ENVoo co
THE WORLDBANK
ENVIRONMET DEPARTMENT Public Disclosure Authorized
Interdisciplinary Fact-Finding on Current Deforestation in Costa Rica
Emst Lutz
Public Disclosure Authorized Mario Vedova W. H6ctorMartinez Lorena San RomAn Ricardo VazquezL. Alfredo Alvarado Lucia Merino Rafael Celis Jeroen Huising
Public Disclosure Authorized September 1993
EnvironmentWorking Paper No. 61 Public Disclosure Authorized
This paper has been prepared for internal use. The viewsand interpretations herein art those of the author(s) and should not be attributed to the World Bank, to its affiliatedorganizations or to any individualacting on their behalf INTERDISCIPLINARYFACr-FINDING ON CURRENTDEFORESTATnON IN COSTARICA
Ernst Lutz Mario Vedova W. Hator Martfnez Lorena San RomAn Ricardo VazquezL Alfredo Alvarado Lucia Merino Rafael Celia Jeroen Huising
A CATIEWorld Bank Project Funded by the Dutch Fund for the Environment ACKNOWLEDGEMENIS
Ernst Lutz is senior economistin :he Land, Water, and Natural Habitats Divisionof the World Bank's EnvironmentDepartment. Mario Vedovais Co-Directorof ProDesarrollo,a consultingfirm in San Jose, Costa Rica. Hector Martinez is a forester and a free-lanceconsultant. Lorena San Roman is an ecologistand former director of the national museumin San Jose, Costa Rica. She currentlyis Vice-Chancellorof Research at the National Universityof Costa Rica. Ricardo VazquezL is an anthropologistwith the Nati nal Museumof Costa Rica and lecturer at the Universityof Costa Rica. Alfredo Alva.ado is a professorof agronomyand soils as well as Director of the Agronomic Research Center of the Universityof Costa Rica. Lucia Merino is a demographer, formerlywith the Populationand EnvironmentProgram of the Costa Rican Demographic Association.Rafael Celis, a resource economist,formerly Director of the Sustainable AgricultureProgram at CATIE, is at present Co-Directorof ProDesarrollo.Jeroen Huisingdid his Ph.D work on the Atlantico regionand is currently a staff member at the Departmentof Surveyingvald Remote Sensingat the WageningenAgricultural University in the Netherlands.
The authors are indebted to many individualsfor their assistanceduring the course of the surveyin Costa Rica. At the Bank, Mr. Binswanger,initially in his capacityas Chief of the AgricultureDivision for Mexicoand Central Americaand later as Senior Adviserfor the TechnicalDepartment of the Latin AmericaRegion, has supported and commented on 1se worlk His successoras DivisionChief, Michael Baxter, also helped see this task through to completionas did Mohan Munasingheand Colin Rees in the Environment Department.Susanna Hecht and James Shortle have provideduseful specificcomments on the initial drafts. During the reviewprocess in the Bank, many individualshav5 provided commentsand suggestionsincluding Bill Beattie, Luis Constantino,Robert Kirmse,Paul Knotter, John McIntire,Augusta Molnar,Jan Post, Robert Schneider,and Jeff Sayer. linda Starke providededitorial assistance.
DepartmentalWorldng Papers are not formalpublications of the World Bank. They present preliminaryand unpolishedresults of country analysisor research that are circulatedto encouragediscussion and comment;citation and the use of such a paper should take into account its provisionalcharacter. The findings,interpretations, ana conclusionsexpressed in this paper are entirely those of the authors and should not be attributed in any manner to the WorldBank, to its affiliatedorganizations, or to members of its Board of ExecutiveDirectors or the countriesthey represent.
Becauseof the informalityand to present the results of researchwith the least possibledelay, the typescriptnias not been prepared in accordancewith the procedures appropriate to formal printed texts, and the World Bank acceptsno responsibilityfor errors.
i INTRDISCIPLNARY FACTI-FINDINGON CURRENT DEFORESTATION IN COSTARICA
Table of Contents
S1ne
Study Objectives ...... 1...... Methods ...... 1 DeforestationEstimates ...... 5 Logistics,Types, aid Methods of Forest Intervention ...... 6 GroupsResponsible for Loggingand Clearing ...... 9 Problemsof Survivalin the Forest Industry ...... 13 Relationshipbetween PopulationGrowth and Deforestation ...... 14 Effects of Loggingand Land Clearingon Biodiversity,Water, and Soils ...... 15 Land Use after the Clearing of Forests ...... 18 EconomicAspects of Tree Harvestingand Processing ...... 20 Bibliography . . . 24
Annex 1: Details on Methodo:agyand Sample Sites
ArPex 2: The Systemof Permits
Annex 3: PopulationDynamics
Annex 4: Possibilitiesand Limitationsof Assessing Deforestationin Costa Rica with GIS Information ABSTRACr
Rapid deforestationof tropical forests has receivedworldwide attention. Yet our understandingof the actual facts of deforestationtends to be limited,derived from satellite or aerial photographsor from case studiesof limited representativeness. Suggestionsfor policyand project interventionsare made in a context of limited informationand considerableuncertainty. To reduce this uncertaintyfor at least one case, the WorldBank and the Center for TropicalAgricultural Research and Teaching (CATIE) surveyed52 deforestationsites distributedacross Costa Rica to allow more accurate determinationof importantfacts about deforestation.
Some of the key findingsof the surveyare:
* Selectivelogging is estimated to affect between 51,000and 59,000 hectares a year, roughly1 percent of Costa Rica's land area.
* Probablybetween 5,000and 10,000hectares of forestland a year are being converted to agriculturaluse through clear-cuttingand clearingof previouslylogged-over areas. This represents some 0.1 to 0.2 % of Costa Rica's land area.
* The surveyteam found no evidenceof clearing by burning,even though this is probablyhappening to a limitedextent.
* Some forest pl.ntations are being established,and there is some natural regeneration of forest in low-useor abandonedpastures. On a net basis,therefore, the lossof forest area is estimated to be smallat present.
* Economicmotives of owners of the ft restlandare the drivingforce behind most of the conversionand selectivelogging. The main objectiveis to reali!e the gains from the timber harvestingor from subsequentagricultural production or both. Forest clearing to establisha stronger claim to the land no longer appears to be a motive,as it was in the past.
* Environmentalconcerns tend not to be taken into considerationby the owners or the loggerswlu, assistthem when they are unrelated to on-site productivitybenefits. Owners,and in particular those that are verticallyintegrated, seek to activelylimit on- site damages.
* Smallholderssquatting on publicor private land seem to play only a minor role in current land clearingor iogging.The surveydata cannot answer the questionwhether smallholdershave also r layed a minor role in the past.
* The large reductionin forested area during this century has reduced habitats for flora and fauna. Fortunately,it appears lossesof biodiversityhave been small so far. There are some threatened species,but the national park system,while needing
m strengthening,should be able to preservemost of the country'sbiodiversity, which is one of the bases for the nation's importantenvironmentally oriented tourism.
* Negativeenvironmental effects on soils and water from land clearing and selective loggingappear to be much smallerthan sometimesasserted. The major sediment load comes from road construction.But under tropical conditions,dirt roads no longer used are generallycovered by vegetationwithin months,thus sharplyreducing erosion. Only a smallpart of eroded soil reached any waterwaysin the cases observed.
All but the last of these findingsare specificto Costa Rica and should therefore not be generalized.
The findingsof the surveypresent a more benignpicture than is usuallyassumed. Given the dearth of empiricalf.ats, hypotheseshave sometimesbeen advancedthat acquire the stLktusof fat by dint of repetition.Some of these hypothesesdramatize a situation that helps raise awareness.The data here suggest that the impactof current deforestationin Costa Rica is less serious than sometimesalleged, in part becauseof past decisionsto set aside large areas as national parks or reserves.But the findingsare not a teason for complacency.Instead, we believethat they can be used to direct policy and regulatoryinterventions more intensivelytoward the areas and problems-n Costa Rica where damagefrom current deforestationis most likelyto occur.Also, fact-findingstudies are encouragedelsewhere to provide a firmer informationbase for improvedmanagement.
iv INTRDISCPUNARY FACT-FINDINGON CURRENTDEFORESTATION IN COSTARICA
Costa Rica has a larid area of about 51,000square kilometers.The forested area has decreased from 85% in 1900 io 56% in 1950and 29% in 1987.More than a quarter of the land area is part of national parks and reserves,whose forests in 1987covered some 19% of the nation's land area.
Deforestation is a major concernin Costa Rica. However,despite a high level of awarenessof this problem,information on the deforestationprocess has been sketchy.As a basis for improvednatural resource management,the Center for TropicalAgriculturai Research and Teaching(CATIE) in Costa Rica and the WorldBank agreed to carry out a field survey in 1991-92to determine key facts related to current deforestationin Costa Rica.
StudyObjectves
The specificobjectives of the studywere to:
* Characterizeforestry exploitation in Costa Rica (includingclear-cutting), identifying those responsiblefor each operation. * Identifydamage to the environmentdue to forest exploitation,with an emphasison soil, aquifers,and biodiversity. * Determine the structure of prices for timber (in-stand,on landingsor beside highways, at distributionsites and industrialplants). * Estimate the participationof squatters in the deforestaticn process (with identification of the stages in which they participate),end their motivationsand geographicorigin. * Identifythe structure of land tenancyof the areas subject to exploitationor clear- cutting. * Characterizethe later use of cleared or exploitedareab, and evaluate the environmentalimpacts of such practices(agriculture, livestock, agroforestry, forestry). * Identifyexamples of sustainableuse of primaryand secondaryforests in the different forest regionsof the country. * From a socioeconomicpoint of view,determine the motivations,relationships, and future options of people involvedin forest exploitation. * Quantifythe area of selectiveexploitation and annual clear-cuttingfor the period in which satellite imagesare available.
Methods
The study was carried out by an interdisciplinaryteam that surveyedaspects such as forest management;impact on biodiversity;land use changes;costs of extraction,transport, and processing;and the social fabricbehind deforestation.The team was composedof a specialistin economics(also the team leader), a forester, a specihCstin agronomyand soils,an ecologist,and a socialanthropologist. Between November 1991 and March 1992
1 the teamvisited 52 sitesdistributed in proportionto deforestationin each regionduring the last fewyears. Initially,surveys were planned in 50 sitesbased on the resultsof analysisof available satelliteimages. But becauseGeographic Inforriation Systewm (GIS) data are not up to date and haveother limitationssuch as cloudcover, an ad hocmethodology was devised for the study,based on data madeavailable to the teamon forestedareas andvolumes of timberauthorized for exploitationin each forestregion by the GeneralDirectorate of Forestry(DGF) for the period1986-90. Table 1 showsthe amountof forestlandin each regionand the distributionof the actualsample sites. Table1 Distributionof ForestedLands and Sample Sites in Costa Rica (area in hectares:percentag*e Shareof Region Protected Unprotected Total Total Sample
Dry PacificZone 41,400 40,920 82,320 5.6 8
E. CentralValley 159,309 35,171 194,480 13.2 0 CentralValley 5,120 3,260 8,380 0.6 0
W. Central Valley 39,920 31,040 70,960 4.8 0 CentralPacific 4,120 6,700 10,820 0.7 0 SouthPacific 267,337 133,403 400,740 27.2 21 NorthernZone 70,050 148,610 218,660 14.8 38 AtlanticZone 385,350 104,230 489,580 33.2 33
TOTAL 972,606 503,334 1,475,940 100.0 100
Source:DOF, Statistics B;lletir, 1990.
