',,;' ^^^;.. ' ' d InO
RFD Technical Report No. I Data Base of Nga. o Demonstration Forest
Development of a Model Forest for Sustainable Forest Management in Thailand FFD 5199 Rev. I (11')
Forest Research Office Royal Forest Department Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives Government of Thailand
Sponsored by International Tropical Timber Organization (ITTO)
December 2000 Technical Report No. I Data Base of Nga. o Demonstration Forest
Development of a Model Forest for SIIstai"able Forest Management jin Thanamd. FFD 5199 Rev. I or)
Forest Research Office Royal Forest Department Ministry of Agric"It"re and Cooperatives Government of Thailand
Sponsored by International Tropical Timber Organization (ITTO)
December 2000
. I Contents
Part I Establishment of GIS Data Base for Planning. ..,...... ,...... ,.,...... ,...... ,...... vi Abstract .*...... ,..,,...... ,..,,,...... ,.. I Intro uction , ...... ,,...... ,...... *...... ,....,....* 2 Descri tion o stu area . , ...... , . . . , ...... * . . . , ...... , . . . . , ...... 3 . Geo graphic database contents , , ...... * . . . , ...... , . . . . . , . . . , , ...... , . , ...... 3 I Base ina s ....,...... ------.,------""""""""" 3 2 ThematIC ina s .,,.....,...... ,.,...... ,...,...... ,. 3 3 11na es ...... *...... ,...... ,...... ,.. 4 M th do10 """""""""""""""""""""""""""""' 4. I Establishment of Geographic database...... ,...... ,...,...... ,.. ,,...... 7 4.2 Classification of forest land use using remote sensing technique ...,....,...... 7 5 Results ...... ,...... ,...... ,....,. 5 * I Topography and relief ...... *...... ,...... ,,...... ,....,...... ,..,...... 5 2 Draina e ,,...... ,..,.,.....,.....,...... 5 3 Geolo ...... ,...... *...... 5 4 Soils ...... ,...... ,,,...... *...... 5. 5 1.1gao Demonstration forest . . . . . , * . . , ...... , . . . . . , . . . . ,...... , . . . . , . . . . , ------5. 6 National reserved forest. . . , ...... , . . . . . , . , . , ...... * ...... , ...... , . . . , ...... 5 7N t al ark ..,....*,...... ,.. 5. 8 Watershed classification ...... , . . . . , ...... , ...... , . . . . . , ...... , . . , , . . . . . , . . . . , . . . . 5 9 Forest antation . . . ,, ...... , . . . . , ...... , ...... , . . . . 5.1 0 Temporary Cultivation Rights (STK)...... *...... ,.. ..,....,...... ,.....,. 5 I I Minin concession .,.. . ..,.. .. *...... ,...... , 5. 12 Assessment of forest land use in 2000 .. ...,...... ,,,...... ,...... 6 Conc us 10n , . . . . . , . . * . , . . . . . , ...... , ...... , , . . . . . 7 References , ...... , . . . . * . . . . , ...... , . . . . . , . .
Fart un Forest Inventory in Ngao Demonstration Forest...... ,...,...... ,..,...... ,..., ...... Abstract ...... ,..,,,...... ,..,.,...... , I introduction ...... , ...... , . . . . * . 2 Stu area .,,...... ,...,...... ,.....,...... ,...... 2 I Back rowi ...... ,.....,...,...... *...... ,.....,.... 2 2 Location .,.....,...... ,...,...... 2 3Climate -.,...... """"""""""""""""""""' 3 M fti d 10 ..,...... ,,.....,...... ,...... ,....,..,. 3 I Stratification , ...... , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . * ...... , . . . . . , . . . . , . . . . . 3.2 Use of satellite Image ...... , . . . , ...... , ...... , ...... , ...... , ...... 3.3 Aerial photo graphs . . , . . . . , * ...... , ...... , , ...... , . . , . , . . . . , ...... , ...... 3 4 Ma s ' """""""""""""""""""""""" 3 5 Inventor esigii . . , ...... , ------, . . . . , 3 6 PI t sha e an size , , ...... , , ...... , ...... , ...... 3 7 D ta collection . . , , ...... , . . . . . * ...... * . . . . , ...... 3.8 Timtng and field work ...... , ...... , , ...... * ...... , ...... 3 9 D t Anal SIS . , , . . ~ ------. . . . . , . . . . . , . ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ,
. ....,*...... ,,...... ,...... *...... ,,...... ,...... ,
.,....,...... ,.*......
,...... ,,...... ,..., '' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' " ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' sJeo!IJo tsarqj pun ISOJOJ spJei\\. o1 septii!11 98 ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' API IseJOJ Jo ^ulpuei. sJopun pun lustu98pejNi. o o *...... ,,,...... ,.,......
...... ,...... ,,...... ,..
...... ,...... ,.,...... """"""""""""...... *...... 8L ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' nonPjndod 91/1Jo sons!JareJe o eJaue ...... ,....,...... ,...... ,....,...... ,......
...... *...... ,...... ,......
.,.....,...... ,...,.,......
...,...... ,.,...... ,.,.....,....,...
...... ,...... ,......
..,...... ,......
.....,...... ,,.....
,.....,...... ,.....,...... ,
...... ,,,....,,...... ,,,....,,...... ,...... ZL ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ', sano, ,: uo!I^. IISruor"30 0^^N un Astir, s a!t"o. 00a-0!o0 .IF
Z9 .,...... ,...... ,.,...... 19 ,...... ,.,.....,.....,...... ,...., 19 ...... ,.*...... ,.....,..*...... ,.....,...... ZS ...... ,....,,...... ,...... ,....,,...... ,...... , ZS ...... ,,...... ,...... ,...... ,,.. - - - - -...,. *.. - -, Teal 1/11ft\. ISOJqj SnOnp!asp poxi ZS ....,...... ,,...... ,,...,...... ,,...... ,,...... ZS ,...... ,...... ,...... ,...... ,...... ,...... ,...... ,...
11 .. .,. 111
Tables
Table I - I List of them atic data...... , , , . . .. . ,...... , . . . . . ,, ...... * . ., ...... 4 Table I -2 The area and percentage of the relief classes ...... ,...... , 8 Table I -3 The area and percentage of the geological units .....,....,...... ,...... ,..,,...... 14 Table I -4 The area and p Greentage of the soil units ...... ,...,,, ...... ,...... *...,...... 16 Table I-5 The area and percentage of the landform units ...... ,.....,,...... ,,... I...... ,.. 17 Table I-6 The area and percentage of the soil parent material units...... ,*,..,,...... 17 Table I -7 The area and percentage of the demonstration forest management units ...... 20 Table I -8 The area and percentage of the national reserved forests ....,...... '...,.....,....*..... 22 Table I-9 The area and percentage of the forest land use zoriation ...... ;...... * 22 Table I-10 The area and percentage of national parks...... ,.....,,.....,...... ,...... ,...... ,. 25 Table I-I I The area and percentage of the watershed Classes ...... ,...... *...,...... ,.....,.....,. 28 Table I-12 The area and percentage of the Temporary Cultivation Rights (STK)...... 32 Table I - 13 Area and percentage of forest land use in 2000 ..,,..,.,...... ,.,...... 37 Table I-14 Area of forest land use in 2000 in each management wit. .,,...... ,...... 38 Table 2-1 Classification of forest land use in I\Igao Demonstration Forest in 1993. ;...... ,. 45 T b1 2 2 Plot Size * . . . . , ...... , ...... , , ...... Table 2-3 Status of land use in Ngao Demonstration Forest. ..,...,,...... ,.....,.,., *... ;...... 5 O Table 2-4 Number and distribution by species and size classes of forest tree in Ngao Demonstration Forest (The 10 most abundant species is shown. ) ...,...... ,...... 53 Table 2-5 Density (rima) and yield (vonlia) of forest tree in Ngao Demonstration Forest (The I O most abundant species is shown. ) ...... ,...... ,....,,... 54
. Table 2-6 Number and distribution by species and size classes of forest tree. in dry evergreen forest (The 10 most abundant species is shown. ) .....*,...... ,...,..... 55 Table 2-7 Density (rima) and yield (voVha) of forest tree in dry evergreen forest (The I O most abundant species is shown. ) ..,.,...... ,,...... *. 56 Table 2-8 Number and distribution by species and size classes of forest tree in mixed deciduous forest with teak (The 10 most abundant species is. shorni. ) ..,...... 57 Table 2-9 Density (ntha) and yield (vowlia) of forest tree in mixed deciduous forest with teak (The 10 most abundant species is shown. ) ...... ,..*...... ,.....,.....,.... 58 Table 2-1 0 Number and distribution by species and size classes of forest tree in dry dipterocarp forest (The 10 most abundant species is shown. ) ...... ,,...... 59 Table 2-I I Density (ntha) and yield (vonlia) of forest tree in dry dipterocarp forest (The I O most abundant species is shown. ) .,,...... , *...... ,..,,,... 60 Table 3-I Number of total households and samples of each coriumunities ,,...... ,... 76 Table 3 -2 SOCio - demographic characteristics of respondents (%) .....,...... *...... 89 Table 3-3 Education levels of respondents and family' s members by cornniuriity (%) 91 Table 3-4 Hometown and relocation of respondents by cornmruiity ( f0) .....,,.....,...... , 93 Table 3-5 Purpose of innnigration of respondents by coinmuriity ( f0) ...... *...,...... ,...... 95 Table 3-6 Occupation of respondents by cornmuntty (%)....,...... ,...... ,..,,...... ,.. 97 Table 3-7 Sources of water supply and light by columniiity (%)...... ,,...... ,*... 99 Table 3-8 Main source of news I infonnation by cornmuiiity (%) ..,,....,,....,...... 101 Table 3-9 Land holding of respondents by community ( fo) ...., ...... ,.....,....,...... Table 3-I 0 Land attainment by community (%) ...... ,,...... ,...... ,.....,...,, ...... Table 3 - I I Land document by community or, ) ..,...... ,,,...... ,...... *...... ,...... ,...... I O , IV
Table 3 - 12 Land use patterns by community (%) ...... ,.....,.....,...... ,...... *....,.....,. I 08 Table 3-13 Distribution of amiual household income by coriumunity (%)..,....,....,.....,....,. 110 Table 3-14 Sources of household income by cornmuriity (%) ...... ,....,,....,,....,...... ,...., I 12 Table 3-15 Financial status of respondents by community (%) .,.....,...... *....,....*..... 1/4 Table 3 -16 Causes of family debt by community (%)....,...... *.....,...... ,...... ,.....,....,...... I 16 Table 3-17 Sources of credit by coriumuriity (%) ...... ,.....,...... ,...... ,.....,....,...... ,... I 18 Table 3-18 Main purpose of visitation ofNgao DF, of respondents by Coinmunity (%).. 1/9 Table 3-19 Sources of timber for household construction by connnunity (%) ...... ,....,.. 120 Table 3-20 Use of fuel wood and charcoal of respondents by coriumunity (%) ...... 121 Table 3 *21 Hunting of wildlife by community. .,..... *.....,.... ;,.....,...... ,...... ,....,....,....., 122 Table 3 -22 Collecting of bamboo Glum by community. .,...... ,...... ,..... *...... ,..... 123 Table 3-23 Collecting of bamboo shoot by- conmnuiiity ...... ,...... ,...... ,....,,.... 124 Table 3 -24 Collecting of rattan by community...... ,..,...... ,.. . ..,...... ,.....,....,...... 125 Table 3-25 Collection of edible mushroom by conirrtunity. ....,...,.*,...... ,...... ,.....,.. 126 Table 326 Correcting of wild vegetable by community ....,.....,...... ,.....,..,..,...... 127 Table 3-27 Collecting of wild fruits by community ,...... ,...... ,*...... , 128 Table 3-28 Collecting of medicinal plants by community ...,...... ,....,,...... ,...... ,....,..... 129 Table 3 -29 Collecting of edible insects by columntiity ..,,.....,.....,...... ,..,.,,...... 130 Table 3-30 Fishing in Ngao Demonstration Forest by coriumunity. ...,.....,...... ,... 131 Table 3-31 Collecting of honey bee by community ...... ,...... ,.....,...... ,...... ,...... ,... 132 Table 3 -32 Collecting of Iac by community ...,...... ,,.....,...... ,.. ..,.. 133 Table 3-33 Perception of forest bounday by community (%) ..,...... ,..,...... ,. 134 Table 3-34 Understanding of conducing activities in Ngao Demonstration Forest ....,...,.. 135 Table 3-35 Perception of forest conservation by coriumunity (%)...... ,....,,...... , 137 . Table 3-36 Attitude towards efforts of forestry officials by coriumunity (%) ...... , 138 Table 3-37 Suggestions for improving efforts of forestry official by coriumuiiity. ..*...... 139 Table 3-38 Recommended Fomis for Future Management ifNgao Demonstration
Forest by community (%) ...... , . . . . . , ...... , ...... , . . , . . , ...... , ...... , ...... , , . . 141 . Table 3-39 Reconunended organizations for future management by coriumuiiity (%) ....,. 142 Table 3-40 Perceived Causes of degradation of Ngao Demonstration Forest bycommunity ...... ,.,,.....*.....,...... ,...... ,,....,,.....,...... , I 43 Table 3-41 Perceived agents caused forest degradation by cornmunity (%)...... ,....,.... 144 Table 3-42 Participation in forestry activities by community (%) ...... ,....,,..,.,...... 145 V
Figures
F I L cation of stu area ...... , , ...... * . . . . , . . . . . , ...... , , . . . . , . . . . Fi re 2 Landsat-TM data In 1993 ... .,...... , ...... ,. .. .., ...... , ------Fi ure 3 Landsat-TM data in 2000 ...... ,., ...... ,...... ,...... ,, . .. .,...... , ... .,. . Fi ure 4 Change Detection Justification ...... , ...... , . .. . ., ...... ,...... Fi ure 5 Elevation data In Ngao Demonstration forest ...... , ...., ...... ,...... Figure 6 Drainage pattern in Ngao Demonstration forest .....,...,., ...... ,...... , .... I Figure 7 Distribution of geological units ...... ,...... ,...... ,., ...... , .. .., ...... Fi ure 8 Distribution of soil units ...... ,... .,...... , ...... ,.. .., ...... ,., ...... Fi e 9 Distribution of landform units .., ...... , ... ..,...... ,.. .,...... , ...., ,.. .,, . Figure I O Distribution of sort parent material units ...... ,...... ,...... , ...., ...... , .. Figure I I Administrative boundary of Ngao Demonstration forest...... ,...,...... ,... 21 Fi re 12 National reserved forests. , ...... , ...... ,...... , ...... , ...... , ,...... Figure 13 Zoriation of forest land use in national reserved forest. ....,...... ,...... , Fi ore 14 Distribution of national parks ...... , ... .., ...... ,, ...... , ...... , Fi ure 15 Distribution of watershed classes...... ,., .....,...... ,. ...,...... ,. Figure 16 Distribution of productive and protective reforestation and field offices, ,...... 31 Figure 17 Distribution of Temporary Cultivation Rights (STK) ...... ,....,.... 33 Figure 18 Distribution of mining concession areas .,...... , ....., . ....,...... , ...., ,..., ...... , .... Figure 19 Distribution of forest land use in 2000 ...... ,...... ,. ....,...... , ...,...... ,. 39 Figure 20 Layout of Unit System ...... , ... ,., ...... ,... .,. ... ., ...... , .. .., ,.. ,, ...... Figure 21 Layout of S runple Plots ...... , ,...... , ... ,., ...... , ...... , ...... Fi ore 22 Concentric Circular Sample Plots . ,...... , *... .., ...... , .. . .. ,.. .,, ...... ,, .. Figure 23 Forest Types of Ngao Demonstration Forest in 2000 ,...... ,....,...... Figure 24 Villages in Ngao Demonstration Forest in 2000...... ,.....,....,...... ,....,.....
\
Vl
PARTl
Establishment of GIS Data Base for Planning
Establishment of GIS Database for Planning
Suwit Origsomwang, Alluchit Rattanasuw^I Chayariee Chandraprabha and anusom Rungsipadch
Forest Resources Assessment Division, Forest Research Office, Royal Forest Department
ABSTRACT
Under the Development of a Model Forest Management in Thailand, which was funded by ITTO, the main objective is to promote sustainable forest management in Thailand througli providing inforrnation and a management plan for establishing a model forest using sustainable management practices. The main activities are the establishment of database for planning and development of management plan for model forest. The specific objective for establishment of database for PIarming is to compile essential data for formulating forest management plan. The main tasks were to establish a geographical database under GIS and to classify forest land use in 2000 using remote sensing technique. The geographic databases were established under the vector and raster GIS systems. in practice, all thematic maps were firstly digitized as vector fonnat of PC Arc/!nfo and digital data of Landsat-TM was processed under raster format of Imagine system. The base and thematic maps and relevant materials of Ngao Demonstration forest which were compiled and established using a GIS system, were consisted of (1) Topography (2) Drainage pattern (3) Geology (4) Soil (5) Soil parent material (6) Landform (7) Ngao Demonstration admiixistrative boundary (8) National reserved forest (9) Forest land use zoriation in National reserved forest (I O) National Parks (11) Watershed Classes (12) Temporary Cultivation Rights (13) Mining Concession (14) Villages and (15) Forest Land Use in 2000. In addition, Two Landsat-TM data, path 130 Row 47 covering Ngao Demonstration forest, dated 31 January 1993 and 25 January 2000 were acquired for updating forest land use in 2000. The major results of the establishment of database for platming are the compilation of relevant thematic databases and assessment of forest land use in 2000. The compiling data were categorized as physiogi. aphic, legal and socio-economic factors. The physiographic factor includes topography, geology, soil, landfonn, and soil parent material. While, the legal factor which designated by laws and regulations consists of administrative boundary of Ngao Demonstration forest, National reserved forest, Zoriation of forest land use in national reserved forest, National Parks, Watershed Classes, Temporary of Cultivation Rig}Its and Mining Concession. In addition, socio-economic factor includes forest land use in 2000 and reforestation. The forest land use in 2000 was updated base on the change detection technique using band difference of landsat-TM in 1993 and 2000 with gr. ound verification in June 2000. The major forest land use were consisted of (1) Evergreen forest (2) Mixed Deciduous forest (3) Dry Dipterocarp forest (4) Productive reforestation (5) Protective reforestation (6) Settlement area (7) Agriculture area (8) Old clearing area (9) Water bodies (10) Mintng area (11) Shifting cultivation in 2000 and (12) Road In conclusion, the establishment of database for planming using Geographic Infonnation System (GIS) appears is to be an efficiency tool for formulating forest management plan. 2
Establishment of GIS Data Base for Planning
I. Introductiom
According to project document of the Project Development of a Model Forest Maria Ginent in Thailand (PPD 15/99 Rev. I (F)) which was haded by InO (International Tro ical Timber Organization), main objective is to promote sustainable forest management in Thailand trough providing infonnation and a management plan for establishin a model forest using sustainable 'management practices. The main activities are the establishment of data base for planing and development of management plan for model forest. The s ecific objective for establishment of data base for PIaiimng is to compile essential data for fonnulating forest management plan.
2. Description of study area
The Ngao Demonstration Forest area extends over the headwaters of Ngao river in the north-west of Lampang province down to its confluence with the Yom river on the Phiae province boundary, the boundaries being those of I\Igao district. The area is a compact block of about 54 kin. north to south and 32 kin. east to west, with Ngao district situated fairl centrally in 18 and 45 north, 100 east. Most of the Ngao Demonstration Forest area that is in Ngao district, Lampang province lies between 18 and 21.5 north, 99 ' and 45 ' east. The total area is about 1,751.59 sq. kin. The area is traversed almost centrally by the national highway number I between Lampang province and Payao province which lie 70 km. and 60 kin respectively from Ngao district itself. A provincial highway, nuniber I 03, connects Ngao district to Song district, Phiae province which lies 40 kin. south-east of Ngao district as shown in Figure I. The boundaries of the study area are: In the North with Muang district, Payao province; In the East with Song district, Phiae province; In the West with Chae Horn and Warig Nua district, Lamparig province; In the South with Mae Mo district, Lampang province.
3. Geographic database contents
Geographic databases, which consist of base and them atic maps and relevant materials of the study area, were compiled and established using a GIS system, The geographic data base contents can be summarized as foMows:
3.1 Base maps
Royal Thai Survey Department topographic maps, from 1973 at a scale of I : 50,000 were used as base maps for geographic database of the study area, Map sheet numbers used were 4947/1,49461 and 11,5046/11 and IV 49451 and 50451V.
3.2 Them atic maps
The type and source of the them atic maps, which were complied for fomiulating a specific forest management plan, are summarized in Table I - I . ^. .,^^ . ,^^,,,.^,^^. , ,*'\
*
rig"re I Location of study area 4
Table 1-1. List of thematic data
No. T e of in a Year Scale Source Topogra hy 1973 1:50,000 Royal Thai Survey Department 2 Drainage pattern 1973 1:50,000 Royal Thai Survey De artment 3 Geology 1971 I :250,000 De t. of Mineral Resources 4 Soil 1982 I :100,000 Land Development Department 5 Soil parent material 1982 I : 100,000 Land Development De artment 6 Landform 1982 I : I 00,000 Land Development Department 7 Ngao 1990 1:50,000 Royal Forest Department Demonstration Administrative Boundary 8 National reserved 1990 1:50,000 Royal Forest Department forest 9 Forest Land Use 2000 1:50,000 Royal Forest Departtnent Zoriation in National reserved forest
10 National Parks 1990, 1:50,000 Royal Forest Department 2000
11 Watershed Classes 1990 1:50,000 National Environment Board 12 Temporary 1990 1:50,000 Lampang Regional Forest Office Cultivation Rights 13 Mining Concession 1990 1:50,000 Royal Forest De artment 14 Villages 2000 1:50,000 Royal Forest Do aitment 15 Forest Land Use in 2000 1:50,000 Royal Forest Department 2000
3.31mages
Two Landsat-TM data, path 130 Row 47 covering Ngao Demonstration fo t, d t d 31 January 1993 and 25 January 2000 were used for updating forest land use in 2000 h in Figure 2 and 3. ,.:,,';a: '.\ ,',, 4;, r ,' ':,., :;: , , . , ,, d, ;'*at . " JJ:7, '; I "j*e!:;.'^.';* ,:~,;:. 2', , I** I" ' , 14-; "' "" "' ' ' ' ' ' '.' *. A. * fro ' "4;;*;" , q:~ ': '* "'~^.<:';:'" "' , ,,,, ^~;' I';"f '-.-~:^! ;^*:;^,,^^;j:>** ' -. ', *,'.,.}I ^; -, '* ,4":I, *j-.. ,^$~ ,^;:?\*. '-:*-;,, I- * - ' -, ~-};, * * 4 ;:* "' r ,^$,,..**,,.!.?.&3.1,9.1':,,;^.,.. - $?, ^: it ,;,:*.::,:^:.*:., z". tin.,t*:**.. ;-.: ; ,^,.;,.,'^t^*;^4A. - :;;. '.-,,-% s^!^,{;,$ ,e. {^-- . I.,,. -1:4 *;*,*^,,,. t ,,, I;,*\, v^-$^;;$):. -,*, *t, ^. ^.,,:" - ^! in;*. ';?' ;. : ,;,---. In j?,;,-.":->' ,-" - 't, .r . ;*,; . ? ., ", a, ' ^ A' '*;:?',,:-* a::g. *"... g, *,.!,*,;~!-:;
",*^!I^I'.- ,,.. 12r ,*:^#.*,.*:,^,. 2.14, :., In. * '.t ,.'.'Inn,*~ '.: ' '.I-,.,.,,;.'*. ' .* {';.';; ^ .. a'i ,, *' ' ' ,:*:;\;,,"- ,, .,, , -,':' * -.!:'. *$.:*. .. _ -.,. \ 52, , , . < 4 " !'~' I" ' ~ ',' "" ' ' t, ' , A I!illi;.:,'41J " {?' :#' ..';' " 133.3?,' ' ',",*3<% c~- -' '~.* *=;
tit,,, !;;' ' ..,I'" , '** I;^,' ;':' - -*,' ,*, f\ -"' "'JAL* I . """ ...; *A. .*-**' . ^j . '. ' ' ';^^',, I-' :~ *'^; If, , ,t':I".' -. -',;; , r:'^;;* 11;; . *,:?;$$,, 54. , I. '.: tiff' ' I * y *" . : . I ., I^?':$* ^,, c!, , -j, ,,,^:., i-',^',..,, - it, I in, - * , I-. .;,,$ ,".;< j"' * ,;^'111" ' I del':"":"' "" ?'; * I":,:>~I ' " :';' '*. I'; ,/^,.'/*' ' -, 4t-!$*@\ - ',-;*-,^*\, ,"?,*, it, 'p I;< - tin:';*,,'., <:'v \r, t';,-er, ,s*4L, .-;- , - , -" * *!$:,^,I!$:'" sit.- ' ,,t, ,;:;* % ;;,-*? * ' $ nil;\I' !,'. J't{^. '--:,-,'-:-;.**I. ;;,:.;^,, ' R",;;*;; , . .-,*':; *;";' * .,.;I":': '*_./.i .., I" v ^A**,^ g . .. "@;<3'7p* * . ., <. .,': 4, .? ,"*,' ' *?'?;;**71'4 a. -' ->I, ,; ts.* -. .;,," - '. I *. ;:4, , #~ "-,: .. ,',# *' , -\ CF. *.-*. ' ^:,^;"4:11'13;."' *."-,, I. ' I^"' - -t'*;' ,*,^;,*%$' *" " ' - , '.1. t\'. <: , -' -, , .;.;:,;:^*'*;s!, I ,,,:"- *'*4, * ,/,' 'f;:..*#'*'I' ,;;*4:1';^E. ",', I ; . -;,::*' .I' " $4,7, ;-3#;."*, <12',- _'.,>,.', A ,, ,,* * ; *.,. g*,* ,- , , "' E, ."*.$i* I~ *#-* * *;,:- " A " :;.. , " ' , ' ' ?;;j. ,,^ ' ;$!.^"
.* I, "I".,;!':*.,{ ,j:~I .,... . 114 , ,, ,'a^:;.* , , 41.3 ,. I*-. I """ ,,*,' ,, ';;; * "' ~ ^,',, We, ,.'?*:, I f'' .!;* ^:-. I"' I". ,p':'- , - 14, , ;,,,\,'t;;i, ^,^: j , .,. *' ;**::-- . '. - !^!I'^;j^;^^t*, , , . ^*, **';gif. .**I ,.:{;...'*
rig, ,re 2 Landsat-TM data in 1993 q. ". . . ' !} ' \, _. '.*, q. >':;'.,:,:,, ' ,.*.*' "'~ ... ' ,.. 11 g;,";;"!";: \ ; ,, U ~'; "'*, 14",.,:.*::.*^",. T. :;" **,., . .,*:I;
!' ^;^.' *',,. '..: .,., ^--';^;'": """ ,^;' ^*;, * "" \^^,.,;n^*'. , ~' ' ',: '. ":? \ , I~. "! ^:.,,.'.,$.:.' -, . :.- - "'.. .: '..-. ''\~"~ *~- ~ ." ..,- ' ! .. ~' <41.I^ ';^it'*,','t'~."",:."*';he*:';., I, , \,,, 'E:i,$,....\ - '*,**,. ,, . fit--:,*:*\',^!:fj^.*-4;if:j:$, ,';' *. ' , ' ,,> , ,*" }\ . \;'* - .^, , ,^' "... *.^,, fief\:.;*;:I"-'*, I ' ';,; ... ; . .* ! '< *.>'.' . :* , .*".';;"," . ':1.'^ ^. .'\-, -' ~ *I;". ' , ' ',';S ~ ' .." ,t' .,-' ' ^" $1"- '^::!-":; ~'!S, ; ' "~,*-' :< \*\"':'.:,-,~,;: *:"'*':'*" ! Q ^ -, ;. ' '.. F \..* **:t. ' .;,, .,."! '. * " ^*\.. , ,j^ ' Fit, , 1.44;, 61 -. , , *. ,,;,,*.: .';;^ I, ^. ;^ ?,?, ' I . " I;* t ,* " \ $1:~; $4^.! .= , , ;_ ',\.';'.:. I. '*,$ ,'. .13 .; a'j'4,Qt!~'~ \. \<;^^g. ~ , A *.*#g. ~ ' .',,'*'^; ': ':., *- "* ',.. . ,$11 ".,.:if;;'.,, ',;, . ' ,.{*" , . ,' .* I*'' '~ ~'., ': "',y ' **:j" ,I, ;*~ Go $6 '. -\ {**::$;.^,,, .*;;.-t. ;,:?'!i. ; ,,'. " , 1, , ,.{" , '**, ;-:'; ~';;-.:.. \.;^:'.$ \ . , :.*.,. , . . ',. 3 , ^ ,*.. -' ., .: ;,. ~. '..",. *, .\**\. ,. ,* ;^I. . t, i*', .,. ,*:. ... Q;,,;.* I' . ' , ' ,,',' :. ..' ' '~ '~ """ " ~ ';'!;$56 ."\:* '*"',*;;;.:"'*i"';^!, 't: ""*."*,';j^'*':I. ^'9.4=,** ,* .... I ^
,. ' *-. :";,. :. , ",. \ \= ^.\j' . *.* :;21. ."r \. * , *$-,,. t tit:*.,*,,\,,;,,, \.:* . "'~\,-,',' :L\* '.<' , .,-;*'.\.--.>'; 4:7*: ;., , *- \-. ;. . ' .,!,,' , , ., . \ I\- ^;:j<^I. I .*;>, ' - . ',^;'*,;. 3$;':,, ' 'j*ite, . ... \ ,, . ' >~ '\,:;,,., . ... . , *, \^,, . I ,,; 4. '"*' - ,,,,. $1;,, Go, t: ,^,,,* -* :^'* , ^ :.^,. I*^,j^.*^ . ^*,.,,$1\; .,.. j:; - . , ,-, >.^. ,** .*,$:{*.^*,* -^},.;.'-.\**.*, -;,,. *. , , -.. : .. ;I^ .^ 1.1.*; - ^ '*, . '$_:,..";";'\,. . .* ., \,,
4. Methodology
The main tasks were to establish a geographical database under GIS and to classify forest land use in 2000 using remote sensing technique. The details of each main step are described as follows:
4.1 Establishment of Geographic Databases
The geographic databases were established under the vector and raster GIS systems. In practice, all them atic maps were firstly digitized as vector format of PC Arc/Info and digital data of Landsat"TM was processed under raster fonnat of imagine system The procedure to create digital coverage was composed of the 7 fonowing steps: Step I . Preparation of the map sheet for digitizing. Step 2. Digitization the coverage. Step 3 . Identification and correction of digitizing errors. Step 4. Definition of features and building of topology, Step 5 . Identification and correction of topology error. Step 6. Assigning attributes to coverage features. Step 7. Identification and correction of attribute coding errors.
4.2 Classification of forest laind use using remote sensing technique The Landsat TM data acquired on 31 January 1993 which was used to classify forest land use in 1993 was firstly registered to a Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) projection by using a polynomial transfonnation matrix with a Bilinear resampling for 25 x 25 meter pixel size. This rectified image was then used as a reference image for correction of geometric correction of Landsat-TM acquired on 25 January 2000 as image to image registration. Then the change detection of band 5 of both Landsat-TM data was conducted to identify change area as shown in Figure 4. The preliminary change . map was then produced for ground verification by using subjective random sampling. The location of checked spots was identified by GPS and ground photographs were also recorded. After that the final forest land use map in 2000 was produced.
+ Change NO Change Change -.,.
.* *
, a * .a
Classes I 2 3 4 5 6 7
Figure 4 Change Detection Justification
, 8
5. Results
The in a, jor results are the compilation of relevant thematic databases and assessment of forest land use in 2000. The compiling data which were categorized as physiographic, legal and socio-economic factors. The physiographic factor includes topography, geology, soil, landfonn, and soil parent material. While, the legal factor which designated by laws and regulations consists of administrative boundary of Ngao Demonstration forest, National reserved forest, Zoriation of forest land use in national reserved forest, National Parks, Watershed Classes, Temporary of Cultivation Rights and Milling Concession. In addition, socio-economic factor includes forest land use in 2000 and reforestation. The detail of each data base can be described as follow:
5.1 Topography and relief
In the Ngao Demonstration Forest area two parallel north-south oriented hill ridges are found. The first is located westward from Ngao district and north-south oriented to Muang district. Its ridge is use!I as a boundary line between Chae Horn and Ngao district. The second is situated in Ngao district and nomi-south oriented to the south, It is used as a boundary between Lampang and Phiae Province. In addition, between these two mountainous ranges, isolated mountains also occur directly below the Ngao basin, which is centrally located in the study area. However, most the study site is mountainous land. The highest peak is 1,340 in westward and 1,280 in eastward, respectively. The elevation of the study area varies from 200 in to 1400 in above mean sea level as shorniin Figure 5. The relief classes of the study area that are classified by 100 meter contour intervals are shown in Table 1-2.
Table 1-2 The area and percentage of the relief classes
No. Relief classes Area in ha Percent < 200 in. 20.61 0.01 2 200-300 in 20,938.86 11.95 3 300-400 in 44,443.89 25.37 4 400-500 in 32,500.44 18.55 5 500-600 in 28,200,87 16.10 6 600-700 in 17,851.68 10.91 7 700-800 in I 1,450.25 6.54 8 800-900 in 9,580.50 5.47 9 900-1,000 in 6,684.12 3.82 10 1,000-1,100 in 2,523.33 1.44 11 1,100-1,200 in 813.15 0.46 12 1,200-1,300 in 143.91 0.08 13 >1,300 in 7.80 0.00 13 Total 175,159.44 I00.00 wits Source: Royal Thai Survey Departinent, 1973. 1,801.200 netss bel"en 200-300nio^ $8 b"~1300.400.1. .r. b"., n, Doson".,. rs b""n 50,600 I"., s bd*"n 60,700, "bin bd. .n 700,001, *., s $^ bd. .no's Cornets, , b".. n 900,100 tiles b""nineOi, Do b, .. n 110,1200, ,Id. ^ bd. .n 1209,300, ,,. I^ 13 mon tin 1300 "lens ^ ,, ". rin IT, .is",, y DBpar. norit. 1973
Fig"re 5 Elevation data in Ngao Demonstration forest 10
5.2 Drainage The mountains in the Ngao Demonstration Forest area are the sources f th Y drainage area which is one of the four main drainage areas in northern Th 'I d h other being the Ping, Warig and Nan Rivers. Nam Mae N ao, whicli ' th of the study area and its tributaries flow sontliward and from the in a'or M N Y in Song district, Phiae province. Based on the to o ra hic in a f th O d Survey Department in 1969 drainage pattern of the study is identified. It ' d d ' ' pattern that is characterized by a treelike branching system where th b h tributaries join the stern mainstreani at acute angles. This drama e s t ' d' hornogenous rock and soil materials with little or no structural control. In dd't' h major rivers in the study are further classified into two types namel interinit t d perennial river as shown in Figure 6,
5.3 Geology Based on this geological map, all rocks of the study area are sed' t d metamorphic and classified into 13 geological units of 7 grou s as roll : (1). Quaternary rock (Qa). This geological unit belongs to the Alluvium Grou , Rocks of the Quaternary are river gravels, sands and muds. It occurred in the Recent a e of the Quatemary period of the Cenozoic era. (2). Lower Terrace Quaternary (Qt I). This geological unit belongs to Mae Tean Group. The rocks of this unit consist of gravels, sands, silts and cla s. It d ' the PIGistocene age of the Quatemary period of the Cenozoic era.
