 925,712 households or in 95% of all households. Applying the fire-wood consumption standards for the study area as provided by the HESS, the total firewood consumption was 5.0 million. m3 in 1995/96. SUMMARY TABLE 8 FIREWOOD CONSUMPTION 1996

(1) Fire-wood Consumption Standards (in m3 per year) DETAIL URBAN RURAL TOTAL

(1) Per PERSON 0.475 0.751 0.736 (2) Per H.HOLD 3.565 5.524 5.428

(2) Fire-wood using households Number 50,359 875,353 925,712

(3) Total fire-wood consumption(in 000 m3 per year) 000 m3/year 178 4,822 5,000

For details see ANNEX 9, PARAMETER TABLE (D) and SUPPORT TABLES 4 (a and b)

27Details of the arithmetic miscalculation contained in the FSMP are discussed in PFRI, Appendix 3 to Annex 4 28Throughout the present study the term “estimate” is used in its scientific and not in its colloquial meaning where it has the connotation as “guesswork”. A scientific estimate is always based on the use of data that are taken from scientific studies and that are applied by following a scientifically prescribed methodology. A scientific estimate is “objective” in so far as its results allow to be proven by reviewing its data base and its methodological application. Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 35

The second use of the forests was for timber harvesting both legally and illegally29. Whereas the volume of legal harvest is – with some data recording flaws – accounted for by the FD/FDC, the total volume of illegal harvesting is not known. A certain fraction of that illegal harvesting is also on FD records – as long as it is noticed by the FD and legally prosecuted. Much of the illegal harvesting, though, is taking place uncontrolled and unrecorded by the Forest Department.

Over the 10 years pre-study period from 1985/96 to 1994/95, the total recorded harvesting amounted to 2.466 mill. m3 or an annual average out-take of 0.246 million m3. In the base year the recorded harvesting only amounted to 0.094 m3, far below the average annual volume over the back-period. Thus, the total wood consumption in the study-area amounted to an estimated 5,094 mill. m3 in the 1995/96.

(2) Timber and Fire-wood Supply Estimate 1996: All timber harvesting for commercial purposes is taking place in forests whereas fire-wood is not only taken from forests but also from fast growing trees and bushes growing on agricultural land, bushes and shrubs growing on rangeland. The parameters for estimating such supplies of fire-wood were taken from the HESS study as shown below:

SUMMARY TABLE 9: PARAMETERS FIREWOOD SUPPLY from NON-FOREST AREAS

SUPPLY from SUPPLY from DETAIL UNIT AGRICULTURE RANGELAND

AVERAGE STOCK cbm/hectare 9.48 2.99 ANNUAL INCREMENT cbm/ha./year 1.16 0.19

YIELD as % of STOCK % 12.23 6.37

NOTE: Yields are based on the total consumption of shrubs and bushes

Applying these parameters in conjunction with the land-use baseline data, the total fire-wood supply from non- forest sources was estimated at 1.265 mill. m3 for 1996.

In 1996 a small amount of fire-wood was already available from thinning and lopping in older plantations and from harvesting of fast growing species within such older plantations30. These supplies have been estimated at 0.162 mill. m3 In addition, there are firewood supplies resulting from harvesting in the form of branch-wood and other harvesting residues, which have been estimated at 0,021 mill. m3 for the base-year. In the base-year thus, supplies from all these sources covered 1,421 mill. m3 or 28.4% of the total fire-wood consumption.

Firewood requirements of the local people that remained to be served from the forests amounted to 3.579 million. m3 (round- and branch-wood).

SUMMARY TABLE 10: FIREWOOD SUPPLY 1996 in 000 m3

FIREWOOD SUPPLY from NON-FOREST FIREWOOD from OTHER WOOD SOURCES FIREWOOD YEAR from AGRICULTURE HARVESTING RESIDUES & GROWING AGRICULTURE RANGELAND PLANTATION 4 & RANGELAND RESIDUES PLANTATION STOCK

1996 819 446 1,265 21 135 156 3,579

For details ANNEX 9, TABLE SET 5

29All harvesting records of the FD are on round-wood volumes only. 30For details on estimating supplies from older plantations see APPENDIX 2 to ANNEX 8 36 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

(3) Estimate of Wood Supply from Forests: With a total growing stock of 188,675 million. m3 (round- and branch-wood) in 1996 there was still a substantial growth potential of these forests from which supplies of wood were generated. Of such natural growth of the forests, wood can be extracted without harming the growth potential of the remaining stock. In the Working Plans applied in NWFP such sustainable supplies are normally calculated at 0.7% of the growing stock and that value was used in the repeated PFRI analysis accomplished in the course of the present study. The parameters to estimate the total stock and yield are shown below: SUMMARY TABLE 11: PARAMETERS WOOD SUPPLY from FORESTS DETAIL 1996

AVERAGE STOCK 278.60 cbm/hectare ANNUAL INCREMENT 1.95 cbm/ha./year YIELD as % of STOCK 0.70 %

Using the adjusted yield data in conjunction with the area and stock data of the PFRI, the total stock decrease in 1996 was 3.150 mill. m3 whereas the total sustainable supply from the remaining growing stock was estimated at 1.321 mill. m3. SUMMARY TABLE 12: STOCK SITUATION of FORESTS 1996

AREA DEVELOPMENT STOCK DEVELOPMENT1 YEAR FOREST LOSS of SUSTAINABLE FOREST AREA AREA LOSS STOCK STOCK SUPPLY2 hectare hectare 000cbm 000cbm 000cbm

1996 677,230 7,171 188,675 3,150 1,321

For details see ANNEX 9, TABLE 5.3

(4) Wood Consumption/Supply Gap 1996: The total wood consumption from forests in the base year was 3.673 mill. m3 of which 0.094 mill. m3 was from recorded commercial harvesting and 3.579 mill. m3 was taken for local fire-wood consumption. 1.321 mill. m3 of that consumption were covered from sustainable supplies of the growing stock. Therefore, in 1996 there was already a gap between wood consumption and sustainable supplies from the forests of 2.353 mill. m3. As firewood is an absolute essential part of the subsistence of the local people, that amount of wood had to be taken from the growing stock.

SUMMARY TABLE 13 WOOD CONSUMPTION/SUPPLY GAP 1996 CONSUMPTION from FORESTS CONSUMPTION/ OTHER YEAR LESS SUSTAIN. SUPPLY GAP OUT-TAKE HARVESTING FIREWOOD SUPPLY 000cbm 000cbm 000cbm 000cbm 000cbm

1996 94 3,579 1,321 -2,353 -797

For details see ANNEX 9, TABLE SET 6

However the total loss in forest stock was 0.797 mill. m3 higher than what can be explained by the commercial out-take and fire-wood consumption. This implies that on top of the forest use for commercial timber and fire-wood there have been also other uses of the forests affecting the reduction of the growing stock. These other uses can be attributed to two factors i.e. (1) the use of the forests by the local people for constructional Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 37

timber and to supplement their meagre incomes for subsistence and (2) organised timber smugglers engaged in large scale clear-cuts for the illegal commercial timber trade common throughout NWFP. Since both are of covert and unrecorded nature, the proportions between the two can not be estimated.

(5) Summing Up: As the magnitude of the consumption/supply gap shows, the use of the forests exceeding their sustainable yield has already taken place many years prior to the base-year and the year of imposing the harvesting ban. Hence, the gap explains the deteriorated state of the forests not only for the base-year but also as a result of the long standing negligence of the real causes for forest deterioration.

In the base-year the recorded harvest accounted for about 2.2% of the total loss of growing stock, local consumption for fire-wood accounted for 80.0% and the other out-takes accounted for 17.8%. Hence forest deterioration in the baseline study was identified as primarily resulting from the fire-wood consumption of the local people.

This also provides an answer to the second question raised in the baseline-study: With an ever growing population the forest will continue to deteriorate as the forest cannot be protected against the subsistence needs of the local people. 38 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

Chapter 3 Timber Harvesting Ban – Directives, Compliances, and Effectiveness

3.1 BACKGROUND TO THE TIMBER HARVESTING BAN

During the operation of the Forest Co-Operative Societies (FCS), numerous observations were made that indicated large scale mismanagement, which in some cases resulted in legal prosecution. These observations also fuelled critical discussions in various quarters of the civil society, prominently voiced through NGOs. The notion of such malpractices to the detriment of the Guzara forests involving both the FCS and the Forest Department, also reached the Provincial and the Federal Governments. Already in the early 90s various discussions were initiated in the political sphere at both levels to review the appropriateness of entrusting the management of large forest areas to the FCS. Simultaneously the management practices of the NWFP Forest Department came under critical review.

In September 1992, a catastrophic flood was received throughout Pakistan. The flood was caused by widespread heavy rainfall causing devastation in mountainous and plain areas. The inflow of water was so sudden and enormous that streams and rivers could not accommodate it. Rocks, trees, timber, roofs and wooden bridges rolled. Enormous damages to the infrastructure occurred both locally and downstream. Human suffering was on top of it.

In the aftermath of the flood many politicians and some scientists attributed the devastating impacts of the flood to the over exploitation of the mountainous forests in NWFP31. According to these voices, the mismanagement of the forests resulted in a decrease of the forest’s water-holding capacities, the loss of their capacity to regulate water run-off and subsequently causing erosion, all of these resulting into grave local and downstream damages even affecting the irrigated agriculture downstream. Such discussions reached a wider public and promoted some generalised accusation at the Forest Department and the Forest Co-operatives as bearing direct responsibility for the catastrophic impacts of the flood.

3.2 INITIAL BAN PERIOD: SEPTEMBER 1993 TO APRIL 1997 3.2.1 Directives

After the dismissal of the civil Government in 1993, a new non-political, interim Government was formed for a period of ninety days. The issue of forestry which had attained significant importance after the flood, resulted in an instant and visible response of the Government to the public discussion on deforestation. Therefore a Prime Minister’s Inspection Team was constituted to examine the forestry affairs of the country in general and that of the NWFP in particular.

Based on the findings and recommendations of the inspection team a Timber Harvesting Ban was imposed on 30th September 1993 as part of an “Action Plan for Prime Minister’s Directives regarding mismanagement and malpractices in Forest Cooperative Societies in Hazara Division and forests in general in Pakistan”32. The overriding directive was a “complete ban on commercial timber harvesting for a period of two years” thus affecting the malpractices of the FCS as well as all other harvesting operations of the Forest Department/ Forest Development Corporation.

Apart from this major directive the action plan contained 13 other actions addressing different aspects in forestry in which changes were required, implying that on these issues shortfalls have been built up in the past that are now to be rectified within the two year period of the ban.

The various action elements of that plan can be grouped under different headings. Given the initial cause for the work of the inspection team, there are three main decisions directly related to the Forest Co-operatives:

31See ANNEX 11: Impact of Deforestation on Floods 32see ANNEX 2: The Timber Harvesting Ban Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 39

• abolition of all the 33 societies established under the Cooperatives Societies System in Hazara Division; • reversion of the management of the Cooperatives to Forest Department so as to safeguard the interests of the small Guzara owners; • sanctioning of a team of auditors to audit the affairs of Cooperatives.

A second set of actions deals with the issues perceived as major weaknesses in the Forest Department to pursue its controlling and policing obligations particularly in view of the increasing activities of the “timber mafia” in illegal logging. Thus two actions call for the necessary resources and extended legal powers to the FD:

• strengthening of the administrative and protective capabilities of Provincial Forest Department by providing arms, wireless sets and operational vehicles; • conferment of magisterial powers on Forest Officers to take prompt cognizance of forest offences.

The inspection team took note of another weakness in the FD relating to the forestry staff. Here it was seen that a staff transfer practice, with political intervention, was in vogue that undermined continuity in forest management. Such continuity was seen essential for long-term sustenance in the preparation and implementation of forest management plans. In addition it was observed that the lack of incentives for a proper performance of the forestry staff made them vulnerable to accept additional incomes from forest offenders. Thus there were two actions to address these staff related aspects:

- tenure fixation regarding postings and transfers of Forest Staff; training of staff of Forest Department for all tiers so as to build their capacities; - sanction of compensation and awards to Forest Officials at par with Police and Customs Departments.

Another set of decisions related to remedial action to improve the forest conditions over a longer-term. In the first instance the forest laws that were never adjusted to changing conditions are to be amended. Hence the actions call for “amendments in the Forest Act 1927 and the Hazara Forest Act 1936”, primarily to adjust these law-sets to accommodate the implementation of a “manifold expansion of social forestry programs to improve the economic conditions of poor farmers and poor people.”

Finally, the actions are addressing issues directly related to the generally deteriorated state of the forests. These actions refer to (1) observations that in the absence of alternatives the local energy requirements are almost exclusively covered from the forests and that these are a major cause for the decline of the forests. Thus, one action calls for the “provision of alternate energy sources such as Sui gas, LPG, etc. to reduce the pressure on forests for firewood/energy.” Similarly, (2) the burden on the forests resulting from commercial timber harvesting is to be substituted by the “permission to import timber”. In the end, however, not only the burden on the forests is to be lifted by energy and timber substitution but also to improve the forests itself by the “establishment of a non-lapsable revolving fund for meeting development expenditure particularly for re-afforestation efforts (in case of NWFP this fund is not to be less than Rs.150 million).”

In the initial phase quite a number of forest officers were supportive of the ban primarily because mounting political interferences in the pre-ban period had undermined the image and operational effectiveness of the FD. This interference had an adverse impact on the operational performance of the FD and it also deflated the department’s public credibility onto which much of the pride of being a forester was based in the past.

In addition, many foresters were of the opinion that the ban would be an entry point to reconstitute the Forest Department’s authority and public respect. Moreover the donor agencies expected that the ban would support and accelerate the introduction of new participatory management systems as attempted by various donor- 40 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

funded projects since the late 80s. The latter notion resulted from the prospects inherent in the action plan of the early ban document and which directly related to claims the donors had raised since for quite some time but onto which the FD so far had shown little to no active response.

3.2.2 Compliances and Effectiveness 1993 to 1997

As indicated in the “Action Plan for Prime Minister Directives” most of the actions were required to be initiated and pursued by the Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Cooperatives either by itself or in conjunction with other Federal Government Ministries and all Provincial Governments including Government of Azad Jammu and Kashmir and Northern Areas. These included provision of alternate energy sources in the forest areas, import of timber, enhancement of punishment in the Forest Acts and their implementation, establishment of non lapsable fund and expansion of social forestry programmes. However, the Federal Government restricted itself only to endorsing the Directives to all the Provincial Forest Departments. After the replacement of the interim Government, none of the preceding Governments was interested to offer any practical assistance to pursue the action –oriented recommendations of the Directives of the defunct interim Government and restricted themselves only to maintaining status- quo with regard to ban on timber harvesting.

Since the ban’s time frame was of two years it was expected that the ban will automatically be relaxed afterwards. However neither the provincial Forest Department took any initiative to resume harvesting on its own nor did the federal Government give any explicit direction in this regard. Therefore until April 1997, an 18 months period after the expiry of the initial ban period passed on as a status-quo.

(1) Initial Donor Activities to Forest Sector Reforms: During the three and a half years of the initial period of the ban, primarily the donors took initiatives that aimed at convincing the NWFP Forest Department and other agencies to comply with the objectives and the action plan of the ban. Major donors active in the forest sector at that time were Germany through GTZ, Switzerland through Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC), the Netherlands through the Royal Netherlands Embassy (RNE) and – later on – the Asian Development Bank (ADB).

All donors shared a common understanding that their engagement in the forest sector will only become effective if the forest sector is comprehensively reformed. However the donors had different perspectives as to how the reform process should be initiated and as to what is required in terms of policy and legal adjustments, institutional changes and managerial practices at the field level. As a result each donor tried to influence the process of reforms through substantiating the objectives of the ban in their own specific way.

Generally there were two factions within the donors with similarities in the approach of SDC and GTZ on the one hand and between RNE and ADB on the other. Both GTZ and SDC had worked with the Forest Department mainly in the designated forest areas in Kaghan, Siran, and Kalam valleys. Given their experience in designated forest areas, both GTZ and SDC considered the introduction of Joint Forest Management (JFM) as a key element of the reform process. The RNE (later in co-operation with the ADB) on the other hand, had experience of working in non-forest private and communal lands including agricultural and rangelands in a wider perspective on poverty alleviation and general rural development.

In terms of the necessities for forest sector reforms and on general concepts for a participatory involvement of local communities in natural resource management, as proclaimed in one of the directives of the ban, there was general agreement between the two factions. From the beginning though, there were also differences as to the focus in the operational concepts for field level implementation i.e. either initiating participatory processes directly related to the forests and treating other land-use matters in relation to the forests, or primarily addressing general land-use management issues and treating forest matters only if local conditions call for it. Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 41

Apart from differences in the operational concepts, major differences were in the ways of imparting such interventions into the process of the forest sector reform in order to get the new participatory management practices institutionalised for long term application. The GTZ/SDC considered establishment of an NWFP Forestry Commission as an independent body outside the existing FD structures to guide and control the reforms in the public interest to be the first step. The RNE/ADB preferred to first establish an Institutional Transformation Cell (ITC) inside the existing setup of the forest administration.

In the course of finalizing the FSP project document and the establishment of ITC such differences among the donors were overruled because the package of these two projects became the main focus for the sector reform process. However the dissent among the donors on preconditions and implementation strategies within the sector reform process continued.

The donors were cognizant of these differences in their approaches and the likely negative impacts these will have on the reform process. To harmonise their efforts and to reconcile the differences in their approaches, the donors established a Forestry Donors’ Coordination Group (FDCG). The FDCG was meant to discuss issues related to the forest sector reforms and to develop some sort of consensus so that the reform agenda of all donors can be pursued in a unified way.

(2) Other Donors and Projects in the Forest Sector: Parallel to these project based initiatives of the four major donors to the forest sector, there were also other forestry related projects active in NWFP under EU and GEF/UNDP funding and IUCN implementation. These projects were also based on a community participation approach but widened their focus to also cover environmental and bio-diversity aspects33. However, on their own they did not directly engage in demanding and promoting forest sector reforms as was the case with the other donors.

That part of participating in the reform process was taken over by IUCN as one of the leading international organizations for the conservation of nature and as such assuming responsibilities in its statutory competence.

In a long localized participatory process IUCN developed a “Sarhad Provincial Conservation Strategy” (SPCS) which was approved by the NWFP cabinet and published in 1996. The strategy recommended (i) to eliminate political interference in the functioning of the Department of DFFW, (ii) re-organize the Forest Department, (iii) enhance the quality and implementation of forest management plans, (iv) improve forest laws and their enforcement, (v) improve forest education, (vi) settle the rights of local people in protected forests, (vii) alleviate poverty of the mountain people, (viii) reduce the excessive removal of timber, (ix) decrease the use of forest trees as fuel, (x) ensure prompt and adequate regeneration, (xi) control grazing in forests, (xii) rehabilitate natural vegetation in the southern districts and (xiii) reduce cultivation on mountain slopes.34

With this tableau of recommendations, the SPCS was not only supporting the directives of the harvesting ban but was also in line with the objectives of the other donors concerning the forest sector in NWFP. Also, as a result of the numerous localised workshops held in the course of developing the SPCS, the awareness of environmental issues enhanced during that process and thereafter. Thus gradually, environmental, ecological, and bio-diversity issues, which until then were more or less a domain of academic circles and some NGOs, reached a wider public. Such issues also became an additional focus in the policy and forest sector reform initiatives of the donors who previously were silent on environmental issues that are, however, of overriding importance for the future of not only the forests but also the people in NWFP and for Pakistan.

33Two of these were the “Environmental Rehabilitation Project in NWFP and Punjab – ERNP” and the “Mountain Areas Conservancy Project (MACP)”. Dir and Galiat areas were included in the former whereas parts of Chitral, Dir and Swat Districts were part of latter. 34IUCN SPCS, 1996:133 42 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

(3) NGO Involvement: Apart from IUCN and the WWF-Pakistan both of which took part in the sector reform discussions at higher levels, there were also local NGOs, prominently the Sungi Development Foundation, which actively mobilised the general public.

(4) Further Donor Support to the Sector Reform: In the course of these donor initiatives and also the SPCS, frequent reference was made to the two major pre-ban studies on forestry that dealt with policy and technical requirements for necessary changes in the Pakistan forest sector in general and forestry in NWFP in particular, the FSMP and the HESS.

The FSMP was well in line not only with the action plan of the ban but, primarily at the operational level, also coherent with what later was consolidated under the RNE/ADB FSP/ITC. Also the HESS study framed a substantiated background to the action plan recommendations contained in the initial ban concerning alternative energy supplies and timber import. Both studies, though, were accomplished at the national level and were less specific at the provincial level. In view of these widely framed national studies, primarily the German donors through their SFDP, engaged in substantiating relevant aspects of the ban more specifically on NWFP both at sub-provincial and provincial levels.

From 1993 to 1997 a full range of studies – all of them under the auspice of the Forest Department – were accomplished or initiated, directly related to relevant aspects of the ban and its concomitant action requirements. Apart from two sub-regional studies, one on the effectiveness of plantations and the other on a satellite image analysis and field survey based wood demand/supply situation in the Siran/Kaghan project area, there were four other studies that directly addressed problems identified in the action plan of the ban:

The major study on the “Evaluation of the Performance and the Future of the Forest Co-operative Societies and the Forest Development Corporation” (FCS/FDC Study) was accomplished in 1995 during the same period when the SPCS field level workshops were taking place. This “FCS/FDC Study” was directly related to the ban. It made a comprehensive empirical analysis of the past operations under the FCS system and thus, reinforced the validity of abolishing the FCS system. This study, accomplished in the middle of the German donor engagement in forest sector reforms, also made a number of recommendations directly referring to the scope of such reforms. The implementation of some of these recommendations was made conditional for the continuation of the German support to the forest sector. The study recommended:

• A politically high level but independent Forest Commission is to be established to guide and monitor the development and implementation of a new forest policy. • The preparation of an NWFP Forest Policy and a revision of Forest Laws to politically and legally accommodate the participatory concept of Joint Forest Management at the local level, including the participation of local communities in planning, harvesting and over-all management of forests. • Reorganization of the Forest Department as line and staff organization with specialized technical staff functions at the central level providing professional services to the territorial staff. • Intensification of forest management by reducing the sizes of territorial jurisdictions and integrating all forest management functions into a uniform organizational set-up of the Forest Department. This uniform set-up is to integrate forest administration and the whole forest management cycle including harvesting under the responsibility of the territorial forest staff. • Reorganizing the Forest Development Corporation previously responsible for timber harvesting and marketing into a “Forest Products Marketing & Promotion Corporation”. • Counteracting political interference in staff postings and transfers and ensuring appropriate time tenures for various positions. • Redesigning forest planning through a number of steps such as repeal of the colonial Working Plan Code and approval of a New Working Plan Code (already prepared under the Kaghan Intensive Forest Management Project), adoption of modern concepts of inventory assessment; and preparation of regional and stand level inventory reports according to a forest function concept on site-specific conditions. • Promoting timber imports by a Public Private Partnership (PPP) project involving a reorganized FDC, private timber industries, and external donors. • Development of a Guzara Development Project. Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 43

On the basis of these recommendations, a number of additional studies initiated on request of the FD, supported by the NWFP PE&D Department and accomplished with financial assistance by the German KfW and technical assistance through the German GTZ. Two studies were prepared as project proposal documents:

• One project document focused on the promotion of timber import in a Public Private Partnership arrangement with the redefined set-up of the FDC as “Forest Products Marketing & Promotion Corporation” involving the public aspect, with Karachi based timber traders as the private aspect.

• The other project document focused on the promotion of Guzara Forest Development in order to replace the defunct Forest Co-operatives and to re-instate the interests of the small Guzara owners in conjunction with safe-guarding the requirements of the non-owner forest users.

• The third study was also initiated on recommendations of the “FCS/FDC Study” and was designed in direct correspondence to the underlying reasoning for the ban. This Provincial Forest Resource Inventory (PFRI), referred to above, was in 1995 to 1997 but the final study report was published only in June 2000.

All these studies were meant and accomplished as a direct support to the Forest Department to comply with the action requirements of the ban. However except for the timber import study and the PFRI, the other studies became victim of the up-coming dissent among the donors as to the right approach to promote changes in forest policy, administration and management.

The basic reason for non-adoption of the recommendations of these studies was rooted in the core recommendation to have an independent Forestry Commission established first, before sound accomplishment of the proposed project were to be expected under German financial and technical assistance. Since the Forest Department opposed any external and independent controlling body, these studies and their recommendations were set aside at that time. Still some cross-fertilization remained from these studies as certain aspects were taken up in the first formal extension of the ban and also in the ADB funded Forest Sector Project that was prepared in parallel to the SFDP studies.

The fates of the timber import study and the PFRI were different. The timber import study was addressing an issue of national concern and was, therefore, discussed with federal agencies. The results of that study were of mixed practicability. On the one hand domestic market prices were much higher than the world-market price “cost-insurance-freight (cif)“ Karachi. On that cif price, however, a multitude of different taxes, duties and other levies were to be charged by various Government agencies making the import of timber questionable on economic grounds. An intervention by the then IGF to get such levies lowered or waived off did not succeed. Since then, the issue of timber imports has been touched in various documents but no deliberate and serious attempt has been made to take it up again.

The PFRI, though accomplished from 1995 to 1997, was published only in June 2000. Therefore its results became relevant to the policy makers only after major policy decisions were taken already with the publication of the new Provincial Forests Policy of 1999.

(5) Initiation of the Reform Process: Based on the recommendations of FSMP, and the interventions of other donor assisted projects, a “Forest Sector Project” was launched with financial assistance of the ADB for the period 1996 to 2006. The project objective was to protect and improve the hilly and mountainous environment of NWFP, thereby raising the productivity of private, communal, and state lands that are suitable for trees, fodder and other crops. The operational approach of the project was based on a social forestry approach that seeks active participation of beneficiaries in the design, planning and execution of project.

In the context of project preparation for that large scale FSP, the need for some wider policy and institutional reforms in the forest sector was substantiated in pursuit of the previous attempts of the various donors and in accordance with the directives of the harvesting ban. That element under the FSP was funded and technically 44 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

assisted by the Netherlands and a Dutch consultant company was commissioned with its implementation. Subsequently, as an entry point to initiate sector reform processes, an Institutional Transformation Cell (ITC) was established but without external backing by a Forestry Commission. At the operational level, the experiences of the Malakand projects focusing on Rural Development, Village Development Committees (VDC) and Village Land Use Planning (VLUP) were introduced as the main instruments for land-use management in which forestry only figured as a minor part.

(6) Summing Up: The three years before the ban and its follow-up initial period of the ban, factually extending until April 1997, were characterised by an almost hectic production of project documents, policy and strategy papers and detailed technical studies on various subjects in the forest sector. Almost all of these studies directly or indirectly are related to the action plan of the ban. These studies and documents converged in a common dominator i.e. the need and urgency of a comprehensive reform in the forest sector of NWFP. All these studies identified the same problems and their recommendations were almost identical in substance, differing only on how to initiate and support such processes.

3.3 FIRST EXTENSION OF THE BAN APRIL 1997 TO DECEMBER 1999 3.3.1 Directives

In April 1997 the ban was formally extended for a period of another three years due to the slow progress in compliance by the Forest Department and other agencies. This second period of the ban factually lasted until December 1999.

It was only in July 1998, though, that the Federal Ministry of Environment furnished a more detailed action plan to the Chief Minister NWFP which was endorsed to the FD for compliance. This action plan emphasized the importance of forests’ environmental role in conserving soil and water for irrigated agriculture in the country, in addition to:

• Preparation of long term Management/Working Plans for forests on the basis of a multiple use-concept without which commercial harvests should not be carried out. • Before undertaking forest harvests, the objectives to manage the forest resources for conservation of biodiversity in perpetuity should not be ignored. • Forest harvests followed by regeneration/reforestation must be ensured by provision of funds. • Tending operations of forests should be carried out to gain optimum growth of trees to enhance commercial value of timber at the time of final harvests. • A system to monitor the health and growth of forests may be established on sustainable basis. Data generated in this process may be utilized for improvement in the management of forests. • The Forest Department should play a lead role in developing marketing initiatives for establishment of wood-based industry, especially pulp and paper mills to reduce dependence on imported forest products. In this context, private sector may be encouraged.

3.3.2 Compliances and Effectiveness 1997 to 1999

The FSP and the ITC started their operation. Initially the progress was slow because of the continued dissent among the donors on the general institutional strategy and also because of disputes between the Dutch consulting company and the ADB on the FSP project approach.

In 1998 a policy review was carried out by IUCN and the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) in collaboration with the Government of Pakistan. The study identified a series of constraints so as to improve forest policy. This included attitudinal indifference of forest functionaries for the participatory approach, weak reconciliation of social and environmental goals, lack of accountability, lack of extension service and inadequate capacities of the forest functionaries and territorial staff to take over responsibilities of the reform process. All this indicated persisting major problems in the forest sector even five years after the imposition Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 45

of the ban and its action plan. Despite clear-cut recommendations of Policy review to be initiated by the Government of Pakistan, no efforts were made to review the National Forest Policy 1991 until 2002.

The NWFP Forest Department on its own took an initiative in this regard and in 1999 the first ever NWFP forest policy document was formulated and notified in the same year. In the document integrated resource management and participatory approaches in forest management were indicated as guiding principles of the policy. Updating forestry legislation and institutional transformation of the forest sector were identified as the major elements of the policy. In order to guide and control the implementation of such policies, a Forestry Commission (FC) was to be created. The policy also envisaged the establishment of a Forestry Development Fund (FDF) to finance effective regeneration of forests and safeguarding the returns to the local communities from timber harvesting.

In its basic features the policy followed suit of what the various ban directives were demanding and it also integrated almost all major demands of the donors regarding the forest sector since the early 90s.

3.4 SECOND EXTENSION OF THE BAN IN JANUARY 2000 AND BAN RELAXATION FOR 2001 3.4.1 Directives

After the military take-over of the Government in October 1999, the ban was further extended in January 2000 for one year. Realizing the legal limitations of imposing such kind of ban on a subject under provincial jurisdiction, this time the extension of the ban was based on the need for mitigating the harmful effects of deforestation on environment, climate, and ecology (these are the subjects on the Concurrent List with joint jurisdiction of federal and provincial Government). This second extension reiterated the focus on environmental issues already addressed in the first extension of the ban in 1997. It was further required to initiate immediate implementation of the Chief Executive’s directive and to furnish compliance reports.

On expiry of the above extension period, in December 2000, the Ministry of Environment conveyed the decision for relaxation of the ban for one year. It also conveyed the following actions for implementation:

• Long term forest working plans should be prepared in consultation with the local communities and in accordance with the guidelines issued by the Federal Government from time to time. The implementation of the working plans will be reviewed periodically by the Federal Government in consultation with the Provincial Forest Departments. The Federal Forestry Board will be activated for this purpose as well as to monitor changes in forest cover to formulate and review Forest Policy, institutional arrangements, etc. • Commercial felling of trees from any forest area without a sustainable working plan should not be carried out. • The depleted forest areas should be protected and a program of afforestation be developed. • Forest harvests shall only be carried out when funds to regenerate the cut-over areas are assured. Restoration of cut-over areas shall be carried out immediately after the completion of felling operations along with strict enforcement measures. • Reserved Forests of conifer types are not burdened with rights of the communities. Harvest of trees from these natural forests should be restricted to hygienic fellings only through Joint Forest Management Committees where such committees exist. Rights of easement in such forests may be maintained. • Timber of dead, dry and wind-fallen trees should be immediately salvaged. • Where private ownership rights in forests are 60% or more, protection/management mechanisms may be left to the communities under legal coverage and based on working plans. Management costs of such forests should be borne by communities out of income from timber sales. Forest Department will continue to assist the village communities in preparation of sustainable working plans and to monitor the activities regarding protection and management of their forests. • A system of forest check posts should be strengthened with the assistance of civil administration and Civil Armed Forces to monitor movement of timber within the province. For inter-provincial movement of wood, 46 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

office of the IGF will regulate in consultation with Provincial Forest Department including NAs and AJK. • The forest offenders may strictly be dealt with in accordance with the provisions of Forest Laws. To deal with forest offence cases, schedule of compensation and fines will be revised/rationalized. • A system of Monitoring and Evaluation of Forest Management may be established to monitor changes in forest cover in consultation with Ministry of Environment and provincial forest departments. • Progress of the proposals will be reviewed by the Federal Forestry Board after one year. • The ban on the commercial harvest of forests shall be removed for a period of one year. It shall be ensured that indiscriminate felling of trees and smuggling of timber shall not take place. • Detailed data with respect to afforestation, deforestation and the targets to be achieved shall be collected within a period of one year.

It was further directed that necessary actions to implement the decisions be taken and progress reports furnished to the Federal Ministry of Environment.

3.4.2 Compliances and Effectiveness 2000 to 2001

During the one-year period of ban relaxation, the FSP and the ITC continued working but more or less on office and paperwork without much field level operations except financing certain elements of the operations directly assigned to the Forest Department under the FSP project agreement. In compliance with the directives of the Federal and Provincial Government that “harvesting shall be done only through JFMCs”, the Forest Department initiated a field campaign to get as many JFMCs established as possible. Thus, within a period of less than three months, about 900 VDC/JFMCs were created in Malakand and Hazara primarily by the field staff simply recording such groups as existing without visiting the respective villages or meeting the village representatives. These “JFMCs” were created as a formality on paper for the sole purpose to justify timber harvesting. Such JFMCs, so constituted, were never heard of again after achieving their objective of timber harvesting.

3.5 THE BAN JANUARY 2002 TO 2008 3.5.1 Directives

After expiry of the relaxation period, the ban was assumed to be continuing and no further formal extension of the ban on timber harvesting was announced.

However, due to persistent claims of the communities and acknowledging the reform process initiated under the FSP/ITC by the Forest Department, the Federal Ministry of Environment indicated in the draft National Forest Policy that “Provincial Governments may resume sustainable commercial timber harvesting in the Reserved, Protected, Guzara, and Private Forests.” Although the draft of the Policy was prepared in 2002, it is still awaits approval in spite of a lapse of more than six years.

3.5.2 Compliances and Effectiveness 2002 to 2008

(1) NWFP Forest Ordinance 2002: The first provincial forest policy of 1999 covered all requirements that were demanded by the various directives of the ban and the recommendations of the donors. The implementation of relevant parts of that policy though, was possible only after formal legal coverage. This new NWFP Forest Ordinance 200235 was promulgated in June 2002 by the Military Government. Under that Ordinance all Forest laws were consolidated and amended. It provided for integrated resource management and community participation besides forest management in consonance with the action plan of the ban. The Ordinance also enacted a three stage planning system, a Forest Development Fund (FDF) and protective field staff of the Forest Department as forest force.

Although both the Forest Policy and the Ordinance advocate the adoption of an integrated approach but in practice it was rarely followed. This is in spite of the fact that the Forest Ordinance has been discussed in

35see APPENDIX to ANNEX 5: Relevant Sections of the Forest Ordinance 2002 Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 47

numerous meetings of the Thematic Working Groups established for the purpose, in which the other line departments such as Fisheries and Wildlife participated in addition to the NGOs. However some of the NGOs, particularly SUNGI and SAFI, still oppose the law as part of their advocacy campaign.

(2) Forestry Commission and Round Table: With the “NWFP Forestry Commission Act 1999” the Forestry Commission (FC) was legally created to guide and oversee the process of institutional and legislative reforms in the forest sector. The Forest Commission was mandated to review, develop and advocate policies for sustainable development of forests in the province and to ensure their implementation through continuous monitoring. A representative body of all stakeholders in the forest sector was also legally created in the form of Forestry Round Table to act as think tank and resource pool for the Forestry Commission.

In 2001 Forestry Donors’ Coordination Group made a joint effort to review the institutional reform process with the aim to further improve the development of the forest sector as well as the manner in which donors can contribute to it. Although the Forestry Commission was already enacted in 1999, the review Mission of 2001 again emphasized that the establishment of the Forestry Commission/Round Tables must be pursued with utmost vigour before all other elements (Forest Policy, Forest Law) are being finalized. It also recommended that the ongoing reform process has to be linked to civil society expectations, more than this has been done so far.

An indication for the continued reluctance of the FD to establish institutions of public control on the reform process is that the election for selection of the FC members could not be held till 2005. It became possible only after the Act was amended which turned the initial idea of having the commission upside down. Instead of creating the membership through an electoral mechanism establishing independent public control on the forest sector reform, the members were nominated by the Round Table from among themselves on political grounds. Still the FC is not in operation in spite of a lapse of more than ten years after its proclamation.

Similarly the Round Tables also failed to meet the original policy intentions. At the inception stage of the Round Table, it was decided that Round Tables will be replicated at Forest Circle and Forest Division level so as to act as an electoral college for the provincial Round Table. So far, such intentions have not been accomplished. Instead the members are nominated by the Forest Department on its own discretion. Therefore, in many cases the members do not act in pursuit of public responsibilities as originally intended.

(3) Re-organization of the Forest Department: In order to reorganize the Department on a matrix (staff and line) structure, 5 specialized units: “Directorate of Forestry Planning and Monitoring”, “Directorate of Community Development, Extension, Gender & Development”, “Directorate of Institutional & Human Resource Development”, “Directorate of Research and Development and Directorate of Non-Timber Forest Products” have been established. Though the matrix system of management was introduced to integrate the planning and field implementation of the activities of all line departments, no other constituent organization ofthe Environment Departments such as Wildlife, Fisheries, FDC, and Watershed Management have opted to join the integrated approach, thereby defeating the very objective of integrated, multiple-use concept in forest and land-use planning.

The re-organized structure of the Forest Department has not yet achieved its basic objective i.e. a functioning matrix management to assist the territorial staff in technical matters. To date the Directorates are unable to perform their assignments and have more or less been treated as transit stations for posting/adjustment of the territorial/managerial staff of the Forest Department with the result that the posted staff tries to get posted out as soon as possible.

Therefore, neither planning and monitoring is operational as foreseen nor any effective extension and awareness raising programs have been launched. Similarly due to the lack of human resources and absence of staff motivation to professionally engage in the new technical functions devised under the reforms, the other Directorates are also struggling. 48 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

(4) Forest Planning: With the harvesting ban, Working Plans in their traditional design have lost their importance and the working plan officers as well as the forest owners consider the preparation of Working Plans as a futile exercise. In addition, the Working Plan Circle does not have the required human resources, facilities, and technical know-how to perform their new functions to prepare Working Plans along the requirements of the new forest policy. Forest officers posted for preparation of Working Plans are frequently transferred which undermines the necessary continuity in the planning process. In a joint meeting of Ministry of Environment and National Accountability Bureau in Islamabad on 06.12.2007 under the Chairmanship of Federal Minister for Environment, the Ministry was requested for provision of resources to the Forestry Management, Planning and Monitoring Circle (FPMC) for acquisition of latest satellite imageries, GIS labs, establishment of field stations, additional staff and incentives to strengthen the planning & monitoring capabilities of Forest Department. The recommendation was approved but did not materialise. Accordingly instead of updating and revising the expired working plans, the FD has been merely extending the operation period of the in-operative working plans for the purpose of implementation but the ban is still intact.

(5) Participatory Forest Management36: Under the previous bilaterally funded projects, about 200 Village Development Plans are said to have been prepared by the Village Development Committees during the last two decades. However, after the termination of these projects, these Village Development Plans and any evidence of their implementation are not traceable in most of the cases. The earlier initiatives for Joint Forest Management (JFM) have also not progressed well. It is only during the period of the ban relaxation that participation of local communities was arranged for harvesting purposes in a hectic campaign as a formality to comply with action requirements of the ban relaxation.

To revitalise participation of the people in forest management the “Community Participation Rules 2004” established a legal basis and renewed mechanism to organise Village Development Committees/Joint Forest Management Committees for involving stakeholders in the management of forests and land-use. Joint Forest Management Committees were to be organised which are either sub-committees of VDCs or independent bodies organised for the management of a forest unit belonging to a village. Integrated land-use planning has been proclaimed in the new policy through joint land-use planning with the Departments of Agriculture, Livestock, and Local Government. However, no practical guidelines exist on how such inter-agency co- operation in integrated land-use planning is to be accomplished on top of the fact that none of the other line agencies had been involved in the preparation of the forest policy that demands such co-operation.

As expected, the acceptance and ownership of this approach among the field staff was difficult as well because of the risk of losing their authority. As of now practically none of the few existing JFMCs are in a position to assume responsibility for forest management.

(6) Forest Development Fund: The operation rules are ineffective in promoting the original intention of establishing the funds. Although the Fund also provides mechanism to receive voluntary contributions from donors, the operational rules of the FDF are too complicated to attract such investments. Such funds are donated by the donors for certain specific purposes such as capacity building, gender mainstreaming, and community participation. However, in the present FDF rules there is no such provision for use of FDF on such support activities. Also no mechanism has so far been provided for the flow of funds to the VDCs and JFMCs.

(7) Forest Force: Although the provincial Government has supplied some old arms from its existing stock but still no resources are provided for training, uniforms, vehicles and transport for the enforcement staff and other necessary infrastructure to help the FD serving as forest force. The NGOs and civil society are critical of this legal provision and apprehend that its compliance will strengthen the policing role of the forest officers undermining the new approach of promoting local level participatory forest management practices. They also apprehend that the powers might be used injudiciously.

36see ANNEX 12: JFM Field Study Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 49

(8) Donors’ response: After such a slow and in parts adverse adoption of the new policy and the conclusions of the Joint Donor Review (JDR) mission report of 2001, most of the donors eventually withdrew support from the forest sector at different points in time and for different reasons. Only the SDC is still supporting the forest sector through its INRM Project.

3.5.3 Forest Staff and Forest Stakeholders’ Perceptions

(1) Forest Staff Perceptions on Forest Sector Reforms37: As the forest staff is the main actor to implement the new policy, their perceptions are critical for their actions and the effectiveness of the policy. In order to assess the present perceptions in that respect – and indirectly the implementation status of the sector reforms – two Circle level forestry workshops were organized in the course of the present study bringing together almost all senior territorial and managerial forest officers.

Apart from the discussions on various aspects, the workshops have revealed that the implementation of the new forest policy at the field level has not gained ground up to the present time. The root cause for that is a missing willingness among forestry staff at all levels to identify with the new policy. There is also a lack of clear and transparent guidelines and hardly any staff training has been accomplished to enlighten the middle and the lower staff on the core elements of the new policy. Another important factor in undermining the implementation of the new policy is rooted in the unwillingness of the partner government agencies to cooperate.

In addition, there is a growing uneasiness among the forestry staff on apparent gaps in the policy that are of utmost importance for practical field work. Although the Provincial Forest Policy 1999 makes reference to the rights/tenure issue but it did not address the issue of land-tenure which is critical for sustainable forest management. Land-tenure is the main concern in practical forest management as the largest part of the forest area is practically unmanageable due to non-settlement of the ownership rights. In the absence of addressing such issues, the forest policy and sector reforms are destined to be ineffective. Consequently, the forestry staff is trapped in between the requirements of the new forest policy and the realities on the ground with little other alternatives than to continue with traditional attitudes and practices.

Summing Up: In the perception of the forest staff, the ban directives and the revision of forest laws, policy and management principles had created a frame for action which was far too wide to fit into the implementation capacities of the Forest Department. Though new policies and management strategies have been chalked out and new administrative structures have been created, field level operations continued almost unchanged along the traditional lines. Much of what was initiated by the new policy was either only reluctantly absorbed by the traditional structures inside the FD and the persisting esprit de corps among its staff, or failed on the ground for its inadequate acknowledgement of realities.

(2) Perceptions of Stakeholders on Harvesting Ban38: Apart from the forest staff, there are various other groups having stakes in the forests either to sustain their subsistence and to generate income for livelihoods, or to represent wider public interest in the management of forests. Such groups of stakeholders have certain common but also conflicting interests. This is reflected in contradictory perceptions on the harvesting ban, depending from what perspective the matter is looked at by a stakeholder. Workshops were organised in order to identify the main aspect of such attitudes and perceptions of the stakeholders for the present study. The workshops brought together the representatives of the various stakeholder groups from Hazara and Malakand. During the joint workshop, it was observed that communities from Hazara were more vocal and dominated the discussions. The perceptions of the participants expressed by the stakeholders reflect their interests but may not necessarily comply with realities.

Right-holders: Community members having user-rights were of the view that the ban was primarily devised to stop large scale commercial felling carried out by the phony Forest Cooperative Societies, the forest

37see ANNEX 13: Circle Level Workshop 38see ANNEX 14: Stakeholder Analysis 50 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

contractors, and illegally by the “timber mafia”. The ban, though successful on abolishing the FCS, has promoted large scale illegal and uncontrolled timber harvesting and trading.

Forest Owners/Concessionaries: This group shared a common perception that the imposition of the ban was the product of political bias and is contradictory to legal rights and constitutional pledges. The presently ongoing large scale illegal felling is the outcome of the ban policy that is being used as political clout to stop forest owners exercising their legal rights. At the same time, it is letting loose the timber-smugglers to illegally exploit their forests. On the other hand, the forest owners being the legitimate stakeholders in forest management and harvesting, were deprived from the use of their assets by the ban without any compensation. Contrary to this, the illegal loggers are financially thriving at the expense of the owners’ forest resources.

In the joint meeting of Ministry of Environment and National Accountability Bureau in Islamabad on 06.12.2007 under the Chairmanship of Federal Minister for Environment, the Ministry was requested for : i. Evolving of a mechanism for payment of rent to forest owning communities maintaining their forests up to desired level of stocking. ii. Establishment of Environmental Development Fund for compensation to Provincial Government for forest/ environmental conservation.

The recommendations were approved but not yet materialised.

VDCs and Local NGOs: This group perceived that the local population has neither experienced any shortage in meeting their household needs from the forests nor that there is a marked difference in the supply of wood after the ban. Not withstanding the ban, the communities have continued their normal practices of wood utilisation from the forests.

National NGOs: The members of the national NGOs working in the study area perceived that the harvesting ban has not contained the depletion of forests. The way these problems were addressed by the policy and legislators bypass the real issues. The local communities continued using forests in the same manner and with the same intensity as in the pre-ban period. However, the magnitude of harvesting increased due to population growth and the resultant enhanced demand. The imposition of the ban has forced the local communities to illegally sustain their livelihoods by resorting to indiscriminate felling. Consequently, the local communities are acting against the principles of sustainable forest use and ignoring the environmental importance of the forests. However, communities residing near the forests acknowledged that an improved utilisation regime can be established through participatory forest management by instituting local responsibilities of control and protection.

Summing up: All stakeholders complained that the ban stopped the owners and users to exercise their legal rights in a lawful manner. In the absence of compensations for the forgone benefits and income, the owners and users had no other choice but to cooperate with those who are more powerful and influential. The ban not only scaled down their own benefits but was also instrumental in increasing illegal logging for commercial purposes by the “timber mafia”. All stakeholders also agreed that the ban weakened the FD in performing its functions of scientific forest management and effectively controlling forest offences. All stakeholders called for lifting the ban under the condition that forest management is carried out in a scientific manner under approved working plans and adopting participatory approaches to control illicit harvesting and over exploitation.

3.6 HARVESTING, MARKETING, AND REVENUES DURING THE BAN PERIOD

During the whole period of the ban the Forest Department was (and still is) considered a revenue earning department by the provincial Government. Harvesting and marketing for the purpose of revenue generation continued in spite of the timber harvesting ban and despite the policy statement that forests should not be treated as a source of revenue. Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 51

(1) Harvesting: The legal part of harvesting during the ban was based on the policies of harvesting dry and wind-fallen trees. These were approved at different points in time and remained valid for various lengths of time during the ban period. The latest update on the policy was issued in 2003 based on an earlier decision of the Federal Cabinet that “timber of dead, dry and wind fallen trees should be immediately salvaged.” The provincial Government, in compliance of that decision and to pacify the forest owners, approved a policy for the disposal of dry standing and wind fallen trees. That policy is still continuing as the ban is not lifted.

Other major sources for timber harvesting have been the permissions granted under the legalisation of illicitly cut timber in Kohistan District after payments of punitive duties and fines. Continued timber supplies for the local timber markets were also secured by the permissions for the import of timber under the Afghan Timber Import Policy. Transportation of Afghan timber provided an opportunity to local timber mafia for admixture of local timber with Afghan timber.

A major impact on harvesting also came from the relaxation of the ban for one year in 2001. As a follow up, markings were made for the prescriptions of working plans for 2001, the extraction of timber in certain cases continued for a number of years.

Over the whole period of the ban (1994 to 2008 including one year relaxation in 2001) the total sanctioned harvesting through FD and FDC amounted to 841,455 m3. With wide variations over the years the annual average out-take was about 56,097 m3 whereas the annual average was 207,274 m3 in the pre-ban period 1985 to 1993. Also the recorded illegal harvesting amounting to an annual average of 68,142 m3 in the pre-ban period decreased during the ban period to an annual average of 53,678 m3.

Thus in terms of legal harvest, the harvesting ban was largely complied by FD/FDC resulting in a decrease in the annual average legal timber harvesting volumes to only 27% of its pre-ban volume. However, the recorded illegal timber harvesting only decreased to 79% of its pre-ban annual average volume.

SUMMARY TABLE 14: TIMBER HARVEST in cubic meter (roundwood only) (1) Pre-Ban Period 1985/86 to 1992/93 (8 years) RECORDED HARVEST DETAIL LEGAL ILLEGAL TOTAL

TOTAL 1,658,191 545,138 2,203,328

AVERAGE p.a. 207,274 68,142 275,416

- in percent 75.3 24.7 100.0

(2) Ban Period 1993/94 to 2007/08 (15 years) RECORDED HARVEST DETAIL LEGAL ILLEGAL TOTAL

TOTAL 841,455 805,174 1,646,629

AVERAGE p.a. 56,097 53,678 109,775

- in percent 51.1 48.9 100.0

For details ANNEX 8, TABLE 4.1 (a and b) 52 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

Apart from harvesting to meet the annual revenue targets assigned to the Forest Department and to ensure wood supplies to the timber markets, illegal harvesting continued outside the control and records of the FD as well. Illegal cutting by petty traders and local people to supplement incomes and also cutting by organised timber smugglers continued over the whole period of the ban.

(2) Marketing and Timber Prices39: As in the pre-ban period, timber and fire-wood was reaching the market during the ban through three channels: the official wholesale markets of the FDC at Goharabad (for Hazara) and Chakdara (for Malakand), a number of authorized local timber traders scattered throughout the province and a huge number of local illegal small-scale timber markets and sawmills. Authorised local traders supposedly, are only receiving their stock from the wholesale markets. They are also supposed to keep records but such records are scanty at best and so far no real attempt was made to analyse the trade practices of such dealers. Similarly, also on the illegal traders, of which there are hundreds, no information is available40.

Concerning the official records of FDC marketing, it seems that the two data systems of the FDC/FD, one on harvesting and the other one on marketing, are only loosely related. Whereas the total harvested volume of FDC (legal harvest only) in the pre-ban period (1985 to 1993) amounted to 1,658,191 m3 the total sales volume during the same eight-year period recorded 863,658 m3 only41. Similarly, during the ban-period (1994/2006) round-wood harvest was recorded as 841,455 m3, the recorded sales are 521,552 m3.

In the pre-ban period and at current prices the total sales value of timber at the two FDC wholesale markets amounted to Rs. 3,355.7 mill. or an annual average of Rs.419.5 mill. In the ban period the average annual sales value (at current prices) decreased to Rs.341.0 mill. During the same period though, the average timber price (all species, all formats) increased from Rs.6,090 to Rs.16,734 per m3 or an increase by 175%. Thus, the timber price increase remained roughly at par with the total overall inflation rate during that period42. SUMMARY TABLE 15: Timber Sales by FDC in cubic meter and mill. Pak. Rs, at current prices (1) PRE-BAN BACKPERIOD (8 years) Deodar Kail Fir Chir TOTAL Year Volume VALUE Volume VALUE Volume VALUE Volume VALUE Volume VALUE

TOTAL 197,150 1,153.9 200,556 802.0 357,514 1,157.8 108,438 242.0 863,658 3,355.7 AVERAGE 24,644 144.2 25,069 100.2 44,689 144.7 13,555 30.3 107,957 419.5

(2) BAN PERIOD (13 years) TOTAL 140,981 1,953.8 119,998 1,035.0 256,173 1,483.0 10,333 43.8 527,485 4,515.6 AVERAGE 10,845 150.3 9,231 79.6 19,706 114.1 795 3.4 40,576 347.4

For details see ANNEX 9, PART 2, TABLES 7.1 (a to c)

During the ban period no breakdown in the timber and fire-wood markets was observed. The markets functioned as in the pre-ban period, though on increasing prices. Such price increases are mainly to be attributed to the overall inflation but they also indicate a growing scarcity particularly for the more valuable species of Deodar and Kail for which the prices increased at a higher rate than the overall inflation. For Fir and Chir in contrast, the prices increased at a lower rate than the overall inflation rate, indicating no scarcity for these timber species – at least in terms of market supplies. Chir has almost completely ceased to be marketed through the legal FDC markets, though Chir is the most common species in the forests of the study-area. Given the

39Data on timber trade is only available for the FDC wholesale markets and approved data only extend to the FY 2005/06. 40In pursuit of one instruction of the study team for the FCS/FDC study of 1994 the SFDP started an initiative to get such illegal traders at least only identified and recorded (for the Abbottabad Forest Circle). This initiative had soon to be terminated due to the non-cooperation of territorial FD staff entrusted with that task. 41Harvested round-wood, marketed as scants does not explain the difference. 42ANNEX 9 SUPPORT TABLE: GDP, WPI and Timber Inflators 1984-85 to 2007-08 Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 53

large volume of illegal and unrecorded harvesting it is mostly Chir reaching illegal markets. The increase in the illegal, but apparently undisturbed, part of marketing was further promoted by the profit incentive due to price increase for high value timber species.

SUMMARY TABLE 16: Timber Prices (FDC) in Pak. Rs. per cubic meter (1) PRE-BAN BACKPERIOD (8 years) AVERAGE PRICES: LOGS and SCANTS Year TOTAL DEODAR KAIL FIR CHIR

1985/86 3,447 2,063 1,805 1,514 2,354 ...... 1992/93 10,092 6,460 5,229 4,145 6,293

% INCREASE 192.8 213.1 189.8 173.8 167.3

(2) BAN PERIOD (13 years)

1993/94 9,385 5,752 5,313 4,305 6,090 ...... 2005/06 32,844 18,248 10,762 11,985 16,734

% INCREASE 250.0 217.3 102.6 178.4 174.8

For details see ANNEX 9, TABLE 7.2 (a to c)

(3) Revenues: At current prices the annual revenue earned by the Forest Department during the pre-ban period ranged from Rs.130 million in FY 1985/86 to about Rs.403 million in the FY 1992/93. Surprisingly, the revenue compliance of the department during the ban increased from Rs.350 mill. to Rs.539 million in 2007/08. Such increases in revenue generation are basically reflecting price inflation as such revenue increases are based on a decreased volume of timber harvested. However, even reduced harvesting which continued to serve the revenue targets set by the NWFP Finance Department is in contradiction to the objectives of the Provincial Forest Policy of 1999 which states that the forests will no more serve as source of revenue for the provincial Government. SUMMARY TABLE 17: REVENUE REALIZATION at current prices, in mill. Pak Rs. (1) Pre-Ban Period 1985/86 to 1992/93 (8 years) REVENUES Total DETAIL Con- Confisc. Refund Revenue FD FDC sumers Timber Duty, Fees Misce. TOTAL 673.2 744.3 76.0 71.9 236.0 251.0 -1.9 2,050.4

Average 84.1 93.0 9.5 9.0 29.5 31.4 -0.2 256.3

in % 32.8 36.3 3.7 3.5 11.5 12.2 -0.1 100.0

(2) Ban Period 1993/94 to 2007/08 (15 years) TOTAL 2,211.1 722.1 381.3 226.7 1,178.6 989.0 -2.6 5,706.2

Average 147.4 48.1 25.4 15.1 78.6 65.9 -0.2 380.4

in % 38.7 12.7 6.7 4.0 20.7 17.3 -0.0 100.0

For details see ANNEX 8, PART 2, TABLE 8 (a and b) 54 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

(4) Summing Up: The whole period of the ban was characterized by an inherent contradiction between the objectives of the ban and the obligations for revenue generation from forests for the public exchequer. While the FD complied with the directives for revenue realisation not only the intentions of the ban were violated but the FD was also forced to directly contribute to the continued depletion of the forests, though at a small scale.