BetweenJuly and December1991 the team leaderand someteam members, equipped with a four-wheeldrive vehicle, made preliminary visits to variousregions and contacted localofficials and private-sector sources to findout whereland clearing and loggingwere plannedor goingon. Thiswas a lengthyprocess, as loggingand landclearing is occurring largelyin inaccessibleareas, and pursuing leads was costlyin termsof time.
2 Local DGF technicianswere the most reliable source of informationon sites. This may bias the results somewhatin favor of larger scale or legal loggingand land-clearing activities.But the team believesthat this bias is smallfor the followingreasons:
* Widespreadillegality does not occur in the sense that large areas are being converted without a permit or that much loggingis undertaken without one; rather, at most sites for which permits were given,additional trees are being harvested illegallyover and above the formallypermitted volume. * If large illegallogging operations or forest conversionswere going on, it wouldbe difficultto keep them secret becauseof the bulldozers,logging trucks, and crews needed to operate them. * Given the reasonablygood economicsituation of the country, particularlyin comparisonwith others in the region, the team believesthat any squatting that is going on affectsvery smallareas.
The team travelledto thb 52 sites selected (Figure 1; see also Annex 1) and used questionnairesto interviewfarm owners, loggers,laborers, sawmill owners, riansporters, and others involvedin forest exploitation4/ In addition, the team interviewedDGF officialsfrom the headquartersof the Atlantic,northern, and southern Pacificregions and from the central headquarters,along with representativesfrom the following nongovemmentalorganizations: Association of Loggersof the Atlantic,Association of ForestryProducers of Agroindustry,Corporation of Forest Developmentof San Carlos, Union of AgroindustrialProducers of the Osa Peninsula,and Foundation for the Developmentof the Central VolcanicMountain Range.
The studywas limitedby the followingfactors:
e Climate:the Atlantic and the northern zones of the country do not have a definite rainy season, although from Novemberthrough February these zones receive the greatest amount of precipitation,which limits harvesting and extraction.This made it difficultto locate sites and the individualswho carry out the extraction operations. * Legalityof harvesting:the studyattempted to identifyspecific cases of illegal harvesting,a practice that is difficultto detect since it is generallydisguised through permitsor legal authorizations.The team spent considerabletime tryingto locate this type of felling. * Informants:the study intended to interviewowners as well as persons exploitingthe forest. In many cases it was not possibleto locate the landownersthemselves. The informationobtained reflects the knowledgeof the persons interviewed.
A/ The questionaireand the initialdraft report, on which this WorkingPaper is based, were prepared in Spanish. A separate questionnairewas used for the socioeconomic survey.
3 %<~~~~~~~~~~ i
_ .: , .~~~= 4g~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Deforestation Estimates
Costa Rica does not have a continuousnational forest inventoryor monitoringsystem, nor a geographicinformation system that periodicallyupdates changes in land use. Records on authorizationsand cutting permits granted annuallyare available,but permits generallyare not supervisedin the field.Therefore, reliable national figureson the magnitudeof deforestationor on affected areas are not available.The team used several approachesto produce such estimates.
Research on humidtropical forests indicatesthat felling one large tree produces a clearingof approximately400 square meters (Oldeman,1978). Given that on average in Costa Rica there are about five trees per hectare of more than 60 centimeters in diameter (Martinez, 1992),their cutting results in an affected area of about 2,000square meters. When approximately500 square meters for roads and loading docks are added in, the affected area totals approximately2,500 square meters per hectare. This means that about 75% of the cover remainsas intervened primaryforest. When the total number of exploitabletrees per hectare nears 10, the percentageof the disturbedforest can reach 50%.
The averagevolume per tree in the natural forest as well as in pasturelandsis about 3.1 cubicmeters. The DGF notes that trees from the natural forest have a volume of 3.16 cubic meters and those from other areas, 2.26. The total volume authorized for exploitationin 1992was not significantlydifferent from that authorized in 1990, approximately650,000 cubic meters (DGF, 1991).Therefore, the total number of authorized trees felled in 1992was about 207,000,which translatesinto an affected area of about 41,000hectares.
The team estimates that:
* The clear-cut area ranges between 5,000and 10,000hectares per year (includingabout 500 hectares for banana cultivation),corresponding to 0.1-0.2% of national territory. In the past, some 30,000hectares may have been converteda year.2 The decrease can be explainedin part by the fact that conversionhistorically occurred on lar.d most suitablefor agriculturaluse, and that the remainingforest lands are of increasingly marginaluse for agriculture. * The authorizedchange from primaryto secondaryforest, from secondaryto logged- over secondaryforest, or from tree stands to solelypastureland may reach 31,000to 36,000hectares per year, or about 0.6% of national territory. If on average, overcuttingin authorizedsites amounts to 50%, and if cutting at unauthorizedsites is 15%, selectivelogging could reach between 51,000and 59,000hectares per year, about 1% of national territory.
at Since our surveywas completed,a governmentanalysis of LANDSATinformation for the period 1986 to 1992 found an averagedeforestation rate of 17,000ha per year, which is broadlyin line with our estimates. 5 Intervieweesnever mentioned that exploitedforests were going to be used later for nonforestrypurposes, which could be due to owners' fear that the informationmight be used by state agencies(DGF and others) to establishsanctions. Some indicatedthat in other sites, once valuabletimber is extracted,forests would be "socolados'(understory eliminated)and later cleared for livestockproduction. This a.ppearsto happen infrequently,however.
In only three cases did smallfarmers solicit and eceive permits to exploitthe land and complete clearing.Banana companiesalso totally eliminatef-est cover when converting the land for agriculturalproduction. In these cases it can be concludedthat all the area clearewis used for nonforestrypurposes.
In the humid tropical forest areas, no fires in the natural forest (exploitedor not) were registered,nor was informationobtained on the use of this practiceexcept in one case in which timber was burned to fazilitatethe clearingof land for banana production. In drier areas, this is commonlydone on pasturelandsand in early secondaryforests to eliminate insectsharmful to livestock,and the burningstimulates the formationof sprouts on pasturelands.It should be noted, however,that the dates of the study limited the observationof this phenomenon,which is more commonin late March,April, and May.
An attempt was made to crosscheckthe area figureswith the total volume processed by the timber industry.But no reliable figuresare available.A DGF estimate suggeststhat 900,000cubic meters of logs are processedeach year. If, on average,a tree produces a volumeof 3.14 cubic meters, and if five such trees are being harvested per hectare, 900,000cubic meters would translateinto an area of about 57,000hectares.
Four GIS methodswere also used to assess national and regionaldeforestation between 1978and 1986.(As noted, more recent satellite imagesfor use at the national levelwere not availablein part because of cloud cover.) Even co.relatingthe land cover classesfor the two years wasdifficult. The Defor-Reformethod gave the lowest result: 19,000hectares per year. The clumpand sieve method, applyinga threshold of 128 hec- tares, producedthe highest estimate:52,500 hectares annually. But it was difficultto say which estimate was the best one.
Logistics,Types, and Methods of Forest Intervention
An estimated80% of the exploitabletimber in Costa Rica comes from the natural forest. Exploitationis generallycarried out in forests outside national parks or in "reserve zones,' with authorized permits from DGF that not only permit tree-cuttingbut also regulate timber through transportationpermits and tags placed by the owner or loggeron tree trunks at the site of exploitation.
Accordingto the ForestryLaw (Law No. 7174 of 1990),all harvestingoperations should be regulated through a forest permit.This is granted on the basis of a study by the forest owner that indicatesthe objectiveof the exploitationand the land use capacityof the land where the operation willbe carried out. A DGF permit, in additionto the technical requisitesmentioned, requires the timber owner to pay a forestry tax as well as municipaltaxes.
6 Permits for the main categoriesof exploitationrequire a forest inventolyas well as a managementplan prepared by a professional.In practice,management plans are really "plansfor cutting";they are used to obtain permits but they tend to have a limited technical foundationthat would allowthem to be used to managea forestryenterprise and assure a continued and sustainableyield from the forest.
Cutting of more than the authorizedvolume appears to be quite common,whether it be in the authorized site or nearby.This illegalcutting is hard to detect becauseit is generallyhidden through the reuse of transportationpermits and licensesfor logs or through clandestinetransportation to sawmillsat night or during holidays,whe?i there is less control on the highways.
In the field, DGF is generallyviewed as excessivelybureaucratic about granting licensesand permits,as favoringlarge producersover smallones, and as being too centralized,particularly when solvinglegal conflicts.On the other hand, those wishing greater control of extraction indicateDGFs effectivenessis limitedby lack of technical personnel and budget.
The team identifiedthree principaltypes of forest intervention:
* Clear-cuttingto change the use of lands under forest cover (to banana plantations, productionof subsistencecrops, and pastures). * Selectivecutting of large, valuabletrees in primaryor secondaryforest. * Exploitationin pasture areas that contain patches of forest or individualtrees cut by owners for extra incomeand/or to eliminateexcessive shade.
Only the first type representsdeforestation, since it results in the disappearanceof the forest. The second type impliesintervention in an existingforest that generallycontinues to remain a forest. Tbis selectivelogging changes a primaryforest into a secondaryone or an existingsecondary forest into a logged-oversecondary one. Either of these can generallybe selectivelylogged again after 15-30years (even without any management,just through letting natural regrowth take its course). The third principal category-exploitationof trees on pasturelands-is the continuationof a process that alreadychanged the land use earlier.
The surveyconfirmed that clear-cuttingand selectivelogging are driven by economic interests. While loggersdo play an importantrole, the principalactors are landownerswho wish to obtain revenue from the sale of timber,to use the land for agriculture,or both. Environmentalconcerns tend not to be taken into accountby the ownerswhen they are not related to on-site productivity.The team noted that timber exploitationis generally carried out with care when the land is owned by integrated sawmillor other industrial operations,which are concernedabout the sustainabilityof the operations.
In the past, governmentsettlement policiesalso played a role in deforestation.The Institute of Land and Colonization(now the Institute for Agrarian Development,IDA) put "agriculturalsettlements" on natio;al lands or private farms, and in some cases on forested lands,which forced farmers to eliminatethe forest for 'land preparation"and
7 titling.The banks granted credits only for agriculturalactivities, which in practicerequired the eliminationof the forest.