(3). Higher Terrace Quatemary (Qt 2), This geological unit is also included in the Mae Tearig Group, The rocks of the higher terraces include gravels, sands, 'It d I . I occurred in the PIGistocene age of the Quaternary period of the Cenozoic era. (4). Tertiary rock (T). This geological unit belongs to Mae MO Grou . Rocks in thi unit consist of fresh water sandstones, shales, carbonaceous shales, Ii t , viviparous beds and lignites. It occurred in the PIiocene/Miocene a e of the T rt' period of the Cenozoic era. (5), Jurassic rock of Phra Vihan Formation (IT 3). This geological unit is included I the Korat Group, Rocks found in this unit are shales, sandstones, con I t ' h reddish-brown to pinkish-white color, ripped marked and cross-bedded. It d ' the upper Jurassic age of the Jurassic period of the Mesozoic era. (6). Triassic rock of Pha Deang Formation (Tr 5). This geological unit belon s to th Lampang Group which is the major group found in the study area, coin r's' b t 45 percent of the study area, Rocks of this unit include reddish-brown s d t , shales, conglomerates, greenish-grey siltstones and sandstones. It occurred ' th 11thaetian age of the Triassic period of the Mesozoic era. (7). Triassic rock of Doi Chang Formation (Tr 4). This geological unit is also included ' th Lampang Group. Rocks of this unit are limestones, and limestone con I ' h medium grey to pinkish~grey color and fossils of gastropods and brachio ods. It d ' the Norian Age of the Triassic period of the Mesozoic era 11
(8). Triassic rock of Hong Hoi Formation (Tr 3). This geological unit also belongs to the Lampang Group, Rocks in this unit are greenish-grey shales, sandstones, tuffaceous sandstones, laminated shales, conglomerates with fossils of Halobia, Daonella, POSidonia, Trachyceras, Paratrachyceras, loamiites, etc. It occurred in the Camian/Ladinian age of the Triassic period of the Mesozoic era. (9). Triassic rock of PI}a Kan Formation (Tr 2). This geological unit is also included in the Lampang Group. Rocks in this unit include massive or banded limestones with a dark grey to medium grey color, shares, sandstones, calcareous with a grey to greyish-brown color and well stratified with fossils of brachiopods, Claraia, Halobia, Daonella, Postdonia, and ammonites. It occurred in the Ladinian/Anisian age of the Triassic period of the Mesozoic
era.
(10). Permian and Triassic rock (Pin-Tr), This geological unit belongs to the Volcanic Group. Rocks found in the unit are rhyolite tuff agglomerates and andesite tuff agglomerates. It occurred in the Scythian/Tartarian age of the Permian to Triassic period of the Paleozoic to the Mesozoic era.
(11). Permian rock of Huai Thak Formation (Pin 3). This geological unit belongs to the Ratburi Group. Rocks in this unit are shares, calcareous shales, carboneous shares, tuffaceous shales, sandstone and laminated shale with fossils of Dielasma, Leptodus, Orthotichia, EChinochus, Neospirifera, Schizophoria, AVIculopecten, etc. It occurred in the Kazaniaii/ Kungurian aoe of the Peruiian period of the Paleozoic era (12). Fermian rock of Pha Huat Formation (Pin 2), This geological unit is also included in the Ratburi group. Rocks in this unit are massive limestones, shales, laminated shares, tuffaceous sandstones, tuffs, chert nodules, chert beds with fossils of fusulinids, Fenestella, Adatheceras, Bellerophon, corals, etc. It occurred in the Artinskian/Salonarian age of the Permian period of the Paleozoic era (13). Permian rock of 1 The distribution and area geological unit was shown in Figure 7 and Table I-3. J ~ ...... ~ . ~ , ,.. ..,., .\*, ; "" : ,:';I ' d . ! A ...... ,... . ., ^ .,.,.,. .,: .. ;;! I;:- I ,^, ...,.-- ., \ - ' ^"; ..^, ' lis;;;!- "" 41 ' ""* 11j...: .': ,^,..:::;;;;;::::. ..,.-- ., ^ \\ - :', I' ,';I^, ,""' iI ' ::::'-;,";;&;;;I , .....:. I' "',' ...... " ...... ...... ~ , I ,"' ,," , _ ~-.:";' ,^ ----> " ' --. " ~"' ,'^^! ~~;,- V' o I'V P, .rid R'S ^ I'Vinl, ^nut A e, ^, 8 " . 510 ^ Source: Royal ThaiSurcy Fig, ,re 6 Drainage pattern in Ngao Demonstration forest , Legal thrum 11" ". Taerig (or 11 M. Tcl, IQ 21 ,,. bin rel", tj*' 31 bong errsj I^a L. ,orig fir 41 ' I'llp, g {rr 31 hung {rrzj ^". cjnn Trj . I^^! R"riIPm3j a A R, .ri (Pm 21 " ^. R"in I GID ^ ", ", Source D. paringriftof Min. rel Resources. 1971 Fig"re 7 Distribution of geological units 14 Table 1-3 The area and percentage of the geological units No Geolo ICal units Formations Grou s Area in ha Percent Qa Alluvium 6,368.94 3.64 Qt I Mae Tearig 1,401.48 0.80 ~ J I ae Teang 8,631.27 4.93 T Mae Mo 13,909.86 7.94 Ir 3 Phia Vihan Khorat 5,742.45 3.28 Tr 5 Pha Daeng Lampang 685.89 0.39 7 Tr 4 Novian Lampang 1,054.89 0.60 Tr 3 Hon Hai Larn an 73,198.17 41.79 Tr2 Pha Kan Lain an 4,544,37 2.59 10 PinTr Volcanic Volcanic 12,346.83 7.05 11 Pm 3 Huai Talc Fluai That 41,314.58 23.59 12 Pin 2 Pha Huat Pha Huat 5,450.13 3.11 13 Pm I Kiu Loin Kiu Loin 509.58 0.29 13 units Total 175,159.44 100.00 ounce: Geological map, I: 250,000, Department of Mineral Resources, 1971. 5. 4 Soils Based on the detailed reconnaissance soil survey map of Lampano Province (Land Development Department, 1982), soils of the study area. are classified and in a ed into 37 soil map units. These soil map units can be also considered as 'Glandf units or 7 soil parent material units. The distributions of soil map units, landfonn unit and soil parent material units are shown in Figure 8 with Table 1-4, Fioure 9 with Table I-5 and Figure 10 with Table I-6, respectively. ,^,^!' - *.- ,^,^ ' I I;^^:^;,-^^^.*.,;,^,^!,^:, j^,.. I. ' ,^^:,,a 114^!.-. .,.. IZ/?#"'/' ' , ,/,/ ;I \,$>;:*\, a^' , ,*;11 :41 ~, "' I * #?,;> If It ,^^,, un ': ' ' \^- \ ",",= , * ,... " . -,, 1-21-,," I, , 41 If ,?4, , ,/ * 11'/.' I I I, I \ '\* ,, I \4, ,/*',#/ '7 I ' *;"' ,// I */ I 41 F t I 11 I & ^ , ,. I I ,/ ~Y I \. ,, 14n-., #. , ,,. ,,, ,' ," ' ' I I 7 2. I#/ **-/ ",, , * .re** I I^^== ASP PC 11, I 1:1 I I I :::,, if .% ,\/,/I , , I a, MMLi \ ",,, $14#, ,/ ,.*. ^**; ^t. a~*~, 1.16 ~ I h, t', , is;^! F1d , " 1.1 , ' 199r \ I. , '., .I. ., ^ ~^ 11 W, ,I .L !'"^ I^1.61 ' , Mr, Haltt .,.*, , I "' of**, ;-; Ms^as . ;;:,.,;;:* , ".~~., I "I'mo o Fee~ 1.1a ^ ,,,,;;; ;^S*;;;> I^^;^! ===:= PC^ un~" ai 3:5:3; ! ~ ""-:*/:, I;^:: I^*^ SI '*::,:!*;.I, ^;^;*$; , , , !**; "' '' .g"re 8 Distribution of soil units 16 Table 1-4 The area and percentage of the soil units No. Soil Ma Unit Area in ha Percent Sari ha a series (Sa) 288.18 0.16 2 Alitivial soils o0rl drained (As- ) 179.73 0.10 3 Alluvial Coin Iex (AC) 2,959.20 1.69 4 Mae Sai series (Ms) 3,693.87 2.11 5 Hano Dono series (Hd) 160.65 0.09 6 Nan series (Na) 37.71 0.02 7 Phan series (Ph) 625.95 0.36 8 Uttaradit series (Utt) 272.43 0.16 9 Chiang Rai series (Co 21.33 0.01 10 La Lae series (Le) 125.73 0.07 11 Mae SailHan Dono association (Ms/Hd) 207.45 0.12 12 Kam haeng Saen series (Ks) 1,182.78 0.68 13 That Phanom series (T ) 126.36 0.07 14 Kam haeno Saen/Si Satchanalai association (Ks/Sir) 671.85 0.38 15 Lain ano series (L ) 48.96 0.03 16 San Pa Tono series s) 199.71 0.11 17 Sari Pa Tono-oraveli variant (S -0) 73.35 0.04 18 Han Chat series (Hc) 1,983.42 1.1fj 19 Mae Rim series (Mr) 7,960.77 4.54 20 RentirSan Pa Tontr association (1 ^ 17 Table 1-5 The area and percentage of the landforrn units Percent No Landfomn unit Area in ha Flood lains 3,427.11 2 2 Semi recent terraces 5,145,12 ~ 1.1 J Oldievee 1,980.99 4 Old alluvial terraces and fans 17,418.69 > Dissected erosion surface includin fans 19,436,94 6 Hills and mountains 127,750.59 6 units Total 175,159.44 Source: Soil map (I : 100,000), Land Development Department, 1982 Table I-6 The area and percentage of the soil parent material units Percent 1'10 Soil arent material unit Area in ha Recent alluvium 3,427. I I 2 Semi recent alluvium 7,126.11 3 Old alluvium 17,418.69 4 Shale, salate, and/or hyllite 11,717.64 5 Quartzite sandstone and/or shale 5,779.08 6 Shale and limestone I, 94 u rocks 127,750.59 I00.00 7 un!ts Total 175,159,44 Source: Soil map (I: 100,000), Land Development Department, 1982 ~. SI!, In UUQJpiiejJo uo!Inq!IIS, q 6 a. "^!.!, IUQUdOj. Aru purl : 00JhCS .a O" @" ", - .^ I, NIIru 0' .1.1 I^; ^ Y a=. pie u^::'p, ^^ I^ ' PI. 300. ,,, non. Do I^:^^ o981 PIO I^^;; annual, "o, 111. s I^' ^,. Id POOH I"""""' Push'I re e o ^ I^^!^,,;':"4 ' ;'o^' 4.1^ ^,:^^. ^,:^;; ,; ^*:~.; . -~;^^ ' .' ;,^;,,.;IIf. ---- " -""", * a^"; '. ," *"*^~"' .... I ..,' " " . I*** , * At*.* o Logond \:* a \ " R. *, tenetim '* * a Saline"Ian*." I*!. .. * ., .. E^ us arith. n I::.. gale ". bardbr^I, .,, *\***j"!** ' ^I on, ^to glad".."ford, a 3.10. ,. d Inc. torn 13 ' ^I ^1.13 rocks ^, "e ". So to d Deado nt Do ament. I 982 Figure 10 Distribution of soil parent material units 20 5.5 Ngao Demonstration forest The Ngao Demonstration forest is second to none as a demonstration f t Thailand and is supervised by the Forest Mariaoement and Economic Research D' ' ' The main objectives for the intensive management in the Norao Demonstration fo t follows: (1), To develop the Ngao Demonstration forest as a work plan under the intensive management; (2). To study the forest managenient system for the teak species and other species to secure the maximum sustained yields; (3). To investigate the optimal silviculture system for this area; (4). To conduct tree improvement for increasing the stocking of stand tree; (5). To prevent the forest by patrol system including forest fire and pest control; (6). To manage the forest for the value of soil and water conservation in catclunent area; (7). To consider the possibilities for other uses of the forest, such as for recreation, preservation of natural resources; (8). To promote the research output for another forest working plan (Pillrrnarnrojariakoon and Surapapmaitri, 1987). To achieve the intensive management purpose the Demonstration Forest Sub-division divided the Ngao Demonstration forest into four working circles under the su ervisio f four demonstration management units: Mae Huat, Mae Heario. Mae Teeb and Mae Noao demonstration forest management units. The responsible area of each management unit is shorni in Table 1-7. The location of headoffices and forest inaria Ginent units are shown i Figure 11. Table I-7 The area and percentage of the demonstration forest management units No. Demonstration forest mana Ginent units Area in ha. Percent Mae Ngao 44,113.14 25.18 2 Mae He ang 35,650.26 20.35 3 Mae Teeb 39,809.88 22.73 4 Mae Huat 43,410.06 24.78 5 Non-demonstration forest mana Ginent units 12,176.10 24.78 5 Units Total 175,159.44 I00.00 Source: Ngao Demonstration forest map (I: 100,000), Forest Management Division, 1990. MBO e a " tond b. "... ". ",. .. .." .. n. I . D. . r. b A a ^- a I*, road. ."I F"- .."I"" Un, ,. J 010 a "O ,. ", Source For"t Managerlent Divbion Royal Fomst DeparbnenL 1990 Fig"re 11 Adniimstrative boundary of Ngao Demonstration forest 22 5.6 National reserved forest Three national reserved forest areas are concerned includino the Mae N ao F Kh , Mae Ngao Fang Sai and Mae Pong national reserved forest. These areas wer d b ' the National reserved forest Act as the national reserved forests in 1964, 1972, d 19 , respectively. The main reason for the designation of the national reserved forest stat d th t the forest in these areas consisted of the economicalIy valuable trees such a T grand!'s, Jin/!ia kerni, Pierocai:pars moorocai:pus, Dip!erocar us 1316erct, 101 , G pinnata, MirrephorQ joinerztosa, Dipterocarpus spp. and others, therefore, these areas should be kept as reserved forests. The- area and _ distribution of these national d forests is shown in Table I-8 and Figure 12, respectively. The results show that most f th study area are gazette national reserved forests which covered an area of 162,983.25 ha 93.05 percent of the total study area. In addition, the Cabinet Resolution in 1994 desionated the zoriation of forest I d the national reserved forest into three zones include Economic Zone A and E d Conservation Zone. The area and distribution of forest land use zoriation in N Demonstration forest was shown in Table 1-9 and Figure 13, respectively. Table 1-8 The area and percentaoe of the National reserved forests No. National reserved forest Area in ha Percent Mae N an Fang Khawa 68,729.58 39.24 2 Mae I*Igao Fang Sai 47, I 16.98 26.90 ~ J Mae Pong 47,136.69 26.91 4 Non-national reserved forest 12,176.19 6.95 4 Units Total 175,159,44 100.00 Source: National reserved forest map (I: 50,000), National Forest Land Management Division, 1990. Table 1-9 The area and percentage of the forest land use zoriation No. Zoriation of Forest Land Use Area in ha Percent Economic Zone A 2,380.96 1.36 2 Economic Zone E 15,632.34 8.92 ~ J Conservation Zone 144,918,37 82.74 4 Nori- forest land use Zone 12,227.77 6.98 4 Units Total 175,159.44 100.00 Source: Forest Land Resources Division, Royal Forest Department, 2000. a I^ 1.9, xi ...*I M" N"o F"19 10n"a NRF a^^I MGO NPC F"g sai NRF ^!! MBOP, 19NRF A, ^ ^ ; I to, .N. "did FUGslI. e. co ^. a CIO a. EU aO Source : National Forest Maria merit DNCion. Royal Forest Do rament. 1990 Fig"re 12 National reserved forests ,^ ^. a"O 2.0 g ^ ;, IQ . = , a CIO I^I ^^ g Q ^^OS "a I-^ 0'0 o ^^^ o = ^8 , -,, ^a -, 80 ^ ^ a a. . ^a " = a ;e a =, C ^ =.. Q ^ ^.. i. ". * ~, - o I ; 1'',"'}.' I^, \,. . ' 104 - ", .\. , ^' * ,, , *. a, ~ , . ,. ~, -,> a , , q , 25 5.7 National park National parks include in Ngao Demonstration forest are ThanI Pha Thai and Mae Yom. ThanI Pha Thai national park was established in 1978 as forest park under the supervision of the Lamparig Regional Forest Office and was upgraded to be national park in 2000. While Mae Yom National Park was established in 1986 under the supervision of the National Park Di\, ision, The area and distribution of national parks area is shown in Table I-10 and Figure 14, respectively. The results show that the study areas are designated as forest and national park amounting to an area of 57,762.93 ha or 32.98 percent of the total study area, Table 1-10 The area and percentage of national parks No. National arks Area in ha Percent Tham Pha Thai 56,518.54 32.27 2 Mae Yom 1,244.39 0.71 3 Nori-national arks 117,396.51 67.02 3 Units Total 175,159,44 I00.00 Source: I. National park map (I: 50,000), National Park Division, 1990 2, GPS Survey Data, Forest Engineering Division, 2000. ,, O ..., . '. '- *,-*^;,^:^;."^"^;^!^,', , I,49.41't'^-;^- ;;^~"""* I- ';,,,;^.,\!. , ', LF= . . ,. ~ ,.,,.\ * , , ._ , ^^,,. " L. .*^, , .. ,, . . Legal intr PI. Thai Nation" Pat Mee VCm Mind Pat mrl. tic'I, P. k A , ," go Goo an "O Source : Forest Engineering DMslDn, Royal Forest Department 2000 ^'ig"re 14 Distribution of national parks 27 5.8 Watershed classification. ConceptualIy, the watershed classification is synonymous with land use piaiming for forest areas. The watershed classification is, therefore, an effort to make man's use of the land as compatible as possible with creatures of the environment, The watershed classification process requires a system for establishing potential uses of land based on physical and/or environmental characteristics of landscape unfits. Physical characteristics of landscape units are stable features such as the long-terni average climate, elevation, slope, landfomi, geology, and soils. Enviroimiental featiires of landscape units are less stable and interact with short-tenn climatic trends, human use, and certain physical features which influence plant and animal populations. The method developed for watershed classification utilize a multivariate statistics analysis for establishing mathematical relationships between variables (Wooldrige at a1. , 1984). The definition of each watershed class with suggested land use capacity is briefly described as follows: (1). Watershed class I. This class is divided into two sub-classes as Watershed Class IA and IB. - Watershed class IA. Class IA are areas of. protected forest and headwater source areas usually at higher elevation with very steep slopes. These areas still remain in permanent forest cover. - Watershed class IB. Class IB is areas of similar physical features and environment to Class I A but portions of the area have been cleared for agricultural use or occupied villages. Cleared areas may be fallow or in cultivation. These areas require special soil conservation protection measures and where possible should be reforested or maintained in permanent agro-forestry. (2), Watershed class 2. Class 2 is areas of protection and/or cornrriercia} forests where mining and logging may be allowed within legal boundaries. Usually at higher elevations with steep slopes. Landfonns are less erosive than WSC IA or IB. Areas may be used for grazing or certain crops with soil protection measures, (3). Watershed class 3. Class 3 is areas of uplands with steep slopes and less erosive landforrns, Areas may be used for coriumercial forests, grazing, fruit trees, or certain agricultural crops with need for soil conservation measures. (4). Watershed class 4. Class 4 is areas of gently sloping lands suitable for row crops, fruit trees, and grazing with a moderate need for a few soil conservation measures. (5), Watershed class 5. Class 5 is gentle to flat areas for paddy fields or other agricultural uses with few restrictions. 28 Based on the watershed classification map of Thailand all of the study area is located in the Yom-Nan River basin where the equation for the prediction of the watershed classes is as follows: Y(WSc) ' 11.93.0,048 (Slope) -0,004 (mev) +0,107 (Landfm) co. 116 (Geol) +0,193 (soil)l oror) Where: '(WSC) is the scaling of the watershed class. Slope is the slope that is measured in percent from contour maps. Elev is the elevation that is read from contour maps as the average for one s uare kilometer divided by ten. Landfm is the scaling of landfonn that has assigned a minimum value to Galc, ridge, canyon, and dissected landforms. Geol is the scaling of geologic fomiations that is based on evolution to a stable soil or dispersion ratios. Soil is the scaling of soils that is based on properties related to inherent stability. (For) is the presence or absence of forest cover that is included as a variable (0, absent or I , present) for the sub~class of watershed class IA and I B only. The scaling of the watershed class of the Yom-Nan River basin is categorized into 5 classes: Y(wsc) < 1.50 for watershed class I; 1.50 < = Y(wsc) < 2.21 for watershed class 2; 2.21 < = Y(wsc) < 3.20 for watershed class 3; 3.20 < = Y(wsc) < 3.99 for watershed class 4 and Y(wsc) > 3.99 for watershed class 5. The distribution of the watershed classes in the study area is shown in Table 1-1 I and Figure 15. Table I-11 The area and percentage of the watershed classes No. Watershed class Area in ha Percent Watershed class IA 51,702,30 29.52 2 Watershed class I B 18.09 0.01 3 Watershed class 2 38,959.65 22.24 4 Watershed class 3 29,470.14 16.82 5 Watershed class 4 38,002.68 21.70 6 Watershed class 5 17,005.68 9.71 6 Units Total 175,159.44 I00.00 Source: Watershed classification map, I :50,000, National Environment Board, 1990. L . . ,* ,I , . , , . ., ,,,. . " , 41 ^, - . *', ,. . . Legend ' ^ us. ,sled 0,681A <, hats, SI. d 0055 TB ^. rind Class 2 C:::, Uubr, ried 0.33 " v. ., Erred goes 4 a A a ; I V. .Idled Class5 ^. "O g. Go 0.0 ,. Source National Environment Board. I 990 Figure 15 Distribution of watershed classes 30 5.9 Forest plantation. Forest resources in Thailand have diminished rapidly in recent decades. For tit f t t' its long history Thailand has become a net importer of wood and non-w d f t d (Chitntanaparp et. a1, 1985). To address this situation and its diverse causes, th R I Forest Department has been working with different to rams I I d I , agroforestry, afforestation, reforestation and land entitlements in reserved f t These activities are supplemented by other site specific projects on watershed con e t' in highland agriculture, mini-watershed development, and villaoe woodlot There are two methods of plantation establishment in Thailand namel ; the tr d't' I planting system; and the Taungya system, Under traditional systems all act'v't' conducted by employees of the responsible agency and trees are Ianted for t' b I . This system is presently used by the Royal Forest Department, 10 ino conce reforesting land in fulfillment of concession contracts, and in rivate ref t t' h Under the Taorigya system originally adopted by the Royal Forest De artment ' 1906 d later modified by the Forest Industry Oroanization in its forest villa e s ste , f out planting and are allowed to cultivate crops between trees until the become h d d t (Hoamuangkaew, 1990). In the Ngao Demonstration forest, forest plantation is classified into 2 functio I : productive and protective reforestation. Productive reforestation is undertake b th Lampang Regional Forest Office while protection reforestation is undertake b th Watershed Management Division that are located in the mountainous land ' th h- of the study area. (1). Productive reforestation, The first forest plantation was set up in 1942 at N ao di t ' t by the Lampang Regional Forest Office. The method of plantation is the tradit ' I I t' system. The main species for reforestation is teak. Most of the plantation areas are 10 t d in the peneplain land around Ngao basin. Tlrree plantation units consist of Huai That, M Yuak and and Mae Proo Plantation. Until 2000, the area of this reforestation t d 7,052.75 ha. .(2), _Protective reforestation. The first protective reforestation was set u in watershed management units 7 and 34 in 1980. Method of plantation is also the traditional I t' system. The main species for reforestation are Finers kgs!ya and fast orowino tree , Lez, coena Jewcocepha/a. All the plantation area occurred in the old cleann th t resulted in the past by the shiftino cultivation activities, Until 2000, the area f th' reforestation amounted to 2,827,19 ha, In addition, forest protection units in and nea b Ngao Demonstration forest were set up include Forest Protection Unit 14 (Mae Teeb), Unit 16 (Pong Tao) Unit 28 (Ban Than), Unit 29 (Mae Heang), Unit 30 (Mae Pon, ) and Unit 31 (Mae Huad). The distribution of productive and protective reforestation and field offices is shown in Figure 16. \, . L, . \ ~, Q. . ^.. ,^^ orig Tao , , ., . Mae Pong e Hae , ^. .t^ ^ . ;*. " . , Mae Te ,^ ^ L ,. o Ban Than ^ Legend I^, Forest protectbn unit ^ ProbCbve Rdoie*tion Area I^ Productive Rdaeaation Area A ^ I^, F10ri. fore. a Area ^. ". ," ." ., O co Source Forest Resources Assessnrsn! Dinsbn. Royal Forest Departinent. 2000 Fig, ,re 16 Distribution of productive and protective reforestation and field offices 32 5.10 Temporary Cultivation Rights (STK) The Temporary Cultivation Rights Project or Thai acronym STK was taken f th h of HM the King given on 26 February 1981 for solvino the roblem of s uatt th National reserved forest. The project was established in 1982 by the National Forest Land Management Division, Royal Forest Department, The main p OSes of this ro'ect t help the squatters by giving them the rights to use the land in national reserved forest d t protect the forest from encroaclunent, Duration of the Temporar Cultivation Ri ht 5 years. In the first 5 years the squatters receive the STK-I certificate without fees. Th conditions for the provision of the ST}< certificate in the national reserved forests include: I. the land is suitable for agriculture with a gradient of less than 35 Greent; 2. the maximum recipient area per household is 3.2 ha; 3. the transaction of the Tights to another is prohibited except by inheritance; 4. ^ recipients will not leave the land unploughed for 2 consecutive years; >. the failure to meet these conditions will result in the nohts being revoked. After 5 years the recipients who have fulfilled the conditions can a I for the STK-2 certificate with fees. Until 1989 the Royal Forest Department conducted the Tern or Cultivation Rights for STK-2 certificate in the country coverin an area of 139,674.08 ha (Royal Forest Department, 1989). ' In the study area the Temporary Cultivation Rights (STK) projects were conducted in all three national reserved forests. Until 1990 4,399.92 ha of the Temporar Cultivation Ri hts (STK) areas were given to the local people in the study area. The area and distribution of Temporary Cultivation Rights (STK) in the national reserved forest are shown in Table 1-12 and Figure 175. Table 1-12 The area and percentage of the Temporary Cultivation Rights (STK) No National reserved forest Area in ha Percent STK area in Mae Noao Fan 1<. 11awa 1,591.11 0.91 2 STK area in Mae Noao Fan Sai 1,633.68 0.93 ~ , STK area in Mae Pong 1,175.13 0.67 4 Other area , ....~~ ,... .",.., 170,759.53 97.49 4 units Total 175,159.44 100.00 Source: The Temporary Cultivation Rights (STK) map (I : 50,000), Lampang Regional Forest Office, 1990. b- L. . a. ^ ~ * . \ .\ , ,.. * ^ , . , *, . ,, , ^ 131^ , . . .^ . ^!^,^;%^,^.,^. o * STK. learn, ,"1,190o I^re Sd NRF orK .Din ". Ping NRF a . A I^run. Ford R'S^ ^. "O in 610 ". Source Lain pang Regional Forest orfice Royal Forest Department, 1990 Figure 17 Distribution of Temporary Cultivation Rights (STK) 34 5. U Mining concession Since the mining operation mostly occurs in forest areas, two goverimient agencies in Thailand are concerned with mining concessions: the Department of Mineral Resource and the Royal Forest Department. In principle, mining concessions are conducted b the Department of Mineral Resources with the peruiission of the Ministry of Industry. However, under the National reserved forest Act in 1964 the mining -concessions which were located in national reserved forests also had to be approved by the Royal Forest Department with the permission of Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives. In the study area two active mining concession areas are located in national reserved forests. The distribution of these mining concession areas is shown in Figure 18. The area of the milling concession covers 364.86 ha or 0.21 percent of the total study area. ~. o ^ Legend Mir"19 Cue*I rea ; Itstold 10.51r",, g A g ; ; ItsFr""'. 1/@/'51 re ^. a. 590 co ." " Source Natonal Forest Man rent Davision. RO I Forest DC funorit 1990 Fig"re 18 Distribution of rimning concession areas. 