Although the ban has had an impact on the legal timber trade, the market supplies continued in line with the growing demand but shifted from legal to illegal trade to an even higher extent than prevalent already in the pre-ban period. Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 55

Chapter 4 The Forests - Demands and Supply 2008

4.1 CHANGING ENVIRONMENTAL AWARENESS AND ENVIRONMENTAL DEMANDS

(1) Growing Environmental Concerns: Whereas environmental, ecological, and biodiversity issues relating to the maintenance of forests particularly for those located in mountainous areas, gained more and more international importance in the 1970s, the public awareness on the importance of such aspects was lagging in Pakistan except the earlier efforts for watershed management and soil conservation. The sustainability of forests found its roots since introduction of scientific management of forests in 1901 through regular working plans and the environmental considerations gained further emphasis after the National Conservation Strategy (NCS) approved in 1992.

In Pakistan the situation in the forestry sector changed significantly after the floods of 1992 when intensive public discussions took place on the environmental functions of the forests. However, discussions on such forest functions did not expand to biodiversity, carbon sequestration and other environmental services. Even the action plan of the initial harvesting ban in direct response to the floods and the public discussion thereafter did not make any reference to environmental functions of the forests. All items of this action plan were geared towards a traditional perception of forest management. In the following years, though, the Federal Ministry of Environment (MoE) and its various organs through the Office of the Inspector General of Forests (IGF) became more active in integrating environmental concerns into national forest policies and management strategies. Hence, the directives following the first extension of the ban in 1997 included some – though still unspecific – actions requiring forest planning and management to address environmental and biodiversity aspects.

A larger impact on enhancing the awareness of environmental issues in the FD was made during the process of preparing the Sarhad Provincial Conservation Strategy (SPCS) in the mid 90s and thereafter. Some of the conceptual and practical implications of observing environmental principles as laid out in the SPCS also became part of the FSP/ITC project documents which were prepared in parallel with the SPCS. Later on these principles were also incorporated in the NWFP Forest Policy of 1999. The practical implementation of forest management in NWFP though, was largely accomplished without much reference to such considerations. However, the Forest Department was already incorporating the importance of watershed and soil conservation functions of the forests in its planning and management systems, but such prescriptions were not being fully implemented due to paucity of funds and limited capacity in the FD.

Other environmentally relevant awareness building processes were also initiated and promoted by the up- coming activities of NGOs in the early 90s., initially and mainly by the SUNGI Development Foundation. Besides advocacy for social justice, poverty alleviation, and women rights, the leading NGOs also raised awareness among the villagers about the harvesting ban and the concurrent environmental needs of protecting the forests. Later on, the local NGOs were supported by international agencies as well as by ongoing donor funded forestry projects in NWFP.

Since most of the biodiversity related projects have been under the NWFP Wildlife Department, this department has developed an understanding of environmental and biodiversity issues both conceptually and technically and is focusing on formal and informal training of its staff and village communities. A new wildlife law has been drafted which is in the process of enactment by the Provincial Assembly. This is in contradiction to the federal and provincial forest policies which refer to the holistic management of natural resources. The delineation between the ‘forest’ and ‘biodiversity’, which appears to be the case in the overall approach of the two administratively separated departments and their respective legislation, is not in the interest of the resource as such. Forests are as important for peoples’ livelihoods as they are for biodiversity and environmental concerns.

In the course of the growing environmental awareness of state institutions, NGOs, and within the civil society 56 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

and local communities a number of policy documents, guidelines and checklists on environmental issues were prepared by various agencies43.

(2) International Commitments: The environmental awareness created additional societal demands on forests for environmental services as well as making Pakistan become a party to a range of Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs)44 and some other forest related non-legally-binding instruments (NLBI). NLBI aim at strengthening political commitment and action at all levels to implement sustainable management of all types of forests to achieve the shared global objectives on forests as well as providing a framework for national action and international cooperation45.

(3) Summing Up: With the expanded environmental awareness, national and provincial policy statements on environmental issues and internationally binding and non-binding environmental agreements that Pakistan has signed or ratified with respect to sustainable management of natural resources, additional demands have been placed on the forests. However, apart from producing policy papers of high professional standards and entering into international commitments it is important first to analyze whether under given local circumstances such new demands and challenges can be accomplished on the ground or not.

4.2 FORESTS 2008 and FOREST CHANGE 1996 to 2008 4.2.1 Basic Data46

(1) Introduction: More than 12 years have lapsed since the base-year 1996 and the study-year 2008. Except for the year 2001, the timber harvesting ban was in force over the whole period until today. During this period, numerous discussions were held between the MoE responsible for imposing and continuing the ban and the FD NWFP to lift the ban in order to revive regular forest management. In spite of the prolonged harvesting ban for one and a half decade and a broadly widened awareness of the importance of forests for environmental services, the condition of the forests and their management have not improved. However, neither the Ministry of Environment nor the NWFP Forest Department have taken any initiatives to monitor its impact on the forests.

Such efforts were missing despite that there was a growing uneasiness among all parties and stakeholders in forestry on the appropriateness of the ban to promote its intended objectives. Therefore the present study, while focusing on the effectiveness of the harvesting ban, has first to analyse what really happened to the forests during the period of the ban.

(2) Study Area 2008: The study-area is the same as in the base-year, i.e. the two civil Divisions Malakand and Hazara47.

(3) Growth of Population and Households 1996 to 2008: Based on a growth-rate of 2.36% p.a. the population in the study area was estimated to be 9.806 mill. people In 2008. Thus, in the 12 years in between the base- year and the study-year the population increased by 37.2%. The population growth rate in the study-area was lower than in the whole of NWFP indicating emigration out of the study area. Emigration was mainly from the

43The relevant regulation and guidelines issued by the Pakistan Environmental Protection Agency (PEPA) include the Review of IEE/EIA) Regulations, 2000; EIA Guidelines & Overview; National Environmental Quality Standards (NEQS); and Guidelines for Sensitive and Critical Areas of Pakistan (October 1997). The MoE has developed the Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP), issued a comprehensive National Environ- mental Policy (NEP), 2005; Pakistan Bio-safety Rules 2005; and National Bio-safety Guidelines. Also a new Draft Forest Policy (DFP) has been submitted for review and approval by the Federal Cabinet. 44Among them the Biodiversity Convention (CBD), the Convention on Combating Desertification (CCD), the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) 45The major ones are the protocols of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED/Rio Summit 1992), the UN Agenda 21, and Forest Principles of the UNCED, the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD), especially its action program WEHAB (Water, Environment, Health, Agriculture and Biodiversity) and the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Goal 7 relates to envi- ronment, which has subsequently been reinforced by the Federal Ministry of Environment by setting its forest cover enhancement goal for the period ending 2015 46For details on basic data see ANNEX 9, TABLE SETS 1, 2 and 3 47A marginal difference of 906 hectare relating to the Swat/Shangla district in the baseline and the present analysis was arithmetically eliminated for consistency purposes Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 57

Hazara Division as a movement out of the division. In Malakand the population growth was higher than in the whole of NWFP with some emigration only taking place from the Chitral district mainly to the lower lying districts of NWFP. Resulting from the slightly different urban and rural growth-rates, the proportion between urban and rural population changed only marginally. 91.9% of the population in the study-area was still living in the rural areas in 2008.

SUMMARY TABLE 18: POPULATION GROWTH 1996 to 2008 POPULATION DETAIL 1996 GROWTH 2008 pers. % p.a. pers.

TOTAL NWFP (excl. FATA) 16,156,043 2.62 22,972,580

TOTAL STUDY AREA 7,146,138 2.36 9,806,344

- MALAKAND 3,832,475 2.95 5,701,644 - HAZARA 3,313,663 1.59 4,104,700

For details see ANNEX 9, BASE DATA TABLE

SUMMARY TABLE 19: POPULATION 2008 ESTIMATES (data used in THBS) POPULATION ESTIMATE DETAIL Urban Rural TOTAL

NWFP 2008 estm. 4,181,010 18,791,570 22,972,580 - in % 18.2 81.8 100.0

INCLUDED IN THBS 802,474 9,003,871 9,806,344 - in % of STUDY AREA 8.2 91.8 100.0

For details see ANNEX 9, TABLE 1 (b)

The number of households roughly grew in line with population growth. However, due to migratory movements both inside the study area and within the whole of NWFP there are some minor changes in the household size differential between rural and urban areas.

SUMMARY TABLE 20: HOUSEHOLDS 2008 ESTIMATES (data used in THBS) HOUSEHOLD ESTIMATES DETAIL Urban Rural TOTAL

NWFP 2008 estm. 539,188 2,457,207 2,996,394 - av. household size 7.75 7.65 7.67

INCLUDED IN THBS 106,043 1,210,685 1,316,728 - av. household size 7.57 7.44 7.45

For details see ANNEX 9, TABLE 1 (b)

(4) Change in General Land-Use 1996 to 2008: With 52.7% the rangelands remained the dominant feature in the overall land-use. The total rangeland area increased from 2,339,386 ha to 2,433,201 ha or by 4.0% during the study-period. Also agricultural land increased from 706,776 ha to 719,970 ha by 13,194 ha or 1.9% 58 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

at a much lower rate than the increase in the area of rangelands. The already small agricultural land holdings in the base-year further decreased from 0.78 ha to 0.59 ha/household. This situation coupled with ban on timber harvesting (a source of legal income) contributes to the pressure on the local people to engage in other activities for income generation including illegal tree-cutting. SUMMARY TABLE 21: THBS - LAND USE by DIVISION 2008 (1) in hectare DIVISION FOREST AGRICULTURE RANGELAND OTHER TOTAL

TOTAL 570,221 719,970 2,433,201 890,373 4,613,765

MALAKAND 302,713 395,233 1,741,251 475,152 2,914,349 HAZARA 267,508 324,737 691,950 415,221 1,699,416

(2) in percent TOTAL 12.4 15.6 52.7 19.3 100.0

MALAKAND 6.6 8.6 37.7 10.3 63.2 HAZARA 5.8 7.0 15.0 9.0 36.8

For details see ANNEX 9, TABLE 2.1 (b and c)

(5) Population Density 2008: The population density increased from 155 to 213 persons per km2 (on vegetated lands the respective figures are 192 to 263).

4.2.2 Total Forest Area and Stock

(1) Total Forest Area Change 1996 to 2008: The most striking feature in the overall land-use is the decrease of area under forest. In twelve years forested areas decreased from 677,230 ha to 570,221 ha, i.e. 107,009 ha or by 15.8%. Natural forests covered 14.7% in the baseline year against 12.4% in 2008 in Hazara and Malakand Circles. In relation to the total area of NWFP, stocked forests that covered 9.2% in the base-year are now covering 7.8%. The area of habitations, snowfields, glaciers and open rocks were considered constant as a detailed assessment was not needed in this category for the study purpose. The decrease of 107,00948 ha (15.8%) need to be seen on two grounds:

As mentioned earlier, legal definitions, i.e. areas under the custody of the Forest Department (FD) which are regularly covered by forest Working Plans (WP) for management purposes, the total area under Forest Department is 841,517 ha. Of this, 7.6% (63,915 ha) are state-owned Reserved forests, 29.7% (250,106 ha) are Guzara forests owned either by community or private individuals and 62.7% (527,496 ha) are Protected forests. Hence during the study period, of the total change in land use from forest, 69,000 ha (64.5%) are from legal categories covered by the Forest Department while the rest (35.5%) is not directly under the management of the Forest Department. Area-wise fragmentation and details are given in Table 22 in this report.

Secondly, though all these areas (841,517 ha) are legally classified as ‘forests’, much of these forest areas are already denuded of trees. In 2008 all classified forests had tree-stands of different densities on 44% (or 369,303 ha) of the total area legally classified as forests as oppose to 52% in 1996 as mentioned above. Which means that legally defined forest areas under tree cover was reduced by 8%, i.e. from 52% to 44%.

Of the change in land use from forest, 93,815 ha (87.6%) were added into rangeland49 and 13,194 ha (12.4%) into agricultural use. This change in land-use has further been qualified by an analysis of the shift pattern in land-use, which indicated a total change in forest area of 124,444 ha. Simultaneously, certain forest areas

48This include areas which are under the control of the Forest Department but do not qualify under the definition adopted by the study, i.e. 10% density. 49These areas though are not forests as per FAO definition but are still under the management of Forest Department Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 59

extended to previously range- and agricultural lands. Both shifts, however, are at a small scale with 16,171 ha former rangelands that are now under forest, indicating success of plantations established prior to 1998. Of former agricultural lands 1,264 ha are now covered by forest, again resulting from plantation on abandoned agricultural lands.

(2) Change in Forest Area Distribution 1996 to 2008: Changes in forest land use have taken place in both divisions and in all districts. In Malakand reduction in forest land use occurred on 58,199 ha (16.1%) on a slightly higher rate than Hazara where forest land use reduced by 48,810 ha (15.4%). Districts with small forest areas (Buner, Battagram and Haripur) in the base-year showed the highest percentage change in their forests. Similarly, in districts with larger forest areas in the base year, but also a large human population (Dir, Swat/Shangla, Kohistan and Mansehra), reduction was the largest, though percentage-wise at a lower rate. Both features indicate the growing demand of the local people on the forests.

The present study did not include a fragmentation analysis (as in the baseline study). Physical ground inspection through a qualitative field survey though, indicates that the change in the forest areas in general is taking place in a gradual patch-work pattern leading to an overall downward shift in the density pattern as compared to the base-year.

SUMMARY TABLE 22: FOREST AREA DISTRIBUTION 2008 by District (1) in hectare FOREST DENSITY CLASS DIVISION/District TOTAL 10-25% cc 26-50% cc 51-100% cc

TOTAL FOREST AREA 290,973 182,012 97,236 570,221

MALAKAND 153,278 97,304 52,131 302,713 Chitral 34,407 22,291 3,400 60,098 Dir (Upper+Lower) 69,765 37,904 25,126 132,795 Buner 6,042 4,049 523 10,614 Swat + Shangla 43,064 33,060 23,082 99,206

HAZARA 137,695 84,708 45,105 267,508 Kohistan 55,407 39,821 13,566 108,794 Batagram 20,019 11,030 3,472 34,521 Mansehra 45,017 25,182 18,905 89,104 Abbottabad 14,402 8,052 9,162 31,616 Haripur 2,850 623 0 3,473

(2) in percent TOTAL FOREST AREA 51.0 31.9 17.1 100.0

MALAKAND 26.9 17.1 9.1 53.1 Chitral 6.0 3.9 0.6 10.5 Dir (Upper+Lower) 12.2 6.6 4.4 23.3 Buner 1.1 0.7 0.1 1.9 Swat + Shangla 7.6 5.8 4.0 17.4

HAZARA 24.1 14.9 7.9 46.9 Kohistan 9.7 7.0 2.4 19.1 Batagram 3.5 1.9 0.6 6.1 Mansehra 7.9 4.4 3.3 15.6 Abbottabad 2.5 1.4 1.6 5.5 Haripur 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.6 60 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

SUMMARY TABLE 23: FOREST AREA CHANGE 1995/96 to 2008 by District (1) in hectare FOREST DENSITY CLASS DIVISION/District TOTAL 10-25% cc 26-50% cc 51-100% cc

FOREST AREA CHANGE 8,413 -69,502 -45,920 -107,009

MALAKAND -447 -38,779 -18,973 -58,199 Chitral -1,876 -7,739 -225 -9,840 Dir (Upper+Lower) 6,585 -22,320 -10,372 -26,107 Buner -3,666 -817 -457 -4,940 Swat + Shangla -1,490 -7,903 -7,919 -17,312

HAZARA 8,860 -30,723 -26,947 -48,810 Kohistan 9,820 -14,807 -10,769 -15,756 Batagram -1,348 -6,923 -3,169 -11,440 Mansehra 3,654 -6,732 -11,792 -14,870 Abbottabad -2,101 -1,507 -1,217 -4,825 Haripur -1,165 -754 0 -1,919

(2) in percent FOREST AREA CHANGE 3.0 -27.6 -32.1 -15.8

MALAKAND -0.3 -28.5 -26.7 -16.1 Chitral -5.2 -25.8 -6.2 -14.1 Dir (Upper+Lower) 10.4 -37.1 -29.2 -16.4 Buner -37.8 -16.8 -46.6 -31.8 Swat + Shangla -3.3 -19.3 -25.5 -14.9

HAZARA 6.9 -26.6 -37.4 -15.4 Kohistan 21.5 -27.1 -44.3 -12.7 Batagram -6.3 -38.6 -47.7 -24.9 Mansehra 8.8 -21.1 -38.4 -14.3 Abbottabad -12.7 -15.8 -11.7 -13.2 Haripur -29.0 -54.8 0.0 -35.6

(3) Changes in Distribution of Forests by Density Class and Altitude 1996 to 2008: Of all forests in the study area, 290,973 ha (51.0%) were in the low-density class, 182,012 ha (31.9%) in the medium, and 97,236 (17.1%) in the high density class in 2008.

424,011 ha (74.4%) are located above 2000m; only 146,210 ha (25.6%) are found below 2000m. Dense and medium dense forests were predominantly situated at the higher altitudes (217,966 ha or 43.9%). Dense and medium dense forests below 2000m and suitable for regular forest management – including commercial purposes in patches – amounted to only 61,282 ha (10.7%) of the total forest area.

Dense and medium dense forests at lower altitudes were concentrated in the districts of Dir (26,290 ha or 3.9% of the total forest area), Kohistan (22,600 ha or 3.4%) and Mansehra (18,961 ha or 2.8%). It was also in these districts where almost all dense forests below 2000m were located, i.e. 80% (28,871ha) of the total dense forest area below 2000m.

The overriding feature in the forest change by density class is the reduction in forest area in the medium and high density classes below 2000m. These two classes already had small area coverage of only 14.4% of the total forest which – in the base-year – were identified as still allowing some commercial harvesting under Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 61

regular management. With now only 61,282 ha (10.7% of the total forest area) these forests have lost 36,359 ha (37.2%) of their area during the study-period. Major changes in these two density classes below 2000m occurred in all districts with relatively larger forest areas found in the base-year in Dir and Mansehra being most affected.

The highest changes occurred in the dense forest class below 2000m. From a base area of 36,135 ha in 1996, forests on 18,994 ha survived in 2008, with a reduction of 47.4% during the study-period.

Reduction in the medium and dense classes also occurred in the stands above 2000m and again in all districts in varying degrees of degradation. In terms of change in total area the decrease in the dense forest class is most striking in the districts of Kohistan and Manshera. Of the total dense forest areas of 36,033 ha in these two districts in the base-year, forests survive on 22,302 ha in 2008, with a total shift of 38.1% of that class during the study-period.

Overall, the low-density class area slightly increased from 282,560 ha in the base-year to 290,973 ha in 2008 or by 3.0%. This increase in area in the low density class was primarily at the higher altitudes in the districts of Dir, Kohistan, and Mansehra but also at the lower altitudes in Dir and Kohistan. These districts had the highest forest endowments in the base year. Hence, the increase in the low-density class during the study period is mainly to be attributed to a shift from higher density classes to the low-density class (degradation) on top of decreases of the total forests area (depletion).

SUMMARY TABLE 24: TOTAL FOREST AREA 2008 by Density Class and Altitude (1) in hectare FOREST DENSITY CLASS DIVISION/District TOTAL 10-25% cc 26-50% cc 51-100% cc

TOTAL FOREST AREA 290,973 182,012 97,236 570,221

- below 2000 m 84,928 42,288 18,994 146,210 - above 2000 m 206,045 139,724 78,242 424,011

(2) in percent TOTAL FOREST AREA 51.0 31.9 17.1 100.0

- below 2000 m 14.9 7.4 3.3 25.6 - above 2000 m 36.1 24.5 13.7 74.4

SUMMARY TABLE 25: TOTAL FOREST AREA CHANGE 1996 to 2008 by Density Class and Altitude (1) in 000 cubic meter FOREST DENSITY CLASS DIVISION/District TOTAL 10-25% cc 26-50% cc 51-100% cc

FOREST AREA CHANGE 8,413 -69,502 -45,920 -107,009

- below 2000 m -6,860 -19,218 -17,141 -43,219 - above 2000 m 15,273 -50,284 -28,779 -63,790

(2) in percent TOTAL FOREST AREA 3.0 -27.6 -32.1 -15.8

- below 2000 m -7.5 -31.2 -47.4 -22.8 - above 2000 m 8.0 -26.5 -26.9 -13.1

For details at divisional level see ANNEX 9, TABLES 3.1.2 and 3.1.3 62 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

(4) Change in Forest Stock 1996 to 2008: Because the analysis of the total forest stock was based on the same standard data for the per hectare average stock endowment by density class of the baseline-study, the changes in the forest stock are basically a reflection of the changes in the forest areas. However, due to the change in the distribution of the forests by density class (degradation) the overall average stock endowment decreased from 278.60 m3/ha in the base-year to 249.06 m3/ha in 2008.

Due to these area shifts within the density classes, mostly affecting the stands of high density and high stock endowment, the overall stock changed from 188,675 mill. m3 to 142,019 mill. m3 in 2008, i.e. reduction of 46.656 mill. m3 or by 24.7%. Thus, the reduction in forest stock was much higher than the reduction of 15.8% in the forest area.

SUMMARY TABLE 26: TOTAL STANDING STOCK 2008 by Density Class and Altitude (1) in 000 cubic meter FOREST DENSITY CLASS DIVISION/ALTITUDE TOTAL 10-25% cc 26-50% cc 51-100% cc

TOTAL STOCK 30,342 58,790 52,887 142,019

- below 2000 m 8,840 12,134 8,378 29,352 - above 2000 m 21,502 46,656 44,509 112,667

(2) in percent TOTAL STOCK 21.4 41.4 37.2 100.0

- below 2000 m 6.2 8.5 5.9 20.7 - above 2000 m 15.1 32.9 31.3 79.3

SUMMARY TABLE 27: TOTAL FOREST STOCK CHANGE 1996 to 2008 by Density Class and Altitude (1) in 000 cubic meter FOREST DENSITY CLASS DIVISION/ALTITUDE TOTAL 10-25% cc 26-50% cc 51-100% cc

TOTAL STOCK 878 -22,535 -24,998 -46,656

- below 2000 m -716 -5,579 -7,844 -14,139 - above 2000 m 1,594 -16,956 -17,155 -32,518

(2) in percent TOTAL STOCK 3.0 -27.7 -32.1 -24.7

- below 2000 m -7.5 -31.5 -48.4 -32.5 - above 2000 m 8.0 -26.7 -27.8 -22.4

For details at division level see ANNEX 8, TABLES 3.2.2 and 3.2.3

4.2.3 Wood Consumption/Supply Gap50

(1) Timber and Firewood Consumption Estimate 2008: To estimate the total timber and firewood consumption for the study-year the same per household standards as applied for the base-year were again used. Commercial timber outtakes (both legal and recorded illegal) were taken from harvesting records of the FD/FDC.

50For details see ANNEX 9, TABLE SETS 4, 5 and 6 Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 63

Due to the improvements in natural gas-supplies to some urban sites and urban vicinities in the study-area, the proportion of urban households using firewood decreased from 69.8% in the base year to 51% in the study-year. In total the proportion of households using fire-wood decreased from 95.2% in the base-year to 90.7% in the study-year. Thus the growth in total fire-wood consumption was lower than the population growth during the study period. SUMMARY TABLE 28 FIREWOOD CONSUMPTION 2008

(1) Fire-wood Consumption Standards (in m3 per year) DETAIL URBAN RURAL TOTAL

(1) Per PERSON 0.475 0.751 0.736 (2) Per H.HOLD 3.565 5.524 5.428

(2) Fire-wood using households Number 54,051 1,139,706 1,193,757

(3) Total fire-wood consumption(in 000 m3 per year) Volume 194 6,354 6,548

Harvesting (recorded legal and illegal) amounted to 192,000 m3 in the study year. Thus the total wood consumption in 2008 was 6,740 mill. m3.

For the whole study-period the total fire-wood consumption amounted to an estimated 69,597 mill. 3m . Together with the total commercial harvest (legal and recorded illegal) of 1,289 mill. cm3, the total wood and woody- biomass consumption amounted to 70,886 mill. m3. SUMMARY TABLE 29 WOOD CONSUMPTION 1996 - 2008

FIREWOOD and COMMERCIAL HARVESTING FIREWOOD COMMERCIAL TOTAL YEAR CONSUMP- ROUNDWOOD CONSUMP- TION HARVEST TION

1996 5,000 94 5,094 ...... 2008 6,548 192 6,740

TOTAL 69,597 1,289 70,886

(2) Timber and Fire-wood Supply Estimate 2008: Forests are the sole source of supply for commercial round-wood, whereas firewood is supplied from various other sources as well. As in the baseline-study the amount of the fire-wood obtained from other sources are to be estimated first. For the estimation of fire-wood supplies from agricultural and rangelands the same parameters were applied as in the baseline-study (see SUMMARY TABLE 9 in Chapter 2.2.5) and the respective supplies from plantation and harvesting residues were added. Of the total fire-wood consumption of 6.548 mill. 3m woody biomass in the study-year, the supplies from these sources covered 1,739 mill. m3 or 26.6%. Fire-wood requirements of the local people that remained to be served from the forests amounted to 4.809 mill. m3 in 2008.

Over the whole study-period from 1996 to 2008 fire-wood supplies from these sources amounted to 18,695 mill m3, leaving 50,902 mill. m3 to be supplied from the forests. 64 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

SUMMARY TABLE 30: FIREWOOD SUPPLY 1996 to 2008 in 000 m3

FIREWOOD from OTHER WOOD FIREWOOD FIREWOOD SUPPLY from NON-FOREST SOURCES YEAR from HARVESTING FOREST AGRICULTURE RANGELAND AGRICULTURE PLANTATION RESIDUES & & RANGELAND RESIDUES PLANTATION STOCK 1996 819 446 1,265 21 135 156 3,579 ...... 2008 834 464 1,298 42 399 441 4,809

TOTAL 9,923 5,457 15,380 284 3,031 3,315 50,902 in percent 14.3 7.8 22.1 0.4 4.4 4.8 73.1

(3) Estimate of Wood Supply from Forests 2008: The present study analysed the supply of timber and fire- wood from forests using the same method that was applied in the baseline-study. However during the study- period the process of forest degradation (downward shift in forest density classes) affected the overall average stock endowment which decreased from 278.60 m3/ha in the base-year to 249.06 m3/ha in the study year. Whereas in the base-year the sustainable supply from forests was 1.321 million m3 or 26% of the total consumption, this supply decreased to 0.994 million m3 or to 14.7% of the total consumption in 2008. SUMMARY TABLE 31: PARAMETERS WOOD SUPPLY from FORESTS DETAIL UNIT 1996 2008

AVERAGE STOCK cbm/hectare 278.60 249.06 ANNUAL INCREMENT cbm/ha./year 1.95 1.74 YIELD as % of STOCK % 0.70 0.70

SUMMARY TABLE 32 STOCK SITUATION 2008 and SUSTAINABLE SUPPLIES 1996 to 2008

YEAR AREA ASSESSMENT STOCK ASSESSMENT Reduction of Reduction of SUSTAINABLE FOREST AREA Forest Area STOCK STOCK SUPPLY hectare hectare 000cbm 000cbm 000cbm

1996 677,230 7,171 188,675 3,150 1,321 ...... 2008 570,220 10,585 142,019 4,658 994

TOTAL 107,009 46,654 13,850

(4) Wood Consumption/Supply Gap 2008: For the year 1996 the baseline-study had already identified a gap between consumption and supply of 2.353 million m3 or 46.2% of the total wood consumption not covered from other sources or sustainable supplies from the forests and therefore, this volume of consumption had to be taken from the growing stock.

Resulting from the heavy loss in forest stock during the study period and a continuously increasing consumption by a growing population, the gap between consumption and supply increased to 4.007 million m3 in 2008 or to 59.5% of the total consumption. Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 65

SUMMARY TABLE 33 WOOD CONSUMPTION/SUPPLY GAP 1996 to 2008 CONSUMPTION from FORESTS CONSUMPTION/ OTHER YEAR LESS SUSTAIN SUPPLY GAP OUT-TAKE HARVESTING FIREWOOD SUPPLY 000cbm 000cbm 000cbm 000cbm 000cbm

1996 94 3,579 1,321 -2,353 -797 ...... 2008 192 4,809 994 -4,007 -651

TOTAL 1,289 50,902 13,850 -38,342 -8,313

(5) Summing Up: The analysis of the stock and yield changes during the study-period in conjunction with wood consumption indicated that a major fraction of the total timber and fire-wood consumption is served from the growing stock, which resulted in a loss of 46,656 million m3 growing stock during the study-period. Despite some minor decreases in fire-wood consumption due to extending gas supplies into urban areas, the accelerated decline in the forest stock is primarily attributable to population growth and the resultant increase in fire-wood consumption as well as increase of wood demand in earthquake affected areas.

In the study-year 3.4% of this decline were to be attributed to commercial harvesting (legal and recorded illegal), 85.1% to fire-wood consumption, and 11.5% to other out-takes including earthquake (unrecorded illegal out-take of timber). Over the whole 12 year study-period from 1996 to 2008 the respective percentages are: 2.1% commercial harvesting, 84.1% fire-wood, and 13.8% unrecorded out-takes.

With some changes in size and proportions the results of the present time-series analysis over the period 1996 to 2008 only reinforce the results of the baseline study, i.e. that the forest are continuously deteriorating and that this deterioration will continue as the forest cannot be protected against the subsistence needs of the local people.

4.2.4 Environmental Impacts51

The analysis above has shown that deforestation and degradation of forests continued despite the harvesting ban. In order to substantiate environmental impacts of the forest degradation, a qualitative assessment of the forest and environmental conditions through a field survey was undertaken in the course of the present study. In order to do so, 36 plots were selected based on several criteria and using satellite imagery as reference.

The assessment revealed that the degradation of forests goes together with an environmental and bio-diversity degradation of most forests and a destruction of the forest eco-systems in general. As a result, except for some patches at higher altitudes there are hardly any areas left that represent an intact natural forest eco- system. Consequently, the other environmental functions (watershed, soil conservation, carbon sequestration and recreational potential) cannot be performed. In addition, the process of deterioration is faster than what was projected by PFRI.

Generally, biodiversity declined further during the ban. Populations of some of the species reduced significantly or were even wiped out from the deforested areas. Almost everywhere the human/livestock conflict with wildlife has emerged.

There are numerous environmental demands that are to be served by the forests and an equally pressing environmental commitment resulting from Pakistan’s ratification of international environmental agreements. However, the present conditions of the forests in NWFP – with very few exceptions – and the ongoing trends of depletion and degradation are not conducive to serve these requirements.

51see ANNEX 15: Field Survey Methodology and Results 66 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

Chapter 5 Conclusion

Already in the pre-ban period forests in NWFP declined substantially and the process continued during the period of the ban. The fact of the rapidly deteriorating forests and its underlying causes were generally known to policy makers (formerly documented in PFRI in year 2000), but were not accepted and addressed. Despite scientifically sound information as contained in the mentioned study, its results and recommendations had little influence on forest policy discussions. In fact all policy efforts both at the national as well as at the provincial level, have failed to fully take into account the real problems in forestry.

Contrary to the known facts about the rapidly disappearing forests and the underlying causes, the changes in forest administrative structures, management and policy were always based on the assumption that the forests in NWFP will flourish again if only an appropriate technical and socially acceptable forest management system would be introduced. Thus, the sector reform and forest policy discussions at the national as well as at the provincial level have not been addressing the real problems in forestry such as the fire-wood consumption requirements of the local people and the illegal cutting for income and commercial purposes. In addition to this, the implementation of policies and sector reforms remained inadequate and lagged behind their objectives. Instead large scale plantations were seen as an appropriate solution of the problems of deforestation and to substitute the declining supply of wood in the longer term.

However, the FD so far has partly formulated and implemented policies and strategies. Overall incentives to promote plantation in the necessary dimensions are lacking. Not only the quantum of investments into plantation is low as compared to the magnitude of the problems in forestry but the quality of plantations is poor as well. Due to multiple reasons the plantation areas on the ground are smaller than what has been reported as planted. Also many of the plantations are mono-cultures of Eucalypts and Chir Pine and do not have the necessary diversity of natural forests which is so important to maintain their ecological functions and sustain their bio-diversity. Even if all necessary prerequisites regarding plantations are addressed, it does not solve the problem owing to competing land uses for plantations, grazing, and agriculture. Thus, what could be achieved by large scale plantations alone is still insufficient to compensate for the losses of the natural forests and biodiversity.

As in the pre-ban period as well as during the ban the change in the condition of forests has basically been caused by socio-economic factors, i.e. the growth in human population, widespread poverty, lack of alternative economic opportunities, livelihood strategies being pursued by forest owners and forest dependent communities at the expense of the forests, and lack of alternative energy and wood sources.

NWFP has a narrow economic base with very little opportunities for industrialisation due to its location disadvantages, lack of trained manpower and a host of other adverse factors. The shrinking job opportunities abroad leading to a decline of remittances and the lack of job opportunities within the province have compounded the poverty situation in NWFP. As a result, most rural households depend on subsistence agriculture and forests to sustain their livelihoods.

Also no large scale effective efforts have been made to provide alternative sources of energy or wood supplies by timber imports to relieve the forests from the ever increasing local use and market demands for timber. However, timber import and wood energy substitutes would not address the issue of income from tree-cutting to local communities who depend on forests for their livelihoods.

Given the environmental value of the forests for the whole country, in particular its water regulation and soil conservation functions in relation to the large power plants of the dams and for the protection of downstream irrigated agriculture, it is surprising that the monetary equivalent of the environmental value of mountainous forests has never been estimated. Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 67

The widening wood consumption and supply gap and policy failures to provide alternative sources of energy, wood and alternate incomes has led to both need- and greed-driven over-exploitation of forests in the province. Need-based over-exploitation of forests has its roots in the use of forests for fire-wood, local construction and income as well as demand for agricultural land.

The greed-driven over-exploitation of forests happens because of illegal trade of timber and other forest products flourishing on high profits and low risk of getting caught or punished. The value of only the recorded illegally harvested timber is estimated to be Rs. 835 million annually, based on the average annual recorded illegal cutting of about 50,000 m3 and a price of Rs.16,700 per m3 (average timber price of 2005/06), whereas the total value of the unrecorded illegal out-take of timber is much higher.

The illegal timber trade links local people, forest owners/concessionaries, government functionaries, timber smugglers, the middlemen, politicians, profiteers and buyers who do not question the source of the timber. This illegal timber trade resembles the drugs and weapons trade, has many of the same characteristics, the same practices and at times the same players. As a result, combating these illegal activities by the Forest Department covered by action under the law has become a difficult job due to the high stakes and influential players involved.

From the results of the study, it can safely be concluded that the ban was largely ineffective in its primary objective to contain forest deterioration. In spite of the ban the forest cover has reduced by more than 107,00052 ha (16% as compared to the base-year 1996) of their stocked area and 25% of their growing stock in 12 years and within the remaining forests a process of degradation is taking place leading to further depletion.

Though the ban has had some positive impacts on accelerating the promotion of a new, technically and socially refined forest policy in NWFP and has also contributed to enhancing environmental awareness among larger segments of the population, its overall impact was marginal and adversely affected the implementation of an appropriate participatory forest management in which harvesting is an indispensable part.

Concerning the legal timber harvesting, the annual average has decreased to 28% of its pre-ban size whereas the recorded illegal harvesting only decreased to 79% of its pre-ban volume. Thus, the ban was partly effective as concerns the legal part of harvesting but with the negative side-effect of undermining appropriate forest management in those areas still suitable for such efforts. However, harvesting (legal and recorded illegal) contributed only to about 2% to forest depletion, whereas the use of the forest for fire-wood contributed 84% and other unrecorded out-takes contributed to forest deterioration by about 14%.

The results of the present study indicate that the challenges in the future forest policy and management will have to take a perspective which addresses these obvious factors responsible for forest degradation i.e. the fire-wood/energy supply issue and the uncontrolled illegal commercial harvesting.

Outlook: Notwithstanding the set back in the forest sector reforms in pursuit of the harvesting ban and its action plan, the Federal Ministry of Environment launched a “National Vision 2030 and the Strategy for Forest Biodiversity Conservation in Pakistan” in July 2008. Regarding commercial forestry, the vision states that “presently, majority of the natural forests are under-stocked and incapable of meeting national wood demands. Situation has further aggravated by putting extended bans on scientific management of forests which restrict natural regeneration. The vision foresees resumption of scientific management on ecosystem principles, enabling sustainable utilization of wood from the over-stocked natural forests.”

52Area where the density of the forest has reduced to less than 10% 68 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

Chapter 6 RECOMMENDATIONS

At the end of the study the study-team discussed a range of potential recommendations that would follow from the study results. Supported by IC-Pakistan, the team finally decided to abstain from phrasing out detailed recommendations over and above the general conclusions on the study results as contained in Chapter 5 of the study.

The evidence on what happened to the forests during the past 12 years is strikingly indicating the need for immediate action onto which an independent study-team is definitely lacking competence to promote such action requirements. Instead, the situation in the forests of NWFP and the overall trend in their continued deterioration can only be prescribed and effectively pursued by the political and administrative decision-makers and local action agents (see Annex 3 for a detailed account on arguments against timber harvesting ban).

At this stage, therefore, the study-team has only one recommendation:

As mentioned in the Terms of Reference for the study, a workshop needs to be organized that brings together the national and provincial political and administrative decisions-makers with local action agents. In this workshop the results of the study are thoroughly to be scrutinized in respect of what feasible action potentials would be available to stop, or even revert, the currently ongoing process of forest deterioration. Apart from the conclusions in Chapter 5 of the present study, also the recommendations of the PFRI study should be taken as a relevant reference in the workshop. Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 69

REFERENCES

(1) DATA SOURCES

Bhatt, B.P. and M.S.Sachan. Firewood consumption along an altitudinal gradient in mountain villages of India. Agroforestry Division, ICAR Research Complex. Megahalaya, January 2004

Household Energy Strategy Study (HESS). Bio-mass Resource Assessment. Islamabad, 1992

Government of NWFP, Forest Department. Yearly Revenue Data. Office of the Chief Conservator of Forests, NWFP. Peshawar, 2009

Government of NWFP, Forest Development Corporation. Sales Volume and Prices Data of FDC Auctions in Goharabad and Chakdara Markets of FDC. Peshawar, 2009

Government of NWFP, Forest Department. Harvesting Data. Office of the Conservator of Forests, Abbottabad Forest Circle. Abbottabad, 2009

Government of NWFP, Forest Department. Harvesting Data. Office of the Conservator of Forests, Malakand Forest Circle. Saidu Sharif, 2009

Government of NWFP, Forest Department. Spring and Monsoon Tree Planting Campaign. Various documents covering the period 1984 to 2009

Jawad Ali, Tor A. Benjaminsen. Fuelwood, timber and deforestation in the Himalayas. The case of Basho Valley, Baltistan Region, Pakistan. In: Mountain Research and Development, Vol 24(4), Nov 2004:312-118

Population Census Organization. 1998 District Census Report of all Districts in Malakand and Hazara Civil Divisions. Statistics Division, Government of Pakistan. Islamabad, 1999

Sial, Muhammad Iqbal. EC-FAO Partnership Programme. National Woodfuels and Wood Energy Information Analysis, Pakistan. Islamabad, 2002

(2) MAJOR STUDIES

ADB and UNDP. Forestry Sector Master Plan (FSMP). National Perspective. Volume 1 to 5, Islamabad, December 1992

Fischer, Rudolf., A. R. Saleemi, Sharjeel Ahmad (2005). KIDP 1981-1998. Tracing Impact of the Kalam Integratede Development Project - Through memories and perceptions of local people, former project staff and other stakeholders. Intercooperation / Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC) Pakistan.

Häusler, Thomas, Joachim Schnurr, Knut M. Fischer. Provincial Forest Resource Inventory (PFRI) North West Frontier Province – Pakistan. Prepared for Government of NWFP, Forestry, Fisheries & Wildlife Department, Munich and Ludolfshausen, July 2000

International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN). Sarhad Provincial Conservation Strategy. Peshawar, 1996

Kohler, Volker, Eberhard Götz, Johannes Huljus, Hans Beigel. Evaluation of the Performance and the Future of the Forest Co-operative Societies and the Forest Development Corporation. North West Frontier Province (NWFP). Volumes 1 to 5 (Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit - GTZ). Eberbach/ Abbottabad, August 1995 Siran Forest Development Project. Regional Resource Inventory – Supply Survey (Archer, Gary. R.). Abbottabad, March 1996 70 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

Siran Forest Development Project. Regional Resource Inventory – Demand Survey (Fischer, Knut M.). Poyenberg, June 1998

Siran Forest Development Project. Afforestation Survey covering plantations accomplished during the period July 1976 to February 1995. Abbottabad, October 1996

(3) DEFORESTATION

Ali, Jawad 2009. Deforestation in the Himalayas: Mainstream views, Institutional Failure and ‘Alternative Systems’. A case study from Northern Pakistan. Norwegian University if Life Sciences. Noragric.

Brown, Katrina and David W. Pearce. The Causes of Tropical Deforestation Vancouver, 1994.

FAO. Bringing Back The Forests. Policies and Practices for Degraded Lands and Forests. Proceedings of an International Conference. 7-10 October 2002, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. FAO. Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific. Bangkok 2003

Geiser, Urs, Jean Marie Samyn, Bernd Steimann. Why do donor-supported initiatives not (yet) mitigate forest deterioration in North-West Pakistan. NCCR-IP 6 Working Paper. July 2004.

Gervet Bruno, Bo Nordell (2007). Deforestation contributes to global warming. Department of Civil and Environmental, Engineering, Luleå University of Technology. Luleå, 2007

Ghazvinian, Amir. Impacts of Deforestation in Mozambique. 2004

Iqbal, Mehmood. Deforestation in NWFP. NIPA, Pehawar, 2003

Shabaz, Babar, Tanvir Ali, Abid Qaiyum Suleri. Analysis of Myth and Realities of Deforestation in Northwest Pakistan: Implications for Forestry Extension. International Journal of Agriculture & Biology, 08/2006 (4) DEFORESTATION and FLOODS

Bracken, Amy. Deforestation Exacerbates Haiti Floods. The Associated Press, September 22nd, 2004

Bruijnzeel, L.A., Van Dijk, A., Van Noordwijk, M., Chappell, A., Schellekens, J. Tropical deforestation, people and flooding: A recent analysis claiming that tropical deforestation amplifies flood risk and severity proves less than solid. World Agroforestry Center. Amsterdam, 2007

Corey J. A. Bradshaw., Navjot S. Sodhi., Kelvin S.H. Peh & Barry W. Brook. Global evidence that deforestation amplifies flood risk and severity in the developing world. Global Change Biology 13, 2379-2395,1-17, 2007

FAO. Forests and floods: drowning in fiction or thriving on facts? Forest perspectives 2: FAO, Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific. Bangkok 2005/03.

Kaimowitz, David. Major floods ‘not linked to deforestation. FAO, Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR). October 13th, 2005

Laurance, William F. Forests and floods.Nature Vol. 449/27, September 2007.

Malhotra, Tara Chand. Deforestation in Himalayas Blamed for Killer Flood. NEW DELHI, August 3rd, 2000

Naranjo, Jose Agustin Breña. Deforestation and flooding. UNESCO-IHE, Institute for Water Education, 2006 Reuters. Planet Art – World Environment News. UN agency blames Mekong floods on Deforestation. Bangkok, 25th,September 2000 Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 71

Taylor, Jerome. El Salvador flood disaster worsened by deforestation. The Independent Environment. October 2005. http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/el-salvador-flood-disaster-worsened-by- deforestation-509617.html Timár G, et al. Deforestation as a primary cause of the recent flood peaks in the Pannonian Basin – Counter- evidences from the Upper-Tisza catchment. European Geosciences Union In: Geophysical Research Abstracts, Vol. 7, 2005

(5) TIMBER HARVESTING BAN

Government of Pakistan. Action Plan, PRIME MINISTER’S DIRECTIVE Regarding Mismanagement and Malpractices in Forest Cooperative Societies in Hazara Division and Forest in general in Pakistan. (Maj.Gen. Sikander Hayat Khan, Chairman). Islamabad, September 30th, 1993

FAO, Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific.Forests out of bounds: impacts and effectiveness of logging bans in natural forests in Asia Pacific. Bangkok, publication 2001/10

(6) FOREST LAW and ACTS

FAO. Best practices for improving law compliance in the forestry sector. FAO Forestry Paper 145. Rome, 2005

Government of NWFP, Forest Department. NWFP Forestry Commission Act 1999. Peshawar, 1999

Government of NWFP, Forest Department: NWFP Forest Ordinance 2002. Peshawar, 2000

Laskar Magsudur Rahman. The Forest Act, 1927 (Act No. XVI of 1927) (as modified up to 30th April 2000). Government of Pakistan.

NWFP Forest Department, Directorate of Institutional & Human Resource Development. Policy, Ordinance, Act & Rules of NWFP Forest Department. Peshawar, April 2008

(7) FOREST POLICY

EC-FAO (Partnership Programme 2000-2002). Forest policies and forest policy reviews. Information and analysis for sustainable forest management: Linking national and international efforts in South and Southeast Asia. Workshop Proceedings Nr. 2. Bangkok, April 2002

Government of NWFP, Forest Department: NWFP Forest Policy. Peshawar, 1999

Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Environment. National Forest policy 2002. Islamabad, January 2002.

Jan, Abeedullah. Forest policy, administration and management in Pakistan. Islamabad, October 1993 Jan, Abeedullah. Review and Analysis of Forest Policies of Pakistan. Islamabad, May 1993

Javed, Ahmad and Fawad Mehmood. Changing Perspectives of Forest Policy. A study co-ordinated by IUCN/Pakistan and the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED). Islamabad, 1998

Shabaz, Babar, Tanvir Ali, Abid Qaiyum Suleri. A critical analysis of forest Policies in Pakistan: Implications for sustainable livelihoods. In: Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change Springer (2003/4) 2006

Suleri, Abid Qaiyum. Regional Study on Forest Policy and Institutional Reforms. Final Report of the Pakistan Case Study. Asian Development Bank. Manila, 2001 72 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

(8) INSTITUTIONAL REFORM

Buttoud, Gerard, Knut M. Fischer, Ismat Shahjehan, Cor Veer. Review of the Process of Institutional Reform of the Forest Sector in NWFP. Report on behalf of: Forest Donor Coordination Group. Islamabad, March 2000

Lubna, Hasan. Analyzing institutional set-up of forest management in Pakistan. Pakistan Institute of Development Economics, Research report N° 182. Islamabad, 2000

NWFP Forest Department, Directorate of Institutional & Human Resource Development. Strategy for Institutional & Human Resource Development of NWFP Forest Department. Peshawar, October 2007

(9) PARTICIPATORY FOREST MANAGEMENT

Chandrasekharan, Diji. Addressing Natural Resource Conflicts Through Community Forestry: The Asian Perspective. Paper prepared for E-Conference.

Geiser, Urs and Bernd Steimann. State actors’ livelihoods, acts of translation, and forest sector reforms in northwest Pakistan. Contemporary South Asia 13(4), December 2004

Haashar, Minutes of the Proceedings in Context with the Agreement Signing Ceremony between NWFP Wildlife Department and JFMC Fateh-Bandi on March 1st 2003

Payr, Gerhard. Experience with Joint Forest Management (JFM) concepts in the Siran Valley, located in the foothills of the Western Himalayas in the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) of Pakistan. Abbottabad, November 2001

Shaheen Rafi Khan, Ali Shahrukh Pracha, and Nazima Shaheen. The Quest for Sustainable Forest Management: Exploring Public-Private partnerships in the Forestry Sector in Pakistan. Sustainable Development Policy Institute for SUNGI and Food and Agricultural Organization

Shaheen Rafi Khan, Moeed Yousaf and Riaz Khan.Anatomy of Peoples Right Movement” (Sarhad Awami Forestry Ittehad). Peshawar, December 2005

Steimann, Bernd. Decentralization and Participation in the Forestry Sector of NWFP, Pakistan – The Role of the State. IP6 Working Paper No. 7, July 2004

(10) TECHNICAL DOCUMENTS

Ali Akbar Khan, Ghazi Marjan, Gul Muhammad, Naseem Javed. Reforming Forest Management in NWFP. Government of NWFP, Forest Department. Peshawar, February 2001

Champion, H.G., S.K. Seth and G.M. Khattak. Manual of Silviculture for Pakistan. Sukkur, 1965

Champion, H.G., S.K. Seth and G.M. Khattak. Forest Types of Pakistan. Sukkur, Pakistan 1965

Davis, L.S. and K.N. Johnson. Forest Management. Third Edition, New York, 1987

FAO, Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific.Code of Practice for Forest Harvesting in Asia and Pacific. Bangkok 1999 Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 73

FAO. Proceedings Second Expert Meeting on Harmonizing Forest-Related Definitions for use by various stakeholders. Rome, September 2002.

FAO, Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific. Applying reduced impact logging to advance sustainable forest management. Bangkok 2002

Fujimori, Takao. Ecological and SiIvicultural Strategies for Sustainable Forest Management Amsterdam, 2003

Government of NWFP, Forest Department. Standardized Methodology for Resource Inventory and Planning. Peshawar 1997

Khattak, G.M. Forest Management. Peshawar 1973

Siddiqui, K.M. General Silviculture. Pakistan Forest Institute. Peshawar 1996

(11) PROJECT DOCUMENTS

Siran Forest Development Project. Timber Import in Public-Private-Partnership (Project Preparation Study). Abbottabad, December 1995

Siran Forest Development Project. Guzara Forest Development Project (Project Preparation Study). Abbottabad, February 1996

Government of NWFP, Forest Department. Kaghan Intensive Forest Management Project (KIFMP) Phase- III, GTZ Assisted. Peshawar, November 1990

Government of NWFP, Forest Department. Siran Forest Development Project (SFDP) Phase-I, KfW Assisted. Peshawar, April 1991

Government of NWFP, Forest Department. Dir-Kohistan Upland Rehabilitation Project. Peshawar 1993

Government of NWFP, Forest Department. Galliat Natural Resources Conservation Project. Peshawar 1993

Government of NWFP, Forest Department. Malakand Environmental Rehabilitation Project. Peshawar 1993

Government of NWFP, Forest Department. NWFP Forestry Sector Project. Peshawar, September 1995

Government of NWFP, Forest Department. Kalam Integrated Development Project. Peshawar 1995

Government of NWFP, Forest Department. Follow-up Phase of Social Forestry Project in Malakand Division. Peshawar, November 1997

Government of NWFP, Forest Department. Institutional Transformation Cell Project. Peshawar, August, 1997 Government of NWFP, Forest Department. Support Unit for Forestry Management Center Project. Peshawar 1997

(12) SELECTED FOREST WORKING PLANS NWFP

Khan, Mohammad Younas. Revised Resource Management Plan for the Alpuri Forest Division (2000- 2001 to 2014-2015). FMC, Peshawar 2001 74 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

Khan, Muhammad Gul (1997). Working Plan for the Upper Siran Reserved Forests of Mansehra District for the Year 1997-2007. NWFP Forest Department 1997

Khattak, Ayaz Khan. Resource Management Plan for the Palas Forests of Lower Kohistan Forest Division (2004-2005 to 2018-2019). P&MC, NWFP Forest Department, Peshawar 2004.

Mannan, Abdul (2001). Resource management Plan for the Dir and Samarbagh forests of Dir forest division (2001-02 to 2015-16). FMC, Peshawar 2001

(13) ENVORONMENTAL ISSUES

EPA-NWFP. Environmental Assessment Checklists and Guidelines: Environmentally Sound Plantation. Peshawar, 2004

FAO, Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific 2004b. Forests for Poverty Reduction: Opportunities with Clean Development Mechanism, Environmental Services and Biodiversity. Proceedings of the Workshop. 27-29 August 2003. Seoul, Korea. Bangkok 2004

Government of NWFP, Wildlife Department. NWFP Wildlife Act. Peshawar, 1975

Government of NWFP, Sarhad EPA. Environmental Guidelines for Forest Harvesting Operations; Forest Road Constructions, Sound Plantation and Tourist Facilities in Ecologically Sensitive Areas. Peshawar, 2004

Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Environment. Pakistan Environmental Protection Act. Islamabad, September 1997

Government of Pakistan. National Environmental Quality Standards (NEQS). Islamabad, October 1997

Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Environment. Guidelines on Environmental Assessment. Islamabad, 1997

Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Environment. Guidelines for Sensitive and Critical Areas of Pakistan. Islamabad, 1997

Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Environment. National Vision 2030 and strategy for Forest Biodiversity Conservation in Pakistan. Islamabad, 2008

Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Environment. National Environmental Policy. Islamabad, 2005

Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Environment. Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). National Operational Strategy. Islamabad, January 2006

Government of Pakistan, World Wide Fund for Nature, IUCN. Biodiversity Action Plan for Pakistan. Islamabad, 2000

Khurshid, Muhammad. Environmental Initiatives: Global and National Perspective. 2004

(14) CARBON SEQUESTRATION

Ruth D. Yanai,William S. Currie, & Christine L. Goodale. Soil Carbon Dynamics after Forest Harvest: An Ecosystem Paradigm Reconsidered. SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry, Syracuse, New York 13210, USA; Appalachian Laboratory, University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science, Frostburg, Maryland 21532, USA; Woods Hole Research Center, Woods Hole 2002 Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 75

Seidl, R., Rammer, W., Lasch, P., Badeck, F.W. & Lexer, M.J. (2008). Does Conversion of Even-Aged, Secondary Coniferous Forests Affect Carbon Sequestration? A Simulation Study under Changing Environmental Conditions. Silva Fennica 42(3) research articles. The Finnish Society of Forest Science, The Finnish Forest Research Institute 2008

Yanai R.D., William S. C. et al. Soil Carbon Dynamics after Forest Harvest: An Ecosystem Paradigm Reconsidered. New York, 2002

(15) ECO-TOURISM

Bhattacharya P., Smriti Kumari (2002). Ecological Footprint-Application of Criteria and Indicator for Sustainable Ecotourism: Scenario under Globalization. Indian Institute of Forest Management, Bhopal, 2002.

Government of NWFP, Wildlife Department. Eco-tourism Potential of Ayubia National Park: Perception of Local People Explainable. Peshawar/Abbottabad, 2008 76 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

INTRODUCTION to the ANNEXES

Annexes are an integral part of the Main Report. In the annexes either main lines of argument as contained in the Main Report are further substantiated or data and analytical information in table formats are presented. In addition the methodological approaches applied in the THB study are discussed.

