YUS Landscape Plan 2013-2015 2 2 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Yopno Valley. Photo: Zachary Wells Zachary Photo: Valley. Yopno DEC), Dr. Bruce Beehler (CI). Dr. Beehler DEC), Bruce (PNG Thomas Benside DEC), (PNG Sabi James (TKCP), Nolan Mikal (TKCP), Samandingke Danny Yamuna (TKCP), Ruby (TKCP), Dope Tingke (TKCP), Sipa Benjamin (TKCP), Kuna Karua (WPZ), Dr. Dabek Lisa Wells (TKCP), Zachary this of preparation the throughout contributions invaluable are thanked for their individuals following the Additionally International. Conservation is as acknowledged gratefully is Entwicklungbank KfW through and (BMU), Safety Nuclear and Conservation for Environment Nature Ministry Federal of the Initiative Climate ofInternational the framework the within Government German the of support financial The Acknowledgements: YUS of the for people the Planner), Management and Landscape Program, Zoo’sPark Tree Conservation Kangaroo byDr. (Woodland Brooks prepared Ashley plan A landscape 2013-2015 Plan Landscape YUS

P

L lan: andscape, Morobe Province, Papua New Guinea, 2012. Guinea, New Papua Province, Morobe andscape, Program Manager: [email protected] Manager: Program P Guinea New Papua TKCP, Province, P.O. Morobe Lae, Box360, contact: information, further For Coordinator. Mapping and GIS TKCP Kuna, byKarau prepared maps All Maps: http://www.suzanneashmore.com.au/ Design Graphic Ashmore Suzanne Design: Guinea. New Papua Lae, Program, Conservation Tree 2013-2015, Plan Kangaroo Landscape (2012)TKCP YUS Citation: h one: +675 472 7226 one:

Senior Conservation Scientist/Director of the Papua New Guinea Tree Kangaroo Conservation Program Conservation Tree Kangaroo Guinea New Papua the of Scientist/Director Conservation Senior Dabek, Lisa Dr Program. ofTree the Conservation Kangaroo supporters and colleagues many the and community, YUS the TKCP, University, Cook James Government, German the International, Conservation Zoo, Park byWoodland supported was work This use. to own work their this adapting on feedback us well provide as as document this from to learn universities and NGO’s, government, other We welcome Guinea. New inPapua programs conservation landscape-level sustainable for building government NGO’s and between for collaboration approach innovative an provides and priorities, and plans government national and into provincial to away integrate management area protected demonstrates Plan The inPNG. for futureareas other protected amodel is produced has he What workshops. planning strategic TKCP and YUS in workshops planning land-use fromongoing information wellincorporating as knowledge, anecdotal and maps, data, extensive analyzing and of synthesizing job incredible an Planner, done has Management and Landscape YUS TKCP’s Dr. Brooks, Ashley community. ofYUS the needs the to responding and new information incorporating basis aregular on revised be will that document aliving considered is It landscape. asustainable for maintaining TKCP and landowners to YUS the support and guidelines to provide designed is Plan Landscape YUS The supporters. and partners many with along community, YUS the and Program Tree the Conservation between Kangaroo history and collaboration aremarkable represents It inYUS. for efforts integrated guide wellastrategic as Area Conservation for YUS the tool management bothas a serves Plan detailed and comprehensive This PNG. and for YUS for first another is Plan Landscape YUS the Act, Areas Conservation PNG the under (PNG) Guinea New Papua protected in area first the as Area Conservation YUS the on Building Foreword Inaugural ranger workshop, Sapmanga Village March 2012 . Photo: Mark Ziembicki Mark .Photo: 2012 March Village Sapmanga workshop, ranger Inaugural

3 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN 4 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Acronyms, Abbreviations and Definitions Abbreviations Acronyms, C CITES CIC CI CBD CAMC CA BMU AZA Acronym MDG M&E LUP LP2 LP LLG KDA KBA JPP&BPC JDP&BPC JCU IUCN ISSG ILG ID HH GPS GIS EN DSP DNPM DEC CR CO2 CO MS C Flora and Fauna Wild of Convention of International Trade in Endangered Species Corporation Industry Coffee International Conservation Convention on Biological Diversity Management Committee Area Conservation Area Conservation Safety, Germany Nuclear and Conservation Nature Environment for Ministry Association of Zoos and Aquariums Definition Millennium Development Goal Millennium Development Monitoring and Evaluation Planning Use Land Plan 2016-2020Landscape Plan Landscape Local Level Government Administration District Kabwum Area Biodiversity Key Committee Priority Budget And Planning Provincial Joint Committee Priority Budget And Planning District Joint James Cook University International Union of Nature for Conservation Group Specialist Species Invasive Integrated Landholder Group Identification Household Global Positioning Service System Information Geographic Endangered Plan Strategic Development PNG Monitoring, and Planning National of Department of Environment andDepartment PNG Conservation, Critically Endangered Dioxide Carbon OrganisationYUS Conservation Animals Wild onvention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of of Species Migratory of Conservation the on onvention

YUS WPZ WHC VU USD USA UNESCO UNEP UNDP UN TNC TK-SSP TKCP TBD SPREP SDP SBSAP REDD PPL POWPA PNRESP PNGFA PNG PA OCCD NSO NRI NGO NCD NBSAP MTDP MPG MOU Acronym Yopno, Uruwa, Som River catchments River Som Yopno, Uruwa, Woodland Park Zoo World Commission Heritage Vulnerable United Dollars States United States of America Organization United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural United Nations Environment Program Program Development Nations United United Nations Conservancy Nature The Plan Survival Species Tree Kangaroo Tree Program Kangaroo Conservation To Developed Be Program Environment Regional Pacific South Plan Development Strategic Plan Action and Strategy Biodiversity Subnational Countries Developing in Degradation Reducing Emissions and Forest Deforestation from License Petroleum Prospecting Areas Protected On Work Of Programme Region Pacific South the of Environment and Resources Natural of Protection the on Convention Authority Forestry Guinea New Papua Guinea New Papua Protected Area PNG Development, and Change of Climate Office National Office Statistics National Institute Research OrganisationNon-Government Moresby Port District, Capital National Plan Action and Strategy Biodiversity National Plan Term Development Medium Morobe Provincial Government Memorandum Of Understanding Definition Forest classifications Forest CO YUS Tambu Yus vs YUS 3 LP 2, 1, LP LP Plan The or Plan, Landscape YUS YUS Abbreviation TKCP-PNG Photo: Mark Ziembicki Mark Photo: following Shearman Shearman following 0-1,000m range altitude in the forests describe to is used forest ‘Lowland’ disaggregated. are forests montane lower and upper et al (2011). necessary, Shearman Where following classifications forest (1,000-2,800m) montane ‘lower’ and (2,800-4,509m) ‘upper’ both encompasses this is used, altitude) (1,000m-4,509m forest montane Where TKCP-PNG. to organisation advisory an as serves It Area. Conservation YUS the for land pledged have that landowners YUS for organisation community-based local the Organisation, Conservation YUS in PNG. law local by is governed and exploitation, or use, access, from restricted be to recognised locally is that one is therefore area Atambu in PNG. outlawing or restriction, avoidance, of concept traditional the to Refers LLGs. Wantoat-Leron and Coast, Rai Deyamos, into extends that people YUS of land clan the include it does nor area, LLG Wasu the within are which catchments the of Sea) Bismarck the at area coastal (the reaches lower the include not does and boundaries, catchment river three the follow not does which area (LLG) administrative Government Level Yus Local the to refers this documents), in government used protocol with (in“Yus” keeping is used non-capitalised Where landscape. whole the to refers therefore YUS LLGs. Wantoat-Leron and Coast, Rai Deyamos, of parts small into also and LLG, in Wasu Sea Bismarck the to down extending and boundaries) administrative provincial and district LLG, transcend (which catchments River Som and Yopno, Uruwa the within living people the of land clan of boundaries outer the LP: the of scope is the what and program TKCP’s landscape of extent the by covered area spatial the to refer to is used “YUS” Landscape. YUS “YUS”, is the acronym, capitalised The 3(2021-2025). Plan Landscape 2(2016-2020); Plan 1(2013-2015); Plan Landscape Landscape catchments. river Som and Yopno, Uruwa the across communities participating of land the only Encompasses Som. and Yopno, Uruwa landscape: the of rivers main three the of names the from Derived Definition Conservation Area. Conservation YUS the of management devoted NGO registered anationally PNG, Program Conservation Tree Kangaroo et al et (2011). 5 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN 6 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Table Contents of

2

1 Section 1: Strategic platform and direction platform 1:Section Strategic Introduction Acr Foreword Summary and structure of the Plan the of structure and Summary Plan the of Purpose Plan Landscape YUS The Th Location and context Location YU Juvenile White-Winged Robin Robin White-Winged Juvenile e YUS Landscape e YUS 2. 2. 2. 2. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. onyms, Abbreviations and Definitions 1 1 4 5 3 2 4 3 2 S Landscape management platform management S Landscape

YU 2. 2. 2. YU Hu Pa 1. 1. Pol 1. 1. 1. Le Ma Sco V ision 5.2 5.1 4.3 4.2 4.1 3.3 3.2 3.1 gal basis gal pua New Guinea New pua

on Peninsula on S Conservation Area S Conservation S Landscape icy and planning context planning and icy nagement targets pe

Cli So Bi Nat Na Lo Nat In ...... ternational obligations ternational o-geographic context and values and context o-geographic mate change context and values and context mate change cal institutional context institutional cal cio-economic context and values and context cio-economic tional constitution tional ional development plans development ional ional legal context legal ional ...... (Peneothello sigillatus saruwagedi) sigillatus (Peneothello ...... Photo: Mark Ziembicki Mark . Photo: ...... 32 22 20 20 18 10 16 15 21 12 12 12 4 3 8

4 3

Photo: Mark Ziembicki Mark Photo: Implementing the Plan Th 3. 3. 3.1 4. 4. reats to management targets 1 2 3 2

3. 3. Pot 3. 3. 3. 3. 3. Co 3. 3. 3. 3. Di Ma Al 3. 4. 4. 4. 4. YUS Landscape 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.1 3.2 3.1 3.3 2.5 2.4 2.3 2.2 2.1 2.4 2.3 2.2 2.1 rect threats igning with government policies government with igning mpounding threats threats mpounding nagement and oversight of the the of oversight and nagement ential threats ential

Min context  rainforest products  We Cli Wat In Inap Un Sm Su Sm Co Road (TKCP-PNG) Wo (CAMC) YU YU Tr ee Kangaroo Conservation Program – PNG –PNG Program Conservation Kangaroo ee vasive species mate change bsistence hunting, fishing and egg collection egg and fishing hunting, bsistence mmercial logging mmercial sustainable marine ecosystem use ecosystem marine sustainable S Conservation Area Management Committee Committee Management Area S Conservation CO) (YUS Organisation S Conservation all scale selective harvesting of timber and and of timber harvesting selective scale all forest clearance all-scale ak, non-existent or undeveloped governance governance undeveloped or non-existent ak, odland Park Zoo (WPZ) Zoo Park odland ing, oil and gas exploration gas and oil ing, er pollution er propriate fire regimes construction ......

40 36 36 4 37 42 42 4

Implementation and management Implementation 5: Strategy

Strategy 4: Strategy

Strategy 3: 3: Strategy

Strategy 2: 2: Strategy

Section 2: 2: Section

Str S5 S5 S5 S4 S4 S4 S32. S3 S2 S2 S2 S2 S2 S2 S2 S18 S1 S1 S1 S1 S1 S1 S1 ategy 1:ategy 1. 4. 1. 7. 2. 3. 5. 6. 1. 1. 4. 1. 6. 5. 2. 7. 2. 3. 2. 3. 3. .

F Mo in line with targets with line in  St Re Eco De En Lan resource use use resource Cl Su So Ma Te Hu Re R In Fi E Si Eco Eco YU inancing inancing nforcement eporting re management vasive management species mt change imate gage, mapping and CA awareness CA and mapping gage, akeholder linkages and an effective workforce effective an and linkages akeholder rrestrial Ecosystems vironmental services sponding to community and government needs needs government and community to sponding YUS Conservation Area Management search collaboration collaboration search

stainability and consumption stainability eoig leadership veloping cial /anthropological cial nted species nted Rangers S rine and aquatic ecosystems aquatic and rine Re management  families Co services Su nitoring and effectiveness assessing t management to threats Addressing  nomic livelihoods – quality and markets and –quality livelihoods nomic logical monitoring and hunting and monitoring logical system resilience and biodiversity conservation biodiversity and resilience system d-use planning, management and sustainable and sustainable planning, management d-use argets search to inform resource and landscape landscape and resource inform to search stainable resource use and environmental environmental and use resource stainable mmunity services, livelihoods and healthy healthy and livelihoods services, mmunity ......

68 60 48 48 72 76 Annexures Literature cited An Annex 7 Annex 6Zoning Annex 5 Annex maps Planning Use 4Land Annex 2 Annex Annex 8 Annex 3 Annex Photo: Mark Ziembicki Mark Photo: nex 1 Governance of the YUS Conservation Area Conservation YUS the of 1Governance nex Pl Al Eco Hi YU YUS the to related administrators and representatives significance YUS Landscape plans process      anning processes, and the role of government government of role the and processes, anning story and background of programs across the the across programs of background and story igning with and building on existing policies and and policies existing on building and with igning S Landscape Strategic Plan development development Plan Strategic S Landscape

systems, flora and fauna of conservation conservation of fauna and flora systems, ......

L andscape ...... 102 83 7 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN 8 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN designation of the designation local deliberation, Following classifications. area protected formal of PNG’s one byseeking efforts of local recognition legal possible to were discuss held workshops of village-based aseries locally, outcomes cultural and environmental wide such having of signs significant showed effort conservation the As tradition. local in embedded firmly is which them, their participation and thereby heralded the start of a true of atrue start the heralded thereby and participation their requested who LLG Wasu the within communities coastal the The threats). conservation and habitat associated range, home (i.e.tree kangaroo ofchallenge the scale the matched area) aprotected across activities (i.e.conservation solution the of scope the that ensured adesignation Such used. been previously not had which aclassification Area, Conservation and designated them them designated and for conservation land to pledge started clans grounds, hunting into adjacent disperse and area an insuch reproduce would a“wildlife hunted as species that bank”.to serve Anticipating area aprotected developing discussing began landowners and researchers for hunted species, particularly trends, population wildlife decreasing Noting threats. to immediate to respond habitat oftree kangaroo the landowners with in partnership actions of discrete conservation into acollection quickly moved initiative the ofMatschie’s the tree kangaroo, ecology and threats, status, atpopulation, looking byDr. Dabek led Lisa study research species endangered an as in1996 Beginning globally. initiatives of conservation trajectory the mirrored has area protected Landscape of YUS the growth and evolution The Landscape YUS The ownership and support, and governance. governance. and support, and ownership community research, inconservation, of work program into acoordinated developed (TKCP) Program Conservation Tree the then Since Kangaroo 2009. inJanuary areality became nationally, area conservation first the Area, Conservation YUS of the establishment the (WPZ), Zoo Park Woodland and International, governmentthe through German Conservation (CI), International Conservation from support generous With CA). (YUS Area Conservation of YUS the for meat, feathers or skin, skin, or feathers for meat, forutility, be their locally are valued Each species. of paradise seven and birds of parrot, species multiple pademelons, eagle, Harpy Guinea New echidna, beaked long cassowary, dwarf others: among include, These rarespecies. and threatened of to arange protect served ultimately which conservation, habitat for flagship the as served tree kangaroo The species. native valued locally multiple the encompassed that initiative protection habitat for alarger of support agroundswell was there that obvious became it and villages, adjacent grew across resource asustainable as species Interest the inprotecting co and community second, effort; conservation reef-to-ridge nsensus and endorsement for the pursuit of national gazettal gazettal of national for pursuit the endorsement and nsensus

w

l Introduction andowners elected to begin garnering support for a formal for aformal support garnering to begin elected andowners orkshops resulted in two key outcomes: the inclusion of of key inclusion the resulted outcomes: intwo orkshops tambu tambu areas under the banner of a PNG areas the of banner under a PNG and ground (off limits to hunting). limits (off ground for the cultural act of hunting of hunting act for cultural the

i t t both species and local people: local and species both milestones for significant achieving initiative, area protected landscape VI Category IUCN atrue is CA Ultimately, YUS the This landscape. the natureacross and people between interface the to managing approaches cost-effective and innovative 24 totalling rangers and professionals development community and livelihoods of conservation, staff atechnical has TKCP-PNG of writing, time At the employment. for local a mechanism provides fundamentally and locally, to develop relationships long term commitment to of landowners, support allows robust provides it as CA, ofYUS the sustainability and to success the pivotal is site. This atasingle use sustainable and management conservation to support mandate explicit an with established NGO asite-based is TKCP-PNG NGO. to PNG aregistered adiscrete ‘program’ being from Program Conservation Kangaroo the of elevation the been has final keymilestone Tree The management to tocentral has be conservation and use resource between reinforcing links lives, the fordaily their resources natural on rely residents over the 12,000 where area an In Landscape. YUS inthe unworkable is this But reserves. and parks managed strictly exclusion and naturethrough protecting on solely focus to to fromnatureinorder exclude humans convenient globally TKCP activities. inits stakeholders of local participation of degree high the and flexibility, its people, the to proximity inits is model ofTKCP the strength The staff). international two and Province, Morobe outside from nationals

from YUS coffee growers to a US-based buyer/roaster; to growers aUS-based coffee YUS from (YUS CO) – which serves as a landowner advisory to TKCP; advisory alandowner as serves –which CO) (YUS r community of alandscape-wide establishment The o base knowledge of acomprehensive development The a languages, YUS local inYUS, types of vegetation Mapping perpetuity. t Endowment Conservation of aYUS establishment The C of the meetings of biannual convening and establishment The deforestation; landowner representatives and NGO partners; and representatives partners; landowner andNGO with along together government local and national bringing The facilitation of sale of organic, shade-grown coffee coffee shade-grown of organic, of sale facilitation The and riparian corridors; w –including program Planning Use Land LLG-wide first The a C for program monitoring ecological community-based first The nationally; force ranger protected area first The

epresentative body – the YUS Conservation Organisation Organisation Conservation YUS –the body epresentative hat provides support for management of the YUS CA in in CA of YUS the for management support provides hat p nd clan and village boundaries; village and clan nd f species, ecosystems, carbon stocks and drivers of of drivers and stocks carbon ecosystems, f species, onservation Area Management Committee (YUS CAMC) – – CAMC) (YUS Committee Management Area onservation ildlife corridors, protected cloud forests, alpine grasslands grasslands alpine forests, cloud protected corridors, ildlife

eople (19 of which are YUS landowners, three PNG three PNG (19 landowners, eople are YUS of which i s not a simple undertaking, and it has often been been often has it and undertaking, s not asimple onservation Area; onservation

a ction. ction.

p rovides efficient, efficient, rovides direct

Introduction national government priorities: reflect also Plan Landscape YUS the and Landscape YUS The Sea. 4,100mto from Bismarck the down gradient entire the elevational along and YUS across connectivity their to due enhanced greatly is YUS weave across that areas was Planner Management and aLandscape and established, were Landscape 2011 In goal. for YUS the targets term long programmatic aspecific became plan management landscape for a support that International Conservation with partnership and grant KfW the through only details). was It 3provide and 2 (Annex work of over 17 culmination the of site-based years is LP) or Plan, (the Plan Landscape of YUS the formulation The Landscape Plan YUS The Plan: Landscape YUS The for success. foundation this offers YUS as such landscape Aprotected solution. the of key the be must part of YUS people the use, sustainable their and assets of environmental protection the both For potential to protect species and habitat within the the within habitat and topotential species protect the that means also approach landscape the Importantly,

T ANational to CBD: the Report National Fourth PNG’s area management effectiveness atsites (DEC effectiveness management area protected reporting and evaluating for monitoring, frameworks through management, of area protected effectiveness the 14, to Goal improve evaluate and and involvement; stakeholder active with plans management andlong-term programs, objectives, targets, management strategies and monitoring biodiversity of clear incorporation through management, and planning area protected improve site-based to substantially 4, Goal formanagement: area protected goals two included Areas Protected on of Work to Program the commitment plans for protected areas (DEC for areas protected plans of management review development that the within include to and (NBSAP) Plan Action and Strategy Biodiversity National for areview of2007 the called also (DEC) Conservation and of Environment Department PNG the report, national fourth  Biological Diversity (CBD) (Wickham (Wickham (CBD) Diversity Biological on ofConvention the to implementation the constraints as them, to implement to communities for support need the and plans, management of such lack the Identified m of lack the Noted Self-Assessment: Capacity National 2010); (DNPM areas protected terrestrial and for marine plans management and D Term (2011-2015), Plan Medium Development 5.6, PNG Goal a individual bysupporting instewardship communities engages s and programs, inconservation use traditional accommodates a biodiversity links between land, with connections recognises errestrial Gap Analysis, implemented as part of PNG’s of PNG’s part as implemented Analysis, Gap errestrial upport for sustaining local livelihoods; and livelihoods; local for sustaining upport nd community responsibility for resource management. for resource responsibility community nd patterns; ownership customary and practice, cultural nd eliverable 4.1: Endangered species and habitat conservation conservation 4.1: habitat eliverable and species Endangered

anagement plans across PNG’s protected area network. network. area protected PNG’s across plans anagement r ecruited. ecruited.

2 010). et al. al. et 2010); and 2010);

2 010). their In tambu

k ey ey

Vision its through of PNG plans development strategic term long the with aligned is data;and government and scientific available levels; atall best bythe representatives backed is government and leaders local landowners, of YUS support full the has that approach acoordinated through of TKCP to work inform the continue will Plan Landscape YUS The use. resource sustainable and practices of cultural preservation the and habitat, and species of endangered protection the for both mechanism afunctional as approach landscape the to is implement ofPlan the purpose overarching The Plan the of Purpose t processes planning government into for input allows local also but lo to changes to capture 2011-2025, plan etc.). each allows This (2016-2020, MTDPs year five the with wholly conform will P 1, LP or therefore is Plan, abridging Landscape present YUS The (Table2). MTDPs yearly five the and 2030, DSP 2050, Vision PNG the per as periods planning government PNG with aligned is Plans) Landscape YUS subsequent all (and Plan the term, long inthe To priorities government with ofPlan the ensure alignment began. feedback and support of community facilitation and of new information, collation and collection information, of existing synthesis the At point this o a l

cal and sectoral development plans that emerge over time, over time, emerge that plans development sectoral and cal an that runs 2013-2015. All subsequent plans (LP 2, LP 3, etc.) etc.) 3, LP 2, (LP plans subsequent All 2013-2015. runs that an NGOs and the private sector. private the and NGOs a for activities the support institutional and recognition elicits an inresearch for new partnerships opportunities facilitates t support for donor proposals funding guide and prioritise helps targets;management c are are aligned, activities program ensures that a policies term to long the contributes and with, aligns a inconservation actions guides and encourages t communities landscape across linkages closer encourages t representatives, community among abridge as serves b activities and projects individual coordinate and direct helps a targets sets and priorities, and needs issues, identifies o YUS; o hrough development of joint actions; joint of development hrough levels all of and government; CO, TKCP YUS he nd strategies of the PNG Government; of PNG the strategies nd development; nd socio-economic to them; to respond actions nd cross the YUS Landscape from PNG government, other other government, PNG from Landscape YUS the cross omplementary, and are all contributing to the same to same the are contributing all and omplementary, ased on a long term vision; term along on ased llow for best possible outcomes for YUS. outcomes possible forllow best d development; and

2 050. The Plan: The 050.

9 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Introduction 10 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN follows this overall framework. itself ofPlan the refer structure 2). (for details them Annex The to achieve actions then and to goals, threats the the identifying values, for these goals and targets term long setting then values), cultural and habitat laterencompassing and kangaroo, Matschie’s the tree (initially of YUS values of management identification the with started ofPlan the development The plan. management abatement athreat is Plan Landscape YUS The Plan the of and structure Summary Table 1: Summary of management targets and goals of the Plan the of goals and targets management of Table 1: Summary 2: 2: 1: A sustainable, healthy and resilient Huon Peninsula landscape which supports the area’s unique biodiversity, human communities, and culture. and communities, human biodiversity, unique area’s the supports which landscape Peninsula Huon resilient and healthy A sustainable, Montane Rainforest. Photo: Ryan Photo: Hawk Rainforest. Montane Conserve and maintain area maintain and Conserve Introduction  and health and En Alpine Grasslands Alpine sure ecosystem integrity Target 1:

2: 1:

is stable or increases or is stable Ar is stable or increases or is stable Are Montane and Lowland and Lowland Montane ea of montane rainforest rainforest montane of ea a of lowland rainforest Rai T ar nforest get 2: 2: get

Programmatic Targets to 2025 to Targets Programmatic 2: 3: 1: Tree kangaroos and other Tree and other kangaroos

stable or increases or stable Po  stable or increases or stable Pop stable or increases or stable Po The Vision The pulation inside CA is is CA inside pulation pulation outside CA is is CA outside pulation ulation is density hu nted species nted Target 3: strategies to achieve the long-term targets. to long-term the achieve strategies the for implementing responsible of organisations the overview an and targets to ofmanagement threats the adiscussion with concludes section ofsite the overall. This values and context p and legal the goals, and targets management the defines It ofPlan. the foundation management the 1builds Section and direction 1:platform Section Strategic o

licy context of the Plan and management, and outlines the the outlines and management, and ofPlan the context licy 1: 1: De ecosystem program ecosystem Marine ecosystems velop a marine amarine velop Target 4:

1: 3: 3: 2: 2: Civil society, partnership partnership society, Civil CAMC functioning management resource use and Sup functioning Sup and port to sustainable sustainable to port port to YUS CO CO YUS to port collaboration Tar get 5: 5: get

Introduction activities and indicators for the period of the Plan. ofPlan. the for period the indicators and activities objectives, specific include inturn which programs, multiple includes strategy Each targets. to threats management mitigate to designed strategies management five the 2details Section targets management to threats Addressing 2: Section 2. 1. Programs protection. environmental and development rural balance to plans local and national with align directly programs Both services. ecosystem from benefits access to continue to communities of ability the enhancing and use, resource for planning term long community-based on focussing programs linked inextricably two of consists strategy This services environmental and use resource Sustainable 3: Strategy 7. 6. 5. 4. 3. 2. 1. Programs relevance. local and rigour scientific ensure to partnerships institutional new and existing foster to will continue and Landscape, YUS the across years many over conducted work the of is acontinuation some and is new research the of Some future. the into programs Landscape YUS the inform and into feed that that programs seven of consists strategy This management landscape and resource inform to Research 2: Strategy 8. 7. 6. 5. 4. 3. 2. 1. Programs Act. the under allobligations fulfil and Plan, Management CA YUS the 1constitute Strategy up make that programs eight The management Area Conservation 1: YUS Strategy Climate change Climate species Invasive YUS Rangers Fire management Ecosystem resilience and biodiversity conservation Social /anthropology Social awareness and mapping Signage, Reporting Environmental services Hunted species Land-use planning Land-use Research collaboration Sustainability Terrestrial ecosystems Marine and aquatic ecosystems Ecological monitoring Enforcement baselines to be used in LP 2 and beyond. 2and inLP toused be baselines establish or gaps, to information fill thereforeand serve are foundational, new or strategies the across programs Various 3. 3. 2. workforce effective an and linkages Stakeholder 1. Programs values. Landscape YUS and desires community reflect programs field any that and maintained are consultations community and monitoring, research, planning, between linkages the that ensure who facilitators as act staff TKCP that landscape the across actions of implementation effective for is vital It linked. inextricably are they management, of processes discrete into divided are programs the While Plan. the within actions allof the adaptive and transparent, professionalfor the effective, implementation guide and basis the are strategy the up make that programs three The management and Implementation 5: Strategy 3. 2. 1. Programs arise. they when and if needs to responding through communities with linkages positive the maintain to ability the Plan the allows also strategy The entitled. are communities the which to services and support government the facilitate to CO YUS the supporting and integration, market and livelihoods supporting leaders, local of capacity the building at aimed are strategy this up make that programs The livelihoods services, and families healthy Community 4: Strategy Matschie’s tree kangaroo Matschie’s tree Economic livelihoods – quality and markets and –quality livelihoods Economic Developing leadership Developing Financing needs local to Responding Monitoring and assessing effectiveness (Dendrolagus matschiei) (Dendrolagus . Photo: Mark Ziembicki Mark . Photo: 11 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Introduction Section 1: 1 12 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Alpine Grassland , Uruwa Zone. Photo: Mark Ziembicki Mark Photo: Zone. ,Uruwa Grassland Alpine Yopno Zone.Wells Zachary Photo: Panoramic toward Uruwa Valley. Ashley Photo: Brooks YUS LandscapeManagementPlatform Strategic platformanddirection into four zones: Yopno, Uruwa, Som and Nambis (Map 2). (Map into Nambis and four zones: Yopno, Som Uruwa, these are grouped purposes management areas. For agricultural forests, and of gardens grasslands, mosaic human settlements, villages across 15 a158,271ha is across and (1,582km Wards, villages of51 area the land the participating therefore encompasses Plan Landscape This of initiative. the part as for conservation land have pledged that are those all communities Participating 6). (Map English to Tok inaddition and Pisin dialects and languages local six spans Landscape YUS the Culturally Province. Morobe District, of area Tewai-Siassi LLG Wasu inthe Sea to Bismarck the down extend ofthree rivers the lowerreaches The Province. Madang in District Coast ofRai the part and LLGs), Wantoat-Leron and Deyamos (namely Province Morobe within LLGs neighbouring of areas small District, of area Kabwum (LLG) Government Level ofYus the Local majority the cover catchments three river (Map PNG Peninsula, ofHuon valleys the River Som and Uruwa Yopno, the within living people bythe owned land customary of boundaries outermost the by defined is and range, mountain Sarawaget the straddles Landscape YUS the Geographically, initiative. Area Conservation YUS inthe participate to have elected that Landscape cope ofYUS the communities and areas all encompasses Plan of Landscape this scope The 1.2 human area’s the biodiversity, unique ision supports which landscape Peninsula resilient Huon and healthy A sustainable, 1.1

1 a S V

c ommunities, andculture. nd Map 3). Administratively, the upper reaches of the of the reaches 3).upper the Administratively, Map nd 2 ) YUS LandscapeManagementPlatform villages and hamlets within that area. Internal clan boundaries within a village cluster are not detailed here). detailed not are cluster avillage within boundaries clan Internal area. that within hamlets and of villages cluster the in residing clans the by owned land of extent outer the represent boundaries ward (mapped scope Landscape 1: YUS Map 13 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Section 1: Strategic platform and direction 1 14 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Map 2: YUS Landscape management zones. management Landscape YUS 2: Map YUS LandscapeManagementPlatform YUS LandscapeManagementPlatform the YUS landscape. landscape. YUS the targets across bothencompass and biological socio-economic Plan inthis outlined actions and strategies management The 1.3 Target 1: Alpine Grassland 1: Alpine Target Target 2: Rainforest (Montane and Lowland) and (Montane Rainforest 2: Target baseline. 2014 the on based increased has or is stable CA the outside species hunted selected of population the 2025, By Rainforest) (Lowland 2: Goal baseline. 2014 the on based increased has or is stable CA the inside species hunted selected of population the 2025, By Goal 1: Rainforest) (Montane Yopno Zones. and Uruwa across grasslands alpine of area appropriate maintain and conserve 2025, By 1 Goal composition. characteristic structure, density & by defined as species indicator key of populations viable support areas grassland alpine the 2025, By 2 Goal

of the CA and cultural values on the landscape. the on values cultural and of CA the p society, to civil support includes target socio-economic The their and species wellfocal as ecosystems, marine and i of key are protection the ecosystems targets Biological Gogiok Village. Photo: Ashley Brooks Ashley Photo: Village. Gogiok ncluding: alpine grasslands, montane and lowland rainforests,

artnerships and governance across the landscape in support insupport landscape the across governance and artnerships Management targets Management

e cology. Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators

 h by measured Viability range. and density presence, species m Ecosystem integrity g alpine of in hectares Area local use. local sustenance of resources for r lowland of in hectares Area r montane of in hectares Area ainforest within CA. within ainforest CA. within ainforest uman use trends and the the and trends use uman rasslands protected. easured by indicator indicator by easured Target 4: Marine Ecosystems Marine 4: Target Target 3: Matschie’s Tree Kangaroo (and other hunted species) hunted other (and TreeKangaroo Matschie’s 3: Target Target 5: Civil society, partnership and collaboration and partnership society, Civil 5: Target G on the 2016 baseline. the on based increased has or is stable species hunted selected of density the 2025, By baseline. 2012 the on based increased has or is stable CA the outside species hunted selected of population the 2025, By 2 Goal with the YUS Vision. YUS the with in-line biodiversity marine conserve to program amarine 2016, develop By 1 Goal baseline. 2012 the on based increased has or is stable CA the inside species hunted selected of population the 2025, By 1 Goal functional. is fully and exists (CAMC) institution Multi-stakeholder management 1 Goal resource use and management. resource sustainable to support of Facilitation 3 Goal functional. is fully and exists CO) A community-based organisation (YUS 2 Goal oal 3 oal Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators

approved. Constitution

a developed program Marine Market integration. Market co Plans Use Land Ward a CO execs present priorities for p twice held meetings General p CA YUS and Plans Landscape held. Meetings required. required. c in scat increase Relative effort. /unit Catch o species target of counts Scat i species target of counts Scat plots at all at transects. plots nside CA. nside ounts across all monitoring all monitoring across ounts nd incorporated into LP 2. LP into incorporated nd lans approved by Minister as as Minister by approved lans ction at CAMC meetings as as meetings CAMC at ction er year. er utside CA. utside mpleted. 15 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Section 1: Strategic platform and direction 1 16 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Source: (Beehler 2012; Birdlife 2012; CITES 2012) CITES 2012; Birdlife 2012; (Beehler Source: survival. their with incompatible in but utilization avoid extinction, to order with in threatened controlled be must trade necessarily not which species II: Appendix circumstances; exceptional in 1 under CITES controls trade international to subject species Landscape Table 1: YUS are inTable listed controls 1. byCITES covered species Landscape YUS to survival. ensure their plants and animals wild of inspecimens trade on controls to international subject is PNG (CITES) Flora and Fauna Wild of Species Endangered Trade in International on Convention (CBD). Diversity Biological on Convention the and (CMS); Animals of Wild Species Migratory of Conservation the on Convention the Region; Pacific South Environment of and the Resources of Natural Protection the on Convention the (CITES); Flora and Fauna of Wild Species Trade International are: on inEndangered Convention the Landscape YUS the to relate specifically that asignatory is 1.4.1 1.4 F Appendix I: species threatened with extinction. Trade in specimens of these species is permitted only only permitted is species these of specimens in Trade extinction. with threatened species I: Appendix Paradisaea guilielmi Paradisaea minor Paradisaea magnificus Cicinnurus regius Cicinnurus wahnesi Parotia superba Lophorina rothschildi Astrapia albertisi Drepanornis magnificus Ptiloris chalybata Manucodia plicatus Rhyticeros chloropterus Alisterus fulgidus Psittrichas roratus Eclectus brehmii Psittacella bruijnii Micropsitta pusio Micropsitta peregrinus Falco severus Falco berigora Falco cenchroides Falco novaeguineae Harpyopsis bruijni Zaglossus Latin / scientific name our key multilateral environmental conventions to which PNG PNG to conventions which keyour environmental multilateral

YUS LandscapeManagementPlatform International obligations International Legal basis Legal Magnificent Riflebird Magnificent Crinkle-Collared Manucode Hornbill Blyth’s Papuan King Parrot Parrot Vulturine Parrot Eclectus Parrot Brehm's Tiger Red-Breasted PygmyParrot Buff-Faced PygmyParrot The Peregrine Falcon Hobby Oriental The Falcon Brown Kestrel Nankeen Eagle Harpy Guinea New Echidna Beaked Long Western Emperor Bird of Paradise of Bird Emperor Lesser Bird of Paradise Paradise of Bird Magnificent Paradise of Bird King Wahne's Parotia Paradise of Bird Superb Huon Astrapia Sicklebill Buff-Tailed English name II II II II II II II I II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II Appendix Appendix CITES 1