36 5.12 Assessment of forest land use in 2000 The forest land use in 2000 was updated base on the change detection techni ue us in band difference of landsat-TM in 1993 and 2000 with oround verification in June 2000. The area and distribution of forest land use in 2000 were shown in Table I-13 and 14 and Fi ure 17, respectively. Based on forest type classification by Sinitinartd at a1. (1978), three main original forest types which was classified based on visual interpretation of aerial photograph from 1984 b Suwit Origsomwang (1993) namely; the Dry Evergreen, Dry Mixed Deciduous and Dry Dipterocarp Deciduous forests can be briefly described as follows: (1). Dry Evergreen forest. The Dry Evergreen forest is found in scattered areas along the depressions on the peneplain and in the humid valleys of the low hills, or forming galleries along streams and rivulets. The soil is either granitic or calcareous loam. Armual precipitation ranges between 1,000 and 2,000 nun. The Dry Everoreen forests are three- stoned, The upper story consists of Antsoprera ob/onoa, fillisopiercz costara, and a number of dipterocarps and other species. The middle story is composed of Chae!oedipus casta/?ocar:pus, Euphoria longana, and several other species. The lowest story contains smaller-statured trees of the genera Ag/o10, rimoora, and others' There are scattered palms and sparsely growing bamboos. Lianas are abundant. Epiphytic orchids and ferns occur sporadically. Strarigulating figs such as Ficz!s dirtssimo and FICUS ofrz!paced are frequent. The dense undergrowth consists' of members of the Ginger family, ferns, and a number of other plants. (2). Dry Mixed Deciduous forest, The Dry Mixed Deciduous forest is generally scattered in both lower and higher elevations, on sandy loam or latentic colluvial soil. Armual precipitation is between 600 and I, 000 nun. The upper story of this two-storied forest contains teak, kill^^ kernt, and several other species. The lower story contains DoIbergio ovaia, I\{inertiQ blondisianci, and other species. Shrubs include species of Memecylon, He titreres, and other genera. Bamboos are scattered. The oround flora is composed of herbaceous species, Knemp/'end, GIIrct!ing, Groin/aria, Desmodiz!in, and others. Epiphytes, including ferns, orchids, and others, are frequent. Along ridoes at elevations between 300 and 500 meters, the forests are more. open. because of bioh evaporation, excessive exposure, extensive surface erosion, and much Ieaching of the soil, Here xerophytic species are found scattered. The ground flora in this forest type is subject to armual ground bunting. (3). Dry Deciduous Dipterocarp forest, The Dry Deciduous Dipterocarps forest is rather open and its structure is 2 two-storied. The predominant species belono to the family Dipterocarpaceae. This forest type is found on undulatino peneplains and ridges, where the soil is either sandy or latentic and has been subject to extreme Ieaching and erosion, as well as annual burning. These conditions create a climax type of vegetation in which dipterocaTps and other fire-resistant species prevail, The upper story includes dipterocarps, Quercus kerni, and lye/an off hoed I'Siiata. The second story is composed of low shrubby trees including Sirychnos nzLx-vomico, Sirychnos rearx-bidnda, and others, Generally, the height of the trees in the upper story is between 20 and 50 meters, but only 15 to 20 meters in avid places. The ground flora consists largely of tuber and rootstock-beanno species, because of the selective effects of fire, and includes small bamboos, as well as members of herbaceous genera and others, Dinenia hookeri is common and tonns clumps of low ., 37 Table 1-13 Area and percentage of forest land use in 2000 Area in Ha Percent No. Forest Land Use Classes Evergreen forest-Stratum. 2 178.88 2 Evergreen forest-Stratum 3 9 3 Mixed Deciduous forest-Stratum I , 4 Mixed Deciduous forest-Stratorn 2 22,131. 5 Mixed Deciduous forest-Stratum 3 51,977, I 5,979.3 6 Dry Dipterocarp forest-Siratrun I 7 Dry Dipterocarp forest-Stratum 2 , 8 Dry Dipterocarp forest-Stratum 3 , 9 Productive reforestation area , 10 Protective reforestation area 2,827 11 Settlement area 1,715. 8,087 12 Agriculture area earln area , 48.44 0.03 dies 124.19 0.07 area 461.01 0.26 16 Shifting cultivation in 2000 oad Total 175,159.44 , I. ", 00 Table I-14 Area of forest land use in 2000 in each mana Gine t t Management Unit Forest Land Use Non-Demonstration Mae I\Igao Mae Hearig Mae Huat Mae Teeb forest Ever reen forest Total , Mixed Deciduous f , 0.00 4,185.52 , , , D Di teroc , 306.88 77,893.65 , , Productive reforestati , 396.76 24,190.79 , , Protective refore 67.56 7,052.89 , Settlement area 0.00 2,827.24 A riculture area 1,368.40 1,715.91 Old clearin area 6,329.00 8,087.97 , a , , 3688.07 4 Mining area 48.44 Shifting (1989-2000 124.19 Road 461.01 65.19 Total 44,141.24 35624.82 43432.60 39779.34 12/8/, 43 r' -, Legal ,.,. n fond-,." 2 a. ,." fore*a. in a o *. d D. dai". F""C. ." , ^ a " *" D. dai". F. "Sb. " a *" 0.0".,."Sb". , DVDi, .. e",.".*."I t, i!^, DVDi, .,," r. .d. a. " a ^*. DVD-.," F""..." a ,^ hoc. .. I. .... A. . ",~, ,"", R. b. *nA. . gutsd ". lyric. . ".. W. , a. ,., e .*. an. A I^ "^ s^:.;';:;;:;; ^ S" 9.0 600 .. n an Source' Forest Resources Assessment DMsion Forest Research Office Royal FDD$1 Doper"rent 2000 Fig, ,re 19 Distribution of forest land use in 2000 40 6. Conclusion In conclusion, the establishment of data base for plainiino using Geographic Infonnation System (GIS) appears is to be an efficiency tool for fomiulating forest management plan. 7. References Chuntanaparb, L. , Sri-Aran, F. and W. Hoamuangkaew. 1985. Non-Wood Forest Products in Thailand, Field Document 5 in Forest Management, Afforestation and Utilization of Forest Resource in the Developing Regions. Faculty of Forestry, Kasetsart University, Banokok. Hoamuangkaew, W. 1990. Thailand Country Report. In Forestry Resources Management. Asian Productivity Organization, Tokyo: 323-354, Peangklai, C. and T* Saintisuk. 1976. Forest Type Classification in Thailand, In Introductory to Botany, Second Edition. Agricultural Cooperatives Assemble of Thailand Limited, Bangkok: 83-92. (in Thai), Pimmarnrojanakoon, V. and S. Surapapmaitri. 1987. Ngao Demonstration forest, Lamparig Province. in Forest Management in Ngao Demonstration Forest, Ngao district, Lampang province. Royal Forest Department, Bangkok: 1-7. (in Thai). Royal Forest Department. 1989. Annual Report 1989. Royal Forest Department, Bangkok. 88 p. ( in Thai). Sinitinand, T. , Sabhasri, S. and Kilnstadter, P. 1978. The Environment of Northern Thailand. In Farmers in Forest (Editor by Kunstadter, P. , E. C. Champion and S, Sanhasri). East West Center, Honolulu: 24-40. Suwit Origsomwang. 1993. Forest Inventory, Remote Sensing and GIS for Forest Mangement in Thailand. Berliner geographische Studien, Institut fure Geographie, - TU Berlin. Gentiany. 272 p. Wooldrige, D, Chankao, K and N. Tangtham, 1984, Method for Watershed Classification in Thailand. 23 p. (mimeographed), .. 41 PART U Forest Inventory in Ngao Demonstration Forest 42 Forest Inventory in Ngao Demonstration Forest Suttatip Jutikidecha, AUSchada Chitechote Chompunuch Sodachan, Phairan Phioniliitatom Sayan Suraphapmaitri and Somyot Saengriin Forest Resources Assessment Division, Forest Research Office, Royal Forest Department ABSTRACT The forest inventory in Ngao Demonstration Forest, Lampang province was conducted during 5 - 13 March 2000 employing stratified random sampling using unit system method. The result reveals that the area covers a total of 1,929,368.75 ha comprising 3 forest types including plantation of 9,812.37 ha and non-forest area of 193,322.37 ha. There are more than 230 tree species found in the area with the volume of 10,558,622.92 in . The average number of trees (density) is 568,9140 stems/11a and the average stocking is 100,0208 in Ina. The sapling and seedling density are also estimated which are about 1,514,0650 and 4,619,6428 individuals/11a respectively. The findings for each forest type are summarized as tonows: I. Dry Evergreen Forest : It covers the area of 4,185.44 ha with the number of tree 1,352,633 stems which yield 853,771.82 in , The average number of trees is 323,1575 stems/11a and the average stocking is 203,9862 in Ina. The tree species dominate the area are Dipteroc@rpt!s tarrbinQ!"s, Hopeo odorato and Lithocoi:pus spp. 2, Mixed Deciduous Forest with Teak : The total area of 77,585.26 ha of this forest ty e contains about 212 species with 39,711,201 stems which yield 7,323,712.92 in . The average number of trees is 511,8395 sterns/}Ia and the average stocking is 94,3957 in'/11a. The dominant species in the area are Teetono grandis, Shoreo sinmensis and Prerocai:pus macroc@rpus. 3. Dry Dipterocarp Forest : More than 125 tree species are reported in this forest type which covers the area of 23,793.50 ha. There are 18;993,148 stems with the volume of 2,381,138.17 in . The average number of trees is 798.2474 stems/11a and the average stocking is I 00,0749 in Ina. The tree species dominate the area are Shored obtusa, Shored stamensis and Dipterocoi:pals obtz, 3:1bfit!s. 43 I. Introduction With the cooperation between Royal Forest Departinent (trough Forest Research Office) and international Tropical Timber Organization (InO), the "Development of a Model Forest for Sustainable Forest Management in Thailand" project was established with the aim to obtai the basis for generating a Model Forest and to set up an action plan for Model Forest Network in Thailand so as to accomplish long terni sustainable forest mana Ginent. Th project was planaried for 10 months in fiscal year 2000 and Ngao Demonstration Forest in Lampang province was selected as a study area. To achieve the goal, such activities as mapping, image processing, exploring on sodo- economic situation of people living nearby forest as well as forest survey had been undertaken. Forest Inventory Section (under Forest Resources Assessment Division, Forest Research Office) was entrusted with forest surveying duty on which stratified random sampling with Unit System method was employed, This report presents the current forest condition resulted of the forest invento with the objective to provide basic infonnation of Ngao Demonstration Forest focusin on t es of forest, species composition, density, stocking including sapling and seedling. These infonnation will be beneficial for assessing the richness of forest resource, ca abilit in natural regeneration, in addition, economic evaluation of volume of harvest. 2. Study Area 2.1 Background In the cooperation between Royal Forest Department (RFD) and United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, a forest management expert, Sir Harry Champion, visited Thailand 1961 to advise and prepare a forest management plan. At the same time, the onc of working plan of RFD was to be changed from a temporary one to a Grinanent one (Origsomwang, 1993). Ngao Demonstration Forest was considered as a study area for research purpose and for the intensive management of the forest. At present, 1.1gao Demonstration Forest covers the area of 1,751.59 kin' and has been divided into 4 sectors: Mae Ngao, Mae Haeng, Mae Huat and Mae Teeb. 2.2 Location The Ngao Demonstration Forest situates in Ngao district, Lampang To vince and lies between18' 21' and 19' 3.5' north, 99' 45' and 100' 7' east (Forest Research Office, 1997). Its boundaries are: North : Muang District, Payao province, East : Song District, Prae province, West : Chaehom and Warig Nua District, Lampang province, South : Mae MO District, Lampang province, 44 2.3 Climate According to the influence of northeast monsoon and southwest monsoon, there are 3 seasons in this area: summer, rainy and winter. The SUITuner is from March to May and the mean temperature during the daytime is 30'-38'C. The rainy is from June to September and the mean temperatore daring the daytime is 31'-33'C. The winter is from November to February and the temperature drop down to 8'-I 0'c in the night time. 3. Methodology 3.1 Stratification In carrying out the inventory, the forested area was stratified corresponding to forest types and crown closure of the upper trees. 3,211se of Satellite linage Satellite linage of scale I :250,000 taken in 1993 was interpreted for the land use in the study area which were classified into 4 broad types : Dry Evergreen Forest, Mixed Deciduous Forest, Dry Dipterocarp Forest and non-forest area. 3.3 Aerial Photographs The aerial photographs of scale 1:15,000 taken during 1983-1984 were used to further classified forest types into strainin by estimation from the crown closure of the upper trees. The characteristics of each stratum are described as follows : Strainin I The crown closure of the upper trees is less than 30 percent, This is a scattered crown density of the upper trees. The forest in this SITatrun is very poor with the dominance of the coppice trees due to the severe disturbance in the past. Strat!un 2 The crown closure of the upper trees is between 30 and 60 percent. This is an intermediate crown density of the upper trees. The forest in this stratum is rather rich but some disturbances are found. Stratum 3 The crown closure of the upper trees is more than 60 percent. This is a dense crown density of the upper trees. The forest in this strainnn is rich with many dominant trees. 3.4 Maps Forest type maps of scale I :50,000 transferred from the interpretation mentioned above were prepared and used as base maps to locate sampling mitt to be inventoried. The forest land use strata in the maps are sunrrnarized in Table I . 45 Table 2-1 Classification of Forest Land Use in Ngao Demonstration Forest in 1993. Area Land Use sq. km. Ha I . Foresi fired 1,066.39 I . I Dry Evergreen Stratum I Forest Stratunn 2 1.75 175 Stratum 3 40.82 4,082 1.2 Mixed Deciduous Strainrn I 39.95 3,995 with Teak Stratrun 2 227.16 22,716 Stratum 3 522.26 52,226 1.3 Dry Dipterocarp Stratrun I 58.32 5,832 Forest Stratum 2 96.81 9,681 Strainin 3 79.32 7,932 2. Non- o1,831 orea 679.13 67,913 Total 1,745.52 174,552 Source : image Processing and GIS Section, Forest Resources Assessment Division, 1993 3.5 Inventory Design To conduct the field survey, sampling mitts with fixed area were employed. In order to select sampling points, a 4x4 cm. gr'id was supertinposed on forest type maps and sampling unfits were randomly allocated on grid intersection in each stratusii taking into consideration thc frequency, extent of occurrence and accessibility of the stratum. Sampling intensity is equivalent to 0.25%. Total of 2,580 sampling plots would be measured, upon "Unit System" method (Figure 20). One unit consists of 80 sample plots on 4 square tracts of 300x30o meters, 20 plots on each tract, The distance of plots is 60 meters and distance from unit center to each tract is 500 meters. The layout of sample plots is shorni in Figure 21. . 500 in II~', I <---> .^ 300 in . Figure 20 Layout of Unit System . 46 3.6 Plot Shape and Size The sample plots are concentric circular plots composed of 4 subplots with radius of 1.26, 5.24,12.61 and 17.84 meters respectively (Figure 22). All living trees were tallied. The size classes of trees to be enumerated within 4 subplots are as follows: Table 2-2 Plot Size Plot Radius Area (in) 01a) Size Classes 1.26 0,0005 Saplings and Seedlings 5.24 0.01 23 15 cm. gbh 12.61 0.05 ^: 46 cm. gbh 17.84 0.1 ^ 100 cm. bh Remark : Sapling : trees with gbh<15 cm. and t!Ie height >1.30 in Seedling : trees with gbh<15 cm. and the height <1.30 in 4>.. ~\I 300m radius = I. 26 in. seedlings and saplings enumeration radius = 5.64 in. measure on tree with gbh;^:15 cm. - ---)------e------~ - - } ------~------radius = 12.64 in. measure on tree with gbh>45 cm. (1) ~-.., - \~., ~ ...,/(11) radius = 17.84 in. measure on tree with gbh>, 00 cm. (..) () [0.1 ha. ] 10 OS ha I <7 [0.01 ha. ] <. . - ...... - - - ...... ,. 1.26 5.64 12.61 17.84 in. 00005 h J ------}------~~ -~ b <~60 in. +- Figure 21 Layout of Sample Plots Figure 22 Concentric Circular Sample Plots 48 3.7 Data Collection The forest inventory data were collected in field plot sheets. In every plot, the following parameters were recorded I . Forest Type (record in coded number) 100 Tropical Evergreen Forest 110 Hill Evergreen Forest 200 Mixed Deciduous with Teak 210 Mixed Deciduous without Teak 300 Dry Dipterocarp Forest 310 Dry Dipterocarp (Scrub) Forest 400 Pine Forest 500 Teak Plantation 510 Nori-teak Plantation 600 Old Clearing Area 610 Shifting Cultivation Area 700 Agricultural Land 710 Occupancy 800 Non-forest Area 900 Savarinah 2. Crown Density (code 20-80) code Crown Closure 20 <20% 40 21.40% 60 41-60% 80 >60% 3, Tree Species 4, Girth at Breast Height 5* Timber Quality (code 11-13 will be recorded for trees with gbh>100 cm. ) 11 Sound Timber 12 Cull Timber 13 Firewood 20 Pole Timber (for tree with gbh 46-100 cm. ) 6. Number of logs (The number of logs will be estimated for all trees with gbh over 100 cm, One log has a five meter length measured from ground to the first branch. ) 7. Number of Sapling and Seedling 8. Slope of the terrain (code 1-4) Code Slope (degree) >25 2 19-25 3 11.18 4 0-10 9. Tree Height The infonnation on forest type, density, timber quality, slope of the terrain were obtained through observation and recorded in coded number defined by Forest Inventory section while the others were measured. 3.8 Timing of Field Work Field survey had been conducted during 5-31 March 2000 49 3.9 Data Analysis The steps for calculating the forest volume are I , Calculation of individual plot volume using volume equation 2. Each forest type volume is calculated from the average volume/area and its type area 3. The total volume of the forest area is the sunnnation of the volume of all forest types Volume estimates of individual trees can be calculated using a mathematical function developed by Pochai and Nanal V volume (in3, DBH diameter at breast height (in) a intercept of equation b slope of equation The fonnulae constructed are categorized into 7 groups regarding genera, computed intercept and slope value Group Equation Dipterocarp Volume = 2,372083 + (2,443847*X) 2 Dalbergia Volume = 2,134494 + (2,363034*X) 3 Terntinalia Volume = 1,880578 + (2,053321*X) 4 AfZelia Volume = 1,789563 + (2,025666*X) 5 Pterocarpus Volume = 2,037096 + (2,299618*X) 6 Tectona Volume = 2.1 19907 + (2,29651 I *X) 7 Others Volume = 2,250111 + (2,414209*X) The dBASE5 for window software was used exclusively for the analysis of inventory data After obtairting volumes in each sample plots, the inventory data were combined for the level of forest type area which were further combined to obtain data for the study area. According to the update interpretation from satellite imagery of scale 1:250,000 taken in 2000 by image Processing and GIS Section (Figure 23), also for this project, the new land use figures shown in Table 2 were taken into account to analyse the data 50 Table 2-3 Status of Land Use in Ngao Demonstration Forest in 2000 Area Land Use S .km. hectare I . Forest Area 1,055.64 105,564.26 I . I Evergreen Forest 41.85 4,185.44 1.2 Mixed Deciduous with Teak 775.85 77,585.26 1.3 Dry Dipterocarp Forest 237.94 23,793.56 2, Re;forestation 98.12 9,812-37 2.1 Prodtictive Forest 69.85 6,985.18 2.2 Protective Forest 28.27 2,827.19 Total 1,751.56 175,156.00 Source : linage Processing and GIS Section, Forest Resources Assessment Division, 2000 .. \ , .^::4, . 41 .\ ^. , \^ \ * f . b \ ^ , *, *,. I' t;.* , \ 19. ., \ ., q \ Y ~,:^, .I!. < ^:' . "' r 'it ^: . ;*, \a^, r . , ^ , .^:^ ~ \ . ^. . , ^. * ,. - .. a;':* ^ \^.: ^.. \ I. , S Legend o 61 Everg. con Forest-Stratum ^ Mixed Deciduous Forest N Dry Dipierocarp Forest Productive Reforestation Area A Protective Reforestation Area o 8 8 ,, Non-Ibresi Area Kin 2 o 2 a 8 580 600 610 620 Source . Forest Resotirces Assessment Division. Forest Research Omce Royal Foresi Departmeni, 2000. Figure 23 Forest Types of Ngao Demonstration Forest in 2000 52 4. Result Based on stratified random sampling with wit system method, existing forest area. in Ngao Demonstration Forest was inventoried and classified into 3 forest types: Dry Evergreen Forest, Mixed Deciduous Forest with Teak and Dry Dipterocarp Forest. More than 230 tree species are investigated in the area which recto"@ grandis is dominated. However, Shoreo ohmsa has the highest voluine, followed by Shoreo stamensis, Teeto, a@ grandis and Pieroc"IP"s macroc",:PMs respectively. The average number of trees (density) and stocking are estimated with 568.91 stems/11a and I00,0208 in'/11a. As they were also calculated in size classes, it is found that trees with gbh 15-45 cm represent 72.15% of the total number of trees whereas the big trees (gbh>100 cm) represent 45.77% of the total growing stock. However, even though rect0,20 grandis dormnates the area, the figures indicate hat Shored obtusa has better regeneration erable 2-4 and Table -5). 4.1 Dry Evergreen Forest Dry Evergreen Forest is found scatterIy in the area which covers only 4,185.44 ha at the smallest portion of the study site. It is characterized by the presence of Dipteroco, :PMs mrbicz, totars, Hope" odora, @ and Lithoca, :PMs spp. Generally Dry Evergr. een Forest occupies the top of the mountain where precipitation is lingli and temperature is cool trough the year. Floristic composition is above 135 species. Forest floor is covered by a number of saplings and seedlings. Table 2-6 and -7 show the distribution and yield of trees in this forest type. 4.2 Mixed Deciduo, Is Forest with Teak Mixed Deciduous Forest with Teak covers the area of 77,585.26 ha which is the highest portion of the study area. This forest type is a transitional plant connnunity between Dry Evergr. Gen Forest and Dry Dipterocarp Forest. Plant composition and structure are more complex than Dry Evergreen Forest and Dry Dipterocarp Forest but not quite as dense as Dry Evergreen Forest. There are more than 212 tree species in tins forest type in which contains remarkable conmnercial species such as Teak (Teeto"a grandis), Shored stamensis, Preroca, pars macroco, :pals. Usually teak is the donxinant specie in this forest type. The distribution, density and yield of trees in Mixed Deciduous Forest with Teak are shown in Table 2-8 and Table 2- 9. 4.3 Dry Dipterocarp Forest There are 23,793.56 ha of Dry Dipterocarp Forest in the area, Comparing to the two forest types mentioned above, the stands of this forest type are not dense and the number of tree with girth at breast height over I 00 cm is low. Dipterocarp trees are dominant which include Shored o613!so, Shoreo stamensis and Djj7reroca, :pals o6tt, sirblit, s. Species composition is about 125 species. The ground floor is dense with small saplings and seedlings. The distribution, density and yield of trees in Dry Dipterocarp Forest are shown in Table 2-10 and Table 11. Table 2-4 Number and Distribution by Species and Size Classes of Forest Tr Ngao Demonstratbn Forest (The 10 most abundant species is shown, ) GBH (cm) Total 15 - 45 cm 46 - 100 cm > too am Scientific name (Sapling) (Seedling) o. o rees Volume No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees No. of Trees (cu. in. ) tou. in. ) (cumJ (cu. in, ) Snorea . . , , . , . . 72.12 4,900,937 945,873.77 12,975,587 67,394,130 Snorea SI , , . , , . 6,371.47 4,968,022 881,959.04 3,330,154 17,660,651 Teetona landis Linn . . , . , , 5.71 6,159,512 519,917.79 10,110,025 14,270,293 PIO, Dear us in I , , 151,973.37 3,604,925 472,377.22 5,141,999 22,756,689 X 11a 1008r a , , , , . 19,509.39 21652.396 390,002.09 7,382,095 21,836,583 Terminal18 elata . . . , , 54.80 ,, 629,999 385,706. o2 3,323,712 5,514,874 Tenninalla coat , . , ,530.78 737,883 384,975.60 2,153,043 6,127,446 DJ toroca u . , , . 17,342.59 I, 052.4 I I 312,359,82 4,052,971 11,214,566 2300. I7 , , , , , 9,228 D^, tomea, pus turbinelus Gaert 26,944 1,713.09 I . , . 480,355 Offer 25,034,251 I 1083 7 , . , , , , , , .756,914 319,834,360 Total 43,328,594 I, 982,507.59 13,654. ,, 9 3,743,093.21 3,074,268 4,833,022. ,2 60 0569B, 00,558622.92 159.83, ,t55 487,669,175 co In 54 @ ,. a co 03 I*. 1.3 o a CD ^ co ^ ^ ., a I~ * ^; C " N .- co co ^ U, ,~ =co co CD L, , * ^ co ^ ^;; ^Z ;e a^ a; Q N g! ^e @ ^ ,. 01 N ^ o ,O co co * co .., 01 01 co co 10 Q ;S ^ :e :;; a Lr> 18 ^; I~ o at un ^ ^ , r. Q C\I co a a o N co @ a CD us r~ I~ O> , to 05 it> 61 ,.- o , ,^ Eru N ,- If> co 63 ^ o co Co CV O, ^. " e> 61 ,. to <0 N co ,. ,. = ^.^ "Z ^ o ", ^ co ^ *. o ^ ^ co co C\I r~ ,- co rin co a * , ^ S; ^ ^ ^ CD co u, 01 Us rin co co e. , CD Co ^ a I~ N ^; ^ " o E to co * * co co ,> CLI co N Q ^ ;:; Q co ^ D. co >~ .-. ,= in to D ,- ^ CD 1.3 ,- 03 co a ^ u> a Co Q = <9 ,. co C, 113 o @ 03 @ C> <. 3 * . 61 to ^ * Chi ^ co ^ to I~ @ ^ ^. Q co ," ,-. a' C, a co co @ co D " = Co r~ co q. IQ un @ a ^ Q CG .~. , , to co o1 ,- ^:! ^ ^ Z co U, in o E Q <6 co co @ ^ ^ ,,, ,- 1.2 co a O, a o co is S; ^= ^; ^;i ^ Co 01 ,~ 62 ,.. co ,. ,~ g, co CV co ,- to 61 * o co co co to ^ q. Ie " E ^ to N Q ,-. N ,- CM ^ N N L, > 183 I- -. co * ^ o o > ^ +, E co o g^ Q o Q co If> I~ ,~ a o @ <. 1 o co 61 N IL ^ co o o co CD ,. un a CM 01 Co ,. S; $2 co $2 co ,. A CG ^ S; ;:; ^ ^; is: C N ^ Q *.. ,.. ^ ,- ,. o o o ^ ^: 81 .-. Z ^ ^ GID = o Q r~ * Q o o Q h. * E a is 01 a; o ^ us 01 a Co CLI Co ^ o * * D in * * N ,- o *' Q ,- o Q co .C, ^ E ^ CD -= o Co E >~ ^ C, Z ,^ o C o *^ ,. co Crib ^ co co I~ co N a~ I, , o *.. O> CD co <. . to = ^; e! Q ^ ^; a; S; co C\I I^ ^!: , ,. Q Q @ co ^ .r> a IC> <. 1 r~ ^; @ co . co <. a *. <. Q *~ a, ^ ,- 61 Q o a a L. o ^ ^ ^ co o1 I- ^ ^ Z '65 co ^ o IL CD I~ in o a I. .. co N co N ", ,. ,.~ 61 02 ^ o 61 ,,, ^; 61 $9 ^ 83 ^ :;; ^ S; ^ ^ ~. a^ IC^ ^ r: ,~: ,:Q ,. a! Q Q ^ I~= CD to .- *.. N ,- o o o Q Q Q . co C E ,. ^ .~ ^ = o > ^O ^ E o *C o u> * g Q co I~- ^ I~. Chi o o co N Q @ co ^ co 61 I~ o "> ^ a~ .r> I~ ,~ co IC> * "> ,. * to ^ 01 Co ^ to ~. q. to GE ^ ^ * ,-. Q co 61 a un co * CD , = in co o O> co U> o Q I~ o ^ ^; , ^I N <6 ^ ^ CU t Z o CD ^ C CG ^ t: ,^ I:! >C ,^ co >< o< co F- < E CD .~. to co Z co ;s L. a: co ^, .co E e- co " O. is: \. in = ~~ ^. = Q >, .~ .C to ^ co ^ co Q C U ^ ^ I~ ^ Q co o co ^ ,<, ^ .-. to I. . . = co b *. '1^ co S co co co a C 8. -- " co 8 C, ^. E Q. a, > L. !a e- , co Q ^. 01 in in co Q. o ^ S co CD co o ^ Q >e .C ,~ co q, ^ L. ,~ e ^ .^ P Q .^, Q. t, C= >. .Q. ,^ I- Co co ,- a: I- I^ .~ Q o Table 2-6 Number and Distribution by Species and Size Classes of Forest Trees in Dry Evergreen Forest (The 10 most abundant. peciesis shown. ) GBH (ami Total 15 " 45 cm 46 - 100 onI > 100 on SGIentmc name (Sapling) (Seedling) No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees Volume No. o1 Trees Volume No. of Trees No. of Trees (cum, ) tsu, in. ) tou. in. ) (cu. in. ) or^eruca, pus turbinetus Geert 3,343 218.98 7,055 2,544.17 21,787 147,581.09 32,185 150,344.24 o 259,838 Hopea odorata Roxb. 3,216 267.27 2,324 987.32 15,541 79,016,73 21,081 80,271.32 o o Liar, Dearpus spp. 41,380 2,073. I I 37,159 I I, 159.80 32n50 50,367.61 110,689 63,600.51 1,140,584 3,835,938 Sohima reinchll Kanti 10,119 490.28 9,751 2,772.60 12,971 42,760.22 32,841 46,023. , I 101,193 64,325 Lagers"bein18 batonsae Koeh, re o 0.00 4,012 1,267.18 I3,853 32,523.82 17,865 33,791.00 o 207,462 Dfy>telocaipus alatus Roxb. 3,216 I50.52 4,897 1,133.76 6,505 31,572.89 14,618 32,857.17 o 707,577 . Ifvingia malayana Oily. Ex A. o 0.00 4,897 1,889.77 6,979 25,808.32 I I, 876 27,698.09 o o Bombax 800eps Pier, e 18,395 798.75 o 0.00 1,655 20,288.00 20,050 21,086.75 o o Mienel/a champaca Llnn. 11,619 686.59 19,567 5,614.69 9,675 14,300.61 40,861 20,601.89 o o EUgenia cumlni Dince 10,029 505.82 8,027 2,59029 5,381 I5,461.95 23,437 18,558.05 101,193 101,193 color 587,913 29,482.58 304,742 91,840,26 134,474 237,616.86 I, 027.1 29 358,939,70 4,718,407 15.83,742 Total 689,231 34,673.90 402,429 ,21,799.85 2.0,972 697,298.07 1,352,633 853.77, .82 6,061,378 20,360,076 Lfj In Table 2-7 Density (Nina) and Yield (Vowha) of Forest Trees in Dry Evergreen Forest (The 10 most abundant species is shown. ) GBH (cm) Total 15.45 cm 46 - 100 cm > 100 cm (Sapling) (Seedling) Scientific name Nina Vonha Nina Nina N/ha Vol/ha Nina Vonha N/ha VolA'Ia (cu. in. ) (cu. in, ) (cum. ) (cum. ) 6208/5 0,6079 5,2055 35,2606 7,6899 35,9208 0,000 D^Ierocaipus turbinetus Gaert 0,7988 0,0523 I. 6856 0.5552 0,2359 37130 18.8790 Hopea odorata Roxb, 0,7684 0,0639 15.1 957 272,5124 916,4958 0,4953 8,8782 2,6663 7,6815 12,0340 26,4463 Uthocaipus spp. 9,8866 0,6624 3,990 10,2164 7,8464 I. Sohima reinchli KOIth 2,4177 0,1171 2,3297 0,9585 0,3028 33099 7,7707 4,2684 8,0735 Lagers"'Demia bahnsae Koehne 0,0000 0,0000 0,2709 1,5542 7,5435 3.49 Ok}1910carpus alatus Roxb. 0,7684 0,0360 1,700 0,4515 1,6674 6,662 2,8374 livingIa malayana 011v. Ex A. 0,0000 0,0000 ,. 