The Annexes are separated from the Main Report because the level of detail provided in these annexes would have undermined the readability of the Main Report. Still, however, major elements of the Main Report can only be completely understood in conjunction with the contents of the annexes and the respective references are indicated in the Main Report.

There are 15 ANNEXES and a small DOCUMENTATION containing important text pieces relevant for the THBS. The ANNEXES are

ANNEX 1: Concerns of the Forest Department The draft study was shared with the NWFP Forests Department in May 2009 and was revised in light of their comments received on various occasions. However, during this one year, the department and the study team could not reach a final agreement on some of the concerns raised by the department. These concerns should be addressed by another study which would require additional time and resources. In order to be fair, the present study documents those concerns in the original form (a letter issued by the department dated April 23, 2010) and are annexed here for the reader’s reference.

ANNEX 2: The Timber Harvesting Ban Contains a copy of the original text of the Action Plan for Prime Minister’s Directive on timber harvesting ban prepared by Maj.Gen. Sikander Hyatt Khan and issued as Prime Ministers Directive and on 30th September 1993.

ANNEX 3: Arguments to lift the Ban Is a compilation of summarized compilation of lines of argument and relevant statements from various sources but primarily from representatives of the NWFP Forest Department substantiating the position as to why the ban should be lifted. Such statements have been raised over the whole period of the ban.

ANNEX 4: Terms of Reference THB Study Is the text of the ToR as phrased out by the contractor of the study, the Swiss Intercooperation Section Pakistan, resultant from an initial team-meeting in Islamabad in March 2008.

ANNEX 5: Analysis of Forest Policy Is an extended version of para 2.1.1 of the main study that has been prepared as an annex because the development of forest policies in NWFP can – to a certain extent – be seen in as a direct response to the harvesting ban and the directives as contained in its various renewals. There is an Appendix to that annex containing relevant sections of the latest forest policy situation in NWFP in the form of the Forest Ordinance 2002.

ANNEX 6: Legal Categories of Forests Substantiates relevant legal aspects on ownership rights and concessions concerning the different tenurial conditions of the forests in NWFP.

ANNEX 7: Timber Harvesting Systems Provides a background to the discussion in para 2.1.4 of the Main Report.

ANNEX 8: Methodology Forest Area and Stock Analysis This Annex describes the methodological approaches applied in the empirical center of the study and has two main Chapters: Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 77

Chapter 1: contains a detailed discussion on the method approach applied in the analysis of satellite imagery information. An Appendix explains the technical terms used in that chapter.

Chapter 2: presents a discussion of continuities and adjustments between the methodological approaches of the PFRI baseline study and the present THBS. In this chapter the different steps in analyzing the satellite imagery results in conjunction with data and information from other sources are discussed. An Appendix explains how plantation data were sued in the present analysis.

ANNEX 9: Tables in this annex all tables either referred to in the main text or containing information that were used in the course of the analyses are compiled. There is a separate Introduction to that annex.

ANNEX 10: FOREST ANALYSIS by WORKING PLAN AREAS At a lower level of detail as compared to the analysis on the forests by physical definition this annex contains the satellite image based area and stock analysis of the forests covered by the legal definition (Reserved, Protected, and Guzara forests) according to the areas identified geographically in the orkingW Plans.

ANNEX 11: Impact of Deforestation on Floods Contains a more detailed discussion to para 3.1

ANNEX 12: JFM Field Study Presents the approach and the results of a field survey on the establishment and functionality of Joint Forest Management Committees.

ANNEX 13. Circle Level Workshops Presents the approach and the results of workshops with NWFP senior forestry staff held in the course of this study.

ANNEX 14: Stakeholder Analysis Presents a table showing the results of the stakeholder analysis.

ANNEX 15: Field Survey Methodology and Results Contains the description of the approach applied in the accomplishment of a qualitative site inspection of 36 sites selected on purpose using satellite images as selection base. In a set of tables the results are summarized. 78 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

Annex 1

AGREEMENT REACHED WITH ENVIRONMENT DEPARTMENT REGARDING THE STUDY

The present Timber Harvesting Ban Study was finalised and presented in early May 2009. During the following 12 months, numerous meetings have been organised and letters exchanged, to record and include the comments of the NWFP Forest Department. Comments not included were documented and proper explanations were provided, in writing, to the concerned persons. A final round of revision took place in April 2010 to arrive at the present version. However, after that, a letter was received on April 27 expressing further concerns of the Forest Department. It is annexed herewith for the information of the reader as Annex 1 (b).

Following this communication, in a meeting, the Secretary Environment department and IC reached an agreement that the study will be published as an independent document with a disclaimer, Annex 1 (a). Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 79 80 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 81 82 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

ANNEX 2 Ban imposed for three years in1993

ACTION PLAN PRIME MINTER’S DIRECTIVE REGARDING MISMANAGEMENT AND MALPRACTICES IN FOREST COOPERATIVE SOCITIES IN HAZARA DIVISION AND FORESTS IN GENERAL IN PAKISTAN

The Prime Minister has been pleased to approve the recommendations of the investigation committee headed by Maj. General Sikandar Hayat Khan, Chairman Prime Minister’s Monitoring and Evaluation Cell and has directed that following actions be taken immediately by provincial Governments particularly by Govt of NWFP and concerned Ministries:

1.Ban on Commercial Cutting of trees Action by A complete ban on commercial exploitation of forests All provincial is imposed for two years with immediate effect Governments Azad Government of Jammu And Kashmir and Northern areas. 2. All the 33 societies established under the forest Co-operative system in the Government of Hazara Division should be abolished forthwith and the affairs of each society NWFP be thoroughly investigated by a tribunal to be established at Abbottabad. This tribunal will function as under.

Composition of Tribunal Appointment

Judge of the High Court or Chairman Senior District and Session Judge Conservator of Forests Abbottabad Member Additional Commissioner Hazara Member

Conservator of Forests Abbottabad will act as Secretary of the Tribunal and will also provide secretarial Services to the tribunal Functions and duties of the tribunal are given in Annexure “A”

3. To safeguard the interest of the small Guzara Owners, management of the Government of societies abolished will be reverted to Forest Department/FDC with immediate NWFP effect. The manner in which Forest Department /FDC will proceed to dispose of the felled trees, semi converted logs and Timber at road side depots and Havelian Timber Market is given in Annexure “B” .Any additional instructions to smooth line procedure will be issued by provincial Govt.

4. Alternate energy sources such as SUI Gas, LPG.etc. Should be provided in all Ministry of petroleum forest areas to reduce the pressure on Forests for firewood/ energy. and Natural resources Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 83

5. The prime Minister has been further pleased to sanction audit and inspection All Provincial staff as under, in order to carry out detailed check of the affairs of existing Government’s cooperative societies. The same staff could be utilized by the Tribunal and Chief Azad Government of Conservator of Forests Government of NWFP for related purposes. Jammu and Kashmir ______and Northern Areas. Designation BPS No. Senior Auditor 16 1 Junior Auditor 07 1 Steno typist 12 1 Nab Hasid 01 1 ______6. Administrative and protective capabilities of Provincial Forest Department Provincial including Azad Government Of Jammu and Kashmir and Northern Areas should Governments, Azad be strengthened by providing arms, wireless sets and operational vehicles to Government of Forest Rangers. Provincial government to ensure necessary budgetary provision Jammu and Kashmir In this regard. and Northern areas.

7. Amendment in Forest Act 1927 and Hazara Forest Act 1936. Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Cooperatives a. Acts should be suitably amended by prescribing punishments which All provincial should act as deterrent to thieves and forest smugglers. Governments, Azad Government Jammu and Kashmir and Northern Areas b. Amendments suggested in Pakistan Forest act 1927(annexure “B” Law and Justice of recommendations of the investigation committee) are approved Division. in principal. The Ministry of Food, Agriculture and cooperatives in Ministry of Food, consultation with provincial Govts. Will ensure that the Amended laws Agriculture and are promulgated by 15 March 1994, after necessary approval from law Cooperatives. and justice division.

8. Magisterial Powers to Forest Officers

Forest officers will be given magisterial powers to take prompt cognizance of All provincial Forest offences. Such provisions if available in the forest act should be affectively Governments, Azad utilized. Government of Jammu and Kashmir and Northern Areas. 9. Import Of Timber The Prime Minister has been further pleased to direct that import of timber Ministry of should be allowed and Ministry of Commerce to take decisions and ensure Commerce. implementation in consultation with Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Ministry of Food, Cooperatives. Agriculture and Cooperatives. 10. Establishment Of a Non-Lapsable Revolving Fund. As recommended by the investigation committee a non-lapsable revolving fund Ministry of Food, should be created immediately in all provinces including Azad Government of Agriculture and Jammu and Kashmir and Northern Areas for meeting development. Expenditure Cooperatives. particularly for re-afforestation efforts in creation of nurseries. This fund in case of Ministry of Finance Government o9f NWFP should not be less than 150 million. and Economic Affairs (Finance Divisions). 84 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

11. Social Forestry Program Should be expanded manifold to improve the economic conditions of poor farmers and improve the lot of poor people. Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Cooperatives. 12. Posting And Transfers Of Forest Staff Conservation of Forests is a specialized subject which requires continuity of planning, execution and follow up over a long period of time. The Prime Minister has therefore directed that the postings and transfers of Forest Officers and Staff Ministry of Food, should be guided by the following considerations. Agriculture and Cooperatives. a. A tenure of 3 to 5 years is laid down by ensure incase of DFOs and RFOs. b. Posting of Forest Officers should be left to the discretion of Chief Conservator of Forests. c. No political interference should be allowed in consideration of any posting.

13. Training The Prime Minister desires that more emphasis should be given to professional Ministry of Food, training, in service refresher training/courses for all tiers of the Forest Agriculture and Department. Cooperatives. 14. Compensation and Awards. The protection, compensation and awards to Forest Officials should be at par with Police and Custom Departments. Those Officials who lay down their lives on All Provincial duty should be handsomely compensated and awarded Governments, Azad Government of Jammu and Kashmir and Northern Areas.

Maj. General Sikandar Hayat Khan Chairman September 30, 1993

Attached Annexure A, page 6/7 Annexure B, page 7/7 Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 85

Annexure “A”

Functions and Duties of the Tribunal

Tribunal will carry out following duties and functions and complete the task 1st March, 1994.

1. They will scrutinize in detail the records, and affairs of each Forest Cooperative Society. This is essential in order to determine the extent of misappropriation done by the managing Directors in owner share (60%), development funds (20%), and in-operational funs (20%).

2. Take all necessary steps to recover and clear dues / liabilities of all owners, Forest Department and other affected persons.

3. The clearance of liabilities maybe done out of the net sales proceeds of Timber i.e. after deduction of 20% development fund, and from the movable and immovable properties of the managing Directors which they have acquired after the institution of Forest Cooperative System.

4. The tribunal will receive the sale proceeds of Timber left over by the society as a result of abolition. The Timber will be disposed of by the Forest Department as per instruction in annexure “B” attached.

5. This task be finalized within 6 months i.e. by 31 March 1994.

Maj. General Sikandar Hayat Khan Chairman

September 30, 1993 86 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

ANNEXURE-B Actions by FDC/Forest Department

1. Take over the converted timber in transit, road side and lying in Federation sale depot. They will also take over the liabilities and other assets as well as the nurseries, afforestation areas, buildings and vehicles etc. of the cooperative societies.

2. The converted timber be disposed of and sale proceeds recovered. The remaining marked standing trees and unconverted timber be taken over by F.D.C exploited and sold.

3. Twenty percent of the gross sale proceeds should be deposited in the special development account of the DFO concerned for achieving the balance development works in which priority should be given to raising of nurseries and afforestation. If there is a balance, of funds still left, then it should be utilized for infrastructure and roads.

4. The remaining revenues after deduction of authorized expenditures and liabilities of the Forest Department/FDC be deposited with the Tribunal for clearing the liabilities of the owners and other affected persons.

5. In case the liabilities exceed the revenues accrued from the sale of timber or if the timber has already been disposed of by Managing Directors and there still exist liabilities of owners(s) or Forest Department or any other person, these should be recovered from the moveable and immovable properties of the Managing Directors.

Maj. General Sikandar Hayat Khan Chairman September 30, 1993 Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 87

ANNEX 3

Arguments against continuation of timber harvesting ban

Due to prolonged continuation of the harvesting ban, professional foresters are now of the view that such kind of a protracted and prolonged ban is not in favor of sustainable forest management. Extended ban; it-self is a mismanagement of forests which cannot be justified as a sustainable solution to forest management on the following technical and legal grounds:

1. Forest is a renewable resource and ban on its utilization on long term basis is technically not an advisable strategy. Timber harvesting is an integral part of forest management. The persistence of prolonged ban on sustainable commercial harvest of the timber has disrupted the management cycle of forestry resources of the province. The silvi-culture requirements of the different forests stands are not being fulfilled. The perpetuity of the coniferous forests as a regulated ecologically sound renewable resource is thus thwarted.

2. Timber harvesting ban was imposed across the board on all forests in AJK, Northern Areas, NWFP, Sind, Punjab and Baluchistan irrespective of the Forest land tenure system of that Province. Sind and Baluchistan Provinces do not have coniferous forests except a small patch of juniper forest in Ziarat (Baluchistan) which is preserved and protected as National Heritage. Therefore, the ban on cutting of trees imposed by the Federal Government has no effect on Sind and Baluchistan Provinces. In Punjab, coniferous forests are confined to Murree Hills which constitute a well known hill resort and attract large number of tourists in summer. Since the area is densely populated, Government of Punjab had taken a conscious decision to discontinue commercial felling from Murree Hills long before the present ban was imposed by the Federal Government. Forests in Azad Kashmir are State-owned. People are not entitled to share in the sale proceeds of these forests. The ban on commercial sales of trees, therefore does not affect ordinary citizens. Moreover, well stocked forests in AJK are located along the line of control where commercial activities are prone to interference from the Indian Army. Such activities are also not supported for strategic reasons militaristically. The Government of AJK therefore, supports the ban out of necessity. In Northern areas ninety percent of the forests are privately owned. These Private Forests are confined to Diamer District only. These are owned by the tribal communities and are managed by the Forest Department. The forests are sold to the lessees by the owners at their own choice subject to concurrence of at least sixty percent of the owners. The sale deed thus drawn is attested by the Assistant Commissioner of the area. Fifty percent of the timber sale proceeds are paid to the forest owners and the rest goes to the Government treasury as revenue. In NWFP, 94 % of the forests are either privately owned or the local concessionaries receive 60 to 80 % of the sale proceeds from these forests as their share.

It is therefore evident that the prolonged continuation of the ban is affecting the livelihood of the local communities only in NWFP and Northern Areas and not in other parts of the country.

In the Federal and Concurrent Legislative Lists of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973, the terms “Forests”, “Forest management” or “as to forests” are not provided. Therefore these matters are of residuary nature and fall within the ambit of provincial legislative and executive jurisdiction. The provincial legislature has already enacted NWFP Forest Ordinance 2002 in that respect and provincial authorities are functioning under the Law in respect of these matters. Therefore, the ban imposed by the Federal Government on forest harvesting in NWFP is not justified.

While extending ban on timber harvesting, the action was given justification as, “to mitigate the harmful effects on environment, climate and ecology. The term “environmental pollution and ecology” is mentioned in the concurrent list of the Constitution and executive authority of the Federation extends to 88 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

the said matter. These matters are covered under the “Pakistan Environmental Protection Act 1997” The Act provides a detailed procedure to be followed before declaring any activity to have adverse environmental effects. In this Act, there is a provision of Environmental Protection Council headed by Prime Minister, and comprising of 35 members including the Chief Ministers and Ministers of Environment of the four provinces with a function to coordinate and supervise the enforcement of the provisions of this Act. There is also provision of Environmental Impact Assessment to be carried out for any planned activity or project before deciding on approval or otherwise of such activity plan or project. The issue of any adverse effects of harvesting of forests in NWFP on the environment has neither been analyzed /discussed in Pakistan Environmental Protection Council, nor has the Chief Executive of the Province been offered a chance to defend the position of the Province on this forum. The Directives have also not been channelized through the forum of PEPC and therefore, the decision was not taken in line with the provisions and purpose of Environmental Protection Act 1997.

3. Continued ban on timber harvesting since one and a half decade is against the objectives of National Forest Policy 1991, (duly approved by the National Assembly) as well as provincial forest policy, regarding meeting the country’s requirements of timber, and providing sustainable livelihood to dependent communities.

4. Principles of equity suggest that the negative social and economic impacts of timber harvesting ban should be borne by a broad cross-section of a society, which in turn point towards the need for compensation or adjustment assistance. However, no positive steps have been taken in this direction. Since the policy of timber harvesting ban fails to provide viable alternative livelihoods, and they create economic disincentive to the community, the abuses of illegal forest activities have increased.

5. In NWFP , there are two kind of private forests:

a. the Guzara forests which are properly demarcated and are being managed by the NWFP forest department b. The privately owned un-demarcated cluster of trees growing on waste lands and cultivated fields, commonly known as “Mazrooa”. Such blocks of trees are not under the management of Forest Department.

Whereas, the Government has imposed a ban on timber harvesting from the first category of privately owned Guzara forests no such ban is applicable on the second category of forests growing on private waste lands. Resultantly private owners are now resisting demarcating their forests which ultimately will then come under the management of the department and will come under the purview of the timber harvesting ban. Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 89

ANNEX 4 Terms of Reference for Study On The Timber Harvesting Ban in NWFP PAKISTAN

1) Background and justification

Natural forests cover less than 5 percent of the total land area in Pakistan. Notwithstanding the low per capita forest area, the demand for services (e.g. watershed protection) and products (e.g. construction wood and fuel-wood) is increasing. Fifty-one percent of the land area of Pakistan is arid (rainfall below 250 mm per year) and supports bushes and grasses used by livestock, particularly goats and sheep, which are the mainstay of people who live in this region. The semi-arid areas (250-750 mm rainfall per annum) cover 35 percent of the land area. This area is used mainly for rainfed agriculture. Only 12 percent of Pakistan (Himalayas, Karakuram and Hindukush mountain ranges) is sub-humid. It is in this area that natural coniferous forests are located, forming the watersheds of the Indus and Jhelum river system. And it is in this very sensitive and fragile area that the pressure of the population on natural resources is the highest.

The floods in 1992 In 1992 Pakistan received severe floods causing a lot of damage to the infrastructure particularly along the Kunhar and Jhelum rivers. After these floods, on 30th September 1993, the Government of Pakistan imposed a ban on the commercial harvesting of coniferous trees in the hill forests for a period of 2 years. The flood was used as a pretext to address other issues related to the mismanagement of the forests in NWFP, especially in relation to the Forest Cooperative Societies. In addition – and thus responding to critique regarding prevailing forest management practices – it called for a reform of Pakistan’s forest sector policy. The ban was initially to last until 1995, but was then extended by the Government, and again in 1997 until June 30, 1999. On November 12, 1999, the federal Government reiterated the ban on harvesting (The Nation 14.11.99).

A first attempt was made in 1998 by the Government of NWFP Forests, Fisheries and Wildlife Department to lift the ban1. The Provincial Administrative Department constituted a committee of forest professionals to analyze the question of lifting of the ban and a document was published giving already concrete recommendations based on consultation of different interested parties. Under certain conditions the ban was relaxed by the federal Government in 2001 for a one year trial period, but was again put in force the year after.

The management system It was generally recognized and admitted that the management system practiced by the Forest Department (FD) in 1992 was inadequate. On the other hand, the communities, deprived from their basic rights, had no incentives to protect the resource. The traditional working plans prepared by the FD were basically oriented towards timber harvesting. The other dimensions and functions of the forest, i.e. environmental and social, were almost completely absent in the traditional management approach. At a time when international concern for biodiversity and forest conservation was growing and the social dimension of forest management, securing tenure and access rights of local people, the traditional management approach was less and less acceptable for many advocacy groups and international organizations.

The reasons for degradation of the situation are both direct and indirect, but the main reason is that a forest needs to be managed properly to fulfill its functions. Moreover, experience has shown all over the world2 that putting a ban on timber harvesting without taking appropriate measures to tackle the root causes of the problems but only the symptoms, has little positive impacts. On the other hand, if no measures are taken to compensate the interruption in supply of timber, it gives room to illegal cutting of timber. Therefore, without applying a proper management system to the forests including the application of appropriate silvi-cultural practices, adverse developments emerge which have long-term effects on the condition of the forests.

1Lifting ban on forest harvesting and reforming forest management in NWFP. Ali Akbar Khan, Ghazi Marjan, Gul Muhammad and Naseem Javed. Government of NWFP Forests, Fisheries and Wildlife Department. 3rd draft, January 7, 1998 2Forests out of bounds: impacts and effectiveness of logging bans in natural forests in Asia-Pacific. FAO, 2001 90 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

Despite the general recognition that under the traditional forest management systems the various functions of the forests could not be sustained, the FD had limited capacities to substantially change towards a new system. The main barrier faced by the FD was a general lack of resources and funding leading to insufficient investment in forest management and low wages/benefits for the FD staff creating a poorly motivated institution with little incentive to seek change.

Governance But to put the blame on the management system and on the FD alone would be unfair. Issues of governance in the forest sector, and of governance in general, also played a critical role in the degradation of the situation. Political interference at all levels deeply undermined the credibility and the capacity of the FD to perform its tasks.

The situation today Since the time the ban was put in force, there are observations that degradation of forest didn’t stop and to some extent it has even worsened. But without any proper investigation based on objectively collected data and consultations, such observations are subjective opinions only.

Since 1995, the Forest Department of NWFP has started to reform its management system and introduced institutional reforms with the support of various donors, namely the GTZ, SDC, RNE and ADB. The reform process gave room for new stakeholders to take an active part in the different activities in the forest sector. The management system was also reviewed, but could only partially be implemented because of the ban. The new management approach is based on a three-tier approach (strategic, operational and village level), which also gives importance to Non-Timber-Forest-Products (NTFP) and forest functions but primarily encourages participatory forest management involving communities and marginalized people.

Currently, both the GoNWFP and the Govt. of Pakistan want to examine the effectiveness of the ban as to whether the ban has achieved its objectives and to decide whether to lift the ban or not. The INRM Project, funded by the Swiss, which promotes a participatory approach for the integrated management of natural resources, is ready to play a role as facilitator in this process. Therefore a study is launched to analyze issues relevant for supporting a final decision on the timber harvesting ban.

2) Objectives of the study

The objectives of the study are as follows:

I. To identify and understand the consequences of the ban on the condition of the forests, on the forestry institutions (Federal, Provincial and regional), and on the various stakeholders in the forest sector. This analysis will be geared towards the economic, social and ecological functions of the forests. II. To document the measures already taken by the FD in particular, and in the forest sector in general, in order to improve and adapt the policies, the institutional set up, and governance to change the traditional forest management system. III. To assess how the ban was effecting the implementation of participatory and sustainable forest management. IV. To suggest the conditions and measures to promote the objectives of the ban, in case the ban is either lifted or continued.

3) Methodology

The study will be divided into four main steps namely:

PHASE 1: Launching of the study PHASE 2: Conducting the study PHASE 3: Presentation and Final Report Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 91

PHASE 1: Launching of the study

Under the supervision of the Team Leader (TL), the team will finalize the methodology, which will be adopted to conduct the study. The TL will distribute tasks and responsibilities in view of the respective profiles and background of the team members. During this step the team will also review the existing literature and documents pertaining to the subject. More specifically, the team will also take into account the effectiveness of logging bans as experienced in other countries.

PHASE 2: Conducting the study

This step is the core of the study. While it will be impossible to establish direct causal relationships between the ban and the current situation of the forests the study will make all efforts to identify explanatory linkages between factors that have been affecting the current state of the forests – including the harvesting ban.

The study will also focus on the measures taken by the different actors to compensate for or to respond to the ban. Changes brought so far at the policy level and in the structure of the FD as well as on the measures taken in improving forest management, will be documented and analyzed. The study will also review the justification for and results of the one-year relaxation of the timber harvesting ban in 2001.

The principal methodological approach of the study is the application of a composite basket of empirical research techniques. On the one hand the study will use objectively verifiable data and facts, i.e. satellite imagery, official records on timber harvesting and marketing, control post records, timber import statistics, and revenue and expenditure data relevant to the forest sector. As far as possible such data will be compiled in a time-series structure allowing for a comparison of a situation prior to the ban with the present situation.

On the other hand the study will use information collection techniques in the form of case studies. Whereas such techniques have limitations for generalized conclusions, there are no other methods that allow for relevant insights into complex issues in a relatively short period of time. On forestry/environmental issues such case studies are accomplished on a selection of about 15 sites. Such sites are identified on the basis of satellite imagery and grouped according to criteria relevant to the subject of the study. Similarly, on livelihood and other social issues at the local level about 10 villages will be selected for information collection using pre-structured information guidelines.

These information techniques are supplemented by interviewing key informants on specific subjects and by analyzing existing reports. These latter information techniques are primarily relevant for the institutional and policy aspects of the study.

It needs to be noted that there are a number of very important issues which, by their very nature, do not lend themselves for direct information collection. Such matters primarily pertain to the illegal timber trade and to various forms of illegal income to various groups of stakeholders in the forest sector. Information on such aspects can only be compiled in a non-verifiable manner based on covert communications.

Forest and Environment This section will focus on the analysis of the status of and the conditions in the forests. To assess the changes in both parameters during the period of the ban, a comparison between information from an existing analysis for 1996/97 (PFRI) and for the present situation is made by using satellite imagery.

On the basis of that analysis a number of sites will be identified for ground inspection. The selection of such 92 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

sites will be guided by criteria like different tenurial systems, type of forest, and relevance for identifying changes as per results of the satellite imagery analysis.

The study will also examine in which way local needs were met during the period of the ban.

Socio-Economic Analysis The study will analyze the general economic and social implications of the ban at the local and regional levels and – in relevant aspects – also at the national level. The main focus of the study will be: In which way the ban

• had effected the livelihoods of the local people, • had interfered into the timber trade including its illegal aspects as far as information on this aspect can be generated, • is affecting the development of the JFM approach.

The study will also examine the issue of timber imports from within the region both as reaction to and as solution for diminishing local supplies.

Policy and Institutional Analysis The study will analyze what effects the ban has had on the development of forest policies and on the FD’s institutional and organizational structures. In particular the changing roles of the FD field staff in forest protection and management will be analyzed. In addition, the study will analyze the implications of such developments on other relevant institutions of the civil society and on the involvement of international donors to support the forest sector. In general, the compilation and analysis of data and drafting the component contributions will be the responsibility of the individual team members. To ensure quality and coherence in the study process a Deputy Teamleader (DTL) will act on behalf of the TL by establishing regular communication among the team members and convene periodical team meetings. On the basis of the draft component contributions of the team members, the TL will edit and compile a comprehensive and cohesive draft final report. This document will contain the findings of the study team and will present recommendations for future action concerning the timber harvesting ban and its concomitant justifications.

PHASE 3: Presentation and Final Report

Once the draft report is completed it will be presented, explained and discussed in a workshop, regrouping representatives of the main stakeholders and decision-makers. The workshop will also draw a plan on the necessary follow-up actions resulting from the recommendations of the study. A Final Report will be prepared by the TL after the workshop.

4) Composition of the team

A multidisciplinary independent team will conduct the study. The study team will be lead by an international senior Team Leader with economics and natural resource management profile, having a strong international experience in forestry, on related environmental issues, and policy and institutional reform processes in Asia (preferably in Pakistan), The TL guides and supervises four national consultants in the fields of forestry, environment, socio-economics, and institutional development. Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 93

5) Role of INRM

In addition to the funding of the study, the INRM project will play an important role in the facilitation and the support of the whole process. The project will facilitate the contacts of the study team with the various institutions and organizations and it will arrange logistic and transport facilities for the consultants.

The INRM project will be informed regularly on the development of the study and it will take any appropriate measures to overcome obstacles and difficulties, which might delay the conduct of the study. 94 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

ANNEX 5

Analysis of Forest Policies

(1) Evolution of National Forest Policies: The need for managing forests arose in the course of an increasing demand for timber in the late 19th century in connection with the railway constructions in the Indian sub-continent under the colonial Government. That natural forests were not only a resource for permanent exploitation resulted from the European experience that in the course of industrialization the forest on the continent became almost extinct. This experience paved the way for the development of scientific forest management the outcome of which was imported by the colonial Government by employing scientifically trained European foresters to develop appropriate management strategies that would allow to permanently cater for the demands of both the local people and the wider society.

In the pre-partition India more than 20% of the area was under forests. The tropical rain forests of eastern part of India (now Bangladesh) were the main supplier of constructional timber. Also in the earlier days there was a smaller population and a lower number livestock in the high-hill forests in the western part of India. The forests were therefore under less local pressure. This position led the British Government to transfer the forests to the public sector, to entrust the Government forest estates to the care of a separate department, and to enunciate a forest policy in 1894 which depicted the sole objective of managing state-owned forests for the benefit of the state, thereby imposing restriction and regulation of rights and privileges of the local population dependent upon the forests. But simultaneously big blocks of forests directly adjoining habitations were left out to meet the constructional timber, fire wood and fodder needs of the local community.

After partition of the sub-continent in 1947 the land area under forests in the new state of Pakistan was less than 5% as compared against about 20% of the land area under forests in the pre-partition India. Even this small percentage of area under forests contained considerable non-commercial forest areas comprising of scrub vegetation, grazing land, and even barren waste lands. Such a change in the forestry situation called for a fresh look into the forest policy. Therefore, a new forest policy was promulgated in 1955 with the major objective to increase the area under forests. The policy also contained provisions for the preparation of management plans, and the management of private forests. In this policy, the protective function of the forest was given precedence over its commercial aspect. However, the policy did not address the problems of hill and scrub forests that continued to deteriorate.

The land along the canals was reserved for raising plantations. Unused government lands were given to the provincial Forest Departments for plantation. Extensive linear plantations were to be established.

In 1958, martial law was imposed in the country. The merger of the four provinces into one unit of West Pakistan and other influences led to the forest policy statement of 1962. The policy gave more definite instructions on increasing the forest base basically along the same lines as in the policy of 1955. There was however, a fundamental change in the basic principle of the policy directive. The new policy gave precedence to the commercial aspects of forestry over all other aspects. Another departure from the previous policies was the approach to the problem of the rights and privileges of the local population for free grazing in the forests and use of other forest resources and this policy recommended that provincial Governments should progressively under take acquisition of such rights.

In 1972, East wing of Pakistan was separated and a new civil Government took over the control in Pakistan. On this background, a new Forest policy was formulated in 1975. The policy marked an important departure from the first two policies in that the management of Guzara forests should be entrusted to owners themselves, with the Government taking only supervisory responsibilities. The policy recommended the formation of “owners cooperative societies”, but recommended that forest harvesting should be carried out entirely by public sector corporations. Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 95

In 1977 the then civil Government was again replaced by a military government, and the new government started the procedure of analyzing the conditions of the forests, range lands and other natural resources. As a result new forest policy was promulgated in 1980. The National Policy on Forestry and Wildlife 1980 was formulated as a part of the 1980 National Agricultural policy. After stressing the inadequacy of forest area, shortage of fuel wood and timber, and the deplorable condition of watersheds and rangelands, it provided a listing of general statements on future forestry; suggested improvement measures, planting of fast growing species and fuel-wood plantations outside public forests, involvement of people for tree plantation and nature conservation through motivation, coordinated development at provincial and national levels, creation of national parks, departmental forest harvesting on scientific lines, and production of medicinal herbs on wild lands.

In 1988, the new (democratic) government constituted a National Commission on Agriculture, which also made some recommendations on forestry. Most of the recommendations of the Commission were finally incorporated in the 1991 forest policy. Since at that time, the Forest Department was a constituent wing of Agriculture Department, the Forest Policy also indicated its sub-ordinance to the Agriculture Policy.

The main objectives of this policy were to meet the country’s environmental needs and requirements of timber, fuel-wood, fodder and other products by raising the forest area from 5.4 percent to 10 percent during next fifteen years, to promote social forestry programs, and to conserve biological diversity and maintain ecological balance through conservation of natural forests and wildlife habitat improvement.

Discussion: a. A detailed analysis of policies by several authors indicates that the policies have been changing with the shifts in the Governments mainly to adjust to their political manifestos. There was no consideration to the fact that forestry being a long term enterprise, any shift in the policies at such frequent intervals can neither practically be implemented nor the management of trees with a rotation period of more than hundred years can be adjusted to such sharp policy adjustments. In this connection a comparison can be made with India whose first forest policy was framed in 1952 and the second or current in 1988, which is still in force. As against, Pakistan’s six national Forest policies which were neither consistent nor that they were introduced with a regular interval of time.

b. The transformation of these policies in administrative practices was top-down, autocratic, aimed at saving public forests, increasing forest area by acquiring the land under the Forest Department, and generating more revenue from the forests. Although the concept of community participation was always advocated verbally, in reality the communities have never been entitled such right to participate in managing their forests.

c. There was and still is a visible tension in the approach of the policy makers and the concerns of the local stakeholders, owners and non-owners, and right-holding users and non-right holding users. Federal policy makers comprising of the academics, urban middle classes and the bureaucracy have construed their natural forest discourse by borrowing from western notion of pristine nature and therefore been advocating human free, untouched wilderness areas. Accordingly, the policy makers care more for environmental concerns of the people of the downstream areas such as regulating water regime, reduced flood risks and soil conservation to reduce sedimentation of the major big reservoirs, bio diversity and eco tourism, with little or no consideration of economic and social aspect of these forests which could address the livelihood concerns of the forest owners, local right holders and the people in general living in or around these forests.

Given these tensions, the forests in NWFP are put under immense pressure for meeting conflicting demands under competing management objectives. This tension is neither healthy for forest management nor a consistent commitment is acquired from either provincial or federal Government on the way forests should be managed. There are always different views in this regard which wait 96 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

for justification from either side. Forest management therefore, remains victim of a more defensive mindset rather than being open to newly emerging concepts such as community based management. Whether or not community based management should revolve around ‘conservation’ or ‘management for meeting multiple needs’ remains the central questions. This question can only be resolved by a consistent policy guideline which does not exist. It is therefore, a general reluctance is noticed in forest managers to devolve forest management to wider public owing to their own fears.

d. All these policies failed to appreciate that the forestry in NWFP was different than that in rest of the country. Here 92% of the forests are encumbered with rights of the local communities and that their only source of living is the amount of royalty received from Forest Department through commercial sale of their trees. Policy initiatives cannot achieve their objectives unless the sustainable livelihood of these stakeholders is taken care of. Failure of such policy objectives is evident from extensive non-compliance with regulations and the poor state of forest resources.

e. Land tenure system in the province is extremely complex. All productive natural forests are located in the areas where ownership rights are neither well defined nor adequately documented in the government revenue record. Where ever settlement of rights has been attempted, local people have boycotted the proceedings as they dispute the validity of the whole process.

The situation in Malakand Civil Division is very grave. Prior to the merger, the Rulers of the States of Swat, Dir and Chitral claimed to be the sole owners of these forests, whereas the locals were claiming their propriety rights in these forests. However, after merger of the States, the ownership disputes of these forests have increased manifolds. Government has declared these forests as protected Forests subject to payment of 10 percent of the sale proceeds of forest produce from these forests to the right holders. This percentage was subsequently raised to 15 % in 1969 and 60 to 80 % in 1976. But the local residents still claim ownership of majority of these Forests. According to them, there is difference, between ex- state property, ex-Rulers private property and the property of the other land owners, which is private property and cannot be taken over by the Provincial Government. There are disputes with a large number of private individual claims still sub-judice in different fora. These ongoing disputes have prevented Forest demarcation in Malakand Division and interfere with proper management of protected forests. However, due to complex nature of the issue, the National Forest policy avoided to find any implementable solution to the issue as indicated below:

“The forest policy has not addressed the question of land tenure because of its complex nature and the tribal life style governing the use of forests. Past experience has shown that policy resolution of land tenure problems is not an option with in the foreseeable future” (Review and analysis of Forest Policies: 85).

It is however, a fact that unless the land tenure issue in Malakand Circle has been addressed, the deforestation with an objective of encroaching and grabbing more land for agriculture purposes, there by establishing ownership, shall continue. In Malakand disputes on forest ownership and tenurial rights is one of the major causes of forest degradation.

The harvesting ban has further accelerated the problem. Since owners are not getting any royalty from their forests, they are now converting their forests into agricultural lands. This will solve their forest ownership dispute with the Government and will also help them to earn some income from the harvest of their agricultural crops. The non-owner graziers who are residing in these forests but do not get any share in the royalty of the sale proceeds from these forests also facilitate the process of deforestation so as to convert the forest into grazing lands. The declining law and order situation prevailing in Malakand since some time has further accelerated these processes. Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 97

f. Similarly, in Hazara Civil Division, the Guzara forests were carved to meet the bona-fide requirements of the local population. At that time no differentiation was made between individually owned Guzaras called malkiat and the community owned Guzaras called shamilat. Local population of the villages could fulfill their domestic requirements from these Guzara forests adjoining their village without any differentiation of ownership category. However, with the passage of time, since the demand of the right holders as well as the value of timber has multiplied, the owners of the individual Guzara forests do not permit exercise of any such rights by the right holders in their property. Therefore, the pressure has been diverted to community owned guzaras and the state forests, resulting in their degradation.

1 Review of National Forest Policies

In 1998 a policy review was carried out by the World Conservation Union (IUCN) and the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) in collaboration with the Government of Pakistan. The study identified a series of constraints to improving forest policy: • attitudinal change in the forest functionaries for participatory approach, • weak reconciliation of social and environmental goals, • lack of accountability, • lack of extension service and capacities of the forest functionaries.

Progress towards practice of better forestry is constrained by: • entrenched forest department attitudes, which use a “command and control” approach, • fiscal deficits, putting a strain on departmental budgets, • weak reconciliation of social and environmental goals with the current formal departmental goal of revenue maximization, • inadequate information on forests and on stake holders” needs and capacities, • lack of established fora for review and debate of policies and experimental initiatives, • lack of local-level governmental institutions that could reconcile top-down policy initiatives and implement bottom-up participatory projects, • weak relations between the state and civil society. • weak integration of farm forestry and import policies into forestry policies, and consequently a continuing and overriding pressure to use the small remaining natural forests for timber production.

The 1998 policy review provided a foundation to revise the National Forest policy in Pakistan. (Changing perspectives on Forest policy 1998: xi)

2 Analysis of Provincial Forest Policy 1999

In 1999 the NWFP Forest Department promulgated a new Provincial Forest Policy. Most of the short falls of the National Forest policies indicated in the above mentioned review were addressed in this Provincial Forest policy. It stressed on integrated participatory natural resource management. Updating forestry legislation and institutional transformation of the forestry sector were identified as the major elements of the policy. To guide and control the implementation of such policies a Forestry Commission (FC) is to be created. The policy also envisaged the establishment of a Forestry Development Fund (FDF) to finance effective regeneration of forests safeguarding the returns to the local communities from timber harvesting.

The idea of adopting a provincial Forest policy was that remaining within the overall umbrella cover of the National Forest Policy, the province should give more emphasis to the regional level forestry issues. However, it appears that the Provincial Forest Policy has been prepared in complete isolation from the National Forest policy. There have been some inconsistencies in the recommendations of the National and Provincial Forest policies, which has not favored the implementation of the provincial forest policy.

1. The national forest Policy 1991 has emphasized on intensive forest management where as the provincial forest policy has not been able to high light this recommendation. According to the National forest policy 1991: 98 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

“The present system of forest management has remained primitive in most countries in this region because the mountain forests are inaccessible and knowledge about the resource is limited. The situation can be changed by bringing fundamental changes in the policy leading to intensive management. The change is necessary to achieve high input-output forest management as it would result in greater contribution of forests to economic prosperity, sustainable development, healthy environments for man( major concern for the 21st century), and enormous job opportunities. This will help reduce rural-urban migration.” (Abeedullah Jan, Review of forest policy, 129)

Single tree selection system is no management as no artificial plantation can be done in the cut-over areas under the system. Therefore, the recommendations of the national forest policy on intensive forest management needs to be implemented.

2. The National Forest Policy 1991 has put more emphasis on increasing forest area through private plantations by adopting social forestry approach. This strategy has not been highlighted in the provincial forest policy.

3. Federal Government has imposed ban on timber harvesting since 1993. The provincial forest policy failed to even mention the existence of such a ban. Without lifting of the ban, most of the recommendations of the policy, particularly the one regarding ”increasing returns to the local communities from timber harvesting” cannot be implemented. The draft National Forest Policy 2002 did took notice of it and has indicated resumption of sustainable commercial harvesting with certain conditions indicated in the draft policy.

4. The Provincial Forest policy has recommended to liberalize the imports of constructional timber. This is in contrast to the recommendation of the National Forest policy 1991 which stresses to “Evolve an export oriented or import substitution strategy.” (Abeedullah Jan, Review of forest policy, 74)

POLICY REVIEW

NWFP Forest Policy has indicated an annual review and five year evaluation of the Policy. However, nothing in that respect has not been initiated even after lapse of about ten years. The main reasons are:

• Policy review processes are not institutionalized and are not a government priority. • Guide lines on periodic policy reviews are unavailable. • Mechanisms for following standard procedures and steps for conducting policy reviews do not exist. • The Forestry Commission whose main task was to review and over see the implementation of Forest policy is not yet operational. • Forest policies are translated to the ground through Forest Management Plans. This strategy has not yet been fully understood and realized by the working Plan Officers and the multistage planning recommended by the Provincial Policy has not yet been started.

3 Draft National Forest policy 2002

In October 1999, the military took over the control of the Government. The new Government reviewed the National Forest Policy 1991 and the outcome of this process is the new draft National Forest Policy 2002. (Government of Pakistan, National Forest Policy 2002.)

The policy seeks to launch a process for eliminating the fundamental causes of the depletion of RNR through the active participation of all the concerned agencies and stake holders. Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 99

It is an umbrella Policy providing guide lines to the Federal Government, Provincial Governments and territories for the management of their RNR. In consonance with it, the Provincial and the District Governments may devise their own policies in accordance with their circumstances. High priority has been given to integrated land use-projects for the sustainable rehabilitation of RNR with the participation of organized local communities.

The most important provision of this draft policy is regarding lifting of ban on timber harvesting. According to the policy:

“Provincial Governments may resume sustainable commercial timber harvesting in the Reserved, Protected, Guzara and Private Forests with the following conditions:

1. Commercial timber harvesting shall only be resumed in those areas whose right-holders and owners undertake to fully participate in the management and regeneration of their forests in association with the Forest Department, with due regard to meeting the minimum sustainable needs of the non-right holders to the extent of the productive capacity of each forest.

2. The essential criteria for classifying forests into commercial and noncommercial categories shall not only be stocking but terrain and need for regeneration also; and a creditable guarantee from the owners, right-holders and users that they will ensure the regeneration of the forests by affording them protection from grazing, fires and other sources of injury.

3. The principal objective of commercial timber harvesting in the above forests shall be poverty alleviation through providing income to the owners and right holders and to prime economic activity through generating local employment. To further the attainment of the latter objective it shall be the policy of Provincial Government to train the local people in all timber harvesting operations and encourage and enable them to take on small timber harvesting contracts on the pattern successfully demonstrated in the Kalam and the Kaghan projects.

4. Since effective regeneration and not the protection of old trees is the sine qua non of sustainable commercial forestry, the utmost emphasis shall be on the establishment of adequate regeneration. This shall be ensured by devising and implementing an appropriate system of incentives and disincentives for the owners, right-holders, and users of forests, and the Forest Department functionaries.

5. Provincial Governments and forest owners shall provide the necessary resources to rehabilitate the degraded sites in these forests. “

The draft of the Policy was prepared in 2002, but it is still awaiting its approval in spite of lapse of more than six years. 100 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

APPENDIX to ANNEX 5

RELEVANT SECTIONS OF THE ORDINANCE (NWFP Forest Ordinance 2002)

67. Community forest: — (1) The Divisional Forest Officer may assign to any village forest community, village organization, Joint Forest Management Committee constituted in the prescribed manner all or any of its rights of management over any protected forest, Guzara forests, and protected wasteland, and may cancel such assignment, or such agreement, as the case may be, if he is of the opinion that such revocation is in the interest of forest conservancy. All forests so assigned shall be called community forests.

(2) The situation and limits of such forest or land be specified, as nearly as possible, by well- known and permanent boundary pillars and proper map shall be prepared and maintained of such forest.

(3) Government may, for the purpose of this section, make rules for regulating the management of community forests, prescribing the conditions under which the community to which any such assignment is made may be provided with timber or other forest produce or permission to pasture be granted, and their duties, liabilities and obligations for the protection, management and sustainable development of such forests be clearly defined.

(4) No assignment under sub-section (1) shall be cancelled or modified by Forest Officer unless the Village Forest Committee, or Joint Forest management Committee concerned has been given an opportunity of being heard. In case there is disagreement, the Forest Officer shall record his reasons for cancellation. 74. Constitution of the Forest Force— (1) The entire forest establishment under Government, excluding ministerial staff, for the purpose of this Ordinance, shall be deemed to be a forest Force and shall be constituted in the prescribed manner.

(2) Members of the Forest Force shall wear such uniform as may be prescribed. (3) The Forest force shall be equipped with such arms and ammunition, vehicles, vessels, tools, equipment and communication system as may be deemed appropriate and necessary by Government.

(4) The Forest Officer may use such force as may be reasonable in the circumstances to arrest the offender, seize the case property, recover the forest produce, detain or take into custody any forest offender or case property, or prevent the escape of any person concerned or likely to be concerned in a forest offence or prevent the removal of any timber or forest produce in respect of which any such offence has occurred or likely to occur: Provided that where it becomes necessary to stop for checking, searching and apprehending any mechanically propelled vehicle, boat, launch, railway wagon, pack animal, cart and carriage or any kind of conveyance, the Forest Officer may use or caused to be used all force and mans for stopping, checking, searching and apprehending it, or preventing its escape, but shall open fire only when it becomes absolutely necessary in self defense or on the specific order of a Forest Officer not below the rank of a Range Officer, if opening of fire in his opinion was necessary for the stoppage of a vehicle/conveyance or apprehension of the offender.

(5) The Forest Officer may enter any depot, sawing unit, sale depot or any premises, any enclosure, or any building other than a dwelling house, to make a search and seizure of timber or Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 101

forest produce and arrest offender, or break open the lock of any door, fixture or conveyance for the purpose of search and seizure of timber, any other forest produce or case property or arrest of offender.

(6) The Forest officer shall have the powers to hold enquiry or investigation into forest offences, and in the course of such inquiry or investigation, to receive and record statements. (7) The forest Officer shall have the power of Civil court to compel the attendance of witnesses and the production of documents and material objects for the purpose of enquiry or investigation. (8) The Divisional Forest Officer having passed the prescribed the departmental examination in forest laws shall, subject to the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 (V of 1898), have the power to issue a search warrant under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, where deemed necessary. (9) Any evidence recorded under sub-section (6) shall be admissible in any subsequent trial before a magistrate to the same extent as evidence recorded by the police officer during investigation; provided that it has been taken in the presence of the accused person.

(10) A Forest Officer is as good a witness as anyone from police until and unless evidence is brought on record to disbelieve him or his ulterior motive is proved. (11) No suit, prosecution or other legal proceedings shall be instituted except with the previous sanction in writing of Government, against any Forest Officer in respect of anything done or purported to be done in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (4) or sub-section (5) of this section. 98. Forest management plans— (1) All reserved forests, protected forests, Guzara forests, wastelands and other forests placed under the management of a Forest Officer, including village forests, areas under Joint Forest Management under section 38 and areas leased out under section 105, shall be managed in accordance with the provincial forest policy, strategic management plans/ forest management plans, operational plans and village plans duly approved by the Department or an officer authorized by the Department for this purpose. (2) Where such management plans do not already exist, they shall be prepared as expeditiously as possible and updated regularly under direction of the Department and with such involvement of local communities and interested parties as may be possible. (3) In the case of reserved forests, the forests management plan shall emphasize in particular the protection, conservation, management and sustainable development of forest and protection of watersheds, the promotion of eco-tourism, recreation, education and research, and consistent with these objectives, the commercial harvesting of timber and other forest produce. (4) In the case of protected forests, waste-lands, and other forests placed under the management of Forest Officer, the management plan shall emphasize in particular the sustainable production of timber and other forest produce for meeting the domestic requirements of the village communities and commercial harvesting; provided that in case of waste-lands, the domestic requirements of land-owners and right-holders shall be given priority. (5) Every forest management plan shall- (a) Include a description of the forests and other natural resources in the areas covered there under, an analysis of the rate at which these resources can be sustainably used and harvested, a detailed listing of the measures proposed for their sustainable management, regeneration, development, and provide for conservation of biological diversity and estimates of funds required for the effective implementation of the plan, showing expected contributions from beneficiaries for 102 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

meeting the costs of management; (b) Provide for appropriate production and security of goods and services, at the optimum level, while continually improving the productivity of forest and safeguarding the national concerns regarding forests and forestry; and (c) Take into account, as far as possible, the village land use planning process,

(6) Government may prescribe procedure for preparation of management plans, including guidelines for sharing of the costs of preparation of management plans by interested parties. 99. Duties and responsibilities of Government— (1) Government, assisted by the interested parties, shall be responsible for the protection, conservation, management and sustainable development of reserved forests, protected forests, Guzara forests, wastelands and any other forests which have been placed under the management of a Forest Officer.

(2) Government shall ensure that its laws, policies, orders, measures and actions promote the objectives outlined in sub-section (1). (3) Government shall facilitate the participation of village communities and interested parties in sustainable development of forests and wastelands, and will make efforts to encourage women to participate in the management process.

(4) In discharging the duties and responsibilities under sub-section (1),(2)and(3), Government shall, as far as possible and practicable, act upon the advice and guidance of the Forestry Commission.

100. Restrictions on commercial harvesting of timber— 1. No forest shall be subjected to commercial harvesting, except with permission in writing by the Divisional Forest Officer in accordance with approved management plan or regeneration scheme, and subject to such conditions, including payment of fees and duties as Government may, from time to time, notify in the Official Gazette.

(2) The management plan or regeneration scheme mentioned in sub-section (1) shall: Be supported by proof of availability of adequate funds for implementation purposes from the Forest Development Fund or other sources; Ensure the participation and assistance of communities in the regeneration of cut over areas, particularly owners, right holders, users and women as far as possible; Include adequate measures and assistance of interested parties for protection against grazing and pasturing, or illicit removal of timber and forest produce; Provide for mitigatory measures.

(3) Where the progress of regeneration in the area set aside for the said purpose is considered unsatisfactory, the Forest Officer may, after giving the grantee of the permission an opportunity of being heard, withdraw the said permission, whereupon the grantee shall cease the harvesting operations forthwith.

102. Joint Forest Management – (1) Subject to the provisions of sections 98 and 99, the Forest Officer may, where he considers appropriate, manage protected forests, reserved forests, Guzara forest, wastelands, mare growing tracts and other forests which have been placed under the management of a Divisional Forest Officer, with the help and participation of community- Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 103

based organizations, village-based organizations, village development committees or any group of persons representing such organizations, constituted in a prescribed manner, in accordance with such procedure, and on such terms and conditions, as may be deemed fit. (2) For purposes of sub-section (1), the Forest Officer may enter into agreements for joint management of the forests mentioned therein, which may provide, among other matters, for establishment of Joint Forest Management committees comprising representatives of the concerned organizations and staff of the Forest Department. (3) Forest Officer may revoke any such management or agreement, as the case may be, if he is of the opinion that such revocation is in the interest of forest conservancy. (4) No revocation shall be ordered under sub-section (3), unless the concerned organization is given an opportunity of being heard, and in case of disagreement the Forest Officer shall record his reasons for revocation. 104. Forest Development Fund— (1) To ensure adequate and timely availability of funds for implementing the forest management plans with specific reference to ensuring forest regeneration, or forest development schemes, Government shall establish a Forest Development Fund. (2) There shall be credited to the Fund- (a) An initial amount of Rs. 50 million from the existing cash reserves of North-West Frontier Province Forest Development Corporation (FDC) plus 70% of its pre- taxed profit each year; (b) Timber surcharge on commercial timber harvesting and sale from Reserved forests, Protected forests, Guzara forests, Protected wastelands, and other forest areas (i) Deodar timber =Rs. 10/- per cubic foot converted

(ii) Blue pine timber =Rs.8/-per cubic foot converted

(iii) Fir/ Spruce timber =Rs.6/-per cubic foot converted

(iv) Chir Pine timber =Rs. 4/- per cubic foot converted

(v) Shisham and other notified species =Rs. 5/- per cubic foot converted on Government land

(c) Managerial charges levied by Government on the management of various types of forest; (d) Seigniorage fee recovered from landowners and right holders; (e) All fines imposed by Forest Magistrate in forest offence cases; and (f) Any other source notified by Government.

(3) The Fund shall be managed in prescribed manner.

(4) The Fund shall be utilized in accordance with such procedure as may be prescribed for- (a) Raising forest nurseries; (b) Forestation in the cut-over areas if warranted by silviculture principles and in the blank areas of forests; (c) Range management; and (d) Any other purpose which will help realize the objectives set out in sub-section (1) above. 104 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

ANNEX 6

Legal Categories of Forests in NWFP

A. Reserved Forests

Reserved forests are declared after lengthy judicial hearings by the Forest Settlement Officer in which claims of local residents on the forests are sifted and either accepted wholly or partially, commuted or rejected. These are legally owned by the state. The accepted rights are entered in the revenue record and allowing their exercise in perpetuity becomes legally binding on the forest Department.

Technically, the Reserved Forests are a category of forests where all acts are prohibited unless permitted specifically by the Government through Notifications. (Abeedullah Jan, Forest policy 1993:3). Legally, Reserved Forests have been defined in Section 4 of Hazara ForestAct 1936 as under:

“Subject only to the rights defined and recorded at settlement and to the payment to the village land owners of seigniorage fee as provided in section 27, the reserved forests shall be deemed to be the property of the Government and the forests income accruing from them shall be credited to the government as Forest Revenue”.

Reserved Forests were designated after settling their ownership and usage rights under section 4 to 26 of the Forest Act 1927. These Forests are situated in the former Hazara Division in Haripur, Galliat, (Abbottabad), Kagan, Siran, Battagram, and Agror Tanawal Valleys.

B. Protected Forests

The category of Protected Forests was coined during the early days of the British era when the demand for timber exploded due to the construction of cantonments and other infrastructure. As the process of declaring forests as ‘Reserved” took years, a more expeditious device was needed to offer immediate protection to forests, till each could be examined in detail to decide whether it should be declared a Reserved Forest, or surrendered to the local people to meet their domestic requirements. Legally, these forests are claimed to be owned by the state.

Technically, all acts are permitted in protected forests unless prohibited by a notification of the Government. (Abeedullah Jan, Forest Policy 1993:5) Legally, Protected Forests have been defined in Section 29 of Pakistan Forest Act 1927 as under:

(1) “The Provincial Government may, by a Notification in the local official Gazette, declare the provisions of this Chapter applicable to any forest land or waste –land which is not included in a Reserved forest, but which is the property of the Government or over which the Government has propriety rights or to which the whole or any part of the forest Produce of which the Government is entitled. (2) The Forest- lands and waste –lands comprised in any such notification shall be called a “Protected Forest”

Almost all the forests in the former princely States of Chital, Dir, and Swat which now constitute Malakand Civil Division and right bank of Indus Kohistan, which now constitute Hazara Civil Division, are Protected Forests. Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 105

C. Resumed lands

In 1959, under the land reforms Act, the ceiling of the ownership of land was fixed. In Hazara Civil Division, big land owners retained cultivated fields and surrendered the wooded lands previously owned by them which were in excess of the ceiling fixed by the Government. To differentiate them from Reserved and protected forests, these wooded lands are called Resumed Lands. Legal protection has been provided to these forests by extending to them the provisions of “Protected Forests” under the Forest Act 1927.