Ecosystem Marine the within assessments biodiversity of marine part as determined be will of turtle species exact The applies. MOU the Zone, Nambis inthe turtles of marine to presence the 2012). (CMS States Due Range to MOU turtles of marine all for protection the responsibility shared gives that agreement anon-binding is MOU the ofCMS, the auspices the Under 2012). (CMS Asia South-East and Ocean ofIndian the Habitats Turtles their and of Marine Management and Conservation the on of Understanding Memorandum the through replenishment and to survival their committed is and turtles, of marine state arange is PNG stocks. species migratory to conserve to together states work range species between are developed agreements subsidiary where convention aframework acts however to convention, CMS the the not asignatory is PNG Animals Wild of Species Migratory of Conservation the on Convention to protect. are designed areas such that processes biological or ecosystems species, the on effects likely to have adverse any regulate activity or prohibit and areas, protected establish To must PNG habitat. well their as end, this as fauna and flora endangered or threatened depleted, and ecosystems fragile rareor preserve to and measures protect 14 to take appropriate all Article under required is PNG (PNRESP) Region Pacific South the of Environment and Resources Natural of Protection the on Convention Dwarf Cassowary chick chick Cassowary Dwarf

( CMS)

g oal. (Casuarius bennetti ) bennetti (Casuarius . Photo: Ashley Brooks Ashley . Photo: YUS LandscapeManagementPlatform commitments and obligations specific to YUS are: YUS to specific obligations and commitments binding the CBD, inthe Articles 42 the Of protection. site level biodiversity to effective down levels, legislative and policy the from of conservation aspect every covering targets biodiversity of ambitious to araft committed has PNG (CBD) on BiologicalConvention Diversity

Som Zone Ashley Photo: Grasslands. Brooks r to financial to promote access partnerships Strengthen ( cooperation scientific and technical international Promote 17); (Article of exchange information the Facilitate b in training and education public strengthen and Promote 12); (Article training and research Promote m and use for sustainable the measures incentive Develop (Article in a resources of use biological customary encourage and Protect 8); (Article arrangements administrative and policy legal, appropriate through application wider promote their and diversity of use biological sustainable and conservation relevant for the lifestyles traditional embodying communities k of maintenance and for preservation systems the Develop 8); ecosystems (Article o introduction forthe prevention the and mechanisms Develop d biological Create to asystemof areas protected conserve ( andIdentify monitor components of diversity biological Article 18); and Article 7); Article esources (Articles 20 and 21) (Wickham et 2010). al. 21) and 20 (Wickham (Articles esources nowledge, innovations and practices of indigenous and local local and of indigenous practices and innovations nowledge, f, control or eradication of alien species which threaten threaten which species of alien f, eradication or control iological resource management (Article 13); resource management (Article iological iversity (Article 8); (Article iversity anagement of the country’s biological resources (Article 11); (Article resources biological ofcountry’s the anagement ccordance with traditional and cultural practices practices cultural and traditional with ccordance

1 0); specific to YUS, are: YUS, to specific and include, agreements multilateral under toward obligations assets, environmental of national protection and management to the contribute that policies environmental landmark The 1.4.2

institutions and conserving biodiversity (Horwich 2005). (Horwich biodiversity conserving and institutions religious and cultural social, meaningful supporting while resources of use natural foster sustainable development, unplanned against protection overall provide areas conservation 1978). Thus, Act (CA Act The under controlled is them etc.) within construction road mining, logging, (e.g. commercial development or use, of land any alteration such, as and conservation, is area of aconservation purpose principal The 2005). (Horwich landscape the and people links between inextricable the recognise and of landowners; consent with byand managed tocommunally be established private; and are government customary, including ownership any of form under be areas: can conservation inthat differs However, areas. protected Act designated CA the within heritage cultural and of environmental preservation seeks it inthat Act Parks to National the similar is Act The Landscape. T Act): The or Act, 1978 (CA Act Areas Conservation The e for mechanism administrative 2000: Environment Act The b of protection the seeks 1998: Act Management Fisheries The CITES; under obligations national t 1979: promotes Act Trade Flora) and International (Fauna The impacting the environment; and environment; the impacting he sustainable use of fauna and flora and is a framework for for framework is a and flora and of use fauna sustainable he nvironmental impact assessment and evaluation of activities of activities evaluation and assessment impact nvironmental iodiversity in respect of fisheries; inrespect iodiversity he key piece of national legislation relating to the YUS to YUS relating the legislation keyhe of national piece

Na tional legal context 17 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Section 1: Strategic platform and direction 1 18 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN and agreements manifest (which asmanagement conservation resource traditional and rights, usage allocation, Land 2010).processes (DEC consultative and byconsensus are made decisions and units, household or byindividuals than rather owned, are collectively resources where gas) and oil minerals, forests, land, as, such resources natural governing (i.e.those laws national in reflected is ownership collective Such groups. are landowning the family extended and clan tribe, the where ownership, collective is land Akey feature of customary livelihoods. subsistence-based and remoteness, trade, small-scale of localised in acontext of years over have evolved thousands are managed) these how settlement, dispute and rights, of usage allocation inheritance, tenure of customary (e.g. aspects various issues around The the colonial period. but Law, Organic the with inconcert thereforemust not only work Landscape ofYUS the planning and Management government. level to local responsibility and power decentralise and levels, local and community atthe ingovernment participation increase services, of rural to seek improve delivery the that mechanisms planning provincial for asystem of bottom-up foundation the is Law Organic The Landscape. of YUS the management locally-based and for communal basis strong a provides 1998 Governments Local-Level and Provincial on Law Organic the within framework institutional The 3). (Annex it preceded that processes inthe and Plan inthe considered carefully have been factors harmony. Such community and wellbeing, economic and culture, social toare intrinsic local context), Landscape YUS inthe use resource sustainable A freehold (0.5%) land freehold (2.5%) into public and 3% remaining divided the with authority, customary tounder be 97%estimated is Nationally, of land tenure. customary under owned andcollectively recognised legally is landscape YUS the across land All area. target the tenure and systemof owners of customary the consideration ensure effective must development, and of conservation for purposes the landscape, YUS the as such inPNG, land 1.4.3 2 Public land is owned by the state. Freehold land is owned and controlled by individuals or corporate bodies. corporate or individuals by controlled and owned is land Freehold state. the by owned is land Public ny approach to identifying, protecting, and managing managing and protecting, to identifying, ny approach

s

l and pledges, land-use planning and zonation, and and zonation, and planning land-use pledges, and eek to enable and support local government processes. government local support and toeek enable YUS LandscapeManagementPlatform Local level institutional context institutional level Local 2 , ‘alienated’ from customary tenure during tenure during customary from , ‘alienated’ 5. St 4. 3. 2. 1. Constitution:PNG 1.5.1 1.5 rategic actions nationally are governed by the five goals of the the of goals five bythe are governed nationally actions rategic

Montane Rainforest, Uruwa Zone. Mark Photo: Ziembicki Rainforest, Montane In person in relationship with others; with inrelationship person awhole as to develop haveopportunity the will woman or man each that so oppression or of form domination every from herself or himself of freeing process inthe involved political and economic organisation (1975). organisation economic and political of social, forms Guinean New of use Papua the through Pa self-reliant; self-reliant; economically independent, and our economy basically Nat the from, benefit and in, to participate opportunity equal Eq generations; and future of benefit the for be replenished and all, us of benefit for collective the used and environment toconserved be Nat

tegral human development: every person to be dynamically todynamically be person every development: human tegral pua New Guinean ways: achieve development primarily primarily ways: development achieve Guinean New pua uality and participation: all citizens to citizens all have an participation: and uality National constitution Policy and planning context

ional sovereignty and self-reliance: politically and and politically self-reliance: and sovereignty ional ural resources and environment: natural resources and and resources natural environment: and resources ural d evelopment of our country; evelopment of our country;

YUS LandscapeManagementPlatform 7. environmental (Wickham management and development human growth, reinforcing of economic roles mutually the on premised is and 2010 from to 2050, period year for a40 initiatives development country’s the out maps subordinate to the PNG Constitution, these plans are: plans these Constitution, to PNG the subordinate to 2050, through development for national foundation 1.5.2 T 6. 5. 1. goals: national all underpin that seven on pillars built is by 2050” (Wickham by 2050” Country Happy and Vibrant Wise, aSmart, be will Guinea New is: “Papua 2009, inNovember launched vision, national The P 4. 3. 2. Notes: Notes: Table 2: PNG national planning framework to 2050 to framework planning national PNG Table 2: hree overarching national planning instruments are the are the instruments planning national hree overarching NG Vision 2050 Vision NG



PNG Medium Term Development Plan (MTDP) 2011-2015 (MTDP) Plan Term Development Medium PNG 2010-2030 (DSP) Plan Strategic Development PNG 2050 Vision PNG

YUS panoramic.YUS Ryan Photo: Hawk Str Sp En Se People Hum In Wea

stitutional Development and Service Delivery; Delivery; Developmentstitutional andService SDP – Strategic Development Plan; # – government re-alignment with PNG Vision 2050. Vision PNG with re-alignment #–government Plan; Development –Strategic SDP National development plans development National vironment Sustainability and Climate Change; Change; Climate and Sustainability vironment iritual, Cultural and Community Development; and and Development; Community and Cultural iritual, curity and International Relations; Relations; International and curity ategic Planning, Integration and Control (NSPT 2010b: 3). (NSPT Control and Integration Planning, ategic lth Creation; an Capital Development, Gender, Development, Youthan Capital and Planning instrument Planning

E mpowerment; mpowerment; Provincial SDP Provincial District SDP District LLG SDP LLG et al. al. et Vision MTDP Year DSP 2010: 2). The PNG Vision 2050 2050 Vision 2010: PNG 2). The 2006-2010 2008-2012 2008-2012 2008-2012 2008 2009

2010 al. et # # # # # # 2011 2010). Vision 2050 2050 2010). Vision

2011-2015 2012 2011-2015 2011-2015 2011-2015 2013 2014 2015 2016

2010-2050 2017 2016-2020 2016-2020 2016-2020 2016-2020 and costings (Wickham (Wickham costings and deliverables indicators, detailed contain MTDPs The MTDPs. of four, aseries through is executionofDSP year five the The 2011-2015 Plan Term Development Medium PNG for details). DSP the or Report Issues Landscape to YUS the (refer of Vision results the long-term the for achieving map road the as acts and indicators, and targets objectives, goals, sector contains DSP The DSPs. 20-year two across interventions sector and policies public policies, for economic into directions are translated 2050 of Vision areas focus seven strategic The 2010-2030 (DSP) Plan Strategic Development PNG 2018 2). (Table with to are required align plans) partner development and partnerships (e.g. public-private plans other and plans, LLG and district provincial, specific, sector that actions Wungon Village. Photo: Ashley Brooks Ashley Photo: Village. Wungon 2019 2010-2030 2020 2021 2022 2021-2025 2021-2025 2021-2025 2021-2025 2023

2024 al. et

2025 guiding these 2010), is it and 2026 2027 2026-2030 2026-2030 2026-2030 2026-2030 2028 2029 2030

.... 2031-50 2050 19 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Section 1: Strategic platform and direction 2 Section 1: 20 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN being the Solomon Islands with 29,753km with Islands Solomon the being species (DEC 2010; Thompson 2011). 2010; Thompson (DEC species from11,000 30,000 as to anywhere high as ranges Guinea New of for island the species plant of vascular number estimated The Pacific region, with a land area of 452,860km area of land a with region, Pacific Western inthe country largest the As Indonesia. with border aland and Palau, and Islands, Solomon the Australia, with borders maritime shares PNG islands, of smaller thousands with along Guinea of New of island the half eastern the Occupying 2.1 the floral diversity of PNG is very high (Shearman (Shearman high is very PNG of diversity floral the grassland, forestalpine and levelto up cloud sea from habitats 71%rainforest approximately cover (forests area), and of land of area tropical contiguous third largest ofworld’s the part As (DEC of fish (~10% species estimates) marine global of 2,800 around home to and significant also is biodiversity marine PNG’s Triangle, 2010). centre ofCoral inthe the Situated (DEC 30% to exceed estimated is and high, also is Endemism of mammal. species 276 and of bird, reptile, 740 and species of amphibian 641 314 ofspecies freshwater of fish, insect, species species 150,000 for estimated an accounted 2010), PNG (DEC CBD the to Report et 2010). al. Fourth its In (Lipsett-Moore area land 1% than inless of the biodiversity terrestrial 9%as of global much as supports PNG that suggested is It diversity. biological byits only matched is Guinea’s New diversity cultural Papua 2006). (Nita nationally groups tribal different byover spoken athousand languages 800 estimated the within captured is ofcountry the wealth cultural level and 2,800m altitude (Hanson (Hanson altitude 2,800m level and sea between live typically and area, 27%around ofland the regionally, at7.06 only in2011. million occupy people PNG The population to highest the home is et 2010), al. PNG (Wickham View of YUS Landscape from the Bismarck Sea. Photo: Mark Ziembicki Mark Photo: Sea. Bismarck the from Landscape YUS of View

Location andContext Strategic platformanddirection 2 Papua Guinea New 010). 010). et al. et 2001). immense The 2 of land area) area) of land 2 (the next highest highest (thenext et al. al. et 2008). 2008). temperatures in the highlands (Hanson (Hanson highlands inthe temperatures milder and regions, island and inlowland temperatures tropical with altitude, with mainly vary temperatures Average 2010). exist (DEC seasons dry extensive Provinces, Central Wickham and 288 are near threatened (Vié (Vié threatened are near 288 and vulnerable, 365 endangered, 49 endangered, are critically 36 suggests List Red IUCN The concern. of conservation species of are number too the so new discoveries, with increase The remain. knowledge scientific inthe gaps large that clear it are known, of biodiversity estimates broad such While While 2010). (DEC to double expected inparticular species frog of numbers with significantly, increase will amphibians and of reptiles species that estimate scientists Some records. of new species pace the will so increases, ecosystems PNG’s 2011). (Thompson interestin research recorded and As being with 1,000 - 1,500mm in coastal areas (Hanson (Hanson areas incoastal -1,500mm 1,000 with seasonal, and low to relatively areas, highlands insome year per 10,000mm as much as with continuous, and high extremely from et varies 2001).rainfall al. annual Average (Hanson Mount peak, highest the (with 3,000m above ranges mountain high extensive and volcanoes, active of large anumber with active, volcanically and tectonically is PNG topography. and climate inlandform, variations large its and 2006) (Nita provinces bio-geographic of several major crossroads atthe location of its symptomatic is Guinea’s New biodiversity Papua occurring. extinctions of species likelihood higher a there is inPNG, endemism levels of high species the given

e xtent of this is reflected by the number of new species newspecies of the number by reflected of is this xtent

s

W pecies number estimates are high and expected to expected and are high estimates number pecies et al. et ilhelm at 4,509m) covering much of the country ofcountry the much covering at4,509m) ilhelm

2010). In some areas such as in Western and and inWestern as such 2010). areas some In et al. al. et 2009). Furthermore, Furthermore, 2009). et al. al. et 2001). et al. al. et 2001; 2001;

i s s Location andContext 3 limestone ridges occur as a sequence of ‘coral terraces’. asequence as occur ridges limestone expressed and well preserved of Sialum, village coastal the 2011). (WHC to ocean around the area the In steeply dipping of limestone ridges of massive consist Ranges Sarawaget al. uplift globally (at least 0.8-2.1mm/yr) (WHC 2011; (WHC Freeman 0.8-2.1mm/yr) least (at globally uplift rates offastest of the geologic atone rises Peninsula Huon As plates. crustal Pacific and ofAustralian the junction at the location to due 2011), its history geologic aturbulent has and Bryan and 11 (Shearman (between ago) years 5million and to Pliocene Miocene Late the during mainland to PNG the docked that island separate of aformerly part is peninsula The 3). (Map Provinces Morobe and of Madang intersection atthe mainland PNG the of out jutting block mountain acoastal is Peninsula Huon The 2.2 ‘youthful’ (Freeman (Freeman ‘youthful’ (to 4,122m), geologically are considered Rawlinson the and (to Finisterre 4,176m), (the ofHuon the ranges Sarawaget the mountain ofthree principal the peaks high the years, million The World Heritage Tentative List is an inventory of sites which Parties to the World Heritage Convention (in this case PNG) intend to consider for World Heritage nomination in the following years WHC (2011). WHC years following the in nomination Heritage World for consider to intend PNG) case this (in Convention Heritage World the to Parties which sites of inventory an is List Tentative Heritage World The 2012). With the majority of uplift occurring in the past one one past inthe occurring of uplift 2012). majority the With

Map 3: Huon Peninsula Huon 3: Map t

he Pacific plate subducts beneath the Australian, the the Australian, the beneath plate subducts Pacific he Huon Peninsula et al. et 2012). and Finisterre the Both et et Montane Rain Forests Ecoregion (number 107 of 200) 107 (number of 200) Ecoregion Forests Rain Montane Peninsula Huon the listing, ecoregion global own its afforded is peninsula the 1993c), (Beehler intact relatively Remaining UNESCO’s World Heritage Site –Tentative Site List Heritage World UNESCO’s on listed have been such as overall,and of peninsula the evolution,landscape history and biological human occupation Huon for understanding resource therefore invaluable an provide 2011). (WHC Terraces years Huon The 300,000 over last the region ofPacific the history totestimony geo-climatic the have asignificant are also but spectacular, not only considered Terraces”, “Huon the as Referred to internationally are these the Central Ranges (Freeman the Ranges Central from taxa bymontane colonization limits that barrier geographic a as act to east, the Basin Ramu-Markham the particularly 2012). While outlying the New Guinea Central Ranges (Freeman (Freeman Ranges Central Guinea New the outlying regions of montane highest and largest the resulted being init has Peninsula ofHuon the history geologic unique The system with high levels of endemism (Freeman (Freeman levels of high endemism system with biogeographic to island represent an thereforeis considered ev olutionary divergence,olutionary the surrounding lowlands, and

the isolation of the montane peninsula promotes promotes peninsula ofmontane the isolation the et al. al. et 2012). The Huon Peninsula 2012). Peninsula Huon The 3 . et al. al. et et al. al. et 2012). 2012). 21 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Section 1: Strategic platform and direction 2 22 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN matschiei) endemic subspecies (Refer Annex Table (Refer Annex 2). subspecies endemic 22 and Adelberts, and Huon tothe both endemic one Huon, the to endemic species five with high relatively is endemism al. (Wikramanayake forest limestone some and to 3,000m) forest 1,000m (from montane of tropical proportion ahigh level) with forest sea (from wet evergreen tropical mostly is ofpeninsula the vegetation The 2008). Triangle Mous and (Green ofCoral the Ecoregion Marine Sea Bismarck the within falls peninsula the around area marine the while Ecoregion, Guinea New Northern the within peninsula with equivalent altitudinal ranges (Gillieson (Gillieson ranges altitudinal equivalent with areas byother matched only is and plant, of higher species 5,000 estimated an with of PNG areas rich botanically most (Wikramanayake grasslands alpine high forests and cloud fragile ecologically (Wikramanayake and community assemblages for the peninsula (Freeman (Freeman for peninsula the assemblages community and of speciation patterns historical have illustrated species avian on conducted studies comparative and surveys extensive for discussion) 2.3 (refer Section 2004 and 2003 in 2001, Surveys Biodiversity to Huon the through continuing and 1920s to late the back Dating research. avifauna fromextensive comes richness faunal for Huon of knowledge body largest the but of the Huon is the most diverse (Freeman (Freeman diverse most the is of Huon the avifauna the Ranges, to Central the incomparison species-poor PNG (Beehler 1993c). Matschie’s tree kangaroo Matschie’s tree kangaroo 1993c). (Beehler PNG in area any similar-sized than vertebrates of warm-blooded species endemic mainland more supports Range Finisterre However, the inIndo-Malaysia. of ecoregions other those with compared when to low is moderate overall endemism to and high moderate considered is richness species Faunal 2012). (Jensen tohigh be believed also is but understood, poorly remains peninsula the on endemism 4 In comparison: PNG national, 11 people/km national, PNG comparison: In 2012). While PNG’s outlying montane regions are relatively are relatively regions montane 2012). outlying PNG’s While Som Grasslands. Photo: Ashley Brooks Ashley Photo: Grasslands. Som Location andContext is the largest known mammal endemic to the Huon, to Huon, the endemic mammal known largest the is et al. al. et al. et al. et 2001). Nationally the DEC lists the the lists DEC the 2001). Nationally 2001). It is considered one of the of the one 2001). considered is It contain peaks ofhigher the 2001). Some 2 , PNG highlands, 22 people/km 22 highlands, , PNG et al. al. et et al. al. et 2 2012). Species (Ningal (Ningal (Dendrolagus (Dendrolagus 2011). Plant et al al et 2008). et et for conservation. In the 1993 1993 the In for conservation. priority as a identified been twice has area landscape YUS integrity, the ecosystem and uniqueness to its Owing value. utilitarian and biodiversity both for communities ecological complete to conserve opportunity therefore aunique offers population, human byasmall fringed The (DEC nationally threatens biodiversity that extraction resource and development large-scale from protection some afforded been has landscape the enter or YUS, dissect currently roads no since and 6% of landscape, around the occupy precisely, communities human permanent quantify to difficult Although area. 70% ofland the occupies that to over 4,000m) zero from CA, the outside and within of rainforest (both tract Assessment a conservation priority area. priority a conservation as tolisted requirements be met the all area YUS the scenario, analysis (Lipsett-Moore (Lipsett-Moore analysis conservation Arecent 2009). DEC 1993a; (Beehler Range population density (~6.2 people/km (~6.2 density population The value. conservation significant has Landscape YUS The 2.3.1 for 2.4 (Refer Section parcels land pledged or area, conservation gazetted the to to refer used is specifically CA YUS Whereas, the human andenvironmental elements the across landscape. all referred is to, encapsulates it Landscape” “YUS where Thus, Area” 78,729ha). (totalling Conservation “YUS the as gazetted aforested zone, core encompasses also landscape The Range. metres Sarawaget inthe inexcess of 4,000 altitudes to kilometres of 40 over adistance rises to then and foothills, (2-5km) plain coastal anarrow across extends landscape the Sea, Bismarck the from Tok 6). Emerging and English (Map Pisin to inaddition dialects and languages local six speaking people, 12,000 ataround estimated population diverse to aculturally 1.1), (Section boundaries administrative home is multiple and of area straddles 158,271ha an 3), covers (Table Landscape YUS the Peninsula, ofHuon the corner north-eastern inthe Located 2.3 impacts (Lipsett-Moore change climate event inthe refugia of predicted species as to act able places and endemics; range of restricted protection representativeness; ecosystem national the conservation; biodiversity for: requirements the meet would protected, if areas, to which determine used was modelling Here, priority. conservation as a area Landscape YUS the identified also PNG species, and the extensive extensive the and species, mammal and bird of endemic presence the ranges, elevational to broad due their for conservation areas priority as proposed

d

Y r iscussion). ugged landscape is characterised by a low human human byalow characterised is landscape ugged US Landscape with its intact natural environment, environment, natural intact its with Landscape US Bi YUS Landscape YUS o-geographic context and values context o-geographic , the Finisterre and Sarawaget Ranges were Ranges Sarawaget and Finisterre , the et al. al. et et al. al. et Dacrydium PNG Conservation Needs Needs Conservation PNG 2010) of terrestrial regions of of regions 2010) of terrestrial 2010). Under each modelling modelling 2010). each Under 2 ) 4 anda unbroken large forests of Sarawaget

2 010).

Location andContext 2,950m: to sites up elevation high various across sets data species significant generated survey Each 2004. and 2003 in 2001, surveys biodiversity Landscape of YUS part as out were carried Huon Peninsula (Gillieson (Gillieson Peninsula Huon the encompasses that classification Forest Finisterre-Huon the within falls for landscape the overall forest vegetation The Flora

4 in genera from67 species plant 89 site, 2004: Dendawang 6 101 from in genera species 156 plant site, 2004: Wasaunon 1 >119 Tarona and from Surim 2003: sites, species, plants f species, plant 2001: sites, >183 Abalgamut and Dendawang rom 111 families; in73 genera Map 4: Ecological monitoring transects, plots and biodiversity survey sites across the YUS Landscape YUS the across sites survey biodiversity and plots transects, monitoring Ecological 4: Map 15 1 families; and 3

fa

g milies (TKCP 2001; TKCP 2003; TKCP 2004). TKCP 2001; 2003; TKCP (TKCP milies enera in 96 families; in96 enera et al. et 2011). studies field Vegetation and tabulated summary follows (Table 3). (Table follows summary tabulated and upper montane, and alpine) (Gillieson (Gillieson alpine) and montane, upper lowermontane, lowland, including zones, elevation four broad along classified was forest vegetation landscape, the across classes cover for land all layers spatial generating with Along remotely sensed image analysis (Map 5) (Gillieson 5) (Map analysis image remotely sensed assessments wasand through completed field Landscape YUS the of 2011,In classification vegetation aspecific 2012). (Jensen new to be science would species many that suggested is it toanalysed, remains be ofdata the much While YUS coastline. Photo: Mark Ziembicki Mark Photo: coastline. YUS et al. al. et 2011). Adescription et al. al. et 2011). 2011). 23 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Section 1: Strategic platform and direction 2 24 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN land forms, soils, and climatic conditions (Gillieson (Gillieson conditions climatic and soils, forms, land of over arange elevations low from occur and 3) (Table area landscape the of afifth almost occupy YUS across Grasslands soil exposed and Grasslands by burning (Gillieson (Gillieson by burning maintained and however,stable, anthropogenic they are largely relatively and well established are generally grasslands YUS grasses and land slips (Gillieson (Gillieson slips land and grasses senesced or burned gardens, bare erosion, bank river from earth exposed includes soil Bare of management. purposes the with for “Grasslands” grouped been has study classification vegetation the from Soil” “Burned/Bare class cover land the accurate distinction difficult (Gillieson (Gillieson difficult distinction accurate relate making to soil bare closely grass of burned properties spectral periodically, are burned grasslands ofYUS the much that to fact the Due lowland. coastal narrow the skirts grassland of ribbon additional an while Zone, Som inthe occurs grassland Map 5: YUS Landscape vegetation and land cover land and vegetation Landscape YUS 5: Map Location andContext et al. al. et 2011). of area contiguous largest The et al. et 2011). 2011). et al. al. et 2011). such, As et al. al. et 2011). 2011). various stages of regenerating forest (Gillieson forest (Gillieson of regenerating stages various gardens) and (abandoned regrowth garden plantations, gardens, of consisting class cover land anthropogenic an primarily is this proximatesettlements, to human located Generally forest /regrowth Gardens scrub vegetation communities (Gillieson communities vegetation scrub dry and forest, canopy open occurring naturally forest, damaged fire and wind includes class The 7% around of YUS. occupies Alpine Grassland Uruwa Zone. Mark Photo: Ziembicki et al. et 2011). et al. et 2011), and and 2011), Location andContext grassland, and Eucalypt savannah (Gillieson (Gillieson savannah Eucalypt and grassland, forest, grassland, Imperata grassland, Themeda Heteropogon Araucaria forest, Casuarina forest, Dipterocarp hill forest, mixed consist broadly rainforests Lowland 1,000m. below mountains of foothills and rainforest the all vegetation include forests lowland 15% around Landscape, Occupying ofYUS the Lowland rainforest 1.2). Section (Refer class vegetation target *–management Notes: baselines and classes cover land Landscape YUS Table 3: this vegetation class inYUS. class vegetation this for however has yet toundertaken assessment be biodiversity alluvium forest (Gillieson forest (Gillieson alluvium in than height, variable less and buttresses, and trees girth of large frequency less emergents, and lowercanopies with These Alpine grassland* Alpine Montane rainforest* Lowland rainforest* forest Gardens / regrowth soil; burned exposed Grassland; class cover land YUS rainforest Up rainforest Lo wer montane per montane

m ixed lowland rainforests are considered species rich, rich, species are rainforests considered lowland ixed 3,110m elevation Mean > 1,000m 0 –1,000m scrub. and dry forest open canopy forest; damaged fire and wind includes includes gardens; established canopy; anthropogenic; no Mostly slips. land and areas gardens, burned from erosion, bare soil exposed scrub, includes some anthropogenic, Mostly Notes > 3,000m 1,000 – 3,000m et al. et 2011). botanical Adetailed TOTAL 158,271 8,540 84,952 26,360 9,885 28,535 (ha) 2012 in Area 11,563 73,390 et al. al. et 2011). 2011). 5% 54% 17% 6% 18% landscape of % area 7% 46% on or near the ridge crest but at slightly lower elevations than than lowerelevations atslightly but crest ridge the near or on found were and typically species, canopy six composed area) to be similar to lower montane rainforests with the addition of of addition the with rainforests to lowermontane to similar be suggested is above) and (3,000m rainforests montane of upper (Gillieson (Gillieson fire history and exposure, drainage, depth, soil on depends and and including including 2,400m) (above emergents with forests, coniferous and the dominant tree species identified in each plot: D plot: each in identified tree species dominant the on based classes forest into montane three distinct upper the to separate able was study The landscape. the across application have broader may and YUS, insouth-eastern 4) (Map site 2,122 research range elevation Wasaonon atthe to 3,067m the within forest on composition conducted was sensing), In starkenborghiorum Schefflera Poa spp. Poa et dulum D. Nothofagus nidulum Dacrydium 3,000m) consist of mixed montane, of montane, mixed consist 3,000m) to (1,000 rainforests montane Lower rainforests. of YUS) (8% montane upper and Landscape) of YUS (45% lower montane of consists oflandscape, over the half covering and above, the 1.2), (Section vegetation target management asingle As Montane rainforest swamps, occupying 6% of the landscape (Table 3) (Gillieson (Gillieson 3) (Table 6% oflandscape the occupying swamps, herbaceous and grasslands alpine includes and over 4,000m), to (rising 3,000m above plateaus and peaks of ridges, areas of discontinuous consists zone of YUS montane upper The grasslandAlpine nidulum shrub-like at the highest elevations (Gillieson elevations highest atthe shrub-like become and decrease heights canopy and trunks, crooked with significantly. aregreater, densities thin Tree aregenerally trees species (Stabach (Stabach species 24 canopy of 3,100m, to composed up elevation an and ridges, and slopes upper were area) the on found ofstudy the 40% forest type (26% of study area) composed 35 canopy species. species. canopy 35 composed area) of study (26% forest type altitude in the upper montane grasslands (Gillieson grasslands montane upper inthe altitude with not decrease does richness Species soils. drained poorly on well drained sites, while low grasses ( grasses low while sites, well drained on

2 al. al. ni

004 a detailed study (combining ground truthing and remote and truthing ground (combining study adetailed 004 m Araucaria 2011). grassland Alpine structure and composition ontane rainforest class, occurring from 1,000m and and 1,000m from occurring rainforest class, ontane dominant, dominant, , Podocarpus et al. et Festuca spp. Festuca (Gillieson (Gillieson forests (Stabach

st (Gillieson arkenborghiorum 2011). Mid-height tussock grasses predominate predominate 2011). grasses tussock Mid-height et al. et dominant (Stabach dominant Caldcluvia nymanii nymanii Caldcluvia dominant forests (making up almost almost up forests (making dominant et al. al. et , 2009). 2009). Dacrycarpus , and , and et al. al. et 2011), differs forest structure while et al. et Danthonia spp. Danthonia 2011). Broadly, composition the Caldcluvia nymanii Caldcluvia dominant forests (2.8% of study of study forests (2.8% dominant 2009). , Castanopsis Pauacedrus et al. al. et dominant and and dominant Deschampsia klossii Deschampsia ) predominate on on ) predominate 2009). et al. et , , dominant dominant Phyllocladus Nothofagus 2011). 2011). et al. al. et acrydium acrydium Nothofagus Nothofagus 2011). , , , 25 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Section 1: Strategic platform and direction 2 26 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Table in concern recorded Species 4: YUS of conservation (Table 4). wild inthe to extinction Vulnerable or Threatened Near either Table 1), (Annex Peninsula to Huon are the six and endemic 2012). in51 are five (Beehler these, genera, 149 families Of from species 268 have documented YUS across surveys avian Source: (ISSG 2011; Beehler 2012; Birdlife 2012; Inkster 2012; Ziembicki 2012) 2012; Ziembicki 2012; Inkster 2011; 2012; Birdlife (ISSG Beehler Source: Ranges. Mountain Adelbert and Peninsula Huon to both #–endemic Peninsula; to Huon *–endemic 3; Table Annex refer description, full ‡–for Notes: (Freeman to late 1920s the back dating Peninsula Huon the on surveys of ornithological history todue along Landscape ofYUS the group animal known are best the Birds understood. poorly remains ecology and biodiversity faunal of the much hint that yet as unrecorded of species discoveries regular and landscape, the across toconducted be continue and have been, surveys biodiversity and research faunal Extensive Fauna research site in PNG (CI 2011; (CI site inPNG research Freeman for asingle dataset avian largest the constitutes now it that YUS across extensive so been has research avifauna Indeed, Family Casuariidae fauna Avian Accipitridae Scolopacidae Psittacidae Paradisaeidae Paradisaeidae Tachyglossidae fauna Mammalian Dasyuridae Macropodidae Macropodidae Macropodidae Muridae Pseudocheiridae Location andContext name Latin / scientific Casuarius bennetti Casuarius novaeguineae Harpyopsis Scolopax saturata Scolopax Psittrichas fulgidus Parotia wahnesi Parotia Paradisaea guilielmi Zaglossus bruijni albopunctatus Dasyurus matschiei Dendrolagus vanheurni Dorcopsulus Thylogale browni rufilatus Paraleptomys corinnae Pseudochirops English name Dwarf Cassowary Dwarf Harpy Eagle Harpy Guinea New Javan Woodcock Vulturine Parrot Vulturine Wahne’s Parotia# Paradise* of Bird Emperor Beaked Echidna Western Long New Guinea Quoll Guinea New Kangaroo* Tree Matschie’s Small Dorcopsis Small Pademelon Guinea New Rat Water Northern Ringtail Possum Plush-coated et al. al. et 2012). To date, et al. al. et Status‡ IUCN Threatened Near Vulnerable Threatened Near Vulnerable Vulnerable Threatened Near Endangered Critically Threatened Near Endangered Threatened Near Vulnerable Endangered Threatened Near 2012). 2012). of of and Landscape YUS the across conducted research from known is much research, of on-going focus the and understood poorly remains oftree kangaroo’s the ecology much While D. matschiei matschiei D. Peninsula between 1,000 between Peninsula ofHuon the elevations to high the are endemic kangaroos Matschie’s tree taxa. unknown for alargely of knowledge body asignificant generating and inparticular, kangaroo Matschie’s tree into endangered the conducted been has Despite 1993b). (Beehler them enumerating and in observing to due difficulties birds, behind lags YUS across mammals of knowledge the level context, national the with Consistent kangaroo species on the Huon Peninsula, Huon the on species kangaroo TKCP 2001; (TKCP predicted previously than species endemic more contain also might region The 2004). TKCP 2001; 2003; TKCP (TKCP documented inadequately is Peninsula of Huon the fauna amphibian and reptile the that and value conservation high has area the indicates collected species un-described of proportion high The species. several unrecorded yielded the biological richness of the YUS Landscape, they Landscape, ofYUS the richness biological the reaffirmed surveys the 5). While (Table 2004 and 2003 2001, in YUS across were conducted surveys biodiversity kangaroos, tree and into fauna research avian on-going the Beyond CA. of TKCP, to YUS the cornerstone the is such as support and conservation. An integral part of the species survival plan of of plan survival ofspecies the part integral An conservation. to intheir aid in1993 Plan Master AZA’sTK-SSP bythe followed in1991, developed was TK-SSP) (AZA Plan Survival Species Aquariums’s and Tree of Zoos Kangaroo Association the incaptivity, populations decreasing and wild, of inthe hunting threat to ongoing the 2001). Owing (Betz resources vegetative different with of habitats arange across occur populations and inPNG, species nine other the than niche ecological a wider Painted ringtail possum possum ringtail Painted D. matschiei matschiei D.