Forest exploitationis generallycarried out with equipment and machinery;in a few cases, the extraction is done with oxen. The felling is done with chain saws.The basic operations are clearingof the bole, determinationof the directionof fall, and fellingof the tree. Laborerscalled "sierreros"specialize in fellingand preparing logs. These operators, when they own the chain saws,generally charge per foot of processedtimber; if the logger owns the chain saw,the operator earns a daily or monthlysalary.
Logs are prepared with a chain saw on the fall site by cutting the timber into sections of 8, 10, or 12 yards (6.6, 8.3, or 10.0 meters) and eliminatingbranches and deformations. The timber that is extracted from the fellingsite is hauled awayby caterpillartractors, oxen, or skidders.Caterpillar tractors, favored by 73% of those interviewed,disturb the soil structure, logs skiddeddirectly by winch over the soil do damage,and trails 4-6 meters wide are cut to facilitatethe movementof logs.The soil also becomescompacted by pressure exerted by the tractor.
Using skidderson rubber wheels,although it also requires the opening of roads and trails, causes less compaction.The entire log is not dragged over the soil, which reduces soil damage.Extracting timber usingoxen, practicedby 14% of those interviewed,disturbs the soil the least. It is limited,however, by the weight (dimensions)of logs that can be skiddedand the distance of the skid.
T-hemajor mode of transport from the landingsor the forest is by truck, usuallywith double axle or greater. This means forest roads must be built and forest exploitersmust avoid marshysites, steep slopes,sharp curves,and the use of bridgesor loggingpontoons for water flow.The survey found that trucks with three axles (tandem) were used in 42% of the cases, flatbedtrucks (trailer with two axleson the flatbed) in 31%, and other types of vehiclesin 27%.
The species and trees selected are determinedby several factors:
* The internal market for timber uses less than 20% of the speciesfrom primarytropical forests, as they are generallyunfamiliar with other speciesand their technological properties. * Prices are low for timber speciesthat are unknown,white, or with little structural resistance. * Sawmillsoften lack adequate machineryfor processingsmall logs. * The dimensionsof the trees that can be harvested from the natural forest are legally restricted. Permits are only granted for trees that are more than 60 centimetersin diameter to breast height in the Atlantic and northern regions.Only trees of more than 80 centimeters can be harvestedin the southern zone.
Accordingto the survey,the most exploitedspecies in the Atlantic zone are caobilla (Carapa guianesis),laurel (Cordia alliodora),and lechoso (Brosimunsvp.); in the northern zone, caobiliaand cedro (Cedrela odorata); and in the southern zone, caobillaand cristobal (Platymisciumpolystachyum).
8 Even though the study team could not visit examplesof forests managed under the concept of sustainedyield, the literature reports some examplesof researchon sustainable silviculturalpractices. Examples are the sites of Tirimbinain Siquirres,Limon (Finegan and Sabogal,1988), and San Isidroof Perez Zeled6n (Picado, W., personal communication,1991). In high-altitudeprimary forests, CATIE in Turrialba is researching managementpractices for timber and charcoalproduction. Also, BOSCOSA(a conservationand agroforestryproject in the Osa Peninsula)told the team it intended to initiate the managementof a natural forest area, with the objectiveof obtaininga sustainedyield of the area, in partnershipwith forest landownersof the region.
GroupsResponsible for Loggingand LandClearing
In approximately44% of the cases surveyed,the extractionof wood in natural forests was carried out by loggers;33% was performedby independentsawyers contracted by landowners;the remaining23% was done by landownersthemselves.
Loggers.Loggers play a pivotalrole in the extractionand marketingof timber. They activelyseek extractioncontracts that guarantee their own businesssurvival, and that serve as a link between forest owners and timber purchasers.However, it would not be appropriate to blame loggersfor loggingand the deforestationproblem since in most cases they carry out their activitiesat the request and with the consent of the owners of the forest. In some cases, loggingcompanies and sawmillowners are loggingtheir own land. (It is worth noting that in these situationsthey are more concerned about the technical excellenceof the extraction than when they work on others' land.)
Loggers negotiate a price with the owner for standingtimber and are responsiblefor all the work in extractingtimber: opening or maintainingroads; fellingand preparing timber; extractionfrom the forest to landingsfor loadingor to a truck; and, in many cases, transportationto the areas where timber is used. They gernerallyown the machineryand equipment necessaryfor extraction.In most cases, they pay for the right to exploit timber (through taxes to the DGF) and to use municipalroads, the cost of the permit,and municipaltaxes, which then are deducted from the gross price of standingtimber. One of the motivationsfor illegalcutting is that no taxes are paid on any additionalvolume extra-ted.
Loggers extract timber from sites authorized under permit A2 (for pasturelandsin use or abandoned,or abandonedcacao plantations)or under forest managementplans required by permit B2 (see Annex 2 for more details on the permit system).On small farms, with sites authorized for a change in land use (permit B1), the loggergenerally only extracts timber,while the owner providesthe labor to clear and prepare the site.
The loggercontracts with the owner of the forestlandby volume removed,expressed in "pulgadasmaderas ticas" (PMT).3/ The measurementappears to underestimatethe
3J This measuresthe volume commonlyused in Costa Rica,which correspondsto a solid section of timber 1" x 1"x 4 yards = (2.54cm)' x 3.35 m = 0.002161m 3. Therefore 1I 3 = 462.7PMT.
9 volume extracted.In none of the cases surveyedwere logs measured using loggingrules or traditional measurementsbased on mathematicalformulas.
Aside from financialobjectives, the loggersinterviewed and the membersof their crews also indicatedindividual motivations of a practicalnature. For them, forest extraction work is gratifyingbecause it entails overcomingchallenging technical problems, team effort, and the know-howrequired in each step of the extractionprocess. As the research team could confirm,there is a high risk of accidentsassociated with timber extraction.Various informants told of fatal accidentsat workLIn two cases, those who died were familymembers of the loggersinterviewed.
Loggingactivities and marketingare coordinatedamong families.This noncommercial relationshipis typicalamong loggers, members of extraction crews,and sawmillowners. Twenty-threeloggers were interviewed,20 of whomworked from an early age alongside their fathers. In most cases,their fathers' businesseshelped them obtain part of the originalcapital or machineryto work independently.Several brothers who work as a team in the same extraction site were interviewed,along with cousinswho work together and a set of brothers who work separately.Also, some fathers and sons were linked in the businessof exploitingand marketingtimber.
The interviewsindicated that loggersgenerally have had little formal, technicaltraining in forestry.This mightbe because they began early to get practicalwork experience.In the current circmstances, formal,technical preparationis less important for loggersthan other qualitiesthey depend on to remain competitive:personal discipline,a nose for findingcontracts, business instinct, and a good sense of logistics.
For methodologicalpurposes, the loggerscan be categorizedinto small,medium, and large. The small ones typicallyown saws,a bulldozertractor, and a four-wheeldrive vehiclefor transportingpersonnel and supplies (gasoline,oil, food, and so on). They subcontractthe transportationof logs to other enterprises.
Loggers in the mediumrange have ali the necessaryequipment: up to two tractors, a log carrier (skidder),and varioustruckls. For them, subcontractingis restrictedto needing extra help becauseof time or weather constraints.Many of the medium-rangeloggers interviewedown farmsvwth forests, which they exploitthrough managementplans. Some have also reforested their farmswith exotic and, less commonly,native species,mainly pochote (Bombacopsisquinata) and laurel (C alliodora).They also consistentlyrecognize that the natural regeneration of forests is environmentallythe most beneficialsilvicultural method.
The large loggershave integrated operationsinvolving harvesting, transporting, and sawing.They have succeededin expandingoperations in order to guarantee the necessary raw material for their sawmillsto functionefficiently. The capital earned from those enterprisesallows them to acquire large farms with primaryand secondaryforests. The data collectedsuggest that the large loggerscontinue to exploitother people's forests, if possible,in order to maintaintheir own reserves for the future.
10 One crucialneed for loggersis sufficientextraction sites to guarantee the profitability of their operations.For that, strategiesof search and contractingare employee-Various waysto search for exploitationsites were recorded:maintaining contacts in the local communitieswho inform them about possiblecontracts, or locatingforested farms and approachingthe owners to offer them services.
The most commonstrategy for obtainingcontracts is to pay the forest owner in advanceand get his signed receipt. The contractualagreement often includesprovisions for the constructionor improvementof roads or for other movementsof earth on a farm with an extractionsite. Getting this type of work done is attractiveto the farm owner, and influenceshis decisionon whether to agree to the exploitation.Sometimes the agreement is establishedverbaly, but this can lead to problemswhen the loggerdoes not complete the work as agreed.
Sawmillowners and contractedsawvers. Sawmill owners generally work in family businessesthat span two or three generationsand often still use original,obsolete machinery.They generallyown farmswith primaryand secondaryforest, and tend to have an interest in reforestation programs.Also, financespermitting, owners are interested in buyingland to secure primarymaterial in the future. This type of exploitationis carried out through the so-calledmanagement plans authorizedby type B2 permits.
Two small,five medium,and four large sawmillswere visited. The smal ones are difficultto locate. They work with tree parts (branchesand deterioratingparts of logs) that are not processedby other sawmiDls.Also includedin this categoryare "resawyers who edge and refine wastes produced by sawmillsof greater range. The owner of a "resawver"was in charge of one of the illegallogging operations registered.
Mediumand large sawmillowners differ in that the medium-sizedones do not own xtractionequipment (tractors, log carriers, and loggingtrucks). This also impliesthat the owners of large sawmillsand the large loggersare essentiallythe same group of people.
Contractedsawyers are operators and ownersof one or more chain saws who fell, cut, and process timber by the job. The cost of preparaticn depends on who owns the chain saws.When the worker does not own the machine,he charges the minimumlegal salaryor a similaramount agreed to with the owner or the logger;if he owns the chain saw, the price is agreed on for the volume prepared. Contractingby "task"(that is, by pieceworkor work carriedout) does not favor the worker because he does not get paid if weather conditionsprevent the work Due to the risks of fellingand extraction,everyone on the contractingcrew is covered by workers'compensation, paid by the contractor.
Extractionby ownersof portable millsoccurs in forested areas of private farms and in national areas. Valuable trees are semiprocessedinto planks and blocks directlyin the forest. These sawyersgenerally have a licensefrom the DGF to use rudimentarysawmils and chain saws,but they often do not have specificpermits for work they do on their own account or for others. In the viewof the team, they play only a minor role in the exploitationof Costa Rica's forests.
11 Forest owners.Most forest exploitationis carried out on private properties (owned by individuals,anonymoi.. societies, or agroindustrialcompanies) or on land outside protected areas where the right to use has been granted by the Institute for AgrarianDevelopment. It appears that in Costa Rica there is a relativelyclear situation regardingland registration.During the survey,no strugglesor conflictsabout landownershipwere found.