Such forests are situated in Shergarh and Gidderpur Ranges of Agror Tanawal Forest Division and Hillan Range of Hazara Tribal Forest Divisions. All roads and canal side plantations have also been declared as protected Forests.

Prior to the merger, the Rulers of the States of Swat, Dir and Chitral claimed to be the sole owners of these forests, whereas the locals were claiming their propriety rights in these forests.

However, after merger of the States, the ownership of these forests is still disputed. Government has declared these forests as protected forests subject to payment of 10 percent of the sale proceeds of forest produce from these forests to the right holders. This percentage was subsequently raised to 15 % in 1969 and 60 to 80 % in 1976. But the local residents still claim ownership of majority of these forests. According to them, there is difference, between ex- state property, ex-Rulers private property and the property of the other land owners, which is private property and cannot be taken over by the Provincial Government. There are disputes with a large number of private individual claims still sub-judice in different fora. These ongoing disputes have prevented Forest demarcation in Malakand Division and interfere with proper management of protected forests.

Due to no demarcation and absence of clear cut boundaries between the protected forests and privately owned non forest lands, the owners of the disputed forestlands always try to clear cut the trees from such forest lands and convert them into cultivated fields so as to establish their right of ownership of the land in the court. This is one of the major cause of forest cutting and decrease of the forest area in Malakand Civil Division.

Besides share of the right holders in the sale proceeds, the non-owner resident’s right holders have also been granted the rights of free grazing of their cattle, collection of dead, dry and wind fallen trees for fire wood and grant of timber for constructional purposes free of charge. Non – owner, Non-right holder residents are also entitled for grant of trees/ timber for constructional purposes on concessional rates.

Due to increase in population, the demand for fire wood and constructional timber from these forests has increased many folds, which cannot be fulfilled from the quota allocated for such purpose in the management plans of these forests and in turn results in un-authorized cutting of forests.

The situation of the management of protected forests in Swat can be judged from the following expression:

“The declaration that the Forests were Government Property, the extension of the forest Act of 1927, and the subsequent Notifications brought no fruitful changes because the physical boundaries of the forest and non-forest land were not marked and nothing was done to ensure proper implementation of the Forest Act of 1927 and the subsequent notifications.

The situation went bad to worse. The Government failed miserably to implement its laws, rules and regulations and to protect the forest land it had declared its own property and the trees that have been designated as reserved. Although the Government considerably increased the royalty from 15 % to 60 % in other parts of the study area and 80 % in Buner and Indus-Kohistan Forests, the people – both the land owners and the non-landowners – still wanted to cut down the trees and clear the forests for their own 106 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

reasons; the contractors and the forest mafia also ruthlessly cut down the trees. None of them cared for the maturity of the trees, etc., nor for silvi-culture practice.” (Sultan-i- Rome, 2008:132).

D Private Forests Guzara Forests Guzara is a colloquial word which means subsistence. When forests were reserved for Government owner ship and management in Hazara at the time of first settlement of land ownership in 1872, sizable patches of wood lands close to habitations were set aside to meet the bonafide domestic needs of the local communities. Such frosts were designated as Guzara Forests. (Abeedullah Jan, Forest policy, 1993:5)

These are individually-owned or Community owned waste lands mostly situated in Hazara Civil Division, (some are also situated in Gadoon area of Mardan District) which have been brought under the management of Forest Department under Guzara Rules made under section 53 of the Hazara Forest Act 1936.

The owners of these forest lands are entitled to use free any produce from these forests. But they shall have no right or power to sell any trees growing on such lands, except with the permission of the Forest Department. The commercial harvest is regulated by the Forest Department under the prescription of the working plans duly approved by the Government. Eighty percent of the net sale proceeds of commercial sale from these forests are distributed among the owners, in proportion of their share in the Forests. The remaining 20 percent is retained by the Government as its management charges.

Under the record of rights (Wajib ul Arz), maintained by the Revenue Department, the non owner residents of the villages adjoining the Guzara forests are also entitled for free timber for construction purposes, fire wood of dead and dry trees and free grazing of their cattle. However, now with the increase in population, such rights have increased many folds. Also, with the passage of time, timber has become more valuable and Government has also allowed the sale of dead, dry and wind fallen trees which are in excess of the local requirements.

Therefore, the forest owners do not permit the non owner users to exercise such rights in their individually owned forests. Resultantly, the non-owner right holders, in order to meet their bona fide requirements, resort to unauthorized cutting of trees.

The non-owner, non-right holder, users of the Forest Produce residing in the towns adjoining these forests also full fill their requirements for fuel wood and constructional timber from these forests through illegal means.

2. Un-demarcated, unmanaged Private Forests These are individually owned chunk of trees either growing naturally or planted on the waste lands or cultivated fields, which have not been demarcated and are not brought under the Management of the Forest Department. Locally they are called as ‘Mazrooas”. The owners of such lands can use the trees from such lands for their personal constructional purpose provided they obtain a permit for the purpose from the Forest Department. However, they are not allowed to sell any tree. In 1975, a Policy was approved to allow the owners to sell one out of five trees under the supervision of the Forest Department. However, during the execution of the policy, it was found that instead of cutting trees from their own private lands, most of the trees were cut from the State- owned forests. Therefore, the policy was discontinued. Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 107

ANNEX 7

Timber Harvesting Systems

With the introduction of scientific forest management in early 1900, forest harvesting systems had repeatedly changed from departmental working to the sale of standing trees (contract system) and vice versa over a period of years as follows:

1900-01 to 1906-07 Departmental 1907-08 to 1919-20 Contractors 1920-21 to 1936-37 Departmental 1937-38 to 1973-74 Contractors 1973-74 to 1976-77 Ban on contractors agency 1976-77 to 1977-78 Departmental 1976-78 to 1993-94 FDC and Forest Co-operative Societies

Departmental harvesting system: Under the departmental harvesting system, the labor crews or work contractors are directly engaged by the forest Department on the basis of the labor rates approved by the Department in the Schedule of Labor rates. The timber so obtained is taken out and sold through sealed tenders or open auction.

In case of State forests the total sale value is credited to the Government. However, in case of other forests, the sale proceeds are apportioned between the government and owners@ 80:20 or 60:40 as the case may be, after deducting the extraction charges. The owner/concessionary share is then transferred to the Revenue Department for its onward disbursement.

Sale of standing trees (Contract system): The sale of standing trees (also called as contractor system) was introduced in1907, which remained in force with the periodic shift to departmental harvesting and vice versa till 1974.

Under contractor system the standing trees were sold through sealed tenders to the registered forest contractors. The amount of sale proceeds was recovered from contractors in installments as the lease progressed. The amount was apportioned between the government and owners as per their respective shares in the forests. However, in case of State Forests, full amount of sale proceeds was credited to the Government.

Although the system was working quite satisfactorily, but with changes in the socio-cultural values and political scenario of the country, the forest contractors acquired more powers by becoming political elites and Government Ministers.

In the changed socio-political environment, impartial and fair application of the forest rules and regulations became difficult for official of the department. The forest contractor thus, stepped up their assault onthe forests. The stories of the forest damage and violation of the sale agreements reached even the highest echelons of the government. Consequently the sale of standing trees or contractor system was abolished during the year 1974.

Forest Development Corporation: In order to achieve the objective of “Forest harvesting on scientific lines to avoid waste and to improve utilization, NWFP Forest Development Corporation was established in 1976 with the following major functions:

• Economic and Scientific exploitation of forests • Sale of forest Products • Establishment of Primary wood processing Units. • Regeneration of areas specified by the Government. 108 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

However, instead of following the principles of market and competition, FDC was encouraged to monopolies forest harvesting and marketing systems. Thus the strategies of competition and efficiency were not indicated in the organizational culture of FDC.

The concessionaries of Malakand Division invented a technique of sale of royalties to the work contractors of the FDC. Consequently, the said work contractors virtually became owners of the harvesting coupes in the same sense as sale of standing trees/forest contract system. Thus the FDC, basically established to replace contractors and introduce scientific forest harvesting, simply became an agency to award logging contracts to the very contractors it was meant to replace and has failed to invest in forest regeneration. (Changing Perspective on Forest Policy:71) FDC thus failed in controlling forest damage and economizing on its operational expenses.

Moreover, FDC initially started a “Fixed Price System“ of royalty under which the forest owners/concessionaries were paid the price of their timber on a pre-determined rate and it was for the FDC either to make profit or run in loss, depending on the efficiency of its managerial capacity. Subsequently, the system was converted to “net sale system” where the forest owners were paid the full price of timber sold in the market, after deducting the operational, managerial and investment charges of the FDC. In this case the burden of any managerial inefficiency of the FDC had to be borne by the forest owners.

Multipurpose Forest Cooperative Societies: Forest owners of the Guzara Forests were not satisfied with the economic efficiency of the Forest Development Corporation which ultimately was resulting in the reduction of their share of royalty in the sale proceeds of trees. Therefore, in 1980, on the recommendations of the Agricultural Enquiry Committee of Government of NWFP, and in compliance with the Forest Policy of 1975, an experiment in co-operative management of the Guzara Forests was launched. The very purpose of the experiment was that the Guzara owners of the co-operative societies should be enabled to administer their forests themselves in accordance with forest management plans duly approved by the forest department. It was also recommended that the Department will not interfere in day to day administration of the Forests, but will ensure through periodic inspection that provisions of the management plans are observed.

The experiment was intended to start with trials in less than six areas. But the process was hijacked by the political System and the cooperative societies were used by the Government as “political bribery” to appease influential guzara owners/ politicians. Thus by 1993, instead of six, 33 cooperative societies were actively operating in the area. The well intentioned experiments of cooperative societies System failed mainly because some ambitious and influential owners with large forest holdings manipulated the system to their own advantage. The bureaucratic control became victim to the political influence and/or corruption. The experiment of cooperative societies was riddled with a number of operational weaknesses such as:

1. The management plans prepared for these forests by the forest department were defective. They prescribed the cutting of volumes far in excess of any sustainable yield, and failed to adjust the silvicultural system by forest types. This defective management planning, coupled with felling in excess of prescribed volumes, accelerated forest denudation. 2. Massive irregularities in the use of funds earmarked for operation and development were evident, and some owner’s shares were often misappropriated. Harvesting and other charges were always on the high side. There were many cases of fraud and embezzlement.

During field implementation of the cooperative concept, genuine forest owners were not empowered and instead in most of the cases, political elites or erstwhile Forest contractors took of the system. They steered the System to make their immediate fortunes and ignore sustainability principles of forest management.

Forest Harvesting Cooperative Societies: Forest harvesting cooperative societies of Kohistan district were also introduced in 1981/82. In fact, Government wanted to extend FDC to Kohistan district, while Kohistanis Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 109

opposed this move tooth and nail; finally they organized a long march in 1981, obliging the Provincial government to sign them what is popularly known as 8-point agreement and the forest harvesting co-operative societies became functional in Kohistan district. This model was comparatively simple and closer to the conventional departmental harvesting system.

As would be seen from the above discussion, in different parts of the province different harvesting systems were operative when ban on forest harvesting was imposed during 1993. 110 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

ANNEX 8 FOREST AREA and FOREST STOCK ANALYSIS Data Sources, Methodology, and Analytical Approach INTRODUCTION

In the course of the present study a multitude of different information and data collection techniques was applied, ranging from document and literature studies (see List of Documents), data compilation from sta- tistical records, stakeholder workshops, field inspections, to the application of satellite imagery and GIS data analysis.

Most importantly, though, on the core subject of the present study, i.e. what happened to the forests of NWFP during the period of the timber harvesting ban, the accomplishment of the THBS was favored by the rare op- portunity of having a baseline study. The present annex discusses methodological issues on the relationship and the differences between the baseline study and THBS approaches.

The annex contains two main chapters. Chapter 1 deals with the methods used in the satellite imagery inter- pretation; Chapter 2 presents the analytical approach of the present study in correspondence to the baseline study.

This baseline study, the Provincial Forest Resource Inventory (PFRI), was commissioned by the NWFP Forest Department (FD) in 1994. The field study of the PFRI was conducted in 1995/96 by an international team of consultants locally supported by staff of the Forest Department. However, the final PFRI report was published only in 2000.

With the PFRI three objectives were pursued:

(1) to identify the total area covered by forest in four Divisions of NWFP (Malakand, Hazara, Mardan, Peshawar) using the FAO definition of forests,

(2) to identify the forest conditions including a volume assessment of the total stock, and

(3) to identify the use of the forests in the study year and to analyze what will happen to the forest if the timber and firewood utilization pattern as of 1996 will extend into the future. On instruction of the FD this part of the study was confined to the two divisions Malakand and Hazara carrying almost 99% of all forests in NWFP.

To cover the first objective an analysis of satellite imagery (Landsat TM and SPOT) was adopted. In the course of applying this advanced method of area analysis, digitized GT map sheets were used for geographi- cal adjustment and preparing a digital terrain model. Intensive ground-truthing was accomplished in order to establish a direct correspondence between the satellite data and the actual conditions found on the ground. This resulted in classifying the total forest area into three classes of different stand densities in terms of canopy cover according to the FAO definition. The method applied in the PFRI corresponds in many aspects to the analysis accomplished in the course of the present study, details of which are discussed in Chapter 1 of this Annex.

Using these density classes for sample stratification a terrestrial survey based on a random sample on standard statistical parameters was accomplished. The terrestrial survey resulted in a detailed description of the forest conditions on various parameters and in an assessment of the average stock endowment per for- est density class (for round-wood only). On the basis of that analysis the total stock (round-wood only) in the forests of NWFP was estimated for the study-year 1995/96 Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 111

Because of their methodological sound basis in direct physical measurements through satellite imagery and an empirically analysis of the forest conditions in terms of stocking, equally based on physical measurement, the area data and the data on average stocking per density class of the PFRI I were taken as baseline for the present THBS.

For the present THBS the benefit of having such a baseline study was further supported in that all the original satellite data of 1995/96 together with their analytical packages and standardized ground definitions were still available in a usable condition in the NWFP Forest Management Center (FMC) of the FD at Peshawar. Also a former local member of the PFRI team with a specialized academic background on satellite imagery interpre- tation and GIS became a member of the present THB study team. Thus, full access and a scientifically sound utilization of the new set of satellite images for 2008 in conjunction with the original baseline data of 1995/96 was secured. In addition, the team-leader of the present study (a former CTA to the SFDP) was also a member of the PFRI study team. Thus, not only sustenance in data sources and their utilization was provided but also personal continuity safeguarding the most appropriate approach of the present study on its core issue, the development of forests in NWFP. 112 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

CHAPTER 1: REMOTE SENSING FOREST COVER ANALYSIS 1.1 Acquisition of Satellite Data The original PFRI Landsat TM images and data files together with the original GIS layers available at the FMC were used as a backbone for the present study. The PFRI used a total of four Landsat TM scenes covering the Malakand, Hazara, Mardan, and Peshawar Divisions of NWFP. Hence, for compatibility purpose, the same scenes with the same ground resolution and path/row were acquired for the (THBS). The Landsat TM satellite scenes used in the THBS are:

Path/Row DATE of IMAGE Cloud Cover 151/035 27.06.2008 10.16% (high cc only in lower right quadrant) 151/036 24.04.2008 1.84% 150/035 03.05.2008 0.29% 150/036 03.05.2008 0.08%

A number of technical features make the Landsat TMs sensor an ideal tool to achieve the objectives of the THBS:

• economic coverage of large areas under investigation due to scene size of 180 km x 185 km, • good geometrical resolution providing 30-m ground resolution cells in 8 bands, • seven single spectral bands with high radiometric resolution and precision, and • availability of near-infrared and mid-infrared bands for best discrimination of vegetation types and moisture as well as bio mass content.

The location of the satellite images in the project area of NWFP is shown below: Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 113

The four false color composites of the four Landsat TM scenes below demonstrate the high image quality of the used Landsat TM scenes.

TM-Scene 151/35, 27.06.2008 TM-Scene 150/35 03.05.2008

TM-Scene 151/36, 24.04.2008 TM-Scene 150/36, 03.05.2008

1.2 Digital Image Processing

System corrected digital satellite images – as provided by the data distributor – require further digital processing procedures in order to be used in the most efficient way. The digital image processing steps comprise • geometric correction, • image enhancement with contrast stretching, and • band ratio transformations.

Geometric Correction: Generally, image rectification is necessary to clear image data from distortions that result from the image acquisition process. In the original format of the images the geometric distortions usually are so significant that the images can not be used as maps. Geometric correction aims to make the satellite image compatible with the geometry of large scale maps. The rectification process was accomplished in the very beginning of the study and was based on topographic maps (GT sheets).

The images were rectified through the already digitized topographic maps by the GIS Unit of theForest Management Centre, FMC Peshawar. Easily identifiable control points, which could be identified in both the satellite images and in the topographic maps, were therefore accurately determined and used to calculate the linear transfer function.

Image Enhancement: The principle objective of image enhancement techniques is to improve the visual quality and, therefore, the interpretability of an image. The technique emphasizes radiometric and spectral 114 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

differences in order to more effectively display the data (on a monitor or in a hard copy format) for subsequent visual interpretation. With image enhancement techniques the identification of apparent distinctions between the interesting features of a scene is considerably increased.

The range of possible enhancement operations is virtually limitless. However, there are three broad categories commonly applied as digital enhancement techniques:

• Contrast manipulation • Spatial feature manipulation • Multi-image manipulation

Choosing the appropriate enhancement for any particular application requires a long-standing experience in digital image processing. In this project mainly three enhancement techniques have been applied:

(A) Selection of appropriate spectral bands of the TM sensor: The specific application demanded maximum spectral discrimination of different vegetation classes. Therefore, Landsat TM bands 3, 4 and 5 were selected. Band 3 (chlorophyll absorption region) aids plant species differentiation. Band 4 (near infrared) is useful for determining vegetation types and bio mass content. Band 5 (mid-infrared) finally is an indicator for vegetation moisture content. The applied band combination TM 4, TM 5, TM3 in the order red, green and blue is a commonly agreed standard to create an image displaying the maximum amount of information for the particular project objectives. Image examples are displayed in figure A2-2.

(B) Contrast stretching: normally, the raw image data only contain brightness values in a rather narrow range of the 256 grey levels available. Contrast stretching is to expand this narrow range over a wider range of grey levels in all 3 bands. The output image shows a strongly improved contrast between the interesting features.

The images above show the original (left) and contrast enhanced (right) Landsat TM scene, spectral bands 4, 5, 3 in RGB (red, green, blue)

(C) Multi-spectral band ratio transformation for shadow treatment: Illumination differences somehow can complicate the evaluation of satellite data in mountainous terrain. On the other hand there are well tested methods to overcome that kind of problems in remote sensing. One of them is to use a multi-spectral band ratio transformation.

A major advantage of ratio images is the reduction of illumination effects in a satellite scene that is caused by topographic influences in rugged terrain. In general, ratio images result from the division of digital number values in one spectral band by the corresponding values in another band. Thus, it compensates for brightness variations introduced by the varying topography (e.g. in mountainous regions) and varying illumination conditions. The graph next page illustrates this compensation effect and gives an example with respect to the digital numbers. Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 115

In the original bands the digital numbers for specific vegetation classes are lower in the shadow area than in the sunlit area. The corresponding ratio values for each cover type are nearly identical. This makes clear that this specific image enhancement technique obviously is an adequate tool to overcome interpretation problems caused by shadows on steep mountainous slopes in some parts of the project area. The shadows in these areas are resulting in a reduction of the intensity of course. But nevertheless, the dark regions still contain information on different land cover classes or forest density. This information can be exploited either by digitally displaying the ratioed images of the corresponding area on a monitor or by displaying the high resolution images of the corresponding area of the Google earth (available through the internet). Google images were also helpful in areas where the Landsat images had severe cloud cover. In the case of Google earth images the shadow impact is almost eliminated. In the present case both techniques were applied.

The images (also on the next page) are displaying a subset of the Landsat TM scene of the Chitral area almost covered with cloud in the centre of the image. The corresponding image of the Google Earth with high resolution clearly shows the forests and other land uses.

Subset of Landsat TM data of Chitral area; upper left: false colour composite of TM bands 4-5-3; upper right: Google earth images of the same area. The forest area is clearly visible and identifiable. 116 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

In order to improve the visual image interpretation of forest classes in shadowed areas of NWFP ratio transformations of near infrared and visible bands of the Landsat TM scenes were also performed and utilized as additional information source. The advantage of these ratio transformations for interpreting shadowed forest areas can be best demonstrated by an example of a below color infrared aerial photography.

Effect of shadow reduction by ratio transformation technique of digitized color infrared (CIR) aerial photography (Source PFRI 2000).

The images demonstrate the ratio effect on the basis of a multi-spectral aerial image. The color infrared aerial photography was digitized and separated into three spectral bands (visible green, visible red and near infrared). The upper part of the image displays the original CIR photo with forests and roads, whereas the lower part displays a ratio transformation of the near infrared and visible red band of the same subset. With the ratio image two effects are obtained:

1. spectral differences related to biomass and crown cover density are visually enhanced and facilitate the forest classification of the original colour composite, 2. shadow along a mature forest border, here covering the road between young and old forest, can be completely removed.

The same technique was applied on the system corrected Landsat TM data and used as additional interpretation basis in critical shadowed areas. Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 117

Subset of Landsat TM data of Kohistan area; upper: false colour composite of TM bands 4-5-3; Lower: Google earth images of the same area. The forest area is clearly visible and identifiable.

1.3 Classification of Forest

Selection of Interpretation Technique: The overall objective of image classification procedures is to categorize spectral and/or spatial patterns in an image into land cover classes or themes. This can be achieved either by automatic, computer driven procedures or by visual image interpretation. Generally, both approaches, effectively applied, offer quality results. The approach chosen in the present case was determined by the objective of the study to identify the changes in forest cover from the base-year to the study-year by polygon by polygon with PFRI results.

One problem, amongst other, was the treatment of the shadow effect caused by illumination differences in parts of the mountainous investigation area of NWFP. A computer assisted automatic classification approach would lead to a considerable degree of misclassifications. Visual techniques, in contrast, make use of the excellent ability of the human mind not only to qualitatively evaluate the spectral but also the spatial patterns in an image. Together with the intimate knowledge of the study area shared amongst all GIS staff the visual interpretation technique was selected as the most appropriate method to achieve the most reliable results for the study. 118 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

Definition of the Classification Scheme: The design of an effective classification scheme with a set of suitable target classes (or legend) is one of the most important points implementing the image interpretation. In establishing the legend for the THBS the following points have been considered:

• primary needs of the project • definition of classes discernible from image interpretation and from ground visits • definition of classes as objective as possible • balance the ideal level of detail with the real constraints of the project • balance the resources available and technology • any vegetation condition should be assignable to one and only one class • main focus on forest cover

Forest Classes: To subdivide the class “forest” into 3 sub-classes the key variable “crown coverage” was used. Crown coverage of less than 10% was categorized as non-forest (FAO standard definition of forest). The minimum size to be applied to forest sub-classes was 0.5 ha. Just like PFRI, broad-leaved trees have been included into the forest layer without any further discrimination. While plantations younger than ten years cannot be detected on the Landsat TM images, plantations older than ten years also were grouped into the forest area as long as no information about the location of plantations was available through other ground surveys and projects (for discussion see Appendix: Plantation).

The class “forest” was subdivided into three subclasses:

FOREST CLASS CLASS DEFINITION Subclass F1 Severely under-stocked, crown coverage of 10-25% Subclass F2 Under-stocked, crown coverage of 25-50% Subclass F3 Normally stocked, crown coverage over 50%

Non-Forest Classes: As far as the “non-forest” classes are concerned these were not taken in classification process except where forest density class shifted to these non forest classes or vice versa. However, intensive shift analysis for inter-sectoral (shifting of forest area into other land uses or vice versa) and intra-sectoral of forest area (shift with in forest density classes) was performed. In this analysis, the resultant amount of forest density class was compared with the PFRI and the individual class shift was noted and tabulated for each district. (WORKTABLE 2.1 (a-d).

1.4 Collection of Reference Data for Image Interpretation

The collection of reference data is an essential part of any vegetation mapping. This involves collecting qualitative and quantitative data from a number of different sources as reports, aerial photographs, maps, personal knowledge of the area of interest or information being derived directly in the field. All these information serve as the basis for the succeeding image interpretation. Fortunately, the original PFRI data and work files provided the major reference data for this study.

Preparation Phase: In a first step the PFRI data was retrieved in the FMC data base. Secondly, the staff of FMC was trained and familiarized with the objective of the present study and methodology used in PFRI. Thirdly, relevant other reports and studies dealing with forestry, land-use, and the ecology of the area were analyzed to obtain in-depth knowledge of the forest resources in the project area and also to become aware of specific problems already identified in previous projects.

Image Interpretation: The visual image interpretation by displaying image on monitor took place in the FMC GIS Lab directly following the PFRI methodology. The interpretation was carried out by four trained GIS/ remote sensing staff of FMC and who were conversant with PFRI methodology, the objectives of the THBS, and the area under study. To ensure continuity in all these aspects between the PFRI and the THBS a forester Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 119

and GIS/remote sensing specialist – who already participated in the PFRI study team with vast experience in forestry as well as having an intimate knowledge of the study area – was guiding and supervising the entire process.

Generally, the following elements of image interpretation have been considered before delineating the classes:

• shape and size of phenomena, • spatial arrangement of the objects (spectral pattern), • color and relative brightness, • frequency of tonal changes (texture), • specific spectral appearance in shadowed areas, • topographic or geographic location (particularly important in mapping vegetation types) • occurrence of certain features in relation to others (association).

Having significant spectral signals, image interpretation is a straightforward process. Sometimes the analysis of remote sensing data is complicated by overlapping signatures or by illumination differences occurring on steep slopes of mountainous regions. Reflectance values become ambiguous due to different topographic aspects. This is true for some limited areas in the study area. To tackle this problem different effort were made:

• checking as many shadowed sites as possible with Google images, • additional use of ratio images directly on the screen when interpreting these areas, and • use of spatial context and information on topographic location

Forest Classes interpretation: The distinct color of dense forest allowed a detailed mapping of this forest cover type. However, there were slight overlaps between the density classes. Particularly the delineation of the forest density class with a canopy density below 25% (severely under-stocked) sometimes caused problems due to its spectral ambiguity with non-forest classes like “agricultural land” and “rangeland”. Moreover the identification of the exact boundaries of different canopy cover classes was a sophisticated effort because of small scale variations within the forest canopy. This held especially true in shaded areas. The structuring of crown cover classes into sub-classes is always somehow artificial and can vary slightly between the interpreters.

Within the area of Indus Kohistan and Dir Kohistan a high spectral similarity of bushy areas and forest was noticed (overlapping spectral signatures). This finding confirmed earlier experience made by remote sensing specialists during PFRI Project.

1.5 gIS Establishment and Analysis

A GIS is generally designed to capture, store, analyze and display spatial data and can be used for computer- aided mapping purposes as well. Due to the geographic nature of the objects, data in a GIS always is spatially referenced. Each object found in a GIS can be related to some location on the ground and can be mapped. The objects in a GIS (e.g. a land cover polygon) are defined by their location and by multiple attributes (e.g. forest density class) that describe their characteristics. This information can be related to each other in a continuous geographic database.

A GIS allows integrating data that has been collected at different times, at different scales and using different methods of data capture.

Generation of Forest Layer: The data capture of the interpreted forest cover information was performed directly through desk top digitization, thus storing the polygon data in a digital form. The data of the different 120 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

polygon was made mosaic. The forest density classes stands now for one layer in the database. After elimination of errors caused by digitizing process, each single polygon had to be labeled with the corresponding class name that describes the type of feature.

All data sets digitized earlier by the PFRI and FMC from the topographic maps have been transformed to this official local grid co-ordinate system. Any combination or overlaying procedure of separated layers in a GIS requires that all the themes are registered to each other by the same co-ordinate system.

It has to be noted that the used grid system is well suited for cartographic purposes (conformal projection) but for the calculation of area statistics the GIS data layers had to be transformed into an area true projection.

Additional Information Layers: All additional map information was taken from available PFRI maps and other data base available in the FMC. The selection of map features was mainly guided by the aim to provide a framework enabling a good spatial orientation in the final forest maps as well as to have a basis for the calculation of area statistics per Division and District. The following information layers were derived from the FMC data base maps:

Legal boundaries of Forests: For the final interpretation of forest areas it was of utmost importance in the design of the THBS to also classify forests according to the legal definition of forest areas. i.e. by reserved, protected, and Guzara forests. Such an analysis was never made on the forest of NWFP before and also the PFRI failed to include that important aspect. At the time of the PFRI no reliable mapping of forest areas according to legal boundaries was possible. In many cases still sketchy drafts on cloth sheets used in the colonial time were still used without appropriate grid references and therefore unsuitable for digitizing. This situation has changed meanwhile. Though there are still certain inaccuracies in the maps used in Forest Working Plans, digitizing was possible. The newly digitized forest areas by legal boundaries were then applied on both the original PFRI and the present THBS data set. Administrative boundaries: International (demarcated, un-demarcated), Provincial (demarcated, un- demarcated) and District boundaries as polygon features (Already available with FMC).

Major infrastructure: All superior surfaced and metalled roads are taken as line features. Exception: Additionally some important unmetalled roads connecting major towns in the northern part of the province were taken from PFRI layer and added to the GIS layer ”roads”.

Major settlements: Taken as point features (Already available with FMC).

River system and lakes: All rivers showing some spatial extension in the topographic maps are already digitized as polygons in the FMC. Minor rivers were shown as line features. They were labeled with different identity codes. The annotation contains the name of the river. All lakes and reservoirs are stored as polygon features. Moreover, the connection of the big rivers (digitized as polygons from the satellite images during PFRI) and the remaining river system (digitized as lines from the topographic maps at the time of PFRI) required interactive adjustments.

2000 m contour line: Available in FMC data base already digitized during PFRI: the 2000 m contour line (elevation above sea level) was marked.

1.6 Accuracy Assessment

Accuracy assessments are essential parts of all remote sensing analysis and provide the user with information regarding the reliability of the applied techniques. It involves the comparison of the classified data for a selection of sites to the ground reference data for the same sites. Quantitative accuracy assessment depends on the collection of reference data. Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 121

Methodology Applied for Accuracy Assessment: The accuracy of the land use/cover map derived from satellite images was assessed by comparing sampled ground truth observations with the mapped satellite classes. The necessary information had to be achieved by:

• terrestrial checking of randomly selected reference areas, • comparing the results of the terrestrial sample plots with the map samples in a confusion matrix,

In a first step, representative regions for the ground survey were selected. Due to law and order situation, in Malakand Division Swat district was omitted from the accuracy assessment. The representative regions are reflecting the differing topographic conditions in terms of altitudes and topographic aspects as well as the different vegetation patterns in the THB study area. Taking all map sheets for ground-truthing would not increase the sampling accuracy, as the data source for mapping and the mapping technique was the same for the entire area. Therefore, the results of the accuracy assessment taken from the representative regions can be extrapolated on the entire area of investigation.

The second layer of accuracy assessment was derived from the field visits observation taken by other specialists conducted field visits in Malakand & Hazara Divisions. In this case the field specialist was going to either predetermined sample plots or selecting a new site and telling the corresponding coordinates (determined by the GPS) through mobile telephone. The GIS expert was sitting in FMC and directly matching the field observations of the field specialist with image forest density classes on computer screen. This method proved very efficient in rectifying the classification accuracy and building the confidence of the image interpreter.

Confusion Matrix: The error matrix or confusion matrix is a standard way of presenting results of an accuracy assessment. Error matrices score each observation (sample) according to the class it has been assigned in the classified map and the true class as determined by reference observations in the field.

Confusion matrix with correctly and mis-classified areas within the reference areas (verification plots);

Map Field Observations Total Class F1 F2 F3 Other F1 54 2 0 4 60 F2 2 56 2 0 60

F3 0 0 60 0 60

Confusion matrix in percent of entire verification area

Map Field Observation Total Class F1 F2 F3 Other

F1 90 3.3 0 6.7 100

F2 3.3 93.3 3.4 0 100

F3 0 0 100 0 100 122 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

CHAPTER 2: METHODOLGY of FOREST USE ANALYSIS 2.1 Introduction

Apart from the forest area and forest stock results the PFRI analysis was also extended to the actual use of the forest resource in 1995/96. This third objective of the PFRI was to identify how the forest were utilized in the PFRI study-year and what will happen to the forest if the timber and firewood utilization pattern as of 1996 will extend into the future.

Data Base: For this third objective of the PFRI, area and stock data were combined with data from other sources. Main additional data sources for that analysis were

- the Pakistan Population Census 1998 - the Household Energy Sector Survey (HESS) and - the Forest Sector Master Plan (FSMP)

In addition to these major studies also some supporting information were taken from regional studies accomplished under the Siran Forest Development Project (SFDP). These were:

- Afforestation Survey published 1996, covering all plantations in the Abbottabad Forest Division from 1976 to 1995, surveyed by on the basis of a total enumeration of all plantation areas and physical measurement of such plantations using GPS facilities, and - Regional Resource Inventory Survey: Supply and Demand, published in 1996, that was based on similar satellite data basis as the PFRI.

Continuities and Adjustments: Though there is much of data, methodological and also professional continuity between the baseline study and the present THBS there are also important deviations between both studies.

In the analysis of the PFRI a number of external data and information from various other studies were used. While many of the external data used in the PFRI were equally applied in the present study (population parameters, firewood consumption standards, etc.) there are several instances where changes and adjustments had to be made.

These adjustments became necessary for different reasons. Firstly, the present THBS provided new empirically data on the actual forest area by density class, and new information on general land-use for 2008. These new data were now used to replace the assumptions in the model-projection of the PFRI. Secondly, some other assumptions adopted in the PFRI model-projection were out-ruled by the new data of the THBS. Finally, some adjustments were to be made due to shortcomings in some aspects of the PFRI model-projection. Data or methodological references to the PFRI that are used unchanged in the present study are discussed further below. In what follows only those aspects are presented which became subject to adjustments in the course of the present study.

Adjustments affecting the Analysis of Forest Development

Forest Stock: The PFRI calculated the total stock volumes on the basis of forest area by density class using per hectare average stock data on round-wood only (see PFRI, page 30 and 31).

Already at the later stages of the PFRI analyses it became apparent that the restriction of the stock volume analysis to round-wood only, created a problem when analyzing the impact of firewood consumption on the development of the forests. Firewood comprises of all types of woody bio-mass which in terms of firewood supplies from forests includes branch-wood from lopping and branch-wood from tree felling and other harvesting residues. Therefore, the PFRI used the total stock volume of round- and branch-wood in its final analysis (see PFRI, TABLE 4-3a, in Annex 4). Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 123

In the PFRI the per hectare stock data by density class were provide in Chapter 3, page 30. However, in the PFRI Chapter 4 (supply analysis) stock data were only differentiated by altitude and only applied on the total forest area by altitude but not by forest density classes. Therefore, while in principle the standard per hectare stock volume data on the totals were also applied in the THBS, reference was made to the PFRI TABLE 3-1 containing the stock data per density class. The necessary adjustments concerning branch-wood were made to provide for the volume assessment by density classes in the THBS.

Increment and Yield: To identify the total volume of timber and branch-wood that could be taken out of the forest without harming its productivity (sustainable use) the PFRI used standard increment data from the scientific literature on forest growth and forest productivity in the sub-Himalayan region (see A.R. Maslekar, Forester’s Companion, 1981). Methodologically the PFRI made a mistake here in that the increment was equated with sustainable use. In the THBS, therefore, the percentage of allowable out-take under sustainable use was taking the average yield data from Forest Working Plans used for the Reserved Forests in NWFP.

Adjustments affecting the Analysis of Wood Supplies/Consumption

Firewood using Households: The PFRI used the data of the HESS study that identified different fractions of the households in rural and urban areas using firewood.

Meanwhile, more gas supplies have been extended into some of the urban centers making the old (1992) HESS data for that fraction of the urban population using firewood obsolete. Thus, in 2008 a smaller number of households in urban areas are using firewood than projected in the PFRI. In the THBS, therefore, instead of using the 69% fraction of urban firewood using households the present fraction is only about 50% and the projection of the growth of the urban households during the study period was adjusted accordingly in the THBS.

Commercial Timber: The data situation on commercial timber harvesting was somewhat non-transparent in 1996 and the various data sources and studies on that subject were providing completely different information over a very wide range of data variation (PFRI, Annex 4, p.5). Therefore, the PFRI had to use an assumed average over the various data sources. That average, growing with population growth, was then used in the PFRI demand/supply model-projection.

In the course of the THBS the actual harvesting data were compiled from official sources indicating the “sanctioned legal” and the “recorded illegal” timber harvesting in the THBS area (see ANNEX 2: Table 5.1 (a) and (b) on harvesting). Thus, these data recorded from real transactions were used in the THBS instead of the assumption applied in the PFRI. On harvesting data, though, there are other relevant considerations that are presented in Chapter 2.3 below.

Timber and Firewood Supply related to Forest Accessibility: In the PFRI an assumption was made that due to the rugged terrain in higher altitudes the forests located in such sites would be left unutilized due to inaccessibility. Therefore, the PFRI excluded these forest patches from the projection of the demand/supply analysis.

The new satellite data analysis of 2008 provided evidence that this assumption was wrong. Instead all forest areas irrespective of their location were subject to utilization which substantially also affected forests in higher altitudes. Therefore, the THBS was using the total forest area and stock for its supply calculation.

Firewood Supplies from Non-Forest Areas: Apart from the classification of forest areas by density class, the PFRI satellite image analysis also resulted in a classification of main land-use categories. For agricultural and rangelands the HESS and FSMP studies established sound empirical information on firewood supplies coming from non-forest lands. Together with the PFRI area and stock data these information were taken to calculate 124 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

the actual supplies from these sources using the HESS/FSMP standards. For the model-projection of the PFRI an assumption on the development of supplies from these sources over time was used. This assumption maintained the standard supply data per hectare but adjusted the over-time area change of agricultural and rangelands. This was done by redistributing the forest areas that are becoming denuded from tree-stands over the projection period to rangelands, agricultural lands, and plantation.

The THBS also provided new data on the land-use pattern for 2008. Hence, the area data for agricultural and rangelands based on assumptions as contained in the PFRI were replaced by measured real data from the 2008 analysis. The supplies from these areas were then calculated by using the standard per hectare data of the HESS/FSMP studies already applied in the PFRI. For the annual sequence from 1995/96 to 2007/2008 the increase of the different land-use areas was calculated by a growth factor on the real data of the base- and the end-year.

Supplies from Plantation: The PFRI based its calculation for woody biomass supplies from plantations on planted areas as recorded by Forest Department for the period 1984/85 to 1992/93.

A detailed study on plantation area survival rates was accomplished in 1994 under SFDP covering more than 50% of all recorded plantations in NWFP (see SFDP Monitoring Cell, Afforestation Survey, Abbottabad 1996). This survey was based on a total enumeration of all plantation sites as recorded in various sources of the FD. All sites were visited by a survey team, physical measured using GPS facilities, and stock densities assessed by a tree count. The survey resulted in a low survival rate of only about 25 to 40% of all areas planted between 1976 and 1995. Thus, the actual biomass supply in the PFRI was calculated on a total plantation area adjusted to survival rates and adopting standard growth tables from the scientific literature relevant for the plantations in NWFP. For the PFRI model-projection an assumption concerning the continued efforts for plantation was used based on the back-period plantation area data adjusted to projected survival rates.

In the course of THBS again the official plantation records of the PFRI were taken but extended for the period 1993/94 to 2007/2008. The full data set ranging from 1985 to 2007 was adjusted to survival rates already adopted in the PFRI. To assess the annual woody biomass supplies from plantation the same growth and management parameters as already used in the PFRI were applied (see Appendix: Plantation).

Supplies from Harvesting Residues: The aspect of firewood supplies from harvesting residues was left out in the PFRI. However, about 22% of the total round-wood harvest is branch-wood and other harvesting residues that are used for firewood. Therefore, that amount was included in the THBS supply analysis.

(3) Overall Result Comparison PFRI and THBS: For the total forest area the table below presents a direct comparison between the PFRI assumption-based projection from 1995/96 to 2008 with the THBS actual area development based on the new satellite data analysis. The table shows that in terms of the actual forest area size in 2008 there is only a small difference to the PFRI result despite various parameter and data adjustments in the elaboration of the two analyses. Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 125

COMPARISON PFRI (1995/96) and THBS (2008) FOREST AREA DECREASE

PFRI THBS YEAR ACCESSIBLE INACCESSIBLE TOTAL ANNUAL TOTAL ANNUAL FORESTS FORESTS1 DECREASE DECREASE DECREASE DECREASE hectare hectare hectare hectare hectare hectare 1995/96 541,784 135,446 677,230 677,230 1996/97 535,688 135,446 671,134 6,096 669,821 7,409 1997/98 528,896 135,446 664,342 6,792 662,165 7,656 1998/99 521,552 135,446 656,998 7,344 654,254 7,911 1999/00 513,673 135,446 649,119 7,879 646,080 8,174 2000/01 505,186 135,446 640,632 8,487 637,636 8,444 2001/02 496,185 135,446 631,631 9,000 628,912 8,723 2002/03 486,351 135,446 621,797 9,835 619,902 9,011 2003/04 475,926 135,446 611,372 10,425 610,595 9,307 2004/05 464,985 135,446 600,431 10,941 600,983 9,612 2005/06 453,329 135,446 588,775 11,656 591,056 9,927 2006/07 441,142 135,446 576,588 12,187 580,805 10,251 2007/08 428,014 135,446 563,460 13,128 570,220 10,585 NOTE 1: In the PFRI it was asssumed that certain areas will not be accessible for timber/firewood extraction. Subsequently these areas were left out of the model calculations.

2.2 Analytical Approach

(1) General Approach: The PFRI (as the FSMP study before) made the analysis in the form of calculating the difference between the growth in the “demand” or consumption for forest products (limited to timber and firewood) and the future capacities of the forests to serve these demands.

The most basic difference between the analysis as contained in the PFRI and the present THBS is constituted by the fact that what was the future year 2008 as part of the PFRI model-projection is now the reality of the year 2008. Therefore, much of what were necessarily assumptions in the PFRI are now replaced by data relating to realities.

With the new data from the satellite imagery analysis of the actual forest area extension and the related stock endowment in 2008 the basic analytical question of the PFRI was reverted. The basic question of the PFRI analysis was: what will happen to the forest if its utilization known in 1996 is continued?

In the present analysis the new data provide information on what actually happened to the forests during the time of the ban for the study period in between 1996 and 2008. Hence, the guiding question for the present analysis is: What caused the present (2008) situation of the forests?

Thus, while the preparation of the tableau of data used in the present analysis was following the same pattern as in the PFRI including – in some aspects – the use of the same basic data sources, the integration of these data into the analytical concept differs from the PFRI approach. Still, however, the basic design of the analysis is related to establish a relationship between the use of forest products (limited to timber and firewood) and the actual supply of the forests. The use of forest products, though, is not treated as a “demand” as in the PFRI model projection, but as a real consumption. Similarly the “supply” of the forest is not calculated anymore on the basis of assumptions on what will happen in the future as in the PFRI, but as a factual assessment on what really happened in the past, i.e. from 2008 backwards to the base year. 126 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

(2) Integration of the Data into the Analysis: To pursue the basic question of the present THBS the analytical approach integrates all data into a set of interlinked, but rather simple, arithmetical functions that are explained in a step-by-step manner below:

STEP 1: Preparing the Consumption Data Set: It was already identified in the FSMP, the HESS study, and in the PFRI that the major burden on the forests results from the firewood requirements of the local people in Malakand and Hazara. Therefore, several steps were taken to identify how the volume of such requirements developed between 1995/96 and 2007/08.

Step 1.1 - Estimating Population Growth: The basis for the development of all firewood consumption volumes is the development of the population. This development was calculated on the basis of the population data as recorded in the Census 1998 at the district level together with the respective growth rates taken from the same source. The result of the population development over the study period is shown in TABLE 1.1(a+b) and WORKTABLE 1.3)

Step 1.2 - Estimating Total Households: Individual people are not the basic unit of firewood consumption but the households, i.e. regularly a group of relatives eating from the same pot and living in the same quarter. Households were calculated using the Census 1998 parameters (PARAMETER TABLE 1) on average household sizes district-wise and differentiated by rural and urban households. The results are shown in TABLE 1.1(a+b) and WORKTABLE 1.3).

Step 1.3 – Estimating Total Firewood Consumption: As per results of the HESS study there are differences in the average firewood consumption not only between rural and urban households but also in the volume of consumption per person living in either a rural or an urban household. The different standard firewood consumption volumes per person are shown in PARAMETER TABLE 4.

The HESS study disentangled different forms of non-woody biomass household energy utilization (like gas, electricity, dung-cake etc.) and isolated the woody biomass fraction from the total of the household’s energy consumption. It was also found that different fractions of rural and urban households are using firewood. Meanwhile gas supplies have been extended into some of the urban areas and the THBS study therefore adjusted the original percentage of the HESS study to the new data on gas supplies to urban households.

The total number of households using firewood is shown inWORKTABLE 5 (a) and the total firewood consumption volume in WORKTABLE 5 (b).

Step 1.4 – Commercial Timber Harvesting: Volume data on commercial timber harvesting (for round- wood only) are recorded by the FD. Even during the ban substantial amounts of timber were harvested sanctioned under legal provisions. In addition, the FD also records those cases where illegal fellings have been identified that became subject to either legal or administrative treatment. Both amounts of recorded harvesting are shown in TABLE 5.1(a+b).

STEP 2: Preparing the Wood-Supply Data Set: The local consumption of firewood is supplied from woody biomass growth on agricultural lands, rangelands, plantation, and forests. Because the THBS is analyzing the impact of firewood consumption on the forests only, it is first necessary to identify what fraction of the total firewood consumption was supplied from the other sources.

Step 2.1 – Estimating Firewood Supplies from Agriculture and Rangelands: Again the HESS study provides the standard data for the per hectare supplies from these lands (see PARAMETER TABLE 3). Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 127

The per hectare supplies from agricultural lands are fairly high because of fast growing tree species on short rotation being planted on such lands together with naturally growing bushes and shrubs. In both cases lopping and twigging is practices but in general the whole plant is taken for firewood consumption. This explains the comparatively high annual productivity of woody biomass on agricultural lands.

Rangelands are defined as having no trees. Still plenty of scattered bushes and shrubs are found that again are utilized for firewood supplies.

The estimation of both sources of firewood supplies is based on the total area as classified under the PFRI for the base year as well as for the THBS for the study year from the satellite imagery land-use analysis. The total supplies for both years are arrived by multiplying the area data with the standard per hectare data of the HESS study. For estimating the volumes for the period in between the base- and the study year growth factors were applied.

Step 2.2 – Estimating Firewood Supplies from Plantation: The FD has recorded a huge area having been planted since the early 80ies both on so-called wastelands (open rangelands) and inside forests as regular part of forest management practices. The respective data from the official records of the FD are presented in TABLE 6.2.

The issue of data reliability – primarily as concerns the relationship between planted area as officially recorded and actual tree growth found on the ground – has been discussed above. To estimate the firewood supplies from the surviving plantation data is somewhat complicated as it requires the application of different growth and use parameters for conifer and broadleaf tree species. Therefore, an Appendix: Plantation has been prepared which explains the details.

With growing age of the plantations of the earlier dates there is a substantial and continuously growing amount of fire-wood supplies from plantation as discussed in the Appendix. The supply datafrom plantation are used in TABLE 7.3.

Step 2.3: - Calculating Wood Supplies from Forests: The calculation of the supply from forests element in the consumption/impact analysis is using on three data sets (1) the area distribution of the forests according forests density classes and its changes over the study period, (2) the average stock volume per hectare and forest density class, and (3) the average yield data per hectare and forest density class.

The methods applied in preparing the area data for the forest development analysis on the basis of satellite imagery interpretation are explained in detail in Chapter 1 of the present annex. The results of that satellite data analysis are presented in the TABLE SETS 3 and 4 for both, the data on total forests (as per FAO definition) and the data according to Working Plan area (as per definition of the Forest Department NWFP).

The average per hectare stock and yield data (with adjustments, see above para 2.1) are taken from the PFRI which still is the most reliable and differentiated forest condition analysis based on physical measurement that is available for the forests of NWFP. The respective standard data used in the present analysis are presented in the SPARAMETER TABLE 2.

The use of these volume data is justified by the fact that the relationship between forest density class and the respective stock volume remains unchanged over time. What changes over time is the distribution of the forest areas by density class and hence the overall average over all classes also changes over time, i.e. the average stock volume over all forest density classes decreases with the downward area shift in the distribution of forest density classes. 128 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

The calculation again is a matter of simple arithmetical operations. Multiplying the area data with the stock data for the base- and the study year provides the total standing stock. For the study period between the base- and the study year the annual decrease of the area was calculated by an inverted decline factor. The use of an inverted decline factor is required as most of the decline in the forest area is to be attributed to the increasing wood consumption of a growing population. Hence, the decrease in the forests area develops in step with the increase in population.

The results of the area decline time-series is then multiplied with the average per hectare stock data on which in the final operation the per-hectare yield percentage is applied. The result of this set of arithmetical operations is the sustainable volume of wood that can be removed from the forest without harming its growth potential.

STEP 3 – The Consumption/Impact Analysis In the final stage of the analysis the various data flows of the previous steps are combined into a single data frame as shown in TABLE SET 7. The whole analysis is geared towards identifying the major reasons for the decline of the forest area and stock that resulted from the satellite imagery analysis.

The analysis itself is again only a simple arithmetical operation as shown in TABLE 7.3. The analysis compares the total decline of the forests stock with the volumes of timber and fire-wood consumption that has taken place during the study period. Subtracting the sum of the identified consumption (commercial timber and fire- wood) from the sustainable yield results in a supply gap, as that consumption is higher than the productive capacities (as sustainable yield) of the forests. Because this supply gap cannot be closed from any other source of energy supply, the gap has been closed by an out-take of growing stock from the forests over an above the sustainable supply. Thus the supply gap explains the major part of the total decrease of the forest stock during the study period.

The final column in TABLE 7.3 shows that volume contributing to the forest decline that cannot be explained by the recorded legal and illegal harvesting and the fire-wood consumption of the local people. That element in explaining the decrease of forest during the study period is to be attributed to the cutting of trees for income purposes of the local people as well as by organized gangs of criminal harvesters.

2.3 Data Quality and Analytical Reservations

Conclusions from any scientific analysis are only as good as the data used in the analysis are reliable and the logical construct of the analytical approach is transparent and adequate to the study object.

As concerns the data used in the present analysis these are exclusively taken from physical measurement (satellite imagery), from officially approved documents (Census data, statistical records of the FD), and from earlier scientific studies (HESS, FSMP, PFRI) all of which were accomplished on high scientific standards and with the direct involvement of the FD.

Still, the data used in this analysis are subject to different considerations concerning accuracy and reliability.

Area Data: The highest level of accuracy and reliability is provided in the data of the satellite imagery analysis as they are based on a scientifically proven technology and direct physical measurement. That statement applies to the measurement of the forests areas by density classes as well as to the data on land-use.

Stock Data: Of an almost equally high standard of accuracy and reliability as the area data are the data on the average stock volumes per hectare by density class and altitude. Though these data resulted from a sample based survey their accuracy and reliability is scientifically described by statistical parameters within very narrow margins of error. Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 129

The standard stock, increment, and yield data that are used in both studies, the baseline and the THBS – though based on a sound statistical sample procedure and physical measurement – have been worked out over a huge range of variation of tree species, terrain and stand conditions, age-distributions, and aspect. Thus, these data represent a very high level of abstraction from realities. This high level of abstraction, though, is equally adopted in the other data fields onto which the yield data are applied. Therefore, there is a matching level of generalization among all the major data fields that are used for describing forest conditions in this study.

The sample based origin of the stock data, however, implies these data can accurately and reliably only be applied at the same level that is pre-scribed by the sample design. In the context of the present study, thus, stock data can statistically safely only be applied at the level of the forest density classes by altitude at the level of the whole study area.

To a certain extent the standard stock data can be applied also at the divisional level as the two divisions under study are large enough and bear sufficient similarities to capture a similar range of variance upon which the overall stock averages have been arrived at. But already at this level the accuracy and reliability of such estimates is subject to an increased margin of error. Therefore, conclusions at that level of analysis cannot and should not be taken too far. Any further application of such data and the calculation of estimates at the district level would increase the margin of error to a size that would make any conclusions from such estimates pure guesswork in scientific camouflage. Therefore, the present study is cautious on calculating estimates at the divisional level and completely abstains from stock volume estimates at the district level.

The use of these highly accurate and reliable data (forest area by density class, and standing stock data if applied at an appropriate level of analysis) constitutes the core of the present analysis. These data are disputable only on repeated measurements to be accomplished under equally high scientific standards that have been applied in the PFRI and the present THBS.

In the setting of the analysis these data constitute the impact or effect part and they are describing a reality, i.e. they describe what actually happened to the forests during the study period. All other data used in the THB study are used to explain the causes for that impact and all of them are of a lesser degree of accuracy and reliability than the area and stock data. The discussion of such aspects is presented below in a declining sequence of data quality:

Population and Household Data: Though these data are taken from a fairly sound Population Census based on a total enumeration accomplished in 1998, data projections had to be made (backwards for the PFRI for two years, and forward for the THBS for 10 years) on Census parameters (growth rates and household sizes) that might have changed over the last ten years. From international comparison it is well known, however, that on population parameters – if based on sound Census methods – only marginal changes occur in inter-census periods of regularly 10 to 15 years. This applies for the growth rates as well as for average household sizes. Thus, the population and household data – despite being arrived at by arithmetical operations – are still at a high level of accuracy and reliability.

Firewood Standard Consumption Data: The firewood consumption standards are taken from the HESS study that was accomplished on the basis of a statistically determined sample and that was using physical measurement of energy consumption over a sequence of time within the same sampled households. On the same subject also under the SFDP a full scale sample based survey was accomplished at sub- regional level in the Mansehra district (see SFDP, Regional Resource Inventory – Demand Survey, 1998). Despite being based on a completely different methodological approach, the SFDP study came to almost identical results on fire-wood consumption than the earlier HESS study. 130 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

More recent studies on firewood consumption standards directly relating to the study area are not available. However, there is a study from the adjacent Himalayan sub region in India that analyzed per person firewood consumption standards by altitude of the habitat as shown in the table below: FIREWOOD CONSUMPTION DATA from INDIAN HIMALAYAN REGION

Population Altitude Firewood consumption Distribution meter asl. kg/pers./day kg/pers./year %

<2000 2.80 1,022 5 1500-2000 2.00 730 5 1000-1500 1.42 518 10 500-1000 1.10 402 40 <500 1.07 391 40 AVERAGE (weighted) 456 100

Source: Bhatt and Sachan, 2004

These data – on an overall average – are slightly higher than the standards found in the HESS and the SFDP studies. But still, and basically for reasons of comparability to the baseline study, the HESS standard firewood consumption data are reasonably close to realities to be safely applied in the present study.