2 003; TKCP 2004). TKCP 003;

t hese challenges, extensive non-avian fauna research research fauna non-avian extensive challenges, hese is the conservation of the species in the wild, and and wild, inthe ofspecies the conservation the is in captivity (Annex Table 4). As the only tree Table tree only the 4). (Annex As in captivity (Pseudochirulus forbesi) (Pseudochirulus

a nd 3,300m (Porolak (Porolak 3,300m nd . Photo: Mark Ziembicki Mark . Photo: D. matschiei matschiei D. et al. al. et

a lso lso in review). occupies occupies

Location andContext Source: (TKCP 2001; TKCP 2003; TKCP 2004) TKCP 2003; TKCP 2001; (TKCP Source: 2004) and 2003, (2001, results surveys biodiversity YUS Table 5: Weevils Moths Herpetofauna Mammals Dwarf Cassowary Cassowary Dwarf (Casuarius bennetti) (Casuarius

Ronji); altitudes. u are documented frogs seven, possibly six, At least inTarona 2003; in 2001; and Surim Abalgamut and Dendawang 2 and 21 lizards) and (nine snakes species reptile 30 h 2003 and 2001 during documented species the of Six in Tarona 2003; in 2001; and Surim Abalgamut d in 12 families, genera, 33 from species, mammal 44 l one than more at collected were species three Only 2 the 111 during in 12 documented families species, r distinct, are surveys two the of faunas moth The 2 from species 600 and species 500 Approximately t un-described are documented skink of Two species ocality, indicating high species-richness. high indicating ocality, eflecting the varied habitats found at different at different found habitats varied the eflecting axa. nknown to science; to nknown 003 survey (Surim, Tarona, and around the village village the around (Surim, Tarona, and survey 003 respectively; surveys 2003 and 001 sites: survey four at documented species 6 frog ocumented at four survey sites: Dendawang and and Dendawang sites: survey four at ocumented ad never been documented for the Huon Peninsula. Huon the for documented been never ad . Photo: Mark Ziembicki Mark . Photo: 2.3.2 many across services basic of improvement and development the in progress of significant alack result being The years. eight over last the funds budget recurrent received only has it at means plan LLG, ofyear afive Yus lack to site. the The funds disburse and to levels offor direct government higher Yus mechanism thereno is Year means Five Plan Development of a Yuslack tothe both LLGs, Wasu and services of public delivery constrain may infrastructure of physical lack the While 4). 2008a: (MPG ineffective...” become have also services and goods of delivering processes and systems [sic] …the state. machinery, government repairable are beyond of which Some deteriorated. has infrastructures education and health including jetties and wharves bridges, “…the roads, as such infrastructure of state physical general states, government provincial The 1970s. the since backwards have gone trends level, socio-economic At provincial the landscape. the shaping elements socio-economic) (or human and environmental both considers therefore and Plan captures The processes. environmental with linked closely settlements human encompasses as the scope management Landscape YUS C onsideration of the socio-economic context is a key part of of akey is context part ofsocio-economic the onsideration

Socio-economic context and values context Socio-economic v illages. 27 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Section 1: Strategic platform and direction 2 28 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN up to 2000 when the census was conducted (MPG 2008a) (MPG conducted was census the when toup 2000 and 1990s the throughout made been had sector education inthe progress that suggested it is Province Morobe Across context Education when compared with Yopno and Nambis Zones (NSO 2000). 2000). (NSO Zones Yopno with Nambis and compared when Zones Uruwa and Som the rates are across lowest attendance average levels.On provincial and national rates than attendance higher reaching 16 with of villages 42 out data, census the from obvious not immediately is YUS rates across attendance school village and provincial national, among imbalance The 2008). LLG Wasu 2008; (KDA town inWasu school thereahigh is residents, Zone for Nambis while closest, townthe is inKabwum school high district the Yus For residents, LLG Landscape. YUS the across schools high 2012). are (Samandingke no There 7) (Map four community and 12 elementary, primary 33 schools: atotal of 49 had Landscape 2012 In YUS the 2008a). (MPG ineducation value of parental lack and for education, female support limited facilities, boarding insufficient to schools, distance fees, school to: accessibility, are attributed attendance in school imbalances the YUS, as such areas rural For people. school-aged primary beyond magnified – both of are which imbalances gender,large andurban-rural however were the emerged that patterns overarching The not available at the time of writing. of time the at available not 5 Many of the statistics used throughout this section are derived from the 2000 census. Although some of the 2000 census data may now be out-dated, it is used here as a baseline as the 2011 census information was was information census 2011 the as abaseline as here used is it out-dated, be now may data census 2000 the of some Although census. 2000 the from derived are section this throughout used statistics the of Many Map 6: Languages and dialects of the YUS Landscape YUS the of dialects and Languages 6: Map Location andContext 5 . On 6 grade rates beyond retention attrition and of school Analysis no one that completed grade 10. grade completed that one no higher (11.2%)significantly have than females, villages 37 17 of 10 to grade is schools retention the inYUS 10. of males While grade completed females where four villages there were only 10, inreality but grade to on complete 6go grade complete that 2% of only females landscape, the Across evident. is disparity gender Asignificant 2008). (KDA education of quality alack or delivery to todue poor be suggested also is as Landscape, YUS the within school high no to there being attributed primarily retention is (24.3%) and rates, Province Morobe and (25.2%) to total national contrast instark is This 2000). (NSO YUS 10 grade across to on complete continue 6, grade complete 6 grade completed females more 16 In 6. villages, of 37 to grade up school havecompleted that have no females villages five inYUS, levels, provincial and national atthe disparity gender asmall only there is While exceptions. some with averages provincial and national the are overall lowerthan Landscape YUS the rates across that clear is it 6, grade complete and inschool stay who of children proportion the we consider When

t han males. han

a verage just under nine in 100 (8.9%) children who who children (8.9%) in100 nine under just verage

a lso highlight education sector challenges for YUS. for YUS. challenges sector education highlight lso Location andContext Map 7: Landscape Socio of the YUS economic context 29 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Section 1: Strategic platform and direction 2 30 30 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Overarching issues nationally include: nationally issues Overarching 2010a). (NSPT level governments to local services health rural for of responsibility devolution the with to have coincided suggested is which sector ofhealth the to deterioration the attributed of 2010a). interlinked have been Arange issues (NSPT mid-1990s the since worsened key indicators some health however, in progress independence, following decades two first inthe nationally sector health inthe made was Progress context Health YUS Landscape in 2005 (Map 7). 7). (Map in2005 Landscape YUS the across facilities ofhealth the distribution the with consistent is nationally. This LLG each across Posts of Aid a network by Center, supported aSub-Health or Centre Health one typically Thereis 2008a). (MPG staffing limited and supplies, medical inadequate facility, of state health deteriorating malnutrition, income, cash limited ignorance, and illiteracy inaccessibility, include: These exist. challenges immediate level more local atthe overall,while delivery service sector health basic constrained has development economic provincial of pace slow the that suggests government provincial The health indicators for the province illustrates its context: its illustrates for province the indicators health of ‘outcome’ Aselection 2008a). (MPG mechanisms in delivery and infrastructure, inhealth status, in health overall decline an experienced has province the over decades recent Morobe, For

in to 51.7 in1996, years 53.9 from dropped expectancy Life c births live 1,000 per deaths rates of 38 mortality Child li 1,000 per deaths to 80 62 from increased Infant mortality g failure byprovincial and ofsector the management Poor p preventative health and primary on of emphasis Lack sh to (due staff of facilities operation limited or Closure infrastructure; transport Inadequate ( facilities and services health basic or to quality access Poor (MPG 2005); (MPG livebirths 1,000 per deaths fell to 72 from 64 infant mortality period same 2010a). (NSPT budgets annual their are not operational); facilities health of rural half (around of buildings maintenance poor and e.g. aid posts and health centres); health and posts aid e.g. ve births between 1980 and 2000, while nationally over the over the nationally while 2000, and 1980 between ve births ompared with the national average of 25 in 2000 of in2000 25 average national the with ompared ractices; and overnments to adequately resource health services through through services health resource toovernments adequately

2 ortages), insufficient medicines, malfunctioning equipment equipment malfunctioning medicines, insufficient ortages), Location andContext 000. 000.

2 005); coastal district. coastal a to to markets being due it access welleasy as grown, be to of products variety for awider allowing zones of climatic arange covering to district due the probably is This crops. cash as coffee and coconut betel nut, producing of people numbers similar with activities, ineconomic participating of households even amore there is spread Tewai-Siassi, In 22). 2008: (KDA issue not an is security food where and round, year all produced crops of food abundance province” its inthe with districts eight “most the is of it the that fortunate suggests administration District Kabwum 6). The (Table for subsistence produced mostly are poultry beteland nut livestock, crops, of food production the while activity, alivelihoods as so are doing coffee produce that households all almost District, Kabwum 8). In 2008a: (MPG (1,500PGK/year) wage minimum rural the below remain incomes household average and areas inmany stagnation or declines there have been that apparent is it production, livestock “extremely favorable” conditions for improving agricultural and has province the that However, recognised is it while 2008a). (MPG production fromagricultural comes Province Morobe across income of household source primary The context Livelihoods to crises. to respond capacity and limitations; resources; funding human supplies; of health distribution and procurement services; health to basic to into be: continue access future will the YUS across sector health the facing challenges overarching The 2008). (KDA resupplying need Posts Aid when and awareness, public raising or clinics, immunization patrols, conducting when staff Centre Health for also but assistance, seeking for people aproblem presents not only byfoot.This or byair accessible are only and terrain of area mountainous alarge across are scattered YUS across Posts Aid and Centres Health the All 2008). (KDA constraints are major facility to nearest time the distance/travelling the and closed, being facilities ofhealth the acombination Landscape, YUS the Across 2008). workers (KDA of staff/health to alack attributed was This 2008). inYus (KDA Posts were LLG closed in2007, that seven of Aid the suggests Administration District Kabwum the though 2005), (MPG 7) (Map Zone) Nambis the (12 Posts Aid and Yus Centres within three in and LLG Health there are atotal of 15 Landscape YUS the across Overall, Location andContext below 2001 levels (MPG 2008a). levels (MPG 2001 below remains currently to copra rise, continues production cocoa while and copra, and vanilla cocoa, include inYUS produced widely crops cash market. Other Lae the and Uruwa between distance to foot extreme notdue on the and plane via buyers by out transported generally is 2010). Coffee (TKCP business apersonal as it transport and coffee aggregate who buyers local and/or groups cooperative five through occur in Uruwa sales 2010). Coffee (TKCP tons ayear 268 as much as produce could Uruwa across households producing coffee the trees standing on based that and 7% only of production, potential was however this that estimated Corporation Industry Coffee The 2010). over just 19 was (TKCP ayear tons of coffee production annual average alone, Zone Uruwa inthe that found by TKCP conducted studies Baseline coffee. Arabica tosuited producing are highly of YUS areas well drained and rainfall high altitude, high The 2008a). tons (MPG at5,000 peaked production 2002 in and activity economic amajor is level coffee At provincial the 2010) (NRI from Adapted Source: –households HH Notes: (2010) districts Landscape YUS across households of activities agricultural TopTable five 6: Poultry nut Betel Livestock Crops Food Coffee District Kabwum Fruit. Photo: Ryan Hawk Ryan Photo: Fruit. 30.9 35.7 74.5 89.8 93.9 engaged % HH 3.1 8.9 7.0 3.8 92.1 for cash engaged % HH Coffee Livestock Coconut nut Betel crops Food District Siassi Tewai- 43.8 54.9 64.7 73.1 83.5 engaged % HH 42.8 15.4 31.2 27.4 14.0 for cash engaged % HH active sinks globally (Dudley sinks globally active Tropical forests are the largest stores terrestrial carbon and source. asink to anet carbon being from shift could YUS are or cleared, degraded forests become tropical the if sink, acarbon acts currently YUS 2010). While Gidda and (Janishevski emissions such incontaining assist will of YUS ecosystems therefore of natural the protection emissions, gas greenhouse 20%global of nearly for accounts fires) and logging agriculture, (e.g. through forest and degradation Deforestation biomass. ground inbelow and ecosystems, marine grasslands, forests, extensive its within carbon atmospheric YUS serves to both store carbon tostore both carbon serves YUS mitigation change climate and YUS andplanningcapacity. governance, management significant has and endowment, an through in perpetuity nationally gazetted protected area, has management support a 3), (Table ecosystems tropical contiguous intact large the are to change climate adaptation and to mitigation contribute to for YUS factors enabling greatest The conservation. biodiversity and wellbeing, and development community for vital services ecosystem maintaining and by providing to and adaptation ecosystems, natural within carbon storing and bysequestering to mitigation contributes landscape The to change. climate adapt help and tomitigate both serve they as are valuable Landscape ofYUS the ecosystems The values and context change Climate 2.3.3 71 to equivalent be would to atmosphere the lost carbon the decades, coming overthe clearing to and fire forests tolost be (111,312ha, were these tons of stored carbon), 19.4million and forests alone of YUS the stocks carbon ground above the we If consider 7). (Table YUS across stocks carbon organic soil in and ground, below ground, above are stored within of carbon tons million over 44 that estimated is it scale, landscape At the estimated for similar ecosystems in PNG (Venter M. M. (Venter inPNG ecosystems for similar estimated previously than store carbon more forests of YUS tropical the that shown was it inPNG, kind of its studies comprehensive in storing carbon (Venter M. (Venter carbon in storing ecosystems the of terrestrial significance the highlighted YUS across stocks of carbon studies in-depth Recent exception. n d the management context: YUS is legally recognised as a a as recognised legally is YUS context: management d the

m illion tons ofillion CO 2 (Janishevski and Gidda 2010). Gidda and (Janishevski et al. al. et et al. al. et and 2012). ofmost the one In 2010), and YUS is no no is 2010), YUS and to continue to capture to to capture continue et al. al. et 2012). 2012).

31 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Section 1: Strategic platform and direction 2 32 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Source: Adapted from (Venter M. M. (Venter from Adapted Source: tons –million Mt t –tons; C–carbon; 1.2); Section (Refer class vegetation target *–management Notes: systems) root in stored carbon (i.e. Carbon Soil GroundAbove Carbon, Organicand Carbon, Below Ground (includes class cover land by stocks carbon Landscape Table YUS 7: Alpine grassland* Alpine rainforest* Montane rainforest* Lowland forest regrowth Gardens / burned exposed soil; Grassland; class cover land YUS Jackfruit and Galip Nuts, Gams Village. Photo: Michelle Venter Michelle Photo: Village. Gams Nuts, Galip and Jackfruit rainforest Up rainforest Lo wer montane per montane Location andContext 3,110m elevation Mean > 3,000m 1,000 – 3,000m > 1,000m 0 –1,000m scrub. dry and forest open canopy damaged forest; fire and wind gardens; includes includescanopy; no established anthropogenic; Mostly slips. land areasburned and gardens, bare erosion, from soil scrub, exposed includes some anthropogenic, Mostly Notes et al. et TOTAL 2012)

158,271 8,540 11,563 73,390 84,952 26,360 9,885 28,535 (ha) 2012 in Area (Mt CO (Mt 182 358 326 357 226 119 (t/ha) density C

2 equivalent) 163.6 163.6 44.6 1.6 4.1 23.9 28.0 9.4 2.2 3.4 C (Mt) Stored develop and prosper. and develop to ability communities’ compromising without extraction, against ecosystems fragmented or of intact to portions protect possible also it to forest of area YUS, to population low the Due change. of climate toresilient potential face have inthe be high they provide, therefore and healthy ecosystems, the services the regard this In of ecosystems. integrity the compromising development industrial or scale, large no with small-scale, and traditional entirely almost is use resource addition, In landscape. the across abound that ecosystems intact largely and representative, to contiguous, extensive, due the climate to to adapt position are inagood of YUS communities The ecosystems. on development) unsustainable and fire species, (e.g. invasive stressors non-climatic reducing and ecosystems, between new corridors establishing and maintaining areas, degraded restoring ecosystems, intact byprotecting YUS in achieved be can This changes. climatic term of long face inthe services ecosystem such of maintaining challenge the is to change climate shelter). and Adaptation medicines, local materials, water, building of clean food, provision wild (e.g. needs community supply and landslides), and severe surge, storm storms, (cyclones, disasters natural against buffer that key provide services already of YUS ecosystems The adaptation change climate and YUS gazetting the YUS CA, refer (Wells refer (Wells CA, YUS the gazetting of ofprocess the (for details inPNG gazetted area conservation first the is in2009, established Area, Conservation YUS The 2.4 planned and approved within the present YUS Landscape Plan. Landscape present YUS the within approved and planned not otherwise is that of land wellany as alteration extraction, resource unmitigated and unauthorised against protection substantive therefore for example, provides CA the governing Minister”. the from approval framework legislative written The with plan; ... inaccordance or ofmanagement the terms the with except: ... land of use that of existing inaccordance the alteration or development the permit alter or or not develop shall CA] YUS in [the land of Specifically, occupier or “...an owner 31. Section under CA YUS the within restricted also is use land of existing alteration or development Any resources. social and scientific historic, geologic, topographical, biological, of important conservation to through and this achieve area, the within inheritance cultural national the environmentand the to is preserve Act Areas Conservation The under CA YUS the

YUS Conservation Area Conservation YUS et al. al. et 2013). The purpose of of 2013). purpose The

t hrough hrough Location andContext Map 8: Gazetted YUS Conservation Area Conservation YUS Gazetted 8: Map 33 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Section 1: Strategic platform and direction 2 34 34 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN the land; natureof customary dynamic of: the todue combination is This process. term along to being due it today continues pledges land proposed of confirmation and mapping The Strategies. the in are reflected these and up follow- and research for targeted opportunity an offers but Plan, to the not aconstraint is This of writing. time atthe not available In landscape. the across workshops TKCP during members community YUS by identified been had or emerged, recently only had workshop, the during time first the for identified was threat priority a many instances, In are not explored. identified threats indirect and intermediate the while targets, management threats the to priority as identified those are only below in2011. workshop of Success detailed threats Foundations The a during were identified targets to management Threats 8). (Map CA YUS the constitute densely forested mountains; and the need to work and map map to and work need the forested and mountains; densely around and up hiking spent field inthe periods units); long GPS and satellite images, maps, (i.e.topographic media unfamiliar et al. al. et (787km of atotal area 78,729ha covers CA YUS gazetted The wished to pledge, and from 2004 GPS units were used (Wells (Wells were used units GPS 2004 from and to pledge, wished they of land parcels the to forms map land and maps drawn hand used Initially,members clan YUS. across landowners with consultation inclose up were drawn boundaries CA proposed area, protected the and to communities support needed much for landscape to YUS the attention international and national bring order to in First, process. longer step ina first the as Zonewas undertaken areas theagricultural across Nambis and villages covering particularly and exist, theycurrently as boundaries CA ofYUS the gazettal The CA. to YUS the adjacent or within residing for people the opportunities to development access restrict or to inhibit gazettal area conservation or Plan, Landscape YUS the CA, ofYUS the purpose not the is it land, to alterations and of development control the and resources, of relevant all conservation the through culture environment and the to area preserve intention the is it of aconservation While Zone. ofNambis the areas lowland inthe particularly hamlets and villages gardens, agricultural and grasslands, including classes, cover land of anthropogenic of amosaic consists area non-forest remaining 8). The (Map forest ecosystems montane and lowland of tropical ribbon contiguous almost an with long tomade be need arrangements means landowners with land

s

uch cases, information, baselines, trends and impacts were impacts and trends baselines, information, cases, uch l i ack of written records for land boundaries; the use of locally of use locally the boundaries; for land records of written ack n advance. 2013). It is these boundaries that were gazetted and now now and were that gazetted 2013). boundaries these is It Location andContext

2 ) research and follow-up and these are reflected in the Strategies. the in are reflected these and follow-up and research for targeted opportunity an offers but to Plan, the constraint not a is This of writing. time atthe were not available impacts In landscape. the across workshops TKCP during members community YUS by identified been had or emerged, recently only had workshop, the during time first the for identified was a threat instances, many In targets. to management threats the direct as 2011. identified those are only below detailed threats The (Section above discussion Landscape YUS the within covered is biodiversity and ecosystems CA YUS of quantification and Annexrefer discussion resolution, Detailed 1. conflict and land of pledging processes and CA, ofYUS the governance the details regarding For mapping. through confirmed and by landowners themselves, are pledged parcels the land communities bythe developed framework bythe governed and O Success of Foundations a during 1.3) were identified (Section targets to ofmanagement achievement the the Threats herein. planned as take will place ecosystems CA YUS In take will place. CA ofYUS the are-gazettal and completed be will lands of pledged 9). Ultimately, mapping the (Map date to landowners CA by as confirmed and mapped, have been 40,411ha the in reflected already is size. and This in shape that augment invariably will boundary CA YUS gazetted current the that means lands, pledged mapping around uncertainties and process The time. for first the land customary of their mapping the ultimately and clans, neighbouring between negotiation and dialogue lengthy necessitates often also Mapping p

Ferns. Photo: Ryan Hawk Ryan Photo: Ferns. t en Standards for the Practice of Conservation workshop in in workshop of Conservation for Practice the Standards en he lead up to re-gazettal, the areas protected under The Act, Act, The under protected areas the to up re-gazettal, lead he

2 .3), and in the lead-up to LP 2, in 2, to LP lead-up inthe and .3),

s uch cases, information, baselines, trends and and trends baselines, information, cases, uch

d epth analysis of of analysis epth

Location andContext Map 9: Mapped Conservation Area Conservation Mapped 9: Map 35 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Section 1: Strategic platform and direction 3 Section 1: 36 36 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN (Ningal likely is to continue growth population with along forest area, in decrease associated with cultivation, under area increasing trend current of the intensification, and introductions new crop are strongly correlated (Ningal correlated are strongly 1975 from to 2000 changes use land and change population production (Wickham agricultural subsistence to support ofland the capacity the outstrip will population the then beyond and by2025, population of the demands to food the meet toused be need will land arable all inPNG, trends growth population current under that suggest Estimates growth. population is agriculture subsistence for forest clearance of small-scale driver overarching The (Wickham cycles gardening inrotational used of land hectares million six around with nationwide, of forest annually 200,000ha as of much as clearing result systems inthe production (Shearman to due logging) 48.2% and agriculture, todue subsistence was 45.6% (of forests cleared, logging behind deforestation of driver largest second the was fodder, fuel) and fibre, food, for crops (including agriculture for subsistence clearance 3.1.1 3.1 N (MAL forlivelihoods systems their agricultural semi-subsistence and subsistence smallholder on depend population) national of (87% population ofrural PNG’s majority vast The ationally between 1972 and 2002 small-scale forest forest small-scale 1972 2002 and between ationally Montane Rainforest, Uruwa Zone. Mark Photo: Ziembicki Rainforest, Montane

Threats toManagementTargets Strategic platformanddirection

Small-scale forest clearance Small-scale forest Direct threats Direct 2 et al. al. et 007; Ningal Ningal 007;

et al. al. et

e t al. 2009; Lipsett-Moore Lipsett-Moore 2009; t al. 2008). 2008). 2010). et al. al. et et al. al. et 2008). It is estimated that such such that estimated is It 2008). 2010). Across Morobe Province, Province, Morobe Across 2010). et al. al. et 2008). In the absence of of absence the In 2008). et al. al. et 2010). local diets (DEC diets local dominate turtles, and molluscs, fish, including of seafood, variety awide regions coastal In ofcountry. the areas isolated and of highland proteininmany fats source and primary the constituting diets, intraditional part important an plays 2010). Wildlife (DEC purposes for various toused be known species plant different 1,035 some with for subsistence, resources biological diverse PNG’s on heavily depend People (Shearman 1972 2002 and between cleared completely been had harvesting to selective of forests all subject aquarter PNG, In to fulldeforestation. aprecursor is it that is harvesting selective 2011). (O’Neil of purposes for impact potential cooking The electricity or to gas access no there is where and 2000), (NSO wood) or bamboo, (i.e.grass, materials fromtraditional made are villages all across of houses 98% average, on where exist, not does intimber for trade access road where, Landscape YUS relevant to the particularly is This for or fuelwood. for building, timbers for high-valued primarily is harvesting selective PNG In area. adefined within use local for non-commercial vegetation woody other or oftrees asubset the of harvesting practice refers ofhere to timber the harvesting selective Small-scale 3.1.3 2011). (O’Neil of YUS areas incertain birds and mammals of certain densities population low or extirpations local caused 2011). (O’Neil zones protected likely pressure has hunting Past as purpose same the served ultimately which purposes, ecological and for spiritual limits off forest was hunting where 2011). (O’Neil communities of the areas had clans Historically, “wildlifeas banks”, systemof the belief traditional the within is and for refugia wildlife as to to hunting limits serve forest off of the ofportions keeping concept the Landscape, YUS the for response management appropriate culturally or a realistic 2011). (O’Neil into account of not is hunting banning the While take this actions conservation all hunters, and are subsistence Landscape YUS the across people the that recognised is It dogs. and traps, arrows, bows, using (O’Neil families their and themselves provide for to sufficiently YUS of ofpeople the ability the and opportunities, size, livelihood may threats, 3.1.2 Vigus 1993). The collateral damage of selective harvesting thus thus harvesting of selective damage collateral The 1993). Vigus and (Cameron operation 10 within of aharvesting die years 70% trees of that remaining suggested another while 2008), of the total wood volume extracted as timber (Shearman timber as extracted volume of total wood the 5-6% only with are killed, operation logging selective typical ina oftrees the half nearly that highlighted inPNG study One 2009). Witness (Global damaged or are killed species non-target many of extraction, felling and process the Throughout biomass. offorest the much and trees oflargest removal the with

Sub Sm products 

2 011). traditional are mostly methods hunting Current all scale selective harvesting of timber and rainforest rainforest and timber of harvesting selective scale all sistence hunting, fishing hunting, andsistence egg collection et al. et

p rove to be linked directly to human population population rove to human tolinked be directly

2008). Typically, selective harvesting begins begins Typically, harvesting selective 2008). 2 010). like of threat hunting, other many The et al. al. et Threats toManagementTargets consumption wasconsumption 2.25m three times the volume of the country’s raw log exports (Filer (Filer exports log raw of country’s the volume the three times new gardens (Carrad 1982, in Filer inFiler 1982, (Carrad new gardens for forestvegetation fallow or secondary of clearing process the in theyneed offirewood the most get can villagers areas, rural inmost but, operations logging aresult as of selective die which trees from firewood remove may some villagers Local et al. al. et m million at6.4 estimated is inPNG use fuelwood Annual YUS. across conversion potential and forest damage to factor contributing afurther is for fuelwood Harvesting 2012). Ramachandra and (Brooks of deforestation driver toakey be suggested is sawmills of use portable indiscriminate 17). seemingly The 2008: LLG (Wasu operations sawmill small ofenvironmentby the destruction the is sector forestry the in identified problem acore 2008-2012, Plan Development Year Five Wasu the In administration. government LLG Wasu bythe recognised is this and Landscape, forests ofYUS the to ofthreat lowland acurrent forests is the harvesting Selective 1989). forest (Johns penetrate intowell primary the fires often that have shown to grasslands forests adjacent harvested of selectively Studies 2009). Witness (Global deforestation to complete potentially to fire,and vulnerability forest increases integrity, and reduces not coral, that are ground into lime in the coastal zone. into are coastal inthe ground that lime not coral, however, shells, mentioned been predominantly is also it that has It betel nut. for lime chewing for inmaking use Landscape zone ofYUS the coastal inthe harvested is coral Anecdotally, 2006). McClanahan and (Cinner fisheries artisanal insmall-scale catch the affect may factors but of overfishing, causes probable as cited pressure have been 3.1.4 Human 2006). McClanahan and markets (Cinner to cash access with infisheries particularly recorded, been has overexploitation local fishery, of PNG the overall health the Despite 2006). McClanahan and (Cinner fish reefreef-associated and harvest to traps) bamboo and weirs dynamite, root, derris traps, hand gillnets, fishing, kite spears, line, hand and hook guns, spear as (such of techniques range a use that fishers subsistence and artisanal exclusively bysmall-scale almost are exploited level. Currently, reefs inPNG coral local atthe role economic akey and 2010), play theydo environmental (DEC nationally remarkable are not considered Landscape zone ofYUS the coastal the fringe that ecosystems marine that fact the Despite per annum in urban areas (Carrad 1982, inFiler 1982, (Carrad areas inurban annum per

f

ew studies have directly examined how socio-economic socio-economic how examined have directly ew studies 2009). A study in Enga Province found that per capita capita per that found Province inEnga Astudy 2009). Un

p sustainable marine ecosystem use ecosystem marine sustainable opulation density, technological efficiency and market and efficiency technological density, opulation 3 per annum in rural areas, and 1.9m and areas, inrural annum per et al. al. et 2009). et al. al. et 3 , more than than , more 2009). 2009). 3

there is no active suppression of forest regeneration patches of forest regeneration suppression active no there is above (Filer above outlined as bylocals acts occasional and prescribed from expected be reasonably could what however beyond go does YUS, and Peninsula Huon the PNG, across of fire impact The (Gillison 1969). boundaries of configuration extent and the ofand year time of duration, interms irregular is of burning pattern the cases, such In 1969). (Gillison villages between travelling people byitinerant spontaneously started and unplanned also be can burning anthropogenic purposes, management of use fire for resource deliberative Beyond to conversion permanent amore undergo may vegetation the regeneration or occurs, traditional propagation practices change, of forest suppression active frequent, more becomes burning factor responsible for such montane forest loss. forest loss. montane for such responsible factor sole the be fire would areas, inthose takes place suppression forest or intense farming, clearing, active no since that being, et al. al. et forests, leading to increases in the village ‘footprint’ (Shearman (Shearman ‘footprint’ village inthe to increases leading forests, into adjacent spreads eventually burning frequent where and settlements, human around and within from radiate typically forest secondary and grassland of gardens, amosaic whereby of mountain ranges (Shearman ranges of mountain tops the on were(>10km), or located patterns, distinct had settlements from human distant were that significantly time, over to forestgrassland or conversion clearing, with consistent features exhibited areas many 1972 –2002, for period the PNG Bryan patterns over many years (Gillieson over years many patterns burning aresult of prescribed and are likely anthropogenic of grassland areas large that possible is it of YUS, case the In F secondary forest will result within 20 or 30 years (Filer (Filer years 30 or 20 forest result within will secondary (Filer settlement of human of years over thousands 3.2.1 3.2 (Gillieson for fuelwood) are sought species woody growing fast pioneer (some species utility of valued for propagation the a trigger (to the maintenance areas of practices, grassland agricultural burn and slash through as such tool, management resource deliberate toas a fire use continue have and people Local as ‘subsistence-related’ clearing (Shearman clearing as ‘subsistence-related’ gardens on a10-15 on (Gillieson cycle year gardens forest. In of secondary succession and grassland, fallowing, gardening, of cycles are interlinked complex outcomes through and ire has played a key role in shaping PNG’s vegetation patterns patterns vegetation PNG’s akey played ire inshaping role has

g

m

rassland.

aintain grass and wildlife stocks for local use), and as use), as and for local stocks wildlife and grass aintain 2009). Where periods of fallow become shortened and and shortened of become fallow periods Where 2009).

Inappropriate fire regimes fire Inappropriate Compounding threats Compounding threats 2 011). in degradation and of forest conversion astudy In

et al. al. et s ome cases grassland areas may be utilised again as as again utilised be may areas grassland cases ome et al. al. et 2011). processes Typically, fire-related these 2009; Gillieson 2009; et al. al. et et al. al. et et al. al. et 2009). The implication implication The 2009). 2011; and Shearman et al. al. et 2011). described is This et al. al. et 2011), where and 2009), 2009),

et al. al. et et al. et 2009). 2009). 2009).

o f f

37 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Section 1: Strategic platform and direction 3 38 38 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN (Johns 1989; Filer 1989; (Johns Niño events El global with havecoincided to due fire,these forest extensive loss and severe conditions, have drought been (SPREP trunks tree-fern open breaking and tree seedlings, uprooting and byeating for starch, search intheir destructive highly are Pigs 2000). (SPREP diversity plant native reducing and of forest canopies, replacement the even or halting slowing tree seedlings, eat for example, pigs, and goats Cattle, impacts. sp.) (Butler sp.) (Butler et al. al. et 1987; Shearman conversionpermanent to (Corlett grassland of and/or trees death the to potential have cause high and forests, intoadjacent spread can readily there fires of drought, periods during and flammable torelatively be are suggested grasslands alpine instance, For offire. the time atthe climate the is offires the key impact ofresultant the The determinant lit. deliberately strike or bylightning either fire– with associated 2011). forest clearly was montane of upper loss areas, many In Bryan and (Shearman nationally regions bio-geographic all of of forest cleared proportion third highest the experiencing Range Adelbert and Peninsula Huon the nationally, with lost 12.7% as much as been forest had area montane of upper 1972 2002, and between that found deforestation on study The and soil conservation and nutrient cycling with invasive with cycling nutrient and conservation soil and pigs, from provisioning (e.g. food productivity and functioning service to ecosystem contribute can species introduced many that fact the Despite 2000). (SPREP rats as such and cattle, pigs, as such of animals importation bythe changed wholly havebeen region Pacific the across Ecosystems or invasions, to succeeding even vulnerable them more making instabilities, ecosystem and set of extinctions a cascading trigger also can species Invasive 2000). (SPREP cause other any than extinctions for species more are responsible species invasive of habitats, alterations through indirectly or species in ecosystems (Lucier in ecosystems presence human and networks road trade, as things by such facilitated is spread their and 2009), Solutions for Ocean (Center activities aresult as of human incidentally or intentionally into either environment the introduced species non-indigenous are species Invasive 2000). (SPREP change land-use after services ecosystem and to threat greatest biodiversity second the represent species invasive region, Pacific the Across 3.2.2 during that drought period. of forest aresultstarted of was fires conversion such that suggests settlements, human beyond location and deforestation of pattern The YUS. across forest toof grassland montane conversion the in factor major the havebeen to is fire suggested 2011). Bryan ofand 1997-1998, period El Niño recent the During

d

isturbances such as climate change (Leadley change climate as such isturbances g

2009). Studies have highlighted that in PNG, when there there when inPNG, that have highlighted Studies 2009). Threats toManagementTargets oats for food, or mongooses for control of other pests of pests other for control mongooses or for food, oats Inv

2 asive species 000). et al. al. et 2009), many have had devastating ecological ecological devastating have many had 2009), et al. al. et et al. al. et 2009; Gillieson 2009; 2009). Through direct impacts on on impacts direct Through 2009). et al. al. et 2011; Shearman et al. al. et 2010). Lucaena

inhibits coral growth, and creates no-growth zones (Bryant (Bryant zones no-growth creates and growth, coral inhibits rivers by carried ofsediments freshwater volume and high flow the as of watersheds, mouths the reefs near tothreat coral are aparticular of pollution sources Land-based habitats. island threatening and degradation, ecosystem river causing waste is solid and from liquid pollution level, water regional Pacific At the 3.2.3 2005). ISSG (IUCN application chemical or uprooting physical through only currently is control management/ and harm, economic and ecological significant of tocausing likelihood have ahigh suggested is species The 2005). ISSG IUCN 2003; (Francis to up 2,000m forest margins forests or indisturbed and rainforest areas, areas, agricultural in occurs stem more diameter, or a10cm with typically and widespread introduced invasive across YUS is is YUS invasive across introduced widespread 2012). most (Wells The species byunwanted shrub invaded entire out hillsides to point able people local Zone), with Yopno inthe (particularly places inmany widespread is of invasive weeds evidence Landscape, YUS the Across In PNG, PNG, In 2005). ISSG (IUCN Provinces Morobe and Chimbu Sepik, Madang, presentacross, is species the PNG, in and Pacific, the Asia, East South across established now is piper bamboo Argentina, to northern Mexico from America tropical mainland 2012). and “bondo” to (Agate WestIndies Anative the called is of YUS Zone Uruwa inthe and 2003), (Francis piper bamboo (Jensen at its for Yopno the clear remains case not the is which This imagery. naked bythe eye satellite both and River ofUruwa the mouth atthe obvious is silt of suspended expanse alarge of these, impacts environmental and social the or trends, historical rivers), reference with to andYopno theupstream Uruwa (particularly from extent of the run-off regarding information no there is While Landscape. ofYUS the communities to lowland the concern of now is some sedimentation and siltation through pollution land-based that suggests partners, to project people local from communications personal and evidence Anecdotal 2011). Brooks 1998; Yawan field office. Photo: Zachary Wells Zachary Photo: office. field Yawan

m Wa outh.