Only on certain occasionsis timber exploitedin reserve areas or in refuges on farms that have not been compensatedby the state. Ten percent of the farmers interviewed expressedan opinion about their expectationsof state intervention.In areas surrounding the National Parks,where there are rumors of state action to protect reserves, farmers are eager to exploittheir forests because they do not believe that they will be compensated. This is the reason for the acceleratedexploitation of forests in the Osa Peninsula,where the possibilityof extendingthe area of the CorcovadoNational Park has been mentioned. So expectedpublic interventionof this type creates incentivesfor rapid extraction of timber.
Farms can be classifiedas small(up to 50 hectares),medium (50-100 hectares),or large (greater than 100 hectares).Medium-sized farms predominate.Farms owned by anonymoussocieties and agroindustrycompanies generally are large,while livestockfarms are medium-sizedand those of individualfarmers vary from small to medium.
In areas suitable for banana production,there is no incentiveto conserveforested areas, given the high opportunitycost of lands. Banana companieseither buy up cleared land (in which case the owner sells,cuts, and contracts the transport of timber) or make a global purchase,appraising areas not suitablefor banana cultivationat around 60,000 colones per hectare (about $460,at the February 1992 rate of 130 colones to the dollar) and computinga certain value for exploitedsaw-timber used on the farm, while using planks to build bridges,laborers' houses, and offices.
Ownersof forestlandsell timber to loggersfor the followingreasons:
* Need for short-termcash for subsistenceor to pay for farm labor. * Lack of capital for the timber permit,municipal taxes, and machineryneeded for extraction. * Little or no capacityto negotiate with sawmillsor plywoodfactories, whether from lack of informationor because the volumeof timber is not of interest to these industries. * Need for roads the loggerwill open so the farmer can transport other products (agriculturaland livestock)later.
In 23% of the cases, it was found that the landownercarried out the work of extraction.Generally these are owners of large sawmillsor companies.They own the machineryand equipment necessaryfor extractionand they contract workers by the job (or fixedsalary). In other cases, banana companiesor large private owners contract labor (by daily or fortnightlysalaries, or by the hectare cut and chopped) to clear-cut the land and change its category of use.
12 In comparingplace of originwith current residence,the surveyshowed great mobility of farm owners, as well as a singlemotive for migration.In all 22 cases interviewed,the owners of the forest were not native to the area of their farms;the fundamentalreason they migratedwas the search for land to use for their own agriculturaland forestry activities.In nine of these cases, the owners were born in the same general regionof the country, in the remaining13 cases,they came from other regions.Migrations between regionsoccur principallyfrom the central valleyand the central Pacifictoward the northern and Atlantic zones. There are only four cases registered,corresponding to the southern region and Guanacaste,which are dividedequally between migrationswithin and amongregions. Two forest owners interviewedwere born in Nicaragua.
Illegalexploiters. Three sites were identifiedwhere forest exploitationswere carried out without DGF permits:two of them correspondedto cutting and in situ sawingin order to market the timber; in the third, illegalfelling was done to provide space for orange trees, and the timber was used on the same farm.4/
Squatters.In the past, some areas were deforestedby squatters who were later settled there more formallyby IDA Traditionally,squatters (agriculturalmigrants or invadersof forestlands)have been mentionedas a part of the populationresponsible for deforestation.They may have playeda significantrole in the past, but during visits to the 52 sites only one such person was encountered near a loggingsite. He had arrived there approximately10 years earlier, after land had alreadybeen exploitedselectively by the landowner.In the viewof the surveyteam, squatters have at present, little influenceon the deforestationprocess.
Problemsof Survivalin the Forest Industry
The forest industryis facingvarious limitationson maintaininga supply of timber on a sustainablebasis. The four basic problemsare scarcityof remainingforest stands; high competition;limitations imposed by the DGF (that is, types of permits,periods of extraction,and volumesof felling);and an increasingnumber of state and private conservationareas with ecological,scientific, or tourism interests.
4/The casesof cutting and in situ sawingtook place in the northern and Atlantic zones. On one side, the timber from trees that were left on pasturelands. One exploiterwas the owner of the farm and the other was a neighbor. Usinga chain saw, the logs were turned into fence po-ts that were then skiddedwith oxen to the road. The exploiterswere on that spot during the interview,waiting for someone to transport and sell the posts to a banana farm. They did this type of extraction to supplementtheir income. In the other side, the surveyteam witnessedthe illegallogging. The farm owner led the exploitation, using a smallsawmill not far from the extractionsite and a truck to transport the timber. Worklngwith him was an uncle, a brother, and a neighbor. The brother stood guard on the only accessibleroad to the site, to warn of any strangers. Logs were being cut with a chain saw to producd planks and fence posts to be sold to banana companiesfor infrastructuredevelopment on farms. Accordingto the informants,who were interviewed on the site, this is commonin the northern sector of the Atlantic zone.
13 All loggersand sawmillowners agreed about the strong competitionfor wood, and many said they intended to abandontheir current occupationand switch to another business.There was a consensusthat those most affected would be the smallerexploiters, since they generallydo not own forests. But it is important to note that medium-and large-sizedloggers face problemstoo. Informantsinterested in remainingin the forest industryagreed on the need to implementstrategies that guarantee an adequate volume of timber for their enterprises.Among the strategiesproposed are to operate with greater efficiency,to purchaseprimary and secondaryforest, to purchaseareas with regenerative capacityfor forest species,and to reforest.
Three options mentionedare suitable for less competitiveoperations: specialized systemsfor extraction and sawing,reforestation projects, and contracts in the service sector. The first option applies,for example.to exploiterswho use oxen. Their services would continue to be demandedby forest owners becauseoxen have a lower impacton vegetationand soils.Another possibilitywithin the specializedsystems in the case of timber processingwould be to concentrate on sawinglogs of smalidiameters. The second option would involvereforestation using the capital and knowledgeaccumulated by the exploitersas well as the incentivesavailable for such activity.Finally, small loggersand transporterscan use their equipmentin activitiessuch as land movementsand carrying merchandise.For example,some loggersand transportersexpect to transport productsof agroexportcompanies between farms and ports of departure.
Joining a nongovernmentalorganization or a professionalcouncil has some advantages for forest exploiters,including the provisionof technical assistanceand extension programs,and havingone day a week reservedfor membersto present permit applications to the DGF. There are also public relationsbenefits. Loggersand sawmillowners are concerned about their deterioratingpublic image. There were complaintsthat the national communityand the media were creating an image that loggersand sawmillowners are the only ones responsille for the country'sdeforestation problem. Professional organizations help membersargue that their work rests on a rational and responsiblepolicy of forest exploitationbased on managementplans, that it is technicallyguided, and that there are obligatoryquotas of reforestationbased on the quantity of trees felled.
Relationshipbetween PopulationGrowth and Deforestation
Demographicpressure is often identifiedas the principalcause of deforestation,and reducing the rate of populationgrowth is proposed by some as the best solution to the problem. Others identifypolitical and economicfactors as determinantsof environmental deterioration,while a third group pinpointsrapid demographicgrowth combinedwith economicand socialpolicies and the level of technologicaldevelopment as causes of deforestation and environmentaldeterioration. It is also argued that povertyand the unequal distributionof wealth in developingcountries can accelerate the processof deforestationand environmentaldeterioration.
Costa Rica's population growthrate was amongthe highest in the world during the 1960s,at around 3.8% annuallyand it continues at a relativelyhigh rate of 2.6% a year. It is often argued that the growth in population,the incidenceof squattingin forest regions, and the short-termrate of harvestingor forest exploitationare related. Yet timber
14 harvestingrequires heavyequipment, so can squatters-a group with scarce resourceswho live in marginalconditions-be identifiedas a prime factor in logging(Lutz and Daly, 1991).
Distributionof land and campesinosettlements. The squatter movementand the consequent land invasionsstarted when the lawsof PrecariousOccupants (1942) and of Lands and Colonization(1961) were proclaimed(Mata, 1991).The actions of legalizing and granting lands are carried out through the Institute for AgrarianDevelopment (IDA), which attempts to resolve problemsrelated to the patterns of land distributionand the conflictscaused by campesinos'efforts to gain accessto land.
It is important to considerthe differencesamong the programsof IDA, in particular whether an IDA action is in response to an initiativeby squatters or whether it is the result of a previousstate action. During its first seven years, IDA was mainlyinvolved with granting lands that were considered"virgin" (Mora, 1991).About half the land that IDA distributedis suitableonly for forestry(Matamoros, 1987) and is located in marginalareas (Mora, 1991).Matamoros (1987) indicatesthat the agrarianlegislation in the past stimulateddeforestation as a mechanismfor recognizing"improvements' and facilitating the grantingof titles on the occupiedlands. At present, however,as noted earlier, the role of squatters in the deforestationprocess seems to be more an old stereotypethan a widespreadreality.
Lack of direct relationship.In the best empiricalstudy to date for Costa Rica, Harrison (1991)analyzed the direct relationshipbetween demographicgrowth and deforestation. She examinedthe spatial relationshipbetween deforestationand patterns of population growth usingcorrelation analyses, which, unlike regressionanalyses, require no assumptionsabout causality.
For the frontier region (the North, Atlantic,and South Pacific),her analysisshows no correlationbetween the increase in populationdensity in absoluteterms and percent loss of forest cover for 1950-84,1950-73, or 1973-84.The same is the case for relative populationdensity for 1950-73and 1973-84.A significantnegative relationship holds only for 1950-84.In the central region, the directionof the correlation is reversed: a relative increase in population is negativelycorrelated with a loss in forest cover for 1950-73,but positivelycorrelated for 1973-84.For the Pacificregion, none of the correlationsare significant.These findingsare in line with the results of Burgess (1991),who found in an econometricanalysis of 54 tropical countriesthat, contrary to expectation,the relationship between populationgrowth and deforestationwas negative.
Effectsof LoggIg and LandCearing on Biodiveity, Water,and Soils
Effects on biodiversitv.Costa Rica has a high diversityof flora and fauna. More than a half-millionspecies are estimatedto exist there, includingapproximately 800 speciesof birds,228 mammals,218 reptiles, 160 amphibians,130 freshwaterfish, and some 10,000 species of plants (9,000of which are native to the area). It is expected that some 360,000 species of insectswill be identified (Jim6nezand Poveda, 1991;National Biodiversity Study, 1991).Endemic species are as follows:mammals: 8; birds: 6; reptiles: 17;
15 amphibians:34; plants: about 10 percent. Identificationof more speciesin neighboring countries mayresult in a decrease of endemicspecies but this is no reason for carelessnesslThe National Studyon Biodiversityindicates that little or no research has been carried out in some areas of Costa Rica; the lack of informationis more evident on fauna than on flora. So only "guesstimates"can be made of the extent of threatened species.