1700 0,0000 0,0000 0,3955 4,8473 4.7 O Bombax Brioeps Pierre 4,3951 0,908 1,3445 2,3116 3,4168 9.7627 MICheffa champaca Linn. 2,7761 0,1640 4,6750 0,6189 a .2857 3,6942 5,5998 ,4 EUgenia cumini Dinee 2,3963 0,209 1,9178 . 245,4052 . . 140,4662 7,044t 72,8100 21,9428 32,290 56.7723 166,6009 323,757 203,9862 1,448,2057 4,864,5006 Total 164,6736 8,2844 96,1498 29,008 62,3523 Ut O\ Table 2-8 Number and Distribution by Species and Size Classes of Forest Trees in Mixed Deciduous Forest (The 10 most abundant species is shown. ) cm 15.45 cm Total Scientific name 46 - 100 cm > too cm (Sapling) (Seedling) o, of Trees Volume No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees Volume No. o1 Trees Volume No. of Trees No. of Trees (cu. in. ) (cum. ) (cu. in. ) (cu. in. ) rectona grandis Litin. 4,924,918 24 9,613.29 530,546 170,406.30 133,676 196,939.94 1,608,395 416,959.53 351,621 f, 180,137 PIerocaJj>us macrocarpus Kurz 2,096,624 91 , . . 1,228.36 345,010 91,319.02 151,048 216,217.25 2486,249 378,764.62 6,859,160 21,001,167 Temmeiia coalcosa Pierie ex 321,539 17 I 1,527.77 , 186,912 67,980.13 130,872 161,977.32 523,013 241,485.22 675,447 I, 632,202 livingia malayana Offv. Ex A. 28,655 . 25,761.41 250,016 83,175.15 95,752 126,748.18 886,955 235,684.74 2,16249 6 , , 59 241,794 183,544.31 Daitorgia kern^ Oralb I 005 380,997 1,855,301 , . .37 oner 1,427,165 182,987.94 16 4,778,055 27,168,016 . . . . , , 42.81 22,911,220 Total 4,183,367.77 73,052,732 221,659,254 28,702,441 1,307,578.60 8699242 2,384552. ,, 2,309,518 3,631 5 r\ Lfj Table 2-9 Density (N/ha) and Growing Stock (Vonha) of Forest Trees in Mixed Deciduous Forest (The 10 most abundant species is shown. ) GBH (cm) Total > 100 cm (Sapling) (Seedling) 15- 45 cm 46 - too cm Vol ha N/ha Nina Scientific name Vol/ha N/ha Vowha Nina Nina Vol/ha N/ha tou. in. ) (cum. ) (cum. ) (cu. in. ) 170,8654 768 77,2379 6,5280 129,1842 2,964 1,7230 25384 12,695 0,6395 6,8382 Shorea siemensiS Mi'q. 37.0023 52478 50,9072 245,9134 I. 1770 I. 9469 2 25,6517 0,9181 4,4468 68,4348 Xyl^a xylocaipa Taub. 3 8,2746 4,808 26,6263 08762 1,6868 2.08 26452 0,1486 2,4091 TerminalIa alata Heyne ex Roth 4,0866 56558 32 1,5605 30889 I. 0720 1,2342 1.6 69754 03320 32225 3,1165 I. 1324 350,1698 Lagerstroemi'a bahnsae Koehne 18.3948 2,3585 61,5846 12,9554 Damergia kerni Crab 53,9196 941,5800 2,856,9764 213,4028 Other 4,114,8709 46,8076 511,8395 94,3957 ,, 346,5131 6,8534 112,249 30,7346 29.7675 11n 00 ,^ ^ Table 2.10 Number and Distribution by Species and Size Classes of Forest Trees in Dry Dipterocarp Forest (The 10 most abundant s eciesis sh un. ) GBH (cm) Total 15.45 cm 46 - 100 cm > 100 cot Scientific name (Sapling) (Seedling) No. of Trees Volume No. o1 Trees Volume No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees No. of Trees (cu. in. ) (cu. in. ) (cu. in. ) (cu. in. ) Shorea obtusa We". 2,553,880 112,845 1,236,609 389,989.03 203,162 197,296.53 3,993,651 700,130. ,7 10,959,338 58,646,495 Shorea slamensis Miq. 2,228,406 II 3,602 1,040,620 280,166.25 74,282 65,131.62 3,343,308 458,899.95 2,978,533 16,480,514 04:11erocaipus obtu^foilus Tel 486,843 I9,883 217,580 73,053.86 58,782 70,329.35 763,205 163,266.02 3,560,283 9,244,708 TerminalIa elata Heyne ex Roth 835,745 60,252 249,090 66,660.57 10,925 I0,844.24 1,095,760 137,756.71 2,648,264 3,778,941 04;;!erucaipus tuberCUIalus Rox 438,918 14,602 162,202 51,158.55 42,107 52,554.25 643,227 118,315.22 1,591.155 4,436,707 Mehnorrhoea us1181a Wall. 698,060 29,076 190,240 42,402.06 7,254 6,476.78 895,554 77,954.78 2,990,197 4,274,919 Pierocaipus macroca, pus Kurz 573,405 26,713 149,700 31,712.08 4,443 4,964.03 727,548 63,388,64 1,192,352 3,371,315 Caneri'urn subulatum Gulll. 439,737 17,047 I11,575 26,116,28 5,735 4,479.06 557,048 47,641.91 1,582,331 1,688,701 Mitragyna brimonis Groin 51 0,695 2t. 394 I I 2,206 23,489,95 3,454 2,037.46 626,355 46,921.63 1,268,359 1,829, I 19 Hongama ku, 211 IQ',^ 325,817 12,247 88,455 19,046. ,2 5,539 4,425.08 419.8t, 35,718.58 I, 046,796 2,416,387 Other 4,845,417 212,594.62 994,171 232,946.51 88,094 85,603.43 5,927,682 531,144.56 19,482,602 41,887,961 Total I3,936,922 640,255,09 4,552,448 1,236.74, .25 503,778 504, ,41.84 18,993,148 2.38f, ,38.17 49,300,209 148,055,768 O\ 1.71 \ Table 2.11 Density (N/ha) and Yield (Vonha) of Forest Trees in Dry Dipterocarp Forest (The to most abundant species is shown, ) GBH (cm Total (Sapling) (Seedling) ,5 - 45 cm 46.100 cm > 100 cm N/ha Nina Sdentific name Nina Vol/ha Nina Vonha N/ha Vol/ha Nlha Voltia (cu. in. ) (cu. in. ) (cum. ) (cum, ) .4252 460.6010 2,464,8054 Sharea obtusa Waft. 107,3349 19.2867 125,1823 692,6460 Shorea shinensis Miq. 93.6559 ,86/8 149.6322 388,5382 2046/1 04>telocarpus objusifolius Tel 7 111,3017 158,8220 35,1248 Tenninalia elata Heyne ex Roth 6 66,8733 186,4667 18,4469 Dipterocaipus Iuberculatus Rox 2763 125,6725 179,667, Mehnorrhoea usliara Wall 29,3382 .6641 50,124 14,6902 24.0992 Pierocaipus macrocarpus Ku, z .0023 66,5025 70,9730 Canerium subulatum Gulll. 1848/4 720 53,3068 76,8746 Mitragyna brunonis Crab 17,6439 1,5012 43,9949 I01,5564 Hongama kuizii' King 249,297 22,3230 818,8183 1,7604747 Other 6,222,5143 21,1729 21,882 798,2474 100,0749 2,071,9980 585,7435 26.9088 191,3311 51,9780 O\ Q ,^ ^ 61 5. Conclusion The forest inventory in Ngao Demonstration Forest can be stunmadzed as follows: I. The area of Demonstration Forest covers the total of 105,564,26 ha comprising 3 forest types include Dry Evergreen Forest, Mixed Deciduous Forest with Teak and Dry Dipterocarp Forest covering the area of 4,185.44,77,585.26 and 23,793.56 I^ respectively. 2, The estimated overall number of trees is 60,056,981 stems with the volume of 10,558,622.92 in'/}Ia. Saplings and seedling calculated are about 159,831,155 and 487,669,175 individuals respectively. More than 230 tree species are found in the area* Shoreo obtusa is the highest volume species following by Shored stamensis and rectorsa grandisI00,0208 resgectively. in Ina. The stand density is 568,9140 stems!11a and the growing stock is 3. The quantities of trees in each forest type are : 1.1 Dry Evergreen Forest : There are 1,352,633 trees in the study area with the volume of 853,771*82 in'. The stand density is 323,1757 stems/11a and the stocking is 203,9862 in'/}Ia. 1.2 Mixed Deciduous Forest with Teak : There are 39,711,201 trees in the study area with the volume of 7,323,712.92 in'. The stand density is 511,8395 stems/}Ia and the stocking is 94,3957 in'/}Ia, 1.3 Dry Dipterocarp Forest : There are 18,993,148 trees in the study area with the volume of 2,381,138.17 in'. The stand density is 798,2474 stems/}Ia and the stocking is 100,0749 in'/11a. 6. Reference Poemai B. and T. Nanakorm, 1992. Volume Table constructed by Spiegel Relaskop. Demonstration Forest Sub-division, Forest Management Division. Bangkok, Thailand. 67 p. (In Thai). Forest Research Office. 1997. Final Report of Thailand Pilot Project and Activities for AIFM Phase U (1992-1997). Royal Forest Depamnent, Bangkok. 24p. Origson, warng S. 1993. Forest Inventory : Remote Sensing and GIS for Forest Management in Thailand. Appendix 2-1 (continued) GBH (cm) Total ,5 - 45 cm 46 - 100 cm > 100 Gin (Sapling) (Seedling) Scientific name Volume No. of Trees No. of Trees No. of Trees Volume N o. of Trees Volume No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees (cu. in. ) (cum. ) (cum. ) (cum. ) 199,554 115,235.55 138,844 681,933 Lagerstroemia duperreana Pier 103,561 4,123.63 42,000 I3,074.79 53,993 98,037. I3 52,548 77,012.14 285.8t2 113,623.41 I, 742,193 2,489,6 Dinenia spp. 157,205 I 1,502.95 76,059 25,108.33 700,334 I03,614.09 1,509,567 5,104,0 Vilex canesGens Kuiz 472,072 23,334.23 203,532 55,805.85 24,729 24,474.01 35,083 56,391.12 598,950 97,325.21 790,250 I, 989.1 I3 Spondi^s pinnata Kuiz 468,096 18,444.94 95,771 22,489. ,6 50,721.08 531,380 95,027.36 672,581 I. Bombax anceps Pierre 406,953 16,480.54 108,522 27,825.73 I5,906 56,581 86,006.48 o I, 879,647 Ok)telooaipus alatus Roxb. 19,408 948.24 17.1 89 5,253.09 19,984 79,805.15 812,904 80,678.95 843,285 2,071,743 Morinda corela Ham. 605,585 31,247.44 202,627 47,151.57 4,692 2,279.94 318,844 79,228.92 6,095,341 6,924,311 Dabergia dongnaiensis Pierre 187,430 7,416.85 98,350 26,661. ,4 33,064 45,150.93 33,331.65 306,944 75,355.27 348,932 1,860,39 Vanea cinerea King ,78,346 8,730.94 106,245 33,292.69 22,353 112,468 65,303. I B 613,187 I, 996.5, I A10geissus 80umi'nata Wa\. 56,366 3,060.55 32,543 , 2,073.76 23,560 50,168.87 I91,852 64,568.01 226,032 348.7 Afuelia icy, localpa Crab 132,547 7235.18 40,628 I0,499.75 18,678 46,833.08 7,651 6,289.33 597,175 64,053.07 996,975 6,800,771 OratoryIum spp. 497,680 30,488.88 91,844 27,274.85 210,771 58.81 1.74 450,125 1.76 , EUg@nia cumini Druce 131,957 5,869.40 61,359 16,400.20 17,456 36,542.15 56,556.34 934,834 6, , A1bi^Ia odorattssima Benth. 224,098 14,120.32 67,584 22,682.41 17,397 '9753.61 309,080 55,672.94 199,850 805,909 Stereospennum fimbriatum ADC. 64,452 3,210.68 24,201 7,214.22 t 6,460 45,248.04 105.1,3 178,181 55,407.88 436,032 370,332 Allocarpus 18koocha Roxb. 89. , 78 3,649.67 66,980 a7,485.45 22,023 34,272.75 269,031 52,868.97 8.5,261 3,408.64a Lepisanthes terraphylla Red"t. 187.45 7,682.95 59,906 16,470.11 2I , 980 28715.92 428,656 51,971.73 671,462 1,669,416 SIerculia viffosa Roxb. 300,958 13,261.29 I I 9,706 31,523.93 7,991 7,186.50 251,998 51,849.11 907,682 '99,273 Lagerstroemi^ calyculata Kuiz 220,016 I I, 032.20 18,928 6,701.73 13,054 34,115.17 51,329.50 380,997 1,613,759 Minusa velutina HookJ. & Th. 387,042 18,751.22 134,799 29,105.51 4,703 3,472.76 526,544 983.07 726,827 51,188.88 I. 707,221 2.21 1,472 byinprocos glabra F1etch. 595,133 25,742.25 I28,401 24,463.56 3,293 469,192 49,764.77 I, 046,796 2,903,277 Hongarna kuru'I King 335,809 12,601. ,I 124,511 28,536.00 8,872 8,627.66 200,733 48,446.88 227,607 2,056,360 A1bizzia Iebbeck Benth. 133,033 6,239.53 56,283 16,009.23 11,418 26,198.12 48,393.68 1,574,039 7,351,429 Mitetlia brandlsiana Kuiz 141,043 6,604.37 77,741 21,489.22 12,549 20,300.09 231,334 O\ 26,010.28 216.45 47,442.46 1,303,403 3,483,206 t\> Berrya aminoni/Ia Roxb 145,381 5,057.37 49,593 16,374.81 21,171 ^^ Appendix 2-1 Number and Distribution by Species and Size Classes of Forest Trees in Ngao Demonstration Forest GBH (cm) Total 15 - 45 cm 46 - 100 cm Scientific name > too cm (Sapling) (Seedling) No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees No. of Trees (cum. ) (cum. ) (cum. ) (cum. ) Shorea obtusa Wa". 3,108,657 139,650.83 1,491,811 475,250.83 300,470 330,972.12 4,900,937 945,873.77 12,975,587 67,394,130 holea siamensi$ Miq. 3,182,952 I64,010.47 1,574,947 451,577.09 210,123 266,371,47 4,968,022 88, ,959.04 3,330,154 17,660,651 rectona grandis Cmn. 5,069,062 254,187.75 I, 056,599 236,194.34 33,851 29,535.71 6,1595,2 519,917.79 10,110,025 14,270,293 Pierocaipus macrocarpus Ku, z 2,675,215 I 18,658.64 809,499 201,745.21 120,210 151,973.37 3,604,925 472,377.22 5,141,999 22,756,689 Xyffa ky, localpa Taub. 2,139,546 75,892, I2 357999 94,600.57 154,851 219,509.39 2,652,396 390,002. o9 7,382,095 21,836,583 TerminalIa aleta Heyne ex Roth 1,046,161 72,177.47 439,114 136,173.74 144,724 I77,354.80 I, 629,999 385,706.02 3,323,712 5,514,874 TerminalIa comeosa Pierre ex 372.1 I3 19,347.97 168,829 68,096.85 196.94I 297,530.78 737,883 384,975.59 2.153,043 6,127,446 titerbeamus obtusiYor/us Tel 619,033 26200.70 309,957 109,816.54 123,421 176,342.59 I, 052.4i I 312,359.82 4,052,971 11,214,566 living 18 malayana Offv. Ex A. 54,661 2,300.17 55,812 17,700.86 85,823 274,379.46 196,296 294,380.49 370,242 579,228 047terocaipus turbinetus Geert 26,944 f ,713.09 23,905 6,972.48 42,042 225,026.28 92,891 233.71 1.85 234,414 480,355 opea odorata Roxb. I I, 935 583.77 4,584 1,633.01 34,834 225,367. ,7 51,353 227,583.94 87,189 o Lagerstroemia belansae Koehne 92,219 6,333.26 71.602 28,181.52 102,033 I84.01 6.95 265,854 21 8,531.73 380,997 2,149,996 altoigia kerni Oralb 1,134,978 50,060,32 420,744 I I 1,435.60 62,928 44,367.09 1,618,650 205,863.01 4918.473 29,219,186 o10na negrocaipa Crab 2.1 90,355 91,782.38 421,764 97,337.49 14,375 10909.12 2,626,494 200,028.98 4,455,279 18,462,605 Canerium subu/aturn Gunl. 686,947 29,622.24 246,063 64,875.09 51,069 69,608. , 2 984,078 164,105.44 1,987,888 3,045,439 aruga pinnata Roxb, 248,817 15,294.53 88,633 29,691.26 73,593 111,614. ,I 411,043 156,599.91 304,690 1,623,171 tiegyna brunonts Crab I, 040,078 44,973.31 280,980 67,907.36 24,400 25,256.35 I. 345,458 138,137.02 3,284,684 4,002,798 I 00arpus Spp. 291,876 I 1,543.57 139,926 40,882.77 60,185 85,023.26 491,987 137,449.60 2,677,186 9,331,798 chieichera oreosa Merr 564,040 21,126.38 142,688 37,636. , 3 52,762 78,254.37 759,490 137,016.88 6,210,357 15,019,215 04:, re, DCa!pus tubercubtus Rox 455,853 I5,594.80 173,684 55,203.75 52,539 65,499. ,6 682,076 136,297.70 1,591,155 4,836,408 albergla cultra!a G, ah. Ex Be 782,656 32778.95 211,283 53,550.52 46,289 44,170.48 I, 040,228 I30,499.95 2,878,019 15,262,658 arianga bar^^ F1het & Gagn 497,163 34,812.68 158,806 47,715.11 41,152 47,635.87 697,121 130,163.66 761,284 2,337,384 elanorrtioea usitata Wall. 822,004 34,936.30 255,391 61,497.14 21,409 25,479.79 I, 098,804 121,913.23 3,276266 5,265,308 L8nnea o010mandelica Merr. 618,404 25.4 I 7.66 158,638 40,391.24 37,440 50,429.45 814,482 I 16,238.35 2,271,727 2,329,560 co MIChel/a champaca Linn. 196,196 8,617.49 166, I 45 41,843,97 \O 53,210 65,283.77 415,550 115,74523 1,141,333 5,020,945 . Appendix 2-, (continued) GBH (cm) Total (Seedling) 15 - 45 cm 46 - 100 cm > 100 cm (Sapling) No. of Trees Scientific name No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees Volume (cum. ) (cum. ) (cum. ) (cum. ) 1,864,503 12,158. 47,658 8,263.22 694 861.16 347,046 20,498.17 CFOton oblongifofius Roxb. 298,694 I I, 373.79 712 . Paremi'chelia banjoni'iHu 30,559 1,939.94 ,51 . o , Perl'nan ariamense Hance o 0.00 7731 , Buchanania fallYd16 Roxb. 152,313 4,675.31 43, . 7 310,415 10,937.61 27.31 Randia desycajpa Bath. f. 2 . SIercuffa gullata Roxb. 60,948 2,645.76 2. . 0.00 2,616 1,070.16 2,453 15,386.86 5.0 Ficus spp. o , 89.98 , 57,653 2,746.19 28,365 8,376.45 3,964 4,776.83 vitex peduncularis We". ex Sc 11 . Memecylon soulellatum Naud. 269,538 I1,019.38 29.4 . 0.00 1,294.06 3,951 14,378.83 6,987 Sandoricum koejape Merr o 3,036 I. 5,694.11 6,320 8,591.40 48,456 . Ebeocarpus stipularis Bl 20,450 1,255.88 21,685 8,664.15 1,952 I , I 23.38 186.61 Gassia garrettiana Crab 137,311 5,624.18 47,347 , 318.22 2,024.67 4,256 12,414.84 17,067 . Mangil^in calorieura Kuiz 5,860 6,951 Quercus spp 37,641 1,786.03 7 . . , Terminalia chebula Retz. 65,556 5,066.76 . . 5 6,765.90 1,706 1,530.37 141,788 ,4,294.81 We ridlandia paniculata ADC. 115,569 5,998.54 24,513 , . 4 , . Beuhinia saccocaly, x Pierre 97,825 4,443.50 4,393.23 3,034 3,205.64 156,274 13,467 Alangium hexapetalum Warig 133,443 5,869.06 19,798 , 702 1,299.55 102,941 . Lagerstroemia macrocarpa Wa". 78,186 4,895.64 24,053 6,322.41 , 3096 I I. 458.03 Isc 0 18 I v , o I03.31 O 3951 7,8831 20,400 12,089.70 00na 01 Ia 87,189 7649 5,063.08 88,231 11,706.17 204,396 12Zl I 566 1,367.02 177.1, I 11,616.14 1,400,311 1,835,389 yinen I 974 1,667.62 105,734 11,537.39 28,447 630,927 anc 0.00 222,836 11,133.26 435,928 409,792 20,731 7800.36 21,104 3,332.89 o O\ Symplocos racemosa Roxb ^. ^^ Appendix 2-1 (continued) GBH (cm) Total 15 - 45 cm 46 - 100 cm Scientific name > too cm (Sapling) (Seedling) No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees No. of Trees (cum. ) (cu. in. ) (cu. in. ) (cum. ) Sohima waMchii KOIth 10.1 19 490.28 9,751 2,772.60 12,971 42,760.22 32,841 46,023.11 101,193 64,325 Terminal18 norovenulosa Pierr 158,930 8,539.72 72,570 21,605.69 14,916 14,905.77 246,415 45,051. ,7 432,652 726,504 Daberg, ^ oilyeri Gamble 81,190 3,238.21 34,054 9,750.18 18,969 31 ., 14.28 134,213 44. to2.66 777,548 5,416,435 Vilex pinnata Linn. 142,989 6,953.48 67,451 20,432.96 13,727 15,732.22 224,167 43,118.66 373,258 2,746,853 Careya sphaerica Roxb. 172,441 6,662.12 63,230 18,638.59 14258 15,118.67 249,929 40,419.38 2,507,871 10,469,991 Terminalia bellerica Roxb. 17,968 831.47 17,264 6,782. ,I 23,732 32,510.97 58,964 40,124.55 364,876 543,134 Phyl/arithus columnari$ Mue" A 642,209 25,199.06 76,337 14,332.64 258 372.72 718,804 39,904.41 1,868,434 4,972,565 Daibergia noribunda Crab 76,179 3,372.36 81,188 24,370.19 14,123 I 1,477.90 171,490 39,220.44 1,303,609 6,805,524 Haldina cordliblia Ridsd. 279,397 I 1526.44 68,546 I7,054.39 5,918 8,308.65 353,861 36,889.49 I, 417,462 1.31 1,978 At>honsea 918biifol^a Crab 152,995 7,950.97 61,848 16,335.68 8,713 12, , 16.20 223,557 36,402.86 226,032 2,159,000 Ternst, oemla gymnanthera Bedd. 55,172 2,498.81 30,579 11,727.09 , 8,658 21,887.16 104,409 36,113.06 351,621 448,244 Erythrina subumbrans MeIT. 64,179 3,340.27 59,141 18,642.26 I3,949 13,863.28 137,269 35,845.81 I03,310 222,047 Lagerstroemia undulata Koehne 156,147 6,407.52 59,077 14,940.46 9,397 , I. 622.97 224,621 32,970.95 561,434 261,566 o c an rone serfuiata Seem. 25,186 819.69 13,474 3,986.02 13,767 27,196.46 52,427 32,002.17 258,274 307,705 emandoa adenophy/Ia SIeenis 162,093 8,310.43 45,881 10,896,79 6,642 8,778.86 214,616 27,986.08 641,854 2,506,551 Bride!Ia pierrei Gagnep, 316,980 14,285.68 50,456 I 1,910.89 1,694 925.21 369,130 27,121.78 174,466 461,505 Cussia fistula Lihn. 174,668 I2,001.86 50,076 12,998.12 2,646 I, 019.62 227,390 26,019.61 485,881 2,647,609 Diospyros in o1"$ Grift: 137,871 6,231.46 34,695 9,619,33 5,831 9,153.02 178,397 25,003.82 361,584 1,454,165 Warsura robusta Roxb. 102,508 2,941.41 36,503 10,824.76 8,037 10,977.80 147,047 24,743.98 343,328 1,727,533 11ychnos nux-vomica L, hn. 387,371 16,527.53 46,551 7,959.43 o 0.00 433,922 24,486.96 1,540,599 2,547,064 Antidesma jauntoffum Airy Sha 468,975 I6,740.57 40,732 7,603.62 o 0.00 509,707 24,344.20 2,193,425 2,803,274 huk, ash veluliria hight & Am 74,800 2,632.78 26,782 7,673.23 9,037 13,771.16 110,619 24,077. ,7 51,655 496,435 Skihonodon Gees!fineus Griff; I 19,419 4,021.32 23,501 6,788.70 9,953 12,657. I9 152,873 23,467.21 403,276 716,630 Wrtghffa tomentosa Roem. &. Sc 247,044 10,087.60 4I, 404 8,673.40 3,922 4,299.07 292,370 23,060.06 529,899 *r; 7.29.123 ^ Parkb 1610phylla Ku, z 177,913 8,461.53 57783 13,038.49 1,566 1,095.63 237,262 22,595.65 87,189 826,293 Appendix 2-, (continued) GBH (cm) Total (Seedling) 15.45 cm 46 - 100 cm > 100 cm (Sapling) Scientific name Volume No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees No. of Trees No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees (cum. ) (cum. ) (cum. ) (cum. ) 1,117,927 4,702.66 2,550 3,590.83 61,184 I0,904.22 181,532 PIGrasma javanica Bl. 42,285 2,610.73 16,349 0.00 3,036 9,808.12 3,036 9,808.12 Pinus kesfy/a Royle ex Gotdon o 0.00 o 3,6173 2,515 3,253.34 68,617 9,204.58 . , Litsea glumosa 0.8. Robihson 5I. 242 2,489.51 14,860 2,799 4,375.20 55,887 9,147.57 Stereospermum neuronthum Kuiz 42,883 1,871.05 10,206 2,901.32 4,102 5,058.42 44,433 8,816.07 Gineiina arborea Roxb. 29,627 1,127.44 10,703 2,630.20 999 0.00 96,516 8,701.27 168,862 Ehrelia Iaevi's Roxb. 77,894 3,855.27 I7,623 4,845.99 2,934,184 3,461.63 258 165.99 194,975 8,650.89 3,040,355 Gardenia sootepnsis Hutch. 179,290 5,023.27 15,426 669 78.76 258 8,465.91 927 8,544.68 Terraineles nudiilora R. Br o 0.00 637.70 3,276 7,048.01 27,404 8,390.78 101,193 A1bizzi61ebbeckoides Benth. 21,160 705.07 2,967 2,544 2,468.67 90,630 8,180.73 454,931 1.5 Diospyros montana Roxb 75,110 2,503.75 I2,976 3,208.32 1,401 a, 564.9i 59,127 8.1 88ccaruea ramMora Lour. 35,496 1,960.18 22,230 4,613.19 5,514.84 322 336.23 54,814 7,359.80 375,902 Ilex umbellata Loesn 35.016 1,508.73 19,476 I. 3,294.9, 1,130 681.38 106,408 7,250.56 519,324 Phyllanlhus embfica Linn. 95,574 3,274.26 9,703 2,743 1,283.64 44,022 , Hesperethusa crenulata Roem. 28,994 1,495.28 12,285 4,272.04 3,197.64 1,954 1,808.41 82,472 6,978.31 Broussonetia papyri'lee Vent. 70,414 1,972.27 10,104 2,547 1,773.21 59,396 6,600.06 , Holerrhena antidysenterica Wal 45,271 1,661.24 I 1,578 3,165.61 2,296.56 2,233 3,610.86 I5,623 6,246.73 . , Protium serratum Engier 5,860 339.3i 7,530 1,086 4,759.33 5,728 6,117.74 Dracontomelon inarigilerum 81. o 000 4,643 1,358.41 1,367 2,167.93 I5,995 6,073.46 138, . Garcihia thoreliiPierre 5,165 300. , I 9,462 3,605.41 4, 543.84 3,309 5,226.50 I0.914 5,906.07 192,976 Nephe"Urn hypoleucum Kuiz 6,433 135.73 1,172 2,140.25 2,770 3,367.28 16,693 5,605. I Polyallhia vindis Crai'b 6,433 97.77 7,490 504.25 3,465 4,160.32 I4,664 . Shorea roxburghii Goon 8,443 726.67 2,757 1,842.99 2,067 3,082.24 I8,243 5,070.69 Lophopetalum warnchii Kuiz 9,077 145.45 7,099 967.45 2,743 3,417.38 9,718 4. rocera Benth 4 359 285.54 2,616 o o 993.92 6,429 1,581.60 2,486 , ,92692 20,636 4,502.43 O\ Adinandra Integerrime T. Anders 11 721 O\ - --^- Appendix 2-I (continued) GBH (cm) Total 15 - 45 cm 46 - 100 cm Scientific name > 100 cm (Sapling) (Seedling) No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees Volume No. o1 Trees Volume No. of Trees No. of Trees (cu. in. ) (cu. in, ) (cu. in. ) (cu, in. ) IPIan us Omen OSUS Uiz 5,165 7593 2,548 758.86 2,487 3,615.85 10,201 4,450.64 o 87,189 in ICUm en. 107,885 4826.84 o 0.00 o 0.00 107,885 4,326.84 574,078 345,463 lop .I 1,107.53 8,920 1,635.72 1,528 1,531.56 42,570 4,274.82 240,037 883,564 I spyroS CaS anea ec . o 0.00 6,867 2,090.26 1,435 1,932.50 8,303 4,022.76 199,850 o elsea kuizii Kosterm. 23,455 1,260.91 6,989 1,291.92 506 1,336.97 30,950 3,889.79 331,037 101,193 IeS 18 40,477 2,306.20 3908 700.7t 1,012 836.21 45,397 3,843.12 101,193 101,193 10 on ro ustus Kuiz 78,504 2,583.43 6,949 I, 170.93 o 0.00 85,452 3,764.36 103,731 366,171 ammea s amensis Kos!eon. 4,359 268.54 4,048 1,631.14 2,024 1,808.63 10,431 3,708.31 o 261,566 enan era pavonina L", n. 24,058 1,117.82 7,887 1,671.20 1,649 917.75 33,594 3,706.77 234,414 520,483 rige at aspcataBl. Var. o 0.00 o 0.00 2,057 3,508.05 2,057 3,508.05 o o elientha suevts Pierre. 23,691 1,317.69 9,553 1,927.24 o 0.00 33,244 3,244.93 602,835 761,656 err. I 10n SPJC Qinl 4,359 268.54 5,626 2,274.81 764 603.40 I0,750 3,4675 o o reinna tomenlosa Wilki. 22,441 870.64 5,891 1,567.67 775 657.90 29,107 3,096.21 199,850 o ina cinerea ar . 2,583 122.68 2,573 809.47 1,815 2,107.10 6.97f 3,039.25 o 64,325 I e Ia euCan a urz I0,220 682.06 7,165 1,794.64 517 557.77 17,902 3,034.47 o o arenephe/I'm longifollo/alum 5,860 I I 1.93 1,033 358.23 1,717 2,541.68 8,610 3.01 1.84 317,057 298,739 Qin re urn quadrangulare Kurz 7,748 355.13 10,848 2,593.69 o 0.00 18,596 2,948.82 o o Izzla chinensis Men. o 0.00 o 0.00 506 2,712.64 506 2,712.64 o o eg/e marine/OS 001r. 20,553 863.16 6,393 1,572.04 258 225.78 27,204 2,660.97 361,584 208,149 Opea errea Ierre o 0.00 517 233.32 2,171 2,293.28 2,688 2,526.61 o o nanihus Inahysa AISton 44,239 2,129.23 1,815 246.68 o 0.00 46,054 2,375.91 165.5f 9 64,325 Is Inn. - " 1,779.59 2,422 541.00 o 0.00 40,166 2,320.59 I 17,207 1,023,133 mooiera cau eta o11. ginsl o 0.00 517 55.22 1,172 2,212.28 1,689 2,267.50 o o FICUS racemosa Linn. 27,000 930.47 I 172 3 . t\ Cordia inhaya Kerr 5,165 404.46 5,985 1,787.09 1,608 0.00 \O 12758 2/9/, 55 o 87189 Appendix 2.1 (continued) GBH (cm) Total 15 - 45 cm 46 - 100 cm > 100 cm (Sapling) (Seedling) Scientific name No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees No. of Trees (cum. ) (cum. ) (cum. ) (cum. ) Eriolaena can donei Wall. 30,571 8,983 5,821 1,371.40 258 000 36,651 2,191.23 138,844 608,642 o Gardenia eiythoclada Kurz 41,424 1,616.68 2,984 397.96 o 0.00 44,408 2,014.64 662,242 Dabergia norescens Kuiz o 0.00 1,388 75506 436 I. 078.18 1,824 1,833.24 87,189 461,417 o Annana toxicari6 Lesch. o 0.00 o 0.00 942 1,749.37 942 1,749.37 o AIStom^ scholaris R. Br. o 0.00 3,903 926.02 764 798.69 4,668 1,724.71 64,325 o o Millettia kangensis Crab o 0.00 872 1,788 436 1,564.30 1,308 1,682.18 o o o 0881anopsis spp. o 0.00 o 0.00 1,172 1,647.46 t. 172 1,647.46 o Diospyros ehretioides Wall. o 0.00 3,216 911.99 777 681.83 3,993 1,593.82 o Kmeria duperreana Dandy o 000 o 0.00 506 I. 575.13 506 1,575.13 303,580 101,193 Meltosma pinnata Walp. o 0.00 o 0.00 334 1,494.25 334 1,494.25 154,964 I03.31 O o Utsea cubeba Pers. D 0.00 3,036 1,452.83 o 0.00 3,036 1,452.83 o o Firmiana colorata R. Br. 5,165 369.85 517 121.80 258 959.05 5,940 1,450.70 51,655 PIuchea Indiba Less I0,331 607.72 2,066 588.40 258 235.21 12,655 1,431.33 o o o 202,387 Pierocymbiumjavani'cum R. Br. o 0.00 517 159.36 506 1,251.36 1,023 1,410.71 o o Stercufrb pexa Pierre 18,138 1,351.12 o 000 o 0.00 I8.1 38 1,351.12 o o Cordia 910bifora V!/ WSmi'th o 0.00 3,616 859.59 436 438.47 4,052 1,298.06 o 168,862 fjcus hi^pida Linn. f. 13,547 275.93 1,388 427.23 1,035 587.88 15,971 1,291.04 o 375.48t SIreblus asper Cour. 7,748 412.46 2,777 4,705 517 393.35 I I. 042 1,222.86 o o Butea monosperma Ktze. 14,303 699.92 517 52.53 436 464.54 I5,256 1,217.00 o o grinamomum porrec!urn Kosterm. o 0.00 o 0.00 506 1,137.11 506 1,137. It o o Aphanamixis polystachya Parker 9,077 352.22 1,815 744.58 o 000 I0,892 1,096.80 o o Polyalthia suberosa Thw. 29,978 879.34 1,999 203.25 o 0.00 31,976 1,082.59 o 87,189 Symplocos hurl'na AISton o 0.00 2,616 1,076.43 o 0.00 2,616 1,076.43 o o Mala azedarach Libn. 4,359 379.71 3,742 684.27 o 0.00 8,102 1,063.98 24665 3,171 784.27 436 0.00 8,772 1,030.92 o o PIerospermum semisagi'1181um Ha 5,165 O\ co ,.^ Appendix 2-I (continued) GBH (cm) Total 15 - 45 cm 46 - 100 cm Scientific name > 100 cm (Sapling) (Seedling) No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees No. of Trees (cum. ) (cum. ) (cum. ) (cum. ) Ginnamomum mers 81. 9,015 345.00 1,287 655.28 o 0.00 I0,302 1,000.28 o o Cordia dichotoma Forst. 11 993.92 29,302 o 0.00 o 0.00 29,302 993.92 o o Redermachera 19nea Steenis 431.77 18,436 2,032 554.45 o 0.00 20,467 986.22 487,599 ,, 998,232 Mallotus phil^pensis Muell. A o 0.00 o 0.00 586 900.85 586 900.85 o o 65.60 Duabanga grandi170ra Wet:I. 2,583 2,045 282.07 656 549.7i 5,284 89738 508,083 51,655 o 0.00 Casearta grew, eelblia Vent. o 0.00 506 885.85 506 885.85 o o Bauhinia variegata Linn 275.50 5,319 1,936 542.36 o 0.00 7,254 817.86 o o SIerculia Qinata Wall. 14,352 413.90 872 342.48 o 0.00 15,224 756.37 174,378 199,850 Cell^^ letrandra Roxb o 0.00 ,, 999 7,906 o 0.00 1,999 719.06 o o o Vilex glabrata R. Br. 0.00 1,744 263.83 436 421.60 2,180 685.43 o o Polyalthb obtusa Oralb o 0.00 o 0.00 506 624.82 506 624.82 o o Alangium chinense Rehd. 274.80 5,165 1,033 324.03 o 000 6,199 598.83 o o 457.84 517 Bridala relusa Spreng 14,380 130.64 o 0.00 14,896 588.48 234,414 234,414 Grewia microcos Cmn. 2,583 114.16 2,205 466.76 o 0.00 4,788 580.91 51,655 I I 7,207 Garo^Ia cowa Roxb o 0.00 1,172 573.49 o 0.00 1,172 573.49 64,325 o 270.7i Madhuca pierrei Lain. 7,978 1,064 299.43 o 0.00 9,041 570.14 o o Acorusa villosa Baill. o 0.00 o 0.00 436 548.03 436 54803 o o Soleropyrum reinchianum Am. 16,780 540.49 o 0.00 o 0.00 16,780 540.49 234,414 117,207 01hnamomum belojghota Sweet 3,216 237.04 2,387 287.59 o 0.00 5,603 524.63 o 662,074 o 8800aruea parviflora Muell. Arg 0.00 1,999 523.2f o 0.00 1,999 523.2i o o Corona auriculata Oralb o 0.00 ,. 