P. aduncum P. 2 ter pollution ter 012), and most commonly referred to in English as, referred012), as, to inEnglish commonly most and is a shrub or small tree up to 7 metres tall, to tree up 7metres small tall, or ashrub is Piper aduncum Piper et al. al. et

Threats toManagementTargets stressors to ecosystems (Hills (Hills to ecosystems stressors human and non-climatic byongoing are exacerbated these and being felt, areclimate already of the effects region Pacific the of parts many For targets. management the and landscape to the change fromclimate threats potential the on predictions broad sufficiently provide do Pacific the and Melanesia from studies regional and national analysis, vulnerability 3.2.4 W These to landscape. threats the potential predict we can context human and location, of terrain, the knowledge howeverbe, with will Landscape to YUS threats the the what exactly to suggest impossible is it this In regard predict. to difficult more become factors non-climate and climate between effects synergistic the and variable, more much becomes climate where context toward a tobut regime, anew climate for ashift are heading we not that is it suggest, many as Thus, go. projections the out further the uncertainty increasing with comes also change impacts of climate change far greater. far change of climate impacts make to the stand all which 3, Section throughout identified ofthreats the of each effects compounding bythe exacerbated are but their own, on challenges significant pose of these All

     hile there has yet to be an explicit YUS climate change change climate YUS yet there has hile explicit toan be time lines and an increase in uncertainty around food security. food around inuncertainty increase an and lines time regimes/ events, agricultural inphenological to achange lead of This storms: severity and variability climate Increased conversion of forests to grassland; and of chances ofand fire severity forest increase integrity, and w rainfall: Coupled decreased with along temperatures Rising e of coastal to inward an migration lead level rise: Could Sea c and into lowland run-off increase will rainfall: This Rising t climatic limited with to Athreat temperatures: species Rising threat to threatened marine species and local livelihoods; local and species tothreat marine threatened adirect represents there, and growth grass sea and coral for suitability decrease could This ecosystems. of marine upslope; fauna and flora of lowland migration and individuals, of some isolation spatial to the lead also May endemics. range forests), restricted or hresholds (e.g. those in high elevation and upper montane montane upper and elevation inhigh (e.g. those hresholds oastal areas, leading to increased siltation and sedimentation sedimentation and siltation to increased leading areas, oastal cosystems (or loss of the system) and communities; ofsystem) the and loss (or cosystems

ith fire and forest clearing, this has potential to decrease potential decrease has to this clearing, and fire forest ith Climate change Climate

in clude: et al. al. et 2011). climate Predicted

c ould ould 3.2.5 development ward all to are facilitate held meetings consultative 5-yearly that fact the despite LLG, the across of plans ward coverage to incomplete due the into plan aLLG toconsolidated be able have Ward wards three of13 the At least Yus training. of adult provision LLG and driers, coffee solar boats, as such services community new infrastructure, extension, agricultural as to such areas directed typically are budgets Development plan. year five not have a does it to fact due the 2008-2012 for period the 2011, Budget Development Yus its that not received has LLG October during inLae key representatives with government discussions from evident is It inpoint. acase is of writing time atthe non-existent was Year (2008-2012) Plan Development Yus the that fact 2010a). Five The NSPT 2008a; (MPG plans into and development LLG chain policy the up them passing and views local atcapturing level ward areat the ineffective mechanisms planning existing while needs, local emerging and to crises appropriately to respond ability the lack bodies government and mismanagement, financial by inefficiencies, focus on its core programs across the landscape. the across programs core its on focus to TKCP allow will and akey be to will this challenge, obstacles the Removing priorities. of government implementation the and of services bygovernment, level delivery, the is landscape the at success of achieving Part aresult. as of landowners support the lose programs if constrained notentirely if difficult becomes targets management are achieving notmet then expectations provider, as development the only service andif/when seen is therefore is risk TKCP that The to LLG. the Budget ofDevelopment the of disbursement lack the and plan LLG an of lack inthe results This overall governance. and collaboration coordination, planning of interms leadership, landscape the across wards among therefore, is, There adisconnect (MPG not occur did management and evaluation, monitoring, a to were LLGs, devolved functions administrative and government various While 2008c). level (MPG local at the delivery inservice decline gradual the around issues address to sought nationally Law ofOrganic the enacting the 1995, In

c ommensurate transfer of institutional support for planning, for planning, support of transfer institutional ommensurate

Wea 2 008c). Service delivery across all sectors is now plagued plagued now is sectors all across delivery Service 008c). k, non-existent or undeveloped governance non-existent k, context

p lans. lans.

d evelopment plans, but these were these not but plans, evelopment 39 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Section 1: Strategic platform and direction 3 40 40 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN minerals (Wickham other and of gold inmining expansion and new explorations and potential, great showing already is minerals sea of deep the project, gas natural liquid for alarge deal dollar multi-billion of a signing the include sector petroleum and mineral the in achievements recent most The over three decades. the employment and earnings export significant with country the and natural gas (Wickham gas natural and 3.3.1 3.3 P imported food (Hanson imported and materials, building fuel, coffee), and freshas vegetables (such crops of cash transport inthe road avital exist theyplay roads Where documents. planning lower levels of government and provincial national, within expressed is sectors of most development the on puts this constraints the and network (NSPT connectivity and of condition interms overall state poor to its tenure) land constraints aroundfunds, customary contribute of wastage the of maintenance, lack (including, of factors infrastructure in the province (MPG 2008a). (MPG province inthe infrastructure of state transportation to bad the attributable is crops cash of sale and delivery inservice decline the that suggests and (MPG maintenance of periodic alack and constraints, budgetary terrain, torugged remoteness, due the limited is network road the context: of national the that mirrors Province of Morobe the rural population (Hanson (Hanson population rural the of majority the to reach said is inPNG network road The 3.3.2 Peninsula. entire the Huon covering (PPL) License Prospecting 2011), aPetroleum obtained (Tiamu subsequently which company Oil Morobe the established (Finschhafen) Saimange and (Kabwum), Dinangat (Nawaeb), Erap District), (Bulolo 2011, however during ILG, the Kumalu representing landowners of registration and offormation the to as status the unclear is It GroupLandholder (ILG) for petroleum development. of Integrated an for establishment the location atargeted is where, LLG Yus (2008-2012), plans development year five District Kabwum and Province Morobe the both with in-line are of 4for Ward development oil aspirations The oil. surface of discovery the on future based inthe development possible (Yus atDinangat community the that itself, recognised is it YUS in or Peninsula Huon the on underway currently is operation NG is rich in gold, copper, silver, nickel, cobalt, petroleum petroleum copper, silver, ingold, nickel, cobalt, rich is NG

d

L evelopment of a new nickel mine, exploration and sampling sampling and of anew nickelevelopment mine, exploration Threats toManagementTargets

Mining, oil and gas exploration gas and oil Mining, Potential threats Potential Roa LG Ward 4), have chosen to pursue oil exploration and and exploration oil toLG pursue 4), Ward have chosen

2 2 008a). The provincial government recognises this this recognises government provincial The 008a). 010a). Recognition of the state of the national transport transport ofnational of state the the 010a). Recognition d construction et al. al. et et al. al. et 2010). While no mining or petroleum petroleum or mining no 2010). While et al. al. et et al. al. et 2001). The transport infrastructure 2001). transport The 2010). These have provided 2001), however, a range however,range a 2001), and plans, to National it. access transport and of road of lack the Yus the across symptomatic is LLG utilities of basic a range of lack the plans, development district provincial, in national, indicated As 2008). Yus the are inside (KDA of which LLG none and of decay), stages various (in of road of 82km a network has District Kabwum available. of transport means only the travel byfoot are and Yus airplanes light For LLG, challenges. have contrasting but status, relative intheir are similar YUS, across LLGs oftwo the contexts infrastructure transport The until at least the next MTDP 2016-2020. MTDP next the until atleast not however apriority would be road this that current the within expected is It Landscape. forest of YUS the areas lowland the particularly pressureresources, natural the to significant bring also will road planned anationally via area of coastal the up opening The of YUS. communities for highland opportunities additional offer also but communities, lowland the not only for opportunities development significant up open will town, Wasu and Province) (Madang Saidor between link road missing for the plan national the and to Weluwelu Ronji, connecting of road of 50km development proposed the landscape, the of Zone toNambis the In markets. access affordable and services of basic for development the catalyst important an as serve could Gogiok at finishing and Zone, into Som the into road Yus Wantoat offrom access an LLG construction The to(50km). Weluwelu Ronji road, –New Plan LLG Wasu and Wantoat to Gogiok; road, –New Plan District – New Plan National years: over coming the Landscape YUS the around inand construction road potential indicate LLG, Wasu and Land Use Planning workshop, Gogiok Village. Photo: Ashley Brooks Ashley Photo: Village. Gogiok workshop, Planning Use Land

c urrent five year development plans for Kabwum District, urrentDistrict, development five Kabwum year plans for

“ missing link” road, Saidor to Wasu to Sialum; Kabwum to to Wasu Sialum; Kabwum Saidor road, link” missing Threats toManagementTargets (Bird areas coastal lowland the specifically and mainland, PNG the toward westward shifted attention granted, been had region islands the in areas concession most When first. exploited accessible most the whereby to direction, west east inan taken place have inPNG operations logging Geographically, 2009). Witness – will be depleted by 2021 (Shearman by2021 depleted be – will forests forests –i.e. lowland accessible of commercially 83% rates of atcurrent logging, that predict estimates Some 2009). Witness (Global for future logging are or earmarked concession logging under forestsalready now accessible commercially 2011),of 1.1–3.4% of all the (Thompson nearly annually with ata rate depleted are being now forests inPNG Accessible (Bird timber for PNG demand the driven market has that export the is it not exist inPNG, does timber industries such as logging (Bird logging as such industries extractive of commercial development returns fromthe early seek necessarily policies that means sectors, employment and commercial of well-developed absence the and areas in rural levels low of development mechanisms, market regulatory using the through signals send can government PNG the that fact the (Bird exports agricultural and mineral after earner foreign exchange third largest the represents now forestry 2010). Commercial 3.3.3 (Bird atotal of 11.2%and logged Province of forests inMorobe 2009), Witness (Global nationally forests were logged valuable commercially- of accessible, all 36% period, over that that estimated is It 1972 2002. and between to nationally forest loss C ommercial logging represented the largest contributing factor factor contributing largest represented the logging ommercial Photo: Ryan Hawk Ryan Photo:

al. et

et al. al. et al. et Commercial loggingCommercial

2007a). Given that a significant domestic market domestic for asignificant that 2007a). Given 2007a). 2007a). a nd high volume forests of the islands region were region forests ofislands the volume high nd et al. al. et 2007b; Wickham 2007b; et al. al. et et al. al. et 2008; Global 2008; 2007b). Despite Despite 2007b). et al. al. et within the YUS Landscape (Gillieson Landscape YUS the within forest encompassed lowland the that to suggest credible is It as it is currently listed only as a as only listed currently is it as The commercial purposes. commercial for Landscape forests ofYUS the to lowland the access improve significantly will This constructed. is Road Sialum Saidor–Wasu– planned the if lifted be also may Singorokai and Ronji forests around oflowland the to exploitation obstacle An lease. timber proposed by the dissected Landscape forest of YUS the lowland of for protection opportunities potential offers schemes, trade The 2008b). (MPG schemes trading carbon and conservation and projects, integrated sawmilling, scale small including: it any Forest Agreement, suggests, as Management the PNGFA has an estimated cut of 16,000cm cut estimated an has of “potential forest” and area, 52,329ha covers concession proposed The 2008b). (MPG Ronji and Singorakai around Zone Nambis lowland atthe CA and Landscape YUS the intersects Area” which Kwama Timber “Timbe the, called lease timber aproposed maps and lists in2007) (developed 2008-2013 Province for Morobe Plan Forest Provincial The threat. term anear is This point. atsome operations logging for commercial

c an be developed through a range of alternative mechanisms mechanisms of alternative arange through developed be an

k p ey point to make about the Timbe Kwama lease, is that that is Kwama lease, Timbe the toey make point about rovision for integrated projects, conservation, and carbon carbon and conservation, for projects, integrated rovision proposed 3 per annum (MPG 2008b). 2008b). (MPG annum per et al. al. et lease, and outside 2011) targeted be will 41 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Section 1: Strategic platform and direction 4 Section 1: 42 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Table 9: Coverage of protected areas and biodiversity conservation across national strategies national across conservation biodiversity and areas protected of Coverage Table 9: current into the incorporated have been goals) forMDG as eight all well (as these and sustainability) (Ensure environmental #7 Goal Development Millennium UN (to 2015) for global the targets national specific has also 9). PNG environment (Table of to the ensureprotection the suite of actions ambitious and to acomprehensive committed has government PNG the 2011-2015, to MTDP current the through down and 2050, Vision PNG The planning, level of national highest atthe Starting refer 7). Strategies, all Annex across details environment (For of the protection and use sustainable the importantly and priorities development, that contribute to socio-economic national multiple with directly aligns Plan Landscape YUS The 4.1 V and climate change climate and sustainability Environmental #5: Pillar e Natural resources and e asustainable Promote Fo C National guiding strategy Goal 5: Goal 5: DSP 2010-2030 n n ons ision vironment vironment

urth Goal: urth Implementing thePlan Strategic platformanddirection Aligning with government policies government with Aligning titution

M

20

TDP. 50

1. Strategies for, reference to, and focus on conservation and protected areas for, to, and and protected focus reference onStrategies conservation the text on page 118 page text on the only] DSP of the strategiesare Specific not listed within DSP, the arein [Note: the detailed they however MTDP. from heresummary Listed is a 2. 4. 3. 5. 7. 6. 9. 8. 12. 11. 10.

   Increase awareness and encourage actions to protect the environment. the protect to actions encourage and awareness  Increase and accounting; environmental for adatabase of  Establishment a pro- their ensure to issues geophysical and environmental for responsible agencies of strengthening and  Empowerment  Re-align PNG’s national environmental programs international with commitments; e the protect to mechanisms evaluation and monitoring with together framework, legislative the of  Improvement environment; the preserving and enhancing for practices customary of strengthening  The pollution; reduce to market apollution of formulation the and pollution, deter to incentives economic of development  The

All necessary steps to be taken to give adequate protection to our valued birds, animals, fish, insects, plants and trees. and plants animals, fish, insects, birds, valued our to protection adequate give to taken be to steps All necessary a scenic, sacred, its and environment the of posterity, and ourselves of benefit the for replenishment, and conservation The a land, the under sea, in the seabed, or land the on in and environment the and resources natural our of made be to use Wise nvironment; ctivity in mitigation;ctivity Re by changes; Es As De Es Co Co Es curricula; and In Pr Pr Es nd historical qualities; and qualities; historical nd generations; future for in trust and development our of air, in the interests nd in the tegrate environmental sustainability and climate change studies in primary, secondary and national high school school high national and secondary in primary, studies change climate and sustainability environmental tegrate ovide 100% of weather and natural disaster monitoring systems in all provinces; systems monitoring disaster natural and weather of 100% ovide sources; energy renewable from generation power 100% ovide

tablish a Sustainable Development Policy in all sectors, especially forestry, agriculture, mining, energy and oceans oceans and mining, energy agriculture, forestry, especially in all sectors, Policy Development aSustainable tablish tablish a total of 20 national reserves, wilderness areas and national parks; parks; national and areas wilderness reserves, national 20 of atotal tablish tablish at least one million hectares of marine protected areas; areas; protected marine of million one hectares least at tablish tablish an Institute of Environmental Sustainability and Climate Change. Climate and Sustainability Environmental of Institute an tablish nserve biodiversity at the current five to seven per cent of the world’s biodiversity; world’sbiodiversity; the of cent per seven to five current the at biodiversity nserve nserve and preserve cultural diversity; cultural preserve and nserve levels; 1990 to 90% by emissions greenhouse duce sist the majority of Papua New Guineans to become resilient to natural and human disasters and environmental environmental and disasters human and natural to resilient become to Guineans New Papua of majority the sist velop mitigation, adaptation and resettlement measures in all impacted provinces by 2015; by provinces in all impacted measures resettlement and adaptation mitigation, velop 2 015; 015; budgeting at all levels. atall budgeting and plans government with synchronised is planning landscape ensure to periods, planning year five government with directly align will future Plans to 2015. present Plan, end the Beyond 2013 starting therefore is and plan athree year phase planning agovernment through midway comes Plan Landscape YUS foundational present, 9). The (Table instruments of such timing the with and plans of national strategies sectoral the both with aligns Plan therefore Landscape the that critical is It Plan. Landscape the within for strategies the sustainability for funding factor enabling apotential and are therefore amandate, aguide, plans government 8). National (Annex services of public delivery for the of funds disbursement the ultimately and plans LLG and district, of provincial, formulation the guide plans national The Implementing thePlan Notes: SDP: Strategic Development Plan; # – National planning re-alignment with PNG Vision 2050; * – Planning and completion of subsequent YUS Landscape Plan. Landscape YUS subsequent of completion and *–Planning 2050; Vision PNG with re-alignment planning #–National Plan; Development Strategic SDP: Notes: 2050 to framework planning national PNG Table 10: 2010a) NSPT 2010b; NSPT 2010; DNPM (1975; Source: MDG Goal 7: Goal MDG 2015 to MDG sus Ensure environmental e asustainable Promote 5.6: Goal MTDP 2011-2015 National guiding strategy Poles to build school teacher house, Yopno Zone. Michelle Photo: Venter n vironment t ainability YUS Annual Work Plan Work Annual YUS YUS Landscape Plan Landscape YUS

Planning instrument Planning

Morobe SDP Morobe District SDP District LLG SDP LLG Vision MTDP Year DSP 6. 5. 4. Relevant PNG Targets for environmental sustainability: environmental for Targets PNG Relevant 3. areas for, to, and and protected focus reference onStrategies conservation 2. 1. Sector strategies: 2006-2010 2008-2012 2008-2012 2008-2012

2008   f in environmentally improvements through resources natural and land of use commercial increase 13:Target 2020, By t 2010,later no by and programs specific sector through development sustainable of principles the 12:Target Implement Env La Cr In Env Ins riendly technologies and methods of production. of methods and technologies riendly han 2015;han and stitutionalise implementation and management of the Global Environment Conventions to meet PNG’s commitments; meet to Conventions Environment Global the of management and implementation stitutionalise eation of systems of protected areas management at all levels and forest and biodiversity conservation; biodiversity and forest and all at levels management areas protected of systems of eation nd and water resource management; and management; resource water and nd titutional capacity strengthening for environmental sustainability for environmental management; strengthening titutional capacity ironmental and data information management for planning and dissemination. 2009 ironmental and standards; protection 2010 * * # # # # # # 2011 *

2011-2015 2012 LP 1: 2013-15 LP 2: 2016-2020 2: 2016-2020 LP 1:LP 2013-15 2011-2015 2011-2015 2011-2015 2013 2014 2015 2016

2010-2050 2017 2016-2020 2016-2020 2016-2020 2016-2020 2018 2019 2010-2030 | * 2020 2021 Footbridge. Photo: Zachary Wells Zachary Photo: Footbridge. LP 3: 2021-2025LP 2022 2021-2025 2021-2025 2021-2025 2021-2025 2023 2024 |

* 2025 2026

LP 4: 2026-203 4: 2026-203 LP 2027 2026-2030 2026-2030 2026-2030 2026-2030 2028 2029 2030 | * .... LP 5:31-35 LP 2031-50 2050 43 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Section 1: Strategic platform and direction 4 44 44 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN programs, activities, staff and finances of their respective their of respective finances and staff activities, programs, all manages Managers Strategy ofTKCP-PNG the Each their in zone. Officers Conservation bythe managed to, are locally and directly report Rangers The required. where roam and YUS-based, are also Officers Mapping local two while Zones, Landscape four YUS the of each in based is Officer Conservation recruited A locally 1). (Figure YUS within based of ateam staff and inLae, based Managers Manager,Strategy aProgram comprises TKCP-PNG The under obligations of fulfilment and Plan, Landscape YUS the of implementation of activities, management day-to-day The 4.2.1 8. Annex refer of key other ingeneral, representatives responsibilities and roles the regarding details here. For are outlined these and mandates, and responsibilities roles, specific has management Landscape to related YUS directly organisation Each bodies. representative elected and organisations, technical and of community to falls arange Landscape YUS the across of activities reporting and oversight management, overall planning, The 4.2 Figure 1: Organisational structure of TKCP-PNG

A Implementing thePlan Y Tr Management and oversight of the Management the of and oversight ct for the YUS CA, are the responsibility of TKCP-PNG. of TKCP-PNG. are responsibility the CA, for YUS the ct US LandscapeUS ee Kangaroo Conservation Program – PNG (TKCP-PNG) –PNG Program Conservation Kangaroo ee Research institutions institutions Research and international and international organisations

Woodland Park Zoo YUS Rangers

(WPZ)

Y US US Conservation Officers Conservation

to fill information gaps where required. gaps to information fill responding to needs, community and conducting local research programs, ongoing managing a‘facility’: acts TKCP-PNG regard, the year. throughout this In held workshops through identified to needs are inresponse all These management. business and writing, grant education, environmental management, financial skills, research building, strategy training, health extension, agricultural development, leadership CO: to YUS areas the of inarange support building capacity direct providing is CO, TKCP-PNG ofYUS the stage building institutional current CO. During YUS body, the representative landowner the by advised locally also is TKCP-PNG Plan. Annual byan guided is organisation the annually while Plans, Landscape 5-yearly O and collaborative fundraising. Endowment Conservation aYUS through basis ongoing and on a regular WPZ by provided is TKCP-PNG to support financial Technical and goals. Landscape YUS with in-line is work their to ensure organisations, and institutions research international with collaboration direct maintains and coordinates, facilitates, also Manager Targets. Program management term The long and Plans, Annual within scheduled as implemented are being programs and strategies all that ensuring with tasked is and WPZ, with closely works Manager Program The for staff. their plans of work development strategy, inthe wellassist as v erall strategic guidance of TKCP-PNG comes from the fromthe comes of TKCP-PNG guidance strategic erall

e Strategy Managers Strategy nsures that strategies are contributing to Goals and and to Goals are contributing strategies nsures that T Manager K CP -PNG CP Mapping Officers Y U S CO

t he he

Implementing thePlan guide TKCP-PNG in the following: inthe TKCP-PNG guide and are to CO implement of YUS the goals CO. The to YUS the YUS to the land pledges aclan When organisation. incorporated an as law PNG under registered is and representatives landowner of 48 comprised is CO YUS The communities. their within development livelihoods for support financial and technical leverage and/or to and develop landscape, the across programs inthe participate and on to advise opportunities with communities to provide serves It groups. for landowner body of representative this establishment the necessitated landscape the tenure across land of customary context The strategy. term for longer CAMC YUS the represented on also 4.2.2 T he YUS CO serves as an advisory board to TKCP-PNG, and is is and to TKCP-PNG, board advisory an as serves CO YUS he Figure 2: Organisational structure of the YUS CO YUS the of structure Organisational 2: Figure

    g and churches NGOs, as such To partners with network o To conservation and awareness promote environmental e inconservation, needs to address To capacity local build CA; for YUS the management To long-term provide basic services and infrastructure to community; the infrastructure and services basic generations; f natural resources and wildlife for present and future future for present and wildlife and resources f natural ducation, healthcare, and community development; community and healthcare, ducation, overnments to establish an effective YUS CA and to provide to and provide CA YUS effective an toovernments establish

C YUS Conservation Organisation (YUS CO) (YUS Organisation Conservation YUS A, that clan is given the right to nominate a representative to arepresentative right nominate the given is clan that A, Conservation Committee Conservation TCKP-PNG CO Education Committee Education E xecutive Committee xecutive President YUS CO CO YUS r Below this committee are three sectoral sub-committees supports the work of the YUS Rangers. ofYUS the work the supports and pledges new land to facilitate TKCP-PNG with closely works The Plan. Strategic CO ofYUS the development and priorities recommending through of future activities development the support and area, intheir activities oversee and to guide staff TKCP-PNG with closely collaborates ofsub-committees the Each livelihoods. and development community projects, healthcare officer, auditor, and ex-officio advisors (TKCP-PNG staff). staff). (TKCP-PNG advisors auditor,officer, and ex-officio apublic ofsub-committees, the each from representatives achair, women’s and secretary, includes committee group within the executive committee (Figure 2). The (Figure executive the committee within group aleadership and president, elected byan led is CO YUS The e

presenting priorities in areas including enforcement, enforcement, including inareas priorities presenting   objectives of the YUS CO in the YUS Landscape. YUS inthe CO ofYUS the objectives m clan byall participation To equal encourage promote and and world; the and o diversity To into research biological the facilitate promote and f the YUS landscape for the benefit of the landowners, PNG PNG landowners, the of for benefit the landscape YUS f the embers and genders in all activities related to achieving the the to related achieving activities inall genders and embers

Y Development Committee US CO Conservation Committee also also Committee Conservation CO US Healthy Community

e xecutive xecutive

45 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Section 1: Strategic platform and direction 4 46 46 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN 1. organisations: following the from representation through area, the govern that authorities the and landowners, CA intereststhe the of reflects committee management member nine The ofCA. the gazettal upon Act Areas ofConservation the part as established was 4.2.3 T 2. 3. 7. 6. 5. 4. and policy support to protect and sustainably use resources. resources. use tosustainably and protect support policy and organisational and guidance, strategic with landowners YUS the serving concurrently while requirements, international and for national all DEC Minister the both serves CAMC The planning. strategic term of long purpose the has CAMC The he YUS Conservation Area Management Committee (CAMC) (CAMC) Committee Management Area Conservation YUS he

Land Use Planning. Photo: Ashley Brooks Ashley Photo: Planning. Use Land Th Di nominee. nominee. their or Administration Provincial Morobe & Environment, Pr Pr He Pr Pr

Implementing thePlan esident, Wasu LLG. Wasu esident, Yusesident, LLG. ogram Advisor, Division of Mining, Natural Resources Resources Natural of Mining, Division Advisor, ogram ogram Manager/Country Director, nominee. their or TKCP Manager/Country ogram strict Administrator, Kabwum District or their nominee. their or District Administrator, Kabwum strict YUS Conservation Area Management Committee (CAMC) Committee Management Area Conservation YUS ree Executive Members, YUS CO. YUS Members, ree Executive ad, Terrestrial Environment Programs, PNG DEC or their their or DEC PNG Terrestrialad, Environment Programs, 4.2.4 for approval. DEC Minister to that the submits and Plan, ofnew Landscape the formulation the to contributes also CAMC the Plan, Landscape five-year of year a fourth the During are referred toDEC. Minister the support to TKCP-PNG. support among donors, research institutions and organisations for linkage and conduit the is Department TKCP The of zoo. the Division Conservation Field the within housed is Department TKCP adedicated WPZ, Within ofinitiative. the sustainability term long akey inthe ultimately is cog and TKCP-PNG, and YUS for support vital and substantive provide endowment the with along WPZ costs. running office and inLae staff TKCP include costs core These Management. Landscape for YUS costs of“core” the to fund some meet Endowment Conservation YUS the manages and intrust holds also WPZ USA. Seattle, from TKCP-PNG to support financial and managerial term long and oversight technical provides (WPZ) Zoo Park Woodland The that could be in breach of either the Landscape Plan or The or Plan Landscape the of either inbreach be could that actions or applications development Any YUS. across arising have/be may that use of land alteration or to any development respond and to and discuss data, and reports toa year collate twice meets CAMC The to landscape. relating the government levels of horizontal and vertical all across acts CAMC the Thus,

Wo odland Park Zoo (WPZ) Zoo Park odland

A ct ct Implementing the Plan Section 1: Strategic platform and direction YUS LANDSCAPE PLANYUS Kiso and Timmy Sowang measuring montane rainforest trees for carbon study in Uruwa Zone. Photo: Michelle Venter 47 1 Section 2: 48 48 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN fire raising, awareness and signage conservation, ecosystem underpins also theygather information The Rangers. by YUS out are carried enforcement activities and surveys, hunting monitoring, 2012. inMarch ecological The Village Sapmanga at inaugurated was program Rangers YUS The planning. and management CA of YUS backbone the is program The S11. 7). (Annex obligations international and plans national and of local to value a range add and with align programs The Act. the under obligations all fulfil and Plan, Management CA YUS make Strategy, the this that up constitute programs eight The Management Area Conservation 1: YUS Strategy challenges across the landscape. to respond and plan, to strategically ofCAMC the ability the Land Use Planning, Besnon Hamlet. Photo: Ashley Brooks Ashley Photo: Hamlet. Besnon Planning, Use Land

S18: S14: S13: S12: S11: S17: S16: S15: a nd invasive species management, and contributes to contributes and management, invasive species nd Strategy 1:YUSConservationAreaManagement Addressing threatstomanagementtargets YU

S Rangers



Re In conservation Fi Si Ecolo Ec En YUS re management vasive species management gnage, mapping and CA awareness and mapping gnage, osystem resilience and biodiversity forcement porting Rangers gical monitoringgical and hunting source of income into local communities. into local of income source therefore asignificant offers program ranger The recruited. to be need will new rangers are established, plots monitoring additional and lowland), and alpine, (e.g. marine, ecosystems monitoringecological program expands to include additional the as Thus landscape. the across need with commensurate insize increase will of 12 Rangers cadre initial YUS The present. challenges the and aware landscape of their theyare comprehensively and communities, of their support havefull the rangers the that means this Importantly land. own their around and within patrol generally that landowners YUS theyare also and locally, selected and are nominated rangers the that is program of ranger the strength overarching The 2012. inMarch Rangers YUS as initiated and 12 were recruited ofcandidates period, the of training the end At the region. respective their across transects atall trained were typically Candidates workers. of additional in supervision and sampling plots, of monitoring establishment inthe by JCU were trained then candidates The region. for that rangers be to candidates local selected then were tolocated, be transects (Map YUS across tolocated be transects of monitoring a series designed(JCU) an monitoring ecological program including University Cook James to up inauguration, leading year the In conventions. environmental international on reporting to Minister, wellPNG’s the as to DEC, recommendations contributes ultimately work rangers the CAMC, the Through

4 ). Village leaders and landowners, where monitoring monitoring where landowners, and leaders ). Village Strategy 1:YUSConservationAreaManagement Strategy results chain

Results chain logic Threat Intermediate Impact STRATEGY 1: Strategy Reduction on Target Outcome Outcome YUS Conservation Area Management

Threat reduction result – YUS Landscape Direct immediate and local threats

1. YUS Rangers 1. Small scale 3. Small scale forest clearance harvesting of Target 1: 111: Rangers ceases in timber and forest Alpine grassland are trained 2. Enforcement the CA products ceases area and integrity and equipped within the CA is maintained 121: YUS CA 2. Hunting, fishing bylaws are 4. Ecological monitoring and collection clear and 112: Rangers cease within 4. Marine understood the CA are recognised locally 141: Ecological 144: Species are resource use is across YUS monitoring available for 6. Fire management 8. Reporting strategically program for local use planned and 122: YUS CA alpine grasslands managed locally 161: Alpine grasslands 181: CAMC meets 113: YUS Ranger bylaws Target 2: remain relevant 145: Species home fire understood twice a year Code of Conduct range monitoring Montane and formulated and up-to-date 142: Monitoring of program lowland rainforest area hunted species developed is stable or increasing within the CA 162: Optimal fire regime 182: Mecahnism Threat reduction result – 123: Protocols for alpine grasslands Potential threats 146: Species for reporting on for enforcement defined international procedures are density 1. Mining, oil or 142: Monitoring of monitoring conventions 2. Road developed hunted species developed gas exploration / construction and understood program extraction outside the CA developed 163: Alpine grassland does not occur fire management do not occur within the CA within the CA Target 3: plans formulated Matschie’s tree kangaroo 147: Hunting 183: CAMC provides and other hunted species survey strategic oversight are stable or increasing conducted to YUS Landscape 3. Commercial 164: Fire management logging does not within the CA, and outside plans for all Plans and facilitates the CA, numbers of hunted Ministerial approval occur within YUS wards the CA species are available for local use 3. Ecosystems and conservation 5. Signage, mapping 165: LUP workshops and awareness 131: Baseline area 136: Montane and used to raise awareness of fire of alpine grasslands lowland forest 151: Mapping and determined monitoring plan management plans Threat reduction result – measurement Compounding threats of the CA completed Target 4: 132: “Appropriate” area 137: Marine resource 1. Fire practices 3. Siltation and A marine ecosystems of alpine grassland use researched follow communally water pollution program is developed of conservation and understood 152: CA boundary agreed plans and from upstream determined remain outside sources is is signposted at 7. Invasive species pathways and the CA reduced access points 133: Alpine grassland 138: Marine biodiversity 171: Extent, impact 172: Extent and 173: Community ecology and use researched and and use of bamboo impact of cocoa consultation on understood understood piper studied borer studied free roaming 2. Invasive species 4. The impacts of 153: CA mapping domestic pigs plans are predicted climate to village level developed and change are 134: Baseline area of 139: Community-based is completed managed locally mitigated montane rainforest marine monitoring Target 5: within te CA determined program developed Civil society processes 154: Mapping of all and landscape-scale socio-ecoomic 5. Leadership and partnerships are strengthened, 135: Baseline area of features governance leading to improved long term 1310: SBSAP for YUS are strengthened decision-making lowland rainforest Landscape developed completed within CA defined 49 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Section 2: Addressing threats to management targets 1 50 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN the rules and restrictions that apply. As such, the program will will program the such, apply. As that restrictions and rules the and boundaries to CA both landowners of local awareness and ofCA the delineation revolve clear will around implementation of three years first inthe Key challenges program. monitoring ecological the and patrols, linkedtherefore to ranger strongly is program The enforcement ofbylaws. the with mandated are principally Rangers YUS The CA. YUS the to govern developed bylaws the with compliance there is ensure that to is ofenforcement program the purpose overarching The S objectives in LP 2. inLP objectives term long develop order to in gaps information filling about 1are principally for LP objectives program where management, species invasive and fire and management, and conservation of ecosystem areas inthe inparticular include 2. These to LP in leading development require some will programs other The TKCP-PNG. with mechanisms in 2012, the reporting refine and started surveys hunting and monitoring ecological the out carry to 1, are well of equipped LP rangers the stages initial the In 12. Nambis Zone. Photo: Mark Ziembicki Mark Photo: Zone. Nambis C Code Code S113 S112 S111

ode Strategy 1:YUSConservationAreaManagement E nforcement their duties professionally. By 2016, rangers are conducting government. of all levels by supported are and YUS across recognised are 2015,By rangers 2 Objective Objective 3 Objective compensated for their compensated and equipped trained, fully are 2016, to rangers through Ongoing, 1 Objective

w ork. Activities Activities Activities

        r with developed Conduct of Code Ranger YUS people. with in dealing training Ranger bylaws. of Gazettal cards. ID Ranger designed. logo Ranger Ranger uniforms. r or required as recruited are rangers Additional required. as trained and paid, are Rangers eflecting need across the landscape. the across need eflecting angers and community leaders. community and angers the 2), (LP three years first the Beyond for rangers. of conduct acode include also will framework The procedures). customary (following level courts higher or atvillage representation and of fines;and referral to payment and collection of appeal; process violations; of bylaw for verification involve consideration This enforcement an framework. pilot and to draft used be will consultations and workshops community from feedback and data rangers’ program, the Throughout communities. with engagement overall, positive governance of andencourage CA (LP awareness threeraising on 1) years to first inthe focus seek rangers in their work. intheir rangers of integrity and professionalism to guide of Conduct Code of aranger formulation wellthe as violations, CA and people to responding and inmanaging for rangers training include therefore 1must of LP period 2. The inLP to begin rangers enforcement law by on focus explicit leaving while program, monitoring ecological the of refinement and testing on focus will 1 LP monitoring, natureofecological the to incipient the Due

e nforcement program will begin inearnest. begin will nforcement program Indicators Indicators Indicators

      y 5 District and in LLG is cited program Rangers YUS resolved. are /concerns requests Ranger r all and patrols their conduct to continue Rangers Ranger reports. Complaints against rangers. against Complaints Training conducted. eporting requirements. eporting ear plans.ear

w ill ill Strategy 1:YUSConservationAreaManagement community collaboration.community ongoing and direct and research, overfrom 16 of scientific years comes values ofecosystem the Targets Recognition to 2025. management five the and Vision the in reflected fundamentally is This inperpetuity. values these sustaining required work the and YUS, across ofecosystems the values ecological and socio-economic dual the recognises Plan Landscape The management resource of sustainable lack or weak and growth, population byrapid exacerbated are further loss ecosystem and impacts Potential for significant change. climate and invasive species, fire, as such threats to secondary vulnerable increasingly they become to actions, due these decreases gradually timber, and of harvesting selective use, ecosystem marine and hunting for agriculture, subsistence clearance value: small-scale economic and local their highlight to ecosystems threats the primary The are atrisk. theysupport, all and ecosystems, these rainforest covering 1,113kmrainforest covering of primary tract unbroken, unoccupied completely almost an is favourable: a low population density (~6.2 people/km (~6.2 density population alow favourable: is level landscape atthe context current the While endemism. levels species high exhibit ecosystems the that meant also has ofregion the context biogeographic island unique The of families. generations have sustained and services, and goods The landscape. the across for communities the all opportunity for life and are foundation the of YUS ecosystems natural The S 13. Code C C S122 S123 S121

ode ode

d iverse ecosystems provide immense direct benefits in in benefits direct immense provide ecosystems iverse Ec osystem resilience conservation andosystem biodiversity and understood locally. understood and clear are bylaws CA 2016, YUS By 1 Objective Objective 3 Objective 2 Objective bylaws. a protocol for enforcement of developed have communities and officers TKCP with partnership in rangers 2016, YUS By date. to up and relevant are bylaws CA 2016, YUS By

c ommercial logging. And as ecosystem resilience resilience ecosystem as And logging. ommercial

l ocally. 2 , history and evidence suggests suggests evidence and , history Activities Activities Activities