Increment and Yield Data: Being directly related to the average stock data per hectare, in principle the increment and yield data used in the THBS are subject to the same limitations as discussed above on the standard stock data. In addition to such limitations the increment and yield data as used in the PFRI and the THBS are not from the same data source as the stock data. Instead these data have been taken from either the standard yield tables used in NWFP, other scientific literature or from information used in Working Plans applied in Malakand and Hazara. Thus, while also these data have been derived from sound scientific sampling and physical measurement when they were generated originally, they do not bear a direct relationship to the stock data of the PFRI. Therefore, instead of using such data directly they have been compiled from various sources and then averaged. On that data compilation an average percentage on both increment and yield data in relation to their original stock data was built and applied on the standard stock data of the PFRI.

While, in the absence of any better data, such practices are common in scientific studies it must be admitted that these data are of a lesser quality than the plain standard stock data of the PFRI.

Branch-wood Proportions: The PFRI in its main Chapter 3 neglected the branch-wood element in the over all stock assessment. Other studies on the round-wood branch-wood proportioning that are directly relating to the study area are missing. Again handbook information and standard data from other sources have been adopted on that issue and again converted to the application in the PFRI and THB studies along similar lines as already practiced for the increment and yield data.

Harvesting and Plantation Data: Harvesting and plantation data have been taken directly from the official records of the Forest Department NWFP. Such records are notorious for their unreliability, inconsistency, and even contradiction in between different reports from the same source of records.

While on plantation data there is a correcting element concerning the difference between recorded plantation areas and plantations actually found on the ground (see SFDP, Afforestation Study, 1996) such correcting information are lacking for the review of the harvesting data. Therefore harvesting data had to be taken un-debated and conclusions on the magnitude of their un-reliability may be taken from the result column in TABLE 7.3 of the present study under “other out-take”. Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 131

Summing up: On the impact side of the analysis the THB study is using data of the highest possible degree of accuracy and reliability. In addition, these data are from a uniform data source of almost identical methodological origin. The data to analyze the causes for the present conditions of the forest, instead, are from various sources of different data quality.

In the analytical approach of using these data, all of them – effects as well as causes – are functionally interrelated through a number of arithmetical operations. What may change by certain vaguenesses in one or the other data field in the forest utilization part of the analysis (the causes for the forest decline) are the proportions in between the different elements of such causes. This, however, does not have any repercussions on the validity of the major results of the THBS (the impact part of the analysis) concerning the area and stock developments of the forests during the period of the ban. 132 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

APPENDIX 1 to ANNEX 8 Glossary of Terms used in Remote Sensing and GIS

Accuracy assessment: The process by which the accuracy or correctness of an image classification is evaluated. Accuracy assessment involves the comparison of the classification to geographic reference data that are assumed to be true. Usually, the assumed-true data are derived from field verification. Accuracy assessments results can be summarized in an error matrix, from which several different measures of accuracy can be easily derived.

Overall accuracy: A common measure of a classification’s accuracy. The overall accuracy is calculated by dividing the total correct samples by the total number of assessment sites.

Accuracy assessment site: A site identified on the satellite image and on reference data. By comparing the classified image data to the assumed-true data for the site (usually derived from field verification), meaningful assessments of classification’s accuracy can be derived.

Confusion or Error matrix: A table used as a starting point for a series of descriptive and analytical statistical techniques for accuracy assessment. Error matrices score each observation (sample) according to the class it has been assigned in the classified map and the true class as determined by reference data. Error matrices are sometimes referred to as confusion or difference matrices because reference data is not always absolutely accurate.

False color composite: A way of displaying satellite or other multi-spectral data in which the recorded near-IR and other “invisible” (to human eyes) energies are shown as colors. The colors in such an image are called “false” because they are not necessarily the colors we might expect to see (e.g., vegetation can appear as magenta or orange).

Geometric correction: An image preprocessing technique that reorients the image data to compensate for the Earth’s rotation and variations in satellite position and attitude.

Geographic information system (GIS): The term frequently applied to geographically oriented computer technology. In it’s broadest sense, GIS is a system for capturing, storing, checking, manipulating, analyzing, and displaying data that are spatially referenced to the Earth.

Global Positioning System (GPS): An array of space satellites and ground receivers that use geometry to provide information about the precise latitude, longitude, and elevation of a particular point. Ground truth: Assumed-true data and information obtained on the surface or subsurface features. Ground truth is used to aid an interpretation of remotely sensed data during the image classification and accuracy processes.

Image classification: The Process of assigning the pixels of an image to discrete categories or classes.

Image enhancement: Any one of a group of operations that improve the detection target classes on the image. These operations include contrast improvement, edge enhancement, spatial filtering, noise suppression, image smoothing, and image sharpening.

Image pre-processing: A general term describing operations aimed at improving the accuracy or interpretability of a digital image. Pre-processing procedures are performed on raw image data prior to the image manipulation and analysis that aims at the extraction of specific information. Common preprocessing operations include geometric correction, image registration, and feature selection. Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 133

Image processing: A general term referring to manipulation of digital image data. Processing includes image enhancement, image classification, and image preprocessing (or rectification) operations.

Landsat: Name for the series of earth-observing satellites first launched In 1972 by NASA (originally named ERTS, for Earth Resource Technology Satellite). Landsat satellites serve as platforms for several sensors including the return beam vidicon, Landsat MSS, and Landsat TM.

Layer: A digital information storage unit, also known as theme. Different kinds of information (e.g., roads, boundaries, lades, and vegetation) can be grouped and stored as separate digital layers or themes in a GIS.

Pre-processing: The group of processes normally completed on an image prior to analysis or classification with the goal of improving the quality of the data. Preprocessing operations may include geometric and radiometric corrections.

Reference data: In the context of projects utilizing digital satellite data, reference data generally refers to any secondary data that supports the primary digital satellite data (and thus may include the ancillary data used to classify the image). In its more specific meaning, reference data is the ground truth data used in the accuracy assessment process.

Remote sensing: The gathering of data regarding an object or phenomenon by a recording device (sensor) that is not in physical contact with the object or phenomenon under observation.

Sensor: A device that records electromagnetic radiation or other data about an object and presents it in a form suitable for obtaining information about the environment.

Thematic Mapper (TM), Landsat: Satellite data acquired in seven spectral bands ranging from visible to thermal with a spatial resolution of approximately 30 meters. 134 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

APPENDIX 2 to ANNEX 8 ESTIMATION OF FIRE-WOOD SUPPLIES FROM PLANTATIONS

Since the 70ies the Forest Department, later on supported by various donor funded projects, started larger plantation efforts in both demarcated but depleted forest areas and privately owned so-called “wastelands” (open rangeland). On these plantation programs records are kept concerning the area planted and the data shown in TABLE 1P (a-c) are taken from these official records.

For a number of reasons, though, these data cannot be used for an analysis of potential wood supplies that will come up from such plantations after a certain period of time. In the first instance the FD is using a very peculiar way of estimating the area planted. The area estimate is simply done by dividing the number of plants leaving the nurseries by the standard plant density per hectare to arrive at the area planted. Numerous efforts by various donors to change this estimation practices failed and still the FD is using that somewhat dubious method of plantation area estimates.

It is a well established fact that due to a full range of malpractices and misappropriations in the plantation process either plantations that are recorded actually never reached the ground or that for a multitude of natural factors young plantations are under considerable stress for survival. In reality, thus, the actual area of plantations found on the ground is much smaller than what the official records suggest. Subsequently, the data as given in TABLE 1P are to be adjusted for a quantitatively more realistic inclusion of plantations into the assessment of their future productive potential.

In the early 90ies there were a few assessments concerning the ground existence of recorded plantation areas. Most of these assessments, though, were based on unsystematic and largely subjective random selection of a few sites with little relevance for an overall general assessment of the true situation on the ground. For the Tarbela Watershed Management Project plantations earlier monitoring reports were putting the survival rate at about 50 to 60 % of the areas recorded as planted. One of such unsystematic assessment of this project in 1994 even estimated the ground existence of plantations as low as 11 %.

Until 1995 only one systematic ground survey study involving a total enumeration and a comprehensive physical measurement of all recorded plantation sites was accomplished in the project area of the SFDP (see “Afforestation Survey”, Abbottabad, October 1996). The study showed for all plantations recorded as having been planted between 1985 and 1995 an actual ground existence of 25%. When taking actual stocking rates found in the plantations (less than 60% on average) the overall quality of the plantations is even less than the plain area data suggest.

To identify plantation areas using LandsatTM satellite images and GOOGL Earth images is also not helpful. Plantations younger than 10 years cannot be identified at all. Such areas are classified as “shrub and bush vegetation” under the land-use class “rangeland”. Plantation older than 10 years can be identified but are classified under the three forest density classes by canopy cover.

However, the older plantations – primarily that part which has been planted with short rotation broad-leaf species – are already providing supplies for firewood from lopping or from regular thinning operations. Therefore, an estimation of that volume has been made based on the officially recorded plantation data which, though, had to be adjusted to realities by applying a 40% survival rate on the official area data as recorded by the FD.

In a second step an estimate of the fire-wood supplies has been worked out using a set of parameters as shown in TABLE 2P. In the course of the PFRI these parameters on plantation growth characteristics have been extracted from the scientific literature and were reviewed and confirmed by senior FD staff; these parameter set was also applied in the present THBS. Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 135

The results in terms of firewood supplies from plantations by using the adjusted plantation data in conjunction with the parameters are shown I TABLE 3P (a + b).

TABLE 1P (a): Plantation in Malakand and Hazara 1985 - 2008 in hectare (1) Total Plantation Year Conifers Broadleaf TOTAL Conifers Broadleaf TOTAL

1984/85 7,674 5,582 13,257 58 42 100 1985/86 13,088 9,520 22,608 58 42 100 1986/87 10,449 7,601 18,050 58 42 100 1987/88 15,743 11,452 27,195 58 42 100 1988/89 20,991 15,269 36,260 58 42 100 1989/90 15,874 11,547 27,421 58 42 100 1990/91 20,178 14,678 34,856 58 42 100 1991/92 14,700 10,693 25,393 58 42 100 1992/93 15,020 10,926 25,946 58 42 100 1993/94 13,279 8,165 21,444 62 38 100 1994/95 13,094 6,246 19,340 68 32 100 Sub-Total 160,093 111,677 271,770 1995/96 15,692 7,040 22,732 69 31 100 1996/97 18,737 12,407 31,144 60 40 100 1997/98 11,937 11,289 23,226 51 49 100 1998/99 9,484 7,666 17,150 55 45 100 1999/00 4,425 7,177 11,601 38 62 100 2000/01 6,581 9,136 15,717 42 58 100 2001/02 6,973 3,401 10,374 67 33 100 2002/03 11,363 7,895 19,258 59 41 100 2003/04 12,921 6,163 19,085 68 32 100 2004/05 14,257 9,243 23,500 61 39 100 2005/06 7,944 5,042 12,987 61 39 100 2006/07 9,125 5,031 14,156 64 36 100 2007/08 12,333 7,260 19,593 63 37 100 Sub-Total 141,773 98,749 240,522 TOTAL 301,866 210,427 512,292 59 41 100

For the data underlined only the total plantation area is available; the underlined data are estimates. Data Source for Plantation 1985-1993: Forestry in NWFP, Peshawar 1995, p. 20 Data Source for Plantation 1994-2008: Official records Forest Department NWFP, 136 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

TABLE 1P (b): Plantation in Malakand and Hazara 1985 - 2008 in hectare

(2) Plantation in demarcated forests Year Conifers Broadleaf Total Conifers Broadleaf Total

1984/85 2,673 1,558 4,232 20 12 32 1985/86 4,559 2,657 7,217 20 12 32 1986/87 3,640 2,122 5,762 20 12 32 1987/88 5,484 3,197 8,681 20 12 32 1988/89 7,312 4,262 11,575 20 12 32 1989/90 5,530 3,223 8,753 20 12 32 1990/91 7,029 4,097 11,127 20 12 32 1991/92 5,121 2,985 8,106 20 12 32 1992/93 5,233 3,050 8,282 20 12 32 1993/94 6,649 2,994 9,643 31 14 45 1994/95 5,789 2,387 8,176 30 12 42 Sub-Total 59,021 32,532 91,553 1995/96 7,091 2,313 9,404 31 10 41 1996/97 6,775 4,430 11,205 22 14 36 1997/98 3,322 1,776 5,098 14 8 22 1998/99 2,940 1,918 4,858 17 11 28 1999/00 1,606 1,950 3,556 14 17 31 2000/01 2,624 2,195 4,819 17 14 31 2001/02 3,609 1,355 4,964 35 13 48 2002/03 2,460 1,566 4,026 13 8 21 2003/04 2,242 987 3,229 12 5 17 2004/05 3,533 1,675 5,208 15 7 22 2005/06 3,784 1,764 5,549 29 14 43 2006/07 4,734 2,393 7,127 33 17 50 2007/08 6,292 3,591 9,883 32 18 50 Sub-Total 51,012 27,913 78,926 TOTAL 110,033 60,446 170,479 21 12 33 Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 137

TABLE 1P (c): Plantation in Malakand and Hazara 1985 - 2008 in hectare (3) Plantation on rangeland Year Conifers Broadleaf Total Conifers Broadleaf Total

1984/85 5,001 4,024 9,025 38 30 68 1985/86 8,529 6,863 15,391 38 30 68 1986/87 6,809 5,479 12,288 38 30 68 1987/88 10,259 8,255 18,514 38 30 68 1988/89 13,679 11,007 24,685 38 30 68 1989/90 10,344 8,324 18,668 38 30 68 1990/91 13,149 10,580 23,729 38 30 68 1991/92 9,579 7,708 17,287 38 30 68 1992/93 9,788 7,876 17,664 38 30 68 1993/94 6,630 5,171 11,801 31 24 55 1994/95 7,305 3,859 11,164 38 20 58 Sub-Total 101,073 79,145 180,217 1995/96 8,601 4,727 13,328 38 21 59 1996/97 11,962 7,977 19,939 38 26 64 1997/98 8,615 9,513 18,128 37 41 78 1998/99 6,544 5,748 12,293 38 34 72 1999/00 2,819 5,226 8,045 24 45 69 2000/01 3,957 6,941 10,898 25 44 69 2001/02 3,364 2,046 5,410 32 20 52 2002/03 8,903 6,329 15,232 46 33 79 2003/04 10,679 5,176 15,855 56 27 83 2004/05 10,724 7,567 18,291 46 32 78 2005/06 4,160 3,278 7,438 32 25 57 2006/07 4,391 2,638 7,029 31 19 50 2007/08 6,041 3,669 9,709 31 19 50 Sub-Total 90,760 70,836 161,596 TOTAL 191,833 149,981 341,814 37 29 67 138 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

TABLE 2P PLANTATION PARAMETERS

CONIFERS: CHIR PINE * Planting Density 1,700 plants/ha * Rotation 80 years * Annual Increment 4.0 cbm/ha/year * Total Production 320 cbm/ha

OUT-TAKE - from lopping after 20 years 1 cbm/ha/year - from thinning * 1. Thinning after 30 years 1.5 cbm/ha * 2. Thinning after 45 years 20 cbm/ha * 3. Thinning after 60 years 80 cbm/ha Harvest after 80 years 218 cbm/ha

BROADLEAF: Average for various species * Planting Density 1,600 plants/ha * Rotation 20 years * Annual Increment 5.0 cbm/ha/year * Total Production 100 cbm/ha

OUT-TAKE * 1. Thinning after 5 years 10 cbm/ha * 2. Thinning after 10 years 20 cbm/ha * 3. Thinning after 15 years 30 cbm/ha Harvest after 20 years 30 cbm/ha Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 139

TABLE 3P (a): CALCULATION OF WOODY BIOMASS SUPPLY Conifer Plantation

WOOD SUPPLY from CONIFER PLANTATION YEAR CONIFER LOPPING 1. THINNING 2. THINNING 3. THINNING SUPPLY 000 cbm 000 cbm 000 cbm 000 cbm 000 cbm

2002/03 0 2003/04 3 3 2004/05 5 5 2005/06 4 4 2006/07 6 6 2007/08 8 8

TABLE 3P (b): CALCULATION OF WOODY BIOMASS SUPPLY Broadleaf Plantation

WOOD SUPPLY from BROADLEAF PLANTATION YEAR BROADLEAF 1. Thinning 2. Thinning 3. Thinning Harvest SUPPLY 000 cbm 000 cbm 000 cbm 000 cbm 000 cbm

1984/85 0 1985/86 0 1986/87 0 1987/88 0 1988/89 0 1989/90 22 22 1990/91 38 38 1991/92 30 30 1992/93 46 46 1993/94 61 61 1994/95 46 45 91 1995/96 59 76 135 1996/97 43 61 104 1997/98 44 92 135 1998/99 33 122 155 1999/00 25 92 67 184 2000/01 28 117 114 260 2001/02 50 86 91 226 2002/03 45 87 137 270 2003/04 31 65 183 279 2004/05 29 50 139 67 284 2005/06 37 56 176 114 383 2006/07 14 99 128 91 332 2007/08 32 90 131 137 390 140 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

ANNEX 9 TABLES

This Annex presents all tables that are referred to in the Main Report or that were produced in the course of the study.

PART 1: contains PARAMETER data taken from external sources that were applied in the analytical calculations; RESULT TABLES presenting the analytical operations, and SUPPORT TABLES substantiating details to the result tables.

The table-set in PART 1 is structured along the following headings:

1 POPULATION 2 LAND-USE 3 FORESTS – CHANGE DETECTION (a) Area Change (b) Stock Change

4 TIMBER and WOODY BIOMASS CONSUMPTION (a) Commercial Timber Harvesting (b) Fire-wood Consumption

5 WOODY BIOMASS and WOOD SUPPLY 6 WOOD CONSUMPTION and FOREST DETERIORATION

The preparation of the tables and their use in the course of the analysis is described in ANNEX 7: METHODOLGY and ANALYTICAL APPROACH.

To ease the use of the tables, under each heading all data relating to the base-year 1996 and the study year 2008 are combined despite of the references to the base-year in CHAPTER 2 and to the study-year in CHAPTER 4 of the main text.

PART 2: contains data on TIMBER MARKETING, TIMBER PRICES, and REVENUE GENERATION by the Forest Department. Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 141

PART 1

PARAMETER, RESULT, and SUPPORT TABLES for the ANALYSIS of FORESTS and FOREST USE 142 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

LIST OF TABLES

BASE DATA TABLE: NWFP – AREA; POPULATION an HOUSDEHOLDS 1996 and 2008

1 POPULATION

PARAMETER TABLE (A): POPULATION CENSUS 1998 POPULATION GROWTH, URBAN/RURAL RATIO, AV. HOUSEHOLD SIZE by DIVISION and District PARAMETER TABLE (B): POPULATION CENSUS 1998 TOTAL POPULATION and TOTAL HOUSEHOLDS 1998 by DIVISION and District TABLE 1 (a): POPULATION and HOUSEHOLDS 1995/96 – ESTIMATES used in PFRI by DIVISION and District TABLE 1 (b): POPULATION and HOUSEHOLDS 2007/08 – ESTIMATES used in THBS by DIVISION and District TABLE 1 (c): PFRI/THBS – CHANGE IN POPULATION and HOUSEHOLDS 1995/96 to 2007/08, by DIVISION and DISTRICT SUPPORT TABLE 1.1: POPULATION DENSITY 1996 and 2008 SUPPORT TABLE 1.2: URBAN and RURAL POPULATION and HOUSEHOLDS 1996 to 2008 by DIVISION

2 LAND-USE

TABLE 2.1 (a): PFRI – LAND USE by DIVISION and DISTRICT 1996 TABLE 2.1 (b): THBS – LAND USE by DIVISION and DISTRICT 2008 TABLE 2.1 (c): PFRI/THBS - CHANGE in LAND-USE 1996 to 2008 by DIVISION and District TABLE 2.2: PFRI/THBS – LOSS of FOREST AREA 1996 to 2008 TABLE 2.3: SHIFT in LAND-USE 1996 to 2008 SUPPORT TABLE 2.1 (a): TOTAL FOREST AREA CHANGE – ALL DENSITY CLASSES by DIVISION and DISTRICT SUPPORT TABLE 2.1 (b-d): SHIFT PATTERN by FOREST DENSITY CLASSES by DIVISION and DISTRICT SUPPORT TABLE 2.2: LAND-USE DEVELOPMENT 1996 to 2008

3 FOREST - CHANGE DETECTION AREA CHANGE TABLE 3.1.1: FOREST AREA by FOREST DENSITY CLASS 1996 by DISTRICT and ALTITUDE in hectare and percent TABLE 3.1.2: FOREST AREA by FOREST DENSITY CLASS 2008 by DISTRICT and ALTITUDE in hectare and percent TABLE 3.1.3: FOREST AREA CHANGE by FOREST DENSITY CLASS 1996 and 2008 by DISTRICT and ALTITUDE in hectare and percent STOCK CHANGE PARAMETER TABLE (C): AVERAGE GROWING STOCK by DENSITY CLASS 1996 and 2008 TABLE 3.2.1: STANDING STOCK by FOREST DENSITY CLASS 1996 by DIVISION and ALTITUDE in hectare and percent TABLE 3.2.2: STANDING STOCK by FOREST DENSITY CLASS 2008 by DIVISION and ALTITUDE in hectare and percent TABLE 3.2.3: FOREST STOCK CHANGE by FOREST DENSITY CLASS 1996 and 2008 by DIVISION and ALTITUDE in hectare and percent Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 143

4 TIMBER and WOODY BIO-MASS CONSUMPTION

TABLE 4.1 (a): COMMERCIAL TIMBER HARVESTING 1985/86 to 1994/95 by DIVISION TABLE 4.1 (b): COMMERCIAL TIMBER HARVESTING 1995/96 to 2007/08 by DIVISION PARAMETER TABLE (D): FIRE-WOOD CONSUMPTION STANDARDS TABLE 4.2 (a): FIRE-WOOD CONSUMPTION 1996 TABLE 4.2 (b): FIRE-WOOD CONSUMPTION 2008 SUPPORT TABLE 4 (a): FIREWOOD USING HOUSEHOLDS – TIME SERIES 1996 to 2008 SUPPORT TABLE 4 (b): TOTAL FIREWOOD CONSUMPTION – TIME SERIES 1996 to 2008

5 WOODY BIO-MASS SUPPLY

PARAMETER TABLE (E): STOCK and GROWTH PARAMETRES – NON FOREST AREAS TABLE 5.1: FIREWOOD SUPPLY from NON-FOREST AREAS TABLE 5.2: SUPPLY from PLANTATION 1985 to 2008 TABLE 5.3: SUPPLY from FOREST YIELDS – TIME SERIES 1996 to 2008 SUPPORT TABLE 5.1 (a): FIREWOOD SUPPLY from NON FOREST AREAS – TIME SERIES 1996 to 2008 THBS AREA SUPPORT TABLE 5.1 (b): FIREWOOD SUPPLY from NON FOREST AREAS – TIME SERIES 1996 to 2008 MALAKAN HAZARA SUPPORT TABLE 5.2 (a): FOREST AREA and STOCK DEVELOPMENT – TIME SERIES 1996 to 2008 MALAKAND, by Density Class SUPPORT TABLE 5.2 (b): FOREST AREA and STOCK DEVELOPMENT – TIME SERIES 1996 to 2008 HAZARA, by Density Class

6 WOOD CONSUMPTION and SUPPLY ANALYSIS

TABLE 6.1: TOTAL WOOD CONSUMPTION and SUPPLY GAP 1996 and 2008 TABLE 6.2: WOOD CONSUMPTION 1996 to 2008 Firewood and Commercial Harvesting TABLE 6.3: FIREWOOD SUPPLY 1996 to 2008 TABLE 6.4: ANALYSIS: WHY ARE FORESTS DETERIORATING? 144 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan 1.7 2.5 1.6 7.4 6.7 2.7 5.5 4.4 6.4 5.1 6.0 11.3 11.3 43.9 22.5 21.5 56.1 14.3 24.3 % 100.0 75,114 75,114 51,792 49,040 80,302 221,754 201,666 164,300 340,003 132,757 427,824 726,707 192,552 154,068 178,516 431,143 673,763 642,965 2,996,394 1,679,667 1,316,728 households 2008 THBS 1.8 3.5 2.2 7.8 6.5 6.2 2.4 4.8 6.6 5.4 6.1 45.8 21.4 24.5 10.7 54.2 13.5 22.5 % 100.0 TOTAL HOUSEHOLDS TOTAL 38,180 73,934 46,946 50,590 101,011 101,011 114,905 114,905 165,427 138,575 131,688 226,226 287,029 478,335 139,818 128,950 335,297 453,570 519,006 2,121,613 1,149,036 972,577 1996 PFRI households 6.2 1.7 7.4 2.1 1.4 4.5 3.1 3.7 7.6 6.6 6.3 42.7 24.8 17.9 12.6 57.3 14.1 22.7 % 100.0 711,585 711,585 398,737 476,412 323,666 841,559 1,511,532 1,511,532 1,453,911 1,453,911 1,707,130 1,427,146 1,035,918 2,884,192 3,237,276 5,217,421 1,746,096 3,789,896 2008 THBS 5,701,644 4,104,700 22,972,580 13,166,236 persons 9,806,344 1.8 2.9 7.3 1.9 6.6 5.1 2.8 4.0 7.3 6.6 6.1 11.9 11.9 44.2 23.7 20.5 55.8 14.0 21.9 % 100.0 TOTAL POPULATION TOTAL 294,575 468,377 310,045 829,873 448,001 640,371 982,464 1996 PFRI 1,172,141 1,064,997 1,917,758 9,009,905 2,256,936 3,532,243 1,174,170 1,064,092 2,946,928 3,832,475 3,313,663 16,156,043 persons 7,146,138 7.2 2.0 6.3 2.4 2.4 2.0 4.2 5.1 6.0 9.6 62.9 39.7 23.2 19.7 10.4 10.5 37.1 12.3 100.0 % 764,711 764,711 529,241 149,096 461,071 179,210 173,985 767,619 145,328 307,661 377,075 439,100 701,400 900,500 ha 1,443,505 7,339,502 2,725,736 2,564,100 2,914,350 1,699,416 4,613,766 TOTAL AREA TOTAL BASE DATA TABLE: NWFP - AREA, POPULATION and HOUSEHOLDS 1996 2008 AREA, POPULATION - NWFP TABLE: BASE DATA District PRO V INCE/DI ISION TOTAL STUDY AREA STUDY TOTAL MALAKAND HAZARA - Chitral - Kohistan - Dir (Upper & Lower) - Batagram - Mansehra - Abbottabad - TOTAL NWFP (excl. FATA) NWFP TOTAL - Buner - Swat & Shangla - Haripur EXCLUDED from THBS MARDAN PESHAWAR KOHAT BANNU D.I. KHAN OUTSIDE NWFP: ALL FATA ALL OUTSIDE NWFP: Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 145

1 POPULATION PARAMETER TABLE (A): POPULATION CENSUS 1998 POPULATIN GROWTH, URBAN/RURAL RATIO, AV. HOUSEHOLD SIZE

POPULATION LOCATED in: AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD SIZE PROVINCE/ DIVISION/District GROWTH URBAN RURAL Urban Rural TOTAL % % % pers./hh pers./hh pers./hh

TOTAL NWFP (excl. FATA) 2.62 17.1 82.9 7.23 7.72 7.63

INCLUDED IN THBS 2.36 8.2 91.8 7.60 7.33 7.35

MALAKAND 2.95 7.6 92.4 8.65 8.44 8.46 * Chitral 2.51 9.6 90.4 6.94 7.79 7.70 * Dir (Upper + Lower) 3.13 5.2 94.8 8.75 8.45 8.47 * Buner 3.86 1.0 99.0 9.00 8.86 8.86 * Swat + Shangla 3.35 10.3 89.7 8.91 8.44 8.48

HAZARA 1.59 8.8 91.2 6.60 6.36 6.38 * Kohistan 0.09 1.0 99.0 6.60 6.34 6.34 * Batagram 0.59 1.0 99.0 6.61 6.60 6.60 * Manshera 2.40 5.3 94.7 6.73 6.42 6.44 * Abbottabad 1.82 17.9 82.1 6.78 6.21 6.31 * Haripur 2.19 12.0 88.0 6.19 6.36 6.34

NOT INCLUDED IN THBS 3.14 24.0 76.0 7.16 8.08 7.84

PARAMETER TABLE (B): TOTAL POPULATIONand TOTAL HOUSEHOLDS CENSUS 1998

TOTAL POPULATION TOTAL HOUSEHOLDS PROVINCE/ DIVISION/District Urban Rural TOTAL Urban Rural TOTAL

TOTAL NWFP (excl. FATA) 3,025,723 14,710,555 17,736,278 418,344 1,906,493 2,324,837

INCLUDED IN THBS 634,410 7,134,237 7,768,647 84,497 968,731 1,053,229

MALAKAND 324,484 3,938,526 4,263,010 37,520 466,625 504,145 * Chitral 30,656 288,344 319,000 4,420 37,015 41,435 * Dir (Upper + Lower) 67,529 1,225,979 1,293,508 7,718 145,086 152,804 * Buner 5,060 500,988 506,048 562 56,545 57,107 * Swat + Shangla 221,239 1,923,215 2,144,454 24,820 227,979 252,799

HAZARA 309,927 3,195,710 3,505,637 46,977 502,106 549,084 * Kohistan 4,726 467,844 472,570 716 73,792 74,508 * Batagram 3,070 303,930 307,000 464 46,050 46,514 * Manshera 61,100 1,091,739 1,152,839 9,079 170,053 179,132 * Abbottabad 157,963 723,037 881,000 23,298 116,431 139,729 * Haripur 83,067 609,161 692,228 13,420 95,780 109,200

NOT INCLUDED IN THBS 2,391,312 7,576,319 9,967,631 333,847 937,762 1,271,609

SOURCE: Population Census 1998, District booklets 146 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

TABLE 1 (a): POPULATION and HOUSEHOLDS 1996 ESTIMATES (data used in PFRI) (1) Total number of people and households POPULATION ESTIMATE HOUSEHOLD ESTIMATE DIVISION/District Urban Rural TOTAL Urban Rural TOTAL

INCLUDED IN PFRI 548,595 6,597,543 7,146,138 72,152 900,425 972,577

MALAKAND 258,725 3,573,749 3,832,475 29,884 423,686 453,570 * Chitral 23,096 271,479 294,575 3,326 34,853 38,180 * Dir (Upper + Lower) 51,803 1,120,338 1,172,141 5,922 132,653 138,575 * Buner 448,001 448,001 50,590 50,590 * Swat + Shangla 183,826 1,733,932 1,917,758 20,635 205,591 226,226

HAZARA 289,870 3,023,793 3,313,663 42,268 476,739 519,006 * Kohistan 4,684 463,694 468,377 73,934 73,934 * Batagram 3,100 306,945 310,045 46,946 46,946 * Manshera 56,445 1,008,552 1,064,997 8,641 156,786 165,427 * Abbottabad 148,796 681,076 829,873 21,383 110,305 131,688 * Haripur 76,845 563,526 640,371 12,243 88,768 101,011

(2) People and households in percent POPULATION ESTIMATE HOUSEHOLD ESTIMATE DIVISION/District Urban Rural TOTAL Urban Rural TOTAL

INCLUDED IN PFRI 7.7 92.3 100.0 7.4 92.6 100.0

MALAKAND 3.6 50.0 53.6 3.1 43.6 46.6 * Chitral 0.3 3.8 4.1 0.3 3.6 3.9 * Dir (Upper + Lower) 0.7 15.7 16.4 0.6 13.6 14.2 * Buner 6.3 6.3 5.2 5.2 * Swat + Shangla 2.6 24.3 26.8 2.1 21.1 23.3

HAZARA 4.1 42.3 46.4 4.3 49.0 53.4 * Kohistan 0.1 6.5 6.6 7.6 7.6 * Batagram 4.3 4.3 4.8 4.8 * Manshera 0.8 14.1 14.9 0.9 16.1 17.0 * Abbottabad 2.1 9.5 11.6 2.2 11.3 13.5 * Haripur 1.1 7.9 9.0 1.3 9.1 10.4 Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 147

TABLE 1 (b): POPULATION and HOUSEHOLDS 2008 ESTIMATES (data used inTHBS) (1) Total number of people and households POPULATION ESTIMATE HOUSEHOLD ESTIMATE DIVISION/District Urban Rural TOTAL Urban Rural TOTAL

INCLUDED IN THBS 802,474 9,003,871 9,806,344 106,043 1,210,685 1,316,727

MALAKAND 432,107 5,269,537 5,701,644 49,882 623,880 673,763 * Chitral 38,319 360,419 398,737 5,525 46,267 51,792 * Dir (Upper + Lower) 89,122 1,618,008 1,707,130 10,185 191,480 201,666 * Buner 7,116 704,469 711,585 791 79,511 80,302 * Swat + Shangla 297,550 2,586,642 2,884,192 33,381 306,622 340,003

HAZARA 370,367 3,734,334 4,104,700 56,160 586,804 642,965 * Kohistan 4,764 471,648 476,412 722 74,392 75,114 * Batagram 3,237 320,429 323,666 490 48,550 49,040 * Manshera 75,639 1,351,507 1,427,146 11,239 210,515 221,754 * Abbottabad 185,740 850,178 1,035,918 27,395 136,905 164,300 * Haripur 100,987 740,572 841,559 16,315 116,442 132,757

(2) People and households in percent POPULATION ESTIMATE HOUSEHOLD ESTIMATE DIVISION/District Urban Rural TOTAL Urban Rural TOTAL

INCLUDED IN THBS 8.2 91.8 100.0 8.1 91.9 100.0

MALAKAND 4.4 53.7 58.1 3.8 47.4 51.2 * Chitral 0.4 3.7 4.1 0.4 3.5 3.9 * Dir (Upper + Lower) 0.9 16.5 17.4 0.8 14.5 15.3 * Buner 0.1 7.2 7.3 0.1 6.0 6.1 * Swat + Shangla 3.0 26.4 29.4 2.5 23.3 25.8

HAZARA 3.8 38.1 41.9 4.3 44.6 48.8 * Kohistan 0.0 4.8 4.9 0.1 5.6 5.7 * Batagram 0.0 3.3 3.3 0.0 3.7 3.7 * Manshera 0.8 13.8 14.6 0.9 16.0 16.8 * Abbottabad 1.9 8.7 10.6 2.1 10.4 12.5 * Haripur 1.0 7.6 8.6 1.2 8.8 10.1 148 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

TABLE 1 (c): PFRI/THBS - CHANGE in POPULATION and HOUSEHOLDS 1996 to 2008

(1) Change in total number of people and households POPULATION ESTIMATE HOUSEHOLD ESTIMATE DIVISION/District Urban Rural TOTAL Urban Rural TOTAL INCLUDED IN THBS 253,879 2,406,328 2,660,207 33,891 310,259 344,150

MALAKAND 173,382 1,695,788 1,869,169 19,998 200,194 220,192 * Chitral 15,223 88,940 104,163 2,199 11,414 13,613 * Dir (Upper + Lower) 37,319 497,670 534,989 4,263 58,828 63,091 * Buner 7,116 256,468 263,584 791 28,921 29,712 * Swat + Shangla 113,724 852,710 966,434 12,746 101,032 113,777

HAZARA 80,497 710,541 791,038 13,893 110,065 123,958 * Kohistan 80 7,954 8,034 722 458 1,180 * Batagram 136 13,484 13,621 490 1,604 2,093 * Manshera 19,194 342,955 362,149 2,598 53,729 56,327 * Abbottabad 36,944 169,102 206,046 6,012 26,600 32,612 * Haripur 24,143 177,046 201,188 4,071 27,675 31,746

(2) Change in percent POPULATION ESTIMATE HOUSEHOLD ESTIMATE DIVISION/District Urban Rural TOTAL Urban Rural TOTAL INCLUDED IN THBS 46.3 36.5 37.2 47.0 34.5 35.4 MALAKAND 67.0 47.5 48.8 66.9 47.3 48.5 * Chitral 65.9 32.8 35.4 66.1 32.7 35.7 * Dir (Upper + Lower) 72.0 44.4 45.6 72.0 44.3 45.5 * Buner 57.2 58.8 57.2 58.7 * Swat + Shangla 61.9 49.2 50.4 61.8 49.1 50.3

HAZARA 27.8 23.5 23.9 32.9 23.1 23.9 * Kohistan 1.7 1.7 1.7 0.6 1.6 * Batagram 4.4 4.4 4.4 3.4 4.5 * Manshera 34.0 34.0 34.0 30.1 34.3 34.0 * Abbottabad 24.8 24.8 24.8 28.1 24.1 24.8 * Haripur 31.4 31.4 31.4 33.3 31.2 31.4

SUPPORT TABLE 1.1: POPULATION DENSITY 1996 and 2008

POPULATION DENSITY 1996 POPULATION DENSITY 2008 DIVISION/District TOTAL VEGETATED TOTAL VEGETATED pers./sqkm pers./sqkm pers./sqkm pers./sqkm INCLUDED IN THBS 155 192 213 263

MALAKAND 132 157 196 234 * Chitral 20 28 28 38 * Dir (Upper + Lower) 221 227 323 330 * Buner 257 258 409 409 * Swat + Shangla 250 270 376 406

HAZARA 195 258 242 320 * Kohistan 61 101 62 103 * Batagram 208 228 217 238 * Manshera 231 284 310 381 * Abbottabad 463 467 578 583 * Haripur 441 486 579 639 Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 149 996,015 1,252,110 1,252,110 8,608,611 8,608,611 1,221,161 1,191,083 1,161,851 1,133,438 9,552,564 1,105,823 8,971,556 9,066,785 1,078,980 8,834,352 1,053,230 8,389,363 8,176,410 1,020,463 7,768,647 7,969,566 7,516,528 1,283,957 7,328,654 972,577 TOTAL TOTAL 7,146,138 9,806,344 1,316,727 989,984 968,732 936,188 913,712 7,319,111 7,319,111 8,114,905 8,114,905 1,149,176 1,120,717 1,093,059 1,066,179 1,040,055 8,775,893 1,014,664 8,239,980 8,328,812 7,907,164 7,705,404 7,509,444 7,151,452 6,902,252 1,178,463 6,729,393 900,425 Rural Rural THBS THBS 6,623,768 9,009,468 1,208,600 98,024 95,671 93,383 91,159 88,995 84,498 84,275 82,302 102,934 100,444 776,671 731,576 737,973 719,446 701,447 683,959 650,455 666,966 617,195 614,275 105,494 599,261 72,152 522,370 796,877 108,128 Urban Urban 620,545 609,686 599,054 588,643 578,450 568,469 558,696 549,084 537,038 527,932 631,637 3,629,118 3,629,118 4,032,381 3,961,574 3,892,248 3,824,370 3,757,909 3,692,835 3,566,728 3,505,637 3,428,730 3,370,593 519,006 642,965 TOTAL TOTAL 3,313,663 4,104,700 565,684 555,785 546,092 536,602 527,310 518,212 509,303 502,106 489,559 481,258 575,795 3,611,339 3,611,339 3,675,886 3,548,141 3,486,265 3,425,679 3,366,358 3,251,400 3,308,274 3,205,709 3,125,603 3,072,605 476,739 586,122 Rural Rural 3,043,799 3,741,812 HAZARA HAZARA 54,861 53,901 52,961 52,041 51,140 50,257 49,393 46,977 47,479 46,673 55,842 356,495 350,235 344,106 338,105 332,230 326,477 315,328 320,844 299,928 303,128 297,988 42,268 56,843 269,864 362,889 Urban Urban 611,475 611,475 631,565 592,029 573,207 554,989 537,354 520,283 504,147 483,425 468,083 652,320 5,520,183 5,009,982 5,174,537 5,009,982 4,850,702 4,696,527 4,402,838 4,547,293 4,263,010 4,087,797 3,958,060 453,570 673,763 TOTAL TOTAL 3,832,475 5,701,644 583,492 564,932 546,966 529,577 512,745 496,452 480,681 466,626 446,629 432,454 602,668 4,067,711 4,067,711 5,100,007 4,628,641 4,780,671 4,628,641 4,481,485 4,339,045 4,201,170 3,945,742 3,776,649 3,656,788 423,686 622,479 Rural Rural 3,579,969 5,267,657 MALAKAND MALAKAND 48,072 46,543 45,063 43,630 42,244 40,901 39,602 37,520 36,797 35,629 49,652 311,148 311,148 420,176 381,341 393,866 381,341 369,217 357,482 335,128 346,123 317,268 301,273 29,884 51,284 SUPPORT TABLE 1.2: URBAN and RURAL POPULATION and HOUSEHOLDS - 1996 to 2008 POPULATION 1.2: URBAN and RURAL SUPPORT TABLE 252,506 433,988 Urban Urban YEAR YEAR 2005/06 2004/05 2003/04 2002/03 2001/02 2006/07 2005/06 2000/01 2004/05 2003/04 1999/00 2002/03 2001/02 1998/99 1999/00 2000/01 1998/99 1997/98 1997/98 1996/97 1996/97 2006/07 1995/96 2007/08 1995/96 2007/08 (1) POPULATION (2) (HOUSEHOLDS 150 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

2 LAND-USE

TABLE 2.1 (a): PFRI-LAND USE by DIVISION and DISTRICT 1996 (1) in hectare

DETAIL FOREST AGRICULTURE RANGELAND OTHER TOTAL

TOTAL 677,230 706,776 2,339,386 890,373 4,613,765

MALAKAND 360,912 389,319 1,688,966 475,152 2,914,349 Chitral 69,938 46,952 920,232 406,383 1,443,505 Dir (Upper+Lower) 158,902 104,680 253,775 11,884 529,241 Buner 15,554 67,020 91,400 11 173,985 Swat + Shangla 116,518 170,668 423,560 56,873 767,619

HAZARA 316,318 317,457 650,420 415,221 1,699,416 Kohistan 124,550 13,261 326,534 300,366 764,711 Batagram 45,961 33,842 56,006 13,287 149,096 Mansehra 103,974 115,941 154,750 86,406 461,071 Abbottabad 36,441 88,016 53,273 1,480 179,210 Haripur 5,392 66,397 59,857 13,682 145,328

(2) in percent

DETAIL FOREST AGRICULTURE RANGELAND OTHER TOTAL

TOTAL 14.7 15.3 50.7 19.3 100.0

MALAKAND 7.8 8.4 36.6 10.3 63.2 Chitral 1.5 1.0 19.9 8.8 31.3 Dir (Upper+Lower) 3.4 2.3 5.5 0.3 11.5 Buner 0.3 1.5 2.0 0.0 3.8 Swat + Shangla 2.5 3.7 9.2 1.2 16.6

HAZARA 6.9 6.9 14.1 9.0 36.8 Kohistan 2.7 0.3 7.1 6.5 16.6 Batagram 1.0 0.7 1.2 0.3 3.2 Mansehra 2.3 2.5 3.4 1.9 10.0 Abbottabad 0.8 1.9 1.2 0.0 3.9 Haripur 0.1 1.4 1.3 0.3 3.1 Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 151

TABLE 2.1 (b): THBS - LAND USE by DIVISION and DISTRICT 2008 (1) in hectare

DIVISION/District FOREST AGRICULTURE RANGELAND OTHER TOTAL TOTAL 570,221 719,970 2,433,201 890,373 4,613,765

MALAKAND 302,713 395,233 1,741,251 475,152 2,914,349 Chitral 60,098 47,532 929,492 406,383 1,443,505 Dir (Upper+Lower) 132,795 107,922 276,640 11,884 529,241 Buner 10,614 67,720 95,640 11 173,985 Swat + Shangla 99,206 172,060 439,480 56,873 767,619

HAZARA 267,508 324,737 691,950 415,221 1,699,416 Kohistan 108,794 14,208 341,343 300,366 764,711 Batagram 34,521 35,395 65,893 13,287 149,096 Mansehra 89,104 119,080 166,481 86,406 461,071 Abbottabad 31,616 89,657 56,457 1,480 179,210 Haripur 3,473 66,397 61,776 13,682 145,328

(2) in percent

DIVISION/District FOREST AGRICULTURE RANGELAND OTHER TOTAL TOTAL 12.4 15.6 52.7 19.3 100.0

MALAKAND 6.6 8.6 37.7 10.3 63.2 Chitral 1.3 1.0 20.1 8.8 31.3 Dir (Upper+Lower) 2.9 2.3 6.0 0.3 11.5 Buner 0.2 1.5 2.1 0.0 3.8 Swat + Shangla 2.2 3.7 9.5 1.2 16.6

HAZARA 5.8 7.0 15.0 9.0 36.8 Kohistan 2.4 0.3 7.4 6.5 16.6 Batagram 0.7 0.8 1.4 0.3 3.2 Mansehra 1.9 2.6 3.6 1.9 10.0 Abbottabad 0.7 1.9 1.2 0.0 3.9 Haripur 0.1 1.4 1.3 0.3 3.1

TABLE 2.1 (c): PFRI/THBS - CHANGE in LAND USE 1996 to 2008 by DIVISION and District AGRICULTURE RANGELAND TOTAL DIVISION/District FOREST LOST GAINED GAINED OTHER CHANGE TOTAL -107,009 13,194 93,815 0 0

MALAKAND -58,199 5,914 52,285 0 0 Chitral -9,840 580 9,260 0 0 Dir (Upper+Lower) -26,107 3,242 22,865 0 0 Buner -4,940 700 4,240 0 0 Swat + Shangla -17,312 1,392 15,920 0 0

HAZARA -48,810 7,280 41,530 0 0 Kohistan -15,756 947 14,809 0 0 Batagram -11,440 1,553 9,887 0 0 Mansehra -14,870 3,139 11,731 0 0 Abbottabad -4,825 1,641 3,184 0 0 Haripur -1,919 0 1,919 0 0 152 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

TABLE 2.2: PFRI/THBS - LOSS of FOREST AREA 1996 to 2008 by DIVISION and District CHANGE DIVISION/District FOREST FOREST 2008 1995/96 Area in % hectare hectare % % TOTAL 677,230 570,221 -107,009 -15.8

MALAKAND 360,912 302,713 -58,199 -16.1 Chitral 69,938 60,098 -9,840 -14.1 Dir (Upper+Lower) 158,902 132,795 -26,107 -16.4 Buner 15,554 10,614 -4,940 -31.8 Swat + Shangla 116,518 99,206 -17,312 -14.9

HAZARA 316,318 267,508 -48,810 -15.4 Kohistan 124,550 108,794 -15,756 -12.7 Batagram 45,961 34,521 -11,440 -24.9 Mansehra 103,974 89,104 -14,870 -14.3 Abbottabad 36,441 31,616 -4,825 -13.2 Haripur 5,392 3,473 -1,919 -35.6 Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 153

SUPPORT TABLE 2.1 (a): TOTAL FOREST AREA CHANGE - ALL DENSITY CLASSES by Division and District; in hectare FOREST AREA LOSS FOREST AREA GAIN DIVISION District Forest to Forest to Agriculture to Rangeland to AGRICULTURE RANGELAND TOTAL LOSS FOREST FOREST TOTAL GAIN TOTAL 14,458 109,986 124,444 1,264 16,171 17,435 MALAKAND 6,064 65,172 71,236 150 12,887 13,037 Chitral 730 11,204 11,934 150 1,944 2,094 Dir (Upper+Lower) 3,242 33,048 36,290 0 10,183 10,183 Buner 700 4,337 5,037 0 97 97 Swat + Shangla 1,392 16,583 17,975 0 663 663

HAZARA 8,394 44,814 53,208 1,114 3,284 4,398 Kohistan 1,140 15,157 16,297 193 348 541 Batagram 1,560 10,149 11,709 7 262 269 Mansehra 3,810 14,085 17,895 671 2,354 3,025 Abbottabad 1,843 3,407 5,250 202 223 425 Haripur 41 2,016 2,057 41 97 138

SUPPORT TABLE 2.1 (b): Shift Pattern of Forest Density Class by Division and District; in hectare (1) Density Class 10-25% (F1) FOREST AREA LOSS FOREST AREA GAIN DIVISION Forest F1 (10-25%) to: FOREST 10-25% from: District TOTAL LOSS TOTAL GAIN AGRICULTURE RANGELAND Agriculture Rangeland

TOTAL 9,249 72,800 82,049 1,019 13,631 14,650 MALAKAND 3,469 43,446 46,915 150 10,952 11,102 Chitral 620 7,458 8,078 150 1,205 1,355 Dir (Upper+Lower) 1,970 22,861 24,831 0 9,295 9,295 Buner 550 3,316 3,866 0 97 97 Swat + Shangla 329 9,811 10,140 0 355 355

HAZARA 5,780 29,354 35,134 869 2,679 3,548 Kohistan 628 11,006 11,634 74 301 375 Batagram 973 4,693 5,666 7 167 174 Mansehra 2,827 9,171 11,998 548 1,950 2,498 Abbottabad 1,311 2,657 3,968 202 209 411 Haripur 41 1,827 1,868 38 52 90 154 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

SUPPORT TABLE 2.1 (c): Shift Pattern of Forest Density Class by Division and District; in hectare (2) Density Class 26-50% (F2) FOREST AREA LOSS FOREST AREA GAIN DIVISION Forest 26-50% to: FOREST 26-50% from: District TOTAL LOSS TOTAL GAIN AGRICULTURE RANGELAND Agriculture Rangeland

TOTAL 3,533 29,718 33,251 216 2,413 2,629 MALAKAND 1,958 18,511 20,469 0 1,835 1,835 Chitral 78 3,462 3,540 0 739 739 Dir (Upper+Lower) 1,032 8,454 9,486 0 870 870 Buner 150 877 1,027 0 0 0 Swat + Shangla 698 5,718 6,416 0 226 226

HAZARA DIVISION 1,575 11,207 12,782 216 578 794 Kohistan 451 2,755 3,206 90 47 137 Batagram 533 4,326 4,859 0 95 95 Mansehra 301 3,238 3,539 123 377 500 Abbottabad 290 699 989 0 14 14 Haripur 0 189 189 3 45 48

SUPPORT TABLE 2.1 (d): Shift Pattern of Forest Density Class by Division and District; in hectare (3) Density Class >50% (F3) FOREST AREA LOSS FOREST AREA GAIN DIVISION Forest >50% to: FOREST >50% from: District TOTAL LOSS TOTAL GAIN AGRICULTURE RANGELAND Agriculture Rangeland

TOTAL 1,676 7,468 9,144 29 127 156 MALAKAND 637 3,215 3,852 0 100 100 Chitral 32 284 316 0 0 0 Dir (Upper+Lower) 240 1,733 1,973 0 18 18 Buner 0 144 144 0 0 0 Swat + Shangla 365 1,054 1,419 0 82 82

HAZARA 1,039 4,253 5,292 29 27 56 Kohistan 61 1,396 1,457 29 0 29 Batagram 54 1,130 1,184 0 0 0 Mansehra 682 1,676 2,358 0 27 27 Abbottabad 242 51 293 0 0 0 Haripur 0 0 0 0 0 0 Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 155

SUPPORT TABLE 2.2: LAND-USE DEVELOPMENT - 1996 to 2008 in hectare (1) TOTAL THBS AREA YEAR FOREST AGRICULTURE RANGELAND OTHER TOTAL 1996 677,230 706,776 2,339,386 890,373 4,613,765

19997 669,822 707,683 2,345,887 890,373 4,613,765 1998 662,166 708,622 2,352,605 890,373 4,613,765 1999 654,254 709,593 2,359,544 890,373 4,613,765 2000 646,081 710,598 2,366,714 890,373 4,613,765 2001 637,636 711,637 2,374,119 890,373 4,613,765 2002 628,913 712,712 2,381,767 890,373 4,613,765 2003 619,902 713,823 2,389,667 890,373 4,613,765 2004 610,595 714,972 2,397,825 890,373 4,613,765 2005 600,983 716,160 2,406,249 890,373 4,613,765 2006 591,057 717,388 2,414,947 890,373 4,613,765 2007 580,806 718,658 2,423,928 890,373 4,613,765

2008 570,221 719,971 2,433,200 890,373 4,613,765 (2) MALAKAND YEAR FOREST AGRICULTURE RANGELAND OTHER TOTAL 1996 360,912 389,319 1,688,966 475,152 2,914,349

19997 356,751 389,742 1,692,705 475,152 2,914,349 1998 352,475 390,176 1,696,545 475,152 2,914,349 1999 348,083 390,623 1,700,492 475,152 2,914,349 2000 343,570 391,081 1,704,546 475,152 2,914,349 2001 338,933 391,552 1,708,711 475,152 2,914,349 2002 334,169 392,037 1,712,991 475,152 2,914,349 2003 329,275 392,534 1,717,388 475,152 2,914,349 2004 324,246 393,045 1,721,906 475,152 2,914,349 2005 319,080 393,570 1,726,547 475,152 2,914,349 2006 313,771 394,109 1,731,316 475,152 2,914,349 2007 308,317 394,664 1,736,216 475,152 2,914,349

2008 302,713 395,233 1,741,251 475,152 2,914,349 (3) HAZARA YEAR FOREST AGRICULTURE RANGELAND OTHER TOTAL 1996 316,318 317,457 650,420 415,221 1,699,416

19997 313,071 317,941 653,183 415,221 1,699,416 1998 309,690 318,446 656,059 415,221 1,699,416 1999 306,172 318,970 659,053 415,221 1,699,416 2000 302,511 319,516 662,168 415,221 1,699,416 2001 298,703 320,084 665,408 415,221 1,699,416 2002 294,744 320,675 668,776 415,221 1,699,416 2003 290,627 321,289 672,279 415,221 1,699,416 2004 286,349 321,927 675,919 415,221 1,699,416 2005 281,904 322,590 679,701 415,221 1,699,416 2006 277,286 323,279 683,630 415,221 1,699,416 2007 272,489 323,994 687,712 415,221 1,699,416

2008 267,508 324,737 691,950 415,221 1,699,416 156 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

3 FOREST - CHANGE DETECTION (a) AREA CHANGE TABLE 3.1.1 (a): FOREST AREA 1996 by DISTRICT and ALTITUDE, in hectare FOREST DENSITY CLASS DIVISION/District TOTAL 10-25% cc 26-50% cc 51-100% cc

TOTAL FOREST AREA 282,560 251,514 143,156 677,230

MALAKAND 153,725 136,083 71,104 360,912 Chitral 36,283 30,030 3,625 69,938 Dir (Upper+Lower) 63,180 60,224 35,498 158,902 Buner 9,708 4,866 980 15,554 Swat + Shangla 44,554 40,963 31,001 116,518

HAZARA 128,835 115,431 72,052 316,318 Kohistan 45,587 54,628 24,335 124,550 Batagram 21,367 17,953 6,641 45,961 Mansehra 41,363 31,914 30,697 103,974 Abbottabad 16,503 9,559 10,379 36,441 Haripur 4,015 1,377 0 5,392

FOREST AREA < 2000 m 91,788 61,506 36,135 189,429

MALAKAND 40,169 29,383 13,093 82,645 Chitral 2,065 1,963 231 4,259 Dir (Upper+Lower) 20,139 16,418 9,872 46,429 Buner 9,224 4,637 890 14,751 Swat + Shangla 8,741 6,365 2,100 17,206

HAZARA 51,619 32,123 23,042 106,784 Kohistan 6,311 10,601 11,999 28,911 Batagram 5,142 3,075 1,257 9,474 Mansehra 24,047 11,961 7,000 43,008 Abbottabad 12,104 5,109 2,786 19,999 Haripur 4,015 1,377 0 5,392

FOREST AREA > 2000 m 190,772 190,008 107,021 487,801

MALAKAND 113,556 106,700 58,011 278,267 Chitral 34,218 28,067 3,394 65,679 Dir (Upper+Lower) 43,041 43,806 25,626 112,473 Buner 484 229 90 803 Swat + Shangla 35,813 34,598 28,901 99,312