550 509.99 o 0.00 1,550 509.99 o o Hongama longifolia Roxb o 0.00 1,037 494.28 o 000 1,037 494.28 o 103,731 Xanthophyllum siamensis Clam 9,525 486.48 o 0.00 o 000 9,525 486.48 o o MOSua tonea Lihn. o 000 o 0.00 436 464.54 436 464.54 61 0,322 o Fleeouitia Ihdica Meif. O\ 2,659 101.58 1,745 355.56 o 0.00 4,404 457.15 o o ^ Appendix 2-, (continued) GBH (cm) Total 15 - 45 cm 46 - 100 cm > 100 cm (Sapling) (Seedling) Scientific name No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees No. of Trees (cum. ) tsu. in. ) (cum. ) (cum. ) 453.09 o o PhDebe laneeolata Nees o 0.00 517 I39.83 258 31326 775 44838 o o Rancha ungi'nosa Poi'r 8,723 448.38 o 0.00 o 0.00 8,723 415.45 o 103,310 Dollchandrone spathacea Sohum o 0.00 872 4,545 o 0.00 872 o o Beuhihia racemosa Laink. o 0.00 284 I70.23 258 24001 543 4,024 o 0.00 384.36 I 17,207 o Suregada inulMorum Balll I I. 721 300.05 872 84.31 12,593 373.26 o o Acacia microcephala Grab. o 0.00 1,033 373.26 o 0.00 1,033 258 348.2t o o Drypetes hamanensi's MeFF. o 000 o 0.00 258 348.21 313.86 o o Nauclea orientafis Linn. o 0.00 872 313.86 o 0.00 872 436 307.17 o o 01aoxylon Indibum Hassk. o 0.00 o 0.00 436 307.17 278.37 o o Gardenia turgida Roxb. 5,860 278.37 o 0.00 o 0.00 5,860 000 276.84 o o SIerculia hypochra PI^rr 4,359 41.41 1,999 23542 o 6,358 o o Grewia asi6t^68 Lihn o 000 o 0.00 436 267.19 436 267.19 o o Lagerstroemib tomentosa Presl o 0.00 517 266.02 o 0.00 517 266.02 252.75 o EUgenia euneura Oral'b o 0.00 517 252.75 o 0.00 517 51,655 252.75 o o Polyalthi6 asterleila Ridl o 0.00 517 25275 o 0.00 517 233.45 o o Perilace burmani'o8 Kuix 2,583 140.24 872 93.20 o 0.00 3,455 o o Ixora o1bdela Oralb 5,187 229.25 o 000 o 0.00 5,187 22925 2,308 o o newi'a nudifiora Litin. 2,583 213.08 o 0.00 o 0.00 2,583 203.25 199,850 o Heterophragma sulfureum Kurz o 0.00 1,999 203.25 o 0.00 1,999 0.00 166.46 o 101,193 Daibergia COGhihchinensiS Pier 5,060 166.46 o 0.00 o 5,060 o o Seinecaipus CDChihchinensi's Eng o 0.00 1,404 145.67 o 0.00 1,404 145.67 000 517 135.23 o o Caesalpinia sappan Libn o 0.00 517 135.23 o 872 128.69 o o Maerua semensi$ Pax o 0.00 872 128.69 o 000 I22.68 o 202,387 EUgeni6 siamensi's Crab 2,583 I22.68 o 0.00 o 0.00 2,583 o 000 532 I 12.49 o 0.00 532 I 12.49 o 53,185 Diospyros caulMora 81. .Q o ,^ ^ - Appendix 2-1 (continued) GBH (cm) Total 15 - 45 cm 46 - too cm > 100 Gin Scientific name (Sapling) (Seedling) No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees Volume No. of Trees No. of Trees (cu. in. ) (cum. ) (cum. ) (cum. ) Ochna inlegerrima Merr. 2,583 31.77 872 80.04 o 0.00 3,455 111.81 246,788 275,235 Crateva religiosa Ham. o 000 872 107.59 o 0.00 872 107.59 o 87,233 ^at^in coohinchihense Pierre o 0.00 517 105.22 o 000 517 105.22 o o Diospyros siamensis 88kh o 0.00 517 90.03 o 000 517 90.03 o o Fyrenaria camel"mora Kuiz. 4,362 83.31 o 0.00 o 0.00 4,362 83.31 o o Other 570,937 23,467.44 176,645 50,612.70 40,627 86,286.51 788,210 160,366.65 3,868,837 8,157,611 Total 43,328,594 I, 982,507.59 I3,654, I I9 3,743,093.21 3,074,268 4,833,022. ,2 60,056,981 10,558,622.92 159,831,155 487,669,175 . ^ r\ 72 FART 111 Socio-economic Survey in Nga. o Demonstration Forest , 73 Socio-economic Survey in Ngao Demonstration Forest Arian Kitakom, Viroj Puangpakisiri Khunawut Lungkasit, Manut Ratanapirom Chakrapan Sku!merit, Surapong Chaweepak Sithapom Eadthong and Phusin Ketanond , Forest Research Office Ro al Forest De armient Forest M Ginent and Econotriic Research Divisio ABSTRt^\. CT The purpose of this study is to investigate socio-economic con itions, exp pi. resources, and attitudes towards forest officers and forest management activities o e people situated in the Ngao Demonstration Forest, Lampang rovince. g were made using a questionnaire as a tool to sample and co ect a a q a I households from 31 villages situated in and around the Demonstration orest. in ings a lied to fomiulate the work plan for establishment of a Model Forest for Sustaina e ores Management at Ngao Demonstration Forest, The results have shown that the local people in the Demonstration Forest area, gao is ri , Lampang province, generally, have as their main occupation, agricu ure an The local people 's income is usually quite low due to low agricu ura p p , unemployment and lack of agricultural land. The local people are actua y aware importance of the forest and understand forestry law and regu ations. owever, forest encroachment, wildlife hunting and NTFPs collection still go on 11/6ga y, creating main roblems at the Ngao Demonstration Forest. This is mainly due to t e ac a people ' s lifestyle relies on natural forest resources, inclu ing an , woo , products. It is estimated that the local people at Demonstration Forest consulne e o o g ount of forest resources, log and sawed wood for construction (24,645 cu or year), e wood (8,457 CUIm, /year), charcoal(33,827 kg/year);wild animals (9,665 animals/year), am 90 (362,430 cullirs/year), bamboo shoot (805,803 kg/year), rattan (1,208 meters/year), wi mushroom '(68,802 kg, /year), wild vegetables (44,700 kg/year), wild fruits (6,041 kg year), medicinal plants (2,416 kg/year), edible insects (6,041 kg/year), fishes (10,873 g year), honey (1,208 hives/year), Ian (1,208 kg/year) and resin (121 kg/year). However, over-exploitation of forest resources, which results Tom an increase p p as well as inappropriate use with regardless of conservation concept, can cause e eri of the forest as well as drastic decreases in both quality and quantity o wi i e an Thus, if there are no any adjustments and improvements to forest managemen me gy by applying sustainable yield concepts, the forest area can e expecte o con ' the neat future and local community will perhaps confront s onages o woo products. 74 I. Introduction With support from International Tropical Timber Organization (ITTO), the pre-project "Development of A Model Forest for Sustainable Forest Management iiT Thailand (PPD 5199 Rev. I (F)) was established to promote sustainable forest management in Thailand. The main activities are the establislnnent of data base for playming and develo merit of nTanagement plan for model forest using sustainable management practices. This survey research aims 'to investigate socio-economic conditions of local people and examine relationships between the local people and nearby forest resources, attitudes towards the forestry sector as well as make recommendations for future management of local communities situated in and along the boundary of the Ngao Demonstration Forest, Ngao District, Lampang Province. The findings will be used for formulating a work plan for the establis}rrnent of a model forest for sustainable forest management at I^;gao Demonstration Forest. A questionnaire was used as a tool for data collection. The details of the questionnaire and the methodology used are discussed later. 2. Study Area The Ngao Demonstration Forest situates in Ngao District, Lampang Province and lies between 18' 21' and 19' 3.5' north, 99' 45' and 100' 7' east, The total area is about 1,751.59 kin' (Forest Research Office, 1997). The target group of the study is the population living in communities'situated in or along the boundary of I\!gao Demonstration Forest, Ngao District* Lampano Province. 3. Methodology 3.1 Research Tool To address the research objectives, a questionnaire was developed and used as a tool for this study, It was divided into seven sections: general information; land holdin ; financial conditions; forest resources utilization; knowledge about forest laws and regulations; attitude towards forest!'forest official and recommendation for future forest management. These include close-ended and open-ended questions. 3.2 Sampling According to the latest survey in 1999, there were 62 villages located in I O sub-districts at Ngao Demonstration Forest. The population was 12,081 households with approximately 48,600 people (Ngao District Office, 1999). To assess the actual SOCio- economic conditions of local people and examine their uses of forest resources as well as attitudes towards forestry sector, purposive and random samplings (Poonlaptawee, 1987; Nikam^10n, 1996) were applied. One thousand and thirty-three households in thirty-one communities out of the total of sixty-two communities in the N ao Demonstration Forest were selected for data collection as follows. .. ^ 75 At sub-district level: To obtain samples from different parts of Ngao Demonstration Forest, data collection was undertaken place in all 10 sub-districts of Ngao Demonstration Forest. In each sub-district, at least one village was selected for sampling using the questionnaire survey. ^!: Thirty-one cornmunities, accounting for 50 percent of a communities at NgaO Demonstration Forest, were selected based on locations and ethnic groups. These coriumunities represent villages of the northern, central and southern regions of Ngao Demonstration Forest, including villages situated along their boundary. It covers samples representing different ettmic groups and levels of developments At household level: Approximately 20 percent of the total house o s in eac village were interviewed. This represented 1,033 households out of the totals, 170 households of the thirty-one selected cornmiiiiities (Table 3-I). 3.3 Data Collection The actual questionnaire survey was conducted in February and March 2000. Local students were employed to assist in the field data collection. The total number of questionnaire interviews conducted in the thirty-one villages was 1,033 households. Village leaders were interviewed, while the others were randomly selected from vinagers staying at home at that time. The respondents were mainly heads of the household or spouse. In general, the researcher and field assistants conducted interviews and recorded data following a set schedule at each house or village hall. 3.4 Data Analysis The analysis of data was descriptive, It presents quantitative data derived from the questionnaire survey. The SPSS software was used as a main tool to analyze the data for this section. The descriptive statistics (i. e. frequency, means) of socio-economic characteristics of respondents, forest resource utilization, attitudes towards forestry sector, . and similar variables were computed and transformed into statistical fonnat (i. e. frequency tables) 4. Results 4.1 General characteristics of the population 4.1. I Samples All samples taken for this study account for 1,033 persons (households), representing 667 males (64.6%) and 366 females (35.4%). The majority of the samples (62.8%) are from the family head, whereas the rest are from spouses (31. I%) and relatives (6.1%). Most samples (66.4%) range from 32 to 57 years of age (Table 3-2) with an average of 48 years of age. The minimum and maximum ages of the samples are 19 and 86 years, respectively 4.1.2 Household size Most households (63.1%) consist of 4-6 members, whereas the households with 1-3 members account for 27.2% (Table 3-2). Large households, having over 7 members account for 9,7910 of the total. Based on the total samples, the number of household members averages 4.44 with the minimum and maximum of I and 14 members, respectively. 4.1.3110usehold labors For all samples, the number of labors per household averages 2.36 with the minimum and maximum number of I and I O, respectively. For most samples (69.2%), each household has 1-21abors, whereas the households having 3-4 and more than Slabors account for 22.0 and 5.7% respectively. However, some samples (3.1%) have no labors and their Iivino counts on younger family members or bank interest 4.1,4 Education Based on the survey, most respondents have an educational background of only primary school (grade 1-6), accounting for 82.5% (69.4% for grade 4 and 13.1% for grade 6). Only 7.9% of the samples have an education level higher than secondary school (grade 7-12). However, 9.6% of the samples is reported to have no formal education (Table 3-3). For educational levels of the household members, most of them (54.5%) have the highest education only at compulsory level (primary school), 32.4% for grade 4 and 22.1% for grade 6 or other similar level. Other household members (33.5%) have higher education of secondary school, 17.8% for grade 7-8 and 15.7% for grade 9-12. Only 3.6% of the members receive bachelor degree or hioher. The survey also indicated that there is an estimate of 1.49"0 of the samples where the household members have no fonnai educational background (Table 3-3). 4.1.5 Domicile and migration Based on domicile of the samples, the study revealed that 80.1% of the samples are permanent residents of the area and 19.9% are immigrants. Among immigrants, 10% 79 jinmigrated from different sub-districts within the same district and 2.4% minigrated from other districts in the same province. 11nmigrants from other provinces and regions account for 5.9% and 1.69'0 respectively (Table 3-4). According to the need for future migration, 95.9% showed Do desire to Ginigrate, whereas only 1.5% are willing to move to other area (Table 3-4). Approximately 68.8% of the immigrants stated that their immigration are due to the following reasons; mainly, to persue the faintly (parent I spouse), the minor reasons are to search for new land and persuasion of friends/relatives, which account for 17.0% and 14.2% respectively. Most mumigrants moved to the village during 1962-1997 with peak immigration in 1974-1985 (Table 3-5) 4.1.6 Occupations In general, the population main occupations are related to agriculture, accounting for 77.2 16 of the total samples, whereas the primary minor occupations is as casual labor 04.9%). Furthermore, population from 3 villages out of the 31 surveyed villages possesses main occupation on agi. iculture, these including Haeng Tai, BO Si Liarn and Khun Haeng villages erable 3-6). For supplemental occupations, 46.29"0 of the population is of casual labor. Others include collection of NTFPs (4.5%) and agriculture (4.2%). About 45.5% of population appears to have no supplemental occupation (Table 3-6). Important economic crops include coin, Soya bean, cotton, garlic, ginger, mango and 11chee. Actually, coin, Soya bean, cotton and garlic are produced in the low land or paddy field following rice harvesting, whereas plantation of Iichee and ginger is popular among hill tribe people situated in the high land, especially, in Ban BO Si Liarn village, Compared to other crops, there is a small number of paddy field since rice is produced for household consumption only. 4.1.7 Sources of water supply Based on the study of demand and supply of water for households, the results showed that most samples consume natutal water resources, 66.5% of the samples using shallow wells, 21.8% using percolating water and 6.4% using underground water (Table 3-7). 4.1.8 Light sources For light sources during night period, most samples (89.3%) nonnally obtain the light through public electricity. Other light sources can be attained from oil lamp (8.5%) and gas lamp (1.2%) (Table 3-8) 80 4.1.9 Obtaining of community information Most samples nounally obtain general infonnation ititougli televisions (76.4%).' The other infonnation sources are radio and village broadcasting, which account for I I. I% and 7.9%, respectively (Table 3-8). ' ' For obtaining forestry information, most villagers in the area are informed b television well (29.8% of the samples). However, others obtain infonnation from village leaders and forest officers, accounting for 19.8 and 15.9%, respectively. (Table 3-8). 4.2 Land holding 4.2. I Land ownership Based on survey on present land ownership, it is estimated that 71.3% of the po ulation hold the land in the following different categories; 8.3% holdin less than I Tai, 31,79' holding I - 5 rat, 15.7% holding 5 - 10 rai and 15.1% holding more than 10 Tai. The surve also revealed that in Ban Haeng Tai 94% of people own land. This is the highest ercenta e whereas the lowest is only 50% in Ban Mae Kiw Tarn (Table 3-9). 4.2.2 Land obtaining Based on the survey on land obtaining, most people obtain the land through inheritance (47.9%). Land obtaining trough forestland encroachment and purchasing account for 34.5% and 12.9 of the population, respectively. It is also revealed that Go to at Ban Mae KGW Tani obtain the land only by forest encroaclunent (Table 3-10). 4.2.3 Land Document (see Appendix) It is revealed that 34.7% of the total population holds the land without an land document (see Appendix), whereas 4.8% possesses some kind of documents of land tax receipt (PBT5). There is 60.5% of the people which hold the land with at least one category of land document (chariond, Nor Sor Three Kor, Sor For Kor and Sor Tor Kor). Most people own the land with chariond (20.3% of the people) and the others hold the land with STK 08.5%) and SPK (11.2%). The survey also revealed that all people at Ban Haeng Tai hold the land with chariond but those at Ban BO Si Liarn hold the land without any land entitlement (Table 3-11) 4.2.4 Land use Based on the survey on use of private land, integrated farming is the most coriumon (45.0% of the population). Other land uses includes fruit orchards (19.8%), paddy field (13.8%) and armual cash crop (11.2%), Grazing livestock accounts for only 0.2% (Table 3-12) 81 4.3 Financial Status 4.3. I Income Based on gross income in the previous year of all samples, the aimual income averages 32,543 baht per household (SD 46,901.69) with a mintmum of 1,400 baht and a maximum of 783,000 baht. Most people earn an income of less than 50,000 baht (86.1fo), dividing into different groups; income less than 20,000 baht and between 20,001 - 50,001 ballt, accounting for 51.3% and 34.8%, respectively. The people having an income ranging between 50,001 - 100,000 ballt account for 9.5%, whereas only 4.4fo of the people can earn more than 100,000 ballt (Table 3-13). It is reported that people at Ban BO Si Liarn, Pong Tao sub-district earn a highest amiual income per household (137,287.60 baht), whereas the lowest armual income (13,884.66 ballt) is estimated at Ban Pong, Ban Pong sub-district (Table 3-14). Study towards sources of income revealed that major portion of armual income o 16,945.30 baht is earned from agi. icultural sectors, accounting for 52.1fo of t e peop e. armualincome gained from non-agricultare accounts for 39.6f0 (12,875,40 baht) ar!, d 8.4 o 0,722.30 baht) is estimated for an armual income from the collection of NTFP^. 11 is, ^ISO, revealed that a highest income of the people at Ban Pong, Ban Pong sub-district is game from agi. ICUltural sectors (80.3% of average income of the village), whereas non- agricultural sectors can contribute the highest income for people at Ban Pang La, an ua sub-district (83.69. "0), People at Ban Warig Khwai, Luang Tai sub-district can earn the highest amualincome from collection ofNTFPs (55.4%) (Table 3-14) 4.3.2 Sayimg status and debts A survey on a status of saving and debts showed that only 28.4fo of the peop e ave a savings plan. The people's highest saving is reported at Ban Mae rigao, ae ee su - district (90.5% of the villagers), However, 39.8% of the total people, in turn, ^ave the highest debts particularly, at Ban Mae Hang, Na Kae sub-district, the people of whic ave the highest debts (69.7% of the villagers) (Table 3-15). Most debts are, apparently, caused by investment. It is clearly state a o debtors showed that most debts are caused by agricultural investtnent only, w ereas o indicated that all debts result from the combination of agricultoral investinent an PUTc use of other household facilities such as cars and bicycles (Table 3-16). All amount of debts account for 5,000 - 200,000 ballt per household. Bank of Agriculture and Cooperative is usually the mainloan source (67.9fo of the loaners) and the other sources may include relatives and friends, accounting for 13.8 fo an o, respectively (Table 3-17). 82 4.4 Natural resource utilization 4.4. I Utilization of forest land According to forest land utilization by the people, it is found that 21.7% fth I utilize any forest land but 78.3% is reported to utilize forest land for d'fT t main parpose is for collection of NTFPs (65.3%) and the other minor I' d' wildlife hunting (4.9%), recreation (3.8%), tree felling (3.0%) andlivestock f d' 1.3', However, 49.0% of people at Ban Nong Hiang never utilize an fore t I d, h " of people at Ban Hua Thusig, Ban Pat Bok and Ban Hat Chieo are rt d fj land for their daily living and other activities, includin collect' f NTFP , livestock grazing (Table 3-18). ' ' 4.4.2 Wood exploitation 4.4.2.1 Wood for construction OSe Based on survey on local wood utilization, it is estimated that 42.79" f Ih I wood from the forest, mainly for construction of acconnnodation, h 43.29, " people purchase construction wood from illegal cutting perfomied b the I th or nearby villages. For the remaining portion (14.1%), wood is obtained unou h b th sources mentioned above (Table 3-19). It may conclude that wood used for acco d t' construction in the local villages, is more likely to originate from the N D Forest. The species well known for construction include recto, I@ d' , P macroca!:pus, "Kiin@ xyloca, :PCI, Shored o611!so, Shorecr stamensis and Shore Th utilization of logs and sawed wood for construction, which is estimated fir th f wood consumption for acconmiodation construction and renovation dorm 1995 - 1999, is revealed that people situated in the Demonstration forest aimuall c I d sawed wood of 2.03 cu, in. per household, accumulating up to 24,645 cu. ./ f households. Local wood prices usually vary among species, ran in from 2,500 t 4.70 baht per cu. in. ' 4.4.2.2 Consmn tion of fuel wood and charcoal The study showed that 86.8% of the people use fuel wood and charco I f generating fuel for the household, Fuel woody'charcoal is derived from th f t I If- over trees in the paddy field (59.6% of the total people). Fuel wood/charcoal is at purchased from the same or nearby villages (19.6%). There is 7.7% of the Go re who at fuel wood/charcoal from both cases mentioned above (Table 3-20). Charcoal rice u 11 range from 3 to 5 baht per kg, whereas fuel wood price ranges from 150-200 baht The surveys also revealed that armual consumption of fuel wood and charcoal 0.7 cu. in. and 2.8 kg per household, respectively. The total demand on both t ' I h Demonstration Forest accounts for 8,457 cu. in. /year for fuel wood and 33,827 kg' ear for charcoal. ,;^., lid ;q, ,local:rig is a well know tree species for makiii fuel wood d h I, whereas other sources include fell hardwood trees in the forest and branches of flu't tr the orchard and/or paddy field. Among hintribe people, X lid x IOCar o als b the most popular species for making fuel wood and charcoal 83 4.4.3 Wildlife hunting The results showed that 92.3% of the people do not hunt, whereas the rest of people (7.7^) do hunting. among the hunting group, 6.6% of the people hunt primary for within- ami y consumption, whereas the other hunting purpose is for the conrrnercial markets .(0.4 0). However, 0.79"0 of the people is reported to hunt for both household consumption an coriumercial purposes. The number of animals hunted per house o averages animal/year. A total amount of animals harvested in the Ngao Demonstration ores accounts for 9,665 animals per year. The higliest hunting rate is found at Ban Mae Teeb Luang (650 animals/year) with an average of 2.1 animals harvested per ho^sehold/y^ar (Table 3-21). Harvested wildlife includes small animals such as cocks, squirrels, rabits, chipmunks and different types of birds. Local price of such small animals ranges rom to 50 baht per animal. Only a small number of bigger-sized animals such as wi oar are hunted because they are less abundant in the area. 4.4.4 Exploitation of minor forest products For forest exploitation, most people count on the Demonstration forest for their iving. e study revealed that 73.2% of the people in the area collect at least one type of NTFPs om the Demonstration forest. It is, however, observed that forest exploitation is seeming y underestimated due to the fact that the local people realize that NTFPs exploitation is considered an illegal antivitie. Also, such exploitation is probably prohibite y t e officers, provided the results have shown the over-exploitation of NTFPs. A etai e analysis of important non-timber forest products exploitation is as follows. 4.4.4.1 Bamboo The study showed that 23.7% of the people collect bamboo only from the forest or t e main purpose of household use and commercial aspects. Annual consumption o am o0 is estimated at 30 canes per household. The people living in the Demonstration Forest are reported to consume a total of 362,430 canes per year, The litgliest amount of bambqo used is reported at Ban Tha Charoen (26,425 canes per year with an average of 122.5 caries per household per year) (Table 3-22). The important bamboo species used include Pai Sang (Dend?, ocalomz, s strictt!s), Pai Bong (Barnbt!s@ nutons), Pai Rat (Giga?Itoch100 o1bociliata), and Pai Ruak (Thyrsostophys stamensisi). Bamboo is, nonnally, utilized as materials for making strengthening stic s, industry of chopsticks and toothpicks. Local bamboo price usually range from 7 to I O b t per cane, 4.4.4.2 Bamboo shoot It is reported that 66.4% of the people collect bamboo shoots from the forest for ouse o use and cornmercial sale. The amual consumption averages 66.7 kg per house o e total consumption of bamboo shoots of the people in the Demonstration forest accounts or 805,803 kg per year. Ban Tha Charoen is reported to consume the highest amoun o bamboo shoots (32,910 kg per year with an average of 153.1 kgl'householdlyear) (Ta^Ie 3: 23), The bamboo species, shoots of which are normally collected, include Pat Rat 84 (Gigantochlo" q!bociliata), Pal Sang (Dendrocolamt, s strictt, s), Pai Bong (Bombers@ nano?Is), Pai Hok (D. hami/!Qini) and Pai Tong (D. a$perl. Local bamboo shoot price varies seasonly and by species, ranging from 2 to 10 ballt per kg. 4.4.4.3 Rattan Only I . I % of the people are reported to utilize rattan canes from the forest for household use only. The consuming amount appears quite low, averaging only 0.1 meter per household per year, The total rattan consumption of the people in the Demonstration forest is estimated 1,208 meter per year. Ban Pat Bok, Bong Rong sub-district is reported to utilize the highest amount of rattan cane, accounting for 200 meters per year with an average of 3.1 meters per household per year (Table 3-24). Local rattan price varies from 5 - 15 baht per meter. 