        Formalise protocol within LP 2. LP within protocol Formalise e for mechanisms and protocol of piloting Local d book event substantive have 2014,By rangers w /amend add and applicability bylaw Evaluate r to workshops community regular conduct Rangers by CA YUS of distribution and copies, of Production v the at use for CA the of maps clear of Production a areas CA YUS pledged of majority 2015,By the protocol can be formulated for discussion. signage). around rules events. aise awareness of the YUS CA bylaws and recent recent and bylaws CA YUS the of awareness aise illage and ward level. ward illage and nforcement and reporting. nforcement cross the landscape are mapped (via GPS). (via mapped are landscape the cross ata and community consultations such that draft draft that such consultations community and ata here required (e.g. addition of marine bylaws; bylaws; marine of (e.g. addition required here laws. 2 ), and and ), with the Land-Use Planning and Management Program. Program. andManagement Planning the Land-Use with 2015 byend complete concurrent be will process This mapped. have not yet been for conservation, topledged be ecosystems of many the that is factor compounding Afurther imagery. remotely sensed on to distinguish forests are impossible (e.g. people bylocal way insome used forest the often is cases, such In area. proximate to or avillage/livelihood to grassland, adjacent aforest where immediately is case the particularly is This identify. to difficult ecotones making scales, at coarse are data mapping and satellite imagery existing that fact the due is to This ecosystems. area the of baseline the defining is key the rainforests, and challenge grasslands alpine For use. for sustainable allowing while of ecosystems, connectivity and ensures resilience that beyond 2and inLP program for astrategic foundation the sets 1thus LP marine. and rainforest, grassland, alpine ecosystems: target the for processes ecosystem and biodiversity on gaps information filling 1is inLP focus The understood. poorly remains YUS across ecosystems and of species ecology and biodiversity the of much that However recognised is it are sustained. needs human and values ecological to is both ensure that Program Conservation and Resilience ofEcosystem the purpose The

sh ade grown coffee, forest garden mosaics), and such such and mosaics), forest garden coffee, grown ade Indicators Indicators Indicators

   Protocol is in LP 2. is in LP  Protocol Protocol is formulated and agreed by communities. reports. workshop Community workshop. ranger and  TKCP data. patrol ranger of  Collection         Bylaws re-gazetted. made. Amendments Evaluation conducted. infractions. # held. meetings community Ranger di and produced bylaws CA the of Leaflets/brochures CA. the of Re-gazettal YUS CA maps produced. s in mapping stored and collected are data CA YUS oftware. stributed. 51 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Section 2: Addressing threats to management targets 1 52 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN habitat and ecosystems into and beyond LP 2. LP into beyond and ecosystems and habitat to critical protect responses management to where direct and key where are, threats occurring, is change where to identify able step being toward first the thus 1is LP landscape. the across cover land for forests and plan amonitoring develop to and CA, the forests within lowland and ofarea montane baseline the 1are to for LP define priorities the 2 (Research), in Strategy and research are inongoing covered questions these many While, of fauna. with relationships ecological fire,and and invasive species to change, climate vulnerability disturbance, species composition, resilience and succession following around unknown remains much that meant has YUS across offorest the estate diversity and vastness The YUS. across conducted have been areas, related inclimate and forests, of use human of species, requirements habitat composition, (montane and lowland): Rainforests requirements. ecological and socio-economic both to sustain CA the within needed area appropriate to the determine ultimately and traditional use of fire,characteristics ecological and importance, and significance cultural the determine area, to the measure 1are inLP Key objectives them. across to forage are thought other among ecosystems, andtree mammals, kangaroos, grassland and rareconifer potentially they contain Biologically hunted. wildlife and periodically are burnt areas the Culturally atloweraltitudes. areas to grassland the community vegetation they are adistinct that evident is it anthropogenic, or are natural continuesdiscussion around whether areas the alpine grassland some While significance. ecological and cultural have both (Map inYopno, inUruwa two two and areas, grassland alpine four the that suggests evidence anecdotal grasslands: Alpine Alpine Grasslands near Uli Monji Ashley Photo: Mountain. Brooks Strategy 1:YUSConservationAreaManagement multiple studies in forest

5 ) ) the country’s first SBSAP, first and country’s the to develop therefore is well placed Landscape YUS The globally. levels city and local provincial, atstate, are developed SBSAPs not exist, does NBSAP an where Increasingly, released. formally never been has 2007, NBSAP however acomplete in NBSAP of its version asummary completed PNG sectors. all across processes into planning conservation biodiversity for mainstreaming strategies outline NBSAPs Overall nationally. CBD the for implementing instrument are principal the which (NBSAP), Plans Actions and Strategies Biodiversity to National contribute generally SBSAPs (SBSAP). Plan Action and Strategy Biodiversity Subnational of a for formulation the foundation opportune an offers also it locally, biodiversity on gaps information 1fills LP As of identification and surveys, biodiversity sites, nesting turtle and grasses reefs, sea mapping present (through ecosystems marine the wellto as locally, understand livelihoods and for subsistence ecosystems of marine importance the about gaps 1therefore to LP information seeks fill area. marine of the values socio-economic and tobiological threats both to to respond programs to implement need the use). Hence resource inmarine to increase an lead may area CA terrestrial in increase an example (For versa vice and ecosystems marine the on have impact an will of area YUS terrestrial inthe actions that recognition also is There livelihoods/subsistence. local with are linked also directly ecosystems significant These Landscape. of area YUS coastal inthe inexistence species and ecosystems Marine ecosystems: Yus of LLGs and Landscape for YUS the SBSAP an develop and to facilitate therefore is collected to information the use Program Resilience the Ecosystem of objective final nationally. The and replication potential success for significant 1offer Strategy

t Montane Rainforest. Photo: Ryan Photo: Hawk Rainforest. Montane hreats).

an d Wasu. anecdotally there are significant there are anecdotally significant

e ach of the programs within within ofprograms the ach Strategy 1:YUSConservationAreaManagement C C C C Code C Code Code S133 S132 S136 S138 S134 S135 S137 S131 ode ode ode ode ode composition) and use. density,(structure, ecology grassland alpine of understanding 2015, By gain Objective 7 Objective 6 Objective Area. within the Conservation area of lowland rainforest baseline 2015,By define 5 Objective 4 Objective 3 Objective 2 Objective resource use. marine 2014,By understand biodiversity. marine 2015,By understand 8 Objective grassland for conservation. alpine of area “appropriate” 2015,By define Objective 1 Objective monitoring plan. area cover land and forest montane and lowland a 2016, develop By Area. within the Conservation rainforest montane of area baseline 2015,By define grasslands. alpine four the of area baseline 2015,By establish Activities Activities Activities Activities Activities Activities Activities Activities

                  g of area monitoring and calculating for methodology Develop t in Wards plan monitoring cover land and area forest the Pilot required. as area baseline update and Amend l pledged of measurement and mapping accurate Facilitate f lowland of area determine to ARCGIS and sensing remote Use required. as area baseline update and Amend l pledged of measurement and mapping accurate Facilitate m of area determine to ARCGIS and sensing remote Use usage. grass alpine and livelihoods with linkages Assess species concern. ofIdentify conservation Define indicator speciesfor monitoring change. ecology. grassland alpine study to aresearcher Engage c ecological, of: consideration on based grassland alpine Assess use. grassland alpine study to aresearcher Engage g alpine of area to change monitoring for methodology Develop Marine ecosystems and turtle nesting sites mapped. sites nesting turtle and ecosystems Marine completed. 2014, survey By marine r marine of survey use and consumption Socio-economic, ands during and between LUP workshops at the ward level. ward the at workshops LUP between and during ands level. ward the at workshops LUP between and during ands orest within CA (pledged land). (pledged CA within orest esources. hat have completed their LUP. their completed have hat ultural, livelihood, and intrinsic values. intrinsic and livelihood, ultural, rassland. in Ha. rassland ontane forest within CA (pledged land). (pledged CA within forest ontane Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators

ortance

                         Maps of ecosystems and habitat and nesting sites. nesting and habitat and ecosystems of Maps Changes made to baseline target every 5years. every target baseline to made Changes calculated. area and mapped are pledged Areas lands/CA. pledged within forest of Ha report. study grassland Alpine reports. Research calculated. in Ha Area report. Research calculated. Baseline Methodology developed. Threat assessment. survey. Biodiversity Imp used Effort income cash Any Methods for catching patterns Consumption Use intensity What is used/caught the monitoring plan. s to respond to taken steps follow-up Any W for cover land and area forest of Monitoring analysis. d plan monitoring area cover land and Forest 5years. every target baseline to made Changes calculated. area and mapped are pledged Areas lands/CA. pledged within forest of Ha ignificant changes should be incorporated into into be incorporated should changes ignificant eveloped using remotely sensed imagery and and imagery sensed remotely using eveloped ards that have completed their LUP. their completed have that ards 53 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Section 2: Addressing threats to management targets 1 54 54 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Table 11: Ecological monitoring target species Table target 11: monitoring Ecological 11). (Table several species comprising cassowary) and cuscus possum/ (macropod, taxa three general on focuses monitoring of hunters. Ecological surveying ongoing and hunted species; of monitoring Rangers: byYUS conducted linked initiatives S14. T taxa is based on scat counts as a proxy of relative aproxy as counts scat on based is taxa for focal the method sampling The outside. other the and CA the inside being one with village, fromthe distance functional same are atthe plots furthest two The intensity). hunting decreasing in acline (considered avillage from distance at increasing stratified of four plots consists transect Each to 3,200m. 400m from inelevation 4), ranging (Map landscape the across 12 on distributed based is transects design Monitoring Macropods Taxa Cassowary cuscus / Possums he Ecological Monitoring and Hunting program includes two two includes program Hunting and Monitoring Ecological he S1310 C Code S139

ode Strategy 1:YUSConservationAreaManagement Ecological and monitoring hunting Objective 10 Objective marine monitoring program. pilot a community-based and 2015,By formulate 9 Objective for the YUS Landscape. YUS the for SBSAP an 2016, develop By Casuarius bennetti Casuarius corinnae Pseudochirops maculatus Spilocuscus trivirgata Dactylopsila palpator Dactylopsila forbesi Pseudochirulus gymnotis Phalanger carmelitae Phalanger browni Thylogale vanheurni Dorcopsulus matschiei Dendrolagus Latin / scientific name Activities Activities English name Dwarf Cassowary Dwarf Ringtail Possum Plush-coated Cuscus Spotted Possum Striped Long-fingered Triok Painted Ringtail Possum Cuscus Ground Cuscus Mountain Pademelon Guinea New Dorcopsis Small Huon, Matschie’s Tree Kangaroo

    Identify and train a local person to be a marine ranger. amarine be to person alocal train and Identify o formulation with concurrent is developed SBSAP 2016, the By t zones and ecosystems marine protected of awareness Raise zon and ecosystems marine protected for support Gain community hrough signage. hrough f Strategy 1 within LP 2. LP 1within f Strategy es.

a bundance. bundance. return to the CA to needs. huntreturn to to CA basic meet the to for people need the eliminating and of harvest sustainability of the understanding an to and gain data, monitoring ecological interpret help and to triangulate YUS, across threats and The how. and why where, when, and intensity, hunted, is what of hunting understanding acomprehensive to is gain survey ofhunting the objective The activity. hunting personal their all record will YUS hunters across selected of this, part As survey. hunting the is monitoring ecological the with Concurrent required. as new taxa and data density to include monitoring the expanding and ecosystems, inadditional transects and plots new establishing estimates, baseline population confident 1involves determining inLP monitoring of ecological focus The landscape. the across are maintained of hunted species populations to ensure viable ultimately and targets, to of achievement management the contribution assess overall, ofCA the effectiveness tothe is monitor program Hunting and Monitoring ofEcological the overall purpose The to closer and to forage CA the outside moving and are recovering populations or sustainable, is intensity harvesting/hunting that indicate may CA the outside species of numbers increasing or stable while of CA, the effectiveness of the indication an gives CA, the inside of species range and numbers there. Increasing plots monitoring inside counts scat in to increase an lead will CA of inthe hunting a cessation that assumption the on predicated is methodology The YUS. areor across rare detect to are difficult that others and species, of non-target several other detection for opportunistic the allows also technique the addition, In time. atone several taxa to survey used be may and equipment, and training specialised without employed be can it that is ofmethod the strength The

in formation will be used to model greatest hunting pressure pressure hunting greatest to model used be will formation Indicators Indicators

       YUS SBSAP listed / available on CBD website. CBD on /available listed SBSAP YUS f CBD PNG to submitted and completed SBSAP species. indicator of Numbers maintained. locally and in place Buoys maintained. locally and in place signage Beach identified. species Indicator Monitoring program. ocal point. ocal

v illages. Strategy 1:YUSConservationAreaManagement Code Code Code Code Code Code S143 S144 S146 S142 S145 S141 four alpine grassland areas. grassland alpine four the for program monitoring implementation of ecological begin and 2016, formulate By Objective 1 Objective inside the CA. the inside program for hunted species ecological monitoring aviable 2016, establish By outside the CA. the outside program for hunted species ecological monitoring aviable 2016, establish By density monitoring program. density species aviable Establish 3 Objective 2 Objective Objective 5 Objective use. local for exist taxa target of numbers sustainable that Ensure 4 Objective Objective 6 Objective hunting survey. hunting Complete a comprehensive Activities Activities Activities Activities Activities Activities

By 2016, establish a confident baseline of species density. species of baseline aconfident 2016, establish By d to plots and transects monitoring ecological existing 2016, use By s target of hunting sustainable the for estimates 2016, establish By Y across ecosystems and pressures hunting key 2015,By determine villages. in selected survey hunting ongoing Conduct G update and numbers population baseline confident 2016, establish By r as taxa target add or / and refine and methodology 2016, evaluate By t of number increasing by monitoring of accuracy 2016, increase By G update and numbers population baseline confident 2016, establish By r as taxa target add or / and refine and methodology 2016, evaluate By t of number increasing by monitoring of accuracy 2016, increase By r as plans work rangers’ into monitoring grassland Incorporate e both for program monitoring grassland alpine pilot and Develop By 2016, model hunting pressure and threats across YUS. across threats and pressure hunting 2016, model By r by conducted survey hunting ongoing of analysis 2015,By complete                equired. equired. equired. ransects to 24. to ransects 24. to ransects angers. pecies. evelop density data for selected hunted species. hunted selected for data density evelop cology and spatial change. spatial and cology US. oal accordingly. oal accordingly. oal Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators

   Monitoring protocol developed. Transects established.       Number of transects. of Number CA). inside #4 and CA, outside and #2 with in-line #3 avillage, with from furthest #4 v a to (#1 closest transect per 4 plots transects. of Number monitoring. r new reflect plans work Rangers w Monitoring incorporated into GIS w Monitoring incorporated into ranger Plots established. p threats hunting of model Spatial co books record ranger of Analysis e into monitoring incorporated Density Y across threats hunting of Modelling Location of hunting site. hunting. in / field spent Time travelled. Distance animals of Number hunted. conducted. Surveys CA). inside #4 and CA, outside and #2 with in-line #3 avillage, with from furthest #4 v a to (#1 closest transect per 4 plots           esponsibilities for grassland illage, #2 away from a village, #3 and and avillage, #3 from illage, away #2 illage, #2 away from a village, #3 and and avillage, #3 from illage, away #2 roduced. cological monitoring program. US. ork as required. as ork required. as ork mpleted. 55 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Section 2: Addressing threats to management targets 1 56 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN bylaws and violations, or monitor species and ecosystems. and species monitor or violations, and bylaws to therefore to how and and is, respond where CA the where to determine rangers and for locals impossible is it mapping Withoutsignage.boundaries through accurate site-specific of CA recognition and awareness to build mapping the uses then It in2004. began that of CA the delineating and mapping S15. T impact highlights the vulnerability of forests to fire during dry dry of forests toduring fire vulnerability the highlights impact of the of recovery,scale the signs show affected areas many suggests field fromthe evidence While YUS. across grassland rainforest to of montane partial inthe factor major the have been to is fire suggested of 1997-1998, period El Niño the (During periods drought in occur fires where to grassland conversion and to death forests are susceptible and trees montane that Landscape; YUS the defining in part major a played has fire that is: known is What limitations. physical substantial and resources minimal with area, alarge aforce across such mitigating and of preventing to challenges due the also but landscape, the across of lives people daily inthe and practices agricultural subsistence processes, of ecological part essential an being it due Notonly challenge. management asignificant represents and Landscape, YUS the across constant historical Fire an is S16. he Signage and Mapping program sets out to complete the the to out complete sets program Mapping and Signage he Code Code C Code S153 S152 S154 S151

ode Strategy 1:YUSConservationAreaManagement Signage, mapping and awareness CA Fi re management re of the CA. the of mapping and measurement the 2015,By complete Objective 1 Objective Objective 4 Objective Objective 3 Objective nesting site). (e.g. turtle areas critical or use high and points, access pathways, –at is signposted boundary 2015, CA By YUS 2 Objective across YUS. across of socio-economic features mapping 2015,By complete boundaries. all land of village mapping the 2015,By complete Activities Activities Activities Activities

Use existing information to map features. map to information existing Use features. mapping for forum aprincipal as LUPs Use ( plans year five in LLG maps LLG and ward of inclusion Ensure lands. village mapping for forum aprincipal as LUPs Use erected. are signboards 2015, CA By YUS signboards. CA YUS of production commission and 2015,By design t into pathways and to access of locations 2015, allBy map existing required. as area baseline update and Amend calculated. area and mapped are pledged Areas connectivity. ensure to CAs between corridors of pledging Facilitate pledges. new mapping and getting for forum aprincipal as LUPs Use           2016-2020). he CA across the landscape. the across CA he protected areas. are of systems thereforedelineating existing with inline signboards CA YUS protected. site locally the is that announce existing existing some In erected. be will signage CA that locations at these is it and CA, the into through and points of access number there are afinite such As areas. accessed frequently other and to gardens, villages, between systemof tracks used widely a there is travel byfoot, inYUS people most to fact the Due and forests to arisk is forest that edge, of grassland burning unnecessary in reduction the ultimately and reforestation, agro-forestry, to relating decisions management to as so make prudent materials) building and of protein fibre sources (i.e.wallabies), (to sustain household per required of area grassland minimal into research the tocomprehensive be need also may There forest types. target and CA YUS the around inand practices fire existing around efforts outreach and education on depend greatly may YUS across of fire management Successful being suppressed (e.g. through fire). forest of secondary regeneration natural the with grassland, to conversion undergone already possibly has grassland Zone Som area of the that and disturbance; significant following have rates of slow recovery forests can montane that periods); tambu

o verall. areas, signs have already been erected to erected been have already signs areas,

Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators

Signboards in place. Signboards p for contract and designed Signboards CA. YUS to points access of Number analysis. and imagery p monitoring area cover land and Forest land. new of Pledges software. t up are features All socio-economic le ( plans 5year Yus LLG Wasu and t to down Map Landscape YUS Complete mapped. are all wards across Villages          2016-2020) include completed ward ward completed include 2016-2020) o date and data is stored in ARCGIS in ARCGIS is stored data and o date he village area level is included in LP 2. in LP is included level area village he lan developed using remotely sensed sensed remotely using developed lan roduction in place. in roduction vel maps, as provided by TKCP. by provided as maps, vel

Strategy 1:YUSConservationAreaManagement integration of fire management into awareness raising initiatives. intoraising awareness management of fire integration level;ward the at the plans and management of fire facilitation ecology; and fire history grassland of alpine understanding 1: inLP keyare planned Three outcomes program. outreach and education an develop to and adequately ecosystems, of integrity the compromising without for fire allows that level response alandscape to develop inorder landscape the across practices of fire of context the understanding fuller a to is gain Program ofFire Management the purpose The Code Code Code C C S163 S162 S164 S165 S161 ode ode grassland area. grassland location) each alpine across of fire (frequency, extent, By 2015, gain understanding 1 Objective practices. awareness of agreed fire raising for information of asource as maps LUP and firemanagement plans level 2015, ward By use 5 Objective wards. YUS of management plans for 100% fire of development the 2015,By facilitate 4 Objective 3 Objective 2 Objective grassland area. grassland fireregime foreach alpine optimal the 2015,By define as required. as studies grassland by informed firemanagement plans as grassland alpine implementing begin and 2016, formulate By Activities Activities Activities Activities Activities

Map all areas designated for prescribed burning. prescribed for designated allMap areas pl management fire the facilitate to forum key the as workshops LUP Use L of Goals into regimes management fire grassland alpine Incorporate m fire and use) and ecology, (area, grassland of testing Conduct a Constitution, TKCP to required changes any complete and Facilitate r 1, (Ward 12, 5, LUPs Ward 13) as affected to changes Facilitate t managing for of fire use the for CAMC the through approval official Get grasslands. alpine own who communities with surveys Conduct t surveying site-based as well as imagery, sensing remote historical Use d to grasslands alpine own who communities with surveys Conduct l community and rangers to available is made maps and Information           eaders to disseminate locally. disseminate to eaders o determine historical fire practices. fire historical o determine equired. he grasslands as required. as grasslands he P 2. P nd gazetted area of the YUS CA as required. as CA YUS the of area gazetted nd etermine historical fire practices. fire historical etermine ans. onitoring in the 6 months leading up to LP 2. LP to up leading 6months in the onitoring by rangers and community leaders to raise awareness locally. awareness to raise leaders community and by rangers used be then will information This plan. the constitute will place i the on information where workshops, planning land-use keythe is these to The forum facilitate plans. management level key ward fire to is facilitate initiative second there. The fire regimes to optimal determine inorder ecosystems alpine the across patterns burning historical to seek understand will Program Fire Management the ecology), unique their and (that Program Resilience the fromEcosystem findings Using m portance of fire, and where and when existing burns take burns when existing whereand of fire,and portance

l ooks at the linkages between the use of alpine grasslands grasslands of use alpine the between linkages atthe ooks Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators

     a noted fires of location and Timing report. Survey LUP posters. Number of unplanned of fires.Number o timing and areas burning Prescribed L all on exists plan management Fire fire. of Cause fire. of Frequency fires. of Extent fires. of Number Human use reports. Ecological monitoring reports. grassland. of Area fi Legislative Council allowing gazettal         UP posters. re. nd mapped. nd f burning are mapped and noted on on noted and mapped are f burning

57 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Section 2: Addressing threats to management targets 1 58 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN are pigs and the South American plant, bamboo piper piper bamboo plant, American South the and are pigs S17. T to a model for national biosecurity planning and management. management. and planning biosecurity for national to amodel contribute and protectedarea, ina first anational be will YUS taken in actions any management that means inPNG species invasive contain and to manage frameworks of national lack The there. program extension of acocoa development to potential curtail has which Zone Nambis in the invasive species additional an is borer Cocoa unwanted shrubs. by invaded entire out hillsides to point able people local with YUS, across widespread is of invasive weeds Evidence harm. ecological significant to cause known is and forest margins disturbed or agricultural in thrives invasiveThe shrub firewood. burning fast as used predominantly seems and communities, local within aposition such not cemented has that introduction recent amore is hand other the on piper Bamboo forests. and gardens to impact negative significant having as recognised theyare also of YUS, most across culture and to households aduncum) he two most widely recognised invasive species across YUS YUS across invasive species recognised widely most two he Torik Village Land Use Planning. Photo: Ashley Brooks Ashley Photo: Planning. Use Land Village Torik Code C C S173 S172 S171

ode ode Strategy 1:YUSConservationAreaManagement Invasive species management species Invasive . While pigs (domestic and wild) are inextricably linked are inextricably wild) and (domestic pigs . While Objective 1 Objective piper. bamboo of use and impact, consultation on the extent, community 2016, conduct By across all YUS villages. YUS all across pigs roaming free of control consultation on potential for community 2016, conduct By 3 Objective borer. cocoa of impact consultation and on the extent community 2016, conduct By 2 Objective Activities Activities Activities

c on discussion facilitate to forum key the as workshops LUP the Use 2. LP for developed plan management borer Cocoa i and discussion facilitate to forum key the as workshops LUP the Use 2. LP for developed plan management piper Bamboo 2. in LP program management piper bamboo of piloting for wards Select i and discussion facilitate to forum key the as workshops LUP the Use       dentify locations ofdentify infestationand impact. impact. highest and piper bamboo of areas map and dentify ontrolling free roaming pigs. roaming free ontrolling (Piper (Piper and pigs is the land-use planning workshops. planning land-use the is pigs and borer piper, cocoa to bamboo responses management potential and key discussion to overall. The forum facilitate a program such to adopt landscape the across willingness communities’ to seek gauge 1will LP action, community-based existing this Continuing into prevent penned impact. their being now are pigs and are fenced gardens villages inmany and villages, around and in damage significant to cause recognised locally are pigs domestic 2. Free roaming inLP response management a develop and gap, to feasible toinformation this required fill is mapping and consultation community and unknown, largely is YUS across piper of state bamboo current The domestic of free roaming to management attitudes community assess Zone; to and Nambis inthe borer of cocoa impact potential response;a management the extent to understand and to develop inorder piper of bamboo uses and of, impacts of extent the threefold: 1is understanding an toin LP gain The

p urpose of the Invasive Species Management program program Management Species ofInvasive the urpose

p igs. Indicators Indicators Indicators

  d villages of Number controlling management plan. borer Cocoa p to volunteer wards Zone Nambis plan. piper management Bamboo i participate to volunteer wards Pilot p extent piper bamboo of Map     n management plan. n management omestic pigs. omestic roduced. articipate in management plan. plan. in management articipate Strategy 1:YUSConservationAreaManagement S18. The rangers collect data and the CAMC reports to Minister. the reports CAMC the and data collect rangers The DEC. Minister the and CAMC the Rangers, YUS the through inplace already is architecture The process. this to develop country, the CA in first the as CA, of YUS managers the on therefore is onus The not exist. does currently policies and plans into level sectoral higher outcomes area protected integrating for Aprocess obligations. international and targets national on report and tooutcomes monitor are theyable nor ground, the on needs the reflect that to budgets formulate are unable levels national and provincial atthe planners government exist, of reporting lack the and gap this as long As government. levels of athigher decision-makers the and ground the on occurring is what between gap the is inPNG management O ne of the key obstacles to effective protected area area protected to effective ofkeyne the obstacles Code Code C S183 S182 S181

ode Reporting Reporting approval. facilitates Ministerial Plans and Landscape YUS 5-yearly to oversight CAMC provides strategic a year. a andconstitution twice meets approved an has CAMC The 1 Objective developed and piloted. and developed environmental obligations is on internationalreporting for 2014,By amechanism Objective 3 Objective 2 Objective Activities Activities Activities

o strategic for CAMC the to 2015, 2is submitted LP quarter 3rd By o reporting for mechanism amodel pilots and 2014, develops By CAMC g TKCP, and defines Rangers CAMC YUS with 2014,By working P in representatives CMS CITES, CBD, national from sought Guidelines DEC. Minister the to reports annual submits CAMC a and synthesized collated, collected, periodically are rangers from Data a YUS from challenges or requests on acts and considers receives, CAMC Minister DEC. Minister        uidelines / requirements for field-based data collection. data field-based for /requirements uidelines nalysed by TKCP, and presented to CAMC. to TKCP, by presented nalysed and s required. s n international environmental obligations – from the CA to the the to CA the –from obligations environmental n international Moresby. ort versight and submission to Minister DEC. Minister to submission and versight planning, and ensures Ministerial approval as required. as approval ensures Ministerial and planning, landscape 5-yearly and to oversight annual strategic the provide to continues CAMC the third that and CAMC; bythe facilitated and atYUS piloted is obligations international on reporting for mechanism anational that second, to DEC; Minister the submissions for annual and strategies Landscape to inform YUS used be can presented to CAMC and the byrangers collected data that ensuring and ofCAMC, the to functioning the support ongoing the three from key first come outcomes: will linkages these Building ofAct. the requirements reporting basic the enhance the enhance and to is develop Program ofReporting the purpose The linkages

among these three bodies, whilst fulfilling fulfilling whilst three bodies, these among Indicators Indicators Indicators

p and received reports Ranger approved. Constitution held. Meetings M by approved Plans Landscape M the to submitted report Initial d Monitoring and protocol reporting established. Guidelines Minister. the by 2is approved LP Minister. to Reports stakeholders. YUS to Reports a plans CA YUS and Plans Landscape Minister. the to Reports             pproved by Minister as required. as Minister by pproved eveloped. resented to the CAMC. the to resented inister DEC. inister DEC. inister 59 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Section 2: Addressing threats to management targets 2 Section 2: 60 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN government plans and international obligations (Annex 7). (Annex obligations international and plans government to multiple contributes also ofprograms the each across gained information The relevance. local and rigour scientific to ensure partnerships to new foster institutional and existing continue will and Landscape, YUS the across over years many conducted ofwork the acontinuation is ofresearch the Much into future. the programs Landscape of YUS many direction into the that inform and feed fields of research fullgamut the cover that of seven programs consists Strategy Research The landscape management resource and Research inform 2: to Strategy Ronji. Photo: Mark Ziembicki Mark Photo: Ronji. S27: S26: S25: S24: S23: S22: S21: Strategy 2:Researchtoinformresourceandlandscapemanagement Addressing threatstomanagementtargets

Cl S Soc Ma E Hu Re cosystems ustainability imate change search collaborationsearch nted species rine and aquatic systems aquatic and rine ial / anthropology research is already listed as an objective within that Program. that within objective an as listed already is research that then Program, of ofachievement aspecific the part is a fundamental field aresearch Where to function. Program of existing an ability the not compromise will it not proceed, does 1, However, field 4. research 3and any if proposed inStrategies programs specific contribute will all and Strategies, and Programs exclusive are of not listed other mutually fields ofresearch the Many required. as framework basic this outside fields new research to facilitate for allow and continue will Strategy the and notis exhaustive fields of list research The programs. and strategies Landscape future YUS ongoing/ to applied be can and database are stored ina findings research completed ensure that then study; the to conduct external) or (in-house institution or individual an engage project; research the develop program: for each same the broadly arethey as not listed activities 2–7the programs In Strategy 2:Researchtoinformresourceandlandscapemanagement Strategy results chain

Results chain logic Threat STRATEGY 2: Intermediate Impact Strategy Reduction on Target Research to inform Outcome Outcome resource and landscape management YUS Landscape 5. Social / anthropological Threat reduction result – Direct immediate and local threats 251: YUS Landscape linguistics 252: Impacts of the CA on livelihoods 1. Small scale 3. Small scale Target 1: and vice versa Alpine grassland 1. Research collaboration forest clearance harvesting of 253: Traditional ecological knowledge ceases in CA timber and forest area and integrity 254: Key drivers of high attrition rates products ceases is maintained 211: Existing 215: Maintain 2. Hunted species of children between grades 6 and 10 within the CA research collection of in general 2. Hunting, fishing partnerships research fees 255: Key drivers of health facility and collection are supported for YUS 221: Tree kangaroo ecology closures and under-supply cease within 4. Marine landowners 222: Tree kangaroo habitat the CA resource use is 223: Tree kangaroo genetic strategically 212: New research planned and reasearch 216: A policy 224: Decomposition rates of managed locally collaborations hunted species scats Target 2: for active Montane and are developed participation of 225: Habitat requirements and 4. Marine and aquatic ecosystems lowland rainforest area community in suitability of hunted species is stable or increasing research 226: Critical factors affecting 213: YUS CA and developed species populations, ranges and 241: Coral use and Threat reduction result – Landscape is densities harvesting intensity Potential threats promoted as a 227: Biodiversity surveying 242: Marine water pollution reaseach site 217: A reasearch 243: Marine turtle tracking 1. Mining, oil or 2. Road coordinator is 244: River siltation and recruited gas exploration / construction impacts extraction do not does not occur 214: A research occur within within the CA the CA Target 3: protocol is 218: An information Numbers of Matschie’s tree developed for YUS system to manage kangaroo and other hunted research data species are stable or 3. Commercial and findings 3. Ecosystems increasing within and developed logging does outside the CA 6. Sustainability not occur within 7. Climate change 231: Forest regrowth / succession following and consumption the CA disturbance 232: Connectivity analysis 261: Household 271: Potential climate 233: Key Biodiversity Areas (KBA) and resource change impacts to critical ecosystems consumption and YUS communities Threat reduction result – 234: Hi-resolution YUS Landscape “footprint” and ecosystems Compunding threats vegetation analysis 262: Natural resource 272: Phenological Target 4: 235: Riparian zones as effective wildlife use and patterns and events across YUS 1. Fire practices A marine ecosystems corridors farming systems 273: Market-based 3. Siltation and program is developed 236: Riparian zones as effective soil 263: Sustainability, options for follow water pollution conservation and mitigation of water siltation subsistence-based ecosystem communally from upstream agreed plans and sources is 237: Drivers and potential responses to natural resource use protection and sustainable remain outside reduced selective timber harvesting in Nambis Zone 274: Carbon the CA development sequestation value of alpine grasslands 2. Invasive 4. The impacts of species plans are predicted climate developed and change are managed locally mitigated Target 5: Civil society processes and landscape-scale partnerships are strengthened, 5. Leadership and leading to improved long term governance are decision-making strengthened 61 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Section 2: Addressing threats to management targets 2 62 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN research grant proposals. grant research of submission joint through partnerships existing strengthen to and YUS; across facilities and stations of research network the develop and complete scientists; international and national site as a for for research Landscape and CA YUS the of profile to: 1aims the to inLP raise continue Program Collaboration Research the for partnerships, to need the responding In overall. for research support community YUS fosteringnew maintaining ones; and and partnerships existing interlinkedmaintaining actions: two through occur only can This for research. collaborations institutional of effective S21. T he cornerstone of research across YUS is the maintenance maintenance the is YUS across of research cornerstone he Code C C C Code S212 S213 S215 S214 S211

ode ode ode Strategy 2:Researchtoinformresourceandlandscapemanagement Research collaborationResearch collaborations. research existing support to On an ongoing basis, continue Objective 1 Objective new research partnerships. new research support basis, ongoing an On Objective 2 Objective research site. a as Landscape and CA YUS promote basis, ongoing an On Objective 5 Objective in YUS. researchers protocol for external research 2014,By develop 4 Objective 3 Objective for landowners initiative. fee research the manage and maintain basis, ongoing an On Activities Activities Activities Activities Activities

a policies formulate to communities YUS and partners existing with Work w sites of etc.) sociology geology, list, species (bioclimatic, data Organise agencies. / interested identified with collaboration seek Actively researches. to landscape YUS promote to networks relevant Identify O with in partnership workshop adissemination facilitate and Develop networks. relevant to dissemination for material promotional Develop agencies. / interested identified with collaboration seek Actively c potential institutionsIdentify and scientists research for YUS-based proposals. funding and grants research of development Joint follow-up. and funding grant for apply to strategy Develop funding. grant of sources potential Identify Continue to exchange information. t and implementation effective ensure to required as program Refine CA. YUS the and landowners to fees pay researchers Ensure               ransfer of fees. of ransfer ollaboration. nd guidelines for researchers. for guidelines nd CCD and DEC on climate research across YUS. across research climate on DEC and CCD ithin YUS to promote outside research interest. research outside promote to YUS ithin coordinator at TKCP to oversee the Research Program. toResearch the oversee atTKCP coordinator of adevoted research recruitment the 1is inLP A key objective ownership. and access for community allows systemthat management of information/data an development the and efforts; inresearch to participate members community of local promotion the feesof for research landowners; continuation the researchers; for outside protocols research of formulation through: the for research support community to aims maintain also Program Collaboration Research The Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators

  Grants submitted. Grants p Continuation of existing Fees paid and accounted for. accounted and paid Fees Protocol developed. organised. Data s field planned, research New scientists. by / interest Approaches r to disseminated Information w dissemination and sourced Funding presentations. Conference s / institutions new by Approaches published.         elevant networks. elevant cientists. tudies implemented, papers papers implemented, tudies artnerships. orkshop completed. Strategy 2:Researchtoinformresourceandlandscapemanagement S22. C C C C C Code Code C C C S222 S223 S225 S226 S227 S221 S224 S216 S218 S217 ode ode ode ode ode ode ode ode

Hu nted species nted Research field 7 field Research 6 field Research 4 field Research 3 field Research 2 field Research Tree kangaroo ecology. Tree kangaroo Research field 1 field Research 6 Objective research. in members community of the participation to promote apolicy 2015,By formulate hunted species. hunted of suitability and requirements Habitat 5 field Research research data and data findings.research manage to system information an 2015,By develop Objective 8 Objective coordinator. aresearch 2014,By recruit 7 Objective Tree kangaroo genetic research. genetic Tree kangaroo Biodiversity surveying. Biodiversity andranges densities. species populations,Critical affecting factors Decomposition rates of hunted species scats. Tree kangaroo habitat. Activities Activities Activities

 C YUS for allowing system and database develops coordinator Research candidate. suitable recruit and Advertise funding. Secure p research on collaboration community ensure to apolicy Develop YUS. across research of raising Awareness Training provided to community.      rojects. O access and dissemination to communities. to dissemination and access O Indicative timing Indicative timing Indicative timing Indicative timing Indicative timing Indicative timing Indicative timing

Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing        Program linkages Program linkages Program linkages Program linkages Program linkages Program Program linkages Program Program linkages Program

   Reporting Resilience Ecosystem Rangers YUS Ecological monitoring Rangers YUS Ecological monitoring Rangers YUS Ecological monitoring Rangers YUS Rangers YUS Reporting Resilience Ecosystem Rangers YUS Reporting Resilience Ecosystem Rangers YUS             

Indicators Indicators Indicators

  d management system Data Research coordinator recruited. Community participation. developed. Policy Training provided.    eveloped.