Currentlybetween 1,000and 1,200species of plants (that is, about a tenth of the total) can be consideredendangered (NationalStudy on Biodiversity,1991); eight tree speciesare being threatened. Thirteen mammalspecies are on the verge of extinction.It was recentlyreported that seven endemicspecies of fish from the continentalwaters and two coral species are in danger of extinction.Some bird species are no longer found due to the total or partial decrease in their population and the destructionof their habitats, with two species on the verge of extinction.A list of 37 species of amphibiansand 36 species of reptiles found to be endangeredor vulnerablehas been published.With respect to the fauna, approximately75% of the insect speciesare exclusiveto the natural forest, so the decrease or disappearanceof forest areas will significantlyaffect them.
Twenty-seven(52%) of the sites visited belong to very humidtropical forest, 14 (27%) to the very humid to basal premontaneforest, 6 (12%) to the humid tropical forest, and the rest to life zones are represented only once. Timber harvestingis carried out mainlyin ecologicalzones with annual precipitationsbetween 2,000and 8,000millimeters, an annual averagebiotemperature greater than 17 degree Celsius,and ranges from very humid to prehumid.
Given that this studydid not involvefield inventoriesand measurements,indirect methods(field interviews)and research done by the ecologistin the field were used to estimate the effects of loggingand land clearingon the environment.An arbitraryscale was assignedto evaluatesubjectively the biodiversityin plants and animalsas high, medium,or low. It was registeredas high when people intervieweddid not indicatean apparent decrease in the number of timber or animalspecies (especiallyhunted species). The mediumvalue correspondedto a smalldecrease in species,while the low value was used when a substantialdecrease in forest and animalspecies was indicated. Data v ere recorded on harvestedtimber on each site and on animalspecies that interviewees reported as common.Climatic data for each site were obtained from the closest meteorologicstation.
Biologicallydiverse primary and secondaryforests are found in the ecologicalzones where harvestingis carriedout, based on what can be observed in the field,with 61% of the sites havinghigh biodiversity,12% with mediumbiodiversity, and 27% with low biodiversity.Of the sites visited,31 (60%) consistedof primaryforests; 14 (27%) were secondaryforests, initialas well as advanced;and 10 (19%) were pasturelands,abandoned plantations(mainly cocoa), or isolatedtrees. Two sites had mangroves.In primaryforests, plant species favor the developmentand maintenanceof mammals.Secondary forests have more fruit species,which provides food for fauna, such as birds,rodents, and monkeys.
Managementplans (found in 44% of the sites) do not include an ecologicalstudy of the forest or its dynamicsincluding the effect of fellingselected trees more than 60 cm. in
16 diameter. But what managementplans have improvedis the reduced harvestingof trees with good phenotypiccharacteristics, which could serve as producersof superior seed for natural regeneration or for forest nurseries.
In the 23 sites with managementplans, localbiodiversity can be decreased.The forest can be partiallyhomogenized through selectiveharvesting of a few species to a degree that variesaccording to the type of harvesting(whether oxen or machinery,depending on size). In clear-cutting,on the other hand, such as harvestingtrees for a change in land use during conversionto banana production,there is an almost total loss of biodiversity.In this case, the DGF recommendsthat a biologist-zoologistbe present during harvesting,a precaution in many cases not followed.
Given current managementplans, in which harvestingof main trees is based on their diameter, there is a tendency toward the loss of species and a decrease in the genetic diversity.Fortunately, actual lossesappear to have been smallso far, in part because of the sizablenational park and reserve areas. So Costa Rica continues to be rich in biodiversity,which is importantfor its thrivingecologically oriented tourism.
Effects on water. The aquatic tropicalsystems of Central Americahave been studied in great detaiL Little basic informationexists on the geochemistryof the region, the chemistryof the water, and the aquaticbiota (Pringle and Triska, 1989).
The water qualitywas assessedin each site. The reported degree of siltation or contamination(high, medium,or low) observed was registeredto complementdirect observationsmade by the team during field visits.Contamination was consideredhigh if those interviewedreported that the water source was contaminatedand there was a decrease in the number of fish; mediumwas used to indicatesome contaminationand some decrease in the number of fish; low was reservedfor cases in which those interviewedhad not observedany type of contaminationor a decrease in the number of fish.
The negativeimpact of deforestationon water bodies is small.The sedimentload near clearingand loggingsites usuallyrises, but the increase tends to be temporary,as vegetation in general soon covers the soil.
Contaminationof water was found in a few sites, but it was not directlyattributable to deforestation.What affectswater qualitysignificantly are plantationsfor bananas and, on a smallerscale, other crops,as wellas gold miningand similaractivities. Specific studies would need to be carried out to determine the impact.
Accordingto those interviewed,loggers in particular do not pay much attention to the water resourcesand sometimesdo not know their names.Some farm owners, membersof nearby communities,and persons linked to ecotourism,especially in areas with contaminatedrivers, noted their concern about sources of water and expressedan interest in protecting and conservingforests.
17 Effectson soils.The soilis an integralpart of the entire ecoystemand representsthe base for all terrestrialcommunities. To studythe soil,the predominanttexture, taxonomic family,and percentageof inclinationwas indicatedfor each site visited,based on visual observation.Also, soil samples in the forest and the clearedareas were taken in the north, south,and dry Pacificregions. The sitescontain ultisols and inceptisols.Little deteriorationwas found in connectionwith clearingactivities, and in the caseof harvesting on pastures,the soil had alreadystabilized. On-site inspection showed low degradation (in termsof soilcompaction, loss of nutrients,erosion, and/or contamination) in 53% of the sites and moderatedegradation in 40%,while only 7% of the sites showedsevere damage. Tbe fieldvisits indicated that soilcover was usually reestablished within weeks of an intervention.The maindamage to the soiloccurs because of roads.But even these generallygrow over quicklyif theyare no longerused.
LandUse after the earg of Forts Land in CostaRica duringthe period .950-85showed very slow increases for agriculturalproducdon (from 10% to 12%). Livestockareas increased from 18% to 43%. Forestlanddecreased from 85% in 1900to 56%in 1950and to 33%in 1985. The studyreconfirmed P6rez and Protti'sfindings (1978): the Atlantic,northern, and southPacific regions have the greatestextraction of timber.Extraction in the dry Pacific zoneand the CentralValley is minimaL The landuse capacitywas determined using the U.S.system of agriculturalclasses, in whichclasses I to IV are relatedto agriculture,class V is reservedfor livestockraising, classesVI and VII are for forests,and classVmI is for protectionand wildlife.In the 29 sitesvisited by the agronomist(14 in the Atlanticregion, 6 in the north,8 in the south Pacific,and 1 in the dry Pacific),28% were in areaswith a goodpotential for agriculture (classes , m, and IV), withthe rest appropriatefor livestockraising (class V), forestry (classesVI and Vm),or protection(class VM). Beforethe forestswere cut, 13%of the siteswere cultivated, 33% were occupiedby pastures(in use or abandoned),and 54% wereprimary forest or selectivelylogged forest. After the extractionof timber,10% of the sitescontinued under cultivation,43% had beenconverted to pastures,and 47% became selectivelylogged forests. (See Table2.) In general,land use patternsconform to the landuse capability(10-13% under cultivationversus 87-90% under pastureor forest),even thoughthe tendencytoward 'pasturing'is maintained(33% previously and 43% after harvesting),a fact mentionedby Alkenburg,Hein, and Weller(1990). Tbe followingchanges in land use wereobserved: the plantingof more than 10,000 hectaresof Gmelina(Gmelina arborea) through reforesidon programsin the southem region;the plantingof some20,000 hectares of orangeorchards in the northernregion; the expansionof bananacultivation in the Atlanticand northernregions (reaching 40,000 hectaresat the end of 1992);and touristdevelopment in the coastalregions. On a smaller scale,pasture grounds are also convertedfor cultivatingpineapple (2,500 hectares) and
18 Table 2 LandUse Capacity,Actual Use and Use BeforeLogging Land Actual Former Degrad- Sites Class Use(a) Use(a) ation(b) Recommendations AtlanticRegion LindaVista VI 5 7 1 None LindaVista VI 4 3 2 Introducelegumes CantaGallo V 4 3 3 Drain for bananas CantaGallo IV 4 6 2 Drain for bananas Rio Tuba III 3 2 1 Drainfor bananas Bribri VII 5 7 1 Deforestation Shiroles VI 1 4 1 Perennials Gandoca IV 2 1 2 Intro. fodderlegumes BocaParismina VIII 9 7 1 None Tortuguero VIII 5 7 1 None Penshurt VI 2 2 1 Forest upgrade Rio Hondo IV 6 5 2 Cultivateperennials Rio CostaRica VII 4 and 8 6 and 7 2 None "a Macha" VII 4 4 2 Deforestation NorthernRegion BocaTapada VI 8 3 3 Mixedforest plantation BocaTapada V 4 6 2 Intro. fodderlegumes a Vegae VI 4 7 2 Intro. fodderlegumes 'La Vega" IV 8 3 1 Mixedforest plantation Venado VI 4 4 1 Intro. fodderlegumes Pejibaye VI 4 4 1 Intro. fodderlegumes Guatuzo Ea 5 7 1 Intro. fodderlegumes SouthPacific PuertoCortes VmI 5 7 1 None Piru VI 8 4and5 1 None Cataza m 4 and 1 4 1 Intro. fodderlegumes Riyito VI 4 1 2 Intro, fodderlegumes Las Gemelas VII 8 6 2 None RanchoQuemado 1I 1 3 1 None Helechales1 VII 5 7 2 Manageforest Helechales2 VIII 5 7 1 Conservation Other Regions Samara vmI 5 1 Conservation a. 1=AnnualCrops; 2=Perennial Crops; 3=Tacotel (2); 4=Pasture;5=Intervened Forest;(50%); 6=Intervened Forest (75%); 7=Primary forest; 8=Deforested; 9=Tourism. b. 1=Low,2=Medium; 3=High.
19 annual or biannual crops such as palm-heart(5,000 hectares),black pepper, roots, tubers, rice, and beans. Reforestationwith native and other exotic species (except G. arborea) is just beginning,but people are starting to show interest in this, which in the short and medium term w:uld affect land-uisepatterns. Fournier (1989)compares the advantages and disadvantagesof natural regeneration and plantations,indicating that in the dry Pacific it is possibleto recover the forest over 30 years by natural regeneration.
Field observationsin areas where the forest was exploited 10 years ago indicated that in some cases old pasture or perhaps croplandspresent a reconversionof areas cleared of vegetationtoward secondary forests. This indicatesthe process of secondary succession(brush, early secondaryforest, late secondaryforests), although it was not possibleto quantifythis change.Secondary forest areas do not appear to be of great interest currently for loggers.But they are used for other purposes (white wood or less valuablewood in the local market,fuelwood, and posts and timber for use on local farms).