HAZARA 77,216 83,308 49,010 209,534 Kohistan 39,276 44,027 12,336 95,639 Batagram 16,225 14,878 5,384 36,487 Mansehra 17,316 19,953 23,697 60,966 Abbottabad 4,399 4,450 7,593 16,442 Haripur 0 0 0 0 Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 157

TABLE 3.1.1 (b): FOREST AREA 1996 by DISTRICT and ALTITUDE, in %

FOREST DENSITY CLASS DIVISION/District TOTAL 10-25% cc 26-50% cc 51-100% cc

TOTAL FOREST AREA 41.7 37.1 21.1 100.0

MALAKAND 22.7 20.1 10.5 53.3 Chitral 5.4 4.4 0.5 10.3 Dir (Upper+Lower) 9.3 8.9 5.2 23.5 Buner 1.4 0.7 0.1 2.3 Swat + Shangla 6.6 6.0 4.6 17.2

HAZARA 19.0 17.0 10.6 46.7 Kohistan 6.7 8.1 3.6 18.4 Batagram 3.2 2.7 1.0 6.8 Mansehra 6.1 4.7 4.5 15.4 Abbottabad 2.4 1.4 1.5 5.4 Haripur 0.6 0.2 0.0 0.8

FOREST AREA < 2000 m 13.6 9.1 5.3 28.0

MALAKAND 5.9 4.3 1.9 12.2 Chitral 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.6 Dir (Upper+Lower) 3.0 2.4 1.5 6.9 Buner 1.4 0.7 0.1 2.2 Swat + Shangla 1.3 0.9 0.3 2.5

HAZARA 7.6 4.7 3.4 15.8 Kohistan 0.9 1.6 1.8 4.3 Batagram 0.8 0.5 0.2 1.4 Mansehra 3.6 1.8 1.0 6.4 Abbottabad 1.8 0.8 0.4 3.0 Haripur 0.6 0.2 0.0 0.8

FOREST AREA > 2000 m 28.2 28.1 15.8 72.0

MALAKAND 16.8 15.8 8.6 41.1 Chitral 5.1 4.1 0.5 9.7 Dir (Upper+Lower) 6.4 6.5 3.8 16.6 Buner 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 Swat + Shangla 5.3 5.1 4.3 14.7

HAZARA 11.4 12.3 7.2 30.9 Kohistan 5.8 6.5 1.8 14.1 Batagram 2.4 2.2 0.8 5.4 Mansehra 2.6 2.9 3.5 9.0 Abbottabad 0.6 0.7 1.1 2.4 Haripur 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 158 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

TABLE 3.1.2 (a): FOREST AREA 2008 by DISTRICT and ALTITUDE, in hectare FOREST DENSITY CLASS DIVISION/District TOTAL 10-25% cc 26-50% cc 51-100% cc TOTAL FOREST AREA 290,973 182,012 97,236 570,221 MALAKAND 153,278 97,304 52,131 302,713 Chitral 34,407 22,291 3,400 60,098 Dir (Upper+Lower) 69,765 37,904 25,126 132,795 Buner 6,042 4,049 523 10,614 Swat + Shangla 43,064 33,060 23,082 99,206

HAZARA 137,695 84,708 45,105 267,508 Kohistan 55,407 39,821 13,566 108,794 Batagram 20,019 11,030 3,472 34,521 Mansehra 45,017 25,182 18,905 89,104 Abbottabad 14,402 8,052 9,162 31,616 Haripur 2,850 623 0 3,473

FOREST AREA <2000 m 84,928 42,288 18,994 146,210

MALAKAND 37,536 17,107 5,868 60,511 Chitral 1,706 594 141 2,441 Dir (Upper+Lower) 21,974 9,128 3,878 34,980 Buner 5,742 3,892 521 10,155 Swat + Shangla 8,114 3,493 1,328 12,935

HAZARA DIVISION 47,392 25,181 13,126 85,699 Kohistan 10,398 8,962 6,283 25,643 Batagram 4,339 2,609 758 7,706 Mansehra 19,891 8,671 3,881 32,443 Abbottabad 9,914 4,316 2,204 16,434 Haripur 2,850 623 0 3,473

FOREST AREA >2000 m 206,045 139,724 78,242 424,011

MALAKAND 115,742 80,197 46,263 242,202 Chitral 32,701 21,697 3,259 57,657 Dir (Upper+Lower) 47,791 28,776 21,248 97,815 Buner 300 157 2 459 Swat + Shangla 34,950 29,567 21,754 86,271

HAZARA 90,303 59,527 31,979 181,809 Kohistan 45,009 30,859 7,283 83,151 Batagram 15,680 8,421 2,714 26,815 Mansehra 25,126 16,511 15,024 56,661 Abbottabad 4,488 3,736 6,958 15,182 Haripur 0 0 0 0 Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 159

TABLE 3.1.2 (b): FOREST AREA 2008 by DISTRICT and ALTITUDE, in % FOREST DENSITY CLASS DIVISION/District TOTAL 10-25% cc 26-50% cc 51-100% cc TOTAL FOREST AREA 51.0 31.9 17.1 100.0 MALAKAND 26.9 17.1 9.1 53.1 Chitral 6.0 3.9 0.6 10.5 Dir (Upper+Lower) 12.2 6.6 4.4 23.3 Buner 1.1 0.7 0.1 1.9 Swat + Shangla 7.6 5.8 4.0 17.4

HAZARA 24.1 14.9 7.9 46.9 Kohistan 9.7 7.0 2.4 19.1 Batagram 3.5 1.9 0.6 6.1 Mansehra 7.9 4.4 3.3 15.6 Abbottabad 2.5 1.4 1.6 5.5 Haripur 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.6

FOREST AREA <2000 m 14.9 7.4 3.3 25.6

MALAKAND 6.6 3.0 1.0 10.6 Chitral 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.4 Dir (Upper+Lower) 3.9 1.6 0.7 6.1 Buner 1.0 0.7 0.1 1.8 Swat + Shangla 1.4 0.6 0.2 2.3

HAZARA DIVISION 8.3 4.4 2.3 15.0 Kohistan 1.8 1.6 1.1 4.5 Batagram 0.8 0.5 0.1 1.4 Mansehra 3.5 1.5 0.7 5.7 Abbottabad 1.7 0.8 0.4 2.9 Haripur 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.6

FOREST AREA >2000 m 36.1 24.5 13.7 74.4

MALAKAND 20.3 14.1 8.1 42.5 Chitral 5.7 3.8 0.6 10.1 Dir (Upper+Lower) 8.4 5.0 3.7 17.2 Buner 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 Swat + Shangla 6.1 5.2 3.8 15.1

HAZARA 15.8 10.4 5.6 31.9 Kohistan 7.9 5.4 1.3 14.6 Batagram 2.7 1.5 0.5 4.7 Mansehra 4.4 2.9 2.6 9.9 Abbottabad 0.8 0.7 1.2 2.7 Haripur 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 160 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 161

TABLE 3.1.3 (b): FOREST AREA CHANGE by FOREST DENSITY CLASS 1996 to 2008, by DISTRICT and ALTITUDE (2) in percent FOREST DENSITY CLASS DIVISION/District TOTAL 10-25% cc 26-50% cc 51-100% cc

TOTAL FOREST AREA 3.0 -27.6 -32.1 -15.8

MALAKAND -0.3 -28.5 -26.7 -16.1 Chitral -5.2 -25.8 -6.2 -14.1 Dir (Upper+Lower) 10.4 -37.1 -29.2 -16.4 Buner -37.8 -16.8 -46.6 -31.8 Swat + Shangla -3.3 -19.3 -25.5 -14.9

HAZARA 6.9 -26.6 -37.4 -15.4 Kohistan 21.5 -27.1 -44.3 -12.7 Batagram -6.3 -38.6 -47.7 -24.9 Mansehra 8.8 -21.1 -38.4 -14.3 Abbottabad -12.7 -15.8 -11.7 -13.2 Haripur -29.0 -54.8 0.0 -35.6

FOREST AREA <2000 m -7.5 -31.2 -47.4 -22.8

MALAKAND -6.6 -41.8 -55.2 -26.8 Chitral -17.4 -69.7 -39.0 -42.7 Dir (Upper+Lower) 9.1 -44.4 -60.7 -24.7 Buner -37.7 -16.1 -41.5 -31.2 Swat + Shangla -7.2 -45.1 -36.8 -24.8

HAZARA DIVISION -8.2 -21.6 -43.0 -19.7 Kohistan 64.8 -15.5 -47.6 -11.3 Batagram -15.6 -15.2 -39.7 -18.7 Mansehra -17.3 -27.5 -44.6 -24.6 Abbottabad -18.1 -15.5 -20.9 -17.8 Haripur -29.0 -54.8 0.0 -35.6

FOREST AREA >2000 m 8.0 -26.5 -26.9 -13.1

MALAKAND 1.9 -24.8 -20.3 -13.0 Chitral -4.4 -22.7 -4.0 -12.2 Dir (Upper+Lower) 11.0 -34.3 -17.1 -13.0 Buner -38.0 -31.4 -97.8 -42.8 Swat + Shangla -2.4 -14.5 -24.7 -13.1

HAZARA 16.9 -28.5 -34.8 -13.2 Kohistan 14.6 -29.9 -41.0 -13.1 Batagram -3.4 -43.4 -49.6 -26.5 Mansehra 45.1 -17.3 -36.6 -7.1 Abbottabad 2.0 -16.0 -8.4 -7.7 Haripur 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 162 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

(b) AREA CHANGE

PARAMETER TABLE (C): AVERAGE GROWING STOCK by DENSITY CLASS1 1996 an 2008 in cubic meter per hectare Sustainable Yield as % of Stock 0.70

FOREST DENSITY CLASS TOTAL 1995/96 DETAIL TOTAL 2007/08 10-25% cc 26-50% cc 51-100% cc

TOTAL STOCK 104.28 323.34 544.06 278.60 249.06 - round-wood m3/ha 85.49 265.08 446.15 228.13 205.57 - branchwood m3/ha 18.79 58.26 97.91 50.47 45.11

- TOTAL YIELD m3/ha/year 0.73 2.26 3.81 1.95 1.74

BELOW 2000 m 104.09 286.94 441.07 229.59 200.75 - round-wood m3/ha 85.17 235.61 363.57 187.12 164.85 - branchwood m3/ha 18.92 51.33 77.50 41.57 36.62

- YIELD m3/ha/year 0.73 2.01 3.09 1.61 1.41

ABOVE 2000 m 104.36 333.91 568.86 297.63 265.72 - round-wood m3/ha 85.64 274.71 474.03 244.50 219.61 - branchwood m3/ha 18.72 59.20 94.83 53.48 48.04

- YIELD m3/ha/year 0.73 2.34 3.98 2.98 1.86

Note 1: Roundwood data taken from PFRI, page 30 Note 2: Branchwood data based on field estimates at 22% of the roundwood volume. Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 163

TABLE 3.2.1: STANDING STOCK by CANOPY COVER CLASS 1996 by DIVISION and ALTITUDE (1) in 000 cubic meter FOREST DENSITY CLASS DIVISION/ALTITUDE TOTAL 10-25% cc 26-50% cc 51-100% cc

TOTAL STOCK 29,465 81,325 77,885 188,675

- Malakand 16,033 44,184 39,332 99,549 - Hazara 13,432 37,141 38,553 89,126

BELOW 2000 m 9,556 17,713 16,221 43,491

- Malakand 4,182 8,461 5,872 18,515 - Hazara 5,374 9,253 10,349 24,976

ABOVE 2000 m 19,909 63,612 61,664 145,185

- Malakand 11,851 35,724 33,460 81,034 - Hazara 8,058 27,888 28,204 64,151

(2) in percent FOREST DENSITY CLASS DIVISION/ALTITUDE TOTAL 10-25% cc 26-50% cc 51-100% cc

TOTAL STOCK 15.6 43.1 41.3 100.0

- Malakand 8.5 23.4 20.8 52.8 - Hazara 7.1 19.7 20.4 47.2

BELOW 2000 m 5.1 9.4 8.6 23.1

- Malakand 2.2 4.5 3.1 9.8 - Hazara 2.8 4.9 5.5 13.2

ABOVE 2000 m 10.6 33.7 32.7 76.9

- Malakand 6.3 18.9 17.7 42.9 - Hazara 4.3 14.8 14.9 34.0 164 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

TABLE 3.2.2: STANDING STOCK by CANOPY COVER CLASS 2008 by DIVISION and ALTITUDE (1) in 000 cubic meter FOREST DENSITY CLASS DIVISION/ALTITUDE TOTAL 10-25% cc 26-50% cc 51-100% cc

TOTAL STOCK 30,342 58,790 52,887 142,019

- Malakand 15,984 31,429 28,354 75,767 - Hazara 14,359 27,361 24,533 66,252

BELOW 2000 m 8,840 12,134 8,378 29,352 - Malakand 3,907 4,872 2,384 11,163 - Hazara 4,933 7,262 5,994 18,189 ABOVE 2000 m 21,502 46,656 44,509 112,667

- Malakand 12,077 26,557 25,970 64,604 - Hazara 9,425 20,099 18,539 48,063

(2) in percent FOREST DENSITY CLASS DIVISION/ALTITUDE TOTAL 10-25% cc 26-50% cc 51-100% cc

TOTAL STOCK 21.4 41.4 37.2 100.0

- Malakand 11.3 22.1 20.0 53.3 - Hazara 10.1 19.3 17.3 46.7

BELOW 2000 m 6.2 8.5 5.9 20.7

- Malakand 2.7 3.4 1.8 7.9 - Hazara 3.5 5.1 4.1 12.8

ABOVE 2000 m 15.1 32.9 31.3 79.3

- Malakand 8.5 18.8 18.7 45.5 - Hazara 6.6 13.9 12.9 33.8 Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 165 166 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan 100.0 206,816 253,335 319,614 303,537 302,598 475,045 165,684 275,416 176,699 2,203,328 TOTAL 25.5 69,453 97,339 70,966 95,524 92,348 41,829 54,966 70,096 38,345 560,768 Hazara 74.5 110,718 110,718 137,364 155,996 248,648 208,014 210,251 433,215 205,320 138,355 1,642,560 Malakand TOTAL COMMERCIAL TIMBER COMMERCIAL TOTAL 24.7 43,486 36,288 33,532 36,625 31,240 28,971 68,142 30,671 304,324 545,138 Total 3.0 V ESTIN G 1985/86 to 1992/93 9,138 8,425 8,103 8,875 9,097 8,132 6,544 8,260 7,763 66,078 Hazara 21.7 34,348 27,864 25,428 27,750 22,144 22,427 59,883 22,908 296,192 479,060 Malakand RECORDED ILLE G AL 75.3 in cubic meter (roundwood only) 163,330 217,047 286,082 266,912 271,358 170,721 136,712 207,274 146,029 Total 1,658,191 22.5 60,314 88,914 62,863 86,649 83,251 33,697 48,421 61,836 30,582 494,691 Hazara TABLE 4.1 (a): COMMERCIAL TIMBER HAR 4.1 (a): COMMERCIAL TABLE 52.8 88,291 115,447 115,447 103,016 128,133 223,220 180,263 188,107 137,024 145,437 1,163,500 Malakand AL SANCTIONED LE G AL V ESTIN G TIMBER and WOODY BIOMASS CONSUMPTION TIMBER and WOODY Year TOTAL 1992/93 1991/92 1990/91 1989/90 1988/89 1987/88 1985/86 1986/87 V ERA G E - in percent A NOTE: Data extracted from records of the Forest Department/Forest Development Corporation 4 (a) HAR Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 167 100.0 93,877 77,779 73,390 69,697 88,795 64,388 72,656 94,100 95,877 101,797 162,462 191,706 156,339 167,274 109,775 136,490 1,646,629 TOTAL 38.6 30,420 57,397 21,910 21,248 25,026 31,130 46,037 26,444 29,303 44,149 98,460 42,840 38,542 81,362 42,365 41,205 635,472 Hazara 61.4 63,457 44,400 55,869 48,365 38,567 42,758 37,944 43,353 49,950 93,246 53,037 85,913 67,410 95,285 117,797 117,797 141,215 1,011,157 1,011,157 Malakand TOTAL COMMERCIAL TIMBER COMMERCIAL TOTAL 48.9 34,667 53,347 38,589 48,686 53,710 62,024 71,465 49,012 46,520 58,449 40,915 48,283 39,567 53,678 50,210 109,730 805,174 Total 20.1 V ESTIN G 1993/94 to 2007/08 8,616 9,734 7,728 8,588 26,815 15,867 20,212 26,883 39,241 15,683 16,561 28,575 64,763 24,101 22,090 17,985 331,352 Hazara 28.8 26,051 26,533 28,855 32,819 33,499 35,141 32,224 33,329 29,959 29,874 44,967 33,187 24,182 30,978 31,588 32,224 473,821 Malakand RECORDED ILLE G AL 51.1 in cubic meter (roundwood only) 7,674 86,281 59,210 48,450 39,190 19,680 17,330 15,376 26,136 35,651 81,976 54,962 56,097 113,776 113,776 108,056 127,708 841,455 Total 18.5 5,380 4,814 4,247 6,796 35,113 35,113 23,220 21,804 30,582 12,176 10,760 12,742 15,574 33,697 14,441 72,774 20,275 304,120 Hazara TABLE 4.1 (b): COMMERCIAL TIMBER HAR 4.1 (b): COMMERCIAL TABLE 32.6 3,426 4,616 63,061 37,406 17,868 27,014 14,866 10,534 13,394 20,076 48,280 19,850 93,615 54,934 35,822 108,396 537,335 Malakand AL SANCTIONED LE G AL Year 2005/06 2004/05 TOTAL 2003/04 2002/03 2001/02 2000/01 1999/00 1998/99 1997/98 1996/97 1995/96 2007/08 1994/95 2006/07 1993/94 V ERA G E - in percent A NOTE: Data extracted from records of the Forest Department/Forest Development Corporation 168 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

(b) FIRE-WOOD PARAMETER TABLE (D): FIRE-WOOD CONSUMPTION STANDARDS (1) STANDARDS PER PERSON DETAIL Unit URBAN RURAL TOTAL WEIGHT kg/year 274 434 425 VOLUME m3 /year 0.475 0.751 0.736

(2) AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD SIZE

TOTAL persons 7.51 7.36 7.38 Malakand persons 8.65 8.44 8.46 Hazara persons 6.60 6.36 6.38

(3) STANDARDS PER HOUSEHOLD

TOTAL m3 /year 3.565 5.524 5.428 Malakand m3 /year 4.107 6.335 6.223 Hazara m3 /year 3.133 4.774 4.693

Note 1: Standard data taken from HESS study, 1993 Note 2: Conversion kg to m3 1 m3 = kg 578 TABLE 4.2 (a): FIRE-WOOD CONSUMPTION 1996 DETAIL Urban Rural TOTAL FIREWOOD USING HOUSEHOLDS Total 50,359 875,353 925,712 - Malakand 20,858 411,890 432,748 - Hazara 29,501 463,463 492,964 FIREWOOD CONSUMPTION 000 cbm 000 cbm 000 cbm Total 178 4,822 5,000 - Malakand 86 2,609 2,695 - Hazara 92 2,212 2,305

TABLE 4.2 (b): FIRE-WOOD CONSUMPTION 2008

DETAIL Urban Rural TOTAL

FIREWOOD USING HOUSEHOLDS Total 54,051 1,139,706 1,193,757 - Malakand 25,353 585,101 610,454 - Hazara 28,698 554,605 583,303

FIREWOOD CONSUMPTION 000 cbm 000 cbm 000 cbm Total 194 6,354 6,548 - Malakand 104 3,706 3,811 - Hazara 90 2,647 2,737 Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 169

SUPPORT TABLE 4 (a): FIREWOOD USING HOUSEHOLDS - 1996 to 2008 MALAKAND HAZARA THBS YEAR Urban Rural TOTAL Urban Rural TOTAL Urban Rural TOTAL

1996 20,858 411,890 432,748 29,501 463,463 492,964 50,359 875,353 925,712

1997 21,200 424,117 445,317 29,433 470,449 499,882 50,633 894,566 945,199 1998 21,548 436,706 458,254 29,366 477,540 506,906 50,913 914,246 965,160 1999 21,901 449,670 471,571 29,298 484,738 514,036 51,199 934,408 985,607 2000 22,260 463,018 485,278 29,231 492,045 521,276 51,491 955,063 1,006,554 2001 22,625 476,762 499,387 29,164 499,462 528,625 51,789 976,224 1,028,013 2002 22,996 490,915 513,911 29,097 506,990 536,087 52,093 997,905 1,049,997 2003 23,373 505,487 528,860 29,030 514,632 543,662 52,403 1,020,119 1,072,522 2004 23,756 520,492 544,248 28,963 522,389 551,353 52,720 1,042,881 1,095,601 2005 24,146 535,943 560,088 28,897 530,264 559,160 53,043 1,066,206 1,119,249 2006 24,542 551,852 576,394 28,830 538,256 567,087 53,372 1,090,108 1,143,480 2007 24,944 568,233 593,177 28,764 546,370 575,134 53,708 1,114,603 1,168,311

2008 25,353 585,101 610,454 28,698 554,605 583,303 54,051 1,139,706 1,193,757

TABLE 5 (b): TOTAL FIREWOOD CONSUMPTION - 1995/96 to 2007/08 (in 000 cubic meter)

SUPPORT TABLE 4 (b): TOTAL FIREWOOD CONSUMPTION - 1996 to 2008 (in 000 cubic meter)

MALAKAND HAZARA THBS YEAR Urban Rural TOTAL Urban Rural TOTAL Urban Rural TOTAL

1996 86 2,609 2,695 92 2,212 2,305 178 4,822 5,000

1997 87 2,687 2,774 92 2,246 2,338 179 4,932 5,112 1998 88 2,766 2,855 92 2,280 2,372 180 5,046 5,226 1999 90 2,849 2,938 92 2,314 2,406 182 5,162 5,344 2000 91 2,933 3,024 92 2,349 2,440 183 5,282 5,465 2001 93 3,020 3,113 91 2,384 2,476 184 5,404 5,589 2002 94 3,110 3,204 91 2,420 2,511 186 5,530 5,716 2003 96 3,202 3,298 91 2,457 2,548 187 5,659 5,846 2004 98 3,297 3,395 91 2,494 2,584 188 5,791 5,979 2005 99 3,395 3,494 91 2,531 2,622 190 5,926 6,116 2006 101 3,496 3,597 90 2,569 2,660 191 6,065 6,256 2007 102 3,600 3,702 90 2,608 2,698 193 6,208 6,400

2008 104 3,706 3,811 90 2,647 2,737 194 6,354 6,548 170 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

5 WOODY BIOMASS SUPPLY

STOCK and GROWTH PARAMETERS NON-FOREST AREAS

SUPPLY from SUPPLY from DETAIL UNIT AGRICULTURE RANGELAND

AVERAGE STOCK cbm/hectare 9.48 2.99 ANNUAL INCREMENT cbm/ha./year 1.16 0.19

YIELD as % of STOCK % 12.23 6.37

TABLE 5.1: FIREWOOD SUPPLY from NON-FOREST AREAS 1996 - 2008 ESTIMATES AREA YEAR SUPPLY from SUPPLY from TOTAL SUPPLY AGRICULTURE RANGELAND AGRICULTURE RANGELAND hectare hectare 000 cbm 000 cbm 000 cbm 1996 706,776 2,339,386 819 446 1,265 2008 719,971 2,433,200 834 464 1,298

(2) MALAKAND ESTIMATES AREA YEAR SUPPLY from SUPPLY from TOTAL SUPPLY AGRICULTURE RANGELAND AGRICULTURE RANGELAND hectare hectare 000 cbm 000 cbm 000 cbm 1996 389,319 1,688,966 451 322 773 2008 395,233 1,741,251 458 332 790

(3) HAZARA ESTIMATES AREA YEAR SUPPLY from SUPPLY from TOTAL SUPPLY AGRICULTURE RANGELAND AGRICULTURE RANGELAND hectare hectare 000 cbm 000 cbm 000 cbm 1996 317,457 650,420 368 124 492 2008 324,737 691,950 376 132 508 Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 171

TABLE 5.2: SUPPLY from PLANTATION 1985 to 2008

TOTAL SURVIVING AREA TOTAL YEAR RECORDED SURVIVING WOOD PLANTATION CONIFER BROADLEAF PLANTATION SUPPLY hectare hectare hectare hectare 000 cbm

1984/85 13,257 3,070 2,233 5,303 0 1985/86 22,608 5,235 3,808 9,043 0 1986/87 18,050 4,180 3,040 7,220 0 1987/88 27,195 6,297 4,581 10,878 0 1988/89 36,260 8,396 6,107 14,504 0 1989/90 27,421 6,350 4,619 10,968 22 1990/91 34,856 8,071 5,871 13,942 38 1991/92 25,393 5,880 4,277 10,157 30 1992/93 25,946 6,008 4,370 10,378 46 1993/94 21,444 5,312 3,266 8,578 61 1994/95 19,340 5,238 2,498 7,736 91

SUBTOTAL 271,770 64,037 44,671 108,708

1995/96 22,732 6,277 2,816 9,093 135 1996/97 31,144 7,495 4,963 12,458 104 1997/98 23,226 4,775 4,516 9,290 135 1998/99 17,150 3,794 3,066 6,860 155 1999/00 11,601 1,770 2,871 4,641 184 2000/01 15,717 2,633 3,654 6,287 260 2001/02 10,374 2,789 1,360 4,149 226 2002/03 19,258 4,545 3,158 7,703 270 2003/04 19,085 5,169 2,465 7,634 282 2004/05 23,500 5,703 3,697 9,400 289 2005/06 12,987 3,178 2,017 5,195 387 2006/07 14,156 3,650 2,012 5,662 339 2007/08 19,593 4,933 2,904 7,837 399

SUBTOTAL 240,522 56,709 39,500 96,209 TOTAL 784,063 184,784 128,841 313,625 Data Source for Plantation 1985-1993: Forestry in NWFP, Peshawar 1995, p. 20 Data Source for Plantation 1994-2008: Official records Forest Department NWFP, submitted CF Alamgir Gandapur 172 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan 994 1,117 1,117 1,088 1,145 1,058 1,027 1,298 1,274 1,250 1,225 1,199 1,173 1,321 000 cbm SUPPLY in SUPPLY 258.61 261.37 263.97 255.67 252.54 276.82 274.96 272.99 270.92 268.73 266.42 249.06 278.60 STOCK/ STOCK/ HECTARE 151,117 151,117 155,420 159,592 163,636 146,677 185,423 182,068 178,608 175,037 171,355 167,555 TOTAL 142,019 188,675 60,121 62,370 64,544 57,795 55,390 76,164 74,386 72,547 70,646 68,680 66,647 77,884 52,887 51-100% cc 65,170 63,121 67,165 69,107 61,015 79,718 78,067 76,370 74,627 72,836 70,997 81,325 58,790 26-50% cc STOCK in 000 cbm STOCK 29,911 29,911 30,129 30,200 30,057 29,984 30,272 29,541 29,616 29,690 29,764 29,838 29,465 30,342 10-25% cc FOREST DENSITY CLASS FOREST DENSITY 600,983 591,057 610,595 619,902 580,806 669,822 662,166 654,254 646,081 637,636 628,913 TOTAL 677,230 570,221 110,507 110,507 114,640 114,640 118,637 118,637 106,231 101,810 139,995 136,726 133,347 129,852 126,238 122,501 97,236 143,156 51-100% cc 51-100% 195,214 201,552 207,721 188,702 246,543 241,436 236,189 230,799 225,261 219,571 213,726 251,514 182,012 26-50% cc TABLE 5.3: SUPPLY from FOREST YIELDS - TIME SERIES 1996 to 2008 from FOREST 5.3: SUPPLY TABLE TOTAL AREA in hectare AREA TOTAL 289,612 288,925 288,234 290,295 283,284 284,004 284,719 285,430 286,137 286,840 287,539 282,560 290,973 10-25% cc FOREST DENSITY CLASS FOREST DENSITY 2006 2005 2004 2007 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 YEAR 1996 2008 Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 173

SUPPORT TABLE 5.1: FIREWOOD SUPPLY from NON-FOREST AREAS 1996 - 2008 ESTIMATES AREA YEAR SUPPLY from SUPPLY from TOTAL SUPPLY AGRICULTURE RANGELAND AGRICULTURE RANGELAND hectare hectare 000 cbm 000 cbm 000 cbm 1996 706,776 2,339,386 819 446 1,265

1997 707,683 2,345,887 820 447 1,267 1998 708,622 2,352,605 821 448 1,269 1999 709,593 2,359,544 822 449 1,272 2000 710,598 2,366,714 824 451 1,274 2001 711,637 2,374,119 825 452 1,277 2002 712,712 2,381,767 826 454 1,280 2003 713,823 2,389,667 827 455 1,283 2004 714,972 2,397,825 829 457 1,285 2005 716,160 2,406,249 830 458 1,288 2006 717,388 2,414,947 831 460 1,292 2007 718,658 2,423,928 833 462 1,295 2008 719,971 2,433,200 834 464 1,298

TOTAL 9,923 5,457 15,380 174 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

SUPPORT TABLE 5.1: FIREWOOD SUPPLY from NON-FOREST AREAS 1996 - 2008 MALAKAND ESTIMATES AREA YEAR SUPPLY from SUPPLY from TOTAL SUPPLY AGRICULTURE RANGELAND AGRICULTURE RANGELAND hectare hectare 000 cbm 000 cbm 000 cbm 1996 389,319 1,688,966 451 322 773

1997 389,742 1,692,705 452 322 774 1998 390,176 1,696,545 452 323 775 1999 390,623 1,700,492 453 324 777 2000 391,081 1,704,546 453 325 778 2001 391,552 1,708,711 454 326 779 2002 392,037 1,712,991 454 326 781 2003 392,534 1,717,388 455 327 782 2004 393,045 1,721,906 456 328 784 2005 393,570 1,726,547 456 329 785 2006 394,109 1,731,316 457 330 787 2007 394,664 1,736,216 457 331 788 2008 395,233 1,741,251 458 332 790

TOTAL 5,457 3,923 9,380

HAZARA ESTIMATES AREA YEAR SUPPLY from SUPPLY from TOTAL SUPPLY AGRICULTURE RANGELAND AGRICULTURE RANGELAND hectare hectare 000 cbm 000 cbm 000 cbm 1996 317,457 650,420 368 124 492

1997 317,941 653,183 368 124 493 1998 318,446 656,059 369 125 494 1999 318,970 659,053 370 126 495 2000 319,516 662,168 370 126 496 2001 320,084 665,408 371 127 498 2002 320,675 668,776 372 127 499 2003 321,289 672,279 372 128 500 2004 321,927 675,919 373 129 502 2005 322,590 679,701 374 129 503 2006 323,279 683,630 375 130 505 2007 323,994 687,712 376 131 507 2008 324,737 691,950 376 132 508

TOTAL 4,466 1,535 6,001 Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 175 497 561 618 481 680 546 607 668 595 656 582 630 643 569 617 556 590 604 542 576 527 512 697 530 624 464 000 cbm 000 cbm SUPPLY in SUPPLY SUPPLY in SUPPLY 272.11 272.11 255.90 255.47 282.19 251.99 253.03 279.88 270.64 277.44 269.08 274.87 265.72 267.45 272.15 263.90 269.28 259.93 261.97 266.24 257.76 263.01 259.57 275.83 250.29 281.76 247.66 STOCK/ STOCK/ HECTARE STOCK/ STOCK/ HECTARE 75,311 75,311 70,958 88,346 68,664 86,675 84,944 83,151 81,293 79,369 77,376 73,173 89,126 66,252 80,159 97,077 78,013 95,393 93,664 90,062 91,887 88,186 84,281 86,260 82,247 99,549 75,767 TOTAL TOTAL 27,483 38,223 26,040 37,208 36,152 35,053 33,912 32,724 31,490 30,206 28,871 38,553 24,533 30,312 37,941 29,350 37,178 36,396 34,768 35,593 33,923 32,164 33,055 31,250 39,332 28,354 51-100% cc 51-100% cc 29,266 36,608 28,340 35,874 35,121 34,348 33,554 32,740 31,905 31,048 30,168 43,110 43,110 36,117 36,117 37,141 27,361 33,855 32,675 42,192 41,249 39,282 40,280 38,257 37,202 35,002 44,184 31,429 26-50% cc STOCK in 000 cbm STOCK 26-50% cc STOCK in 000 cbm STOCK 13,514 14,284 13,593 13,672 13,750 13,827 13,904 13,981 14,058 14,209 14,133 16,011 16,011 13,432 14,359 16,026 15,988 16,023 16,019 16,015 16,007 15,999 16,003 15,995 15,991 16,033 15,984 10-25% cc FOREST DENSITY CLASS FOREST DENSITY 10-25% cc FOREST DENSITY CLASS FOREST DENSITY HAZARA, by Density Class MALAKAND, by Density Class 302,511 302,511 313,071 272,489 309,690 306,172 298,703 294,744 290,627 286,349 277,286 281,904 267,508 356,751 308,317 352,475 348,083 343,570 334,169 338,933 324,246 329,275 319,080 313,771 316,318 TOTAL 360,912 302,713 TOTAL 70,257 47,863 68,390 66,449 64,430 62,332 60,149 57,880 55,520 50,516 53,067 72,052 45,105 69,738 53,946 68,336 66,898 65,422 62,352 63,907 59,120 60,757 57,440 55,716 71,104 52,131 51-100% cc 51-100% cc 90,511 90,511 87,647 98,672 96,022 93,302 113,218 113,218 110,947 110,947 108,617 106,226 103,773 101,256 84,708 111,699 111,699 118,316 118,316 115,054 115,054 133,325 101,055 130,488 127,572 124,572 121,488 108,250 104,703 115,431 115,431 97,304 136,083 26-50% cc 26-50% cc TOTAL AREA in hectare AREA TOTAL TOTAL AREA in hectare AREA TOTAL 129,596 136,979 130,353 131,106 131,854 132,598 133,339 134,075 134,807 135,535 136,259 153,688 153,316 153,651 153,613 153,576 153,502 153,539 153,465 153,390 153,427 153,353 128,835 137,695 153,725 153,278 10-25% cc FOREST DENSITY CLASS FOREST DENSITY SUPPORT TABLE 5.2 (b): FOREST AREA and STOCK DEVELOPMENT - TIME SERIES 1996 to 2008 and STOCK AREA 5.2 (b): FOREST SUPPORT TABLE 10-25% cc SUPPORT TABLE 5.2 (a): FOREST AREA and STOCK DEVELOPMENT - TIME SERIES 1996 to 2008 and STOCK AREA 5.2 (a): FOREST SUPPORT TABLE FOREST DENSITY CLASS FOREST DENSITY 1997 2007 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 YEAR 1996 2008 1997 2007 1998 1999 2000 2002 2001 2003 2005 2004 2006 YEAR 1996 2008 176 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

6 WOOD CONSUMPTION and FOREST DETERORATION

TABLE 6.1 (a): WOOD CONSUMPTION and SUPPLY GAP 1996 WOOD CONSUMPTION UNIT VALUE

TOTAL CONSUMPTION 000 cbm 5,094

- FIREWOOD 000 cbm 5,000 - COMMERCIAL TIMBER 000 cbm 94

WOOD SUPPLY UNIT VALUE TOTAL SUPPLY 000 cbm 2,741 - from FOREST 000 cbm 1,476 - Plantation/Residues 000 cbm 156 - Sustainable Yield 1995/96 000 cbm 1,321

- from NON-FOREST 000 cbm 1,265 SUPPLY GAP 000 cbm -2,353

TABLE 6.1 (b): WOOD CONSUMPTION and SUPPLY GAP 2008 WOOD CONSUMPTION UNIT VALUE TOTAL CONSUMPTION 000 cbm 6,740 - FIREWOOD 000 cbm 6,548 - COMMERCIAL TIMBER 000 cbm 192

WOOD SUPPLY UNIT VALUE TOTAL SUPPLY 000 cbm 2,733 - from FOREST 000 cbm 1,435 - Plantation/Residues 000 cbm 441 - Sustainable Yield 2008 000 cbm 994

- from NON-FOREST 000 cbm 1,298 SUPPLY GAP 000 cbm -4,007 Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 177

TABLE 6.2: WOOD CONSUMPTION 1996 - 2008 FIREWOOD and COMMERCIAL HARVESTING

FIREWOOD COMMERCIAL TOTAL YEAR CONSUMP- ROUNDWOOD CONSUMP- TION1 HARVEST2 TION 000 cbm 000 cbm 000 cbm 1996 5,000 94 5,094 1997 5,112 73 5,184 1998 5,226 64 5,291 1999 5,344 89 5,433 2000 5,465 70 5,535 2001 5,589 73 5,662 2002 5,716 162 5,878 2003 5,846 78 5,923 2004 5,979 102 6,081 2005 6,116 94 6,210 2006 6,256 136 6,393 2007 6,400 156 6,557 2008 6,548 192 6,740

TOTAL 69,597 1,289 70,886 NOTE 1: see SUPPORT TABLE 4 (a and b) NOTE 2: Roundwood only from sanctioned harvest and illegal fellings recorded by the Forest Department see TABLE 4.1 (b)

TABLE 6.3: FIRE-WOOD SUPPLY 1996 - 2008, in 000 cubic meter

FIRE- FIRE-WOOD SUPPLY from NON-FOREST1 FIRE-WOOD from OTHER WOOD SOURCES WOOD from YEAR GROWING STOCK4 AGRICULTURE RANGELAND AGRICULTURE HARVESTING PLANTATION3 OTHER WOOD & RANGELAND RESIDUES2 SOURCES 1996 819 446 1,265 21 135 156 3,579

1997 820 447 1,267 16 104 120 3,725 1998 821 448 1,269 14 135 149 3,808 1999 822 449 1,272 20 155 174 3,898 2000 824 451 1,274 15 184 200 3,991 2001 825 452 1,277 16 260 276 4,036 2002 826 454 1,280 36 226 262 4,174 2003 827 455 1,283 17 270 287 4,276 2004 829 457 1,285 22 282 305 4,389 2005 830 458 1,288 21 289 310 4,517 2006 831 460 1,292 30 387 417 4,547 2007 833 462 1,295 34 339 373 4,733 2008 834 464 1,298 42 399 441 4,809

TOTAL 9,923 5,457 15,380 284 3,031 3,315 50,902 in percent 14.3 7.8 22.1 0.4 4.4 4.8 73.1 NOTE 1: see SUPPORT TABLE 5.1 NOTE 2: Branchwood and other residues from recorded harvesting valued at 22% of the roundwood volume NOTE 3: see ANNEX 7, APPENDIX: Plantation NOTE 4: Total firewood consumption minus supplies from non-forest sources minus supplies from other wood sources 178 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan 6 -711 -711 -648 -752 -757 -724 -735 -773 -636 -670 -677 -797 -577 -651 -8,313 000cbm OTHER OUT-TAKE 5 -3,523 -2,500 -2,597 -2,736 -2,835 -2,910 -3,163 -3,374 -3,626 -3,208 -3,862 -2,353 -4,007 -38,342 000cbm SUPPLY GAP SUPPLY CONSUMPTION/ 4,611 4,611 3,798 3,872 3,987 4,060 4,109 4,336 4,491 4,684 4,354 4,889 3,673 5,001 52,191 TOTAL 000cbm 4 3,725 3,808 3,898 3,991 4,036 4,517 4,174 4,389 4,547 4,276 4,733 3,579 4,809 50,902 000cbm FIREWOOD 3 73 64 89 70 73 94 78 94 162 102 136 156 192 1,289 000cbm CONSUMPTION from FORESTS HARVESTING 2 994 1,117 1,117 1,298 1,274 1,250 1,225 1,199 1,173 1,088 1,058 1,145 1,027 1,321 1 13,850 000cbm SUPPLY SUSTAINABLE SUSTAINABLE 1.74 0.70 2008 3,252 3,355 3,461 3,570 3,683 3,799 4,044 4,171 4,303 3,920 4,440 3,150 4,658 249.06 46,654 STOCK 000cbm LOSS of ANALYSIS: WHY ARE FORESTS DETERIORATING WHY ANALYSIS: 151,117 151,117 185,423 182,068 178,608 175,037 171,355 167,555 159,592 155,420 163,636 146,677 % 188,675 142,019 STOCK DEVELOPMENT STOCK STOCK STOCK 000cbm cbm/hectare cbm/ha./year DEVELOPMENT TABLE 6.4: SUPPLY and CONSUMPTION - TIME SERIES 1996 to 2008 6.4: SUPPLY TABLE 0.70 1.95 1996 7,911 7,911 9,011 7,409 7,656 8,174 8,444 8,723 9,307 9,612 9,927 7,171 278.60 10,250 10,585 107,009 hectare FOREST AREA LOSS AREA 1 669,821 662,165 654,254 646,080 637,636 628,912 619,902 610,595 600,983 591,056 580,805 677,230 570,220 hectare AREA DEVELOPMENT AREA FOREST AREA AREA FOREST DEVELOPMENT PARAMETERS 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 YEAR 1996 2008 TOTAL AVERAGE STOCK AVERAGE NOTE 1: Roundwood and branchwood combined NOTE 2: allowable out-take under sustainable use from the remaining forest stock NOTE 3: roundwood only NOTE 4: consumption from forest stock including branchwood wood consumption minus sustainable NOTE 5: Total supply stock decrease minus consumption/supply gap NOTE 6: Total YIELD as % of STOCK INCREMENT Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 179

ANNEX 8

PART 2 MARKETING and REVENUE DATA

LIST of TABLES

TABLE 7.1 (a): TOTAL TIMBER SALE by FDC 1985/86 to 2005/06 TABLE 7.1 (b): TIMBER SALE by FDC: LOGS 1985/86 to 2005/06 TABLE 7.1 (c): TOTAL TIMBER SALE by FDC: SCANTS 1985/86 to 2005/06

TABLE 7.1 (a): AVERAGE TIMBER PRICES 1985/86 to 2005/06 TABLE 7.2 (b): TIMBER PRICES: LOGS 1985/86 to 2005/06 TABLE 7.3 (c): TIMBER PRICES: SCANTS 1985/86 to 2005/06

TABLE 8 (a): REVENUE REALIZATION 1985/86 to 1992/93 TABLE 8 (b): REVENUE REALIZATION 1983/94 to 2007/08

SUPPORT TABLE: GDP, WPI, and TIMBER INFLATORS 1985/86 to 2007/08 180 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan 25.721 55.298 71.820 326.788 375.697 404.589 192.088 759.320 708.681 521.861 412.309 343.293 290.285 176.831 243.132 786.271 396.651 193.040 805.352 227.069 555.201 347.354 419.462 mill. Rs. 4,515.601 3,355.697 Sale Value TOTAL 2,598 6,577 19,529 26,997 24,184 20,498 10,778 40,894 90,173 20,757 81,940 95,502 38,885 73,955 96,473 91,165 40,576 cbm 120,670 147,291 131,035 122,121 129,121 107,957 527,485 863,658 Volume 0.356 0.950 0.018 3.370 32.111 32.111 49.171 19.832 22.763 14.669 39.990 31.679 10.497 31.825 31.993 30.255 43.813 242.041 mill. Rs. Sale Value Chir 5 30 222 795 6,354 9,940 8,760 2,644 7,432 11,862 11,862 16,719 18,952 14,833 21,018 13,555 cbm 10,333 108,438 Volume 6.780 7.570 95.523 65.857 28.148 76.303 73.982 34.929 50.403 44.286 38.147 311.589 311.589 114.079 114.079 158.749 106.209 322.303 192.020 125.100 128.335 259.731 278.344 236.554 144.729 mill. Rs. 1,483.031 1,157.829 Sale Value Fir 8,876 1,157 1,949 7,312 7,319 11,618 11,618 16,724 10,665 59,589 80,575 61,873 53,258 17,620 36,201 17,925 21,450 48,382 23,428 62,105 21,139 44,522 19,706 44,689 cbm 256,173 357,514 Volume 4.407 9.230 66.482 10.605 98.576 40.794 83.861 31.744 79.249 68.545 38.487 44.930 79.615 147.526 100.757 109.950 174.564 161.480 131.523 135.461 170.006 128.778 100.246 801.965 mill. Rs. 1,034.991 Sale Value Sale Kail 495 8,084 6,330 6,771 6,369 1,841 1,505 6,808 4,469 7,952 9,231 27,024 32,361 32,933 25,536 23,676 22,865 16,671 14,385 30,313 21,775 22,389 25,069 cbm 119,998 119,998 200,556 Volume TABLE 7.1 (a): Timber Sale by FDC - LOGS and SCANTS 7.1 (a): Timber TABLE 83.383 59.750 14.535 38.498 33.067 84.195 78.588 116.191 116.191 117.773 117.773 110.157 110.157 112.167 112.167 188.430 223.996 205.067 175.556 156.522 226.195 189.050 390.128 346.505 157.875 144.233 150.290 mill. Rs. 1,153.862 1,953.766 Sale Value Deodar 946 2,539 3,943 6,748 2,510 2,787 1,961 8,970 22,195 28,000 26,290 26,608 16,466 21,535 13,003 18,673 30,227 21,309 34,059 32,541 16,822 24,644 10,845 cbm 197,150 140,981 Volume Year 2005/06 2004/05 2003/04 2002/03 1992/93 2001/02 1991/92 2000/01 1990/91 1999/00 1989/90 1998/99 1988/89 1996/97 1997/98 1987/88 1995/96 1986/87 1994/95 1985/86 1993/94 TOTAL TOTAL AVERAGE AVERAGE (1) PRE-BAN BACKPERIOD (8 years) (2) BAN PERIOD (13 years) Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 181 8.379 95.588 42.425 41.713 116.520 116.520 240.918 295.827 187.715 161.454 404.033 147.860 169.463 355.510 178.685 225.268 195.610 217.424 307.692 369.084 375.681 279.276 229.328 150.813 2,440.290 1,927.343 mill. Rs. Sale Value TOTAL 957 7,459 5,191 61,119 61,119 73,802 54,599 25,759 74,252 81,332 60,920 54,280 66,529 25,620 13,674 28,762 77,569 87,401 92,696 69,929 14,931 17,446 18,506 12,106 cbm 334,862 590,413 Volume 2.964 9.124 0.420 0.001 24.113 24.113 25.577 28.988 27.593 32.072 14.669 22.623 19.794 18.152 45.598 38.532 204.615 mill. Rs. Sale Value Chir 1 708 109 6,774 2,318 8,760 8,784 5,885 9,202 11,393 11,393 11,082 11,082 11,692 11,692 18,961 15,736 12,931 93,532 cbm Volume 4.189 0.584 89.118 89.118 12.255 98.569 67.274 59.635 39.072 19.817 52.001 69.577 18.477 61.756 55.744 21.813 73.352 43.490 41.637 69.603 129.981 132.477 133.616 146.325 775.258 538.194 mill. Rs. Sale Value Sale Fir 246 4,924 5,536 1,286 8,813 6,336 7,150 11,836 11,836 11,535 11,535 10,704 23,095 27,399 12,654 39,213 21,785 30,706 28,867 12,104 33,285 13,558 32,763 46,685 33,270 cbm 164,503 219,195 Volume 5.551 8.167 1.152 28.207 71.499 57.360 41.681 96.855 25.395 77.012 47.667 45.881 47.089 47.375 28.389 16.747 92.436 81.330 90.589 37.571 62.281 41.940 47.596 541.849 458.880 mill. Rs. Sale Value Kail 961 206 6,055 5,540 5,491 3,014 1,688 4,384 4,694 3,627 3,688 TABLE 7.1 (b): Timber Sale by FDC - LOGS 7.1 (b): Timber TABLE 11,035 11,035 16,423 13,828 17,099 20,559 10,746 17,440 15,238 15,021 26,005 20,018 15,898 78,714 cbm 136,790 Volume 6.642 93.399 96.771 90.707 83.435 59.280 69.907 66.134 85.670 60.364 15.061 29.356 93.169 35.458 98.270 33.614 111.478 111.478 168.073 145.602 108.602 122.109 135.986 175.358 725.654 mill. Rs. 1,084.651 Sale Value Deodar 962 505 6,342 7,974 9,713 5,736 2,217 9,680 1,734 3,344 6,415 1,267 28,164 10,902 17,612 19,243 16,995 12,429 16,107 13,663 16,332 19,849 20,107 cbm 82,443 140,897 Volume Year 1985/86 1993/94 1994/95 1986/87 1995/96 1987/88 1988/89 1996/97 1989/90 1998/99 1997/98 1999/00 TOTAL TOTAL 1990/91 2000/01 1991/92 2001/02 1992/93 2002/03 2004/05 2003/04 2005/06 AVERAGE AVERAGE (1) PRE-BAN BACKPERIOD (8 years) (2) BAN PERIOD (13 years) 182 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan 41.713 99.993 94.304 95.588 42.425 43.507 240.918 375.681 224.406 195.610 363.314 181.326 194.444 161.454 147.860 178.685 217.424 307.692 369.084 331.394 313.021 317.514 169.463 1,927.343 2,357.233 Sale Value TOTAL 5,191 7,459 6,075 11,192 11,192 61,119 61,119 73,802 69,929 25,480 28,762 27,004 25,302 20,243 13,674 13,741 74,252 60,920 66,529 77,569 87,401 92,696 66,471 57,404 46,233 590,413 328,929 Volume 2.964 9.124 0.420 0.001 24.113 24.113 25.577 38.532 45.598 28.988 27.593 32.072 14.669 22.623 19.794 18.152 204.615 Sale Value Chir 1 708 109 9,202 6,774 8,760 8,784 5,885 2,318 11,082 11,082 11,393 11,393 11,692 11,692 93,532 18,961 15,736 12,931 Volume 4.189 67.274 69.153 55.744 57.028 32.000 18.477 21.731 58.659 21.813 26.646 12.255 39.072 19.817 52.001 61.756 73.352 90.150 110.212 110.212 538.194 741.358 146.325 103.495 133.616 129.089 Sale Value Fir 7,276 4,924 4,950 7,201 1,286 5,536 4,579 11,836 11,836 25,118 27,399 33,270 12,008 13,558 13,995 12,396 10,704 21,785 28,867 33,285 32,763 46,685 33,910 26,806 219,195 161,147 Volume 8.167 5.551 8.949 57.360 90.589 46.941 16.747 28.389 41.736 78.961 33.496 39.573 32.266 64.764 28.207 25.395 47.667 45.881 47.375 92.436 81.330 85.241 63.243 458.880 514.450 Sale Value Kail 961 929 TABLE 7.1 (b): Timber Sale by FDC: LOGS 7.1 (b): Timber TABLE in cubic meter and mill. Rs. at current prices 6,011 6,011 5,515 3,014 5,491 1,688 4,485 6,392 2,949 5,913 9,036 17,099 76,870 15,898 16,423 10,746 17,440 15,238 15,021 26,005 20,018 17,701 12,699 136,790 Volume 1.051 7.912 90.707 81.761 93.169 60.364 29.356 36.526 15.061 93.399 59.280 69.907 66.134 85.670 111.478 111.478 725.654 108.312 180.858 102.289 122.109 135.986 107.940 159.209 142.537 1,062.893 Sale Value Deodar 181 962 567 6,285 9,680 7,958 5,736 9,713 2,217 1,757 6,617 3,591 17,612 81,710 28,164 16,995 16,107 13,663 16,332 19,849 20,107 12,542 17,789 12,078 140,897 Volume Year 1985/86 1986/87 1987/88 1988/89 1989/90 1990/91 1991/92 1992/93 1993/94 1994/95 1995/96 1996/97 1997/98 1998/99 1999/00 2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 TOTAL TOTAL Average Average (2) BAN PERIOD (1) PRE-BAN BACKPERIOD Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 183 75.569 29.395 13.586 17.343 81.242 73.670 45.180 65.615 111.600 111.600 175.975 146.369 125.313 383.639 339.597 147.683 214.169 194.885 171.383 430.761 401.319 259.373 159.639 178.544 2,075.311 2,075.311 1,428.354 mill. Rs. Sale Value TOTAL 7,423 8,492 6,738 5,567 3,319 1,386 1,642 7,083 50,741 54,595 12,132 43,635 44,552 23,644 13,265 20,821 41,222 47,789 13,035 36,566 14,817 22,222 34,156 cbm 192,623 273,244 Volume 0.356 3.573 1.680 2.968 9.488 0.000 0.017 7.918 0.530 1.373 7.566 3.005 0.406 4.232 4.678 5.281 37.426 mill. Rs. Sale Value 0 4 Chir 30 87 113 113 780 469 326 658 1,155 3,787 3,216 3,440 1,863 2,057 1,131 14,906 cbm Volume 6.336 3.381 6.195 5.214 25.920 69.631 64.572 22.367 20.559 63.345 16.452 21.981 58.758 30.585 54.444 77.454 25.892 118.667 118.667 165.264 188.686 127.254 148.363 137.984 707.772 619.635 mill. Rs. Sale Value Fir 663 912 1,725 5,189 4,328 2,805 1,776 4,062 2,394 7,334 5,820 9,614 1,642 7,052 29,111 29,111 26,320 33,890 19,973 17,676 22,893 21,427 17,290 10,435 91,670 cbm 138,319 Volume 5.054 1.064 3.255 99.930 58.818 47.668 28.910 83.974 39.087 80.150 12.406 51.200 14.997 37.980 32.160 58.450 20.878 73.151 13.092 57.279 42.886 37.934 16.723 493.142 343.085 mill. Rs. Sale Value Kail 544 153 289 4,396 2,703 2,077 1,985 6,928 1,317 1,455 8,438 2,412 5,636 5,424 9,754 3,639 8,561 7,971 3,176 5,352 11,125 11,125 12,344 10,515 TABLE 7.1 (c): Timber Sale by FDC - SCANTS 7.1 (c): Timber TABLE 41,283 63,766 cbm Volume 9.141 7.893 49.769 17.921 13.072 24.292 18.006 69.081 70.852 53.447 49.793 51.639 80.447 14.288 19.307 61.104 53.526 66.855 18.768 114.718 114.718 130.827 244.527 178.432 869.115 869.115 428.208 mill. Rs. Sale Value Deodar 600 333 570 441 776 999 1,271 7,893 6,441 6,753 3,234 7,872 5,028 2,566 4,314 5,920 7,032 4,503 4,376 12,516 10,276 17,797 14,816 56,254 58,538 cbm Volume Year 2005/06 2004/05 2003/04 2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 1992/93 1999/00 1991/92 1989/90 1990/91 1998/99 1997/98 1988/89 1996/97 1995/96 1987/88 1994/95 1986/87 1993/94 1985/86 TOTAL TOTAL AVERAGE AVERAGE (1) PRE-BAN BACKPERIOD (8 years) (2) BAN PERIOD (13 years) 184 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

TABLE 7.2 (a): Timber Prices - LOGS and SCANTS (FDC) in Pak. Rs. per cubic meter (1) PRE-BAN BACKPERIOD (8 years) AVERAGE PRICES: LOGS and SCANTS Year TOTAL DEODAR KAIL FIR CHIR

1985/86 3,447 2,063 1,805 1,514 2,354 1986/87 3,688 2,675 1,890 2,136 2,610 1987/88 4,509 2,998 2,350 2,110 2,967 1988/89 5,469 3,542 2,044 1,675 3,219 1989/90 5,883 3,860 2,349 1,921 3,376 1990/91 6,678 3,994 3,103 2,290 3,983 1991/92 7,324 4,990 4,000 3,121 4,811 1992/93 10,092 6,460 5,229 4,145 6,293

% INCREASE 192.8 213.1 189.8 173.8 167.3

(2) BAN PERIOD (13 years)

1993/94 9,385 5,752 5,313 4,305 6,090 1994/95 10,174 5,608 4,482 3,970 6,237 1995/96 12,907 8,126 5,368 4,274 8,233 1996/97 14,539 9,966 7,160 3,202 10,201 1997/98 12,281 7,103 4,773 8,519 1998/99 13,737 5,992 4,330 8,395 1999/00 16,863 7,047 3,850 6,664 2000/01 13,812 5,013 3,884 8,407 2001/02 15,362 8,901 5,859 9,899 2002/03 23,805 10,438 5,668 9,371 2003/04 27,923 16,238 9,959 16,730 2004/05 29,466 15,918 9,492 13,916 2005/06 32,844 18,248 10,762 11,985 16,734

% INCREASE 250.0 217.3 102.6 178.4 174.8 Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 185

TABLE 7.2 (b): Timber Prices - LOGS (FDC) in Pak. Rs. per cubic meter (1) PRE-BAN BACKPERIOD (8 years) AVERAGE PRICES: LOGS Year TOTAL DEODAR KAIL FIR CHIR

1985/86 3,316 1,718 1,145 1,455 2,174 1986/87 3,488 2,363 1,793 2,116 2,427 1987/88 4,340 2,733 1,674 2,038 2,773 1988/89 4,840 3,011 1,801 1,675 2,686 1989/90 5,246 3,154 1,855 1,749 2,803 1990/91 6,152 3,555 2,239 2,253 3,520 1991/92 6,763 4,063 2,862 3,084 3,982 1992/93 9,625 5,698 4,398 4,115 5,372

% INCREASE 190.2 231.8 284.1 182.7 147.1

(2) BAN PERIOD (13 years)

1993/94 8,876 5,171 4,268 4,279 5,418 1994/95 8,734 4,711 3,315 3,937 4,968 1995/96 11,714 6,979 4,314 3,852 6,550 1996/97 13,619 8,500 5,748 421 8,793 1997/98 10,524 5,556 3,752 6,990 1998/99 11,477 5,170 4,111 6,801 1999/00 15,651 5,779 3,940 5,688 2000/01 13,242 4,838 3,258 8,035 2001/02 13,148 5,599 2,380 8,760 2002/03 20,451 8,570 4,935 7,804 2003/04 27,334 13,268 6,571 16,008 2004/05 29,390 11,565 7,726 12,392 2005/06 26,520 12,905 9,734 12,458

% INCREASE 198.8 149.6 128.1 129.9 186 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

TABLE 7.2 (c): Timber Prices - SCANTS (FDC) in Pak. Rs. per cubic meter (1) PRE-BAN BACKPERIOD (8 years) AVERAGE PRICES: SCANTS Year TOTAL DEODAR KAIL FIR CHIR

1985/86 4,289 3,124 2,481 2,057 2,953 1986/87 4,476 3,597 3,175 2,200 3,466 1987/88 5,567 3,849 3,181 2,462 3,538 1988/89 6,560 4,501 2,997 4,720 1989/90 6,895 4,869 3,171 2,505 4,374 1990/91 8,298 5,642 4,076 2,569 4,908 1991/92 8,753 6,493 5,568 3,584 6,220 1992/93 10,453 7,548 6,279 4,580 7,561

% INCREASE 143.7 141.6 153.1 122.7 156.1

(2) BAN PERIOD (13 years)

1993/94 10,321 6,691 6,440 4,569 7,093 1994/95 12,043 7,500 6,481 4,209 8,398 1995/96 13,739 10,371 7,199 4,680 10,450 1996/97 15,999 13,331 10,095 4,167 12,920 1997/98 15,399 10,309 6,871 11,470 1998/99 16,988 9,418 5,062 12,173 1999/00 18,032 9,285 3,568 8,858 2000/01 16,027 6,951 5,099 9,800 2001/02 17,900 11,250 6,796 10,563 2002/03 31,297 14,563 7,973 13,575 2003/04 39,279 22,950 14,919 18,597 2004/05 29,892 21,758 13,419 17,237 2005/06 39,148 22,731 15,022 11,985 23,708

% INCREASE 279.3 239.7 133.3 162.3 234.2 Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 187 100.0 178.811 311.420 186.722 403.593 256.305 157.061 145.070 369.799 297.966 2,050.442 Total Revenue Total 0.1 0.236 1.194 0.675 0.020 1.889 Refund Deducted amount to be 12.2 31.375 22.385 16.241 31.747 31.508 41.922 48.486 22.453 36.256 250.998 FDC Misce. Revenue on Timber on Timber Sources of Removed by including Duty 11.5 1.185 1.793 29.500 22.521 44.742 44.172 56.427 20.604 44.559 236.003 Revenue Fees and managed by Forest from Duty, from Duty, Forests not Department Senignorage 3.5 8.984 0.819 2.537 2.906 1.846 1.450 1.342 23.117 37.858 71.875 Timber Revenue Confiscated from Drift and 3.7 5.011 9.502 3.204 1.845 4.312 5.004 11.026 29.200 16.416 76.018 and Produce Timber and Timber Purchasers Consumers Removed by Other Forest Revenue from 36.3 86.116 93.032 70.776 75.686 51.900 111.088 158.104 190.587 744.257 FDC TABLE 8 (a): REVENUE REALIZATION 1985/86 to 1994/95 8 (a): REVENUE REALIZATION TABLE Produce timber and other Forest Removed by Revenue from 32.8 84.148 21.434 31.741 63.466 36.859 52.957 88.325 85.876 292.522 673.180 Produce Removed by Forest timber and Department other Forest Revenue from % Year 1986/87 1987/88 1988/89 1989/90 1990/91 1991/92 1992/93 1985/86 at current prices, in mill. Pak Rs. Average TOTAL 188 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan 100.0 411.848 342.629 349.047 495.255 490.230 388.280 261.330 558.813 352.335 344.852 247.925 257.777 318.312 348.352 380.415 539.243 5,706.228 Total Revenue Total 0.0 0.646 0.005 0.313 0.290 0.438 0.847 0.055 0.174 0.015 2.609 Refund Deducted amount to be 17.3 99.628 30.188 48.781 75.177 59.633 32.939 35.947 41.368 65.936 60.949 69.494 85.630 73.882 48.705 119.018 107.704 989.043 FDC Misce. Revenue on Timber on Timber Sources of Removed by including Duty 20.7 79.726 57.544 36.545 49.335 82.089 71.100 78.570 30.587 17.150 44.299 62.053 40.933 131.067 104.544 269.097 102.487 1,178.556 Revenue Fees and managed by Forest from Duty, from Duty, Forests not Department Senignorage 4.0 9.267 8.254 7.616 9.629 1.183 4.478 1.329 4.465 4.257 11.748 15.112 12.086 14.627 17.150 31.063 89.522 226.674 Timber Revenue Confiscated from Drift and 6.7 4.452 2.380 2.070 2.601 4.039 1.851 12.686 16.275 55.391 58.900 57.375 56.283 34.189 25.422 30.698 42.141 and 381.331 Produce Timber and Timber Purchasers Consumers Removed by Other Forest Revenue from 12.7 88.284 67.806 45.847 65.466 89.106 94.625 48.140 128.550 142.412 722.096 FDC TABLE 8 (b): REVENUE REALIZATION 1993/94 to 2007/08 8 (b): REVENUE REALIZATION TABLE Produce timber and other Forest Removed by Revenue from 38.7 64.141 54.441 86.328 50.195 38.860 55.449 45.878 87.697 147.409 253.948 402.063 356.371 243.841 165.584 108.937 197.404 2,211.137 Produce Removed by Forest timber and Department other Forest Revenue from % Year 1993/94 1994/95 1995/96 1996/97 1997/98 1998/99 1999/00 2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006I07 2007/08 at current prices, in mill. Pak Rs. Average TOTAL Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 189

Explanatory Notes to TABLE 9

1. Timber and Other Forest Produce removed by Forest Department represents the sale value of departmentally extracted timber, fire-wood, medicinal plants, etc.