    Reporting Ecological monitoring Ecological monitoring Ecological monitoring Enforcement Ecosystem resilience Ecosystem resilience Ecosystem resilience Ecological monitoring  Enforcement  Enforcement      63 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Section 2: Addressing threats to management targets 2 64 64 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN S23. Code Code Code Code Code Code Code S233 S232 S236 S234 S235 S237 S231

Strategy 2:Researchtoinformresourceandlandscapemanagement Terrestrial Ecosystems timber harvesting in the Nambis Zone. Nambis in the harvesting timber Drivers and potential responses to selective Research field 7 field Research 6 field Research corridors. wildlife effective as zones Riparian 5 field Research 4 field Research 3 field Research 2 field Research Research field 1 field Research and mitigation of siltation. water conservation soil effective as zones Riparian /habitats. ecosystems critical and (KBA) Areas Biodiversity Key of Identification analysis. Connectivity truthing). hi-resolution sensing remote and data ground (using scale Landscape YUS the to analysis vegetation al (2009) et Stabach the Expand vs. secondary forests). vs. secondary primary and communities, climax ecotones, of identification change, of (rates disturbance Forest / regrowth succession following Indicative timing Indicative timing Indicative timing Indicative timing Indicative timing Indicative timing Indicative timing By 2016 By 2016 By 2015 By 2016 By 2016 By By 2016 By Ongoing  Program linkages Program linkages Program linkages Program linkages Program linkages Program linkages Program Program linkages Program Ecosystem resilience awareness. and mapping Signage, Ecological monitoring Ecosystem resilience YUS Rangers Ecological monitoring Ecosystem resilience use resource Sustainable Planning Use Land awareness and mapping Signage, Ecosystem resilience Sustainable Resource Use Resource Sustainable Planning Use Land Ecosystem resilience Use Resource Sustainable Planning Use Land Ecosystem resilience Ecological monitoring Use Resource Sustainable Planning Use Land Ecosystem resilience Ecological monitoring Use Resource Sustainable Planning Use Land Invasivespecies management Fire management awareness and mapping Signage, Strategy 2:Researchtoinformresourceandlandscapemanagement S25. S24. Code Code Code Code Code Code Code Code Code S253 S252 S254 S255 S243 S244 S242 S251 S241

So Marine and aquatic ecosystems cial /anthropological cial Research field 5 field Research 3 field Research 2 field Research 4 field Research 3 field Research 2 field Research Marine water pollution. water Marine Traditional ecological knowledge. Research field 1 field Research 1 field Research even higher levels of attrition of females. of attrition of levels higher even the and 10 6and in general, grades between Key drivers of high attrition rates of children 4 field Research Marine turtle tracking. turtle Marine versa. vice and livelihoods on CA the of Impacts siltation. River undersupply of resources. and closures facility health of drivers Key YUS linguistics. Landscape intensity. harvesting and use Coral Indicative timing Indicative timing Indicative timing Indicative timing Indicative timing Indicative timing Indicative timing Indicative timing Indicative timing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing 2016 By 2016 By 2015 By 2015 By Ongoing Program linkages Program linkages Program linkages Program linkages Program linkages Program linkages Program Program linkages Program linkages Program Program linkages Program Land use planning use Land Ecosystem resilience Ecological monitoring Ecosystem resilience Enforcement YUS Rangers planning use Land Ecosystem resilience use resource Sustainable Ecosystem resilience Responding to community needs. community to Responding needs. community to Responding needs community to Responding leaders of capacity Building development Community use resource Sustainable Ecosystem resilience YUS Rangers needs community to Responding Ecological monitoring 65 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Section 2: Addressing threats to management targets 2 66 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN S27. S26. Wungon Village. Photo: Ashley Brooks Ashley Photo: Village. Wungon Code Code Code Code Code Code Code S263 S262 S272 S273 S261 S271 S274

Strategy 2:Researchtoinformresourceandlandscapemanagement Cl Sustainability and consumption Sustainability imate change imate alpine and grasslands. grasslands of value sequestration carbon at Looking 4 field Research Phenological events across YUS. 2 field Research Research field 1 field Research “footprint”. consumptionand Household resource Research field 1 field Research Research field 3 field Research 3 field Research 2 field Research communities and ecosystems. and communities YUS to impacts change climate Potential development. sustainable and use resource natural based sustainability, Understanding subsistence systems. farming and patterns use resource Natural options for ecosystem protection. options for ecosystem market-based /carbon climate of Exploration Indicative timing Indicative timing Indicative timing Indicative timing Indicative timing Indicative timing Indicative timing By 2015 By 2015 By 2016 By 2016 By 2016 By 2015 By 2015 By Program linkages Program linkages Program Program linkages Program Program linkages Program Program linkages Program linkages Program linkages Program Sustainable resource use resource Sustainable Planning Use Land Ecological monitoring Ecosystem resilience All Ecosystem resilience; Environmental services Ecosystem resilience Strategy 2: Research to inform resource and landscape management Section 2: Addressing threats to management targets YUS LANDSCAPE PLANYUS Tapmange Village. Photo: Mark Ziembicki 67 3 Section 2: 68 68 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN use for the long term. term. for long use the resource plan collectively and sustainably lands clan their use therefore, communities that imperative eternity. absolute an is It for byclans held is land Government, ofPNG the words the In settle. and areas move to and productive more property, sell and to buy for people impossible is it cases inmost groups, by clan owned collectively 97% inPNG around of land With system. tenure land ofan essential customary the component country’s also is It yet has to mainstreamed. but be priority, anational as government PNG bythe recognised also is planning use Land mechanisms. planning are therefore and plan), into integrated development ward local the becomes and adopted is WardLUP the cases some (in plans to development ward support or with, alignment enable the LUPs finally And to them. agree protect collaboratively and forests for protection adjoining identify to clearly able were wards and villages fromneighboring landowners Here, landscape. the across connectivity ecosystem in promoting were valuable also LUPs The limits. off declare to and protect forests which forests to and use which land, of use existing the to how toon improve together agree clans neighboring bringing through overuse resource consensus community in facilitating vital is process LUP the that showed phase pilot LUP the from in2011/12 in5wards piloted LUPs the 4). Experience (Annex continues program The Landscape. YUS the across ward every for (LUP) plans land-use byfacilitating threats compounding and The Niño events). El with associated bushfires and of drought case inthe as are unpredictable or entirely point, atthis potential a are only operations bycommercial posed usually threats acute (the of communities requirements bysubsistence driven to ecosystems changes incremental term long are small-scale, YUS across targets to of threats management majority vast The 7). (Annex frameworks MDG and CBD the within conservation biodiversity with development sustainable to balancing contribution asubstantive provide and protection, environmental and development rural to balance plans local and national with directly align programs Both services. provide to to continue of ecosystems ability the enhancing and use, for resource planning term long community-based on focussing linked programs inextricably of two consists Strategy The services environmental resource Sustainable use and 3: Strategy S31. S32: S31:

L Strategy 3:Sustainableresourceuseandenvironmentalservices and-use Planning Program responds to these incremental to incremental these responds Program Planning and-use Addressing threatstomanagementtargets

sustainable resource use Land En Land vironmental services vironmental -use planning,-use and management planning -use but 1, in LP to not set out prevent will developments, potential program The to mining) YUS. and roads (logging, threats to “potential” the inrelation important particularly is 2. This LP in communities to support strategic basis for asignificant form then will LUPs The Landscape. YUS the across wards remaining for the LUPs to 1, seek complete will LP In program the in are of sustainability principals if and inplace, is protection and of use balance right the if determining and intracking vital is use resource and of LUPs overall. Monitoring LUPs the for program amonitoring to seek develop 1will LP Finally wards. inselected development the small program supports scale agroforestry through nursery 1, LP In theyemerge. as needs to community to respond open LUP. their completes ward remains program the regard this In each until known be notwill priorities specific the cases most In CA. the pressure off keeping thereby area, of that productivity improve zone that livelihoods inthe actions supporting The ofprogram. the part as for conservation pledged for land substitution indirect an considered be can This communities. by needs priority as to identified areas support to provide seeks then program the completed, is LUP ward each As and presented, any opportunities to aview maximising with LUPs, into ward their integrate future developments potential can

Yopno Zone.Wells Zachary Photo: p

lace.

w m p rogram responds to communities’ commitment by by commitment to communities’ responds rogram ill ensure that through the LUP process, communities communities process, LUP the through ill ensure that itigating any potential negative impacts. any negative potential itigating Strategy 3:Sustainableresourceuseandenvironmentalservices Strategy results chain

Results chain logic Threat STRATEGY 3: Intermediate Impact Strategy Reduction on Target Sustainable resource Outcome Outcome use and environmental services YUS Landscape Threat reduction result – Direct immediate and local threats

1. Small scale 3. Small scale Target 1: forest clearance harvesting of Alpine grassland ceases in CA timber and forest area and integrity products ceases is maintained within the CA 2. Hunting, fishing 1. Land-use planning, and collection 4. Marine management and cease within the CA resource use is sustainable resource use strategically planned and managed locally 311: Land-Use Plans and Target 2: facilitated in all YUS Montane and Landscape wards lowland rainforest area is stable or increasing Threat reduction result – 312: Technical support is Potential threats sought for development priorities identified in LUPs 1. Mining, oil or 2. Road gas exploration / construction extraction do not does not occur 313: Monitoring program for occur within within the CA the CA Target 3: resource use and Numbers of Matschie’s tree sustainbility is developed 2. Environmental services kangaroo and other hunted species are stable or 3. Commercial increasing within and 321: Options for a carbon logging does outside the CA pilot scheme are explored not occur within for the Nambis Zone the CA

322: In the absence of a carbon pilot, explore Threat reduction result – alternative options to Compunding threats safeguard lowland forests Target 4: against future logging, and 1. Fire practices A marine ecosystems current selective 3. Siltation and program is developed harvesting follow water pollution communally from upstream agreed plans and sources is remain outside reduced the CA

2. Invasive 4. The impacts of species plans are predicted climate developed and change are managed locally mitigated Target 5: Civil society processes and landscape-scale partnerships are strengthened, 5. Leadership and leading to improved long term governance are decision-making strengthened 69 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Section 2: Addressing threats to management targets 3 70 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN S and not exist inPNG, does apilot Such forests of YUS. lowland for pilot the for potential acarbon the assessing on focus will Program 1, LP Services Environmental the Throughout provision. service ecosystem enhancing and maintaining while protection, with use to balance able is area protected alandscape how showcasing bysimply or adaptation, change for climate model of anational development the Zone, Nambis inthe livelihood alternative an as markets internationally) carbon accessing as to forests (such the protect mechanisms market-based exploring through either done be can This services. environmental of to benefits access enhancing – or benefit community stores with carbon massive its in linking akey to play nationally role well is placed Landscape YUS The 32. Code C Code C Code S322 S321 S312 S313 S311

ode ode g iven the strong governance and management in place for for inplace management and governance strong the iven Strategy 3:Sustainableresourceuseandenvironmentalservices Env ironmental services carbon pilot for the Nambis Zone. Nambis the for pilot carbon a of development for options 2015By explore Research field 1 field Research Research field 2 field Research current selective harvesting. harvesting. selective current and logging, future against forests lowland safeguard to options alternative explore pilot, acarbon of absence 2016, inBy the Research field 2 field Research Research field 3 field Research Wards. LLG Wasu all Yus three and LLG across (LUP) Plans Land-use 2016, facilitate By 1 field Research level LUPs. level ward in identified priorities development to respond to required as support technical seek basis, ongoing an On completed LUP wards. LUP completed by used is being level landscape and zone village, ward, at sustainability and use resource for program 2015,By monitoring Indicative timing Indicative timing Indicative timing

Indicative timing Indicative timing Reporting of YUS CA outcomes on MDG 7 to UNDP in Port Moresby. in Port UNDP 7to MDG on outcomes CA YUS of Reporting  w subsequent or new into incorporated are lessons any that Ensure u is monitoring and baselines have LUPs completed with Wards agendas. into LUP monitoring workshop program Incorporate a perceptions community guide to report socio-economic JCU Use questions. sustainability guide to 7indicators MDG Use w in partnership agroforestry for nurseries pilot 2015,By develop w incorporate presidents and 2016, managers Yus LLG By Wasu and o revise and landowners with all of LUPs areview 2016, conduct By L (Yus Ward target in each 3workshops of aseries 2015,By conduct         LG 8 wards, Wasu LLG 2 wards) to complete Land Use Plans. Use Land complete to 2wards) LLG Wasu LG 8wards, nd impacts of the CA on communities. on CA the of impacts nd nderway. r modify LUP as required for LP 2. LP for required as LUP r modify

ith the YUS CO. YUS the ith ard LUPs as they arise. they as LUPs ard plans. development LLG their into LUPs ard p forest lowland for sought options funding and feasibility Assess a c of merit determine to DEC and OCCD communities, with Liaise pilot. the for options funding and feasibility Assess    rotection. arbon pilot. arbon biodiversity and watershed conservation. watershed and biodiversity and generation, income employment, of in terms co-benefits development, community for sustainable opportunities offering while mitigation, change for climate mechanism cost low toarelatively offer expected is it possible, made is approach an such if term, long the In them. clearing versus ecosystems the protect and to maintain toincentives offer developed to pilot be for acarbon opportunity ideal the offers lease proposed The Zone. of forests of Nambis the the part covering lease logging aproposed therealso is addition, In sawmills. walkabout using harvesting timber pressure selective from under are already forests of YUS lowland The initiative. pilot carbon first PNG’s to develop site well the is placed methods, monitoring ecosystem wellpending as Landscape, YUS the Program linkages Program Program linkages Program Program linkages Program Program linkages Program Program linkages Program

 Reports to UN MDG. UN to Reports in use. monitoring LUP Trainings conducted. andcoffee cocoa). currently happening with s financial and Technical Nurseries established. i incorporated LUPs Ward completed. maps LUP Workshops held. ward. each for LUPs          Actions integrated into LP2. started. project Pilot s relevant with held Meetings   nto LLG development plans. development LLG nto upport received (as is (as is received upport takeholders. Strategy 3: Sustainable resource use and environmental services Section 2: Addressing threats to management targets YUS LANDSCAPE PLANYUS Tapmange Village. Photo: Mark Ziembicki 71 4 Section 2: 72 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN that have government budgets already earmarked for them. for them. earmarked already budgets have government that areas in gaps to fill to left is Yus TKCP LLG, support government ongoing and of significant Yus absence the In across LLG. upgraded or maintained delivered, be can services government few and plan, ofLLG the to lack due the to area, the budget development allocated the to distribute unable is government district the aconsequence As district. –the government d LLG five-year its to complete unable is Manager LLG the that being The result plans. development ward five-year 7). (Annex of NGOs expectations government are with inline and plans development key national support programs The they arise. /when if to needs responding through communities with linkages positive the to maintain provision Plan Landscape the allows also Strategy The entitled. is landscape the to which services and support government the to CO facilitate YUS the supporting and market integration, and livelihoods supporting leaders, of local capacity the atbuilding are aimed make Strategy this that up programs The families healthy and livelihoods services, Community 4: Strategy Across the Yus LLG, as few as three wards currently have have Yus the few as currently threeAcross wards as LLG, todeveloped. be needs links, presented bythese opportunities the to maximise leaders of local there,ability the not previously was that levels to of government higher people for YUS conduit adirect they offer While boundaries. administrative multiple transcend that institutions are nested of which –both CAMC the and CO ofYUS the establishment the about brought TKCP and communities YUS the between collaboration the Indeed level. landscape atthe of to TKCP work the prior boundaries these across occurred development for sustainable collaboration and any if planning little and jurisdiction, given of their boundary outer the reaches only however, forservices their mandate the Invariably presidents. LLG respective and Managers LLG two women’s teachers; the and officers; representatives; extension agricultural and health ward officers; peace and magistrates wardchurch leaders; elected counsellors; andparish ward congregation, include: these YUS Across responsibilities. differing with and fromasuite of organisations individuals strong, committed,professional, and highly respected are Landscape YUS the across leaders of local cadre The e velopment plan for submission to the next level of to next the for submission plan velopment S41. S42: S41: S43: Strategy 4:Communityservices,livelihoodsandhealthyfamilies Addressing threatstomanagementtargets

De Re Eco De sponding to local needs local to sponding veloping leadership veloping leadership nomic and livelihoods markets – quality

and Saburong Village (within Yus (within 2). Ward Village Saburong and 4) Ward (Yus Ward of Dinangat participation the to CO gain YUS the and leadership 1to local use inLP seeks also program The Landscape. YUS the to contribution makes significant ultimately and villages, through to government from flow information for improved mechanisms to develop able is government, with by,partnerships develops and recognition significant has CO YUS the 2, inLP whereby afoundation develop and CO’s strengths, YUS the to seek build 1will LP governance. and leadership, capacity, institutional inits lie Challenges problems. economic and social to local solutions cost-effective and timely to provide ability its and activities, inits participation and membership peoples’ the and to people, the proximity its in lies CO ofYUS the strength The mandates. individual beyond atscales occur that for challenges solutions seek and concerns, common identify to lessons, share leaders village for and ward aforum as placed uniquely is CO YUS the level organisation, alandscape CO. As to YUS the support continued and planning, LLG for and ward training direct through achieved be will This development. community and for services support government receive for and to advocate ability leaders’ local to strengthen 1is inLP Program Leadership ofDeveloping the purpose The Bridge. Photo: Ryan Hawk Ryan Photo: Bridge. Strategy 4:Communityservices,livelihoodsandhealthyfamilies Strategy results chain

Results chain logic Threat STRATEGY 4: Intermediate Impact Strategy Reduction on Target Community services, Outcome Outcome livelihoods and healthy families

Threat reduction result – YUS Landscape Direct immediate and local threats

1. Small scale 3. Small scale Target 1: forest clearance harvesting of Alpine grassland ceases in CA timber and forest area and integrity 2. Economic livelihoods – quality and markets products ceases is maintained within the CA 421: Coffee growers in 2. Hunting, fishing 423: Cocoa extension and and collection Uruwa Zone are export initiative in the 4. Marine undertaking all aspects of cease within Nambis Zone undertaken the CA resource use is transportation for export of strategically coffee planned and managed locally Target 2: Montane and 422: New areas to support lowland rainforest area coffee quality improvement is stable or increasing 1. Developing leadership and marketing integration Threat reduction result – are identified Potential threats 411: YUS and Wasu LLG 413: YUS CO management leaders are able to capacity is supported 1. Mining, oil or 2. Road formulate ward and LLG gas exploration / construction development plans for the extraction do not does not occur 2016-2020 planning period occur within within the CA 414: Participation of the CA Target 3: Dinangat Ward, and Numbers of Matschie’s tree Saburong village in the kangaroo and other hunted 412: YUS CO has a species are stable or constitution and meets YUS Landscape and CA 3. Commercial plans is facilitated 3. Responding to increasing within and twice a year local needs logging does outside the CA not occur within the CA 431: Support to education sector is provided as required Threat reduction result – Compunding threats 432: Support to adult Target 4: training as required 1. Fire practices A marine ecosystems 3. Siltation and program is developed follow water pollution communally from upstream agreed plans and sources is remain outside reduced 433: Support to health the CA sector as required 2. Invasive 4. The impacts of species plans are predicted climate developed and change are managed locally mitigated Target 5: Civil society processes and landscape-scale partnerships are strengthened, 5. Leadership and leading to improved long term governance are decision-making strengthened 73 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Section 2: Addressing threats to management targets 4 74 74 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN market opportunities when they when arise. market opportunities (e.g. market linkages however any physical where of Plan, the remit the beyond is of infrastructure development The YUS. across crops cash additional with used be will approach same and model, effective proved toan has be producers local to of management handover and market integration, of coffee, to development the TKCP. obstacles of removing success The by of market linkages facilitation and extension of coffee piloting successful the from on continues This in market integration. assist and quality to improve product capacity small-holder local to seek build ofprogram the activities overarching The S42. Land Use Planning workshop, Yawan Village. Photo: Ashley Brooks Ashley Photo: Village. Yawan workshop, Planning Use Land Code C Code Code S413 S412 S414 S411 ode

r Strategy 4:Communityservices,livelihoodsandhealthyfamilies oads) are planned, small-holders will be made aware of made be will small-holders are planned, oads) Ec onomic livelihoods – and quality markets 2016-2020 planning period. the for plans development LLG and ward formulate to able are leaders LLG Wasu Yus and 2016, participating By 1 Objective Objective 4 Objective and CA plans. Landscape YUS in the village Dinangat Ward, and Saburong Facilitate participation of is supported. capacity management CO YUS 3 Objective periodically. meets and plan strategic constitution, and annual approved an has CO YUS The 2 Objective Activities Activities Activities Activities

p the garner to place in put been have actions 2016, significant By p priority support to arise that opportunities grant any into linked CO YUS l CO YUS to opportunities training and building capacity Ongoing, a strategic of funding Endowment for WPZ to application submits CO YUS ( plans development 5year have 2016, both LLG Yus Wasu By and LLG r as training vocational or study tertiary for scholarships of Identification d community facilitating in planning, counsellors Training ward of       2016-2020). eaders. equired. iscussion, and formulation of ward plans. ward of formulation and iscussion, ctivities in line with the Landscape Plan. Landscape the in line with ctivities rojects within the CO strategic plan. plan. strategic CO the within rojects articipation of Dinangat and Saburong.

t he he cultural or numbers wildlife compromising of proteinsources without of alternate for investment inproduction new opportunities up open and streams, income to diversify serves also incomes, household Improving forests for existing agriculture. clear to need the mitigates thereby and land, cleared of already productivity the to enhance serves livelihoods Supporting production techniques. friendly environmentally using Zone Nambis fromthe cocoa quality high and produced of asustainably export the promoting begin and coffee, to support continue 1, will LP In Program the

tr aditions. Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators

Grants sought and secured. and sought Grants Training conducted. i Funding and received activities W to submitted applications Annual L for plans development year Five a wards Wasu three for plans Ward c Yus are LLG for plans Ward l Dinangat and Saburong manager. LLG the manager. collaboration with TKCP. with collaboration         mplemented. andowners pledge land / or seek seek /or land pledge andowners LGs. ompleted and submitted to LLG LLG to submitted and ompleted re completed and submitted to to submitted and completed re PZ. Strategy 4:Communityservices,livelihoodsandhealthyfamilies T S43. health sectors where basic services are lacking. are lacking. services basic where sectors health and education inthe of TKCP work the continues program the 1, LP vein. In inthis designed is Program Government and to Community Responding The needs. unforseen or requests to unplanned responsive be also level, must it to policy the field the from needs area protected of landscape fullgamut the covers it while and management, CA and allocation for resource h e Landscape Plan provides a structured and long term plan plan term long and astructured provides Plan e Landscape C C Code Code C Code S433 S432 S422 S423 S431 S421 ode ode ode

with targets Re sponding to community and government needs in line line in needs government and community to sponding outcomes. education to Support integration. market and improvement quality coffee support to areas new 2016, identify By Objective 3 Objective 2 Objective outcomes. health community to Support training. and education adult to Support buyers. other or Vita Caffé to coffee of for export transportation of all aspects undertaking are Zone in Uruwa holders small- 2016, coffee By 1 Objective Objective 1 Objective in the Nambis Zone. Nambis in the initiative andextension export cocoa the 2016, complete By 3 Objective Objective 2 Objective Activities Activities Activities Activities Activities Activities coffee. YUS for buyers and markets new of Identification By 2015, current scholarships program is evaluated. program scholarships 2015,By current c and trade direct including opportunities market of 2015,By evaluation s national against assessments quality 2015, by periodic and Ongoing b quality cocoa improving at aimed exercises building capacity Technical collected. 2014, data By baseline w identify to consultations community ongoing and CO YUS LUPs, Use / fl transport out phase and collectives, coffee Uruwa to support Continue to remove obstacles for health services in YUS are explored. are in YUS services health for obstacles remove to p new for proposals and evaluated are projects health 2014,By current workshops. LUP during identified priorities key to Training in response          ertification schemes. ertification tandards. rojects and ongoing collaboration with provincial health department department health provincial with collaboration ongoing and rojects y PNGCB. here local needs are. needs local here ight subsidy. ight

contribute to targets. the management for, planned would and explicitly not be may that in areas new activities to implement requests government or to donor to respond Plan Landscape the within mechanism the provides also program The bygovernment. are funded services basic and established, aYusbeen has 2when plan inLP LLG strategic more become or out, phased then is areas inthese Support Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators

Future actions incorporated into LP2. into incorporated actions Future Evaluation conducted. Trainings conducted. LP2. into incorporated actions Future Evaluation conducted.     

 i for ranking opportunities Report g highest attain samples 90% individuals. 200 least at Training of e of 100% for collection Data identified. buyers New b areas new in training Extension m are growers coffee Uruwa production. independently. coffee their of transport and       ncome generation through cocoa. through generation ncome rade appropriate for smallholder smallholder for appropriate rade xisting cocoa cooperatives. y CIC. anaging the production 75 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Section 2: Addressing threats to management targets 5 Section 2: 76 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN in-line with government priorities (Annex 7). (Annex priorities government with in-line are also and outcomes, to these achieve capacity management therefore to seek build Strategy inthis programs The values. Landscape YUS supports and desires community reflects action program any resultant that and are maintained consultations community and monitoring, research, planning, among linkages the ensure that who are therefore facilitators staff TKCP sharing. with stakeholders to encourage participation and knowledge consultation regular professionally, theyfacilitate work that and their conduct they that their roles, to skills fulfill have right the staff TKCP that landscape the across of actions implementation for effective vital linked.is It theyare inextricably management, of into discrete processes are divided programs the While Plan. Landscape YUS the within ofactions the all implementation professional and adaptive transparent, for effective, the guide and are basis the make Strategy the that up three programs The and management Implementation 5: Strategy Code S511 S51: S53: S51: S52: Strategy 5:Implementationandmanagement Addressing threatstomanagementtargets



workforce Stak F Mo workforce Stak Objective 1 Objective stakeholder involvement. stakeholder available information and best on based made are Key management decisions inancing nitoring and assessing effectiveness nitoring and assessing eholder linkages and an effective eholder linkages and an effective Guide

mi meeting information, programmatic to access have Community g to planning ward and LLG district, provincial, of periods use Staff c and access to bodies government with work to continue Staff g to in YUS workshops programmatic use to encouraged are Staff t long- and relevant reliable, on based are decisions management Key may arise.      erm information gathered from a range of sources. of arange from gathered information erm onsider policies and plans to support decision making. decision support to plans and policies onsider ather information to guide their programs. programs. their guide to information ather that concerns or queries to respond and views, community ather nutes, and reports. and nutes, organisational ongoing and ofworkforce, the professionalism gathering, information of aculture learning, through are enhanced and are maintained, to stakeholders respond and with communicate staff TKCP bywhich processes and structures institutional the The WPZ. from support organisational and for research, partnerships institutional CAMC, CO, the are YUS linked the through stakeholders Many information. available best the on based landscape the to support and technical financial direct and facilitate who personnel of qualified therefore is TKCP abody gathered. information and dialogue community on are based decisions key and management bycommunities, supported are aspirations, community to reflect continue activities therefore program that vital is It community-driven. inherently is Landscape YUS the area, protected alandscape As

St akeholder Linkages Program is designed to ensure that to ensure that designed is Program Linkages akeholder

o peration. Indicators

q Minutes/reports are updated p all to delivered are minutes Meeting e meetings CAMC and CO All official a district provincial, national, Relevant l is at attendance meeting CAMC o pre-planning support staff TKCP i activities CAMC and CO for Funding C and defined are leads CAMC and CO i are plans development Professional meetings. centres. (at meetings). secretariat. CO/CAMC and TKCP by kept release. public to related as time-frame appropriate ex-officios. and members plans. annual work          n place. n s in place. east 75% of regular committee committee 75% regular of east uarterly at all field office resource resource alloffice at field uarterly nd LLG plans are sought within an an within sought are plans LLG nd nd with a Q and A session, minutes minutes Asession, aQand with nd f CO/CAMC and TKCP planning planning TKCP and f CO/CAMC articipants (CAMC and CO) in-situ in-situ CO) and (CAMC articipants O/CAMC activities are built into into built are activities O/CAMC Strategy 5:Implementationandmanagement Land Use Planning Village, Yawan. Photo: Ashley Brooks Ashley Photo: Yawan. Village, Planning Use Land Code Code Code S513 S512 S514 responsibilities. their fulfil to necessary skills the have staff TKCP and programs. staff support to resources and office afunctioning has TKCP making. decision inform to supported stakeholder engagement is and learning of A culture Objective 4 Objective 3 Objective Objective 2 Objective Guide Guide Guide

s support to is in place environment working professional and A safe m relevant attend to staff for is provided support Organisational c with engagement improve to in ways supported are Staff a and opportunities in training participate to engaged actively are Staff position. each for developed are competencies core of A system a culturally be to continues and adaptive and is flexible Management a be could that processes and systems identify to encouraged are Staff p YUS for ideas innovative encourage to support organisational Provide targets. skills. develop and information exchange to programs other and organisations external with contact their         ommunities. taff reaching their full potential and achievement of landscape landscape of achievement and potential full their reaching taff ppropriate. n annual training program is developed. program training n annual dapted or incorporated to improve their programs. their improve to incorporated or dapted rograms. eetings, conferences, field work and workshops which increase increase which workshops and work field conferences, eetings, Indicators Indicators Indicators

 t to relevant in areas trained Staff r Mentoring programs developed as developed. plans training Annual c staff address reviews Annual o leadership from is sought Guidance m or systems new of Presence i Quarterly and 6-monthly reviews of mon annual have leads Strategy new steps are implemented. are steps new improve their programs. o on reports financial Annual p and /bills scrutinised are All invoices s is financially account Lae TKCP sustained. are functions All office a # presentations, of staff attendance resolution). design, communication and conflict project building, capacity community programs. their for requirements developed. and programs.             ndividual staff work plans. work staff ndividual equired. heir programs (e.g. in facilitation, (e.g. in facilitation, programs heir olvent at all times. oncerns with management. with oncerns nd contribution to external forums forums external to contribution nd r relevant stakeholder body before before body stakeholder r relevant verhead / costs / sustainability are are /sustainability /costs verhead aid on time. aid on ethods developed by staff to to staff by developed ethods itoring and evaluation 77 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Section 2: Addressing threats to management targets 5 78 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Table 1: YUS monitoring framework monitoring Table 1: YUS Plan. Landscape subsequent inthe resources of allocation and programming to guide used are then Findings implemented. overall are being strategies and programs if and achieved have been objectives to if determine used be should evaluations 3). These (Figure Plan Landscape subsequent the of to implementation the prior months six inthe begin should strategies and of goals evaluations 5-yearly The monitored. is Plan of resultLandscape area the each when highlighting below is shown framework monitoring activity A simplified term. long inthe targets and goals of management to achievement the are contributing programs and activities all if to determine used is indicators socio-economic and ecological of monitoring the Second theyaretrack. if on determine and actions to ongoing review monitor used is and monitoring activity First, Program. ofMonitoring the components overarching are two There required. as programs and actions site atthe level;management the to and of adapt management ofimpacts the observation from to learn objectives; achieving toward made are steps being and effectively implemented being is plan the whether are: toof program this identify way. purposes under is The implementation met once being are Plan Landscape inthe objectives if to understanding S52. T Target result area Landscape Program Strategy Goal Activity Objective he Monitoring Program provides the key feedback loop loop key the provides feedback Program Monitoring he

Strategy 5:Implementationandmanagement Monitoring and assessing effectiveness andMonitoring assessing Type of monitoring

 mon Socio-economic Ecological monitoring. r monitoringQuarterly and Ongoing review. Annual review. 5-yearly evaluation. 5-yearly evaluation.       eview. itoring. Comments

m Review is at quarterly Monitoring is ongoing. p annual during Developed m Review is at quarterly D in review Annual Plan. Landscape subsequent s first is the Evaluation Plan. Landscape subsequent s first is the Evaluation s 5-yearly socio-economic mon 5-yearly ecological          urveying. tep in planning for the the for in planning tep the for in planning tep lanning in December. in lanning ecember. eetings. eetings. itoring. and incorporation in the subsequent Landscape Plan (Figure 3). (Figure Plan Landscape subsequent inthe incorporation and for consideration time lead enough with completed be should which initiatives, monitoring socio-economic and ecological the by verified be fromand come will to questions answers these the instances many In values. Landscape YUS enhancing and protecting or threats, are minimising interventions management whether and to threats targets, responded Plan Landscape the well how has including: of issues arange to assess used be will evaluations 5-yearly The basis. a5-yearly on goals and targets social and environmental long-term the against verified and measured be will Landscape ofYUS the success The ended. has them in identified period time until the unchanged remain should targets and goals but statements, of objective re-wording or of activities, adaptation or change the necessitate year. reviews could subsequent inthe work Annual the year,for for programs all on the lay and to foundation reflect key the as to used forum be should inDecember planning and appraisal Annual goals. to annual meet implemented and planned suitably more be could activities the how and feasibility, and timing their statements, objective the on to reflect used be should reviews of objectives Ongoing Plan. M&E strategies. forrespective their programs (M&E) evaluation and monitoring are given leads strategy TKCP year Each Tapmange Village. Photo: Mark Ziembicki Mark Photo: Village. Tapmange

p rograms are taken directly from the current Landscape Landscape current fromthe are taken directly rograms Strategy 5:Implementationandmanagement and plans, annual inTKCP-PNG outcomes linked to clear closely therefore is funds of endowment allocation The perpetuity. in programs landscape for core funding partial to provide year, of each designed is and inDecember formulated budget and plans annual TKCP-PNG with inaccordance by WPZ annually todisbursed is be endowment bythe interest earned 4% Manual, of the Operations inWPZ’s outlined procedures the Following 2million. atUSD stands of writing time the at which and byWPZ, managed Endowment, Conservation YUS ofnon-sinking the establishment the through to end this taken havebeen steps Significant management. Landscape for aim YUS overarching an is sustainability Financial S53. relevant the within Objectives as listed are already these 1and LP inTable (noted TBD as 13) during todeveloped is be initiative monitoring inTable shown is specific the 13. cases many In monitoring framework and socio-economic ecological The –2015 2013 timeline monitoring Indicative 3: Figure TKCP-PNG staff will be trained in fund raising. infund trained be will staff TKCP-PNG and regard, inthis to donors proposals funding to submit continue will TKCP-PNG and WPZ circumstances. to changing to adapt aneed there is where and costs, operational programs, non-core programs, for rest ofcore the the streams funding additional to to attract continue necessary are also Strategies Tree coring. Mireia Photo: Torello Raventos

t he long term targets of the YUS Landscape Plan. Plan. Landscape of YUS the targets term long he F inancing

P Q1: activity review Dec 2012: Annual planning rograms.