4.4.4.4 Mushroom It is revealed that 52.3% of the people collects edible mushrooms from the forest. Among this group, 45.9% collects the mushrooms with purpose of household consumption, whereas 1.0% collects for coriumercial aspect and 5.4% collect for both purposes. Consumption amount averages 5.7 kg per household per year. The total harvested amount of the people in the Ngao Demonstration Forest accounts for 68,862 kg per year. Ban Teeb Luang is reported to consume this highest amount, accounting for 2,685 kg per year with an average of 8.7 kg per household per year. Forty-seven percent of the total population is reported not to collect any mushrooms from the forest (Table 3-25). The well-known edible mushrooms include, Kon (Termitomyces spp. ), Loin (Lenint, s prcierigidzi. $,), Daeng (Rt, ssz, /a Iepidq), Phoa 44sireoi, s hygromeh. icz, ,$, I and Khai dimn"jig spp. ). Local mus}Iroom price varies among species, ranging from I O to I 00 baht per kg. 4.4.4.5 I^' The survey revealed that 56.6% of the people do not collect any wild vegetables, whereas 43.4% is reported to collect different types of wild vegetables. Based on the collecting group, 33.2% collect wild vegetables for household consumption, whereas 2.2% collect for commercial sales and 8.0% collect for both purposes. Local consumption by the people at the Ngao Demonstration Forest averages 3.7 kg per household per year, totaling 44,700 kg per year. Ban Warig Khwai is reported to consume the highest amount of wild vegetable, estimated at 1,800 kg per year with an average of 8.5 kg per household per year (Table 3-26). Most popular wild vegetables include Wari (lifelientho swayis), Good (Drynaricimboinensis), Cha-om 44caciopenn@!4.1, and 1 4.4.4.6 Wild fruits Most people (93.3%) do riot collect any wild fruits, whereas 6.5% collect wild fruits mainly for household use and 0.2% conects for both household use and coinmercial sales. The amount of collected wild fruits at the Demonstration Forest averages 0.5 kg per household per year and totals 6,041 kg per year. The highest amount of collected wild fruits accounts for 610 kg per year with ariaverage of 3.7 kg per household per year at Ban Pha Daeng 85 (Table 3-27). Most collected fruits include BCCcit!rea sapidQ, :*?ondigspin??"!a, Mong;ford caloriez, 70, Musa act, minato and Sandorict4m koe4j'qpe. 4.4.4.7 ^;' Presently, the people are increasingly interested in medicinal plant. However, only a small number of people are reported to use the medicinal plants. In total, 1.8 fo of the people collect for household use and 0.4% for commercial sales, The other 97.8% of the people do not use any types of medicinal plants. The amount of medicinal plants collected from the Demonstration Forest averages 0.2 kg per household per year and totals approximately 2,416 kg per year. Ban BO Si Liarn is reported to use the medicinal plants up to 260 kg per year with an average of 4.0 kg per household per year. Medicinal plants most collected include $j7hei?odesmepe, :tndra, Ficusp, !bigera and Tinospora crispa. 4.4.4.8 Edible insects Among the people who collect edible insects (9.4%), 8.3% collects for household consumption only, 0.19"0 for coriumercial sales and 1.0% for both purposes. The amount of edible insects collected by the people in the Demonstration Forest averages 0.5 kg per household and totals 6,041 kg per year. Ban Pha Daeng is reported to collect the highest amount of 51 0 kg per year with an average of 3 .I kg per household per year. However, the people from 6 villages out of 31 villages are reported not to collect any edible insects. Those villages are as follows: Ban Sri Pan, Ban BO Si Liarn, Ban Khun Haeng, Ban Hua Thung, Ban Tha Charoen and Ban Sop Pon (Table 3-29). Edible insects most collected by the people include ant eggs, bamboo worms, and grasshoppers. Bamboo worm is the most popular when compared to other insects. It' s price is approximately I 00 baht per kg. 4.4.4.9 Fishes There are 10.9% of the people who catch fishes in the forest area. The manority (10.5%) is reported to catch fishes for household consumption, whereas O. I % catches for commercial purpose and 0.4% catchs for both purposes. The amount of fishes collected by the people average 0.9% kg per household per year and totals up to 10,873 kg per year, Types of fishes caught by the people include Pull!ills onphoides, Ophicephql"s striatus, Glands bonachus, and Daniops myersi. The people at Ban Teeb Luarig are reported to catch the highest amount of fishes, accounting for 670 kg per year with an average of 2.2 kg per household per year, There are 89.1% of the people that do not catch any kinds of fishes (Table 3-30) 4.4.4.1 0 ^^^i! The survey revealed that only small number of people (2.0%) collect honey. About 1.7 fo of the people collects for consumption, whereas the others (0.3%) collect for household consumption and coriumercial purpose. The amount of hives/}loney collected by the people in the Demonstration Forest averages 0.1 hive per household per year and the total amount is 1,208 hives per year. Ban Thusig Sala is reported to collect the highest hive amount of 60 hives per year with an average of 0.6 hive per household per year. Up to 98.0 fo of the people do not collect any bee hives/}loney (Table 3 -31 ) 86 4.4.4.1 I Lac (Lac!for incca KGrr. ) Only small number of the people (0.9%) are reported to collect Iac from the forest. Among this group, 0.6% collect for household use and 0.3% collects for general use and coriumercial purposes. The amount of Iac collected by the local people averages O. I kg per househld per year and or a total of 1,208 kg per year. Ban Pat Bok is reported to collect the highest amount of Iac, up to 150 kg per year, with an average of 2.3 kg per household per year, Up to 99.1% of the people do not collect any inc (Table 3-32) 4.4.4.12 Resin Resin collection is considered to be a less important activity of the people. The survey revealed that people from only one village, Ban Thusig Sala out of 31 vinages collect resin from the forest, primarily for household use. Only 0.7% of the people collects resin in the Demonstration Forest with an average of 0.01 kg per household per year and a total of 121 kg per year. Up to 99.3% of the people are reported not to collect any resins. 4.5 Acknowledgement and understanding of forest law 4.5. I Forest boundary Based on the survey on understanding of forest boundary, it is revealed that most people (62.4%) know the forest boundary location, whereas 37.6% indicated that the boundary location is still unclear. Most people at Ban Sop Haeng (92.9% of the villagers) know the boundary location but only small number of the people at Ban On Tai (35.3%) know the boundary location (Table 3-33). 4.5.2 Activities in forest area The study on understanding of the people towards various activities in the forest aims to elucidate any causes of activities that have been made against the forest law. This can be evaluated by investigating the people 's knowledge related to non-pennission activities in the forest area. However, such non-pennission activities are frequently made because they are apparently related to the people ' s lifestyle in the area. The results showed that people 's awareness on non-permission activities in the forest area varies among activities. The number of the people that understand the various activities legally allowed in the*forest area are as foUows: accommodation building (91.5%), planting (77.7%), livestock feeding (73.2%), tree felling (95.5%), fuel wood collecting (72.2%) plants/plant products collecting (50.6%), fishing (65.5%) and hunting (91.7%) (Table 3-34), 4.6 Attitudes towards forest and forest officers 4.6. I Attitudes towards forest Most people are well aware of the importance and conservation of forest. Based on the survey, most people (97.8% of the people) agreed that forest conservation is important, 87 whereas only I, 0% indicated that forest conservation is not beneficial or important. About 1.2% of the people had no comment on this aspect (Table 3-35). 4.6.2 Attitudes towards forest officers' Based on attitudes towards forest officers, most people are somewhat satisfied with the forest officer's working perfonnarice. furlong these, the people's satisfaction can be divided into different levels; including moderate, good and excellent levels, which account for 46.7%, 42% and 3.2%, respectively. The people with low satisfaction and very low satisfaction account for only 5.0 and 1.5%, respectively (Table 3-36). 4.6.3 Suggestions forwards improvement of Forest Offers. The survey elucidated that 37.9% of the people suggested that the forest officers should concentrate more on strengthening of forest protection, whereas 37.9% suggested creation of relationship with local people* Suggestion on contribution of knowledge/forestry infonnation, improvement of well being of local community and reduction of corruption are less important, which account for 17%, 11.3% and 5.4% of the people, respectively. However, 21.5% of the people needs improvement towards all aspects mentioned above (Table 3-37). 4.6.4 Future management of the forest Forest management using conservation strategies is strongly requested by the people in the area (30.69, '0), whereas 30.3% of the people suggested that forest management should place emphasize on periltission to use the forest for household use and 24.0% for NTFPs collection. Other management types include periliission for utilization of wood and NTFPs, accounting for 12.1%. Compared with other villages, people at Ban 11uat (45.7%) indicated their strong need for forest management and conservation, whereas forest management, emphasizing permission to utilize wood and by-products is most requested by the people at Ban Pang La (31.3%) (Table 3-38), 4.6*Sinstit, Itional setup offcrest management Based on the survey and the suggestions revealed institutional setup of future forest management, 57.8% of the people suggested that all institutions/organizations should be involved and cooperate in future forest management. However, 17.1% of the people suggested that the forest should be managed only under goverirrnent as is the current situation. The other people suggestions include that the forest management be under local people 06.6%) and local organizations (6.7%) (i. e. Aor Bor Tor, Local Administrative Office) (Table 3-39). 4.6.6 Deterioration of the Ngao Demonstration Forest Most people suggested that forest deterioration is manly the result of logging (57% of the people). Moreover, encroaching and NTFPs collection are also considered as causes of such deterioration, which .accounts for 29.6% and 2.7%, respectively. The other 10.7% 88 indicated the combination of all causes mentioned above contribute to the forest deterioration (Table 3-40). The further survey also revealed that the Ngao Demoirstration Forest is most degi. aded by the people from outside the village (34.4%). Other causes also include the local people (33.2%), local Mafia/gangs 03.4%), govemmental officers (21%) and local institutional'organizations (0.7%), The other 16.2% of the people indicated that the deterioration resulted from the combination of all causes mentioned above (Table 3-41). 4.6.7 ^amcipati0, , o. 1 forest activities The study found that 57.5% of the people used to participate in some kind of forest activity. . Most people (49.9%) participate in plantation activities dormg special occasions or holidays, whereas the other participatory activities include training and extension on forestry and forest protection volunteer, which account for 4.6% and 3.0, respectively (Table 342). Table 3-2 SOCio-Demographic Characteristics of Respondents (%) Household Labor (person) Household SIatus Gender Age (year) Household Size (person) Village Name 3- > 58-70 > 70 1.3 4.6 7-9 >9 none 1.2 head S OUSG others male female 19-31 32-44 45-57 36.0 50.0 14.0 71.0 29.0 I. Bang Sop Haeng 85.7 14.3 85.7 14.3 57.0 43.0 18.2 27.3 63.6 9. , 63.6 36.3 2. Ban Sri Pan 81.8 9.1 9.1 90.9 9.1 45.5 36.3 18.5 21.0 27.8 32.6 4.7 210 58.1 18.6 2.3 60.5 3. Ban Warig Khwai 60.5 32.6 6.9 65.1 34.9 2.3 32.6 2.9 31.7 10.9 51.5 48.5 2.9 82.9 11.6 4. Ban Haeng Tai 42.9 54.2 2.9 457 54.3 34.4 23.0 3.6 41.0 1.8 23.8 73.2 3.0 5.4 60.7 30.3 5. Ban Phrao 51.8 446 3.6 44.6 55.4 28.6 28.6 46.2 7.7 15.3 7.7 30.8 46.2 I5.3 46.2 6. Ban BO Si Liam 76.9 7.7 15.4 84.6 154 385 46.2 3.8 53.8 38.5 3.9 42.3 46.2 11.4 7. Ban Mae Kiw Tarn 76.9 3.8 19.3 96.2 3.8 38.5 42.3 19.2 22.6 12.9 16.0 51.6 38.7 9.7 64.5 8. Ban Khun Haeng 61.3 32.3 6.4 710 29.0 25.8 58.2 4.3 17.4 8.7 8.7 91.3 69.6 26.1 9. Ban Hua Thung 56.5 30.4 13.1 60.8 39.1 43.5 30.4 7.5 25.0 5.0 40.0 550 5.0 72.5 20.0 10. Ban Sop Pon 55.0 40.0 5.0 47.5 52.5 2.5 37.5 30.0 9.1 12.2 3.0 42.4 51.5 3.1 3.0 6.1 63.7 21.3 11. Ban Pha Daeng 60.6 364 3.0 63.6 36.4 12.1 39.4 33.3 30.8 69.2 61.5 38.5 12. Ban Pat Bok 61.5 30.0 8.5 69.2 30.8 15.4 61.6 23.0 4.7 279 6.9 39.6 58.1 2.3 2.3 74.4 18.7 13. Ban Tma Charoen 51.2 46.5 2.3 48.8 51.2 14.0 30.2 21.0 9.5 19.0 9.6 28.6 66.6 4.8 4.8 762 9.6 14. Ban Thung Sala 47.6 47.6 4.8 61.9 38.1 4.8 47.6 19.0 2.0 33.3 9.8 37.3 607 2.0 11.8 68.6 17.7 15. Ban Nong Hiang 51.0 39.2 9.8 51.0 49.0 7.8 27.5 21.6 4.3 47.8 I7.4 8.8 26.0 69.6 4.4 78.3 17.4 16. Ban Na Kae 69.6 30.4 65.2 34.8 4.3 21.7 . Go ^ --..^ - Table 3-2 (continued) Village Name Household Status Gender Age (year) Household Size (person) Household Labor (1)erson) head s ouse g 90.9 6.1 3.0 93.9 6.1 6.1 60.6 18.2 12.1 3.0 18.2 75.7 6.1 3.0 72.7 15.2 9.1 18. Ban Mae Kwak 13.3 40.0 26.7 16.7 3.3 20.0 73.3 6.7 33 73.3 23.4 19, Ban On Tai 7.8 21.6 31.5 35.3 3.8 15.7 70.5 11.8 2.0 2.0 66.7 27.4 3.9 20. Ban Huai Hok . , 15.2 65.7 11.5 7.6 3.8 57.7 23.1 15.4 7.7 50.0 23.1 19.2 21 . Ban Rong Ta 18.3 27.3 68.2 4.5 77.3 13.6 9.1 22. Ban Huat 8.3 49.2 27.9 13.0 1.6 39.3 54.2 6.5 4.9 83.6 11.5 23. Ban Pang La I. 18.8 6.1 25.0 75.0 84.4 15.6 24. Ban Mrs Teeb Lumi 29.0 27.4 30.6 9.8 22.6 694 8.0 3.2 64.6 29.0 3.2 25. Ban Nam Lon 17.6 38.2 32.4 11.8 14.7 79.4 5.9 64.7 29.4 5.9 26, Ban N iu N am I9.0 42.9 33.3 2.4 2.4 26.2 69.0 4.8 4.8 57.1 31.0 7.1 27. Ban Mae N an 9.5 33.4 38.1 19.0 23.8 714 4.8 71.4 14.3 14.3 28. Ban Mai Na Chae 39.1 47.8 8.7 4.4 21.7 73.9 4.4 73.9 26.1 29. Ban Sop Phlun 28.2 , 30. Ban Pong 48.3 43.3 8.4 43.3 56.7 6.7 33.3 25.0 31. Ban Hat Chieo 85.7 14.3 85.7 14.3 50.0 2t. 4 28.6 28.6 57.2 14.2 Total 62.8 31.1 6.1 64.6 35.4 8.4 38.5 27.9 20.5 5.0 27.2 63.1 8.4 1.3 3.1 69.2 22.0 5.7 . Q O\ Table 3-3 Education Levels of Respondents and Family's Members by Community (%) Education Level of Res ondent Hi hest Education Level of Res on dent's Famil Member Village Name Techntcal Bachelor None Grade 4 Grade 6 Grade 9 Grade 12 Technical Teclunical None Grade 4 Grade 6 Grade 9 Grade 12 Teemcal College College College College or 12 rs 15 s) 12 s (15 rs hi er 14.3 I. Bang Sop lineng 64.3 21.4 7.1 7.2 21.4 7.1 28.6 28.6 9.0 27.3 2. Ban Sri Pan 45.5 18.2 18.2 9.1 9.0 9.1 36.4 18.2 2.3 4.7 4.7 3. Ban Warig Khwai 7.0 86.0 2.3 4.7 34.8 9.3 9.3 34.9 2.9 47.1 4, Ban Hacng Tai 71.4 11.4 11.4 5.8 37.2 11.4 14.3 17.1 5.4 1.8 5.4 5. Ban Phrao 89.3 3.6 5.4 17 51.2 10.7 16.1 8.9 7.7 15.3 6. Ban BO Si Liarn 15.4 80.8 46.2 7.6 23.1 15.4 15.4 23.1 7. Ban Mae Kiw Tani 46.2 23.1 26.9 3.8 3.9 53.8 23.1 19.2 9.7 a2.9 3.2 8. Ban Khun Haeng 35.5 19.4 29.0 16.1 6.5 16.0 6.5 9.7 35.5 4.4 4.4 8.7 9. Ban Hua Thung 91.3 8.7 13.0 17.4 30.4 21.7 10.0 2.5 5.0 10, Ban Sop Pon 7.5 75.0 7.5 5.0 5.0 2.5 27.5 32.5 20.0 3.1 11, Ban Pha Daeng 21.2 54.5 12.1 3.0 9.2 3.0 27.3 33.3 9.1 24.2 7.6 12. Ban Pak Bok 15.4 76.9 7.7 46.2 30.8 7.7 7.7 23.3 2.3 2.3 13. Ban Tha Charoen 4.7 76.7 14.0 4.6 2.3 25.6 140 30.2 9.5 14. Ban Thung Sala 14.3 76.2 4.8 4.7 4.8 28.6 19.0 28.6 9.5 2.0 15. Ban Nong Hiang 76.5 17.6 3.9 2.0 54.8 19.6 11.8 11.8 4.3 4.3 13.0 16, Ban Na Kae 73.9 21.7 4.4 35.0 4.3 13.0 26.1 \O ^ ,^ ^ Table 3-3 (continued) Village Name Education Levels of Res ondents Hi best Education Levels of Famil Member None Grade 4 Grade 6 Grade 9 Grade 12 Technical Termcal None Grade 4 Grade 6 Grade 9 Grade 12 Termcal Technical Bachelor College College College College or 12 rs 15 rs 12 rs 15 rs hi er 7. Ban Mae Hang 27.3 51.5 12.1 6.1 3.0 3.0 24.2 36.4 27.3 9.1 18. Ban Mae Kwak 3.3 70.0 20.0 6.7 a9.9 23.3 16.7 16.7 6.7 6.7 10.0 19. Ban On Tai 88.2 9.8 20 23.4 51.0 11.8 7.8 20 2.0 2.0 20. Ban Huai Hok 57.7 15.4 15.4 I 1.5 19.3 7.7 385 I 1.5 11.5 7.7 3.8 21. Ban Rong Ta 13.6 68.2 4.6 13.6 18.2 27.3 27.3 4.5 9.1 13.6 22. Ban Huat 1.6 75.4 16.4 3.3 3.3 60.7 16.4 9.8 9.8 3.3 23. Ban Pang La 12.5 59.4 12.5 3.1 12.5 3.1 25.0 34.4 15.6 18.8 3.1 24. Ban Mae Teeb . 12.9 72.6 8.1 3.2 3.2 29.0 17.7 19.4 17.7 8. , Lumi 6.5 1.6 25. Ban Nam Long 11.8 79.4 2.9 5.9 8.8 35.4 14.7 14.7 17.6 8.8 26. Ban Ngiu Ngam 16.7 64.3 16.7 2.3 26.2 33.3 214 14.3 4.8 27. Ban Mae Ngao 4.8 57.1 23.8 9.5 4.8 9.6 28.6 190 19.0 9.5 14.3 28. Ban Mai Na Chae 78.3 8.7 13.0 44 34.8 39.1 17.4 4.3 29. Ban Sop Pmlung 2.2 73.9 21.7 22 60.8 19.6 6.5 8.7 2.2 2.2 30. Ban Pong 83.3 11.7 1.7 3.3 48.3 I6.7 15.0 10.0 5.0 5.0 31 . Ban Hat Chieo 92.9 7.1 428 35.7 14.3 7.2 Total 9.6 69.4 13.1 5.2 2.3 0.3 0.1 1.4 32.4 22.1 17.8 15.7 2.8 4.2 3.6 61 O\ Table 3-4 Hometown and Relocation of Respondents by Coriumuriity (%) Hometown Future Relocation Village Name within inovin from. ,.. sub-district other oher other other expected unexpected Upto goveiT"rimt uncertain sub-districts districts ,' rovinces re Ions tic I. Bang Sop Haeng 78.6 14.3 7.1 100.0 I8.2 2. Ban Sri Pan 81.8 18.2 81.8 2.3 3. Ban Warig Khwai 81.4 7.0 4.7 4.7 2.2 70 90.7 4. Ban Haeng Tai 88.6 11.4 100.0 5. Ban Phrao 89.3 7.1 1.8 1.8 3.6 96.4 7.7 6. Ban BO Si Liarn 100.0 92.3 7, Ban Mae Kiw Tan 69.2 7.6 23.2 100.0 3.2 8. Ban Khun Haeng 32.3 13.0 6.3 48.4 96.8 9. Ban Hua Thung 78.3 13.0 8.7 100.0 5.0 10. Ban Sop Pon 850 10.0 27 2.3 95.0 6.1 11. Ban Pha Daeng 75.8 9.1 12.1 3.0 3.0 90.9 12. Ban Pat Bok 69.2 15.4 154 100.0 23 13. Ban Tha Charoen 86.0 2.5 11.5 97.7 14, Ban Thung Sala 61.9 19.1 9.5 9.5 95.2 4.8 15. Ban Nong Hiang 88.2 9.8 2.0 2.0 98.0 16. Ban Na Kae 87.0 4.3 43 4.4 100.0 \O t, ., ^ -- Table 3-4 (continued) Village Name Hometown Future Relocation within inovin from. ... sub-district other oher other other' expected unexpected upto govemniait uncertain sub-districts districts rovinces re Ions Iic an ae ang 90.9 6.1 3.0 100.0 18. Ban Mae Kwak 83.3 6.7 3.3 6.7 96.7 3.3 19. Ban On Tai 92.2 7.8 100.0 20, Ban Huai Hok 92.3 3.8 3.9 3.8 96.2 21. Ban Rong Ta 40.9 31.8 4.5 18.3 4.5 9.1 77.3 13.6 22. Ban Huat 77.0 14.7 3.4 4.9 3.3 90.2 6.5 23. Ban Pang La 59.4 12.5 18.8 6.3 3.0 6.3 93.7 24. Ball Man Teeb Lunig 79.0 14.5 1.6 3.2 1.7 100.0 25. Ban Nam Long too. o 100.0 26. Ban Ngiu Ngam 83.3 14.3 2.4 100.0 27. Ban Mae Ngao 66.7 9.5 23.8 4.8 81.0 14.2 28. Ban Mai Na Chae 73.9 26.1 95.7 4.3 29. Ban Sop Phlung 89.1 8.7 2.2 95.7 4.3 30. Ban Pong 85.0 10.0 1.7 3.3 1.7 96.6 1.7 31. Ban Hat Chieo 100.0 92.9 7.1 Total 80.4 10.0 2.4 5.9 1.6 1.5 95.9 2.6 .,. O\ Table 3-5 Purpose of Immigration of Respondents by Community (910) Vinage Name PU OSe of tintni ation Period of nomi ation 1986"1997 after 1997 follow clear forest follow 1938-1949 1950-1961 1962-1973 1974-1985 parents or for fanning friends or fomil relatives I. Bang Sop Hanng 66.7 33.3 66.7 33.3 2, Ban Sri Pan 100.0 50.0 25.0 25.0 12.5 25.0 3. Ban Warig Khwai 100.0 12.5 12.5 12.5 25.0 100.0 4. Ban Haeng Tai 100.0 5. Ban Phrao 66.7 33.3 16.7 16.7 33.3 33.3 6. Ban BO Si Liam 7. Ban Mae Kiw Tarn 25.0 25.0 500 75.0 250 8. Ban Khun Hanng ,9.1 9.5 71.4 47.6 23.8 28.6 9. Ban Hua Thung 60.0 40.0 800 20.0 10. Ban Sop Pon 80.0 20.0 16.7 50.0 I6.7 16.6 11. Ban Pha Darng 37.5 50.0 12.5 12.5 12.5 37.5 37.5 12. Ban Pat Bok 750 50.0 50.0 25.0 . I6.7 13. Ban Tha Charoen 100.0 16.7 16.7 49.9 14.2 14. Ban Thung Sala 71.4 28.6 14.3 42.9 28.6 15. Ban Nong Hiang 100.0 60.0 20.0 20.0 16. Ban Na Kan 66.7 33.3 100.0 *@ U', ^^ Table 3-5 (continued) Village Name P OSe of 11nmi tion Period of jinmi ation O OW clear forest follow 1938-1949 1950-1961 1962.1973 1974-1985 1986-1997 after 1997 parents or for farming friends or lainii relatives 17. Ban Mae Hang 100.0 33.3 33.3 33.4 18. Ban Mae Kwak 60.0 40.0 20.0 40.0 400 19. Ban On Tai 100.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 20. Ban Huai HDk 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 21. Ban Rong Ta 53.8 30.8 t5.4 23.0 38.5 38.5 22. Ban Huat 64.3 35.7 14.3 71.4 14.3 23. Ban Pang La 50.0 33.3 16.7 15.3 30.8 30.8 23.1 24. Ban Man Teeb Luarig 75.0 25.0 15.4 15.4 46.2 23.0 25. Ban Nam Long 66.7 33.3 50.0 50.0 6. Ban Ngiu Ngam 85.7 14.3 28.5 42.9 14.3 14.3 27. Ban Mae Ngao 7f. 4 28.6 14.3 42.9 28.5 14.3 8. Ban Mai Na Chae 100.0 66.7 33.3 29. Ban Sop Phlung 100.0 20.0 20.0 60.0 30. Ban FDng 62.5 12.5 25.0 12.5 . 50.0 12.5 25.0 31. Ban Hat Chieo Total 68.8 17.0 14.2 4.9 9.3 23.4 33.7 24.9 3.9 ^I O\ Table 3-6 Occupation of Respondents by Coriumunity (%) Village Name Major Occupation Minor Occupation unskilled NTFPs tanner farmer unskilled governmenU others none farmer labor state labor collector enterprise officer 64.3 35.7 I. Bang Sop Hanng 92.9 7.1 45.5 9.0 2. Ban Sri Pan 63.6 27.3 9.1 27.3 18.2 41.9 23.2 3. Ban Warig Khwai 79.1 11.6 9.3 25.6 9.3 65.6 2.9 2.9 4. Ban Haeng Tai 100.0 28.6 32.1 7.2 8.9 5. Ban Phrao 67.9 19.6 1.8 10.7 51.8 7.7 6, Ban BO Si Liarn 100.0 84.6 7.7 53.8 7. Ban Man Kiw Tani 84.6 7.7 7.7 42.3 3.9 3.3 8. Ban Khun Hanng 100.0 67.7 29.0 47.8 9. Ban Hua Thung 78.3 17.4 4.3 43.4 8.8 10. Ban Sop Pon 82.5 2.5 2.5 12.5 52.5 2.5 45.0 6.0 11, Ban Pha Daeng 93.9 6.1 48.5 45.5 15.4 12. Ban Palc Bok 69.2 7.7 15.4 7.7 7.7 76.9 4.7 13. Ban 'rha Charoen 62.8 25.6 11.6 39.5 55.8 14. Ban Thung Sala 71.4 19.0 4.8 4.8 33.4 66.6 3.9 15. Ban Nong Hiang 49.0 27.5 23.5 60.8 7.8 27.5 16. Ban Na Kac 82.6 8.7 8.7 39.4 56.5 44 @ -- ~:I Table 3-6 (continued) Village Name Major Occupation Minor Occupation farmer unskilled governmen others none farmer unskilled NTFPs farmer labor or state labor collector enterprise officer 17. Ban Mac Hang 78.8 9.1 6.1 6.0 36.4 6.1 57.5 18. Ban Mae Kwak 93.3 6.7 48.3 13.0 38.7 19. Ban On Tai 90.2 9.8 27.5 3.9 68.6 20. Ban Huai Hok 96.2 3.8 46.2 3.8 30.8 19.2 2I. Ban Rong Ta 68.2 27.3 4.5 45.5 4.5 40.9 9.1 22, Ban HUBt 50.8 39.4 9.8 49.2 3.3 36.0 11.5 23. Ban Pang La 34.3 59.4 6.3 3.0 53.1 9.4 28.1 3.1 6.3 24. Baa the Teeb Lung 88.7 3.2 3.2 4.9 41.9 1.6 46.8 3.2 6.5 5. Ban Narn Long 100.0 44.2 52.9 2.9 26. Ban Ngiu Ngarn 95.2 4.8 26.2 71.4 2.4 27. Ban Mac Ngao 66.7 19.0 4.8 9.5 42.9 9.5 42.8 4.8 28. Ban Mai Na Chae 69.6 21.7 8.7 34.8 47.8 4.3 13.1 9, Ban Sop Pmlung 67.4 23.9 2.2 6.5 50.0 6.5 32.6 10.9 30. Ban Pong 73.3 20.1 3.3 3.3 48.3 3.3 46.7 1.7 an Hat Chieo 85.8 7.1 7.1 35.7 7.1 57.2 Total 77.2 a4.9 1.8 6.1 41.5 4.2 46.2 4.5 3.6 o0 Q\ Table 3-7 Sources of Water Suppy and Light by Coinmimty (%) Main Source of Water Supply Source of Light Village Name others river/canel tit^thrumfj others electricity Electric oillamp gas lamp rain pond well reservior " (tin^'u) generator 85.7 14.3 I . Bang Sop Haeng 21.4 7.2 71.4 1000 2. Ban Sri Pan 45.5 9.0 45.5 97.7 2.3 3. Ban Warig Khwai 7.0 90.7 2.3 5.7 I00.0 4. Ban Haeng Tai 629 14.3 11.4 5.7 98.2 1.8 5. Ban Phtao 5.4 83.9 8.9 1.8 7.7 84.6 7.7 6. Ban BO Si Liarn 7.7 7.7 84.6 73.1 26.9 7. Ban Mae Kiw Tarn 19.2 7.7 73.1 100.0 8. Ban Khun Hanng 6.5 22.6 3.2 67.7 262 100.0 9. Ban Hua Thung 4.3 65.2 4.3 2.5 I7.5 17.5 975 10. Ban Sop Pon 5.0 57.5 2.5 100.0 I I. Ban Pha Danng 12.1 3.1 9.1 12.1 63.6 7.7 7.7 84.6 77 12. Ban Pak Bok 77 84.6 2.3 97.7 2.3 13. Ban Tha Charoen 4.7 83.7 2.3 7.0 95.2 4.8 14, Ban Thung Sala 4.8 66.6 28.6 100.0 15. Ban Nong Hiang 2.0 96.0 2.0 100.0 16. Ban Na Kae 87.0 13.0 \O IQ Table 3-7 continued) Village Name Main Source of Water Supply Source of Light rain pond well reservior river/canel Uraln;;I, ,I others electricity Electric o1/18mp gas lamp others , (11.1^11) generator 17. Ban Mac Hang 48.5 12.2 3.0 6.0 30.3 78.8 9.1 12.1 18. Ban Mae Kwak 96.7 3.3 100.0 19. Ban On Tai 2.0 92.1 5.9 100.0 20. Ban Huai Hok 3.8 96.2 100.0 21. Ban Rong Ta 68.2 4.5 27.3 100.0 22. Ban Huat 3.3 82.0 1.7 1.6 I1.4 100.0 23. Ban Pang La 3.1 53.2 3.1 3.1 37.5 90.6 9.4 24. Ban Mae Teeb Luar, g 1.6 75.8 22.6 100.0 25. Ban Nam Long 82.4 5.8 11.8 100.0 26. Ban Ngiu Ngam 2.4 90.5 4.7 2.4 100.0 27. Ban Mae Ngao 100.0 100.0 28. Ban Mai Na Chae 91.3 8.7 , 100.0 29. Ban Sop Phiung 8.7 13.0 28.3 50.0 97.8 2.2 30. Ban Pong 91.7 1.7 6.6 100.0 31. Ban Hat Chieo 50.0 21.4 21.4 7.2 100.0 Total 2.3 65.5 6.4 0.8 2.0 21.9 I, f 89.3 0.1 8.5 1.2 0.9 Q o ^ Table 3-8 Main Source of News/Information by Community (%) Village Name Generatl Information Forestry Information village radio television newspaper forestry friends/ village radio television newspaper forestry friends/ village radio officer relatives radio officer relatives leader I. Bang Sop Hanng 7.1 929 14.3 7.1 14.3 7.1 57.2 2. Ban Sri Pan 9.1 90.9 9.1 63.6 9.1 18.2 3. Ban Warig Khwai 14.3 4.7 81.0 11.6 47 46.5 4.7 I 1.5 21 4. Ban Hanng Tai 22.9 2.9 74.2 57.1 11.4 2.9 11.4 I7.2 5. Ban Phrao 14.3 5.4 71.4 1.8 7.1 8.9 37.5 1.8 10.7 8.9 32.2 6. Ban BO Si Liarn 7.7 23.1 69.2 15.4 I5.4 23 30.8 15.4 7. Ban Mae Kiw Tani 73.0 39 77 a 5.4 11.5 11.5 o 46.2 7.7 23.1 8. Ban Khun Haeng 25.8 710 3.2 16.1 9.7 45.2 12.9 3.2 12.9 9. Ban Hua Thung 13.0 8.7 78.3 47.8 17.4 4.3 30.5 10. Ban Sop Pon 7.5 10.0 80.0 2.5 25.0 5.0 45.0 5.0 5.0 15.0 I I. Ban Pha Daeng 6.1 93.9 9.1 30.3 42.4 3 15.2 12, Ban Pak Bok 23.1 76.9 15.4 7.7 53.8 23.1 13. Ban Tma Charoen 4.7 4.7 90.6 4.7 4.7 55.8 11.6 2.3 20.9 14. Ban Thung Sala 23.8 76.2 28.6 4.8 23.8 4.8 9.5 28.5 15. Ban Norig Hiang 11.8 3.8 80.4 2.0 20 294 2 25.5 3.9 3.9 35.3 16. Ban Na Kae 13.0 87.0 13.0 4.3 34.8 13.0 4.3 30.6 -.. ^ ^ Table 3-8 (continued) Village Name Generatl Information Forestry Information village radio televisio newspaper forestry friends/ village radio television newspaper forestry friends/ village radio n officer relatives radio officer relatives leader 17. Ban Mac Hang 15.1 27.3 48.5 9.1 24.2 6.1 21.2 t2. I 6.1 30.3 18. Ban Mae Kwak 6.7 10.0 80.0 3.3 6.7 20.0 50.0 6.7 6.7 3.3 6.6 19, Ban On Tai 2.0 9.7 84.3 2 2.0 7.8 3.9 39.2 2.0 9.8 15.7 21.6 20, Ban Huai Hok 50.0 3.8 34.6 11.6 7.7 15.4 19.2 23.1 34.6 21. Ban RongTa 18.2 4.5 77.3 27.3 22.7 22.7 27.3 22. Ban Huat 1.6 1.6 93.6 1.6 1.6 9.8 1.6 37.7 1.6 21.3 6.6 21.4 23. Ban Pang La 6.3 3.1 90.6 21.9 6.3 28.1 12.5 3.1 28.1 24, Ban Mae Tech Li^18 3.2 6.5 87.1 3.2 9.7 6.5 29.0 32.3 12.9 9.6 25. Ban Nam Long 11.8 88.2 I7.6 70.6 11.8 26. Ban Ngiu Ngam 4.8 90.5 4.7 42.9 26.1 31.0 27. Ban Mae Ngao 4.8 9.5 81.0 4.7 38.1 19 42.9 28. Ban Mai Na Chae 8.7 91.3 4.3 60.9 26.1 8.7 29, Ban Sop Phlung 6.5 13.2 71.7 4.3 4.3 10.9 6.5 32.6 4.3 17.4 4.3 24.0 30. Ban Pong 5.0 8.3 81.6 1.7 1.7 1.7 20.0 75.0 5.0 31. Ban Hat Chieo 21.4 14.3 64.3 2t, 4 21.4 14.3 42.9 Total 7.9 fl. , 76.4 1.9 0.5 2.2 15.8 10.6 29.8 1.5 15.9 6.6 19.8 61 Q ,..., 103 Table 3-9 Land Holding of Respondents by Community (%) Total Village Name Land Holding none , I raj2 >I -5 rai >54 0 rei ' 10 rai 7.1 100.0 I. Bang Sop Haeng 35.7 14.3 28.6 14.3 18.2 100.0 2. Ban Sri Pan 9.1 9.1 45.5 18.1 9.3 100.0 3. Ban Warig Khwai 41.9 7.0 30.2 11.6 8.6 100.0 4. Ban Haeng Tai 8.6 5.7 45.7 31.4 8.9 100.0 5. Ban Phmo 26.8 t4.3 33.9 16.1 69.2 100.0 6. Ban BO Si Liarn 15.4 7.7 7.7 100.0 7, Ban Man Kiw Tom 50.0 7.7 45.4 7.7 19.2 100.0 8. Ban Khun Haeng 22.6 3.2 6.5 67.7 9. Ban Hua Thun. g 17.4 56.5 I7.4 8.7 100.0 100.0 10. Ban Sop Pon 20.0 7.5 22.5 37.5 12.5 100.0 11. Ban Pha Daeng 21.2 51.5 21.2 6.1 100.0 12. Ban Pak Bok 45.4 30.8 7.7 46.4 13. Ban Ina Chamen 37.2 23.3 27.9 11.6 100.0 14. Ban inlung Sala 38.1 4.8 42.9 9.5 4.7 100.0 15, Ban Nong Hiang 49.0 19.6 23.5 5.9 2.0 100.0 16. Ban Na Kae 17.4 17.4 52.2 4.3 8.7 100.0 17. Ban Mae Hang 24.2 6.1 21.2 48.5 100.0 18. Ban Mae Kwak 23.3 36.7 23.3 16.7 100.0 19, Ban On Tai 17.6 13.7 41.2 17.7 9.8 100.0 20. Ban Huai Hok 11.5 3.8 7.8 76.9 100.0 100.0 21 . Ban Rong Ta 31.9 13.6 40.9 13.6 100.0 22, Ban Huat 42.6 13.1 ,9.7 13.1 11.5 23, Ban Pang La 46.9 21.9 18.7 12.5 100.0 24. Ban MBeTeeb Luang 21.0 3.2 33.9 22.5 19.4 100.0 25. Ban Nam Long 14.7 47.1 20.6 17.6 too. o 26, Ban Ngiu Ngam 19.0 4.8 28.6 35.7 fig 100.0 27. Ban Mae Ngao 28.6 9.5 47.6 9.5 4.8 100.0 100.0 28. BanMaiNaCliae 43.5 8.7 39.1 8.7 100.0 29. Ban Sop Phlung 39.1 13.1 34.8 8.7 4.3 30. Ban Porng 35.0 11.7 43.3 3.3 6.7 100.0 31. Ban Hat Chico 21.4 14.3 42.9 21.4 100.0 Total 28.7 8.3 31.7 15.7 15.6 100.0 I rai = 0.16 hectare . L Table 3-11 Land Document by Community (%) village Name Land Document Total none PBT5 STK SPK Charion NS3 STK STK STK SPK SPK PBT5 PBT5 Chnond d & (%) & & & & & & & SPK PBT5 chariond chariond NS3 chariond NS3 NS3 35.8 7. I 7.1 14.3 35.7 100.0 2. Ban Sri Pan 36.4 9.1 54.5 100.0 3. Ban Warig Khwai 27.8 23.3 18.6 20.9 4.7 4.7 100.0 4. Ban Haeng Tai 85.7 8.6 5.7 100.0 5. Ban Phiao 48.3 7.1 25.0 10.7 8.9 100.0 6. Ban BO Si Liarn f 00.0 100.0 7. Ban Man Kiw Tam 84.6 15.4 100.0 8. Ban Khun Haeng 45.1 25.8 3.2 3.2 3.2 6.5 6.5 6.5 too. o 9. Ban Hua inlung 13.2 8.7 13.0 43.0 34.8 8.7 4.3 4.3 100.0 10. Ban Sop Pon 22.5 47.5 2.5 25.0 2.5 100.0 11. Ban Pha Daeng 37.5 3.0 24.2 18.2 12.1 5.0 100.0 12. Ban Palc Bok 61.5 38.5 100.0 13. Ban Tma Chancen 16.1 4.7 7.0 14.0 34.9 16.3 4.7 2.3 100.0 14, Ban Thung Sala 57.1 14.3 4.8 19.0 4.8 100.0 15. Ban Nong Hiarig 48.9 2.0 25.5 20 15.7 5.9 100.0 16. Ban Na Kae 21.9 4.3 4.3 52.2 13.0 4.3 100.0 I see Appendix ^> ^ ^ Table 3-11 (continued) Total PBT5 Chnon Village Name STK STK SPK SPK PBT5 (%) PBT5 STK sPK charion NS3 STK none & & & d & & & & & I*Is3 NS3 SPK PBT5 chariond chariond NS3 chariond 6.1 100:O 6.1 3.0 3.0 17. Ban Mae Hang 27.2 18.2 36.4 33 3.3 18. Ban Mae Kwak 20.1 20.0 13.3 20.0 20.0 100.0 19. Ban On Tai 27.4 11.8 37.3 7.8 13.7 20 100.0 20. Ban. Huai HDk 88.5 7.7 3.8 1000 21. Ban R. origTa 31.8 18.2 I8.2 27.3 4.5 100.0 22. Ban Huat 44.4 13.1 13.1 26.2 3.2 6.3 100.0 23. Ban Pang La 75.0 6.2 3.1 9.4 I00.0 3.2 24. Ban Mar Teeb Luang 21.0 25.8 210 16.1 I2.9 100.0 25, Ban Nam Long 38.4 17.6 2.9 23.5 17.6 100.0 7.1 26. Ban Ngiu Ngam 14.3 14.3 52.4 9.5 24 100.0 28. Ban Mai Na Chae 23.8 4.8 57.1 14.3 100.0 29. Ban Sop Phlung 26.1 21.7 34.8 I7.4 100.0 29. Ban Sop Phlung 23.9 30.4 174 I7.4 10.9 100.0 3.3 30. Ban Pong 26.8 3.3 15.0 26.7 I3.3 8.3 3.3 100.0 7.1 31 . Ban Hat Chieo 21.5 7.1 35.7 21.5 7.1 0.1 0.3 0.2 1.0 100.0 20.3 6.2 0.7 0.3 0.9 0.8 Total 34.7 4.8 18.5 11.2 I see Appendix I-" o \I Table 3-12 Land Use Patterns by Community (%) ame g Land Use orchard paddy field amual cash Total grazing intererated fani housing'others crop livestock I . Ban So Haen (%) 11.2 44.4 2. Ban Sri Pan 100.0 70.0 100.0 3. Ban Warig Ichwai 48.0 16.0 100.0 4. Ban Haen Tai 59.4 3.1 100.0 5. Ban Phiao 9.8 43.9 7.3 6. Ban BO Si Liam 100.0 36.3 18.2 100.0 7. Ban Man Kiw Tarn 23. f 53.8 7.7 8, Ban Khun Hann 100.0 41.7 37.4 4.2 9. Ban Hua Thusi 100.0 63.1 100.0 10. Ban Sop Pon 34.4 3.1 100.0 I I . Ban Pha Daen 38.5 19.2 3.8 12, Ban Pak Bok 100.0 9.1 54.5 9.1 100.0 13. Ban Tha Charoen 11.1 33.4 18.5 100.0 14. Ban Thun Sala 53.8 an Nong Hiang 15.4 11.5 3.8 16. Ban Na Kae 5.3 26.3 10.5 52.6 5.3 100.0 00 Q ^I Table 3-12 (continued) Village Name Land Use Total orchard annual cash grazing inter grated fam housing!others paddy field (%) crop livestock 100.0 17. Ban Mae Hang 24.0 20.0 8.0 48.0 100.0 18. Ban Mae Kwak 39.1 21.7 4.4 34.8 4.8 100.0 19. Ban On Tai 21.4 11.9 23.8 38.1 100.0 20. Ban Huai Hok 26.1 4.3 69.6 100.0 21 . B an Rong Ta 13.3 33.3 6.7 46.7 22.9 too. o 22. Ban Huat 8.6 8.6 11.3 2.9 457 35.3 100.0 23. Ban Pang La 23.5 5.9 5.9 29.4 100.0 24. Ban Mae Teeb Luanig 22.4 16.3 10.3 51.0 100.0 25. Ban Nam Long 10.3 13.8 72.4 3.5 100.0 26. Ban Ngiu Ngam 17.6 29.4 I7.6 29.5 5.9 100.0 28. Ban Mai Na Chae 20.0 26.7 40.0 a3.3 15.4 100.0 29, Ban Sop Phlung 38.5 15.4 15.4 15.3 100.0 29. Ban Sop Phiung 39.3 14.3 7.1 35.7 3.6 100.0 30. Ban Pong 15.4 12.8 10.3 46.2 15.3 100.0 31 . Ban Hat Chieo 27.3 9.1 54.5 9.1 10.0 Total 19.8 43.8 11.2 0.2 45.0 100.0 ^ Q ^ Table 3-13 Distribution of Armual Household Income by Conunui}ity (%) Village Name Income (Baht) Total ^ 20,000 20,001~ 50.00 I- 100,001. 