In seven cases (13% of the sample),farms were located on forest reserve lands or buffer zones. In two of these cases the type of exp!oitationcarried out correspondedto A2 permits (extractionof remainingtrees on pasturelands),while in the other five it correspondedto the so-calledmanagement plans (B2 permits).In those cases, the governmenthad declared the zone a reserve area or buffer zone and no compensationwas paid to owners,so they continuedwith their normal productiveactivities. Asked about their motivesfor harvestingtrees in areas that are supposedlyforest reserves (especiallyin the Osa Peninsula),farmland ownerspointed out that in the face of imminentprohibition of all forest activity,it was necessaryobtain 'something"(part of the products)frG.o dte forest, since the governmentlater would not compensatethem.
Finally,during the field trips, forest plantationswere found in the southern zone as well as the northern and Atlantic zones, especiallyGmelina (G. arborea) in the southern areas, where a project of Ston Forest is establishinga plantation of 10,000 hectares. Gmelina,laurel, and deglupta (Eucalyptusdeglupta) also exist in the northern and Atlantic zones. In the dry Pacific,small plantationsof Gmelina,teak (T. grandis),and pochote (B. quinata) were found. These reforestationprojects have been financed through private initiativeas well as through govemmentincentives for reforestation.
EconomicAspects of Tree Harvestingand Processing
The value of forestlandsdepends on the potential use. The situation regarding land registryand farm taxes is relativelyclear. Even in IDA settlements,registered farmers are allowedto sell their rights. The averagenational value per hectare is approximately158,000 colones (US$1,200),which is stronglyinfluenced by the high value of land in the banana zones. The value fluctuatesbetween 60,000colones (US$460)and 300,000colones (US$2,300)in the banana zones.
Pricingof standingtimber. Most farm ownersinterviewed (25 cases) had a fairlygood idea of the price of standingtimber as well as the value of their land. The gross price in current colones for a PMT (see footnote on p.9) of standingtimber is approximatelya tenth of the retail price of timber,and ranges from 5 to 15 colones (4-120 US) depending on the qualityof the wood. The price is part of the contract between the owner and the
20 logger. The latter generallytakes the responsibilityfor all the paperwork required for harvestingand transport. The price agreed on is the gross price, from which the costs of taxes, tariffs,roads, and other costs are subtracted to get the net price for the owner, which may be half as large. To compensatefor the forest tax, which is 10% of the value of the harvest authorized by the DGF, and for other taxes, it is commonto cut around 50% more than the stated volume.
Due to the remotenessof the harvestingsites of primaryforests, there are incrementalcosts of skiddingand loading.This helps produce a certain distributionof zones amongloggers, as well as a market situation in which at most a few buyersexert a disproportionateinfluence on the purchasingof timber in remote areas. This depressesthe prices paid to farmers.
Value of standingtimber. The grossvalue per PMT for standingtimber in early 1992was as follows:softwood such as ceibo at 5.20 colones (40 US), semihardwood such as caobilla at 7.25 colones (60 US), and hardwood(fne woods)such as pochote at 15 colones (120 US). These figuresrefer to the contract between farm owners and loggers,and to the estimatedvolume of usable timber without the bark and scraps.It was observed that the prices paid on-farmvaried in different zones, due mainlyto the distancesto sawmills,and that the costs of loadingvaried with the topographyof the farm. Since the sawn timber market is very competitive,the costs of transportationand loading "penalize"the value of the standingtimber.
The costs of access-roadconstruction by loggers,the taxes paid in advanceby loggers,the costs of the forest regency,the legal fees, and the fees for processingthe permit are all deducted from the grossvalue agreed on by forest owners and loggers.Also, the requirementthat a forester 'regent" help lay out managementplans and inspect the timber forest (at 7,000colones per visit', together with the time it takes to process permits in DGF offices,weighs heavily on the gross incomeof the sale of exploitabletimber. These costs may add up to 50%oof the total contractedestimate. Existing skewed market situations further depress the grossvalues.
The contractedvolume does not alwayscorrespond to the real volume extractedby loggers.There is likelyan underestimationof 10% of the actual measuredvolume of wood because farmers are unfamiliarwith the measurementof wood carried out with a rope ("mecate"),a techniquethat lends itself to confusion.According to the Technological Institute of Costa Rica (ITCR, 1988),the PMT underestimatesaround 30% of the exploitablevolume of solid timber comparedwith other methodsof volume determination that employ mathematicalformulas ("Smalian," for example).
Costs of extraction.As noted earlier, exploitationsare mainlycarried out by a loggerwho uses chain sawsfor the felling and preparationof logs, caterpillartractors or skiddersfor haulingoff or minor transport, and trucks with three or more axlesfor major transport. Sometimesthe logs are initiallytransported to a loadingdock from which they are later taken to the sawmill.Rarely (onlywhen dealingwith medium-sized,highly valued timber) are oxen used for minor transport.
21 It costs approximately1 colon (0.770US) per PMT to use the chain saw, including the cost of an assistant.An additional4 colones needs to be included for skiddingand loading,while 10 colones per PMT must be added when a loadingdock is involved.For skiddingwith oxen, which impliesan investmentcost in animalsof 200,000Wcolones (US$1,540),loading costs approximatelyI colon per PMT. For skiddingwith a tractor to a river or a canal, the cost increasesto 5 colones per PMT, while sawingit directlyon the farm impliesan extractioncost of 20 colones per PMT. Overall,the labor for preparing logs, skidding,handling at the landing,and loadingonto trucks costs between 5 and 11 colones (4-8.50 US). The cost for handlingat the sawmillis high and was not calculatedin previous studies (Flores Rodas, 1985;WRI, 1991).
A "typical"logger generally owns chain saws,a caterpillar bulldozer,and a platform tractor, which altogether amount to a fixedcapital investmentof around 10 million colones (approximatelyUS$77,000). He contracts sawyersand sometimesfor trucks for transport to the mills.
Costs of transport and processing.The final transport by truck to sawmillsis also calculatedwith PMT and costs 5-6 colones per 150 kIlometers(approximately from the Atlantic Coast to San Jos6) and 8-10 colonesfrom the southern zone (where the Osa Peninsulais 300 kilometersfrom San Jos6). Comparedwith other costs of standingtimber and of hauling,loading, and docking,this is not as signiricantas discussedin other studies (WRI, 1991;Flores Rodas, 1985).Independent truck driverspoint out that there is great competitivenessin this link in the chain of costs Truck driversand loggersinterviewed claim that in addition, in municipalitiesand/or associationsof comm'initydevelopment force them either to pay a toll (peaje) for repairingroads or to return with stone and fling materialsfor road repair.
The forest industryemploys about 2,000people. Sawmilloperators-an estimated 161 in 1988 (TR, 1988)and 125 in 1990 (DGF, 1990)-purchase approximately60% of their timber from independentloggers even when the companyowns forest reserves,since they prefer not to exhaust their own reserves.Large sawmillsare increasinglytrying to integrate verticallyin order to secure a future supplyof raw materiaLSawmills on average buy softwoodat 15 colones (120 US) per PMT, semi-softwoodat 25 colones (190 US), and hardwood at 45-55 colones (35420 US). These prices can varyslightly, depending on the source of the wood, due to transportationcosts.
Accordingto Flores Rodas (1985)and the fTCR (1988), most sawmillsoperate with low efficiencybecause they use old equipment and obsolete technology.That is probablydue to the fact that their profits have historicallybeen very good, which discouragesimprovements in efficiency(around 50%). Another factor in the low qualityof sawmillequipment is that improvementswould require a cumbersomeand costlyDGF procedure in order to reauthorizeoperation.
Wholesalesawn pricesvary with the species and the volume acquired,ranging from 30 colones for softwoodsto 90 colonesfor fine wood (23-690 US). Retail prices range from 42.50to 140colones per PMT (330 US to US$1.08)for finishedwood. The greater proportion of the markup is added in the processingindustry. It is interestingto
22 note that contraryto a previousstudy by Flores Rodas (1985),transport represents only 6% of the retail price.
The informationcompiled indicates that most of the timber is acquiredby four groups: the free market located in San Jos6, sawmilloperators throughout the country, the PlywoodCompany, and exportersof finishedproducts (furniture stores and the PORTICO Company).The last two purchasersalso acquired raw materialat the free market.
International Market. The export and import of timber in log form for commercial purposes is prohibitedin Costa Rica (Forest Law,Art. 134, 1986).Therefore no official statisticson external trade for this item exist. International trade in sawn wood is allowed but is subject to regulationson thicknessand length (Forest Law, 1986),and DGF authorizationis required.
Costa Rican timber would be cheaper in the United Kingdommarket than timber from Brazil but more costlythan that from Africa.In consultingwith local exportersof finished wood products,some questionswere raisedabout whether the countly could produce the amountsand the qualitythat would be required internationally.
23 BIBLIOGRAPHY
ALTENBURG,T., HEIN, W., and WELLER,J. 1990.El DesaffoEcondmico de Costa Rica: DesarrolloAgroindustrial Autocentrado Como Alternativa.DEI, San Jose, Costa Rica, 394 p.
BURGESS,J. 1991."Economic Analysis of Frontier AgricultureExpansion and Tropical Deforestation."Master's Thesis,University College, London. June.
DOSZLELN,J. von. 1991."Pesticide Contamination and PesticideControl in Developing Countries."In Richardson,M. (ed.). Chemistry.Agriculture and the Environment.Royal Societyof Chemistry,England. pp. 410-428.
FINEGAN,B. and SABOGAL,C. 1988."El Desaroilode Sistemasde Producci6n Sostemnbleen los BosquesTropicales Hdimedos de Bajura: Un Estudio de Caso en Costa Rica."El Chagui (Costa Rica) Vol. 18, pp. 16-24.
FLORES RODAS, J.G. 1985."Diagn6stico del Sector Industrial Forestal."EUNED, San Jos6, Costa Rica.
FOURNIER, LA. 1985."El Sector Forestal de Costa Rica: Antecedentesy Perspectivas." AgronomfaCostarricense. VoL 9, No. 2, pp. 253-260.
FOURNEER,LA. 1989."Importancia de la Reforestaci6nen Costa Rica."Aronomfa Costarricnese.VoL 13, No. 1, pp. 127-133.
HARRISON,S. 1991."Population Growth, Land Use and Deforestation in Costa Rica, 1950-1984."Interciencia. Vol. 16, No. 2, pp. 83-93.
INSTITUTOTECNOLOGICO DE COSTA RICA; MINISTERIODE RECURSOS NATURALES,ENERGIA Y MINAS.1988. Censo de la IndustriaForestaL ITCR- MIRENM San Jos6, Costa Rica.
JIMENEZ, Q. and POVEDA, LJ. 1991."Arboles Maderables Nativos de Costa Rica." Contribucionesdel Departamentode Historia Natural-MuseoNacional de Costa Rica. No 5. 32p.
LUTZ, E. and DALY, H. 1991."Incentives, Regulations, and SustainableLand Use in Costa Rica."Environment and Resource Economics.No. 1, pp. 179-194.
MATA,R. 1991."Los Ordenes de Suelosde Costa Rica."In Vahrson, W. et al. (eds). Taller de Erosidn de Suelos. Heredia, Costa Rica. pp. VII-VIII.