Q2: activity review

Q3: activity review

Q4: activity review

Dec 2013: Annual review and planning Q1: activity review

Q2: activity review

Q3: activity review

Q4: activity review Montane Rainforest. Photo: Ryan Photo: Hawk Rainforest. Montane

Dec 2014: Annual review and planning Q1: activity review

Q2: 5-yearly ecological monitoring and socio-economic survey

Q3: 5-yearly Goal and Strategy evaluations

Q4: Landscape Plan 2016-2020 development

Dec 2015: Annual planning 79 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Section 2: Addressing threats to management targets 5 80 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Notes: TBD: To developed. be TBD: Notes: Table 13: Ecological and monitoringframework socio-economic Ecological indicator Verifiable indicator Verifiable indicator Ecological Attitudes toward the CA. the toward Attitudes and access to resources. livelihoods on CA of Impact levels. ward, zone and landscape village, at sustainability Resource use and indicator Socio-economic species density.Hunted CA. the outside species Hunted CA. the inside species Hunted ecosystems. Marine area. cover land and forest and lowland Montane ecology grassland Alpine change over time. over change and area grassland Alpine use. local for exist taxa target of Sustainable numbers Strategy 5:Implementationandmanagement Verifiable indicator Verifiable ectares. ectares. erceptions.   P Gardening output/yield. income. Export trends. income Cash in field/hunting. spent Time travelled. Distance benefit. vs. Effort a Resource use, availability Forest area regrown. Forest area cleared. in field/hunting. spent Time travelled. Distance benefit. vs. Effort a Resource use, availability Location of hunting site. in field/hunting. spent Time travelled. Distance animals of Number hunted. analysis. Genetic d and production Scat counts. scat Standing counts. scat Standing Hectares protected. species. Indicator mapping.Boundary Rates of change. H species. Indicator mapping.Boundary Rates of change. H nd trends. nd trends. ecomposition rates. the planning cycle. planning the of year 5th in the surveyed all plots Then 4years. over basis rotational a on year each surveyed 5-yearly 5 5 5 “ “ S 5-yearly A 5 5-yearly A 5 frequency Monitoring frequency Monitoring -yearly -yearly -yearly -yearly -yearly elected plots plots elected nnual and nnual and Rangers. representatives. / landholder community representatives. / landholder community Rangers and and rangers. sensingRemote and rangers. sensingRemote survey. Household survey. Household sensing.remote and survey Household “ Ra rangers. marine and based Community- Rangers. method Monitoring method Monitoring ngers and GPS. books. Record GPS. books. Record GPS. books. Record imagery. Satellite imagery. Satellite analysis. GPS. Genetic GPS. imagery. Satellite R GPS. books. Record GPS. books. Record required Resources required Resources ecord books. books. ecord JCU PhD study. PhD JCU Rangers. Rangers. Rangers. rangers. coordinator, GIS rangers. coordinator, GIS Rangers. LUP facilitators. LUP facilitators. LUP facilitators. LUP Rangers. Rangers. Responsibility Responsibility S1.4.4) (Objective 2016 by TBD S143. Objective S142. Objective S136). (Objective 2016 by TBD S131). (Objective 2015 by TBD (Objective S146). (Objective 2016 by TBD (Objective S313). (Objective 2014 by TBD S313). (Objective 2015 by TBD S313). (Objective 2015 by TBD S139). (Objective 2015 by TBD S133). (Objective 2015 by TBD Comment Comment Strategy 5: Implementation and management Section 2: Addressing threats to management targets YUS LANDSCAPE PLANYUS YUS coastline. Photo: Zachary Wells 81 A 82 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Governance of the YUS Conservation Area Conservation Governance YUS the of themselves, and enacted as law under the CA Act. asthemselves, lawthe andenacted CA under landowners the by developed processes) resolution conflict and with bylandowners, for conservation of land pledging voluntary bythe underpinned is Landscape ofYUS the Governance 1 Annex 5. 4. 3. 2 1. makim graun bilong ol igo long Konsevesen. long iwanbel husait lain ol wantaim lidas clan ol bilong nem em Aninit istret itru. na antap toktok olgeta olsem wanbel Mipela em. long itambuim graun we papa hap tasol makim bai Program Tri Konsevesen ogavman. Tri long Kengeru Konsevesen igo Program graun Kengeru dispel igivim mipela olsem soim ino pepa dispela bilong Sainim graun. stretim tok bilong long Tri bilong wok ino Konsevesen em Program olsem Kengeru kilia Mipela antap. graun tambu bilong banis makim long antap istap grup olan ikenmi wantaim wok Imakim, ol ohusait Tri bilong Konsevesen Program opisa Kengeru ol olsem wanbel Mipela Konsevesen Eria. YUS long igo putim na tambuim long iwanbel graun hap dispela bilong papa ______Olgeta long ______Wod Gavaman. Levol Lokol ples, YUS , klostu fom)istap em na narapela pulumapim mas yu graun narapela tambuim laik yu Sapos tasol. nem graun wanpela (raitim ______i em Eria Konsevesen YUS long insait igo tambuim we mipela graun hap dispela bilong Nem Eria. Konsevesen YUS long insait igo putim na graun tambuim long ______Klen wanbel i Mipela, PNG. na Provins, Morobe Distrik, Kabwum Gavaman, Lokol Levol YUS Eria, Konsevesen YUS long insait igo graun tambuim long iwanbel representitif grup lan ol na clan ol olsem isoim em pepa Dispela Graun Tambu Konsevesen Eria igo long YUS land / non-degraded Pledge for forest form

a . Nem ______Nem . ______Sain ______Deit Annexures Nem ______Nem ______Sain ______Deit Nem ______Nem ______Sain ______Deit Nem ______Nem ______Sain ______Deit Nem ______Nem ______Sain ______Deit n enforcement framework (including bi-laws, penalties penalties bi-laws, (including n enforcement framework

degraded / grassland areas exist and are shown here intok are pisin: shown exist and areas /grassland degraded forested for and both forms Pledge form. apledge sign and complete owners clan finally and boundaries, land pledged out mark to officer mapping the accompany landowners cases both In workshops. planning land-use during by landowners pledged is Land ii) or GPS; using parcel land proposed the makes then withmap landowners theto arrangements officer mapping ATKCP for conservation. land intention to pledge the of notification with TKCP with make contact landowners Participating i) processes: of two one through pledged is Land land pledging of Process Annexures 5. 4. 3. 2 1. makim kunai bilong ol igo long Konsevesen. long iwanbel husait lain ol wantaim lidas clan ol bilong nem em Aninit istret itru. na antap toktok olgeta olsem wanbel Mipela em. long itambuim graun we papa hap tasol makim bai Program Tri Konsevesen ogavman. Tri long Kengeru Konsevesen igo Program kunai Kengeru dispela igivim mipela olsem soim ino pepa dispela bilong Sainim graun. stretim tok bilong long Tri bilong wok ino Konsevesen em Program olsem Kengeru kilia Mipela antap. kunai tambu bilong banis makim halivim long antap istap grup lan ol ikenmipela wantaim wok Imakim, ol ohusait Tri bilong Konsevesen Program opisa Kengeru ol olsem wanbel Mipela bek. ikamap bus inap olsem istap lusim mipela Bai gras. kunai kukim inap ino mipela olsem isoim wanbel Dispela Konsevesen Eria. YUS long igo putim na tambuim long iwanbel kunai ______long klostu fom)istap em na narapela pulumapim mas yu kunai hap narapela tambuim laik yu Sapos tasol. nem wanpela (raitim i______em Konsevesen Eria YUS long insait igo tambuim we mipela kunai hap dispela bilong Nem Konsevesen Eria long kamapim niupela bus. Mipela, PNG. na Provins, Morobe Distrik, Kabwum Gavaman, Lokol Levol YUS Konsevesen Eria, YUS long insait igo putim na kunai hap wanpela tambuim long iwanbel representitif grup lan ol na clan ol olsem isoim em pepa Dispela Tambu Konsevesen Eria Kunai igo long YUS Pledge for degraded form land / grassland . Nem ______Nem . ______Sain ______Deit Nem ______Nem ______Sain ______Deit Nem ______Nem ______Sain ______Deit Nem ______Nem ______Sain ______Deit Nem ______Nem ______Sain ______Deit ______ples, Wod ______, YUS Lokol Levol Gavaman. Olgeta papa bilong dispela hap hap dispela bilong papa ______Wod ples, Olgeta Gavaman. Lokol Levol ,YUS Klen i wanbel long tambuim kunai gras na putim igo insait long YUS YUS long insait igo putim na gras kunai tambuim long iwanbel Klen

83 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Annexures A 84 84 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN (3 K4,000. not Afine exceeding penalty: Default Penalty: ( K4,000. not Afine exceeding penalty: Default K40,000. not Afine exceeding Penalty: (1) 35. Section referArea to Act, the Conservation the within changes land-use on regulations For Act. Areas to content the of Conservation the subject is CA YUS Penalties, fines andfees CA: of YUS the boundaries the within to areas all apply CAMC, YUS bythe endorsed and developed have been Rules following the landowners, YUS with consultation In Rules framework enforcement CA YUS 2 ) )



use of land did not adversely affect the environment. environment. the affect not adversely did ofuse land to existing the alteration or development the that section this It sh It guilty of an offense. of offense. an guilty 34(1), is Section under Minister the from approval written 12(1), Section under given with been except inaccordance has of recommendation anotice of which inrespect area inan of use land ofexisting the alteration or development A pe (a except: area conservation ina of use land ofexisting the alteration or development A pe 6: Rule Ru 4: Rule 3: Rule 2: Rule 1: Rule Annexures ) of an offense. offense. an of 34(1), guilty is Section under Minister the from approval written with inaccordance area; (b) or conservation that in ac le 5: le all not be a defense to an action for an offense under under for offense an adefense to notall be action an rson who develops or alters or permits the the permits or alters or develops who rson the permits or alters or develops who rson A fine not exceeding K40,000. not A fine exceeding cordance with the terms of the management plan for for plan ofmanagement the terms the with cordance

We m We m We Re m We m We m We YUS CA (Stakeholders can mean community, Government, DEC, TKCP, DEC, etc.) Government, community, mean can CA (Stakeholders YUS levant stakeholders must give permission before any services or development takes place in in place takes development or services any before permission give must stakeholders levant ust increase/extend/connect the YUS CA. YUS the increase/extend/connect ust resources. non-living/abiotic of kinds different the of all after look ust sites. sacred and beliefs traditional respect ust CA. YUS the in fauna and flora of kinds different the of all after look ust CA. YUS the in resources the of all after look ust

parameters of constitution. its the within destination revenue this todirect appropriate the to determine will CAMC YUS to Committee. the are payable and Members Committee Management Area Conservation YUS by relevant are and imposed fees fines penalties, All 7. 3. 2. 1. Plan. Management Strategic Landscape YUS current the in prescribed specifically is an exception unless apply and fees fines penalties, These and Rules site-specific following the developed/approved has landowners, local with inconsultation Committee, Management Area Conservation YUS the 28 Section with accordance In 6. 5. 4 .  

 

associated fine. associated no is =There Fine Area. Conservation the within permission i It =K50. Fine Area. Conservation i It b. a. Area Conservation i It e d. c. b. a. Area K200. = Fine cooking). fires for not include (does It i It i It the Conservation Area. Fine =K10. Fine Area. Conservation the =K150. Fine Area. Conservation It i It i It fi . nes. I I If pig. Fine =K30. Fine pig. If I I I I s illegal for anyone to go into a sacred site without site for without anyone tointo go s illegal asacred the within any plants destroy to any or trees cut s illegal the within dog or for anyone apig to release s illegal s illegal for anyone to hunt or fish within the Conservation Conservation the forwithin anyone to huntfish s illegal or Area Conservation the towithin forest light fires s illegal s illegal for anyone to pollute any water body or soil inside inside soil or for anyoneany to water body pollute s illegal the for anyone within to makes illegal agarden f species without special status. Fine =K50. Fine status. special without f species f dog. Fine =K100. Fine f dog. f species with special status. Fine =K100. Fine status. special with f species f dog. Fine =K50. Fine f dog. f tree kangaroo. Fine =K500. Fine f tree kangaroo. f pig. Fine =K30. Fine f pig.

Annexures Fourth: Fourth: level. regional or village the than levelward rather atthe operate also that committees Hevi and Conservation the of the jurisdiction within fits It court. Village level: Third court. village the to to escalation stepprior amediation as act committees These committee. ofchurch the members or committee church the level:Second CA. YUS breaker, of the rule regulations and rules the individual the about most appropriate because the committee members know most This infraction. to each together resolve representatives ward to all get feasible or enforcement –not appropriate forward local ineach committee One committees. Conservation level: First resolution. and for consideration body administrative If level. to ahigher not escalated is issue the and metedis out to victims) compensation or service, (e.g. community penalty or afine resolved is problem the If bodies. administrative of to aseries access has perpetrator the Rangers, YUS or members bycommunity recorded and violated is alaw Once across YUS. for enforcement law inplace systems follow existing these CA, YUS laws the of enforcing the for drafted was resolution conflict for process following the in2008 workshops landowner During resolution Conflict K50. not Afine exceeding Penalty: offense. of an guilty is Act this under exercise functions or of powers his of aranger, request inthe any reasonable with to fails or comply refuses (b) or aranger; obstructs or –(a) hinders who A person follows: as is and Act of the 40 Section with inaccordance is of aranger obstruction the for imposed fine The ofAct. the 29 refer toplease Section ranger area of aconservation ofpowers the adescription For rangers. CA ofregister YUS current the maintain will CAMC The Act. the with compliance of ensuring for purpose the rangers area of conservation of group appointment to the Minister the recommended and developed has landowners local with inconsultation CAMC The Rangers YUS

t here is a dispute or appeal, the issue is escalated to a higher to ahigher escalated is issue the appeal, or here adispute is District court or higher. or court District Hevi (“problem”) committee. This may include include may (“problem”) Hevi This committee.

i s s Gogiok Village. Photo: Ashley Brooks Ashley Photo: Village. Gogiok Som Zone Ashley Photo: Grasslands. Brooks 85 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Annexures A 86 86 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Annex Table Plan and of the Landscape production synthesis 1: for development, Process Landscape Plan development process YUS 2 Annex Surveying, pre-planning Surveying, Gazettal CA YUS pre-planning and Surveying, Inception stage Planning Annexures

2010–2012 2009 January 2008 2008 2008 2007 2004 2005 2004 2004 2003 2001 1996 1996 1996 Timing A series of research studies conducted to feed into The Plan: The into feed to conducted studies research of A series 2009. in April Village in Teptep celebrated CA YUS the of launch and Establishment Government. National PNG the by CA YUS the of approval Formal governments. Provincial Morobe and District, Yus Kabwum by LLG, endorsement formal with establishment CA in YUS step First agreed. are penalties and Goals, Rules, of set Adraft CA. YUS the for mechanism governance the develop to Village in Isan held Workshop International. Conservation with in partnership KfW through (BMU) Safety Nuclear and Conservation Nature Environment for Ministry Federal the of Initiative Climate International the of framework the within Government German the by Plan Landscape YUS the of development the for support for provided support Financial villages. in coastal assessments needs participatory facilitating and relationships, building resources, Nambis surveying begins TKCP Zone. Landscape YUS 4th the becomes Zone Nambis The initiative. level landscape and CA YUS in the participation their request villages Zone Nambis workshops, these During CA. YUS the of establishment the for support garner to held workshops Community 2nd foothill and conducted. montaneavifauna research work. survey and research ongoing for priorities and identification, and mapping resource for communities by plan agreed an was Outcome Zones. Som and Yopno, Uruwa for Plan Management aResource Yus develop to LLG across held Workshops Foothill and conducted. montaneavifauna research sites. research familiesidentified) 43 in genera 67 from species plant (89 Dendawang and identified) families in 61 101 genera from (156 species plant Wasaunon at conducted composition forest and surveys Biodiversity identified). 115 families in 11996 (> from sites species, genera plants research Tarona and Surim at surveys Biodiversity identified). in 73 families genera 111 from species, 183 (> plant sites research sites Abalgamut and Dendawang at conducted surveys Biodiversity initiative. conservation community-based and building capacity abroader into TKCP of Expansion conservation. for land of parcels pledging begin landowners protection; kangaroo tree for support Community of species distribution, potential habitat and and conservation challenges. research Yus Initial LLG. within sites selected across begins Program Conservation Tree Kangaroo Peninsula Huon andActions outcomes

  International Multilateral Environmental policy Agreements analysis analyses policy LLG and district provincial, sectoral, national, PNG avifauna of survey Distributional YUS 2004) (since research range home Tree Kangaroo YUS Zone,Uruwa linguistics research survey distribution Skink YUS –2,400m) (500m surveys Bat YUS –2,500m) (700m survey beetle Assessment Rapid YUS surveys Bird study feasibility REDD+ and deforestation of Drivers YUS analysis cover land and Vegetation YUS YUS Ecological monitoring research analysis carbon and Tree density YUS research carbon Soil organic YUS research carbon ground Above YUS survey use Wood YUS study Agroforestry YUS study Socio-economic YUS Annexures public release public and release Synthesis, goal and setting planning Community consultation, stage Planning Alpine Grassland Uruwa Zone. Mark Photo: Ziembicki March 2013 March 2013 2012 2011–2012 2011 2011 2011 2011 2011 2010 2010 Timing Production and public release of the YUS Landscape Plan 2012-2015. Plan Landscape YUS the of release public and Production Village. in Bungawat to agreed were that Bylaws CA YUS of Gazettal 2012. Oct and in May meetings during CAMC the by plan landscape the of update further and feedback of Facilitation developed. village pilot each for plans land-use Village guide. activities the within activities permissible of Designation villages. four across workshops Planning 12 Use of Land A series workshops. LUP into goals and targets Landscape YUS of Incorporation Village. in Ronji members, CO YUS with policies government and goals, targets, Landscape YUS of Discussion strategies. Landscape YUS agreed of alignment and analysis policy dialogue, Government feedback. community and CAMC and discussion for framework overall plan landscape the to Introduction goals. and targets landscape of discussion in Yawan Village, and held meeting CAMC First setting. goal and targets, values, Landscape YUS to threats key identify to in Cairns held workshop Success of Foundations CO. YUS the of establishment Formal Bylaws. CA YUS the as gazetted be to CA YUS the for Penalties and Goals Rules, the finalise to Village in Bungawat held workshop planning Management andActions outcomes 87 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Annexures A 88 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN kangaroos such as hunting and forest clearing (Wells forest and clearing hunting as such kangaroos key the on to threats tree information wellcollect as This previously. conducted been had Matschie’s tree kangaroo tree kangaroo. long No term research biological on the research Matschie’s onthe endangered conservation undertake to in area YUS 1996 entered the first researchers TKCP described as a“wildlife as bank”. described was of area one’s for tambu) (or aprotected land hunting portion a aside of setting concept The hunting. for subsistence resource hunters by the to desire the create asustainable and populations of tree kangaroo decline the to discuss Zones Uruwa and inYopno, inSom then villages and insurrounding staff TKCP and leaders local landowners, with were held meetings community Informal pledges. for further support garner and otherresearch, educate landowners andthen this helped clan and Yopnoin the of Yus, Zone forest for set conservation aside clan one Initially biologists. conservation and landowners local between discussions through on early developed area protected recognised internationally to create aformal, decision The (Wells attention conservation and scientific “scientificof unknown” need in and toa be range to Mountain Finisterre the adjacent and Range, Mountain Sarawaget the ofYus area the the straddling LLG considered 1993c) (Beehler Assessment Needs Conservation and Peninsula, to Huon the endemic is Matschie’s tree kangaroo key First, for reasons. two chosen –was Province Morobe District, Yus –the Kabwum site area, for program the LLG The initiative. conservation community-based ecosystem-wide, into abroader expanded soon and ofMatschie’s the tree kangaroo status conservation to the determine astudy as commenced initially project The habitat. natural inits ofspecies the protection to the seek in Peninsula, Huon the on program conservation kangaroo tree the instigated WPZ that context inthis is It preservation. species for endangered –vital insights biology reproductive and genetic valuable offer individuals the addition In America. North across Guinea New Papua for benefit awareness public invaluable provide itself, three Matschie’s tree kangaroos zoo At the Plan. Survival ofSpecies the formulation the led endangered, Huon endemic, Matschie’s tree kangaroo, and of the protection and conservation the with charged globally agency lead the is WPZ Dr. Dabek. Director Lisa Program by in1996 started was USA, inSeattle Zoo Park Woodland at based Program Tree Conservation The Kangaroo program of aEmergence conservation L and background programs acrossYUS of the History 3 Annex a ndscape

g in Annexures lobally endangered. And, second, the 1991 PNG PNG 1991 the second, And, endangered. lobally itial work helped to determine basic population estimates estimates population to basic determine helped work itial

et al. al. et 2013). et al. al. et

o 2013). rder rder Land Use Planning Use mapsLand relationships across the YUS Landscape. YUS the across relationships term long and trust build helped has development education and health supporting through priorities to local Responding centres. health and posts inaid refrigerators solar byestablishing project immunisation an supporting and Department) Health Provincial the and community the by identified need (a for midwives workshops training supporting on was focus The community. YUS the and government provincial the with collaboration in project health acommunity started TKCP 2005 In use maps for each ward are provided here. are ward provided for each maps use in2012. were land completed plans use The land ward pilot Five 4 Annex (Wells LLG the and levels of government higher between linkages toremote facilitate aneed there is areas of case inthe but services, government not replace should An agencies. government Yus provincial and between LLG link direct the strengthen then and gaps fill to initially been has The government. met bythe were that not being services The YUS. across TKCP’s anotherof presence benefit research became assistants for local training capacity Additionally efforts. conservation for support gaining with helped which communities and 11%. remaining entire villages benefitted approach This source and the need to manage harvesting (Wells harvesting to manage need the and source ahunting as of tree kangaroos vulnerability the emphasise to to slow reproduce) years, to one two every offspring one Through resource. asustainable as them harvest huntersthe can disperse young the when and to breed, wildlife other and arefugefor as tree kangaroos serve would area protected The shared information about tree kangaroo reproduction (e.g. reproduction tree kangaroo about information shared also staff TKCP system. hunting asustainable creating was area One missionised. were clans the after abandoned been had practice this although past, inthe areas tambu of culturally-based practice a similar c Yus the and TKCP each where LLG basis the co-funding a on are provided scholarships The for teachers. current workshops training teacher and students for YUS scholarships training teacher providing in1998 started then project education community sponsored ATKCP of teachers. to due alack closed were villages the in Manyschools services. education on first Yus fromthe focused and came LLG who time atthe District the from of Parliament Member wellthe as Yus leaders from guidance took researchers years, size early inthe of TKCP small the Given health. and were education about concerned The needs. community and toenvironmental both responding through conservation fostered community-based TKCP needs community Addressing o ntribute 44.5% of the fees, and the parents provide the the provide parents the and offees, the 44.5% ntribute

p rincipal services that the YUS communities were communities YUS the that services rincipal

t hese discussions it became clear that there had been been there had that clear became it discussions hese

c

o ommunity approach was to address LLG-level LLG-level to was address approach ommunity f the motivating factors for the protected for protected the factors motivating f the

et al. al. et et al. al. et 2013). 2013).

o g

N nly nly oal oal GO GO Annexures Map 10: Yawan – Ward Land Use Plan Use Land –Ward Yawan 10: Map 89 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Annexures A 90 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Map 11: Ronji – Ward Land Use Plan Use Land –Ward 11: Ronji Map Annexures Annexures Map 12: Gogiok – Ward Land Use Plan Use Land –Ward Gogiok 12: Map 91 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Annexures A 92 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Map 13: Kumbul – Ward Land Use Plan Use Land –Ward Kumbul 13: Map Annexures Annexures Map 14: Mengan – Ward Land Use Plan Use Land –Ward Mengan 14: Map 93 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Annexures A 94 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Ecosystems, flora and fauna of conservation significance faunaand flora of conservation Ecosystems, Source: (ISSG 2011; Beehler 2012; Birdlife 2012) 2011; 2012; Birdlife (ISSG Beehler Source: Annex Table Species 2: endemic to the Huon Peninsula 5 Annex Family Paradisaeidae Paradisaeidae Ptilonorhynchidae Meliphagidae Meliphagidae Meliphagidae Zosteropidae Zosteropidae Dicaeidae Dicaeidae Dicaeidae Pachycephalidae Pachycephalidae Pachycephalidae Eopsaltriidae Eopsaltriidae Orthonychidae Turdidae Alcedinidae Psittacidae Psittacidae Psittacidae endemicSub-species to Huon Peninsula Paradisaeidae Endemic to Huon Ranges and Mountain Adelbert Ptilonorhynchidae Paradisaeidae Paradisaeidae Meliphagidae Meliphagidae Macropodidae Endemic to Huon Peninsula Annexures

Lophorina superb latipennis superb geisleri Lophorina albertisi astigmaticus Drepanornis melanotis cahni Ailuroedus torquatus lucifer Melidectes ochromelas Melidectes fuscicapilla fulvigula oreophila Timeliopsis novaeguineae Zosterops gregaria atrifrons septentrionalis Zosterops poliopterus Toxorhamphus brevicauda montium chrysocome Paramythia striativentris Melanocharis harterti nigrescens madaraszi Pitohui megarhyncha lochmia Colluricincla rufinucha saruwagedi Aleadryas sigillatus harterti Peneothello nigripectus par Machaerirhynchus castanonota Ptilorrhoa keysseri poliocephalus Turdus sellamontis megarhyncha huonensis Syma madaraszi Psittacella harterti brehmii Psittacella wahnesi papou Charmosyna wahnesi Parotia macgregoriae Amblyornis guilielmi Paradisaea rothschildi Astrapia ater Melipotes foersteri Melidectes matschiei Dendrolagus Latin /scientific name Madarasz's Tiger-Parrot Madarasz's Brehm's Tiger-Parrot Papuan Lorikeet Wahne’s Parotia Huon Bowerbird Paradise of Bird Emperor Huon Astrapia Spangled Honeyeater Melidectes Huon Huon, Matschie’s Tree Kangaroo Superb Bird of Paradise of Bird Superb Sicklebill Buff-Tailed Spotted Catbird Melidectes Ornate Cinnamon-Browed Melidectes Straightbill Olive White-Eye Guinea New Black-fronted White-Eye Longbill Slaty-Chinned Berrypecker Crested Berrypecker Streaked Black Pitohui Shrike-Thrush Little Whistler Rufous-Naped Robin White-Winged Black-Breasted Boatbill Chestnut-backed Jewel-Babbler Island Thrush Kingfisher Mountain English name Annexures Annex Table 3: Status of fauna of conservation concern across YUS across concern conservation of fauna of Status Table 3: Annex Considered to be facing a very high risk of extinction in the wild (EN), as best available evidence indicates that: that: indicates evidence available (EN), wild best as in the extinction of risk high avery facing be to Considered future. near in the category athreatened for qualify for, to is likely or qualifying to is close now, but Vulnerable or Endangered Endangered, Critically for qualify not Does that: indicates evidence available best (CR), as wild in the extinction of risk high extremely an facing be to Considered near in the category athreatened for qualify for, to is likely or qualifying to is close now, but Vulnerable or Endangered Endangered, Critically for qualify not Does that: indicates evidence available best as (VU), wild in the extinction of risk ahigh facing be to Considered that: indicates evidence available best as (VU), wild in the extinction of risk ahigh facing be to Considered near in the category athreatened for qualify for, to is likely or qualifying to is close now, but Vulnerable or Endangered Endangered, Critically for qualify not Does that: indicates evidence available best as (VU), wild in the extinction of risk ahigh facing be to Considered future. near in the category athreatened for qualify for, to is likely or qualifying to is close now, but Vulnerable or Endangered Endangered, Critically for qualify not Does Psittrichas fulgidus Psittrichas saturata Scolopax novaeguineae Harpyopsis bennetti Casuarius Latin / scientific name Dendrolagus matschiei Dendrolagus albopunctatus Dasyurus bruijni Zaglossus guilielmi Paradisaea wahnesi Parotia

or its causes may not have ceased OR may not be understood OR may not be reversible (A2), based on any of the following: the of any on based (A2), reversible be not may OR understood be not may OR ceased have not may causes its or (a(i)) individuals mature 1,000 than more contain subpopulations No (2) individuals mature of in numbers decline is acontinuing There (C) individuals mature 10,000 than fewer number to is estimated size Population following: the of any on 4), and based (A2,3 reversible be not may OR understood be not may OR ceased have not may causes its or ≥ of reduction population projected or inferred estimated, observed, an been has There (a(ii)) subpopulation in one are individuals  Allmature (2) individuals mature of in numbers inferred, or projected, observed, decline, is continuing  There (C) individuals mature 10,000 than fewer number to is estimated size  Population At least 95% of mature individuals are in one subpopulation (a(ii)) subpopulation in one are individuals mature of 95% At least (2) individuals mature of in numbers decline is acontinuing There (C) individuals mature 2,500 than fewer number to is estimated size Population ≥ of reduction population suspected or inferred estimated, observed, an been has There

f f

actual or potential levels of exploitation (d) exploitation of levels potential or  actual (c) habitat of quality and/or occurrence of extent occupancy, of in area  adecline (d) exploitation of levels potential or  actual (c) habitat of quality and/or occurrence of extent occupancy, of in area  adecline direct observation (a) observation  direct (b) taxon the to appropriate abundance of index  an uture. uture. Matschie’s Tree Kangaroo* Matschie’s Quoll Guinea New Echidna Long-Beaked Western Paradise* of Bird Emperor Wahne’s Parotia# Parrot Vulturine Woodcock Javan Eagle Harpy Guinea New Cassowary Dwarf English name 3 8 0% over the last 10 years or three generations, where the reduction reduction the where generations, three or 10 years last the 0% over 0% over the last 10 years or three generations, where the reduction reduction the where generations, three or 10 years last the 0% over ENC2a(ii) Near Threatened CRA2acd Near Threatened VUC2a(i) VUA2bcd+3bcd+4bcd Near Threatened VUC2a(ii) Near Threatened IUCN Status 95 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Annexures A 96 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Annex Table 4: Matschie’s Tree Kangaroo TreeKangaroo Matschie’s Table 4: Annex 2012) 2012; Ziembicki 2012; Inkster 2011; 2012; Birdlife (ISSG Beehler Source: Ranges Mountain Adelbert and Peninsula Huon to both #–endemic Peninsula; to Huon *–endemic Notes: McGreevy McGreevy near in the category athreatened for qualify for, to is likely or qualifying to is close now, but Vulnerable or Endangered Endangered, Critically for qualify not Does Considered to be facing a very high risk of extinction in the wild (EN), as best available evidence indicates that: that: indicates evidence available (EN), wild best as in the extinction of risk high avery facing be to Considered that: indicates evidence available best as (VU), wild in the extinction of risk ahigh facing be to Considered McNab, B.K. (McNab 1988) (McNab B.K. McNab, Principal / researchers authors rufilatus Paraleptomys browni Thylogale vanheurni Dorcopsulus Latin / scientific name Porolak, G. (2012, current Doctoral research) Doctoral (2012, G. current Porolak, al. et (Porolak G. Porolak, al. et (Travis Travis, E.K. al. T.J.Jr., L., et Dabek, McGreevy, al. et Y. R., &Wang, (Stabach L., Jensen, Q. Dabek, J.A., Stabach, 2008) &Harder (North &Harder, J.D L.A. North, 2008) (Porolak G. Porolak, (Ancrenaz L., &O’Neil, S. M., Dabek, Ancrenaz, 2006), &Dabek (Ross L. T.Ross, &Dabek, 2003) (Pugh J.A. Pugh, 2005), (Stabach J.A. Stabach, Betz, W. (Betz 2001) Betz, W. (Betz 2001) Betz, W. (Betz 2001) Montali, R.J. et al (Iwaniuk A.N. Iwaniuk, 1998) &Betz (Dabek L. Dabek, 1994) (Dabek L. Dabek, et al. 1994) (Burns D.L. Burns,

Continuing decline, observed, inferred or projected (b), following: in the projected or inferred observed, decline, Continuing (a) locations five than more no at exist to known or fragmented is severely Population 5,000km2 than less be to is estimated occurrence) of (extent range Geographic on: based (A2), reversible be not may OR understood be not may OR ceased have not may causes its or ≥ of reduction population suspected or inferred estimated, observed, an been has There

f

Annexures number of mature individuals (v) individuals mature of  number (iii) habitat of quality and/or extent  area, (d) exploitation of levels potential or  actual uture. et al. 2007) et al. et et al et 2010a) (Montali 2012) in review) in et al. 1998) et al. 1998) et al. et McGreevy al. et 2009; (McGreevy Small Dorcopsis Northern Water Rat Water Northern Brown’s Pademelon, New Guinea Pademelon English name (Dendrolagus Matschiei) Matschiei) (Dendrolagus 2009) 2010b; 2010b; research Research field Research food plants hunting pressures distribution and home range assessment health population genetics conservation for type forest dominant reproductive biology habitat and size range and participation community conservation habitat identification usingsensingremote history cultural and status conservation population estimation density immunosuppressive disorders and mycobacterial infections limb movement and dexterity manual species conservation behaviour and biology reproductive infections cobacterial mycobacterial of treatment conservation energy 3 0% over the last 10 years or three generations, where the reduction reduction the where generations, three or 10 years last the 0% over Near Threatened ENB1ab(iii,v) VUA2d IUCN Status Annexures Zoning Livelihoods and Village inthe take place should anyas new developments expansion, to due village not decrease also should area Use serves bank, wildlife the as CA the as not decrease also should range and numbers Wildlife cut. one each with planted be will trees as decrease not ofzone should zone, area the this the within allowed are forest products timber, collecting and cutting clearing, hunting, including activities many While trapping. and hunting animal and species, invasive fire, from clearing, forest impacts human to damaging ofCA the ofedges the exposure the of zoneto is this reduce purpose The areas. livelihoods and village the and CA the between abuffer as zone acts The for Use Zone Forest areas. current andgrassland livelihoods within designated new areas well, or as increase may zones As for Zone. Use Forest the and Area Conservation the within forest areas clear to and cut for people need the reduces and fuel, and for construction of wood source alternative an provides areas inthese grown wood and timber for The use. trees growing and of planting purpose for explicit the land of designation the is Zone ofReforestation the purpose The Zone Reforestation over time. habitat forest wildlife and to grow back should area this then types, of vegetation other up made is area conservation the over Where time. same the remain should area this then grassland, forest alpine or natural of up made is area conservation the Where of ecosystems. the size and health the reduce or destroy might that of activity kind any or gardening, and clearing, to of hunting, any limits kind off This there. wildlife and ecosystems natural the conserve to is and protect Area ofConservation the purpose The Area Conservation 6 Annex

c

ommunity populations growsize the ofreforestation the populations ommunity in cludes both forestreef. are and both areas therefore cludes These

Z ones.