2. Timber removed by FDC represents the sale value of government share of timber extracted by FDC and does not include the royalty paid to the concessionists or right holders

3. Timber, firewood, grasses, etc. removed by purchasers and contractors represents the sale value of forest products removed by agencies other than Forest Department and FDC

4. Drift, waifwood and confiscated Forest Produces represents timber and other forest produce which has been confiscated by Courts and otherwise seized by Forest Department and which is not now under trial and has been sold by Forest Department.

5. Revenue from Duty, Seneiorage Fee and Forests Not Managed by Forest Department represents the value of Duty, Seneiorage Fees and Other Taxes etc. realized by Forest Department on the transport of timber in NWFP.

6. Miscellaneous sources of revenue includes revenues realized on account of fines, forefeitures, compensation amonuts and also includes duty amounts paid by FDC.

7. Refund amounts shows any refunds that Forest Department has to refund on account of over-realization, court decisions, etc.

8. Total revenue is the total revenues realized during the year less the refund amount that has to be made.

9. Year is financial year, which covers the period from first July of the First Year in question and goes upto 30th June of the next year.

190 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

SUPPORT TABLE: GDP, WPI and TIMBER INFLATORS 19984/85 to 2007/08

FINANCIAL GDP INFLATION WPI INFLATION TIMBER INFLATION YEAR INFLATOR1 RATE INFLATOR2 RATE INFLATOR3 RATE

(1) PRE-BAN BACKPERIOD 1984/85 96.809 95.582 95.340 1985/86 100.000 3.2 100.000 4.4 100.000 4.7 1986/87 104.518 4.3 105.002 4.8 100.694 0.7 1987/88 114.568 8.8 115.524 9.1 105.571 4.6 1988/89 124.404 7.9 126.689 8.8 117.129 9.9 1989/90 132.289 6.0 135.933 6.8 144.364 18.9 1990/91 149.732 11.6 151.873 10.5 153.711 6.1 1991/92 164.549 9.0 166.814 9.0 176.613 13.0 1992/93 179.183 8.2 179.085 6.9 200.253 11.8

% increase 85.1 87.4 110.0

(2) BAN PERIOD 1993/94 201.518 11.1 208.457 14.1 222.111 9.8 1994/95 229.297 12.1 241.807 13.8 248.349 10.6 1995/96 248.280 7.6 268.658 10.0 269.623 7.9 1996/97 284.604 12.8 303.619 11.5 311.048 13.3 1997/98 303.227 6.1 323.605 6.2 338.285 8.1 1998/99 320.979 5.5 344.137 6.0 349.014 3.1 1999/00 339.916 5.9 350.243 5.9 367.398 5.0 2000/01 367.018 7.4 372.006 5.9 389.686 5.7 2001/02 376.158 2.4 379.748 2.0 395.341 1.4 2002/03 392.807 4.2 400.915 5.3 394.561 -0.2 2003/04 423.182 7.2 432.610 7.3 474.448 16.8 2004/05 452.912 6.6 461.813 6.3 549.190 13.6 2005/06 500.411 9.5 508.463 9.2 553.555 0.8 2006/07 540.334 7.4 543.804 6.5 631.649 12.4 2007/08 612.773 11.8 591.124 8.0 673.112 6.2

% increase 204.1 183.6 203.1

SOURCES GDP INFLATOR * State Bank of Pakistan, Handbook of Economic Statistics 2005 (for GDP Inflator up to FY 00) * Ministry of Finance, Government of Pakistan, Economic Survey of Pakistan (2008/09) Chapter 7 on Inflation (for GDP Inflator of FY01-FY08) WHOLESALE PRICE INDEX (WPI): Statistical Year Book 2008, Bureau of Statistics (page 341) TIMBER PRICE INDEX * 50 Years of Pakistan in Statistics Volume-IV (1947-97), FBS, Statistics Division, GoP (1998) page 255-271 * Pakistan Statiscal Year Book 2008 , FBS, Statistics Division, GoP (2009) page 341-345 Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 191

ANNEX 10

FOREST ANALYSIS by WORKING PLAN AREAS Introduction

In the PFRI the forest area analysis was on contiguous tree-stands following the FAO definition of forests. Hence the PFRI classified areas only if they were showing tree stands on the Landsat images irrespective as to whether such tree-stand was on legally classified forests or outside of such areas.

At the time of the PFRI mapping material referring to the forest area classification by legal definition was not available and an analysis along that definition was not possible1. This shortcoming of the PFRI was addresses in the present study and a new analytical layer for Landsat image analysis was prepared showing the geographical position of the forest boundaries by legal definition, i.e. for the Reserved, Protected, and Guzara forests that are covered by Working Plans. Still the mapping material and the digital data layer for the Working Plan areas covering all legally classified forests is not of the highest standards of accuracy but good enough to be applied on the Landsat images of the 1995/96 images of the PFRI as well as onto the 2008 images of the present THBS.

In the present report it is for the first time ever in NWFP forestry that the Working Plan areas are being comprehensively analysed on a sound empirical basis using satellite imagery. However, apart from some inaccuracies that are still in the mapping material for the Working Plans, also the overall analytical depth is not as much sophisticated as it was for the total forests area (FAO definition) in the PFRI and the present study. In particular, the distinction of forest stands by altitude level and the land-use area assessment in the non-forested areas could not be accomplished in the course of the present study mainly due to capacity problems. Still, also the reduced approach to the area assessment provides relevant insights into the forests under Working Plans.

1.1 Working Plan Area and Stock 19962

(1) Total Forest Working Plan Area and Area Stocked3: The total Working Plans area of designated (legally defined) forests covered 841,517 ha or 18.2% of the total study area (11.5% of NWFP), of which 438,607 ha were located in Malakand and 390,546 ha in Hazara4 Divisions.

Reserved forest of 63,915 ha (7.7% of the total WP area) and Guzara forest of 237,742 ha (28.7% of WP area) are only situated in Hazara. All forest areas in Malakand are Protected forests and the total area of Protected forests including the Protected forests in Agror Tanawal of Hazara covered 527,496 ha (63.6% of WP area).

In 1996 the total area of forests in different densities according to the physical (FAO) definition of forests covered 677,230 ha. The stocked area under Working Plans covered 458,318 ha or 67.7% of all forests, the remainder of 218,912 ha (32.3%) were tree-stand areas outside the designated WP forest areas.

In relation to the total Working Plan area 55.3% was stocked in different densities and 370,835 ha (44.7%) were under various other uses (agriculture, rangeland) or even blank. The Reserved forests area with 66.9% had the highest stocked area and the Guzara forest with 50.2% the lowest. Protected forests had 56.2% of their area stocked.

1In 1996 many of the maps of legally classified forests were still on the colonial cloth sheets without proper northing and grid references. Also the maps used in the Working Plans were in many cases only sketches without geographically correct definitions. Meanwhile the map- ping situation for legally classified forests– with still some flaws - has been improved, allowing data transfer into a digital format for further analytical use. 2The Table sets referred to in the text are always showing the data for both the base-year 1996 and the study-year 2008. 3For details per single Working Plan see WP SUPPORT TABLE 1 4For the Guzara Forest Pattan in Hazara no maps were available, and that area of 12,324 ha had to be left out of the analysis. Therefore all data analysis is referring to a total of 829,153 ha instead of the overall total 841,517 ha. 192 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

Generally, the analysis of the stocked and the non-stocked areas within the designated WP area showed that much of the forest area was already depleted in 1996. However, there were huge differences in the ratio between forested and non forested areas in between the WP areas. In Malakand, the Protected WP areas of the Swat Range, Buner, and Timergara were showing the lowest proportion of the stocked area and Dessan Utror, Dir Kohistan, Chitral and Warrai the highest. In Hazara, the Reserved and Guzara forests of Haripur WPs were almost completely depleted and for the other Reserved forests, the WP area Lower Siran/Agror showed a high degree of depletion. Similarly, also for the Protected forests in Hazara, only the WP Kandia Uthor area had a high degree of depletion. In the Guzara forests high depletion was found for the Harban, Lower Siran and Agror, Gallies, and Jalkot WP areas.

(2) Working Plan Area Distribution by Density Class5: The distribution of forests by densities classes in Working Plan areas differed considerably to the density class distribution in the non-WP forest areas. Whereas the degradation was showing in all forest areas, the degradation was much higher in the non-WP areas with 52.8% in the low density class and only 13.7% in the high density class.

Within the WP areas the Reserved forests – though also degraded – were still showing 47.1% of the area in the high density class as compared to 21.3% and 25.0% in this density class in the Protected and Guzara forests respectively. There were also differences in the low density class with 38.5% and 36.7% in the Protected and Guzara forests as compared to 21.3 % in the Reserved forests. However, in relation to the total area distribution by legal category, high density areas covered only 113,061 ha (24.7 % of the total WP area) of which 20,148 ha (17.8% of the total area in the high density class) were found in the Reserved forests, 63,064 ha (55.8% of the total) in the Protected forests, and 29,849 ha (26.4% of the total) in the Guzara forests.

With about 39% of the forested areas in the medium density class in the Guzara and Protected forests, that proportion is about 10% higher than in the Reserved forests. These differences in the respective proportions by density class indicate that in the Guzara and Protected forests there a strong shift from high density forests to medium density forests, a process that had not affected the Reserved forests to the same extent.

Obviously the data on forest area distribution by density classes indicated a higher degree of forest protection for the Reserved forests as compared to the Protected and Guzara forest. However, area-wise stocked Reserved forest areas covered only a minor fraction of all stocked WP forest areas (9.3% of all stocked WP forests) within which the high density class accounted for only 4.4% of the total stock area under WPs.

The overall feature of those WP areas that had the lowest proportion of stock, is repeated also in the density classes. Here also the proportion of the remaining stock was the highest in the low density class, indicating a dual grip on the forests by both depletion and degradation.6

(3) Working Plan Forest Stock7: With 136,6 mill m3 of standing stock (round-wood and branch-wood), the WP forests covered 72.4% of the stock in the total forest area as compared to 52.1 mill m3 (27.6%) in the non-WP areas. Thus, the proportion of stock in the WP areas is higher than its area proportion in the total forest. This was mainly due to very low proportions of high and medium density forests in the non-WP areas and the fairly high proportions of these density classes in the WP areas.

1.2 Working Plan Area and Stock 2008

(1) Forest Working Plan Area: The total Working Plan Area in the study year remained the same as in the base-year. This also applies for the WP areas under different legal categories.

5See WP TABLES 2.1 and 2.2 6See WP SUPPORT TABLES 1 (a to c) and 2.1 to 2.3 for details by single WP 7To estimate the stock situation in WP areas the same stock parameters were used as already applied on the analysis of the total forest area. See PARAMETER TABLE (c) in ANNEX 8. Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 193

(2) Change in Working Plan Area Stocked: In 2008 the WP forests covered 389,760 ha of stocked areas indicating a loss of 68,558 ha or 15.0% as compared to the base-year 1996. In the same period the non-WP forest areas lost 38,451 ha or 17.6% of their area in 1996, indicating a higher degree of forests depletion in these forests.

In relation to the total WP area the Reserved forests lost 4,639 ha (or 10.9%) of their stocked area; the Guzara forest 15,174 ha (or 12.7%) and the Protected forests 48,745 ha (or 16.5%) of their initial area in 1996.

The adjoining WP areas of Lower Siran/Agror and Gidderpur were most heavily affected by forest depletion in all three types of WP forests. The Protected forest of Gidderpur lost 53.0% of their area, the Reserved forests Lower Siran/Agror 64.8% and the Guzara forests Lower Siran/Agror 77.1%. The area surrounding these forests is also the most densely populated within the study area. WP areas that were less affected by depletion are Upper Siran, Palas, and Harban in the Guzara forests; Kaghan and Upper Siran in the Reserved forests, and Ranolia Dubair, Behrain and Swat Range in the Protected forests.

(3) Change in Working Plan Area Distribution by Density Class: As compared to the base-year there were changes in all density classes, however, at different rates in between the WP and the non-WP areas and within the different density classes.

In the density pattern, the Guzara forests were most heavily affected by the degradation process. The high density class decreased from 29,849 ha in 1996 to 16,103 ha in 2008 or by 46.1%. Simultaneously, though, the low density class increased from 43,777 ha to 54,670 ha or by 24.9% indicating a high degree of degradation in these forests. Protected forests were more heavily affected by a process of depletion with a total area loss of 49,737 ha in the medium and high density classes or by 37.5% for these two classes combined, whereas the low density class remained almost constant during the study-period.

The Reserved forests with 10.7% overall loss in the stocked area were least affected by the process of depletion but were still affected by the process of degradation with shifts from the high and medium density classes to the low density class.

(4) Change in Working Plan Forest Stock: In 2008 the designated forests had a standing stock of 104.2 mill m3 (round-wood and branch-wood) as compared to 136,592 mill. m3 in the base-year. During the study-period, thus, the WP forests lost 23.7% of stock as compared to 27.2% stock loss in the non-WP areas.

Because the stock assessment used the same parameters for stock/hectare/density class, the stock changes basically reflect the change in area though weighted by the different stock parameters/density class. Thus, the area shifts in density classes (degradation) are showing only in the total stock loss per legal type of forests. Here the heavy area decrease in the high density class of the Guzara forests with a simultaneous increase in the low density class had the highest impact on the total stock loss during the study-period. Whereas the total area loss was 12.7% in the Guzara forests the total stock loss was from 35,592 mill. m3 in the base-year to 25,266 mill m3 in the study year or by 29.0%.

Also for the Reserved and Protected forests the degradation process had an impact on the overall stock loss. Volume-wise the Protected forests had the highest loss with 19,501 mill. m3 or 23.0% of their initial stock, whereas the Reserved forests lost 2,605 mill. m3 or only 16.0% of their stock. 194 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

LIST of TABLES

WORKING PLAN FORESTS - CHANGE DETECTION

AREA CHANGE

WORKING PLAN TABLE 1 (a) TOTAL WORKING PLAN AREA and TOTAL AREA STOCKED 1996 by DIVISION and LEGAL TYPE, In hectare and in percent

WORKING PLAN TABLE 1 (b) TOTAL WORKING PLAN AREA and TOTAL AREA STOCKED 2008 by DIVISION and LEGAL TYPE, In hectare and in percent

WORKING PLAN TABLE 1 (c ) CHANGE in WORKING PLAN AREA – 1996 to 2008 by DIVISION and LEGAL TYPE, In hectare and in percent

WORKING PLAN TABLE 2.1 TOTAL STOCKED FOREST AREA – STOCKED WORKING PLAN AREA COMPARISON 1996 and 2008

WORKING PLAN TABLE 2.2 STOCKED WORKING PLAN AREA by LEGAL TYPE COMPARISON 1996 to 2008

STOCK CHANGE

WORKING PLAN TABLE 3.1 TOTAL FOREST STOCK - WORKING PLAN STOCK COMPARISON 1996 and 2008

WORKING PLAN TABLE 3.2 WORKING PLAN STOCK by LEGAL TYPE COMPARISON 1996 and 2008

SUPPORT TABLES

WORKING PLAN – SUPPORT TABLE 1 (a) TOTAL WORKING PLAN AREA and TOTAL AREA STOCKED 1996 by single Working Plan, In hectare and in percent

WORKING PLAN – SUPPORT TABLE 1 (b) TOTAL WORKING PLAN AREA and TOTAL AREA STOCKED 2008 by single Working Plan, In hectare and in percent

WORKING PLAN – SUPPORT TABLE 1 (c ) CHANGE in WORKING PLAN AREA – 1996 to 2008 by single Working Plan, In hectare and in percent Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 195

WORKING PLAN – SUPPORT TABLE 2.1 (a and b) AREA STOCKED 1996 - by DENSITY CLASS by single Working Plan, In hectare and in percent

WORKING PLAN – SUPPORT TABLE 2.2 (a and b) AREA STOCKED 2008 - by DENSITY CLASS by single Working Plan, In hectare and in percent

WORKING PLAN – SUPPORT TABLE 2.3 (a and b) CHANGE in AREA STOCKED 1996 to 2008 - by DENSITY CLASS by single Working Plan, In hectare and in percent 196 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

WORKING PLAN TABLE 1 (a) TOTAL WORKING PLAN AREA and WORKING PLAN AREA STOCKED 1996 (1) in hectare (2) in percent

TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL WORKING PLANS STOCKED AREA NON- WORKING STOCKED AREA NON- AREA STOCKED PLAN AREA AREA STOCKED TOTAL 458,318 370,835 829,153 55.3 44.7

WP AREA MALAKAND1 256,186 182,421 438,607 58.4 41.6

WP AREA HAZARA2 202,132 188,414 390,546 51.8 48.2

Protected Forests 40,034 48,855 88,889 45.0 55.0 Reserved Forests 42,738 21,177 63,915 66.9 33.1 Guzara Forests 119,360 118,382 237,742 50.2 49.8

NOTE 1: Protected Forests only NOTE 2: No Working Plan map was traceable. The total WP area of the Pattan Guzara forests of 12,364 ha was left out of the analysis. The total WP area including Pattan is 841,517 ha.

WORKING PLAN TABLE 1 (b) TOTAL WORKING PLAN AREA and WORKING PLAN AREA STOCKED 2008 (1) in hectare (2) in percent TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL WORKING PLANS STOCKED AREA NON- WORKING STOCKED AREA NON- AREA STOCKED PLAN AREA AREA STOCKED TOTAL 389,760 439,393 829,153 47.0 53.0

WP AREA MALAKAND 215,710 222,897 438,607 49.2 50.8

WP AREA HAZARA 174,050 216,496 390,546 44.6 55.4

Protected Forests 31,765 57,124 88,889 35.7 64.3 Reserved Forests 38,099 25,816 63,915 59.6 40.4 Guzara Forests 104,186 133,556 237,742 43.8 56.2

WORKING PLAN TABLE 1 (c ) WP AREA CHANGE 1996 to 2008 WORKING PLANS LOSS of STOCKED AREA in ha in %

TOTAL -68,558 -15.0

WP MALAKAND -40,476 -15.8 WP HAZARA -28,082 -13.9 Protected Forests -8,269 -20.7 Reserved Forests -4,639 -10.9 Guzara Forests -15,174 -12.7 Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 197

WORKING PLAN TABLE 2.1 TOTAL STOCKED FOREST AREA - STOCKED WORKING PLAN AREA COMPARISON 1996 to 2008, in hectare AREA STOCKED DETAIL 10-25% cc 26-50% cc 51-100% cc TOTAL ANALYSIS 1996 TOTAL STOCKED AREA 282,560 251,514 143,156 677,230

- Working Plan Area 166,874 178,383 113,061 458,318 - Other Forest Area 115,686 73,131 30,095 218,912

ANALYSIS 2008 TOTAL STOCKED AREA 290,973 182,012 97,236 570,221

- Working Plan Area 180,199 129,783 79,777 389,760 - Other Forest Area 110,774 52,229 17,459 180,461

CHANGE 1996 to 2008 TOTAL STOCKED AREA 8,413 -69,502 -45,920 -107,009

- Working Plan Area 13,325 -48,600 -33,284 -68,558 - Other Forest Area -4,912 -20,902 -12,636 -38,451 198 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

WORKING PLAN TABLE 2.1 (continued) TOTAL STOCKED FOREST AREA - STOCKED WORKING PLAN AREA COMPARISON 1996 to 2008, in percent AREA STOCKED DETAIL 10-25% cc 26-50% cc 51-100% cc TOTAL (1) in percent of TOTAL STOCKED FOREST AREA ANALYSIS 1996 TOTAL STOCKED AREA 41.7 37.1 21.1 100.0 - Working Plan Area 24.6 26.3 16.7 67.7 - Other Forest Area 17.1 10.8 4.4 32.3

ANALYSIS 2008 TOTAL STOCKED AREA 51.0 31.9 17.1 100.0 - Working Plan Area 31.6 22.8 14.0 68.4 - Other Forest Area 19.4 9.2 3.1 31.6

(2) in percent of WORKING PLAN AREA and OTHER FOREST AREA ANALYSIS 1996 TOTAL STOCKED AREA 41.7 37.1 21.1 100.0

- Working Plan Area 36.4 38.9 24.7 100.0 - Other Forest Area 52.8 33.4 13.7 100.0

ANALYSIS 2008 TOTAL STOCKED AREA 51.0 31.9 17.1 100.0

- Working Plan Area 46.2 33.3 20.5 100.0 - Other Forest Area 61.4 28.9 9.7 100.0

(3) percent CHANGE 1996 to 2008 TOTAL STOCKED AREA 3.0 -27.6 -32.1 -15.8

- Working Plan Area 8.0 -27.2 -29.4 -15.0 - Other Forest Area -4.2 -28.6 -42.0 -17.6 Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 199

WORKING PLAN TABLE 2.2 STOCKED WORKING PLAN AREA by LEGAL TYPE COMPARISON 1996 to 2008, in hectare

AREA STOCKED WORKING PLANS 10-25% cc 26-50% cc 51-100% cc TOTAL ANALYSIS 1996 STOCKED WP AREA 166,874 178,383 113,061 458,318

- Reserved Forests 9,094 13,496 20,148 42,738 - Protected Forests 114,003 119,153 63,064 296,220 - Guzara Forests 43,777 45,734 29,849 119,360

ANALYSIS 2008 STOCKED WP AREA 180,199 129,783 79,777 389,760

- Reserved Forests 10,534 10,996 16,569 38,099 - Protected Forests 114,996 85,375 47,105 247,475 - Guzara Forests 54,670 33,413 16,103 104,186

CHANGE 1996 to 2008 STOCKED WP AREA 13,325 -48,600 -33,284 -68,558

- Reserved Forests 1,440 -2,500 -3,579 -4,639 - Protected Forests 993 -33,778 -15,959 -48,745 - Guzara Forests 10,893 -12,321 -13,746 -15,174 200 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

WORKING PLAN TABLE 2.2 (continued) STOCKED WORKING PLAN AREA by LEGAL TYPE COMPARISON 1996 to 2008, in percent AREA STOCKED WORKING PLANS 10-25% cc 26-50% cc 51-100% cc TOTAL (1) in percent of TOTAL STOCKED WORKING PLAN AREA ANALYSIS 1996 STOCKED WP AREA 36.4 38.9 24.7 100.0

- Reserved Forests 2.0 2.9 4.4 9.3 - Protected Forests 24.9 26.0 13.8 64.6 - Guzara Forests 9.6 10.0 6.5 26.0

ANALYSIS 2008 STOCKED WP AREA 46.2 33.3 20.5 100.0

- Reserved Forests 2.7 2.8 4.3 9.8 - Protected Forests 29.5 21.9 12.1 63.5 - Guzara Forests 14.0 8.6 4.1 26.7

(2) in percent of STOCKED WORKING PLAN AREA by LEGAL TYPE ANALYSIS 1996 STOCKED WP AREA 36.4 38.9 24.7 100.0

- Reserved Forests 21.3 31.6 47.1 100.0 - Protected Forests 38.5 40.2 21.3 100.0 - Guzara Forests 36.7 38.3 25.0 100.0

ANALYSIS 2008 STOCKED WP AREA 46.2 33.3 20.5 100.0

- Reserved Forests 27.6 28.9 43.5 100.0 - Protected Forests 46.5 34.5 19.0 100.0 - Guzara Forests 52.5 32.1 15.5 100.0

(3) percent CHANGE 1996 to 2008 STOCKED WP AREA 8.0 -27.2 -29.4 -15.0

- Reserved Forests 15.8 -18.5 -17.8 -10.9 - Protected Forests 0.9 -28.3 -25.3 -16.5 - Guzara Forests 24.9 -26.9 -46.1 -12.7 Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 201

WORKING PLAN TABLE 3.1 TOTAL FOREST STOCK - WORKING PLAN STOCK COMPARISON 1996 to 2008, in 000 cubic meter FOREST STOCK1 DETAIL 10-25% cc 26-50% cc 51-100% cc TOTAL ANALYSIS 1996 TOTAL STOCK 29,465 81,325 77,885 188,675

- Working Plan Area 17,402 57,678 61,512 136,592 - Other Forest Area 12,064 23,646 16,373 52,083

ANALYSIS 2008 TOTAL STOCK 30,343 58,852 52,902 142,097

- Working Plan Area 18,791 41,964 43,403 104,159 - Other Forest Area 11,551 16,888 9,499 37,938

CHANGE 1996 to 2008 TOTAL STOCK 877 -22,473 -24,983 -46,579

- Working Plan Area 1,390 -15,714 -18,108 -32,433 - Other Forest Area -512 -6,759 -6,875 -14,146 202 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

WORKING PLAN TABLE 3.1 (continued) TOTAL FOREST STOCK - WORKING PLAN STOCK COMPARISON 1996 to 2008, in percent FOREST STOCK1 DETAIL 10-25% cc 26-50% cc 51-100% cc TOTAL (1) in percent of TOTAL STOCK ANALYSIS 1996 TOTAL STOCK 15.6 43.1 41.3 100.0

- Working Plan Area 9.2 30.6 32.6 72.4 - Other Forest Area 6.4 12.5 8.7 27.6

ANALYSIS 2008 TOTAL STOCK 21.4 41.4 37.2 100.0

- Working Plan Area 13.2 29.5 30.5 73.3 - Other Forest Area 8.1 11.9 6.7 26.7

(2) in percent of WORKING PLAN STOCK and OTHER FOREST STOCK ANALYSIS 1996 TOTAL STOCK 15.6 43.1 41.3 100.0

- Working Plan Area 12.7 42.2 45.0 100.0 - Other Forest Area 23.2 45.4 31.4 100.0

ANALYSIS 2008 TOTAL STOCK 21.4 41.4 37.2 100.0

- Working Plan Area 18.0 40.3 41.7 100.0 - Other Forest Area 30.4 44.5 25.0 100.0

(3) percent CHANGE 1996 to 2008 TOTAL STOCK 3.0 -27.6 -32.1 -24.7

- Working Plan Area 8.0 -27.2 -29.4 -23.7 - Other Forest Area -4.2 -28.6 -42.0 -27.2

NOTE 1: Round-wood and branch-wood combined Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 203

WORKING PLAN TABLE 3.2 WORKING PLAN STOCK by LEGAL TYPE COMPARISON 1996 to 2008, in 000 cubic meter FOREST STOCK WORKING PLANS 10-25% cc 26-50% cc 51-100% cc TOTAL ANALYSIS 1996 STOCKED WP 17,402 57,678 61,512 136,592

- Reserved Forests 948 4,364 10,962 16,274 - Protected Forests 11,888 38,527 34,311 84,726 - Guzara Forests 4,565 14,788 16,240 35,592

ANALYSIS 2008 STOCKED WP 18,791 41,964 43,403 104,159

- Reserved Forests 1,098 3,555 9,015 13,668 - Protected Forests 11,992 27,605 25,628 65,225 - Guzara Forests 5,701 10,804 8,761 25,266

CHANGE 1996 to 2008 STOCKED WP 1,390 -15,714 -18,108 -32,433

- Reserved Forests 150 -808 -1,947 -2,605 - Protected Forests 103 -10,922 -8,683 -19,501 - Guzara Forests 1,136 -3,984 -7,479 -10,327 204 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

WORKING PLAN TABLE 3.2 (continued) WORKING PLAN STOCK by LEGAL TYPE COMPARISON 1996 to 2008, in percent FOREST STOCK WORKING PLANS 10-25% cc 26-50% cc 51-100% cc TOTAL

(1) in percent of TOTAL STOCK ANALYSIS 1996 STOCKED WP 12.7 42.2 45.0 100.0

- Reserved Forests 0.7 3.2 8.0 11.9 - Protected Forests 8.7 28.2 25.1 62.0 - Guzara Forests 3.3 10.8 11.9 26.1

ANALYSIS 2008 STOCKED WP 18.0 40.3 41.7 100.0

- Reserved Forests 1.1 3.4 8.7 13.1 - Protected Forests 11.5 26.5 24.6 62.6 - Guzara Forests 5.5 10.4 8.4 24.3

(2) in percent of WORKING PLAN STOCK by LEGAL TYPE ANALYSIS 1996 STOCKED WP 12.7 42.2 45.0 100.0

- Reserved Forests 5.8 26.8 67.4 100.0 - Protected Forests 14.0 45.5 40.5 100.0 - Guzara Forests 12.8 41.5 45.6 100.0

ANALYSIS 2008 STOCKED WP 18.0 40.3 41.7 100.0

- Reserved Forests 8.0 26.0 66.0 100.0 - Protected Forests 18.4 42.3 39.3 100.0 - Guzara Forests 22.6 42.8 34.7 100.0

(3) percent CHANGE 1996 to 2008 STOCKED WP 8.0 -27.2 -29.4 -23.7

- Reserved Forests 15.8 -18.5 -17.8 -16.0 - Protected Forests 0.9 -28.3 -25.3 -23.0 - Guzara Forests 24.9 -26.9 -46.1 -29.0 Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 205

WORKING PLAN - SUPPORT TABLE 1 (a) TOTAL WORKING PLAN AREA and WORKING PLAN AREA STOCKED 1996 (1) in hectare (2) in percent TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL No. WORKING PLANS STOCKED AREA NON- WORKING STOCKED AREA NON- AREA STOCKED PLAN AREA AREA STOCKED TOTAL 458,318 370,835 829,153 55.3 44.7

WP AREA MALAKAND 256,186 182,421 438,607 58.4 41.6 Protected Forests only 1 Kalam 14,893 19,047 33,940 43.9 56.1 2 Dessan Utror 1,778 543 2,321 76.6 23.4 3 Behrain 33,153 12,771 45,924 72.2 27.8 4 Swat Range 10,993 18,752 29,745 37.0 63.0 5 Matta Range 18,598 13,559 32,157 57.8 42.2 6 Alpuri 22,522 21,949 44,471 50.6 49.4 7 Buner 12,762 30,569 43,331 29.5 70.5 8 Dir Kohistan 46,186 15,628 61,814 74.7 25.3 9 Dir & Samarbagh 20,746 13,863 34,609 59.9 40.1 10 Warrai 23,254 10,063 33,317 69.8 30.2 11 Timergara 4,051 6,612 10,663 38.0 62.0 12 Chitral 47,250 19,065 66,315 71.3 28.7

WP AREA HAZARA 202,132 188,414 390,546 51.8 48.2 Protected Forests 40,034 48,855 88,889 45.0 55.0 1 Kandia Uthor 15,743 35,501 51,244 30.7 69.3 2 Seo 7,377 4,128 11,505 64.1 35.9 3 Ranolia Dubair 9,691 5,720 15,411 62.9 37.1 4 Upper Tanawal 5,128 2,924 8,052 63.7 36.3 5 Gidderpur 2,095 582 2,677 78.3 21.7

Reserved Forests 42,738 21,177 63,915 66.9 33.1 1 Haripur 1,299 12,937 14,236 9.1 90.9 2 Gallies 12,899 2,866 15,765 81.8 18.2 3 Kaghan 20,620 918 21,538 95.7 4.3 4 Upper Siran 4,807 430 5,237 91.8 8.2 5 Lower Siran & Agror 3,113 4,026 7,139 43.6 56.4

Guzara Forests 119,360 118,382 237,742 50.2 49.8 1 Haripur 2,154 28,783 30,937 7.0 93.0 2 Gallies 3,217 4,864 8,081 39.8 60.2 3 Upper Kaghan 16,084 12,393 28,477 56.5 43.5 4 Lower Kaghan 9,913 2,952 12,865 77.1 22.9 5 Lower Siran & Agror 2,551 5,271 7,822 32.6 67.4 6 Hilkot Range 1,054 105 1,159 90.9 9.1 7 Upper Siran 9,111 3,013 12,124 75.1 24.9 8 Harban 7,519 18,393 25,912 29.0 71.0 9 Jalkot 17,416 18,464 35,880 48.5 51.5 10 Pattan1 11 Palas 24,937 14,576 39,513 63.1 36.9 12 Allai 12,021 4,508 16,529 72.7 27.3 13 Hillan Batagram 6,160 2,117 8,277 74.4 25.6 14 Black Mountain 7,223 2,943 10,166 71.1 28.9

NOTE 1: No Working Plan traceable, the total WP area of the Pattan forests of 12,364 ha was left out. 206 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

WORKING PLAN - SUPPORT TABLE 1 (b) TOTAL WORKING PLAN AREA and AREA WORKING PLAN AREA STOCKED 2008 (1) in hectare (2) in percent

TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL No. WORKING PLANS STOCKED AREA NON- WORKING STOCKED AREA NON- AREA STOCKED PLAN AREA AREA STOCKED TOTAL 389,760 439,393 829,153 47.0 53.0 WP AREA MALAKAND 215,710 222,897 438,607 49.2 50.8 Protected Forests only 1 Kalam 12,338 21,602 33,940 36.4 63.6 2 Dessan Utror 1,459 862 2,321 62.9 37.1 3 Behrain 30,707 15,217 45,924 66.9 33.1 4 Swat Range 10,208 19,537 29,745 34.3 65.7 5 Matta Range 15,952 16,205 32,157 49.6 50.4 6 Alpuri 20,296 24,175 44,471 45.6 54.4 7 Buner 9,028 34,303 43,331 20.8 79.2 8 Dir Kohistan 40,252 21,562 61,814 65.1 34.9 9 Dir & Samarbagh 14,712 19,897 34,609 42.5 57.5 10 Warrai 19,904 13,413 33,317 59.7 40.3 11 Timergara 3,163 7,500 10,663 29.7 70.3 12 Chitral 37,691 28,624 66,315 56.8 43.2

WP AREA HAZARA 174,050 216,496 390,546 44.6 55.4

Protected Forests 31,765 57,124 88,889 35.7 64.3 1 Kandia Uthor 11,188 40,056 51,244 21.8 78.2 2 Seo 6,677 4,828 11,505 58.0 42.0 3 Ranolia Dubair 9,260 6,151 15,411 60.1 39.9 4 Upper Tanawal 3,656 4,396 8,052 45.4 54.6 5 Gidderpur 984 1,693 2,677 36.8 63.2

Reserved Forests 38,099 25,816 63,915 59.6 40.4 1 Haripur 1,200 13,036 14,236 8.4 91.6 2 Gallies 11,523 4,242 15,765 73.1 26.9 3 Kaghan 19,701 1,837 21,538 91.5 8.5 4 Upper Siran 4,580 657 5,237 87.5 12.5 5 Lower Siran & Agror 1,095 6,044 7,139 15.3 84.7

Guzara Forests 104,186 133,556 237,742 43.8 56.2 1 Haripur 1,552 29,385 30,937 5.0 95.0 2 Gallies 2,622 5,459 8,081 32.4 67.6 3 Upper Kaghan 13,362 15,115 28,477 46.9 53.1 4 Lower Kaghan 7,949 4,916 12,865 61.8 38.2 5 Lower Siran & Agror 584 7,238 7,822 7.5 92.5 6 Hilkot Range 829 330 1,159 71.5 28.5 7 Upper Siran 9,082 3,042 12,124 74.9 25.1 8 Harban 7,292 18,620 25,912 28.1 71.9 9 Jalkot 14,026 21,854 35,880 39.1 60.9 10 Pattan1 11 Palas 24,923 14,590 39,513 63.1 36.9 12 Allai 11,009 5,520 16,529 66.6 33.4 13 Hillan Batagram 4,790 3,487 8,277 57.9 42.1 14 Black Mountain 6,166 4,000 10,166 60.7 39.3 Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 207

WORKING PLAN - SUPPORT TABLE 1 (c ) CHANGE in STOCKED WORKING PLAN AREA 1996 to 2008, in hectare and percent

AREA LOST AREA LOST No. WORKING PLANS in hectare in percent TOTAL -68,558 -15.0 WP AREA MALAKAND -40,476 -15.8 Protected Forests only 1 Kalam -2,555 -17.2 2 Dessan Utror -319 -17.9 3 Behrain -2,446 -7.4 4 Swat Range -785 -7.1 5 Matta Range -2,646 -14.2 6 Alpuri -2,226 -9.9 7 Buner -3,734 -29.3 8 Dir Kohistan -5,934 -12.8 9 Dir & Samarbagh -6,034 -29.1 10 Warrai -3,350 -14.4 11 Timergara -888 -21.9 12 Chitral -9,559 -20.2

WP AREA HAZARA -28,082 -13.9

Protected Forests -8,269 -20.7 1 Kandia Uthor -4,555 -28.9 2 Seo -700 -9.5 3 Ranolia Dubair -431 -4.4 4 Upper Tanawal -1,472 -28.7 5 Gidderpur -1,111 -53.0

Reserved Forests -4,639 -10.9 1 Haripur -99 -7.6 2 Gallies -1,376 -10.7 3 Kaghan -919 -4.5 4 Upper Siran -227 -4.7 5 Lower Siran & Agror -2,018 -64.8

Guzara Forests -15,174 -12.7 1 Haripur -602 -27.9 2 Gallies -595 -18.5 3 Upper Kaghan -2,722 -16.9 4 Lower Kaghan -1,964 -19.8 5 Lower Siran & Agror -1,967 -77.1 6 Hilkot Range -225 -21.3 7 Upper Siran -29 -0.3 8 Harban -227 -3.0 9 Jalkot -3,390 -19.5 10 Pattan1 11 Palas -14 -0.1 12 Allai -1,012 -8.4 13 Hillan Batagram -1,370 -22.2 14 Black Mountain -1,057 -14.6 208 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

WORKING PLAN - SUPPORT TABLE 2.1 (a): AREA STOCKED 1996 by DENSITY CLASS, in hectare AREA STOCKED 1996 No. WORKING PLANS 10-25% cc 26-50% cc 51-100% cc TOTAL

TOTAL 166,874 178,383 113,061 458,318

WP AREA MALAKAND 95,300 102,251 58,635 256,186 Protected Forests only 1 Kalam 5,669 4,155 5,069 14,893 2 Dessan Utror 0 325 1,453 1,778 3 Behrain 7,997 15,231 9,925 33,153 4 Swat Range 5,086 3,968 1,939 10,993 5 Matta Range 5,217 7,648 5,733 18,598 6 Alpuri 9,518 8,801 4,203 22,522 7 Buner 7,415 4,536 811 12,762 8 Dir Kohistan 13,865 17,464 14,857 46,186 9 Dir & Samarbagh 9,199 7,225 4,322 20,746 10 Warrai 7,537 9,758 5,959 23,254 11 Timergara 2,374 828 849 4,051 12 Chitral 21,423 22,312 3,515 47,250

WP AREA HAZARA 71,574 76,132 54,426 202,132

Protected Forests 18,703 16,902 4,429 40,034 1 Kandia Uthor 7,520 6,390 1,833 15,743 2 Seo 2,143 4,335 899 7,377 3 Ranolia Dubair 5,580 4,034 77 9,691 4 Upper Tanawal 2,463 1,278 1,387 5,128 5 Gidderpur 997 865 233 2,095

Reserved Forests 9,094 13,496 20,148 42,738 1 Haripur 832 467 0 1,299 2 Gallies 2,247 3,723 6,929 12,899 3 Kaghan 3,345 6,390 10,885 20,620 4 Upper Siran 934 1,986 1,887 4,807 5 Lower Siran & Agror 1,736 930 447 3,113

Guzara Forests 43,777 45,734 29,849 119,360 1 Haripur 1,575 579 0 2,154 2 Gallies 1,353 993 871 3,217 3 Upper Kaghan 4,536 4,818 6,730 16,084 4 Lower Kaghan 3,254 4,447 2,212 9,913 5 Lower Siran & Agror 1,533 677 341 2,551 6 Hilkot Range 237 348 469 1,054 7 Upper Siran 3,418 3,874 1,819 9,111 8 Harban 3,772 3,218 529 7,519 9 Jalkot 6,634 6,862 3,920 17,416 10 Pattan1 0 0 0 0 11 Palas 7,778 10,701 6,458 24,937 12 Allai 5,724 4,377 1,920 12,021 13 Hillan Batagram 2,436 2,101 1,623 6,160 14 Black Mountain 1,527 2,739 2,957 7,223

NOTE 1: No Working Plan traceable Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 209

WORKING PLAN - SUPPORT TABLE 2.1 (b): AREA STOCKED 1996 by DENSITY CLASS, in percent AREA STOCKED 1996 No. WORKING PLANS 10-25% cc 26-50% cc 51-100% cc TOTAL

TOTAL 36.4 38.9 24.7 100.0

WP AREA MALAKAND 37.2 39.9 22.9 100.0 Protected Forests only 1 Kalam 38.1 27.9 34.0 100.0 2 Dessan Utror 0.0 18.3 81.7 100.0 3 Behrain 24.1 45.9 29.9 100.0 4 Swat Range 46.3 36.1 17.6 100.0 5 Matta Range 28.1 41.1 30.8 100.0 6 Alpuri 42.3 39.1 18.7 100.0 7 Buner 58.1 35.5 6.4 100.0 8 Dir Kohistan 30.0 37.8 32.2 100.0 9 Dir & Samarbagh 44.3 34.8 20.8 100.0 10 Warrai 32.4 42.0 25.6 100.0 11 Timergara 58.6 20.4 21.0 100.0 12 Chitral 45.3 47.2 7.4 100.0

WP AREA HAZARA 35.4 37.7 26.9 100.0

Protected Forests 46.7 42.2 11.1 100.0 1 Kandia Uthor 47.8 40.6 11.6 100.0 2 Seo 29.0 58.8 12.2 100.0 3 Ranolia Dubair 57.6 41.6 0.8 100.0 4 Upper Tanawal 48.0 24.9 27.0 100.0 5 Gidderpur 47.6 41.3 11.1 100.0

Reserved Forests 21.3 31.6 47.1 100.0 1 Haripur 64.0 36.0 0.0 100.0 2 Gallies 17.4 28.9 53.7 100.0 3 Kaghan 16.2 31.0 52.8 100.0 4 Upper Siran 19.4 41.3 39.3 100.0 5 Lower Siran & Agror 55.8 29.9 14.4 100.0

Guzara Forests 36.7 38.3 25.0 100.0 1 Haripur 73.1 26.9 0.0 100.0 2 Gallies 42.1 30.9 27.1 100.0 3 Upper Kaghan 28.2 30.0 41.8 100.0 4 Lower Kaghan 32.8 44.9 22.3 100.0 5 Lower Siran & Agror 60.1 26.5 13.4 100.0 6 Hilkot Range 22.5 33.0 44.5 100.0 7 Upper Siran 37.5 42.5 20.0 100.0 8 Harban 50.2 42.8 7.0 100.0 9 Jalkot 38.1 39.4 22.5 100.0 10 Pattan1 11 Palas 31.2 42.9 25.9 100.0 12 Allai 47.6 36.4 16.0 100.0 13 Hillan Batagram 39.5 34.1 26.3 100.0 14 Black Mountain 21.1 37.9 40.9 100.0

NOTE 1: No Working Plan traceable 210 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

WORKING PLAN - SUPPORT TABLE 2.2 (a): AREA STOCKED 2008 by DENSITY CLASS, in hectare AREA STOCKED 2008 No. WORKING PLANS 10-25% cc 26-50% cc 51-100% cc TOTAL TOTAL 180,199 129,783 79,777 389,760

WP AREA MALAKAND 95,496 75,882 44,333 215,710 Protected Forests only 1 Kalam 3,592 4,049 4,697 12,338 2 Dessan Utror 2 114 1,343 1,459 3 Behrain 9,722 11,715 9,270 30,707 4 Swat Range 4,847 4,164 1,197 10,208 5 Matta Range 10,704 2,530 2,718 15,952 6 Alpuri 9,107 8,975 2,214 20,296 7 Buner 5,423 3,245 361 9,028 8 Dir Kohistan 14,664 13,134 12,454 40,252 9 Dir & Samarbagh 9,217 3,075 2,421 14,712 10 Warrai 9,155 7,147 3,602 19,904 11 Timergara 2,137 644 382 3,163 12 Chitral 16,926 17,090 3,674 37,691

WP AREA HAZARA 84,703 53,902 35,445 174,050

Protected Forests 19,500 9,493 2,773 31,765 1 Kandia Uthor 5,589 4,496 1,103 11,188 2 Seo 5,585 575 517 6,677 3 Ranolia Dubair 5,788 3,403 69 9,260 4 Upper Tanawal 1,965 608 1,084 3,656 5 Gidderpur 573 411 0 984 Reserved Forests 10,534 10,996 16,569 38,099 1 Haripur 828 372 0 1,200 2 Gallies 2,396 2,718 6,409 11,523 3 Kaghan 5,482 5,773 8,446 19,701 4 Upper Siran 1,140 1,976 1,464 4,580 5 Lower Siran & Agror 688 157 250 1,095 Guzara Forests 54,670 33,413 16,103 104,186 1 Haripur 1,398 154 0 1,552 2 Gallies 1,235 755 631 2,622 3 Upper Kaghan 6,578 3,479 3,305 13,362 4 Lower Kaghan 3,320 3,329 1,300 7,949 5 Lower Siran & Agror 521 35 28 584 6 Hilkot Range 332 295 202 829 7 Upper Siran 5,775 2,383 924 9,082 8 Harban 6,245 1,047 0 7,292 9 Jalkot 5,578 6,305 2,143 14,026 10 Pattan1 11 Palas 13,984 7,508 3,431 24,923 12 Allai 5,825 3,846 1,338 11,009 13 Hillan Batagram 2,215 1,556 1,019 4,790 14 Black Mountain 1,663 2,720 1,782 6,166

NOTE 1: No Working Plan traceable Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 211

WORKING PLAN - SUPPORT TABLE 2.2 (b): AREA STOCKED 2008 by DENSITY CLASS, in percent AREA STOCKED 2008 No. WORKING PLANS 10-25% cc 26-50% cc 51-100% cc TOTAL TOTAL 46.2 33.3 20.5 100.0

WP AREA MALAKAND 44.3 35.2 20.6 100.0 Protected Forests only 1 Kalam 29.1 32.8 38.1 100.0 2 Dessan Utror 0.1 7.8 92.0 100.0 3 Behrain 31.7 38.2 30.2 100.0 4 Swat Range 47.5 40.8 11.7 100.0 5 Matta Range 67.1 15.9 17.0 100.0 6 Alpuri 44.9 44.2 10.9 100.0 7 Buner 60.1 35.9 4.0 100.0 8 Dir Kohistan 36.4 32.6 30.9 100.0 9 Dir & Samarbagh 62.6 20.9 16.5 100.0 10 Warrai 46.0 35.9 18.1 100.0 11 Timergara 67.6 20.4 12.1 100.0 12 Chitral 44.9 45.3 9.7 100.0

WP AREA HAZARA 48.7 31.0 20.4 100.0

Protected Forests 61.4 29.9 8.7 100.0 1 Kandia Uthor 50.0 40.2 9.9 100.0 2 Seo 83.6 8.6 7.7 100.0 3 Ranolia Dubair 62.5 36.7 0.7 100.0 4 Upper Tanawal 53.7 16.6 29.6 100.0 5 Gidderpur 58.2 41.8 0.0 100.0 Reserved Forests 27.6 28.9 43.5 100.0 1 Haripur 69.0 31.0 0.0 100.0 2 Gallies 20.8 23.6 55.6 100.0 3 Kaghan 27.8 29.3 42.9 100.0 4 Upper Siran 24.9 43.1 32.0 100.0 5 Lower Siran & Agror 62.8 14.3 22.8 100.0 Guzara Forests 40.0 35.6 24.4 100.0 1 Haripur 90.1 9.9 0.0 100.0 2 Gallies 47.1 28.8 24.1 100.0 3 Upper Kaghan 49.2 26.0 24.7 100.0 4 Lower Kaghan 41.8 41.9 16.4 100.0 5 Lower Siran & Agror 89.2 6.0 4.8 100.0 6 Hilkot Range 40.0 35.6 24.4 100.0 7 Upper Siran 63.6 26.2 10.2 100.0 8 Harban 85.6 14.4 0.0 100.0 9 Jalkot 39.8 45.0 15.3 100.0 10 Pattan1 11 Palas 56.1 30.1 13.8 100.0 12 Allai 52.9 34.9 12.2 100.0 13 Hillan Batagram 46.2 32.5 21.3 100.0 14 Black Mountain 27.0 44.1 28.9 100.0

NOTE 1: No Working Plan traceable 212 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

WORKING PLAN - SUPPORT TABLE 2.3 (a) CHANGE in AREA STOCKED 1996 to 2008 by DENSITY CLASS, in hectare GAIN and LOSS of AREA STOCKED No. WORKING PLANS 10-25% cc 26-50% cc 51-100% cc TOTAL TOTAL 13,325 -48,600 -33,284 -68,558

WP AREA MALAKAND 196 -26,369 -14,302 -40,476 Protected Forests only 1 Kalam -2,077 -106 -372 -2,555 2 Dessan Utror 2 -211 -110 -319 3 Behrain 1,725 -3,516 -655 -2,446 4 Swat Range -239 196 -742 -785 5 Matta Range 5,487 -5,118 -3,015 -2,646 6 Alpuri -411 174 -1,989 -2,226 7 Buner -1,992 -1,291 -450 -3,734 8 Dir Kohistan 799 -4,330 -2,403 -5,934 9 Dir & Samarbagh 18 -4,150 -1,901 -6,034 10 Warrai 1,618 -2,611 -2,357 -3,350 11 Timergara -237 -184 -467 -888 12 Chitral -4,497 -5,222 159 -9,559

WP AREA HAZARA 13,129 -22,230 -18,981 -28,082

Protected Forests 797 -7,409 -1,656 -8,269 1 Kandia Uthor -1,931 -1,894 -730 -4,555 2 Seo 3,442 -3,760 -382 -700 3 Ranolia Dubair 208 -631 -8 -431 4 Upper Tanawal -498 -670 -303 -1,472 5 Gidderpur -424 -454 -233 -1,111 Reserved Forests 1,440 -2,500 -3,579 -4,639 1 Haripur -4 -95 0 -99 2 Gallies 149 -1,005 -520 -1,376 3 Kaghan 2,137 -617 -2,439 -919 4 Upper Siran 206 -10 -423 -227 5 Lower Siran & Agror -1,048 -773 -197 -2,018 Guzara Forests 10,893 -12,321 -13,746 -15,174 1 Haripur -177 -425 0 -602 2 Gallies -118 -238 -240 -595 3 Upper Kaghan 2,042 -1,339 -3,425 -2,722 4 Lower Kaghan 66 -1,118 -912 -1,964 5 Lower Siran & Agror -1,012 -642 -313 -1,967 6 Hilkot Range 95 -53 -267 -225 7 Upper Siran 2,357 -1,491 -895 -29 8 Harban 2,473 -2,171 -529 -227 9 Jalkot -1,056 -557 -1,777 -3,390 10 Pattan 11 Palas 6,206 -3,193 -3,027 -14 12 Allai 101 -531 -582 -1,012 13 Hillan Batagram -221 -545 -604 -1,370 14 Black Mountain 136 -19 -1,175 -1,057 Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 213

WORKING PLAN - SUPPORT TABLE 2.3 (b) CHANGE in AREA STOCKED 1996 to 2008 by DENSITY CLASS, in percent GAIN and LOSS of AREA STOCKED No. WORKING PLANS 10-25% cc 26-50% cc 51-100% cc TOTAL

TOTAL 8.0 -27.2 -29.4 -15.0

WP AREA MALAKAND 0.2 -25.8 -24.4 -15.8 Protected Forests only 1 Kalam -36.6 -2.6 -7.3 -17.2 2 Dessan Utror -64.9 -7.6 -17.9 3 Behrain 21.6 -23.1 -6.6 -7.4 4 Swat Range -4.7 4.9 -38.3 -7.1 5 Matta Range 105.2 -66.9 -52.6 -14.2 6 Alpuri -4.3 2.0 -47.3 -9.9 7 Buner -26.9 -28.5 -55.5 -29.3 8 Dir Kohistan 5.8 -24.8 -16.2 -12.8 9 Dir & Samarbagh 0.2 -57.4 -44.0 -29.1 10 Warrai 21.5 -26.8 -39.6 -14.4 11 Timergara -10.0 -22.2 -55.0 -21.9 12 Chitral -21.0 -23.4 4.5 -20.2

WP AREA HAZARA 18.3 -29.2 -34.9 -13.9

Protected Forests 4.3 -43.8 -37.4 -20.7 1 Kandia Uthor -25.7 -29.6 -39.8 -28.9 2 Seo 160.6 -86.7 -42.5 -9.5 3 Ranolia Dubair 3.7 -15.6 -10.4 -4.4 4 Upper Tanawal -20.2 -52.4 -21.9 -28.7 5 Gidderpur -42.5 -52.5 -100.0 -53.0 Reserved Forests 15.8 -18.5 -17.8 -10.9 1 Haripur -0.5 -20.3 -7.6 2 Gallies 6.6 -27.0 -7.5 -10.7 3 Kaghan 63.9 -9.7 -22.4 -4.5 4 Upper Siran 22.1 -0.5 -22.4 -4.7 5 Lower Siran & Agror -60.4 -83.1 -44.1 -64.8 Guzara Forests 24.9 -26.9 -46.1 -12.7 1 Haripur -11.2 -73.4 -27.9 2 Gallies -8.7 -23.9 -27.6 -18.5 3 Upper Kaghan 45.0 -27.8 -50.9 -16.9 4 Lower Kaghan 2.0 -25.1 -41.2 -19.8 5 Lower Siran & Agror -66.0 -94.8 -91.8 -77.1 6 Hilkot Range 40.1 -15.2 -56.9 -21.3 7 Upper Siran 69.0 -38.5 -49.2 -0.3 8 Harban 65.6 -67.5 -100.0 -3.0 9 Jalkot -15.9 -8.1 -45.3 -19.5 10 Pattan 11 Palas 79.8 -29.8 -46.9 -0.1 12 Allai 1.8 -12.1 -30.3 -8.4 13 Hillan Batagram -9.1 -25.9 -37.2 -22.2 14 Black Mountain 8.9 -0.7 -39.7 -14.6 214 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

ANNEX 11 Impact of Deforestation on floods

Experts at the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP) claimed that deforestation may be one of the principal causes of the most severe floods to hit the Mekong delta in the last forty years.