MATAMOROS,A. 1987."Los Recursos Fc restales.Borrador de Trabajo,Estudio Actual del Ambiente.San Jose, C.R." In Desarrollo Socioeconomicoy El Ambiente Natural de Costa Rica: SituacionActual y PerspectivasFuturas. FundacionNeotropica, Editorial Heliconia,San Jose, Costa Rica.
24 MORA, J. 1990.'La Distribucionde la Tierra y los AsentamientosHumanos en Costa Rica."In Centroamericav Los Problemasdel Desarrolloen el Campo. FAO.
NATIONALBIODIVERSITY STUDY. 1991.Ministerio de Recursos Naturales,Energda y Minas,Museo Nacionalde Costa Rica, e Instituto Nacionalde Biodiversidad.1 88p.
OLDEMAN,R.AA. 1978."Architecture and Energy Exchangeof DicotyledonousTrees in the Forest."In Tomlinson,P.B. and Zimmermann,H.M. (eds). TropicalTrees as a LivingSystem. Cambridge.
PEREZ, S. and PROTTI, F. 1978."Comportamiento del Sector Forestal Durante el Perfodo 1950-1977."AOPSA, San Jos6, Costa Rica,59 p.
PRINGLE,C. and TRISKA,F. 1989."Spatial Variation in Phosphate Concentrationsof Small-orderStream DrainingVolcanic Landscapes in Costa Rica: Sourcesand Implications for Nutrient Cycling."In PhosphorusCvcles in Terrestrialand AquaticEcosystems. Scope- UNEP. SaskatchewanInstitute of Pedology.pp. 70-83.
SADER, S.A. and Joyce, A.T. 1988 "DeforestationRates and Trends in Costa Rica, 1940 to 1983."Biotropica. VoL 20, No. 1, pp. 11-19.
SECRETARIATECNICA DE RECURSOSNATURALES and DIRECCION GENERAL FORESTAL 1990.Bolet(n EstadfsticoForestal No.4. San Jos6, Costa Rica. DGF. 109 p.
WORLD RESOURCESINSTTUITE, U.N. ENVIRONMENTPROGRAMME, and U.N. DEVELOPMENTPROGRAMME. 1991. World Resources 1990-1991.New York. Oxford UniversityPress. 463 p.
WORLD RESOURCESINSTITUTE. 1991.Accounts Overdue: Natural Resource Depreciationin Costa Rica. Washington,D.C. 110 p.
25 ANNEX 1 Page 1
ANNEX 1: DETAILS ON METHODOLOGYAND SAMPLESITS
Annex Table 1.1 Volumesof CuttingsAuthorized by DGF in the Period 19861990, Per Forest Region
3 Volume of TimberAuthorized (m ) REGION 1,986 1,987 1,988 1,989 1,990 TOTAL
Dry Pacific 24,296 31,039 46,582 23,233 22,075 147,225
E Central Valley 6,587 4,650 5,953 8,407 16,800 42,397
Central Valley 7,162 4,748 5,787 5,074 143,25 37,096
W. Central Valley 5,041 5,511 6,184 4,979 7,990 29,705
Central Pacific 3,979 2,493 2,257 3,591 8,724 21,044
South Pacific 49,523 45,365 39,668 29,926 60,055 224,537
Northern Zone 246,391 133,941 163,724 243,226 266,658 1,053,940
Atlantic Zone 125,769 84,416 128,539 132,681 244,406 715,811
TOTAL 468,748 312,163 398,694 451,117 641,033 2,271,755
Source: DOF, 1990.Anuario estadfstico.
Note: To help understandthe increasebetween 1989 and 1990 in the table one needs to point out that during 1989 the past Forest Lawwas repealed and declared unconstitutional. In 1990 a new law was proclaimed. It facilitatesbetter record keeping of the quantities authorized at the national level, and may explainthe increase. ANNEX 1 Page 2
Annex Table 1:2 Calculationon the Distrbution of the Samplingfor the Studyon Deforestationin Costa Rica
UNPROTECTED TOTAL PROD. REGION AREA' 86-902 %3 N4 PROPORTION5 %3 N4 AREA6 N4
Dty Pacific 40,920 147,225 6 3 664,487 6 3 6,024 1 E. Central Valey -.5,171 42,397 2 1 191,355 2 1 1,491 0 Centnal Valley 3,260 37,096 2 1 167,430 2 1 121 0 W. Central Valley 31,040 29,705 1 1 134,071 1 1 922 0 Central Pacific 6,700 21,044 1 0 94,980 1 0 141 0 South Padfic 13:1,403 224,537 10 5 1,013,429 10 5 29,954 6 Northern Zone 146,610 1,053,940 46 23 4,756,868 46 23 156,626 29 Atlantic Zone 104,230 715,811 32 16 3,230,752 32 16 74,609 14
TOTAL 503,334 2,271,755 100 50 10,253,372 100 50 269,888 S0
1. Unpwected forest area in each region. 2. Total volume authorized in the period 1986-1990. 3. Percentage volume authorized in relation to the total. 4. SampUngsize per foret region. 5. Volume authorzed per tor for exploitation (rotal volume authordzedhnpwceed area). 6. Volume authoied, emphasized for the unprotected area (in miles of ha. and m3). ANNEX 1 Page 3
AnnexTable 1.3 Lcation of the Selected Sites and Obsevations by SurveyTeam
Site Municipality Observations
01-Canta Gallo Palmitas,Cariari Loggingon remainingtrees in pasture
02-LomasSierpe Pueblo Nuevo, Guacimo SelectiveLogging with DGF permit in a farm near Tortuguero National Park; contract between a logger and the two co-owners of the primaryforest
03-Fnca Gavilan Puerto Viejo,Sarapiqui Clear cutting; wood choppedfor fertilization; banana plantation preparation of COBAL,a subsidiaryof United Brands,in a slightly loggedforest.
04-Charco del Atlantico 1 Las Marias,Sarapiqui Clear-cutting;Use and marketingof higher and lower qualitywoods; farm owned by loggingcompany, surrounded by banana plantations;only slightlylogged primary forest.
05-Fmca Sol Las Marias,Sarapiqui Clearcuttingwith DGF permit in primary forests. Farm owned by a large logging company.
06-Cano Sardinal Santa Elia, Sarapiqui Logs taken from Las Mariasarea through the SarapiquiRiver using a towingboat
07-Casa de Lata Boca Tapada, Pital Selectivelogging contracted by the landownerwith a milLIt has a management plan
08-El Jardin Coopevega,Cutris Forest managementwith intervenedforest plots and reforested plots
09-El Encanto Dos Rios, Upala Selectivelogging for 1992 in a secondary forest plot, which was intervened 30 years ago. Owner is an IDA settler ANNEX1 Page 4
10-La Avalancha Buenos Aires, Upala Loggingin a primaryforest to be converted into pasture land. Some other areas within the farm show regeneration of forest.
11-Albata Guayabito,Guatuso Cutting of scattered remainingtrees., without permit from the DGF, to make room for an extensiveorange plantation.Farm is owned by a company(Albata)
12-La familia Catira, Guatuso 5utting of remainingtrees and on-site millingwith portable equipment. No DGF permit. Use of oxen to carry the logs.
13-Las Minas Pitahaya,Abangares Illegal loggingin the Rio Abangares watershed,which showspollution with mercuryand cyanidespilled by gold mining
14-La Purruja Golfito, Golfito Cuttingof secondaryforest with permit from the DGF. Owner showsintention to take advantageof reforestationsubsidies to replant.
15-BosqueViejo Rio Piro, Osa Cuttingof few trees from a primaryforest preservedby the owner. Timber is processed in a small mill in the same farm.
16-U Moc Penshurst,Valle La Estrelia Cuttingof cordia alliodora(laurel) trees from a cocoa plantation,where they were used as shade. Owner has permit from the DGF and managementplan, which includes replantingwith the same species. Use of oxen to transport logs
17-Rio Hondo 28 Millas,Siquirres Selectivecutting in intervened forest, with permit from the DGF. The owner's main activityis productionof cocoa
18-Arjade Rio Costa Rica, Guapiles Selectivecutting with permit from the DGF and managementplan in a primaryforest. The owner is also owner of a sawmill.He is also reforestingthe farm.
19-Charcodel Las Marias,Sarapiqui Clear-cuttingin a farm acquiredAtlantico by COBAI, a banana company.The former owner of the land contractedwith a logger cutting and processingof timber,before ANNEX1 Page 5
COBALwould take possessionof the property.
20-Aguas Mansas Rio Costa Rica, Guapiles Progressivecutting and in situ processing usingchain saws.The owner obtained the forest from squatters who previously occupiedthe land
21-Israel Mora Cimarrones,Siquirres Cuttingof remainingtrees in a steep pasture plot. Only mature trees were authorized for cutting
22-GARGI Bufalo,Limon Selectivecutting with permit from the DGF and managementplan in a farm devoted to timber production
23-Barro de OUa Rio Barbilla,Limon Selectivecutting in a former cocoa plantation,with permit from the DGF
24-Coopemangle Coronado,Desembocadura Selectivecutting of del Rio Terrabamangrove,with permit from the DGF. The bark is used to produce tannine and the logs for productionof charcoal
25-Coyunda Rio Piro, Osa Selectivecutting with permit from the DGF and managementplan in a primaryforest. Reforestationwith exotic and native species has taken place
26-Agua Buena Agua Buena, Osa Cuttingof remainingtrees in pasture plots, with permit from the DGF. The majorityof the farm is still under primary 'orest.
27-Barrigones Canaza, Osa Selectivecutting with permit from the DGF and managementplan for primaryand secondaryforest. Cattle ranchingis the main activityof the farm.
28-El Mentiroso Rio Riyito, Osa Selectivecutting with permit from the DGF. The loggerowns a truck and rents a caterpillar and additional transport. Dubious testimony,which makes this interview unreliable.
29-Las Gemelas Chacarita,Golfito Selectivecutting with permit from the DGF. The logger owns the farm, and has a very well organizedcamp-site ANNEX 1 Page 6
30-Santa Cecilia Mogos,Golfito Selectivecutting with permit from the DGF in a mildlyintervened &,rest. The logger owns a farm with natural forest and reforestationnear this loggingsite.
31-Aporreo Rancho Quemado,Osa Plan to clear-cutin order to establish a pasture plot. The loggerhad advanced money for the timber,but this type of permit was recently suspended.
32-Campana Linda Vista, Cariari Cuttingand insitu sawmillingwith chainsaw, without permit from the DGF. This is a mildlyintervened forest. The farm is owned by a non-authorizedsawyer. Cutting is done by purchaseorder from banana companies, which use the timber mainlyfor posts and planks
33-SociedadVargas Linda Vista, Cariari This is a cattle ranch where clear-cuttingand transport of logs is done by loggershired by the landowner.Timber is sold to the plywood companyand sawmills.