t o replenish those stocks. Forest for for Forest stocks. those o replenish therefore no large ships or boats can pass over this zone. over zone. this pass can boats or therefore ships large no and ecosystems are sensitive These resources. marine collect and fish can people where are aplace and sustenance, and needs local to reefs are sustain used These scope. Landscape YUS the of area reefs the is along Zone Reef The Zone Reef andtransport. resources, passage to marine have access communities to is local ensureZone that All of reefs. water outside open the is Zone Marine The Marine Zone traps. setting and kunai lighting zone are inthis not permitted key The activities construction. or service any village other and airstrips and churches, schools, stores, for houses, place the principally is Zone Village The Zone Village use. local for sufficient is grassland however will area have to of area ensure remaining grassland in decrease Any are established. (e.g. coffee) plots livelihoods new or use, for local are established plots reforestation as over time decrease zone may size of ofarea grassland the actual The Zone. Grassland inthe are allowed construction, and services except for village-based activities, all Importantly (of, hunting and for burning land and pit pit and of kunai source asustainable to is provide Zone ofGrassland the purpose The Grassland Zone avoided. for Zone Use Forest into the encroachment any zone, incremental inthis and occur should of livelihoods intensification or growth forest Any area. of aminority with and disturbed or cleared already typically however for Zone, Use zone tois this Forest are the similar trapping) and hunting wood, cutting forest products, collecting (such as activities small-scale of Many the permitted activities. processing or any livelihoods other or husbandry, animal of gardening, expansion the for and current space provide to is Zone Agroforestry and ofLivelihoods the purpose The Zone Livelihoods and Agroforestry

a f ctivities are permitted in this Zone. The purpose of this of this purpose The Zone. inthis are permitted ctivities or example wild pigs) for local collection and use. use. and collection for local pigs) wild example or 97 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Annexures A 98 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN “*”, the expected outcomes of the Strategy or Program will: exceed the basic guideline/requirement of the article/action; or is a pilot/has no precedent in PNG, and could replication. could and national for PNG, in amodel as serve precedent no apilot/has is or article/action; the of guideline/requirement basic the exceed will: Program or Strategy the of outcomes “*”, expected the it where: obligation represents and/or component international ofa with is to an emphasised nationalmeetsa Where therequirement. basic article/action, guideline/requirement of an article/action the specific contribute or to align considered is Program or AStrategy Sustainability; Environmental –Ensure #7 Migratory of MDG Animals; Wild of Conservation the on Species –Convention CMS Species; Endangered Trade in International on –Convention CITES Diversity; Biological on –Convention CBD Notes: obligations environmental international PNG’s with Programs and Strategies of Alignment Table 5: Annex policies and and plans building on existing with Aligning 7 Annex S2.5: S2.5: S3.1: S3.1: use and livelihoods Strategy 3: Sustainable resource S2.7: S2.6: S2.4: S2.4: S4.1: S4.1: and healthyfamilies services Community 4: Strategy S3.2: S2.3: S4.2: S4.2: S2.2: S2.1: management and landscaperesource inform to Research 2: Strategy S1.7: S1.6: S4.3: S4.3: S1.5: S1.4: S1.3: S1.2: S1.1: S1.8: Strategy 1: YUS CA management CA 1: YUS Strategy Programs and Strategy Landscape YUS agreement convention/ International Annexures Climate change Climate YUS Rangers Invasive species Invasive Research collaboration Land-use planning Land-use Developing leadership Developing Ecological monitoring Fire management Sig  Reporting Enforcement Ecosystem resilience Marine and aquatic systems Sustainability Social /anthropology Social Ecosystems Hunted species Environmental services Li Responding to local needs local to Responding velihoods – quality and markets and –quality velihoods nage, mapping and awareness and mapping nage,

PNRESP Article 14* 14* 14 14 14 14 Appendix CITES I &II I &II I &II I &II I &II I &II I &II I8*, 17, 26 I &II I &II I7*, 13, 14*, 18 I &II 12, 13*, 17, 21 20, 8, 10,8, 11, 21 20, 6*, 7*, 8*, 13, 13, 8*, 7*, 6*, 12, 14, 17, 18, 17, 14, 18, 12, 18, 20, 21 20, 18, 12, 17, 18 20*, 21* 20*, 8, 10, 11 10, 8, 8, 10,8, 14 Article 20, 21 20, 7*, 10 7*, 8*, 13 8*, 8*, 13 8*, CBD 8, 13 8, 8, 11 8, 8* 8 7 7 8 1.1.4, 2.1.2, 4.1.2, 4.1.2, 2.1.2, 1.1.4, CBD Article 8: 8: Article CBD 1.2.1, 3.1.2 1.2.1, 1.2.1, 3.1.6 1.2.1, POWPA Activity 3.1.2 4.2.1 3.1.6 1.1.1 1.2.1 1.1.5 1.1.5 1.1.5 1.1.5 3.1.1 Appendix CMS I &II I &II I &II I &II I &II I &II I &II I &II I &II I &II MDG #7 MDG Target 12*, 13 12*, 12, 13 12, 12 12 12 13 12 12 12 12 12 Annexures Goals and Deliverables (2011-2015) Plan Term Development Medium PNG applicable with Programs and Strategies of Alignment Table 6: Annex S1.1: S1.2: S1.2: S1.3: S1.3: management CA 1: YUS Strategy S1.4: and Programs YUS Landscape Strategy S1.6: S1.6: S1.5: National Goal National S1.7: S1.7: S2.6: S2.6: S2.5: S2.4: S2.3: S2.2: S2.1: management and landscaperesource inform to Research 2: Strategy S1.8: S2.7: S2.7: YUS Rangers Ecological monitoring Invasive species Invasive Research collaboration Fire management awareness Sig  Reporting Enforcement Ecosystem resilience Climate change Climate Marine and aquatic systems Sustainability Social /anthropology Social Hunted species Ecosystems nage, mapping and and mapping nage,

D Goal e 3.3 v. # v. Health Dev. # Dev. Goal 3.4 School Education Dev. # Dev. # Dev. # Dev. # Dev. # Dev. # Dev. # Dev. # Dev. # Dev. # Dev. # Dev. # Dev. # Dev. # Dev. # Dev. # Dev. # Dev. # Dev. # Dev. # Dev. # Dev. Goal 3.6 2.1 2.1 Adult Education Goal 3.7 8 2 2 2 8 8 2 2 8 8 2 2 Research Goal Rural Development 3.14 Goal 4.1 4.4 Agriculture Goal

Fisheries 4.2 4 Goal 6, 8 6,

Forestry 4.3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 9

Environment Goal 4.4, 4.4, 4.1, 4.1, 3.1, 3.1, 4.4, 4.4, 4.4, 1.6, 1.6, 1.6, 1.6, 1.6, 1.6, 1.6, 1.6, 1.6, 1.3, 1.3, 1.6, 1.6, 1.6, 1.6, 4.1, 4.1, 4.1, 4.1, 3.1, 3.1, 4.1, 4.1, 4.1, 4.1, 4.1, 4.1, 4.1, 4.4 5.6 4.5 4.5 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 1.3 4.1 4.1 4.1

Climate Change Goal 1.2 5.7 4.4 4.4

1.2, 1.3 1.2, Governance Goal 5.9

Partnerships 6.2.3, 6.2.3, 6.2.5 6.2.5 Goal 6.2.5 6.2

Alignment Goal 6.3 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 99 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Annexures A 100 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN and/or represents a component of a wider national requirement, for which the province could report on. report could province the which for requirement, national awider of article/action, a component specific represents the of and/or guideline/requirement basic the meets it where: Goal to anational contribute or to align considered is Program or AStrategy to Goal Alignment. 6.3: contributing also therefore is program the goal, national one least at with aligning to programs due that highlights this noted, *–Where Dev. =Deliverable; Notes: resource use and livelihoodsresource Strategy 3: Sustainable Services and Families Healthy Services Strategy 4: Community and Programs YUS Landscape Strategy Goal National S4.3: S4.1: S3.2: S3.1: S4.2: Land-use planning Land-use Developing leadership Developing Annexures Responding to local needs local to Responding Environmental services markets Li velihoods – quality and and –quality velihoods

D Goal 1.3, 1.3, 1.2, 1.2, 5.1, 5.1, 4.1, 4.1, e 2.1, 2.1, 3.3 5.2 v. # v. Health Dev. # Dev. 2.6, 4 2.6, Goal 2.5, 2.5, 1.5, 1.5, 3.4 School Education Dev. # Dev. # Dev. # Dev. # Dev. # Dev. # Dev. # Dev. # Dev. # Dev. # Dev. # Dev. # Dev. # Dev. # Dev. # Dev. # Dev. # Dev. # Dev. # Dev. # Dev. # Dev. Goal 3.6 2.1 2.1 2.1 Adult Education Goal 3.7

8 8 Research Goal 3.14 3, 5 3, 8 8 8 1 Rural Development Goal 4.6, 4.6, 4.2, 4.2, 4.1, 4.1, 4.1 7.2 Agriculture Goal

Fisheries 4.2 4 Goal

Forestry 4.3 6.8 8

Environment Goal 4.5, 4.5, 1.2, 1.2, 1.3, 1.3, 1.6, 1.6, 4.5, 4.5, 2.1, 2.1, 1.3, 1.3, 1.6, 1.6, 1.2, 1.2, 3.1, 3.1, 2.1, 2.1, 5.6 5.7 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.7

Climate Change Goal 5.7 4.4

1.2, 1.3 1.2, Governance Goal 5.9

Partnerships 6.2.4, 6.2.4, 6.2.5 Goal 6.2.5 6.2

Alignment Goal 6.3 * * * * * * Annexures

Annex 8 come together at a consultative meeting to develop specific Planning processes, and the role of government priorities and actions that align with and contribute to provincial representatives and administrators related and national policy frameworks to achieve national development goals. Ward development plans are synthesised into a five year to the YUS Landscape LLG development plan, while LLG plans within a given district are synthesized into a five year district development plan. Planning processes District plans are in turn synthesised into provincial plans and so Broadly, planning in PNG follows a three-step process. First the on. The completion of a five year development plan ensures that highest levels of government set the national agenda (as is a given administrative unit receives their proposed allocation from currently done through The Vision 2050 and in accord with the national development budget. any international obligations), and passes down to provincial The third and final stage of planning is the synthesis of all governments the architecture, or the policy framework, for provincial plans – complete with priorities and actions specific to national development goals, as well as the indicators to be used to measure achievement. From here, provincial governments each locality – into national plans, and the allocation of budgets. adapt the national framework to their contexts and similarly pass their strategic direction and long term targets down to the district, Roles and responsibilities of representatives and regional LLG and ward level administrations. administrators The second stage of the process begins at the ward level where The roles of the key representatives present on the CAMC or every five years the ward counsellors, along with LLG managers, linked to the CAMC are summarised in the table below.

Annex Table 7: Government functions with potential implications for the YUS Landscape The Department of Minister DEC has power to approve or disapprove a YUS Landscape Plan; Conservation and Minister DEC has power of approval or veto to all major forestry development projects. The Minister is a foundational Environment (DEC) member of the National Forest Board. With regard to timber extraction, no actual development will take place until the Minister DEC has approved an environment plan; DEC Secretary is the focal point for the ‘Rio Conventions’; and DEC Secretary is Chair of the MDG 7 Technical Committee. Secretary DEC supports coordination with other government agencies relevant to MDG 7 guides DEC, the implementing agency. As the implementing agency, DEC has primary responsibility in managing organisational, policy and technical assessments to inform the MDG 7 implementation strategy. Provincial Government and Provincial Administrator (PA) has responsibility for the effective implementation of provincial five year development plans; Administrators PA is supported by Deputy Provincial Administrators, who are in turn supported by Program Advisors who coordinate implementation of development objectives in each district and LLG; Joint Provincial Planning and Budget Priority Committee (JPP&BPC) overseas and coordinates all provincial budgeting processes; and Regarding forestry, provinces may make laws on: Land and land development including provincial titles and leases; Forestry and agro-forestry; Renewable and non-renewable natural resources; and Parks, reserves, gardens, scenic and scientific centres. Provincial Department of Advocacy for local communities with regards to extractive and natural resource-based industries; and Mining, Natural Resources Assessment of and approval of exploration and prospecting leases. and Environment District Government / District program coordinators are directly responsible for the implementation of provincial development objectives through Administrators district projects and activities; District Administrator monitors implementation of provincial plans at the district and LLG level, and reports directly to the Deputy Provincial Administrator – District Affairs; and At the district level a Joint District Planning and Budget Priority Committee (JDP&BPC) exists in all nine districts of Morobe Province. This committee oversees and coordinates the planning and budgetary process for all districts and LLGs to ensure funding and implementation are in line with the district and LLG development plans and priorities. Local Level Government LLG are responsible for community development. The LLG Manager plays the key role in overseeing the implementation of five year plans, data collection and reporting to Annexures the District Administrator. LLG Managers have Project Officers assigned to work closely with Ward Counsellors; Regarding forestry, LLGs have power to make laws on: Dispute settlement; Local environment; Domestic animals, flora and fauna; Protection of traditional sacred sites; and the imposition of fines for breaches of any of its laws; and LLGs have implicit veto under the Forestry Act when it comes to the acquisition and allocation of resources, where they have not been consulted of the province’s intentions to enter into an FMA. YUS LANDSCAPE PLANYUS 101 L 102 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN CI (2011). May – September 2011 YUS Elevational Transect. C. I. YUS Conservation Program. (2011).CI Conservation 2011 Transect. YUS I. –September Elevational C. May YUS and Coastal Literature of Review Scientific Summary: Executive Synthesis Ocean Pacific (2009). Solutions forCenter Ocean Tropical ofMoist the Growth and Regeneration Study: Volume Growth and Guinea New T. and Papua (1993). L. Vigus A. Cameron, inthe Services Ecosystem for System Mapping F. Information Environmental Butler, An Schroers, J., R. Tron D. (2009). and Metcalfe Beehler, B. M. (1993b). Chapter 15: Biodiversity and Conservation of the Warm-Blooded Vertebrates of Papua New Guinea. Guinea. New of Papua Vertebrates ofWarm-Blooded the Conservation and 15: Chapter Beehler, (1993b). Biodiversity M. B. Beehler, B. M. (1993a). Chapter 11: Mapping PNG’s Biodiversity. Papua New Guinea Conservation Needs Assessment. Volume 2 Assessment. Needs Conservation 11: Chapter Guinea New Beehler, (1993a). M. B. Papua Biodiversity. PNG’s Mapping 2012]. Feb 10th communication: Tables:Beehler, (2012). [Personal B. Huon BirdDistributional inbiodiversity communities for arole local of exclusion: costs Recognizing “The (2007). O’Neil S. and Dabek L. M., Ancrenaz, 2012. January 23rd D.Agate, (2012). communication, Personal Guinea. New Papua State of Independent Counsel. Legislative of Office Act. Areas (1978). Conservation Moresby. Port Counsel. Legislative of Office Guinea]. New [Papua Guinea New of State Papua ofIndependent the (1975). Constitution Literature Cited Burns, D. L., R. S. Wallace and J. A. Teare (1994). “Successful treatment of mycobacterial osteomyelitis in a matschies tree kangaroo tree kangaroo in amatschies osteomyelitis of Teare mycobacterial treatment “Successful J.A. and (1994). Wallace S. D. R. L., Burns, Reefs, to Coral World’s the of Threats Indicator AMap-Based atRisk: Reefs (1998). Spalding M. and D., Burke, J.McManus L. Bryant, Zoo’s Park Tree Conservation Woodland Kangaroo Landscape, (2012). ofYUS deforestation: Drivers Ramachandra A. and A. Brooks, Pacific, inthe Ecosystems and for Species (2011). Options A. 1:Brooks, Adaptation Number Change Climate Paper Background Birdlife (2012). Zone.” “Birdlife Data 31st Retrieved 2012, March fromhttp://www.birdlife.org/datazone/home New inPapua sector offorestry the past? fromthe Ahistory learnt be F. Wells, can A. N., What TuriaBird, v. R. and (2007b). Helden New Papua Guinea: New inPapua for forest the sector F. Wells, A. N., TuriaBird, opportunities v. R. and and Issues (2007a). Helden Volume 2 Assessment. Needs Conservation Guinea New Papua Beehler, (1993c). Ed. M., B. Betz, W. (2001). Matschie’s tree kangaroo (Marsupialia: Macropodidae, Dendrolagus matschiei) in Papua New Guinea: Estimates Estimates Guinea: New inPapua matschiei) Dendrolagus Macropodidae, (Marsupialia: W. (2001). Matschie’sBetz, tree kangaroo Literature Cited University, California. Stanford for Environment, the Institute Woods The Solutions, for Center Ocean The Solutions, and Impacts, Threats, Ocean Canberra. CSIRO, Ecology, and of Wildlife Division Bank, for World the prepared Report for Future Harvest, Implications the and Guinea New inPapua Forests International. Conservation Report, Draft Nord Province Massif, Panié Mont Papua New Guinea Conservation Needs Assessment. Volume B 2, Assessment. Needs Conservation Guinea New Papua pp. D.C. 434 Washington, Program, Support Biodiversity conservation.” (Dendrolagus-Matschiei).” 56. of Columbia: District Washington, Institute, Resources World International. Conservation with inpartnership Program, Samoa. Apia, (SPREP), Program Environment Regional Pacific South and International, Conservation London. (ODI), Institute 1, Development Studies Forest Overseas Guinea New Papua Guinea: London. (ODI), Institute Development Overseas 3, Studies Forest Guinea Masters 152 pp. of Southampton. history, University natural and plants of food accounts landowner and density of population pp. D.C. 434 Washington,

t hesis Biol PLoS . 5(11): e289 5(11): Medicine Wildlife and of Zoo Journal . (doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0050289). 25 (2): 274-280. (2): i odiversity Support Program, Washington, D.C. 434 pp. D.C. 434 Washington, Program, Support odiversity , Biodiversity Support Program, Program, , Support Biodiversity .

, Literature Cited CITES (2012). “Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species: Species Database.” 31st Retrieved Species 2012, (2012). March Trade Species: “Convention International on CITES inEndangered Gillison, A. N. (1969). “Plant Succession in an Irregularly Fired Grassland Area – Doma Peaks Region, Papua.” Journal of Ecology Papua.” Region, Journal Peaks –Doma Area Grassland Fired Irregularly inan Succession “Plant (1969). N. A. Gillison, Landscape, (2011). Kuna Conservation K. and Quenzer for YUS M. the Mapping Vegetation Hopkinson, R. D.,Gillieson, J.Silverman, Peninsula, ofHuon the ofmountains the survey (2012). Tomassi S. Beehler B. and “Ornithological J.Mandeville, Class, B., A. Freeman, Risk. At Ecosystems Islands Pacific 2003. PIER, Service. Forest USDA sheet. fact aduncum Piper (2003). J.K. Francis, Cinner, J. E. and T. R. McClanahan (2006). “Socioeconomic factors that lead to overfishing in small-scale coral reef fisheries of Papua Papua of fisheries reef coral small-scale in to overfishing lead that factors “Socioeconomic (2006). Cinner, T. and J.E. McClanahan R. C G Guinea.” New inPapua forest and degradation “Deforestation (2009). Mcalpine J.R. and J.Allen B. Filer, J.Keenan, R. C., Hanson, L. W., B. J. Allen, R. M. Bourke and T. J. McCarthy (2001). Papua New Guinea Rural Development Handbook, The Australian Australian The Handbook, Development Rural Guinea New (2001). Papua T. and Bourke M. R. W., J.McCarthy L. J.Allen, B. Hanson, Coral ,TNC Version 5.0. Seascapes. Functional and Triangle, Ecoregions Coral its the Delineating P. and L. A. Green, (2008). J.Mous (2010). Eds. Sekhran, N. and T. Sandwith MacKinnon, K. Lopoukhine, Belokurov, N. Krueger, L. Stolton,Dudley, A. S. N., Monitoring and Planning 2011–2015, Term of National Plan, Medium Development Guinea New Department (2010). Papua DNPM of Environment and Department Diversity. Biological on to Convention the Report National Guinea’s New Fourth (2010). Papua DEC of Environment and Department Areas, Protected on of Work Programme CBD the on Action Country Supporting (2009). DEC update Guinea.” species New inPapua Endangered “Tree conservation W. (1998). and Betz L. kangaroo Dabek, of University matschiei, Dendrolagus Matschie’s female tree kangaroos of captive behavior and biology Reproductive (1994). L. Dabek, C Inkster, 14th T. 2012]. communication: Feb [Personal (2012). of YUS Chiroptera: Bats Conservation, Community Guinea, New inPapua Law to Environmental Relevant Handbook ALandowner’s (2005). H. R. Horwich, Adaptation: Change Climate (2011).and James Ecosystems R. Biodiversity, and Island Rao N. T., J.Atherton, Pacific Hills, Brooks, A. MS (2012). “Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS).” 2012, Animals 5th June Retrieved of Wild Species of Migratory (2012).MS Conservation “Convention the on orlett, R. T. (1987). “Post-Fire Succession on Mt. Wilhelm, Papua New Guinea.” New Papua Biotropica Wilhelm, Mt. on T. Succession R. “Post-Fire (1987). orlett, lobal Witness (2009). Vested Interests Industrial logging and carbon in tropical forests, A Report by Global Witness, Global Witness Witness Global Witness, byGlobal AReport forests, intropical carbon and logging Vested Interests Industrial (2009). Witness lobal A Guinea.” New Papua British Club Ornithologists’ Guinea.”New Conservation Environmental Ann. For. Ann. Sci. 57 York, New and USA. DC Washington Switzerland, Gland, WWF, and Natural Solutions: Protected areas helping people cope with climate change, I change, climate with cope people helping areas Protected Solutions: Natural from Triangle Program Report 1/08. 44 pp. 44 1/08. Report Triangle Program Ltd., London. Moresby. Port Guinea, New of Papua Government (DNPM), Moresby. Port (DEC), Conservation Guinea. New Moresby, Papua Port (DEC), Conservation Washington. from from Gay Mills, USA. Mills, Gay Samoa. Apia, (SPREP) Program Environment Regional Pacific Nature’s on South Building Resilience, University,National Canberra.

r ( eport by James Cook University (JCU), Cairns for Conservation International and KfW Entwicklungsbank. KfW and International for Conservation Cairns (JCU), University Cook byJames eport 2): 415-428. 2): www h ttp://www.cites.org/eng/resources/species.html .cms.int Ph.D. dissertation thesis Ph.D. dissertation 66 ( 8 ): 813. ): . . 33 (01): 73-80. (01): 133 (1). . U CN-WCPA, TNC, UNDP, WCS, The World Bank Bank World The UNDP, WCS, TNC, CN-WCPA,

19 (2): 157-160. (2): 15 (6): 114. (6):

103 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Literature Cited L 104 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN McGreevy, T.McGreevy, J., T. Jr., and Dabek marsupial L. P. three sympatric among “A (2010b). to distinguish assay Husband PCR multiplex T.McGreevy, inthe J., T. Jr., and Dabek Analysis L. P. Mendelian and Development (2010a). Marker “Microsatellite Husband Matschie’s tree wild and incaptive T. and “Genetic diversity P. T.McGreevy, (2009). Gomez-Chiarri M. J., Jr., Husband Dabek, L. and of Volume Agriculture 1, Strategies, and Policies Ministry 2007-2016: Plan Development Agriculture National (2007). MAL to Vulnerabilities and Responses Forest (2009). Sohngen B. and Percy K. Loehle, C. Thompson, I. D. Ayres, Karnosky, M. Lucier, A., Gwaibo R. and Kula G. J.Sabi, Singadan, R. J.Michael, Allison, A. Sheppard, S. Saxon, E. Peterson, N. Game, E. G., Lipsett-Moore, V.J.P. (2010). Leadley, P., J.Walpole Proenca, M. J.F. and Alkemade, W. R. Pereira, Scharlemann M. H. Fernandez-Manjarres, strategies. and goals development term long and 2008-2012, Plan Developemnt Electorate: District Open Kabwum (2008). KDA J of food manipulation and grasping “Reaching, (1998). Whishaw Q. I. and Pellis M. T. S. Nelson, J.E. N., Ivanco, L. A. Iwaniuk, Gland.” (ISSG), Group Specialist Species Invasive IUCN/SSC Aduncum. Piper Database: Species Invasive “Global (2005). ISSG IUCN Version (2011).2011.2.” I. Species. ofISSG, Threatened List 2012, Red March “IUCN fromwww.iucnredlist.org 20th Retrieved MPG (2008a). Five Year Development Plan 2008 – 2012: Volume Two Development Strategies. Division of Policy, Planning, Research –2012: Research of Policy, Volume Two Planning, Division Year 2008 Five Strategies. Plan Development Development (2008a). MPG Guinea. New Papua Province, Morobe Lae, Government, Provincial –2010, Morobe 2005 Plan Action Population (2005). MPG Worley, Maslow, M. J.N. T. “Primary and F. (1998). Holland, Phillips M. M. S. Witebsky Cromie, G. R. Bush, J., M. R. Montali, (ailurus-fulgens).” panda red the and (dendrolagus-matschiei) inatree-kangaroo “Energy-conservation (1988). K. B. McNab, and Guinea.”New Research on Drought Mountain Papua Rainforestof in Vegetation Influence Tropical “The J.(1989). R. Johns, 16th 2012. January (2012). communication, R. Personal Jensen, anishevski, L. and S. B. Gidda (2010). Protected Areas and Climate Change, Biodiversity and Climate Change: Issue Paper No. 6, 6, No. Paper Issue Change: Climate and Biodiversity Change, Climate and Areas (2010). Protected Gidda B. S. and L. anishevski, Literature Cited matschiei).” of Heredity Matschie’s Tree Journal (Dendrolagus Kangaroo sequences.” region control mtDNA on based Guinea, New Papua Peninsula, Huon from matschiei) (Dendrolagus kangaroo Moresby. Port Guinea, New of Papua Government (MAL), Livestock p. 224 Helsinki. Volume 22. Series World (IUFRO) Organisations Research of Forest Union (eds)] International Katila Pia Buck, Alexander Seppala, [Risto Report, Assessment AGlobal to Change. Climate People and of Forests Adaptation Change. Climate Recent pp. 92 No. 1/2010. Report Countries Island Climate; Pacific inaChanging Biodiversity Protecting Guinea: New for Papua Assessment Terrestrial(2010). Conservation Interim National 132 pages. 50, no. Technical Montreal. Series (CBD), Diversity Biological on Convention of the Secretariat services, ecosystem associated and inbiodiversity of 21st change Projections century Scenarios: Biodiversity PNG Province, Morobe Administration, Distirct Kabwum Retrieved 9th January 2012, fromhttp://www.issg.org/database/species/ecology.asp?si=332&fr=1&sts=sss&lang=EN January 9th Retrieved & management Information Unit, Morobe Provincial Administration, Lae, Morobe province. Morobe Lae, Administration, Provincial Morobe Unit, Information & management (Dendrolagus matschiei).” of Infectious Diseases Journal inMatschie’s tree kangaroos reactivity immune cellular lowered with correlate infections complex avium Mycobacterium Physiological Zoology 397-400. region.” control Resources Ecology Molecular mitochondrial the using Guinea, New Papua Peninsula, fromHuon taxa Zoo Biology Development (UNEP). Conventions and Law of Environmental Division and (SCBD), Diversity Biological on ofConvention the Secretariat 46 of Zoology matschiei.” Journal Australian Dendrolagus and lumholtzi Dendrolagus species, tree kangaroo bytwo objects ( 3): 235-248. 3):

28

9 ( (3): 248-251. (3): 3 ): 183-196. ):

61 (3): 280-292. (3):

178 . (6): 1719-1725. (6): 101 1:13-118. 113 (1):

10

. .

( 2

): ):

Literature Cited Shearman, P. L., J. E. Bryan, J. Ash, P. Hunnam, B. Mackey and B. Lokes (2008). The state of the forests of Papua New Guinea: New offorests of state the Papua The P. P. J.Ash, Shearman, Lokes (2008). B. and Mackey B. Bryan, J.E. L., Hunnam, Shearman, P. L., J. Ash, B. Mackey, J. E. Bryan and B. Lokes (2009). “Forest Conversion and Degradation in Papua New Guinea Guinea New inPapua Degradation and Conversion “Forest P. Lokes (2009). B. Shearman, and Mackey, B. J.Ash, Bryan L., J.E. P. (2011).Shearman, J.Bryan inPapua and of rainforest cover, degradation “A and ofdistribution the deforestation analysis bioregional 15th 2012]. June communication [personal Landscape D. of YUS (2012).Samandingke, Schools Peninsula, Huon the on conservation –community-based program conservation tree kangaroo “The T. (2006). Ross, Dabek L. and of integration through Guinea New Papua in habitat matschiei) (Dendrolagus kangaroo tree Huon of Identification (2003). J.A. Pugh, Porolak, G., L. Dabek and A. K. Krockenberger (in review). “Spatial Requirements of Free-ranging Huon Tree Kangaroos, Dendrolagus Tree Dendrolagus Huon Kangaroos, of Free-ranging Requirements review). (in “Spatial Krockenberger K. A. and Dabek L. G., Porolak, S inMatschie’s tree status of reproductive assessment and cycle of estrous the “Characterization (2008). J.D. and Harder A. L. North, Nations for United Prepared Guinea. New of Papua University Report, Assessment National Guinea New Papua (2006). A. Nita, Porolak, G. (2008). Home range of the Huon tree kangaroo, Dendrolagus matschiei, in cloud forest on the Huon peninsula, Papua New New Papua peninsula, Huon forest the on incloud matschiei, Dendrolagus tree kangaroo, ofHuon the range Home (2008). G. Porolak, of behalf on Consultants byEvergreen Funding Prepared –DRAFT, Plan Management (2011). Area S. O’Neil, Conservation YUS Guinea. New of State Papua Independent The Taskforce Plan (NSPT), Strategic National 2050, Vision Guinea New Papua (2010b). NSPT The Taskforce Plan (NSPT), Strategic National 2010 Plan –2030, Strategic Development Guinea New (2010a). Papua NSPT Moresby, NCD. Port Office, Statistics National 2000, Census (2000). NSO Guinea. New Moresby, Papua Port (NRI), Institute Research National The Profiles, Provincial and District Guinea New (2010). Papua NRI New of Papua Province Morobe inthe growth population and change use “Land (2008). Bregt K. A. and T., Hartemink E. Ningal, A. Team, -2012. Management District Year 2008 Five Plan District Development Electorate, Open District Tewai/Siassi (2008c). MPG Forest PNG the and (MPG) Government Provincial Morobe Province, –2013: Morobe 2008 Plan Forest Provincial (2008b). MPG Stabach, J. A., L. Dabek, R. Jensen and Y. Q. Wang (2009). “Discrimination of dominant forest types for Matschie’s tree kangaroo for Matschie’s tree kangaroo forest types of dominant “Discrimination Y. and Jensen (2009). Wang R. Q. Dabek, L. J.A., Stabach, habitat, matschiei) (Dendrolagus Matschie’s tree kangaroo to identify remote technologies Utilizing sensing (2005). J.A. Stabach, P REP (2000). Invasive species in the Pacific: A technical review and draft regional strategy. South Pacific Regional Environment Environment Regional Pacific strategy. South regional draft and review A technical Pacific: inthe species Invasive (2000). REP 1972–2002.” 1972–2002.” Guinea.”New Austral Ecology Evidence Guinea.” New Papua Conservation MS thesis Island. Rhode of University observations, field remote and sensing matschiei, (Macropodidae) in Upper Montane Forest.” of Montane Mammalogy Journal inUpper (Macropodidae) matschiei, University of Papua New Guinea, Port Moresby Port Guinea, New of Papua University 1972–2002, period inthe of forest change drivers the of measuring forest and cover condition extent and the Mapping profiles.” progestin fecal General and with Comparative Endocrinology matschiei) (Dendrolagus kangaroo York. New Development for Sustainable Commission Affairs Social and of Economic Department Masters Thesis Masters University. Cook James Guinea, Seattle. Program, Zoo’s Park Tree Conservation Woodland Kangaroo Guinea. New of State Papua Independent Management of Environmental Journal 1975 2000.” and between Guinea Lae. Administration, Provincial Morobe Service. Forest /National Authority 405-422. of Remote Sensing remote data.” Journal sensing International high-resolution using Guinea New inPapua conservation MS thesis Island. of Rhode University Program Apia. (SPREP), Biotropica

41 (3): 379-390.

36 (1): 9-24. (1): . 3 : 51-52. : . . 87 (1): 117-124. . . 156 (1): 173-180. (1):

30 (2): (2): 105 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Literature Cited L 106 YUS LANDSCAPE PLAN Vié, J.-C., C. Hilton-Taylor and S. N. Stuart, Eds. (2009). Wildlife in a Changing World – An Analysis of the 2008 IUCN Red List of List Red IUCN of2008 the Analysis –An World inaChanging Wildlife (2009). Eds. Stuart, N. Hilton-Taylor S. C. and J.-C., Vié, James Area, Conservation YUS inthe stocks (2012). BirdM.I. and Carbon A. D., Gillieson Ramachandra W.I.J., Venter Dieleman M., TKCP (2010). YUS Coffee Growers Production & Sales Record Sheet: Uruwa Zone - Group and Individual Records of Sales of Sales Records Individual and -Group Zone Uruwa Sheet: Record &Sales Production Growers Coffee (2010). YUS TKCP PNG. Lae, Program, Tree Conservation 3, Survey Kangaroo Biodiversity Landscape YUS (2004). TKCP PNG. Lae, Program, Tree 2, Conservation Survey Kangaroo Biodiversity Landscape YUS (2003). TKCP PNG. Lae, Program, 1, Survey Tree Conservation Kangaroo Biodiversity Landscape (2001). YUS TKCP Moresby. 22nd. Port 2011 September (2011). E. National The Tiamu, find. oil to assist urged Govt Programme Melanesia Western WWF –2008), (1998 (2011). C. Guinea of New species Thompson, discovered Newly Frontier: Final T Wikramanayake, E., E. Dinerstein and C. Loucks (2001). Terrestrial Ecoregions of the Indo-Pacific: A Conservation Assessment, Island Island Assessment, Conservation A (2001). Terrestrial ofIndo-Pacific: the Loucks Ecoregions C. and E., Dinerstein E. Wikramanayake, Self Capacity (2010). National Nicholls S. and Kula G. Maru, G. Sissiou, G. Alphonse, F., R. Bongro, M. D. Mitchell, Wickham, J.Kinch, (2011). Tentative Site WHC 2011, November List.” Heritage “World 20th Retrieved http://whc.unesco.org/en/tentativelists/5066/ from YUS fromthe Learned Guinea—Lessons New inPapua Area aConservation (2013). Kula Establishing G. and Dabek L. Z., Wells, Tewae –2012. District, Administration, LLG Siassi Wasu Year 2008 Five LLG Wasu Plan Development (2008). LLG Wasu W Ziembicki, M. (2012). Mammals of YUS [Personal communication: 10th Feb 2012]. Feb 10th communication: [Personal (2012). of YUS M. Mammals Ziembicki, r avis, E. K., P. Watson and L. Dabek (2012). “Health assessment of free-ranging and captive Matschie’s Tree captive and Kangaroos P. K., E. of (2012). free-ranging avis, assessment Dabek “Health L. and Watson e lls, Z. (2012). [Personal communication, 10th January 2012]. January 10th (2012). communication, Z. lls, [Personal Literature Cited Cook University, Cairns Australia. Cairns University, Cook Medicine Wildlife and Guinea.” of New Zoo inPapua Journal Matschiei) (Dendrolagus Office, Port Moresby. Port Office, 2008 – 2010, TKCP Livelihoods Program, Tree Kangaroo Conservation Program (TKCP), Lae. (TKCP), Program Tree Conservation Program, Kangaroo –2010, Livelihoods TKCP 2008 and the Papua New Guinea Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC), Port Moresby. Port (DEC), of Conservation Environment and Department Guinea New Papua the and Program, Development Nations United Environment Facility, Global Report, Final (UNFCCC): Change Climate on Convention Framework Nations United the and (UNCCD), Desertification to Combat Convention Nations United the (UNCBD), Diversity Biological on Convention Nations United the to Implement Guinea New of Papua Capacity the Assessing Project: Assessment (TKCP). Program Tree Conservation Area, Kangaroo Conservation G Species, Threatened Morobe Province. Morobe Press, World Wildlife Fund Ecoregion Assessments Vol. 3. Assessments Ecoregion Fund Wildlife World Press, l and, Switzerland: IUCN. 180 pp. 180 IUCN. Switzerland: and, 43 ( 1) . : 1-9. :

. Literature Cited Literature Cited YUS LANDSCAPE PLANYUS Tapmange. Photo: Mark Ziembicki 107