Another point of view is that the soils of well-managed natural forests and plantations can maintain a higher water-storage capacity than most non-forest soils under similar conditions. They can thus slow the rate of runoff, which in turn helps to minimize flooding in smaller watersheds and of more frequent intermediate events. It also does justice to the multitude of other environmental services that forests provide.

Some others view that the local level is where deforestation has the most immediate effect. The forest acts as a sort of sponge, soaking up rainfall brought by tropical storms while anchoring soils and releasing water at regular intervals. This regulating feature of forests can help moderate destructive flood. When forest cover is lost, runoff rapidly flows into streams, elevating river levels.

An early American view on forests and floods is that rain which falls over a bare slope acts differently. It is not caught by the crowns nor held by the floor, nor is its flow into the streams hindered by the timber and the fallen waste from the trees. It does not sink into the ground more than half as readily as in the forest, as experiments have shown. The result is that a great deal of water reaches the streams in a short time, which is the reason why floods occur. It is therefore true that forests tend to prevent floods. But this good influence [of forests on floods] is important only when the forest covers a large part of the drainage basin of the stream. Even then the forest may not prevent floods altogether. The forest floor, which has more to do with the fallen rain water than any other part of the forest, can affect its flow only so long as it has not taken up all the water it can hold. That which falls after the forest floor is saturated runs into the streams almost as fast as it would over bare ground. (From: Gifford Pinchot, A Primer for Forestry, 1905)1.

The Himalayan sponge: The Himalayan forests normally exert a sponge effect, soaking up abundant rainfall and storing it before releasing it in regular amounts over an extended period. When the forest is cleared, rivers turn muddy and swollen during the wet season, before shrinking during drier periods (From: Myers 1986)2.

Sampurno L.A has, however, concluded that a recent global analysis claiming that tropical deforestation amplifies flood risk and severity proves less than solid. The scope of forestry in mitigating floods …the scope for forests to reduce the severity of major floods that are derived from an extended period of very heavy rainfall is rather limited (From: UK Forestry Commission, 2002)3. It is known that the increased forest evaporation may reduce floods, and that interception of rainfall by forests reduces floods by removing a proportion of the storm rainfall and by allowing the build up of soil moisture deficits. In addition, forest management activities may increase floods such as cultivation, drainage and road construction which tend to increase stream density and soil compaction during logging. Studies at large catchment size held for the Himalayas (Hofer, T. 1998) show no measurable effects for Ganga-Brahmaputra- Meghna catchment as well no increase in frequency or the magnitude of flooding over the last few decades (reported in Calder et al., 2003)4.

1FAO & CIFOR (October 2005). Forests and floods, Drowning in fiction or thriving on facts? , page-40, RAP Publication 2005/03, Bangkok,Thailand. 2FAO & CIFOR (October 2005). Forests and floods, Drowning in fiction or thriving on facts? , page-4, RAP Publication 2005/03, Bangkok,Thailand. 3FAO & CIFOR (October 2005). Forests and floods, Drowning in fiction or thriving on facts? , page-34, RAP Publication 2005/03, Bangkok,Thailand. 4Naranjo, Jose Agustin Breña (2006). Deforestation and flooding. UNESCO-IHE, Institute for Water Education. Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 215

According to FAO (2005) the conventional wisdom is that forests act as giant ‘sponges’, soaking up water during heavy rainfall and releasing freshwater slowly when it is most needed, during the dry months of the year. The reality is far more complex. Although forested watersheds are exceptionally stable hydrological systems, the complexity of environmental factors should cause us to refrain from overselling the virtues of forests and from relying on simple solutions (e.g., removing people currently living in mountainous watersheds, imposing logging bans, or implementing massive reforestation programs). Rather, the complexity of these processes should prompt us to reassess our current knowledge of the relationship between forests and water, and reconsider conventional responses to one of the most serious disaster threats in the Asia-Pacific region i.e. large-scale floods. The reality, however, is that direct links between deforestation and floods are far from certain.

FAO and the CIFOR groups also found in the 2005 study that the frequency and extent of major floods has not changed over the last century despite significant reductions in forest cover. Instead deforestation does have a role in small floods and erosion by eliminating the buffering and soil-anchoring effects of forests5.

Timár G, et al (2005)6 concluded that the detected small decrease of the forest cover does not support the concept that the increased discharge fluctuations and the catastrophic upstream floods as the ones of 1998 and 2001 are because of a major deforestation process. The role of forests in solving flood problems remains uncertain, although the progress that has been made in understanding upland-lowland interrelationships suggests that forests are much less important than commonly perceived. However, close to the forests in the uplands, they can reduce flooding from frequent, low-intensity, short-duration storms (Hamilton 1986)7. Although forests can play a certain role in delaying and reducing peak floodwater flows at local levels, scientific evidence clearly indicates that forests cannot stop catastrophic large-scale floods, commonly caused by severe meteorological events — the type of events that are often blamed on forest harvesting or conversion to agricultural uses. A 2007 study published in the journal Global Change Biology8 has, however, found that forests do impact the occurrence and severity of destructive floods. A prominent researcher is already calling the new work a “landmark study” in support of forest conservation. Analyzing data from 56 developing countries and controlling for differences in rainfall, elevation, soil moisture and degraded areas, researchers from Charles Darwin University in Australia and the National University of Singapore found that a 10 percent increase in deforestation results in a 4 -28% increase in flood frequency.

Based on an arbitrary decrease in natural forest area of 10%, the model-averaged prediction of flood frequency increased between 4% and 28% among the countries modeled,” wrote the researchers. “Using the same hypothetical decline in natural forest area resulted in a 4 -8 % increase in total flood duration. An important additional finding was that only the amount of native forest was correlated with reductions in flood risk — plantation forests had the opposite effect”, said lead author Dr. Cory Bradshaw of Charles Darwin University9. Unabated loss of forests may increase or exacerbate the number of flood-related disasters.

5FAO & CIFOR (October 12, 2005). Forests and floods, Drowning in fiction or thriving on facts? RAP Publication 2005/03, Bangkok,Thailand. 6G. Timár., G. Molnár., Cs. Ferencz., J. Lichtenberger., B. Székely., Sz. Pásztor. & P. Bognár (2005). Deforestation as a primary cause of the recent flood peaks in the Pannonian Basin? - Counter-evidences from the Upper-Tisza catchment. Geophysical Research Abstracts, Vol. 7, 01032, 2005 SRef-ID: 1607-7962/gra/EGU05-A-01032. European Geosciences Union. 7FAO & CIFOR (October 2005). Forests and floods, Drowning in fiction or thriving on facts? , page-21, RAP Publication 2005/03, Bangkok,Thailand. 8Journal Global Change Biology Edited by: Steve Long 9Corey J. A. Bradshaw., Navjot S. Sodhi., Kelvin S.H. Peh & Barry W. Brook (2007). Global evidence that deforestation amplifies flood risk and severity in the developing world. Global Change Biology (2007) 13, 2379–2395, 1—17. 216 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

ANNEX 12 FIELD STUDY CONDUCTED ON THE ADOPTION AND PRACTICING THE JFM APPROACH A field study has been conducted to find out the implementation status of the joint forest committees. From the available record it was indicated that more than 800 VDCs and JMCs have been organized by the NWFP Forest Department under its various developmental projects such as Kalam Integrated Development Project, Malakand Social Forestry Project, Siran Forest Development Project, Watershed Management Project, Natural Resource Conservation Project, Forestry Sector Development Project and by the NWFP Forest Department itself.

Since most of the JFMCs were organized in Hazara and Malakand circle, therefore, three Forest Divisions, namely Siran Forest Division (where the concept of JFMC for the first time was introduced by the Siran Forest Development Project), Haripur Forest Division (where INRM project is currently operating) and Swat Forest Divisions (Where VDC system was first introduced by Malakand Social Forestry Project) were selected to have an idea of the performance of the VDCs/JFMCs. The detail of VDCs/JFMCs in these Forest Divisions is as under:

S.No Name of the Forest Division No. of VDCs No. of JFMCs 1 Swat 27 30 2 Siran 3 46 3 Haripur 12 -

The Community Participation Rules 2004 has laid down a definite procedure for organization of these JFMCs. Besides, the guidelines for registration and operation of VDCs/JFMCs were also laid down in various Projects as well as by the Forest Department under various forest harvesting policies. The Village Land Use Plans and Joint Forest management plans has also indicated a series of interventions to be adopted by these VDCs/ JFMCs. Based on the requirements indicated by these two documents, a set of criteria was developed for evaluation of these VDCs/JFMCs and an Institutional Capacity Assessment Form was developed accordingly. A point value was attributed to each of the criteria according to their importance for the functionality of the VDCs/JFMCs.

A total enumeration and evaluation of these VDCs and JFMCs was carried out. Assessment Form was filled from all VDCs/JFMCs through the field staff of Community Development Directorate of NWFP Forest Department. The results of the evaluation are shown in the tables.

Summary of Results: The basic idea of organizing the JFMCs was to decentralize the management but at the same time to devolve the responsibility of development and protection of the resource to the real beneficiaries. As per provision of community participation Rules 2004, besides other, the JFMCs haveto perform the following functions:

• It shall identify beneficiaries. • It shall carry out plantation on wastelands and ensure its protection. • It shall perform the duties of forest officer particularly in the protection of forests including erection of forest check posts to reject encroachment. • It shall produce witnesses in the court against forest offenders.

However, the field study has indicated that most of the JFMCs have not associated themselves with any of these developmental and protective functions.

1. The JFMCs in Swat Forest division are mostly in-operative because of the following reasons: • None of the JFMCs of Swat Forest Division has prepared the list of beneficiaries. • Seven JFMCs were registered in a single day i.e. 17.3.2007 Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 217

• The harvesting of timber in Malakand Circle is being carried out through FDC and not delegated to JFMCs. • Due to peculiar Law and Order situation in Swat District it is not possible for the JFMCs to operate.

1. Most of the JFMCs organized/operating in Siran Forest Division are acting merely as Forest Harvesting Societies. They have been created in response to the harvesting policies that all harvesting is to be accomplished through JFMCs and most of them were established in the course of the one year ban relaxation in 2001 for the sole purpose of harvesting.

The initial establishment of JFMC on pilot basis under Siran Forest Development Project was done with the idea of participatory forest management. However subsequently after the winding of the SFDP, the concept could not be pursued by the Forest Department in its true spirit. Accordingly no other JFMCs have been established with the idea of participatory forest management. No social organization process has been followed for establishment of these JFMCs and no effort has ever been made to build their capacity to manage their privately owned forests. In fact the Forest Department itself is reluctant to devolve its managerial authority to these JFMCs, because as already experienced in the case of Cooperative societies, any sort of mismanagement if made by these JFMCs shall anyhow fall on the shoulders of the Forest Officers and they will have to bear the consequences.

1. Field study indicated that in Haripur Forest Division, so far no JFMC has been established. However, the Village Development Committees are progressively achieving their targets of integrated planning and community organization through the association of INRM Project. 218 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan 9 27 32 31 10 21 15 15 15 10 15 15 10 10 10 15 10 10 28 10 15 10 15 15 10 17.5 19.5 22.5 Total 75 points

2.5 2.5 7.5 2.5 Linkage 10 points

2.5 10 points Trainings Trainings

5 5 5 5 5 5 5 points Savings

Infra- 5 points Structure

5 4 5 Income 5 points Generation

2 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 Dev. Dev. Forest 10 points

Forest 5 points Protection

2 1 2 2 2 1 1 5 points Involved in Harvesting 5

5 5 5 5 5 5 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 JFM Plans TABLE 1: Comparison of JFMCs Assessment - SWAT 1: Comparison of JFMCs TABLE prepared 10 points 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Mtc. Record Meeting/ 10 points

Name of VDC Roringar Miandan comptt: 22 Maindam-2 Malamjaba Mangor Kot Dud Fazli Banda Sapruno Khawar Miandam Qalagay Lalku Bar Lalku Khawaza Khela Peochar Shawar Barikot Ghalegay Mattu Shumali & Gawalerai Jura & Charma Gamser Mula Khel Swatoo Khalay Maindam Kaldar Khawar Miandam Maurahi Shahdehri Faqira Urdam Shalpin Sheri Janpatai Shalpin Khawaza khela Sheri Borai Spani Uba Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 219 20 20 15 15 15 20 15 15 20 15 16 15 15 14 30 17.5 17.5 17.5 17.5 27.5 17.5 27.5 17.5 14.5 17.5 19.5 17.5 17.5 12.5 17.5 39.5 38.5 Total 75 points 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 Linkage 10 points 10 10 10 10 10 10 points Trainings Trainings 5 5 5 points Savings Infra- 5 points Structure Income 5 points Generation 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 10 points Forest Dev. Forest Dev. Forest 5 points Protection 2 1 2 2 1 5 points Involved in Harvesting 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 TABLE 2: Comparison of JFMCs Assessment - SIRAN 2: Comparison of JFMCs TABLE prepared 10 points JFM Plans 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 7.5 7.5 Meeting/ 10 points Record Mtc. Name of VDC Chinar Devli Mandagucha Pichla ban Panjool Chathoo Doga Titri Wala Titri Mohri Moza Jachha Devli West Titrri Khanda Devli Seyyadan Arshi Danna Hilkot Chapar Mandaguacha Keri Bala Jachha No.1 Balimang Mandgucha Choor Keri Mand gucha Chooran Mohri Attershisha Cholli Laar Bela Mailbat Battal Neelban Timri Guazara Timri Jabbar Devli East Jhak Katha Ratta pani 220 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan 40 45 46 45 44 50 40 28 36 48 37 23 23 23 22 23 23 21 20 23 23 23 Total Total 75 points 75 points 3 4 5 Linkage Linkage 10 points 10 points 6 8 8 7 7 8 8 5 7 8 7 10 points 10 points Trainings Trainings Trainings 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 5 points 5 points Savings Savings 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 Infra- Infra- 5 points 5 points Structure Structure 3 3 3 3 3 Income Income 5 points 5 points Generation Generation 8 9 9 9 8 9 9 5 9 9 9 10 points 10 points Forest Dev. Forest Dev. Forest Dev. Forest Forest 5 points 5 points Protection Protection 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 points 5 points Involved in Harvesting Involved in Harvesting 9 9 8 9 9 9 9 8 9 9 9 8 8 8 7 8 8 6 5 8 8 8 TABLE 4: Comparison of JFMCs Assessment - HARIPUR 4: Comparison of JFMCs TABLE prepared prepared 10 points 10 points JFM Plans JFM Plans 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 TABLE 3: Comparison of JFMCs Assessment - WOODLOT (Mazrooa) 3: Comparison of JFMCs TABLE 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Meeting/ Meeting/ 10 points 10 points Record Mtc. Record Mtc. Name of VDC Name of VDC Keroach Khairbara Bela Dharyal Timri Baki Khalas Devli Chattan plain Ranjnan Lachimang Malkoora Dharyal Dadar Sarban Roti Basool Keri – 2 Batagram Kanar hater Deri kiala Triman kata Triman Ghari Dhalam paisser Kund Battal Salem band Kundi Kotewa Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 221

ANNEX 13 Circle level Workshops of Forest Officers

Two workshops were organized, one at Abbottabad on 27.8.2008 and the other at Peshawar on 01.9.2008. Almost all the senior Officers including the CCF, Conservators of Forests, Directors of the Specialized Directorates, Sub Divisional Forest Officers and officers of the specialized Directorates participated in these workshops. The purpose of the workshops was to:

• review the forestry reforms and the state of their implementation, high light the bottle necks in the implementation of the reforms, • impact of timber harvesting ban on the reform process and the overall management of forests • Propose a viable post- ban implementation strategy.

A back ground presentation relevant to the subject on forest policy, Institutional reforms and progress on timber harvesting ban, was made to the participants. Thereafter, the participants were divided in to four working groups one each on forest policy, participatory forest management, institutional reforms, and timber harvesting ban. The response of the participants is summarized as under.

1 Forestry Reforms General

Following general bottlenecks were identified as causes of low progress on Institutional reforms.

Lack of ownership of the reforms: There is lack of ownership of the Institutional reforms in the Department. The Steering Committee and the Support Group created to pursue the reform process have been winded up after the termination of the Forestry Sector Project. The Forestry Commission which was supposed to pursue the reforms is not functional. The managerial staff posted in the specialized Directorates have neither the required expertise nor much interest to promote the cause of matrix management.

Lack of driving force behind the reforms: The reforms were mostly donors driven. The response of the Provincial Government and the Department was only to meet the donors demand. However, after the incidence of 9/11, almost all the donors have withdrawn from the country due to security reasons. This resulted in to the withdrawal of technical and financial facilitation required for the reforms and hence low progress on the follow up of the reforms.

Lack of clarity of the reform process: The concept of the reforms is not clear to all the implementers. There is confusion among the participants on Integrated, participatory Natural Resource Management approach. The matrix management system is also not properly under stood.

Lack of Coordination among various actors: There is lack of coordination and synchronization among various actors of the matrix management in implementing the system.

Lack of Human Resources in the Department: Due to non induction of the new recruitment in the department for the last two decades, high out turn of the existing qualified and experienced staff either due to their retirement or hiring by other organizations, there is acute shortage of human resources in the Department to provide the technical support required for the reforms process and support other specialized and managerial functions.

Sub standard quality of the working plans: Although, it has time and again been insisted that the forests should be managed by improving quality of the working plans so as to meet the demands of the changing Forest policies, the working Plans are still prepared under the old Working Plan Code of pre-independence 222 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

era. No consideration is given in the preparation of the working plans towards meeting the commitments made through Multilateral Agreements, Bio Diversity Conservation or other National and Provincial Policy Guide lines.

Budgetary constraints: The department faces acute shortage of funds especially for their operational and maintenance expenditures.

Non induction of the specialised Staff in the Directorates: Basically, the Specialised Directorates were established to inculcate subject specialisation in the Department. However, up till now, most of the Directorates have not been able to induct specialised staff.

Complications in effective enforcement of forests laws: As a part of the reforms in the judiciary system, the old system of Executive Magistrates have been abolished and replaced with Judiciary Magistrates. However, Forest Department has not been able to adjust its prosecution procedures with the new Judiciary system. Resultantly, the Forest department staff feels difficulty in pursuing their prosecution cases and most of their cases fail in the trial courts.

Poor governance: The Department is also facing political interference in appointment, posting and transfer of its staff, resulting in to poor governance in the Department.

1.2 Specific

Following specific shortfalls pertaining to each item of the reforms were also indicated:

Forest policy: The policy goals are not precise and specific. Implementing mechanism of the policy has not been spelled out clearly. An action plan was supposed to be developed in light of the policy which could not be done due to absence of forestry commission. An institutional locus was required to be identified to ensure implementation of the action plan, which has not been done. No policy review has been done for the last ten years. The forest policy has failed to address the land tenure issue of the forests.

Participatory Forest Management: There is lukewarm acceptance of the approach in the Department. JFMCs even do not know what their role is. They are dominated by influential land owners and timber traders.

Forestry Commission: The Commission has been notified but is not functional. Forestry Commission overlaps and contradicts the existing political system of the Government. The Commission was supposed to curtail political interference, but it has itself been politicized. The present form of the Commission is more like a Forestry Management Board than a Commission.

Forestry Round Table: Presently the Round Table is non functional. Membership of the provincial Round Table is 51, which is too large. It is unmanageable. The Round Table should have its sub- units at Forest Circle and Forest Division level. There is lack of facilitation of the Round Table. Capacity building of the members is required.

Village Development Committees: It is a Project oriented concept and discontinues as soon as the project is over. There is lack of interest on the part of territorial staff of forest and other line departments. Based on land use planning, an independent model for VDC should be developed for each area instead of adopting a universal concept.

Joint Forest Management Committees: These are only Forest harvesting Committees. JFMCs are lacking developmental works. JFMCs are not associated in the Forest Management. Management must be devolved to JFMCs as provided in the rules. Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 223

Forest Development Fund: Only the Forest Development Fund collected through FDC is operational. The FDF collected through the Forest Department is not operational due to complicated financial procedure of the Government. Existing FDF rules need to be re-examined and reviewed. No procedure has been evolved for accessibility of the JFMCs to the FDF.

Forest Force: It is not yet functional. The forest force lacks equipment and proper training. It has to be organized as an independent wing at Forest Division level within the Department, separated from developmental and social activities of the Department.

Forest Planning: Facilities available to the working plan crews are inadequate, in terms of staff residences, office accommodation, conveyance, equipment, instruments and staffing. Very insufficient meager budgetary provisions are made for preparation of the working plans. It is not possible to prepare quality working plans with in these meager budget provisions. Capacity building of the working plan staff is needed. Regular master trainers are required to train the staff. There is very low commitment of the working plan staff to their assignments as no incentives are provided to them. Rather working plan posting is considered as punishment for the field staff and like all other specialized Directorates, working Plan circle is also considered as dumping ground for the managerial staff. Based on the above factors, the quality of the field data of the working plans is poor and their reliability is of average type. At present the planning is being done in the traditional way. The new concept of multi stage planning needs to be operationalized and implemented at ground level.

Forest Protection: The strength of the present protective staff is insufficient. Effectiveness of the protective staff in protecting the forest resource is poor. They need strengthening and training. The present legal documents need effective implementation.

Forest Management: Forest management is literally absent and static due to imposition of ban on scientific management.

Status of Afforestation: Large scale afforestation program is required. Provision of funds from FDF is erratic and inadequate. Afforestation has low priority in financial allocation from other sources.

Monitoring: Monitoring needs improvement.

Specialized Directorates: Human resource capacity of the Directorates to deliver is inadequate. Their technical capacity is poor. Conceptual clarity of the staff is low. Availability of financial resources is very poor. Territorial staff is not benefitting from the services of the specialized Directorates. They act like strangers to each other.

2 Impact of Ban on Timber Harvesting

Impact on forest protection: Ban on timber harvesting has negatively affected the forest protection. It has created a gap between supply and demand in the market. The skilled labor which was trained by the Forest Department and the FDC for harvesting has become unemployed. Resultantly, they are employed by the timber smugglers for illegal cutting and conversion of trees, so as to feed the market demand. Fuel wood supply from legal harvest has been reduced, resulting into cutting of green trees for fuel wood requirements. Resultantly, policing role of forest department has increased.

Impact on Forest management: The ban has resulted into stoppage of scientific forest management. Accordingly, the planning and management capability of the Department has been adversely affected.

Impact on Participatory Forest Management: Repeated extensions of the ban has affected the credibility of the Forest Department among the forest owners and they have lost trust in the department. This has adversely effected the implementation of participatory forest management. 224 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

Impact on Silvi-culture Improvement of the Crop: In silvi-cultural marking of trees for harvesting, silvicultural requirements of the trees are being taken care of. For example, over shading trees are removed so as to create gap for regeneration of light demanding species such as chir pine. Due to ban on silvicultural marking, growth of light demanding species is suppressed. There is disturbance of age pattern due to illegal cutting. Resultantly, the condition of the crop has deteriorated. Regeneration gaps are not created, therefore natural regeneration is poor.

3 Post Ban Management Strategy.

For proper planning and to reduce chances of exaggerated prescriptions for marking, the preparation of scientifically sound management plans having accurate and authentic data is to be ensured. Implementation of the working plans in letter and spirit is to be ensured through regular monitoring. An electronic data base for monitoring through planning and monitoring Circle is to be developed. GIS is to be used as a tool for monitoring. Periodical monitoring reports are required to be compiled. The forest inventory procedures, based on rough ocular estimation, needs to be made more precise and reliable. Operationalize the specialized units in accordance with the spirit of matrix management. Participatory integrated natural resource management is to be implemented in its true spirit. Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 225

ANNEX 14 Stakeholders’ Analysis

Stakeholders Stake in Forests Means to peruse stake Constraints faced 1. Local Communities Continuous forest Individual and communal degradation, conflicts with a. Forest Owners Subsistence and commercial lands, legal rights, illegal other stakeholders and use means, ban lifting weak management of forest department

No forest income because Sale of royalties to timber of ban , shortage of timber Flow of royalties and timber traders, collection or supply for domestic use, b. Right holders for domestic use purchase of fuel wood and timber mafia offering low free grazing, ban lifting royalty prices, illegal felling, and resource degradation.

Use of forest for fuel wood, Diminishing supply of wood c. Non-right holders/ timber, grazing, grasses, Pay in kind or cash to right and non-wood products for Users herbs, mushrooms, nuts et holders, illicit felling, continue survival , expose high risks cetera. ban and security issues

Conservation of forests, just Sustainability of poor Continuous resource use of forest resources and households, stable degradation, decreasing d. NGOs / VDCs / JFMCs sharing benefits with the environment, and resource forest production, illicit felling, poorest users. sustainability, lifting ban high market prices

Purchase of royalties at low prices, remove more Forest degradation, ban e. Timber Traders / Commercial profits, political timber than marked, develop on commercial felling, high Contractors power contacts with officials and transportation costs, taxes, politicians, lifting ban import duties 2. State of Pakistan Policy, legislation, inter- provincial coordination, Dwindling forest resources, a. Federal Government Honoring international financial and technical increasing local and treaties and obligations support, international liaison international pressure for and linkages sustain management

Population pressure, illicit Administration, protection, felling, political interference, b. Provincial Government Revenue and ecological development, management, low public cooperation, balance implementation, policy, degrading forest resources, legislation, lifting ban weaker control, corruption

Sustained supply of wood c. Wood-based industries Wood processing and selling from domestic markets at low Uncertain supply, rising to maximize profit prices, imports prices, import restrictions

Purchase from local d. Consumers Low prices of wood and markets, better substitutes at Rising prices, irregular supply wood-products competitive prices

Bilateral and multilateral Inexperience, weak state f. Pakistani NGOs Poverty alleviation, links, political influence, and society relationships, Biodiversity conservation international NGOs’ support continuous decline of habitat

Political and administrative Biodiversity conservation, Bilateral and multilateral constraints, continuous 3. International Agencies mitigation of global warming funding, technical assistance, degradation of habitat, and climate change, and bindings ecosystems, biodiversity 226 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

ANNEX 15 Field Survey for Forest and Environmental Conditions Assessment Methodological (1) Objectives of Field Survey

1. To identify eco-climatic zone of the forest area/sample point site. 2. To collect qualitative data on forest lands regarding forest conditions—crown density, composition, associate vegetation, ground vegetation, forest stand development phase, regeneration status, and the status of medicinal and aromatic plants. 3. To collect qualitative data on environment and environment related services of the forest area, including soil and humus, wildlife/biodiversity, soil conservation/watershed values, carbon sequestration values and recreational values. 4. To collect qualitative data on social use such as intensity of grazing, firewood collection, timber cutting, etc. 5. To collect data on physical characteristics of the forest site such as geographical and GPS coordinates, altitude, aspect, slope, soil conditions, erosion hazards, etc. 6. To serve as an aid in ground truthing of satellite images being used for quantitative analysis.

(2) Sample Plots Selection Criteria and Method: The sample plots were randomly selected after stratification of the study area based on the following criteria, so as to include sites representing the following categories:

1. Altitudinal Zones: Sample plots be distributed between different altitudinal zones, below 2000 meters and above 2000 meters. 2. Legal Categories of Forests: Sample plots be distributed between different forest tenure/legal categories—Reserve Forests, Protected Forests, and Guzara Forests. 3. Eco-Climatic Zones: Sample plots be distributed between different eco-climatic--- Sub-tropical forests, Wet Temperate Forests, and Dry Temperate Forests. 4. Crown Density Classes: Sample plots be distributed between different canopy covers/crown density conditions—less than 10 % density (Regeneration areas or Range Lands), and F1, F2 and F3 density classes. 5. Accessibility: Sample plots be accessible for data collection, keeping in view the prevailing security situation, weather conditions, time required for approaching the sample plot, and also be reflective of the social pressures on the forests.

(3) Sample Plot Size: A square plot of 1 hectare size measuring 100 meter by 100 meter was used for data collection.

(4) Maps and Images, and Documents Used: - G.T. Sheet Maps - Landsat Images - Zoomed Images of Sample Points from Google Earth - Relevant Forest Working Plan - Relevant Compartment History File - Worksheets/Data Collection Forms and Interpretation Keys

(5) Organization and Control of Works/Teams for Data Collection

Consultants: Qualitative assessments based on personal experiences FMC Staff: Interpretation and analysis of Landsat images of 2008 and comparison of forest cover and density with the images taken for PFRI Study of 1995/1996. Location of pre-determined plots (based on selection criteria and results of Landsat image analysis). Finding the GT sheet coordinates and the Global Positioning of new sample plots. Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 227

GIS Expert: Kept in loop online on computer by the consultant through mobile phone contact from the sample plot for ground truthing. Assistants: Provided assistance to the consultants Local Forest Staff: Provided logistical help to reach to the sites of the sample plots, relevant Forest Management Plan and Compartment History Files, local written and oral information regarding the history of management of the sample plot, the forest and the adjoining areas regarding felling (legal and illegal), important events, local wild animal/bird species, medicinal and aromatic plants, nearest villages, population, threats and pressures on the forest resource and on the environmental parameters; and facilitation in contact with the local people for getting information and knowing their perspectives

(6) Assessment and presentation of Forest and Environmental Conditions: The main factors/ parameters included in the qualitative assessments included geo-physical features (GPS coordinates, elevation, slope and aspect), edaphic factors (soil depth and humus formation), biological and environmental elements including species composition, species diversity, age classes, regeneration status, biodiversity, soil erosion hazard, watershed protection, carbon fixation and recreational potential.

The following two forms were used for collection of data and summarized reporting of results of field assessment.

Form-1 (see TABLE 1E) contains the basic data on geo-physical features of the site as mentioned above. These features were studied to interpret their influence on the forest and environmental conditions and to assess the accessibility and suitability of forests for local use and forest working.

Form-2 (see TABLE 2E) gives in summary form the qualitative assessment of the forest and environmental condition.

The forest density is an indicator of forest health, productive capacity and volume of biomass, environmental values (biodiversity, watershed and soil conservation, soil fertility, carbon sequestration, recreation and ecotourism potential etc) With reduction in density, there is less plant cover and biomass leading to reduction in forest productivity; less plant cover to protect soil, intercept rain, absorb water and regulate its flows; less conducive conditions for forest litter decomposing organisms which help in soil formation, organic matter accumulation and nutrient recycling; low diversity of plant and animal species due to loss of habitat and as a refuge for wild fauna; and low potential for recreation and carbon fixation.

Forest soils and humus are important for supply of nutrients for trees growth, quality, absorption and regulation of water and maintaining biodiversity, in particular of soil organisms.

The species composition, diversity, status of regeneration and age class distribution are important variables of forest health, biodiversity and other environmental conditions.

The macro-level locality factors and outcome variables were assessed qualitatively for their significance for and relation to the impact of harvesting ban on the condition of forests including environment.

(7) Terms, Categories and Definitions used in Field Survey Forms and Result Sheets

A. Legal Categories of Forests 1. Reserve Forests (RF): Forests that are state property and which are encumbered with none or very few legal rights of the surrounding community. 2. Protected Forests: Forests that are state property but which are heavily encumbered with legal rights and concessions of private individuals or communities. 228 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan

3. Guzara Forests: Forests that are private property of individuals or communities but which are managed by the state on behalf of the owning individuals or communities. 4. Resumed Lands: Forest lands which have been resumed by the state under different land reforms and which are now state property.

B. Land Use Categories 1. Forest/Forest Land (F): A forest is a land area of more than 0.5 hectare size, with a tree canopy cover of more than 10 percent and which is not primarily under agricultural or other specific non-forest land use. 2. Range Land (RL): A land area with sparse tree cover (less than 10 percent) and which is primarily used a grazing land for livestock. 3. Agricultural Land (A): A land area which is used for the production of agricultural crops and which may or may not contain trees in block or linear form 4. Barren Land (BL): Land with no vegetation.

C. Forest Density Classes 1. Low Density or Degraded Forest (F1): A forest with density ranging between 10 to 25% crown cover. 2. Medium Density Forest (F2): A forest with density ranging between 26 to 50% crown cover 3. High Density Forest (F3): A forest with density more than 50% crown cover

D. Major Conifer Species 1. Kail or Blue Pine (Pinus wallichiana) 2. Deodar (Cedurs deodara) 3. Fir (Abies pindrow) 4. Spruce (Picea smithiana) 5. Chir Pine (Pinus roxbughii) 6. Yew (Taxus baccata) 7. Chilghoza (Pinus gerardiana)

E. Major Broadleaf Species/Associates 1. Oak (Quercus spp.) 2. Walnut (Juglans regia) 3. Horse Chestnut (Aesculus indica) 4. Bird Cherry (Prunus padus) 5. Olea (Olea ferruginea) 6. Other Broadleaf species.

F. Ground Vegetation Condition 1. Depleted: Under growth grazed, browsed out, cut or affected by fire 2. Sparse: > 5 meter (average) distance between under growth 3. Moderate: 3-5 meter (average) distance between under growth 4. Rich: < 3 meter (average) distance between under growth

G. Regeneration Status 1. 0: None 2. 1: Established < 1/3 3. 2: Established 1/3 to 2/3 4. 3: Established > 2/3

H. Medicinal and Aromatic Plants (MAP) 1. Poor: None or only one species in the sample plot 2. Modest: Tow species in the sample plot 3. Rich: More than two species in the sample plot Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 229

I. Wildlife and Biodiversity Status 1. Poor: Less than 50 % of the normal conifer and broadleaf tree species, under growth and ground flora and some food; tree/rock cavity/roosting site/bush for shelter available in the sample plot. Common species of wild animals have not been sighted by the local wildlife/forest staff during the last one year in the forest. 2. Medium: 50-75 % of the normal conifer and broadleaf tree species, under growth and ground flora and some food; tree/rock cavity/roosting site/bush for shelter available in the sample plot. Some of the common species of wild animals have been sighted by the local wildlife/forest staff during the last one year in the forest. 3. Rich: All of the normally occurring conifer and broadleaf tree species, under growth and ground flora and some food; tree/rock cavity/roosting site/bush for shelter available in the sample plot. Most of the common species of wild animals have not been sighted by the local wildlife/forest staff during the last one year in the forest.

J. Soil and Humus Conditions 1. S: Soil Shallow 2. MD: Soil Moderately Deep 3. D: Soil Deep

K. Watershed Value 1. Low: Low recharge value. Canopy cover and ground vegetation is less than 25 % and exposed bed rock or shallow soil with low or no humus/organic matter. Angle of micro slope more than 30 degrees. No watershed value for local communities. 2. Medium: Medium recharge value. Canopy cover and ground vegetation from 25-50 % and more than 3 inches layer of soil including humus/organic matter. Angle of micro slope between 15 to 30 degrees. 3. High: High recharge value. Canopy cover and ground vegetation more than 50 %. Soil including humus/organic matter more than 6 inches deep. Angle of micro slope not more than 15 degrees.

L. Carbons Sequestration Value Canopy cover/leaf surface area; photosynthetic and in soil carbon fixation capacity of tree and other plant species; age of trees, aspects affecting radiation (aspect, light hours); occurrence of forest fires leading to destruction of leaf surface and carbon in soil; and availability of water for photosynthesis.

1. Low: Poor canopy/leaf surface area; northern aspect; prone to forest fires; and poor and dry soil. 2. Medium: Medium canopy/leaf surface area; western aspect; forest fires rare; humus and water available in soil. 3. High: Most of the contributing factors of carbon fixation are present—dense canopy/leaf surface area; eastern and southern aspects; no forest fires; and lot of humus and plenty of water available for photosynthetic activity.

M. Recreation Value The presence of recreation increasing attributes in the forest itself or in close by vicinity such as natural or cultural heritage sites or a national park; landscape attractions; species richness and presence of fascinating species of plants and animals; variety of blossoms or fall colors; cultural values such as buildings, archeological sites, carvings, dwellings, caves, and other cultural aspects; access and visitors facilities; appropriate security conditions and rescue arrangements.

1. Low: Poor in all recreation value attributes. 2. Medium: Currency or potential of some of the recreation value attributes. 3. High: Currency or potential of most of the recreation value attributes. 230 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan 5 F1 F3 F1 F1 F3 F3 F2 F3 F1 F2 F2 F1 F1 F2 F1 RL F2 AG VYR Visit 2008 Field F3 F1 F3 F3 F2 F1 F2 F3 F2 F2 F1 F1 RL RL RL AG AG N.A. N.A. 2008 THBS Forest Density 2 F1 F3 F1 F3 F3 F3 F3 F2 F1 F1 F1 F1 F2 F3 F3 F3 F1 RL AG 1996 PFRI- 45 65 40 70 45 70 75 75 55 55 65 40 45 70 65 45 75 40 70 (Degree) Inclination Inclination E S E E E S S E S N N N N W W W W NW NW Aspect (m) 1,031 2,228 1,245 2,295 1,354 1,914 1,000 1,335 1,200 2,314 2,183 1,439 1,228 1,070 1,364 1,210 2,395 Note 1 Note 1 Elevation Y 34:33:28 34:02:47 33:48:05 35:01:46 34:29:16 34:25:05 34:29:25 1,145,233 1,102,063 1,073,413 1,159,184 1,145,109 1,098,767 1,072,748 1,151,035 33:50:31.5 35:14:02.3 34:46:00.0 34:40:45.6 X Global position 73:15:23 73:24:09 73:07:50 73:02:32 73:18:12 73:01:27 73:08:42 3,214,116 3,236,106 3,217,780 3,218,929 3,214,297 3,241,768 3,217,106 3,218,540 73:12:56.72 73:10:03.27 73:03:16.14 73:25:56.73 Y 1,145,233 1,102,063 1,154,278 1,098,373 1,069,988 1,074,683 1,073,413 1,159,184 1,145,109 1,098,767 1,205,582 1,146,707 1,228,763 1,176,505 1,135,680 1,146,440 1,072,748 1,151,035 1,168,939 X 3,214,116 3,236,106 3,225,086 3,241,358 3,217,598 3,225,597 3,217,780 3,218,929 3,214,297 3,241,768 3,202,989 3,229,757 3,213,307 3,205,482 3,204,647 3,215,270 3,217,106 3,218,540 3,240,823 Co-ordinates (GT Sheet) District Mansehra Abbottabad Mansehra Abbotabad Haripur Haripur Haripur Mansehra Mansehra Abbottabad Kohistan Mansehra Kohistan Battagram Mansehra Mansehra Haripur Mansehra Mansehra Forest Name of Gallies RF AT PF Gallies RF Dadar Ayubia NP Nilan Bhoutu Dheri Rakhala Haripur RF Siran RF AT PF Sharial Massar Zaidkarr Surgai Kala Maira Jagir Haripur GF Siran GF Manshi Working Plan Gallies RF Agror Tanawal GF Gallies RF Lower Siran GF Gallies RF Haripur RF Haripur GF Haripur RF Lower Siran RF Gidarpur PF Pattan GF Lower Siran RF Seo PF Allai GF AT GF Gidarpur PF Haripur GF Lower Siran GF Kaghan RF 5 9 2 4 1 3 6 7 8 18 17 19 10 11 12 15 16 13 14 No. Plot TABLE 1E: Basic Information of Sample Plots - Forest & Environmental Conditions TABLE 1. HAZARA Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 231 232 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan or Low High Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium (Current Very high Very high Potential) Recreation

Low Low Low Low Low High High High Poor Carbon Medium Fixation Low Low High High High High Medium Medium Medium Medium Watershed Extent/ Potential of Environmental Services Low Low Low Soil Low Low High High High Medium Medium Conservation Rich Rich Rich Rich Rich Poor Poor Poor Poor Status Medium Biodiversity Rich Rich Rich Poor MAP Lacking Lacking Lacking Moderate Moderate Moderate Rich Rich Rich grasses Ground depleted depleted depleted Moderate Moderate Moderate Only burnt Vegetation Sparse and Sparse and Sparse Sparse and Sparse blue pine forest fires regeneration regeneration heavy grazing to heavy grazing Deodar and blue pine Blue pine and deodar Regeneration Status and over-mature trees, Sparse regeneration of No regeneration due to No regeneration due to steep slope and regular etablished regeneration etablished regeneration etablished regeneration Scattered but established Middle aged crop and the middle aged crop and the Middle aged crop and the Scattered regeneration due Uneven aged stand, mature plot plot plot padus padus Populus ciliata Populus ciliata impure patches Quercus incana Quercus baloot, Quercus baloot, Prunus padus (Kalakath), Quercus incana - mixed and Acer caesium, Prunus padus, Acer caesium, Prunus padus, Exterminated from the sample Exterminated from the sample Exterminated from the sample Main Broad leaved Tree Spp. Juglans regia, Aesculus indica, Juglans regia, Aesculus indica, spp., Juglans regia and Prunus spp., Juglans regia and Prunus ciliate, Parrotia jacquemontiana floribunda, Aesculus indica, Acer floribunda, Aesculus indica, Acer Quercus spp., Acer spp. (Maple), Diospyrus lotus (Amlok), Populus Aesculus indica (Horse chestnut), (Horse indica Aesculus deodar, deodar, Conifer Species Chir pine Chir pine Chir pine Chir pine Chir pine blue pine Blue pine deodar,fir Blue pine, fir, spruce, fir, spruce, Blue pine, Blue pine, Taxus spp. Taxus spp. and spruce Deodar and F1 F1 F2 F2 F3 F1 F3 F2 VYR F2 ## Forest Current Density TABLE 2E: Summary of Sample Plots - Forest & Environment Conditions TABLE litter litter litter litter litter litter Shallow soil hin Shallow soil but Shallow soil but Shallow soil thin Shallow soil and Soil and forest Shallow soil and Shallow soil and Shallow soil and burnt forest litter thin layer of forest thin layer of forest thin layer or forest Deep soil and thin layer of forest litter layer of forest litter layer of forest litter layer of forest litter thick layer of forest thick layer of forest Deep soil and thick Forest Name of Jagir PF Sharial GF Kala Maira GF Zaidkarr PF Surgai GF Manshi RF/WS Manshi Dadar GF Massar RF Ayubia NP Nilan Bhoutu RF 7 2 6 8 5 9 10 ^ 1 No. ^* 3 ^^ 4 1. Hazara Division Plot Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 233 or Low Low Low High High Medium Medium Medium (Current Very High Potential) Recreation

Low High High Poor Poor Carbon Medium Medium Medium Medium Fixation Low High High Poor Poor Medium Medium Medium Medium Watershed Extent/ Potential of Environmental Services Low Soil Poor Poor Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Conservation - Rich Poor Poor Poor Poor Status Medium Medium Medium Biodiversity - Rich Poor Poor Poor Poor MAP Medium Moderate Moderate - Rich Poor Sparse Medium Ground Depleted Moderate Moderate Moderate Vegetation - Scarce present present damages of regeneration damaged by fire Around 30 percent Regeneration Status established regeneration Established regeneration Regeneration scanty and Dense young regeneration Some regeneration present Some regeneration present Regeneration scanty due tp Being Protected for through but prone to fire and grazing which is prone to fire hazard excessive litter accumulation fencing for the establishment Spp. None Scarce Quercus spp. broadleaf associates Quercus spp.and other None in the sample plot None in the sample plot None in the sample plot Main Broad leaved Tree Lacking in the sample plot Quercus spp. And Punica crop upper Conifer Species Chir pine Chir Pole Chir Pine Chir Pine Chir Pine Chir Pine along the boundary Blue Pine Blue Pine Fir, Taxus containing Blue Pine, Mixed Conifer Mixed F3 F1 F1 F3 F2 F1 F1 RL AG Forest Current Density TABLE 2E: Summary of Sample Plots - Forest & Environment Conditions TABLE litter Deep matter present Shallow Shallow soil Shallow, stony Soil and forest Moderately Deep and rock outcrops Moderate but thick Moderate To Deep layer of litter/organic Shallow to Moderate Shallow to Moderate Forest Name of Gallies RF Agror T. GF Agror T. PF Siran RF Siran GF Haripur GF Haripur RF Dheri Rakh. GF Gallies RF #* 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 No. Plot 1. Hazara Division continued 234 Study on timber harvesting ban in NWFP, Pakistan High High High Medium Medium Medium Medium Very high Potential) Low due to Recreation (Current or inaccessibility Low Low High High High High High High Carbon Medium Fixation Medium to Low High High High High High Medium Medium Medium Watershed Extent/ Potential of Environmental Services Soil High High High High High Medium Medium Medium Medium Conservation Rich Rich High High Poor Poor Status Medium Medium Medium Medium to Biodiversity Rich Rich High Poor Poor MAP Lacking Lacking Medium Medium Rich Rich grasses Medium Medium Medium Ground Not even Moderate Moderate Vegetation Almost lacking Medium fully established Regeneration Status Negligible due to grazing regeneration in the blanks to grazing and shallow soil Young regeneration coming Middle aged crop with scattered Medium but grazing threat is there Mature and over-mature trees with Scattered established regeneration Regeneration of deodar & chalgoza scattered regeneration in the blanks No regeneration of quercus spp. due plot present and Prunus padus and Prunus padus Broadleaf associate present Main Broad leaved Tree Spp. Pure stand of only Quercus spp. Quercus spp., Acer spp. (Maple), Olea and other associates present Populus ciliate, Betula utilis (Birch), Quercus baloot, floribunda, Quercus baloot, floribunda, indica and other broadleaf associates Prunus padus, Acer caesium, Aesculus Quercus and other broadleaf associates Parrotia jacquemontiana, Taxus baccata Aesculus indica, Acer spp., Juglans regia Aesculus indica, Acer spp., Juglans regia Aesculus indica (Horse chestnut), Prunus Quercus spp. far down below the sample padus (Kalakath), Diospyrus lotus (Amlok), lotus Diospyrus (Kalakath), padus spp. Pine spruce deodar Deodar chalgoza Blue pine Blue pine, Blue pine & Deodar and Mixed conifer No coniferous Mixed Conifer deodar,fir and and Blue Pine including Blue Mixed Conifers Mixed Conifers and some Blue including Deodar Conifer Species dominant Deodar Pine, Fir, Spruce, F2 F2 F2 F2 F2 F1 F3 F1 ** F3 *** Forest Current Density litter litter Deep present forest litter forest litter forest litter and humus Shallow soil thick layer of thick layer of layer of forest no forest litter Deep soil and Deep soil and and very thick Very deep soil and thin layer of Soil and forest Shallow soil and Moderately Deep Moderately Deep Moderately Deep but humus is less TABLE 2E: Summary of Sample Plots - Forest & Environment Conditions TABLE Forest Name of Upper Dir PF Kalpani PF Ayun Dok PF Upper Dir PF Lilauni PF Asarmara PF Lower Dir PF Panjkora PF Alpuri PF 26 23 24 27 21 22 28 25 No. Plot #* 20 2. Malakand Division Integrated Natural Resource Management Project 235 Low Low Low Low Low High Medium Pir Baba to Elum , High due Potential) to proximity Recreation (Current or Karakar and Low Low Low Low Low High Carbon Medium Medium Fixation Low Low Low Low Low High Medium Medium Medium to Watershed Extent/ Potential of Environmental Services Soil Low Low Low High Medium Medium problem Soil erosion Not a serious Conservation problem due to road side cuttings Low Low Low Low Status Medium Medium Biodiversity Medium to High to Medium Medium to High to Medium Low Low Low Few Rich High MAP Medium Medium Medium to Medium tio Sparse Sparse Sparse Sparse Present Medium Ground Vegetation Medium to Rich Medium to High to Medium attack Present Present Medium Scanty Regeneration Regeneration Status browsing, urbanization Negligible due to grazing at the time of grass cutting Some regeneration but subject Present but threats of grazing, threats of grazing, fire and damages Regeneration present but subject to threats of fire, grazing and porcupine Few Rare Sparse Present Broadleaf Associate present Broadleaf associates present Broadleaf associates present Main Broad leaved Tree Spp. Olea and other broadleaf associates Mixed Chir Pine Chir Pine Chir Pine Chir Pine tropical forest Regeneration Mixed Conifer Chir Pine Zone Evergreen Sub- Conifer Species TABLE 2E: Summary of Sample Plots - Forest & Environment Conditions TABLE F2 F1 F1 F3 F1 F1 of Chir of Chir Forest Forests Forests Current Density to cutting to cutting BL/RL due BL/RL due litter Shallow Shallow Shallow Shallow to erosion Soil and forest Sandy soil prone Moderately Deep Moderately Deep Moderately Deep Name of Forest Swat PF Lower Dir PF Lower Dir PF Lower Dir PF Buner PF Buner PF Buner PF Buner PF 36 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 No. Plot * Misinterpreted in PFRI study ** Trees of Quercus spp. low height *** Density unchanged despite significant logging of mature deodar trees . This is due to establishment regeneration and chilghoza in the intervening period ## Significant variation in canopy cover within and outside the sample plot. Forest re-establishing on abandoned agricultural fields at forest boundary with Daat Sherakot village. ^ Details contributed by Mr. Muhammad Mumtaz (Deputy Ranger Wildlife Dassu, Kohistan Division) for details ^^ The sample plot is situated very close to the forest boundary Masar RF with Jhindal village ^* Details contributed by Mr. Umer Sharif (Block Officer), BRE & Sargai Block #* Sample plots and forest situated close to the villages 2. Malakand Division continued