150,001. 200,001- 250,001. > 300,000 50,000 (%) 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 50.0 28.6 214 I00.0 . Ban Sri pan 9.1 72.7 18.2 100.0 an Warig Khwdi 44.2 44.2 11.6 100.0 an aeng Tai 74.4 22.6 2.9 100.0 . Ban Phiao 73.2 21.4 5.4 100.0 an BO Si Liarn 15.4 30.8 15.4 7.7 7.7 23.1 100.0 an Mae row Tom 65.4 34.6 100.0 an un Haeng 16.1 29.0 38.7 12.9 3.2 100.0 an Hua Thung 47.8 34.8 8.7 4.3 4.3 100.0 . Ban Sop Pon 42.5 42.5 10.0 2.5 2.5 F I00.0 an a Daeng 57.6 36.4 3.0 3.0 100.0 . Ban Pat Bok 61.5 23.1 7.7 7.7 100.0 an aroen 48.8 32.6 11.6 2.3 2.3 2.3 100.0 an ung Sala 42.8 42.8 9.5 4.8 100.0 an orig Hiang 56.9 33.3 7.8 20 16. Ban Na Kae 39.1 39.1 8.7 8.7 4.3 100.0 Q ^I ^ Table 3-13 continued oa Income (Baht) Village Name > 300,000 (%) 20,001- 50,001* 100,001- 150,001- 200,001- 250,001. ^ 20,000 300,000 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 100.0 3.0 17. Ban Mae Hang 45.5 42.4 9.1 100.0 3.3 18. Ban Mae Kwak 26.7 36.7 33.3 100.0 19. Ban On Tai 56.9 29.4 11.8 ,. 9 100.0 20. Ban Huai Hok 34.6 34.6 26;9 3.8 100.0 21. Ban Rong Ta 54.5 18.2 13.6 13.6 100.0 3.3 22. Ban Huat 39.3 50.8 4.9 1.6 3.1 100.0 23. Ban Pang La 37.2 53.1 6.6 100.0 3.2 1.6 24. Ban Man Teeb Luang 58.1 29.0 6.5 1.6 2.9 100.0 25. Ban Nam Long 55.9 32.4 5.9 2.9 24 100.0 26. Ban Ngiu Ngam 54.8 429 100.0 28. Ban Mai Na Chae 42.9 52.4 4.8 100.0 29. Ban Sop Phlung 30.4 56.5 8.7 43 100.0 29. Ban Sop Phlung 76.1 15.2 6.5 2.2 400.0 30. Ban Pong 73.3 21.6 5.0 100.0 31. Ban Hat Chieo 50.0 42.9 7.1 1.1 0.3 0.3 0.6 100.0 Total 51.3 34.8 9.5 2.1 ,^ ,-. -4 \ Table 3-14 Sources of Household Income by Community (%) ge ame Income (Baht) ticulture Non-a iculture Collection NTFPs Total o Baht % Baht % Baht % I. Ban Sop Haeng , 2,497,20 8.9 27,908.60 2. Ban Sri Pan 100.0 ,880.00 48.6 1,494.00 5.6 26,495.90 100.0 3. Ban Warig Kliwai . 13,147.20 55.4 23,712.30 100.0 4. Ban Haeng Tai 933.70 3.9 23,937.10 100.0 5. Ban Phiao . 5,877.20 31.8 8,270 4.4 18,477.90 6. Ban BO Si Liam 100.0 ,I 16.90 46.0 747.00 0.5 137,287.60 7. Ban Mae Kiw Tarn 100.0 . .I 45.8 3,904.50 17.9 21,801.40 8. Ban Kilnn 11aen f 00.0 .935.50 32.4 2,241.00 3.2 70,872.50 9. Ban Hua Thini 100.0 , I ,771.10 37.9 990.50 2.7 36,351.70 I00.0 10. Ban Sop Pon , . 2,713.80 11.7 23,258.80 100.0 11. Ban Pha Daen , 2.80 33.5 149.40 0.4 35,061.90 12. Ban Pat Bok 100.0 . 5,219.40 46.7 2,447.90 7.5 32,565.40 13. Banlha Charoen 100.0 . .70 14. Ban Thung Sala , . 50,586.10 52.3 I7,778.60 45. 15. Ban Norig Hiang 4,120.90 I8.4 17,530.80 7 16. Ban Na Kae , 13,944,70 48.5 8,313.20 28.9 6,498.90 22.6 28,756.80 100.0 61 ^I ^ Table 3-14 (continued) Village Name Income (Baht) Total A riculture Non-a iculture Collection NTFPs 9'0 Baht % Baht % Baht 70 Baht 672.30 2.5 27,359.10 100.0 17. Ban Mae Hang 12,243.70 44.8 14,443.10 52.8 21.7 41,274.60 too. o 18. Ban Mae Kwak 20,812.40 50.4 I I, 498.20 27.9 8,964.00 5.7 16,952.70 100.0 19, Ban On Tai 7,972.30 47.0 8,022.00 47.3 958.40 2.7 28,082.70 100.0 20. Ban Huai Hok 21,768.60 77.5 5,567.10 19.8 747.00 2.3 35,332.54 100.0 21. Ban Rong Ta 15,711.50 44.5 18,820.20 53.3 800.84 10.3 28,202.20 100.0 22. Ban Huat 9,722.30 34.5 15,566.60 55.2 2,913.30 2.4 24,934.27 100.0 23. Ban Pang La 3.49t. 60 14.0 20,839.00 83.6 603.67 38.5 34,498.42 100.0 24. Ban ManTeeb Luang 19,236.70 55.8 1,983.80 5.8 13,277.92 6.5 23,823.60 100.0 25. Ban Nam Long 17,641.40 74.1 4,638.90 19.5 1,543.30 2.3 17.1 44.64 100.0 26. Ban Ngiu Ngam 7,167.30 41.8 9,585. , O 50.9 392.24 4.3 54,079.68 100.0 28. Ban Mai Na Chae 36,466.50 67.6 15,281.70 28.3 2,331.48 5.3 28,273.43 100.0 29. Ban Sop Phlung I2,960.50 45.8 t3,815.20 48.9 1,497.73 10.0 16, a72.77 100.0 29. Ban Sop Phlung 9,043.90 55.9 5,519.50 34.1 1.61 1.37 4.9 13,884.66 100.0 30. Ban Pong It ,523.40 83.0 1,680.00 12.1 681.26 14.0 18,851.66 . 100.0 31. Ban Hat Chieo 10,921.40 57.9 5,292.00 28.1 2,638.26 8.4 32,543.00 100.0 Total I6,945.30 52.1 42,875.40 39.6 2,722.30 ^ ^ U. , Table 3-15 Financial Status of Respondents by Community (%) Village Name Total Saving Status Debt Status Total yes none do not answer (%) In debt No debt do not answer (%) p aeng 78.6 21.4 100.0 21.4 78.6 2. Ban Sri Pan I00.0 .I 100.0 36.4 63.6 100.0 3. Ban Wari Khwai 100.0 46.5 51.2 2.3 100.0 4. Ban Haen Tai 100.0 17.1 80.0 2.9 5, Ban Phiao 100.0 100.0 32.1 64.3 3.6 100.0 6. Ban BO Si Liarn 100.0 23.1 76.9 I00.0 7. Ban Mae Kiw Tarn 100.0 46.2 53.8 100.0 8. Ban Khun Haen 100.0 100.0 100.0 9. Ban Hua Thini 100.0 I7.4 82.6 100.0 10. Ban So Pon 100.0 25.0 72.5 2.5 100.0 I I, Ban Pha Daen 100.0 54.5 45.5 100.0 12. Ban Pak Bok 100.0 61.5 38.5 100.0 13. Ban Tha Charoen 100.0 67.4 32.6 100.0 14. Ban Thun Sala 100.0 33.3 66.7 100.0 lang 58.8 41.2 16. Ban Na Kae 47.8 52.2 100.0 30.4 69.6 100.0 <1. ^ ^I Table 3-15 (continued) Total Debt Status Total Village Name Saving Status (%) (, fo) In debt No debt do not answer yes none do not answer 69.7 30.3 100.0 17. Ban Mae Hang 81.8 18.2 100.0 76.7 100.0 18. Ban Mae Kwak 76.7 23.3 100.0 23.3 60.8 100.0 19. Ban On Tai 68.6 31.4 100.0 39.2 80.8 100.0 20. Ban Huai Hok 76.9 23.1 100.0 19.2 I00.0 21. Ban RongTa 77.3 22.7 100.0 455 54.5 34.1 1.6 I00.0 22. Ban Huat 86.9 13.1 100.0 67.2 34.4 3.1 100.0 23. Ban Pang La 78.1 18.8 3.1 100.0 62.5 67.7 1.6 100.0 24. Ban Mae Tech Lunig 74.2 24.2 1.6 100.0 30.6 100.0 25. Ban Nam Long 58.8 41.2 100.0 20.6 79.4 4.8 100.0 26. Ban Ngiu Ngarn 88.1 9.5 2.4 100.0 40.5 54.8 71.4 100.0 28. Ban Mai Na Chae 90.5 4.8 4.8 100.0 28.6 100.0 29. Ban Sop Phiung 78.3 21.7 100.0 43.5 56.5 2.2 too. o 29, Ban Sop Phlung 76.1 21.7 2.2 100.0 37.0 60.9 5.0 100.0 30. Ban Pong 65.0 35.0 100.0 45.0 50.0 100.0 3I. Ban Hat Chieo 71.4 28.6 100.0 35.7 64.3 1.5 100.0 Total 28.4 70.9 0.8 400.0 39.8 58.8 ^ ^ V, Table 3-16 Causes of Family Debt by Community (%) Village Name Causes Total agriculture household Facilities (%) I&2 I&3 2&3 inputs ( I ) expenditures (2) (3) I&2&3 g 66.7 33.3 2. Ban Sri Pan 100.0 100.0 3. Ban Wari K}Iwai 4. Ban Haen Tai 100.0 16.7 100.0 5. Ban Phiao all 11.1 11.1 6. Ban BO Si Liam 100.0 100.0 7. Ban Mae Kiw Tom 8.3 8. Ban Khun Haen I000 g 50.0 25.0 25.0 100.0 10. Ban Sop Pon 10.0 11. Ban Pha Daen 100.0 16.7 12, Ban Pal< Bok 100.0 100.0 13. Ban Tha Charoen 13.8 6.9 100.0 42.9 14.3 14.3 28.6 15. Ban Norig Hiarig 50.0 17.9 3.6 14.3 16. Ban Na Kae 42.9 28.6 14.3 14.3 100.0 \O ^I ^I Table 3-16 (continued) Callses Total Village Name (%) ag, 'jou!tore household Facilities ,&2 I&3 2&3 I&2&3 inputs ( I ) expenditures (2) (3) 17. Ban Mae Hang 78.3 21.7 100.0 18. Ban Mae Kwak 57.1 28.6 14.3 100.0 19. Ban 011 Tai 45.0 15.0 10.0 20.0 10.0 100.0 20. Ball Hanal HDk 80.0 20.0 . 100.0 21. Ban Rong Ta 70.0 30.0 . 100.0 22. Ball Huat 43.9 24.4 19.5 12.2 100.0 23. Ball Pang La 20.0 40.0 30.0 10.0 100.0 24. B"I M" Teeb hang 41.4 26.3 10.5 15.8 . 100.0 " 25. Ban Nani Long 71.4 . 28.6 100.0 26. Ball Ngiu Ngam 58.8 29.4 11.8 100.0 28. Ban Mai Na Cmae 50.0 33.3 16.7 100.0 29. Ban Sop Phlur^ 70.0 30.0 100.0 29. Baai Sop Phiung 35.3 23.5 11.8 17.6 I1.8 100.0 30, Ban PCng 59.3 14.8 14.8 7.4 3.7 100.0 31, Ban Hat Chico 60.0 - 40.0 . 100.0 Total 55.6 22.3 6.7 1.7 0.6 0.2 2.9 100.0 -. ^ \I , 1/8 Table 3-17 Soumns of Credit by Community (%) Village Name Sources of Credit Total APIia, !tonal con^. I Trader Relatives Friends ., d Bank Co^ hit I Ban Sop Hagng 66.7 33.3 ,00.0 2. Ban Sri Pan 50.0 50.0 too. o 3. Ban Warig Khwai 80.0 10.0 10.0 100.0 4. Ban Hamg Tai 100.0 100.0 5. Ban Pmao 66.6 16.7 16.7 100.0 6. Ban BO Si Linm 66.7 33.3 100.0 7. Ban Mae Kiw Tom 75.0 16.7 8.3 100.0 8, Ban Khun Haeng 9. Ban Him Tmung 75.0 25.0 100.0 10. Ban Sop Pon 90.0 10.0 100.0 11. Ban Pha Dae"g 72.3 11.1 16.7 100.0 12. Ban Pal: Bok 75.0 15.0 10.0 100.0 13. Ban Tha Charoen 79.2 13.8 6.9 100.0 14. Ban Tliung Sala 71.5 . 28.6 100.0 15. Ban Nong Himg 67.9 32.1 I00.0 16. Ball Na Kan 85.8 14.3 100.0 17. Ban Mae Hang 47.8 26.1 ,7.4 8.7 100.0 18* Ban Mae Kwak too. o I00.0 19. Ban 0.1 Tai 55.0 20.0 25.0 ,00.0 20 Ban Huai 110k 70.0 30.0 100.0 21. Ban tong Ta 75.0 25.0 a00.0 22. Ban Huat 43.9 24.4 ,9.5 12.2 100.0 23. Ban Pang La 60.0 30.0 10.0 100.0 . 24. Ban Mae Teeb Lumg 75.5 10.5 44.0 too. o 25. Barn Nani Long 71.4 14.3 14.3 100.0 26. Ban Ngiu Ngan, 70.6 17.6 11.8 100.0 27. Ban Mee Ngao 75.1 16.6 8.3 100.0 28, Ban Mai Na Chae 70.0 30.0 100.0 29. Ban Sop Flung 70.6 17.6 11.8 100.0 30. Ban Pong 77.8 14.8 7.4 100.0 31 . Ban Hat Chieo 60.0 15.0 20.0 5.0 too. o Total 67.9 29 6.3 1.3 13.8 7.8 100.0 1/9 Table 3-18 Main Purpose of Visitation ofNgao DF. of Respondents by Community (%) village Name visitation of Ngao Demonstration Forest Total never Main PIi OSe of Visitation recreation hunting gazing cutting collecting livestock wood NTFPs I Ban Sop Haeng 35.7 7.1 7.1 50.1 I00.0 2. Ban Sri Pan 27.3 12.2 6.1 54.4 100.0 3. Ban Warig Khwai 23.3 2.3 74.4 100.0 4. Ban Haeng Tai 28.6 8.6 62.8 100.0 5. Ban Plumo 23.2 3.6 73.2 100.0 6. Ban BO Si Liam 38.5 15.4 7.7 38.4 100.0 7. Ban Mae Kiw Tarn 42.3 57.7 100.0 8. Ban Khun Haeng 35.5 3.2 61.3 100.0 9. Ban Hua Thang 4.3 95.7 100.0 10. Ban Sop Pon 17.5 7.5 10.3 64.7 100.0 I I. Ban Pha Daeng 15.2 6.1 6.1 72.6 I00.0 12. Ban Pat Bok 15.4 84.6 100.0 13, Ban Tha Charoen 27.9 2.3 4.7 65.1 100.0 14. Ban Thung Sala 14.3 4.8 4.8 76.1 100.0 15. Ban Norig Hiang 49.0 2.0 2.0 5.9 41.1 100.0 16. Ban Na Kan '6.1 73.9 100.0 , 17. Ban Mae Hang 9.1 6.1 3.0 3.0 6.1 72.7 aOO. O 18. Ban Mae Kwak 23.3 16.7 13.3 46.7 I00.0 19. Ban On Tai 13.7 3.9 9.8 2.0 5.9 64.7 100.0 20 Ban Huai Hok 15.4 19.2 3.8 61.6 100.0 21. Ban RongTa 13.6 4.5 4.5 9.0 68.4 100.0 22. Ban Huat 21.3 6.6 4.9 1.6 3.3 62.3 100.0 23. Ban Pang La 15.6 6.3 3.1 12.5 62.5 100.0 24. Ban Mae Teeb Luang 27.4 4.8 1.6 3.2 63.0 100.0 25, Ban Nam Long 2.9 2.9 8.8 2.9 82.5 100.0 26. Ban Ngiu Ngam 26.2 24 2.4 4.8 64.2 100.0 27. Ban Mae Ngao 14.3 14.3 714 100.0 28. Ban Mai Na Chae 39.1 60.9 100.0 100.0 29. Ban Sop Flung 15.2 13.0 8.7 63.1 100.0 30. Ban Pong 30.0 15.0 3.4 1.7 49.9 31 . Ban Hat Chieo 7.1 7.1 85.8 100.0 100.0 Total 217 3.8 4.9 1.3 3.0 65.3 120 Table 3-19 Sources of Timber for Houshold Construction by Community (%) Village Name Cutting from Ngao Buying from. .. Cutting & Buying Total DF. Neighbor others I Ban Sop Haeng 7.1 92.9 100.0 2. Ban Sri Pan 18.2 81.8 I00.0 3. Ban Warig Khwai 41.9 46.5 I1.6 I00.0 4, Ban Haeng Tai 42.9 48.6 8.5 100.0 5. Ban Phiao 23.2 62.5 1.8 12.5 100.0 6. Ban BO Si Liarn 61.5 23.1 7.7 7.7 100.0 7. Ban Mae Kiw Tan 65.4 15.4 19.2 100.0 8. Ban Khun Hanng 38.7 35.5 25.8 100.0 9. Ban Hua Tmung 26.1 43.5 30.4 100.0 10, Ban Sop Pon 52.5 37.5 10.0 I00.0 I I. Ban Pha Daeng 60.6 24.2 15.2 too. o 12: Ban Palc Bok 69.2 23.4 7.7 100.0 13. Ban Tha Charoen 34.9 46.5 I8.6 100.0 14. Ban Thinig Sala 23.8 47.6 28.6 100.0 15. Ban Nong Hiang 21.6 54.9 3.9 19.6 100.0 16. Ban Na Kan 8.7 60.9 17.4 13.0 100.0 17. Ban Mae Hang 72.7 15.2 12.1 100.0 18. Ban Mae Kwak 73.3 10.0 16.7 100.0 19. Ban On Tai 49.1 43.1 7.8 100.0 20 Ban Huai Hok 61.6 34.6 3.8 100.0 21. Ban Rong Ta 27.2 45.5 27.3 I00.0 22. Ban Huat 36.1 39.3 4.9 19.7 100.0 23. Ban Pang La 28.1 53.1 18.8 100.0 24. Ban Mae Teeb Luang 45.2 41.9 12.9 100.0 25. Ban Nam Long 58.8 32.3 8.9 100.0 26. Ban Ngiu Ngam 714 26.2 2.4 100.0 27, Ban Mae Ngao 42.9 38.1 19.0 100.0 28, Ban Mai Na Chae 21.7 52.2 26.1 100.0 29, Ban Sop Flung 47.8 41.3 10.9 100.0 30, Ban Pong 30.0 55.0 1.7 13.3 100.0 31. Ban Hat Chieo 71.4 28.6 100.0 Total 42.7 42.0 1.2 14.1 100.0 121 Table 3-20 Use of Fuel Wood and Chacoal of Respondents by Connnu, ,ity ( fo) Source of Fuelwood/Chacoal Total Village Name never cutting buying from. .. cutting & from buying others orest/ farm neighbor land 14.3 100.0 Ban Sop Haeng 7.1 50.0 28.6 9.1 100.0 2. Ban Sri Pan 27.3 273 27.3 9.1 16.3 100.0 3. Ban Warig Khwai 7.0 72.1 2.3 2.3 8.6 100.0 4. Ban Haeng Tai 2.9 77.1 11.4 17.9 100.0 5. Ban Phiao 8.9 35.7 37.5 7.6 100.0 6. Ban BO Si Liam 7.7 46.2 38.5 100.0 7. Ban Mae Kiw Tam 3.8 923 3.8 12.9 100.0 8. Ban Khun Haeng 3.2 51.6 25.8 6.5 8.7 100.0 9. Ban Hua Thung 8.7 65.2 174 7.5 100.0 10, Ban Sop Pon I7.5 57.5 150 2.5 18.2 100.0 I I. Ban Pha Daeng 12.1 66.7 3.0 15.4 100.0 12. Ban Pak Bok 7.7 69.2 7.7 t 6.2 100.0 13. Ban Tha Charoen 30.2 34.9 14.0 4.7 14.3 100.0 14. Ban Thung Sala 4.8 57.1 23.8 3.9 100.0 15. Ban Norig Hiang 23.5 45.1 25.5 20 11.5 100.0 16. Ban Na Kae 27.0 46.2 11.5 3.8 100.0 17. Ban Mae Hang 6.1 90.9 3.0 100.0 18. Ban Mae Kwak 23.4 73.3 3.3 100.0 19. Ban On Tai 2.0 90.2 5.9 2.0 100.0 20 Ban Huai Hok 96.2 3.8 100.0 21. Ban Rong Ta 59.1 40.9 3.3 100.0 22. Ban Huat 18.0 59.0 19.7 100.0 23. Ban Pang La 12.5 68.8 18.7 3.2 100.0 24. Ban Mae Teeb Luang 33.9 37.1 24.2 I. 6 8.8 100.0 25. Ban Nam Long 70.6 20.6 7.1 100.0 26. Ban Ngiu Ngam 9.5 50.0 31.0 2.4 19.0 100.0 27. Ban Mae Ngao 19.1 23.8 38.1 8.7 100.0 28. Ban Mai Na Chae 13.1 60.9 13.0 4.3 8.7 100.0 29. Ban Sop PIung 6.6 804 4.3 6.7 100.0 30. Ban Pong 21.7 400 23.3 8.3 100.0 31. Ban Hat Chieo 92.9 7.1 7.7 100.0 Total 13.2 59.6 17.7 1.8 122 Table 3-21 Hunting of Wildlif^, by Community Village Name Use of Respondents Estimated Total Never Total Purpose (%) Average Use I Year housetiold (no. /yr. ) (nonUyr) (%) sale household use o111 use & sale too. ) an op Haeng 78.6 21.4 7 0.5 35 2. Ban Sri Pan 9.1 90.9 24 2.2 120 3. Ban Warig Khwai 930 7.0 10 0.2 50 4. Ban Haeng Tai 97.1 2.9 3 0.1 15 5. Ban Phrao 98.2 1.8 5 0.1 25 6. Ban BO Si Liarn 92.3 7.7 10 0.7 50 7. Ban Mae Kiw Tom 96.2 3.8 2 0.1 10 8. Ban Ithun Haeng 90.3 9.7 28 0.9 140 9. Ban Hua Thung 100.0 10. Ban Sop Pon 92.5 5.0 2.5 1/2 2.8 560 11. Ban Pha Daeng 87.9 12.1 45 1.4 225 12. Ban Pak Bok 84.6 15.4 40 3.1 200 13. Ban Ina Charoen 97.7 2.3 60 1.4 300 14. Ban Thung Sala 95.2 4.8 55 2.6 275 15. Ban Nong Hiarig 96.1 3.9 5 0.1 25 16. Ban Na Kae 100.0 17. Ban Mae Hang 78.8 21.2 60 1.8 300 18. Ban Mae Kwak 93.3 6.7 20 0.7 100 19. Ban On Tai 100.0 20. Ban Huai Hok 80.8 19.2 60 2.3 300 21. BanRongTa 73.0 18 4.5 4.5 49 2.2 245 22. Ban Huat 95.1 4.9 25 04 125 23. Ban Pang La 93.8 6.2 11 0.3 55 24. Ban Mar Teeb Luarig 91.9 8.1 130 2.1 650 25, Ban Nam Long 88.2 I1.8 15 0.4 75 26. Ban Ngiu Ngam 97.6 2.4 4 0.1 20 27. Ban Mae Ngao 90.5 9.5 12 0.6 60 28, Ban Mai Na 01ae 95.7 4.3 10 0.4 50 29. Ban Sop Phiung 100.0 30, Ban Pong 100.0 31. Ban Hat Chieo 57.2 35.7 7.1 52 3.7 260 Total 92.3 6.6 0.4 0.7 854 0.8 4,270 Estimated total wildlife hunted by villagers living in Ngao Demonstration Forest (62 villages) = 9,665 noJ . . 123 Table 3-22 Collecting of Bamboo Clum by Cornmunity Estimated Total Village Name Use of Respondents Total Average Use I Year Never Purpose (%) (cullulyr. ) (culliVH. /yr) household (%) housetiold sale (CUIm) use onI use & sale' I . Ban Sop Haeng 85.7 14.3 425 30.4 2,185 2. Ban Sri Pan 100.0 3. Ban Warig Khwai 81.4 18.6 343 8.0 1,715 750 4. Ban Haeng Tai 68.6 257 5.7 150 4.3 , 850 5. Ban Phrao 91.1 8.9 170 30 6. Ban BO Si Liarn 69.5 30.5 550 42.3 2,750 7. Ban Mae Kiw Tarn 65.4 34.6 710 27.3 3,550 8. Ban Ithun Haeng 77.4 22.6 590 19.0 2,950 9. Ban Hua Thung 65.2 17.4 17.4 260 11.3 1,300 400 10. Ban Sop Pon 82.5 12.5 5.0 80 2.0 I I . Ban Pha Daeng 87.9 12.1 270 8.2 1,350 775 12. Ban Pat Bok 53.8 46.2 155 I1.9 13. Ban Tha Chumen 79.1 9.3 4.7 6.9 5,285 122.9 26,425 865 14. Ban Thung Sala 47.6 42.9 95 173 8.2 41.2 15. Ban Norig Hiang 94.1 5.9 2,100 I0,500 12.6 16. Ban Na Kae 87.0 13.0 290 1,450 17. Ban Mae Hang 45.5 36.3 6.1 12.1 3,115 944 15,575 18. Ban Mae Kwak 56.7 13.3 13.3 16.7 1,435 47.8 7,175 19. Ban On Tai 66.7 11.8 2, .5 4,170 81.8 20,850 20. Ban Huai Hok 30.8 61.5 7.7 815 31.3 4,075 7.7 845 21. Ban RongTa 54.5 27.3 18.2 169 22. Ban Huat 86.9 4.9 4.9 3.3 2,280 374 I I, 400 23. Ban Pang La 68.8 21.9 9.3 3,010 94.1 15,050 24. Ban Mar Teeb Luarig 90.3 8.1 1.6 3,190 51.5 t 5,950 980 25. Ban Nam Long 52.9 23.6 23.5 196 5.8 2.9 600 26. Ban Ngiu Ngam 90.5 9.5 120 27. Ban Mae Ngao 100.0 28. Ban MaiNaCliae 100.0 5.2 29. Ban Sop Phlung 84.8 15.2 240 1,200 30. Ban Pong 91.7 8.3 450 7.5 2,250 21.1 31. Ban Hat Chieo 35.7 ~ 50.0 14.3 295 1,475 Total 76.3 16.1 2.3 5.3 31,036 30.0 155,180 Estimated total bamboo clum collected by villagers living in Ngao Demonstration Forest (62 villages) = 362,430 calmsly 124 Table 3-23 Collecting of Bamboo Shoot by Community Village Name Use of Respondents Estimated Total Total Never Purpose (%) Average Use I Year (kg. /yr. ) (kgJllJyr) hallsdiold household (%) sale (kg. ) use use & sale I . Ban Sop Hanng 50.0 14.3 7. , 28.6 1,515 108.2 7,575 2. Ban Sri Pan 36.4 63.6 4,170 106.4 5,850 3. Ban Wrung Khwai 41.9 36.0 22.1 3,686 85.7 I8,430 4. Ban Hanng Tai 314 62.9 5.7 661 18.9 3,305 5, Ban Phrao 28.6 64.2 5.4 1.8 1,904 34.0 9,520 6. Ban BO Si Liarn 30.8 53.8 7.7 7.7 530 40.8 2,650 7. Ban Mae Kiw Tom 39.0 30.5 30.5 4,970 191.2 24,850 8. Ban Khun Hanng 45.2 19.4 16.1 19.4 2,395 77.3 I 1,975 9. Ban Hua Ihung 63.0 37.0 370 16.1 1,850 10. Ban Sop FDn 27.5 60.0 2.5 10.0 2,572 64.3 I2,860 I I. Ban Pha Dagng 42.4 48.5 3.0 6.1 1,125 34.1 5,625 12. Ban Pat Bok 7.7 53.8 38.5 675 51.9 3,375 13. Ban inIa Chainen 37.2 41.9 20.9 6,582 153.1 32,910 14. Ban Thung Sala 19.1 61.9 19.0 1,450 69.0 7,250 15, Ban Norig 11iang 62.7 25.5 11.8 3,750 73.5 18,750 16. Ban Na Kae 39.2 47.8 13.0 3,680 160.0 18,400 17, Ban Mae Hang 27.3 18.1 9.1 45.5 2,840 86.1 14,200 18. Ban Mae Kwak 23.3 40.0 36.7 3,012 100.4 15,060 19. Ban On Tai 314 33.3 35.3 5,690 111.6 28,450 20. Ban Huai Hok 11.5 77.0 ,1.5 630 24.2 3,150 21. Ban Rong Ta 13.6 50.0 4.6 31.8 2,110 95.9 I0,550 22. Ban Huat 34.5 34.4 31.1 1,910 31.3 9,550 23. Ban Pang Ia 28.1 t8.8 53.1 3,198 99.9 15,990 24. Bai Iv^e Teeb ^Ig 40.3 43.5 6.5 9.7 2,701 43.6 I3,505 25. Ban Nam Long 14.7 58.8 26.5 1,470 43.2 7,350 26. Ban Ngiu Ngam 54.8 28.6 16.6 1,207 28.7 6,035 27. Ban Mae Ngao 14.3 85.7 376 17.9 1,880 28. Ban MaiNa Cl^ 43.6 30.4 26.0 795 34.6 3,975 29. Ban Sop Phiung 34.8 28.2 15.3 21.7 3,975 86.4 I9,875 30. Ban Pong 43.3 43.3 6.7 6.7 1,484 24.7 7,420 31. Ban Hat Chieo 7. f 78.6 14.3 495 35.4 2,475 Total 33.6 44.9 3.0 18.5 68,928 66.7 344,640 Estimated total bamboo shoot colleeted by villagers living in Ngao Demonstration Forest (62 villages) = 805,803 kg. fyr. 125 Table 3-24 Collecting of Rattan by Comumitty Estimated Total village Name Use of Respondents Total Average Use I Year Never Purpose (%) (in. /yr. ) (miniyr) household (%) household sale (in. ) use use & sale I. Ban Sop Hacng 100.0 2. Ban Sri Pan I00.0 3, Ban Warig Khwai 95.3 4.7 10 0.2 50 4. Ban Hanng Tai I00.0 5. Ban Phrao too. o 6. Ban BO Si Liarn too. o 7. Ban Man Kiw Tan 100.0 8. Ban Khun Hanng 100.0 9. Ban Hua Thung 100.0 10, Ban Sop Pon 95.0 5.0 9 0.2 45 I I. Ban Pha Danng 97.0 3.0 20 0.6 100 12. Ban Pat Bok 92.3 7.7 40 3.1 200 13 . Ban Tha Chantn 100.0 14. Ban Thung Sala 100.0 15. Ban Nong Hiarig 98.0 2.0 15 0.3 75 16. Ban Na Kan too, o 17. Ban Mae Hang 100.0 18. Ban Mae Kwak 100.0 19. Ban On Tai too. o 20, Ban Huai Hok 100.0 21. Ban RODgTa 100.0 22. Ban Huat 100.0 23. Ban Pang La 100.0 24, Ban lvlaeTeeb Lung 100.0 120 25. Ban Nam Long 91.2 8.8 24 0.7 26. Ban Ngiu Ngam 97.6 2.4 27, Ban Mae Ngao I00.0 28. BallMaiNaOiae 100.0 29. Ban Sop Phlung 100.0 30. Ban FDng 100.0 31. Ban Hat Chieo 100.0 590 Total 98.9 1.1 1/8 0.1 Estimated total rattan collected by villagers living in Ngao Demonstration Forest (62 villages) = , ,208 in. /yr. F~ 130 Table 3-29 Collecting of Edible insects by Community village Name Use of Respondents Estimated Total Total Never Purpose (%) Average Use I Year (kg. /yr. ) O:gnuyr) household (%) housdiold sale (kg. ) use onl use & sale I. Ban Sop Hacng 92.9 7.1 5 04 25 2. Ban Sri Pan 100.0 3. Ban Warig Khwai 74.4 25.6 98 2.3 490 4. Ban Hanng Tai 88.6 1/4 13 0.4 65 5. Ban Phrao 94.6 5.4 15 0.3 75 6. Ban BO Si Liarn 100.0 7. Ban Mae 1 8. Ban Khun Hanng 100.0 9. Ban Hua Thung 100.0 10. Ban Sop Pon 90.0 10.0 15 0.4 75 I I . Ban Pha Daeng 75.8 21.2 3.0 102 3.1 510 12. Ban Pat Bok 61.5 23.1 15.4 11 0.8 55 13. Ban Tha Charoen 100.0 14, Ban Thung Sala 95.2 4.8 10 0.5 50 15. Ban Nong Hiang 94.1 3.9 2.0 13 0.3 65 16. Ban Na Kae 73.9 26.1 16 0.7 80 17. Ban Mae Hang 78.8 21.2 24 0.7 120 18. Ban Mae Kwak 96.7 3.3 12 0.4 60 19. Ban On Tai 94.1 59 18 0.4 36 20. Ban Huai Hok 80.8 19.2 15 0.6 75 21 . Ban Rong Ta 95.5 4.5 10 0.5 50 22. Ban Huat 98.4 1.6 8 O. , 40 23. Ban Pang La 90.6 6.3 3.1 14 0.4 70 24. Ban Mae Tech Lung 93.6 4.8 1.6 21 0.3 105 , 25. Ban Nam Long 91.2 8.8 11 0.3 55 26. Ban Ngiu Ngam 73.8 21.4 4.8 20 0.5 100 27. Ban Mae jigao 81.0 19.0 16 0.8 80 30 28. Ban MaiNa 0100 95.7 4.3 6 0.3 29. Ban Sop Phiung 100.0 50 30. Ban Pong 96.7 3.3 10 0.2 31. Ban Hat Chieo 71.5 7.1 21.4 20 1.4 100 Total 90. .6 8.3 0.1 1.0 54? 0:5 2,565 Estimated total edible insects collected by villagers living in-Ngao Demonstr^tion Forest (62-villages) = 61041 kgJyr. . 1-31 Table 3-30 Fishing in Ngao Demonstration Forest by Coriumunity Estimated Total Village Name Use of Respondents Total Avenge Use I Year Never Purpose (%) (kg. /yr. ) 0 I. Ban Sop Haeng 78.6 21.4 30 2.1 150 2. Ban Sri Pan 9.1 90.9 60 5.5 300 3. Ban Warig Kliwai 76.7 18.6 4.7 76 1.8 380 4. Ban Hanng Tai 100.0 5. Ban Phrao 98.2 1.8 10 0.2 50 6. Ban BO Si Liarn 69.2 30.8 12 0.9 60 7. Ban Mac Kiw Tarn 80.8 19.2 80 3.1 400 8. Ban Khun Haeng 96.8 3.2 56 1.8 280 9, Ban Hua Thung 1000 10. Ban Sop Pon 90.0 10.0 8 0.2 40 I I. Ban Pha Daeng 81.8 15.2 3.0 50 1.5 250 12. Ban Pat Bok 76.9 15.4 7.7 25 1.9 125 13. Ban Tma Charoen 90.7 9.3 41 ,. O 205 14. Ban Thung Sala 905 9.5 10 0.5 50 15_ Ban Nong Hiang 100.0 16. Ban Na Kae 95.7 4.3 11 0.5 55 17. Ban Mae Hang 75.8 24.2 48 t. 5 240 18. Ban Mae Kwak 867 13.3 20 0.7 100 19. Ban On Tai 98.0 2.0 10 0.2 50 20. Ban Huai Hok 73.1 26.9 28 1.1 140 21 . Ban Rong Ta 90.9 9.1 13 0.6 65 22. Ban Huat 984 I. 6 10 0.2 50 23. Ban Pang La 90.6 9.4 8 0.3 40 24. Ban Man Teeb Luang 82.3 16.1 1.6 134 2.2 670 , 25. Ban Nam Long 76.5 23.5 80 2.4 400* 14 0.3 70 * 26. Ban Ngiu Ngam 85.7 14.3 . 27. Ban Mae Ngao 100.0 100 28. BanMaiNaChae 95.7 43 20 1.2 50 29. Ban Sop Phlung 93.5 6.5 10 0.2 30. Ban Pong 983 I. 7 5 0.1 25 31. Ban Hat Chieo 78.6 21.4 23 1.6 115 Total 89.0 10.5 0.1 0.4 892 0.9 4,460 Estimated-total fishes Collected by villagers living in NgaO Demonstration Forest (62 villages) = 10,873 kg. /yr. . 132 Table 3-31 Collecting of Honey Bee by Community Village Name Use of Respondents Estimated Total Never Total Purpose (%) Average Use I Year (hive/yr. ) Olivemyyr) (%) household household sale (hive) use onI use & sale I. Ban Sop Haeng 100.0 2. Ban Sri Pan 100.0 11 1.0 55 3. Ban Warig Khwai 100.0 4. Ban Haeng Tai 100.0 5, Ban Phrao 98.2 1.8 5 0.1 25 6. Ban BO Si Liarn 100.0 7. Ban Mae Kiw Tom 96.2 3.8 3 0.1 15 8. Ban Khun Haeng 100.0 9. Ban Hua Thung 100.0 10. Ban Sop Pon 100.0 I I. Ban Pha Daeng 93.9 6.1 10 0.3 50 12. Ban Pat Bok 100.0 13. Ban Tha Clamen 100.0 14. Ban Thung Sala 95.2 4.8 12 0.6 60 15, Ban Nong Hiarig 100.0 16. Ban Na Kan 100.0 17. Ban Mae Hang 93.9 6.1 5 0.2 25 18, Ban Mae Kwak 100.0 19. Ban On Tai 98.0 2.0 10 0.2 50 20. Ban Huai Hok 96.2 38 4 0.2 20 21. Ban Rong Ta 100.0 22. Ban Huat 100.0 23. Ban Pang La 100.0 24. Ban Mae Teeb Luang 100.0 , . 25. Ban Nam Long 97.1 2.9 2 0.1 10 26. Ban Ngiu Ngam 100.0 27. Ban Mae Ngao 100.0 28. Ban Mai Na 0100 100.0 29. Ban Sop Phlung 100.0 30. Ban PODg 100.0 31. Ban Hat Chico 100.0 Total 98.0 1.7 0.3 62 0.1 3.0 Estimated total honey collected by villagers IMng in Ngao Demonstration Forest (62 villages) = 1,028. hives!yr. 133 Table 3-32 Collecting of Lac by Community Village Name Use of Respondents Estimated Total Total Average Never Purpose (%) Use I Year (kg. /yr. ) O, g. /IIJyr) household (%) houseliold sale (kg. ) use onI use & sale I. Ban Sop Hanng 100.0 2. Ban Sri Pan too. o 3. Ban WarigIthwai 100.0 4. Ban Haeng Tai 100.0 5. Ban Phiao 100.0 6. Ban BO Si Liam 100.0 7. Ban Mae Kiw Tani 100.0 8. Ban Khun Haeng 100.0 9. Ban Hua Thung 100.0 10. Ban Sop Pon 100.0 11. Ban Pha Daeng 97.0 3.0 10 0.3 50 12. Ban Pat Bok 92.3 77 30 2.3 150 13. Ban Tha Charoen 100.0 14. Ban Thung Sala 100.0 15. Ban Nong Hiang 100.0 16. Ban Na Kae 100.0 17. Ban Mae Hang 100.0 18. Ban Mae Kwak 100.0 19. Ban On Tai 100.0 20. Ban Huai Hok 96.2 38 2 0.1 10 21. Ban RongTa 100.0 22. Ban Huat 100.0 23. Ban Pang La 100.0 24. Ban Man Teeb Luang 100.0 25. Ban Nam Long 85.3 8.9 5.8 13 04 65 26. Ban Ngiu Ngam 100.0 27. Ban Mae Ngao 100.0 28. Ban Mai Na Chae 100.0 29. Ban Sop Phlung 97.8 2.2 10 02 50 30. Ban Pong 100.0 31. Ban Hat Chieo 1000 Total 99.1 0.6 0.3 65 0.4 325 Estimated total Iac collected by villagers living in Ngao Demonstration Forest (62 villages) = 1,028 kg. /yr. 134 Table 333 Perception of Forest Boundary by Community (%) Village Name Forest Boundary Total recognized unclear I. Ban Sop Hanng 92.9 7.1 100.0 2. Ban Sri Pan 63.6 36.4 100.0 3. Ban Warig Khwai 53.5 46.5 100.0 4. Ban Haeng Tai 48.6 51.4 100.0 5. Ban Phrao 58.9 41.1 100.0 6. Ban BO Si Liarn 37.3 62.7 100.0 7. Ban Man Kiw Tani 57.7 42.3 100.0 8. Ban 1<. 11un Haeng 35.5 64.5 100.0 9. Ban Hua Ihung 79.3 20.7 1000 10. Ban Sop Pon 80.0 20.0 100.0 11. Ban Pha Darng 66.7 33.3 t00.0 12. Ban Pat Bok 76.9 23.1 100.0 13. Ban Iha Charoen 60.5 39.5 100.0 14. Ban Thung Sala 28.6 71.4 100.0 15. Ban Norig Hiang 45.1 54.9 f 00.0 16. Ban Na Kan 73.9 26.1 100.0 17. Ban Mae Hang 78.8 21.2 100.0 18, Ban Mae Kwak 50.0 50.0 100.0 19. Ban On Tai 35.3 64.7 100.0 20. Ban Huai Hok 53.8 46.2 100.0 21 . Ban Rong Ta 77.3 22.7 100.0 22. Ban Huat 63.9 36.1 I00.0 23. Ban Pang La 53.1 46.9 I00.0 24. Ban Mac Teeb Luang 72.6 27.4 100.0 25. Ban Nam Long 85.3 14.7 doo. 0 26, Ban Ngiu Ngam 69.0 31.0 100.0 27. Ban Mae Ngao 61.9 38.1 100.0 28. Ban MaiNaChae 69.6 30.4 100.0 29. Ban Sop Phiung 52.2 47.8 100.0 30. Ban Pong 46.7 53.3 100.0 31. Ban Hat Chieo 78.6 21.4 100.0 Total 62.4 37.6 100.0 Table 3-34 Understanding of Conducting Activities in Ngao Demonstration Forest (%) Village Name Activity other NTFPs building house growing plant grazing cutting wood collecting fuel collecting fishing hunting livestock wood plant/ plant products 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 a 2 3 2 3 92.8 100.0 14.3 85.7 I. Ban Sop Hatng 100.0 21.4 78.6 14.3 85.7 100.0 14.3 85.7 14.3 85.7 7.1 54.4 100.0 81.8 18.2 2. Ban Sri Pan 100.0 18.2 81.8 18.2 81.8 100.0 36.4 63.6 72.7 27.3 45.5 79.1 100.0 100.0 3. Ban Warig Khwai 95.3 4.7 47 95.3 20.9 19.1 100.0 14.0 86.0 16.3 67.4 16.3 20.9 20.0 80.0 914 8.6 65.7 343 4. Ban Haeng Tai 85.7 14.3 257 743 25.7 74.3 100.0 28.6 714 82.9 17.1 37.5 62.5 7.2 929 25.0 34.0 41.0 5. Ban Phrao 98.2 18 16.1 83.9 I2.5 87.5 100.0 32.1 67.9 55.4 44.6 7.7 38.5 7.7 I5.4 38.5 46.2 7.7 15.4 76.9 6. Ban BO Si Liarn 15.4 69.2 15.4 15.4 69.2 15.4 23.1 769 15.4 84.6 30.8 61.5 7.7 23.1 69.2 53.8 19.2 3.8 96.2 1:5 15.4 731 7. Ban Mac Kiw 11.5 88.5 1/6 76.0 I 1.6 15.4 84.6 100.0 154 84.6 30.8 69.2 80.8 Tam 48.4 51.6 3.2 96.8 29.0 3.2 67.7 8. Ban Khun Haeng 6.5 93.5 19.4 80.6 29.0 71.0 100.0 64.5 35.5 25.8 74.2 43.5 52.2 4.3 4.3 91.3 4.3 13.0 43.5 43.5 9. Ban Hua Thung 95.7 4.3 522 435 4.3 39. , 56.5 43 95.7 4.3 30.4 65.2 4.3 78.3 17.4 4.3 77.5 20.0 2.5 27.5 700 2.5 2.5 95.0 2.5 ,5.0 42.5 42.5 10. Ban Sop Pon 5.0 92.5 2.5 32.5 65.0 ?. 5 25.0 12.5 2.5 97.5 2.5 30.0 67.5 2.5 333 66.7 3.0 97.0 15.2 18.2 66.7 11. Ban Pha Daeng 12.1 84.8 3.0 21.2 78.8 27.3 72.7 3.0 97.0 18.2 81.8 33.3 66.1 53.8 46.2 100 30.8 30.8 38.5 12. Ban Pat Bok 100 53.8 46.2 30.8 69.2 ,00.0 38.5 61.5 84.6 ,5.4 11.7 76.7 11.7 100 4.7 20.9 14.4 13. Ban Tha 4.7 90.7 4.7 9.3 86.0 4.7 7.0 88.4 47 95.3 4.7 11.6 88.4 23.3 7.7 Charoen 238 61.9 14.3 90.5 9.5 4.8 23.8 71.4 14. Ban Thung Sala 95.2 4.8 42.9 52.4 4.8 23.8 71.4 4.0 95.2 4.8 33.3 57.1 95 6.9 28.6 9.5 27.5 68.6 3.9 98.0 2.0 I 1.8 314 56.9 15. Ban Norig 98.0 2.0 137 84.3 2.0 33.3 647 20 98.0 2.0 21.6 76.5 2.0 45.1 52.9 2.0 Hian 21.7 69.6 8.7 95.7 4.3 87 26.1 65.2 16. Ban Na Kae 100.0 8.7 82.6 8.7 30.4 69.6 4.3 95.7 26.1 696 4.3 47.8 52.2 Note : I = allow 2 = not allow 3 = do not mow L-. IPJ U. Table 3-34 (continued) Activity Village Name building house growing plant grazing cutting wood collecting fuel collecting fishing hunting other NTFPs livestock wood plant/ plant products 2 a 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 a 2 3 3.0 97.0 2f2 17, Ban Mae Hang 78.8 24.2 75.8 3.0 97.0 t5.2 84.8 33.3 66.7 39.4 60.6 9.1 90.9 12.1 36.4 51.5 18. Ban Mae Kwak 13.3 86.7 26.7 73.3 36.7 63.3 100.0 20.0 70.0 10.0 46.7 43.3 10.0 26.7 63.3 10.0 3.3 86.7 10.0 16.7 20.0 63.3 19. Ban On Tai 13.8 100.0 86.2 15.7 78.4 5.9 2.0 9.8 9.8 90.2 15.7 80.4 3.9 23.5 76.5 5.9 94.1 5.9 39.2 54.9 20. Ban Huai Hok 7.7 34.6 65.4 92.3 26.1 53.8 26.1 100.0 34.6 65.4 65.4 34.6 28.9 73.1 3.8 96.2 50.0 50.0 4.5 95.5 31.8 68.2 21. BallRong Ta 54.5 45.5 50.0 50.0 54.5 45.5 95.5 4.5 63.6 36.3 9.0 90.9 22.7 31.8 45.5 22. Ban Huat 1.6 98.3 85.2 14.7 26.2 73.8 100.0 36.1 64.0 50.8 49.2 26.3 73.8 100 29.5 I3.1 57.4 3.1 96.9 23. Ban Pang La 9.4 81.3 9.4 34.4 65.6 3.1 96.9 34.4 65.6 37.5 62.5 15.6 68.8 15.6 9.4 90.6 9.4 28.1 62.5 24. Ban Mac Teeb 11.3 88.7 21.0 71.0 22.6 77.4 100.0 24.2 75.8 38.7 54.8 6.5 355 58.1 6.5 1.6 90.3 8.1 14.5 37.1 48.4 Luari 100.0 23.5 23.5 25. Ban Nam Long 76.5 76.5 100.0 23.5 38.3 38.3 55.9 44.1 82.5 70.6 100.0 5.9 58.8 35.2 us. ? 83.3 21.4 78.6 26, Ban Ngiu Ngarn 31.0 69.0 9.5 90.5 26.2 73.8 35.7 64.3 35.7 64.3 92.9 7.1 14.3 16.7 69.0 9.8 90.5 90.5 27. Ban Mae Ngao 9.6 33.4 66.7 1000 23.8 76.2 23.8 76.2 28.6 71.4 100.0 14.3 85.7 28. Ban Mai Na Chae 100.0 4.3 95.7 95.7 4.3 100.0 17.4 82.6 30.4 69.6 21.7 78.3 100.0 13.0 2t. 7 65.2 28.3 71.7 29. Ban Sop Phlung 28.3 71.7 13.0 74.0 13.0 4.3 84.8 10.9 17.4 69.6 13.0 37.0 50.0 t3.0 34.8 47.8 17.4 8.7 71.7 19.6 17.4 13.0 69.6 30. Ban Pong 28.3 71.7 26.7 73.3 IB. 3 66.7 15.0 3.3 80.0 16.7 25.0 55.0 20.0 41.7 38.3 20.0 20.0 55.0 25.0 8.3 66.7 25.0 16.7 15.0 68.3 31. Ban HatChieo 100.0 21.4 64.3 ,4.3 28.0 57.1 14.3 100.0 35.7 64.3 71.4 28.6 57.1 42.9 14.3 85.7 7.1 50.0 42.9 Total 6.5 91.5 1.6 20.5 77.7 4/7 23.6 73.2 3.2 1.5 95.5 3.1 23.0 72.2 4.0 45.5 50.6 3.9 29.5 65.5 4.9 3.5 91.7 4.8 11.0 31.1 57.9 Note : I = allow ,. 2 = not allow , 3 = do not know ^ CFj ^ 137 Table 3-35 Perception of Forest Conservation by Coriumunity (%) Total Village Name Perception no comment necessary riot necessary . Ban Sop Haeng 100.0 100.0 2. Ban Sri Pan 100.0 100.0 3. Ban Warig Khwai 100.0 100.0 4. Ban Haeng Tai 100.0 100.0 5. Ban Phrao 98.2 1.8 100.0 6. Ban BO Si Liarn 100.0 100.0 7. Ban Mae Kiw Tan 1000 100.0 100.0 8. Ban Khun Hanng 96.8 3.2 100.0 9. Ban Hua Thung 95.7 4.3 10. Ban Sop Pon 92.5 2.5 5.0 100.0 11. Ban Pha Daeng 90.9 3.0 6.1 100.0 100.0 12. Ban Pak Bok 100.0 13. Ban Tha Charoen I00.0 I000 100.0 14. Ban Thung Sala 100.0 100.0 15. Ban Nong HimIg 1000 100.0 16. Ban Na Kae 100.0 100.0 17. Ban Man Hang 100.0 100.0 18. Ban Mae Kwak 100.0 I00.0 19. Ban On Tai 100.0 100.0 20. Ban Huai Hok 100.0 100.0 21 . Ban Rong Ta 95.5 4.5 100.0 22. Ban Huat 95.1 4.9 100.0 23. Ban Pang La 96.9 3.1 100.0 24. Ban Mar Teeb Luang 98.4 1.6 100.0 25. Ban Nam Long 100.0 100.0 26. Ban Ngiu Ngani 904 2.4 7.2 100.0 27. Ban Mae I. igao 100.0 100.0 28. Ban MaiNa Char 100.0 100.0 29. Ban Sop Phlung 97.8 2.2 100.0 30. Ban Pong 96.7 3.3 100.0 31 . Ban Hat Chieo 100.0 100.0 Total 97.8 1.0 1.2 \ 138 Table 3-36 Atomde Towards Offorts of Forestry Officials by Community (%) Village Name Attitude Total sinnewliat negative neither somewhat positive no negative positive positive comment or ne ative I . Ban Sop Hanng 21.4 50.0 21.5 7.1 100.0 2. Ban Sri Pan 18.2 63.6 18.2 100.0 3. Ban WarigIchwai 7.0 37.2 46.5 7.0 2.3 100.0 4. Ban Hanng Tai 2.9 5.7 57.1 31.4 2.9 100.0 5. Ban Phrao 1.8 33.9 55.4 7.1 1.8 100.0 6. Ban BO Si Liarn 30.8 69.2 100.0 7. Ban Mae Kiw Tarn 7.7 69.2 23.1 100.0 8. Ban Khun Haeng 9.7 3.2 58.1 25.8 3.2 100.0 9. Ban Hua Thung 4.3 65.4 21.7 43 4.3 100.0 10. Ban Sop Pon 2.5 42.5 37.5 10.0 7.5 100.0 11. Ban Pha Daeng 3.0 30.3 60.6 6.1 100.0 12. Ban Pat Bok 7.7 61.5 30.8 100.0 13. Ban Tha Charnen 2.3 7.0 39.5 51.2 100.0 14. Ban Thung Sala 71.4 "4.3 9.5 4.8 100.0 15. Ban Norig Hiarig 2.0 7.8 490 33.4 3.9 3.9 100.0 16, Ban Na Kae 4.3 52.2 43.5 100.0 17. Ban Mae Hang 6.1 3.0 42.4 45.5 3.0 I00.0 18. Ban Mae Kwak 56.7 43.3 100.0 19, Ban On Tai 2.0 2.0 29.3 66.7 100.0 20. Ban Huai Hok 3.8 7.7 73.2 7.7 3.8 3.8 100.0 21. Ban Rong Ta 59.1 36.4 4.5 100.0 22. Ban Huai 1.6 3.3 36.2 55.7 1.6 1.6 100.0 23, Ban Pang La 94 56.2 31.3 3.1 100.0 24. Ban Mae Teeb Lung 6.5 46.8 43.5 1.6 1.6 100.0 25. Ban Nam Long 8.8 55.9 32.4 2.9 100.0 26, Ban Ngiu Ngam 4.8 30.9 61.9 2.4 100.0 27. Ban Mae Ngao 4.8 14.3 38.0 42.9 too. o 28. Ban Mai Na Chae 4.3 39.2 47.8 8.7 100.0 29. Ban Sop Phlung 8.7 47.8 37.0 6.5 100.0 30. Ban Pong 1.7 3.3 43.3 46.7 5.0 100.0 31. Ban Hat Chieo 71.4 21.4 7.1 100.0 Total 1.5 5.0 46.7 42.0 3.2 1.6 100.0 Table 3-37 Suggestions for Improving Efforts of Forestry Official by Conrrnunity (%) Activities Village Name all Total increasing forest Increasing improving well providing reducing protection relationship being of local knowledge/forest corruption with local community ry information community 14.3 57.2 100.0 I Ban Sop Haeng 21.4 7.1 36.4 9.1 100.0 2 Ban Pan 45.5 9.1 2.3 18.6 100.0 3 Ban Warig Khwai 41.9 27.9 7.0 2.3 5.7 28.6 I00.0 4 Ban Haeng 17.1 29 25.7 20.0 3.6 19.6 100.0 5 Ban Phrao 30.4 17.9 8.9 19.6 45.4 100.0 6 Ban BO SI Liam 31.5 7.7 7.7 7.7 3.8 I 1.4 100.0 7. Ban Mae Kiw Tam 34.9 26.9 11.5 11.5 65 6.5 100.0 8 Ban 1<. 11un Haeng 29.0 41.9 3.2 12.9 4.4 26.0 100.0 9 Ban Hua Thung 21.7 26.1 4.4 17.4 5.0 20.0 100.0 10 Ban Sop Pon 42.5 I2.5 10.0 too 3.0 30.2 100.0 11. Ban Pha Daeng 39.4 273 15.4 100.0 12 Ban Pak Bok 15.4 15.4 23.1 30.8 4.7 33.9 100.0 13 Ban Tha Charoen 39.5 9.3 4.7 7.9 286 100.0 14 Ban Thung Sala 19.0 9.5 19.0 23.8 11.8 29.3 100.0 15 Ban Nong Hiang 27.5 9.8 11.8 98 44 25.8 100.0 16 Ban Na Kae 43.5 13.0 4.4 8.9 ^ 1.19 @ Table 3.37 (continued) Village Name Activities increasing forest increasing improving well providing reducing all Total protection relationship with being of local knowledge/ corruption local community community forestry information an ae ang 48.5 21.2 6.1 9.1 15.1 100.0 18. Ban Mae Kwak 50.0 13.3 6.7 3.3 10.0 16.6 100.0 19, Ban On Tai 52.9 15.7 2.0 5.9 2.0 21.5 too. o 20. Ban Huai Hok 11.5 7.7 7.7 42.3 30.8 100.0 21. Ban Rong Ta 27.3 18.2 4.5 18.2 4.5 27.3 100.0 22. Ban Huat 54.1 24.6 8.2 3.3 6.6 3.3 100.0 23. Ban Pang La 40.6 21.9 6.3 3.1 3.1 25.0 100.0 24. Ban Man Teeb 56.5 17.7 3.2 Luari 4.8 11.3 6.5 100.0 25. Ban Nam Long 14.7 8.8 11.8 20.6 44.1 100.0 26. Ban Ngiu Ngam 47.6 9.5 16.7 2.4 23.8 100.0 27. Ban Man Ngao 42.9 19.0 4.8 9.5 23.8 100.0 28. Ban Mai Na Chae 39.1 13.0 8.7 21.7 4.3 13.2 I00.0 29. Ban Sop Ph!ung 39.1 17.4 6.5 8.7 28.2 100.0 30. Ban Pong 35.0 2t. 7 10.0 16.7 3.3 13.3 400.0 31. Ban Hat Chieo 28.6 14.3 7.1 7.1 42.9 too. o Total 37.9 17.0 6.9 11.3 5.4 21.5 100.0 o * ^I 141 Table 338 Recommended Forrns for Future Management ofNgao Demonstration Forest by Community (%) Recommendation Village Name Total conservaion allow cutting allow allow no comment only wood & collecting household use collecting NTFPs only only NITPs I. Ban Sop Haeng 7.1 7.1 85.8 100.0 2. Ban Sri Pan 36.4 63.6 100.0 3. Ban Warig Khwai 46.5 2.3 23.3 16.3 11.6 100.0 4. Ban Hanng Tai 48.6 2.9 14.1 28.6 5.8 100.0 5. Ban Phrao 28.6 8.9 16.1 44.6 1.8 100.0 6. Ban BO Si Liam 23.1 I5.4 15.4 46.2 100.0 7. Ban Mae Kiw Tan 26.9 30.8 3.8 35.8 2.7 100.0 8. Ban Khun Hanng 32.3 6.5 38.6 22.6 100.0 9. Ban Hua Thung 39.1 26.2 30.4 4.3 100.0 10. Ban Sop Pon 17.5 7.5 17.5 52.5 5.0 100.0 11. Ban Pha Darng 27.3 48.5 18.2 6.0 100.0 12. Ban Pat Bok 7.7 23.1 7.7 61.5 100.0 13. Ban Tha Chainen 37.2 7.0 41.9 11.6 23 100.0 14. Ban Tmung Sala 14.3 19.0 334 33.3 100.0 15. Ban Nong Hiang 25.5 7.8 21.6 43.1 20 100.0 16. Ban Na Kae 26.1 21.7 43.5 8.7 100.0 17. Ban Mae Hang 33.3 21.2 12.2 30.3 3.0 100.0 18. Ban Mae Kwak 40.0 6.7 23.3 30.0 100.0 19. Ban On Tai 35.3 I7.6 29.5 17.6 100.0 20. Ban Huai HDk 38.5 11.5 3.9 42.3 3.8 100.0 21. Ban Rong Ta 9.1 13.6 18.2 409 18.2 100.0 22. Ban Huai 47.5 I1.5 23.0 16.4 1.6 100.0 23. Ban Pang La 28.1 31.3 18.7 21.9 100.0 24. Ban Man Teeb Luang 17.7 22.6 30.7 27.4 1.6 100.0 25. Ban Nam Long 26.5 2.9 32.3 324 5.9 100.0 26. Ban Ngiu Ngam 28.6 I 1.8 31.0 238 4.8 100.0 27. Ban Mae Ngao 38.1 9.5 47.6 4.8 100.0 28. Ban MaiNa 0100 39.1 21.7 17.5 21.7 100.0 29. Ban Sop Phlung 19.6 26.1 19.6 34.8 100.0 30. Ban Pong 41.7 13.3 20.0 233 1.7 I00.0 31. Ban Hat Chieo 14.3 35.7 50.0 100.0 Total 30.6 12.1 24.0 30.3 3.0 too. o 142 Table 3-39 Reconrrnended Or anizations for Future Forest Management by Conarnuiii (%) Village Name Recommended Or anization Total government local Local all others (I (1) villager(2) organization organizations and 2/3 ) 3 1-3 I . Ban Sop Haeng 21.4 14.3 7.1 57.2 100.0 2. Ban Sri Pan 9.1 36.4 45.4 9.1 100.0 3. Ban Warig Khwai 25.6 9.3 65.1 100.0 4. Ban Haeng Tai 20.0 20.0 57.1 2.9 100.0 5. Ban Phrao 19.6 14.3 5.4 55.3 5.4 100.0 6. Ban BO Si Liam 7.7 77 46.2 30.7 7.7 100.0 7. Ban Mae Kiw Tom 7.7 23.1 7.7 61.5 100.0 8. Ban Khun Hanng 6.5 35.5 9.7 48.3 100.0 9. Ban Hua Thung 13.0 13.0 69.7 4.3 100.0 I O. Ban Sop Pon 15.0 10.0 2.5 57.5 15.0 100.0 11. Ban Pha Daeng 15.2 24.2 60.6 100.0 12. Ban Pak Bok 23.1 7.7 69.2 100.0 13. Ban Tha Charoen 279 2.3 4.7 65.1 100.0 -14. Ban Thung Sala 14.3 14.3 14.3 57.1 100.0 15. Ban Norig Hiang 21.6 13.7 11.8 50.9 2.0 100.0 16. Ban Na Kan I7.4 13.0 69.6 100.0 17. Ban Mae Hang 12.1 30.3 6.1 51.5 100.0 18. Ban Mae Kwak 30.0 16.7 6.7 46.6 100.0 19. Ban On Tai 13.7 3, .4 2.0 52.9 I00.0 20. Ban Huai HDk 3.8 11.5 3.8 80.9 100.0 21. Ban Rong Ta 9.1 9.1 4.5 68.2 9.1 100.0 22. Ban Huat 27.9 6.6 11.5 52.4 1.6 100.0 23. Ban Pang La 12.5 37.5 50.0 100.0 24. Ball Mar Teeb Lunig 12.9 14.5 6.5 66n 100.0 25. Ban Nam Long 11.8 23.5 5.9 58.8 100.0 26. Ban Ngiu Ngam 19.0 4.8 4.8 69.0 2.4 100.0 27. Ban Mae Ngao 23.8 14.3 4.8 57.1 100.0 28. Ban MaiNaChae 26.1 4.3 13.0 56.6 100.0 29. Ban Sop Phlung 17.4 15.2 19.6 47.8 100.0 30. Ban Pong 25.0 13.3 5.0 56.7 100.0 31. Ban Hat Chieo 42.9 57.1 100.0 Total 17.1 16.6 6.7 57.8 1.8 100.0 I 143 Table 3-40 Percieved Causes ofDegt'adation ofNgao Demonstration Forest by Cornmuility (fo) Total Village Name Cause of Degradation logging forest collecting of 18 (1) encroachment IQTFPs (3) 2 100.0 I. Ban Sop Haeng 50.0 50.0 2. Ban Sri Pan 81.8 18.2 100.0 3. Ban Warig Khwai 744 23.3 2.3 100.0 4. Ban Hanng Tai 82.9 8.6 8.5 100.0 5. Ban Phrao 39.3 50.0 3.6 7.2 100.0 6. Ban BO Si Liarn 15.4 462 384 100.0 7. Ban Mae IQW Tom 38.5 53.8 7.7 100.0 8, Ban Ithun Haeng 54.8 16.1 29.1 100.0 9. Ban Hua Thung 73.9 17.4 8.7 1000 10. Ban Sop Pon 62.5 22.5 15.0 100.0 11. Ban Pha Daeng 48.5 364 3.0 12.1 100.0 12. Ban Pat Bok 46.2 15.4 7.7 30.7 100.0 13. Ban Tha Charoen 65.1 18.6 2.3 14.0 100.0 14. Ban Thung Sala 61.9 9.5 28.6 100.0 15. Ban Nong Hiang 47.1 47.1 2.0 3.8 100.0 16. Ban Na Kae 60.9 17.4 8.7 13.0 100.0 17. Ban Mae Hang 303 51.5 18.2 100.0 18. Ban Mae Kwak 86.7 10.0 3.3 100.0 19. Ban On Tai 37.3 529 3.9 5.9 100.0 20. Ban Huai Hok 65.4 I9.2 3.8 11.6 100.0 21. Ban Rong Ta 50.0 40.9 9.1 1000 22. Ban Huat 50.8 44.3 1.6 3.3 100.0 23. Ban Pang La 46.9 344 3.1 15.6 100.0 24. Ban Man Teeb Luang 75.8 21.0 3.2 100.0 25. Ban Nam Long 52.9 17.6 2.9 26.6 100.0 26. Ban Ngiu Ngam 52.4 31.0 9.5 7.1 1000 27. Ban Mae Ngao 57.1 23.8 9.5 9.6 100.0 28. BanMaiNaChae 65.2 21.7 8.7 4.4 100.0 29. Ban Sop Phlung 67.4 21.7 2.2 8.7 100.0 30. Ban Pong 56.7 36.7 5.0 1.6 100.0 31. Ban Hat Chieo 714 14.3 14.3 100.0 Total 57.0 29.6 2.7 10.7 100.0 144 Table. 3-41 Percieved Agents Caused Forest Degradation by Community (%) Village Name Agent Total Local oulside Local government local all villagers villagers influential official organization I . Ban Sop Hanng 35.7 28.6 7.1 28.6 100.0 2. Ban Sri Pan 18.2 18.2 9.1 54.5 I00.0 3, Ban Warig Khwai 7.0 60.5 18.6 2.3 11.6 100.0 4. Ban Hanng Tai 22.9 54.3 11.4 2.9 8.5 100.0 5. Ban Phrao 44.6 30.4 10.7 1.8 12.5 100.0 6. Ban BO Si Liarn 53.8 23.1 7.7 15.4 100.0 7. Ban Man Kiw Tern 30.8 34.6 19.2 7.7 7.7 100.0 8. Ban Khun Hasng 41.9 38.7 3.2 3.2 13.0 100.0 9. Ban Hua Thung 17.4 52.2 13.0 8.7 8.7 100.0 10. Ban Sop Pon 32.5 32.5 10.0 25.0 100.0 I I. Ban Pha Daeng 45.5 39.4 3.0 12.1 100.0 12. Ban Pat Bok 23.1 46.2 7.7 23.0 100.0 13. Ban Tha Charoen 32.6 25.6 18.6 23.2 100.0 14. Ban Thung Sala 33.3 33.3 33.4 100.0 15. Ban Nong Hi^Ig 35.3 21.6 27.5 2.0 13.6 100.0 16. Ban Na Kan 26.1 43.5 13.0 17.4 100.0 17, Ban Mae Hang 15.2 48.5 15.2 6.1 15.0 100.0 18. Ban Mae Kwak 30.0 50.0 16.7 3.3 100.0 19. Ban On Tai 33.3 19.6 19.6 27.5 100.0 20. Ban Huai Hok 7.7 69.2 a1.5 3.8 7.8 100.0 21. Ban Rong Ta 27.3 54.5 9.1 9.1 100.0 22. Ban Huat 47.5 21.3 13.1 4.9 13.2 100.0 23. Ban Pang La 37.5 25.0 9.4 28.1 100.0 24, Ban h!Iae Teeb 41.9 37.1 1.6 1.6 17.8 IAIarl 100.0 25. Ban Nam Long 47.1 29.4 5.9 17.6 100.0 26. Ban Ngiu Ngam 35.7 28.6 16.7 18.9 100.0 27. Ban Mae Ngao 23.8 42.9 4.8 4.8 4.8 19.0 100.0 28. Ban Mai Na Char 21.7 30.4 21.7 17.4 8.8 100.0 29. Ban Sop Phlung 28.3 28.3 26.1 6.5 10.8 100.0 30. Ban Pong 48.3 16.7 18.3 1.7 15.0 100.0 31. Ban Hat Chieo 35.7 28.6 14.3 21.4 100.0 Total 33.2 34.4 13.4 2.1 0.7 16.2 100.0 145 Table 3-41 Percieved Agents Caused Forest Degradation by Conmiuiiity (fo) Total Village Name Participant Activities forestry training re-planting forestry never volunteer I. Ban Sop Haring 35.7 7.1 57.2 100.0 2. Ban Sri Pan 72.7 9.1 18.2 100.0 100.0 3. Ban Warig Khwai 7.0 74.5 18.5 4. Ban Haeng Tai 36.3 63.7 aOO. O 5. Ban Phrao 37.5 1.8 60.7 100.0 100.0 6. Ban BO Si Liam 23.1 53.8 23.1 7. Ban Mae Kiw Tani 53.8 7.7 38.5 100.0 100.0 8. Ban Khun Haeng I6.1 54.9 29.0 100.0 9. Ban Hua Thung 13.0 21.7 4.3 61.0 10. Ban Sop Pon 70.0 5.0 250 100.0 100.0 I I. Ban Pha Danng 9.1 54.5 6.1 303 12. Ban Pat Bok 69.2 30.8 100.0 13. Ban fita Charoen 55.8 2.3 41.9 100.0 100.0 14. Ban Tmung Sala 9.5 19.0 71.5 100.0 15. Ban Nong Hiang 2.0 392 3.9 54.9 100.0 16. Ban Na Kae 13.0 56.9 4.3 25.8 17. Ban Mae Hang 66.6 9.1 24.3 100.0 100.0 18. Ban Mae Kwak t 3.3 66.7 20.0 100.0 19. Ban On Tai 3.9 41.2 2.0 52.9 1000 20. Ban Huai Hok I 1.5 7.7 80.8 21. Ban Rong Ta 45.5 9.1 45.4 100.0 100.0 22. Ban Huat 6.6 55.7 1.6 36.1 23. Ban Pang La 56.3 3.1 406 100.0 24. Ban Mar Teeb Luang 64.2 ,. 6 34.2 100.0 25. Ban Nam Long 44.1 55.9 100.0 26. Ban Ngiu Ngam 28.6 2.4 69.0 100.0 100.0 27. Ban Mae Ngao 4.8 33.3 4.8 57.1 100.0 28. Ban MaiNaChae 4.3 69.6 26.1 29. Ban Sop Phlung 48.8 6.5 44.7 100.0 100.0 30. Ban Pong 6.7 48.3 450 31. Ban Hat Chieo 64.3 35.7 600.0 100.0 Total 4.6 49.9 3.0 42.5 146 Table 3-42 Participation in Forestry Activities by Conrrnunity (%) Village Name Participant Activities Total forestry training re-planting forestry never volunleer I. Ban Sop Haeng . 35.7 7.1 57.2 100.0 2. Ban Sri Pan 72.7 9.1 18.2 100.0 3. Ban Wrung Khwai 7.0 74.5 18.5 100.0 4. Ban Haeng Tai 36.3 63.7 100.0 5. Ban Phrao 37.5 1.8 60.7 100.0 6. Ban BO Si Liarn 23.1 53.8 23.1 100.0 7. Ban Mac Kiw Tan 53.8 7.7 38.5 100.0 8, Ban Khun Haeng 16.1 54.9 29.0 100.0 9. Ban Hua Thung 13.0 21.7 43 61.0 100.0 10. Ban Sop Pon 70.0 5.0 25.0 100.0 I I. Ban Pha Daeng 9.1 54.5 6.1 30.3 100.0 12. Ban Pak Bok 69.2 30.8 100.0 13. Ban Tlia Charoen 55.8 2.3 4t. 9 100.0 14. Ban Thung Sala 9.5 19.0 71.5 100.0 15. Ban Nong Hiang 2.0 39.2 3.9 54.9 100.0 16. Ban Na Kan 13.0 56.9 4.3 25.8 100.0 17. Ban Mae Hang 66.6 9.1 24.3 100.0 18. Ban Mae Kwak 13.3 66.7 20.0 100.0 19. Ban On Tai , 3.9 41.2 2.0 529 100.0 20. Ban Huai Hok I1.5 7.7 80.8 I00.0 21. Ban RongTa 45.5 9.1 45.4 100.0 22, Ban Huat 6.6 55.7 t. 6 36.1 100.0 23. Ban Pang La 56.3 3.1 40.6 100.0 24. Ball Mae Teeb Luang 64.2 1.6 34.2 100.0 25. Ban Nam Long 44.1 55.9 100.0 26. Ban Ngiu Ngarn 28.6 2.4 69.0 100.0 27. Ban Mae Ngao 4.8 33.3 4.8 57.1 100.0 28. Bari MaiNa 01ae 4.3 69.6 26.1 I00.0 29. Ban Sop Phiung 48.8 6.5 44.7 100.0 30. Ban FDng 6.7 48.3 45.0 100.0 31. Ban Hat Chico 64.3 35.7 100.0 Total 4.6 4919 3.0 42;5 ~ 100.0 147 5. Conchsiom The conmiunities situated in the Demonstration Forest Area, Ngao district, Lampang province apparently extends progressiveIy. The coriumustity people normally have low eve s of education and their main occupation is in the agricultural sector and casual labor, The people's income appears very low, averaging only 32,543 bahtihouseho year, mai y ue to low agricultaral product prices, unemployment and lack of agr. icultiiral land. The local people 's lifestyle apparently depend on natural forest resources, which have been used for household and commercial sales, Utilization includes establishment of agricultura land, provision of accotrunodation construction, wildlifes and 1.1TFPs. This, there ore, results in a continuous increase in forest encroachment and illegal felling in the Ngao Demonstration Forest. It is estimated that the local people in the Demonstration Forest area consume the following amount of national forest resources; log and sawn wood for construction (24,645 cu. in. /year), fuel wood (8,457 cu. in. /year), charcoal 33,827 kg/year wild animals (9,665 animals/year), bamboo (362,430 cu. in. /year), bamboo shoot (805,803 kg/year), rattan (1,208 meters/year), wild mushroom (68,802 kg. /year), wild vegeta^Ies (44,700 kg/year), wild fruits (6,041 kg'year), medicinal plants (2,416 kg/year), edible insects (6,041 kg/year), fishes (10,873 kg/year), honey (1,208 hives/year), Ian q, 208 kg/year) and resin (121 kg/year). Nowadays, 'exploitation of minor forest products is considered an important activity towards the local people' s lifestyle. Some NTFPs such as bamboo and its shoots can be used as economic goods for many communities. However, over^xploitation of such products apparently results in a drastic decrease in the nuni er an volume of bamboo. A similar situation also occurs in which there is an increasing Ginan on other important NTFPs such as wild mushroom, wild vegetables and edible insects, ue to a progressive increase in the local population. It is recoirunended that, there should be an improvement of work efficiency of forest officers, building relationship with the local communities and an increase in role of IOCa development. The local people also indicated that the govermnent should involve them and cooperate in developing forest management systems beneficial to the local people, 6. Reference Ngao District Office. 1999. List of Village and Population in Ng"o District, Lampa?, g Province, (in Thai) Nikamamon, ^. 1996. Foundation of Research. Bangkok: Tipayavisut Printing. (in Thai) FOOLlaptawee, K. 1987. Research Statistics. Bangkok: Physic Centre. (in Thai) Forest Research Office. 1997. Final Report of Thailand Pilot Project and Activities for AIFM Phase 11 (1992-1997). Royal Forest Depariment, Bangkok. 148 APPENDIX 3-I Different l. ,and Doc"", eruts For Bor Tor This is a tax certificate not recognized as legal title used by landless CPEr) formers to demonstrate occupancy. In Thailand, tax is collected on squatters are prepared to pay in hope that it will assist them in obtoiiiin tenure at a later date Sor Tor Kor This is a usufruct certificate issued by the Royal Forest De artrnent (STIQ (RFD) to squatters in the forest reserves. It provides harvest rights which,,,,, cannot be transferable except,, inheritance in, land holdin' u to 15 rat. The conversion of the certificate to title deed or others land certificate of use (NS. 3 and NS. 3K) is prohibited. The violation could cause revocation of usufruct ri ts b the RFD. For Sor Two This document is similar to the STK in tenns of status and restrictions One (r's. 21) but it issued by the That Army Force to villagers living in forest reserves under the Army Pro^Cts. Sur For Kor This document is sinitlar to the STK and the PS. 21 but it Tovides (SPEQ cultivation rights in land holding up to 50 Tai and it is issued by the Agricultural Land Refbnn Office (ALRO) in the forest areas roclainied as the land refonn zones. Sor Kmor This is a document to certify that the rig}Its of a land owner to a piece One (NS. I) of land without any size jinitts. It also certifies the owner's ri ht to occupy the land. The land calmot be sold. The riglit is mittasferable, excepts as inheritance Transfer of ownership can be done at the district office. However, ouniers have the right to apply to land authorities to upgi, ade it to Nor Sor Three. The Nor Sor Three sets no time limits for ownershi transf;er. Nor Sor Two This document is sinitlar to the Sor K7ior One but limits ownershi to (NS. 2) a plot of land no larger than a 20 rat plot. It is also upgradable into a Nor Sor Three, But holders of Nor Sor Three issued from Nor Soy Two documents camiot transfer ownership until I O years have ela sed, The transf^3r of ownershi can be done at the district office. Nor Sor This is a land ownership certificate issued by the Govennnent 10n Three 01S. 3) before aerial surveys were conducted. The ouniership could be transftsrred but it must be declared in public in advance, and anyone can object to the transfer. This requirement applies to inheritance as well. This is an option to prevent ouniership disputes after the transfer has been completed. However, this ownership could expire and others could clami ownership over the piece of land if the ounier neglects the land for over one year. Transfer of ownership can be done at the district office. Nor Sor This is a land ownership document issue based on new survey Three Kor methods such as aerial surveys, and therefore it is more accurate. The 0'1S. 3 K) transfer of ownership requires no public aimouncement. The transfer of ownershi can be done at the district office. 149 Cha-nord This is a document to clarify that the persons whose nanne appears in (Land title the document has complete rights over a piece of land. However, one deed) may lose ownership through a court order if the land is left without care for ten or more years, The transfer of ownership must be done at the Provincial Land Office or at the Land De artment, Note: The difference between Cha-nord and Nor Sor Three; chariord is a more accurate size measurement of land than other types of land documents which in the past have always relied on less accurate means. The measurement of land is done through modem methods while the Nor Soy Three is made through very roughjudgments with the tapes or other means of measurement. The transfer of the right and ownership, for the ch"-nord must be done only at the Provincial Land Office or at the Land Department but the right under the Nor Soy Three and Nor Sol Three KOI can be made at district offices. Sources: Chinitanaparb and Wood, 1986: 85; Fader at a1,1988 (a): 10-19; Wit^yapak, 1995: 193-195; Bangkok Post, May 4,1997: 5 Project Manager Mr. lira lintanugool Project Coordinator Mr. Jirajet Urasayanan Ms Phusin KGtanond Techmical Staff Mr. Suwit Origsomwang Mr. Anuchit Rattanasuwari Ms. Chayanee Chandraprabha Mr. Anusom Rungsipanich Ms. SIIttatip Jutikidecha Ms. AUSchada Chitechote Ms. Chompunuch Sodachan Mr. Phairan Phiomhitatom Mr. Sayan Seraphapmaitri Mr. Somyot Sanngnin Mr. An an Kitakom Mr. Viroj Puangpakisiri Ivh . Khunawut Lungkasit Mr. Manut Ratanapirom Mr. Chakrapan Skulmerit Mr. Surapong Chaweepak Mr. Sithapom Badthong Ms. Phusin KGtanond Executing Agency Forest Research Office Royal Forest Department 61 Pationyothin Road, Chatuchak, Bangkok, 10900 THAILAND Tel: (662) 5799578, Fax: (662) 5614809