34-CasasVerdes Palmitas,Cariari Cuttingof remainingtrees in farms owned by banana companies.Extensive cutting took place about sixyears ago.
35-Hemingway Canta Gallo, Cariari This is a farm with pasture and secondary forest. Clear-cuttingis performedin some plots to change use of land into banana plantation.
36-El Comendador Valle La Estrella Tuba Creek Cuttingof remainingtrees in a cocoafarm purchasedby a banana company,with permit from the DGF. Use of oxen and bulldozer.
37-Corea Gandoca, Sixaola Cuttingby a loggerof remainingtrees in pasture land, with permit from the DGF.
38-La Balsa Boca de Parismina, Cuttingof remainingTortuguero trees in pasture land. The farm still has land under secondaryforest and crops. Logs are deliveredto PORTICO, the companythat claimsto do sustainablelogging, via the Tortuguero canals. ANNEX 1 Page 7
39-Betancour Jaloba, Tortuguero Selectivecutting by landowner,who is also a logger,with permit from the DGF. Logs were transporte through the Tortuguero canals.
40-El Roble Coopevega,Cutris Cuttingof remainingtrees in pasture land, with permit from the DGF. The owner is planningto make a managementplan for other parts of the farm still under forest cover.
41-Chamorro Coopevega,Cutris Selectivecutting with permit from the DGF. The managementplan was formulatedby a forest engineer from CODEFORSA.The loggerused to be a cattle rancher until 1989, when entered into the timber business.
42-El Carmen Coopevega,Cutris Selectivecutting of remainingtrees in pasture land, with permit from the DWF. The farm also has 100 reforested hectares.
43-Cano El Recreo Boca Tapada, Pital Selectivecutting in primaryforest, with permit from the DGF. The farm is possessed by the owner of a sawmill,who also owns harvestingequipment A forest engineer is in charge of the field work
44-Boca de la Rio San Juan Selectivecutting in Curena Frontera Norteprimaryforest. The site is located within the one-mileCosta Rican - Nicaraguanborder conservationzone; nevertheless,this cuttingwas autho.ied by the DGF.
45-El Diamante Venado, Guatuso Cuttingof remainingtrees in pasture land, with permit from the DGF.
46-Pejlbaye Guatuso Cuttingof remainingtrees in pasture land, with permit from the DGF
47-Numa Buenavista,Guatuso Cuttingof remainingtrees in pasture land, with permit from the DGF. The logger also participatesin ecotourismactivities.
48-Muerte San Rafael, Guatuso Cuttingof remainingtrees in pasture land, with permit from the DGF. This a very large ranch, devoted to fattening cattle. ANNEX 1 Page 8
49-Los Angeles Garza, Nicoya Selectivecutting in a secondaryforest, with permit from the DGF. Loggingis performed on a hilly topographywith clear forestry potential.
50-Salina Puerto Jesus, Nicoya Cuttingof remainingtrees, with permit from the DGF. Part of the timber is used as firewoodin a neighboringsalt factoty.
51-Helechales Potrero Grande, Selectivecutting in Coto Brus primaryforest, with permit from the DGF. This site is located withinwhat wouldbe the buffer-zone of La AmistadNational Park.
52-Lechoso Potrero Grande Selectivecutting in Coto Bnis primaryforest, with permit from the DGF. This site is located withinwhat wouldbe the buffer-zone of La AmistadNational Park. ANNEX 2 Page 1
ANNEX 2 TYPES OF EXPLOITATIONAND PERmITS
Forest exploitationin Costa Rica is generallycarried out on forestlandsituated outside national parks, but also in forest reserves through authorized permits from the Directorate General of Forestry (DGF) that permit tree-cuttingand regu.ate transport.
Processingof Permits
The Costa Rican forest law has scheduleddifferent stages in the processingof permits. For example,for 1992 the last day of July was establishedas a deadline for receivingthe solicitationof permits at the regionaloffices of the DGF. During the subsequentmonths, the DGF informedthe applicantwhether the applicationhad been processedor whether more documentswere needed for processing.The documentsthat are lackingmust be receivedby the last workingday of August. During the monthsof September to November,the required inspectionsand evaluationsare carriedout, and the trees that are allowedto be extractedare marked.In December, applicantsare notifiedabout whether or not their requests have been approved.Beginning on December 31. permits for extraction and transport are granted to forestlandowners. These permits authorize them to carry out the extraction,which must be completedbefore May 1. The month of May can only be used for transport of timber to the timber consumingareas.
In all cases, permits granted by the DGF indicatethe quantityof taxable timber in cubic meters authorized for extraction.The quantitycan also be expressedin total volume/area,or by volume and number of trees (umatasi)to be extracted.
Ihe Requirementof Mangement Plans
The grantingof forest permits is regulatedby the DGF based on a managementplan that clearlyindicates the purpose of the exploitationand the land use capacityon the site where it will be carried out. Such managementplans generallyrequire a professionalforester's involvement.(In general, extraction permits on unforested lands that exceed41 trees and are less than 400 m3 (permitsA2) must include a forest inventorycarried out by a professionalforester. Regarding permits B1 (located on lands suitable for agricultureand change of use), when areas for extraction are greater than 5 hectares, a forest inventoryby a professionalforester is required. Permits B2 (forest managementplans in the natural forest) must be elaborated by a professional forester.)
Requiringthe involvementof professionalforesters is one of the mechanismsof control establishedby the DGF for the correct applicationof managementplans and the replacingof extracted timber.According to the DGFs 1991document on technical-administrativeprocessing for the managementand exploitationof the forest in Costa Rica 1990-1994,each management plan must includethe provisionof technicalservices by the technicianwho wrote up the plan, as defined by Article 104 of the Forest Law,which stipulates that such technicianmust prepare trimestralreports on the progressof the project and submit them to the DGF. The technician ANNEX 2 Page 2 responsiblemust be properlyregistered in the professionalregistry established by the DGF, as indicatedin Article 54, clause "d,' of the Forest Law.
Types of Permits in SurveySites and Type of TreesFelled
Accordingto informantsinterviewed (87% of the cases),the majorityof the timber extracted from the forest or extractionsites involvedpermits obtained by ownersof forestlandsin accordancewith the regulationsof the DGF. It is notable that only in three cases was it clear that the extractionwas carried without forest permits (Annex Table 2.1), while the majorityof informantsclaimed that they had some type of permit. In the view of the team, illegalfelling without permits on a large scale does not exist. Commonly,however, a greater volume is cut than is authorized,and transport permits and tags for the logs are reutilizedand wood is transported at night and on weekends,when there is less control.
The three cases involvedsmall trees. One extractionthat occurred inside a citrus plantation amountedto 20 trees (40 in3). In the second case, fallen trees and some standing timber (approximately4), located on pasturelandfor extensivelivestock production, were taken out. The third extractioninvolved a sawyer,the owner of forestlandlocated in a reserve area, who works with the semiprocessing(squaring) of timber insidethe forest because. As he indicated,the DGF had not granted the permit he had requested becauseall the documentsrequired for processingthe permit were not submitted.
At least three farmersinterviewed during the field studystated that, faced with the difficultyin obtainingextraction permits for changingthe land use by small farmers,a gradual approach was used. This is knownin Costa Rica as "socola"("clearing") involving the elimination of the understoryin an area of natural forest, the plantingof pastures and the gradual elimination,whether it be through ringingor simplefelling of upper-crowntrees. Later, a permit for extractingtimber on pasturelandsis obtained,which does not have the same requirementsas a permit for changingthe land use.
Accordingto AnnexTable 2.1, the majorityof permits granted by the DGF correspond to selectiveexploitations in the primaryforest (B2): 39%. As a consequence,it can be affirmedthat the greater part of the timber used in Costa Rica comesfrom selectiveexploitations in the natural forest. In these cases, the most exploitedspecies are: caobilla(Carapa guianensis),cedro (Cedrela odorata), cristobal(Platymiscium polystachyum), gavilin (Pentaclethramacroloba), fruta dorada (Virola spp.), botarrama (Vochysiahondurensis), roble (Tabebuiaroseae), cocobolo (Dalbergia retusa), pil6n (Hieronymaalchorneoides), ron-ron (Astroniumfraveolens), and lechoso (Brosimun gR)n A2 authonzations,the next most numerous,correspond to the extraction of timber on pasturelands(seven cases) or on abandonedcocoa plantations(three cases),and represented l9o of the total interviewed.Generally, the timber extracted correspondsto speciesof high value, such as laurel (Cordia alliodora),chilamate (Ficus werckleana),and, on a smallerscale, cedro amargo (C. odorata) and guanacaste(Enterolobium cyclocarpurm).
AnnexTable 2 1 Types of Penmits During the Survy ANNEX-2 Page3
South SouthDty Type Atlantic North Pacific Pacific Total %
A2 5 5 10 19 A2-B2 1 1 2 BI 2 5 7 13 B2 8 5 6 1 20 39 B3 1 1 2 B5 3 3 6 IlMegal 1 2 3 6 No Information 1 2 1 3 7 13 Total 17 20 11 4 52 100
Source:Field Survey
Permitsfor the changein landuse (B1) are less common;these requirea judgmenton the landuse capacityfor the new activities.The interviewsindicated that only 13%of thistype of permitswere granted to bananacompanies (four cases) or to smallfarmers (three cases). One of the interviewscorresponded to an organizedgroup (Mangrove Cooperative, 'Coopemangle")that processedand obtained a B3 permitfor the managementand exploitationof a mangroveaea dedicatedto harvestingtrees, fuelwood, and charcoaLThis group can counton the servicesof an internationalconsultant (CATlE/IUCN) and the localuniversity (UNAH) for executingthe managementplan. The typeB5 permit,which authorizes the harvestingof up to 10 trees in the natural forest,was not grantedin 1992,and the casesreported correspond to permitsgranted during 1991.One of the personsinterviewed claimed that the permitwas revokedbefore he wasable to extractthe timber.As a result,he lost moneythat he had investedin obtainingthe permit. Typesof Permt for HavestingTmber and Other ForestProducts Tp Armit. Thesepermits are authorizedin areaswithout forest cover (in areas currently used for agriculturalproduction). 1.1Type Al permitsThese are authorizedfor beingprocessed and usedwithin the samefarm and as improvements.The maximumvolume to be grantedfor each farmis 10 cubicmeters per year.A maximumof two permitscan be grantedfor a periodof one year. ANNEX 2 Page 4
The selection,marking, numbering, and determiningthe cubic content of trees can be carried out by an authorized forest inspectorfor ensuring that protected areas are not affected.
In protected areas administeredby the DGF, the complete processingfor grantingthe permit can be carried out by the administratorof the area, when s/he is a professionalforester or the equivalent,who in all case should send a copy of the permit granted to the corresponding Regional Forest Office.
1.2 Type A2 permits.These permits,by their nature, number of trees involved,and volume of timber to be harvested require greater utilizationof machineryand equipment.They can be used on the same farm or for commercialpurposes.
On lands suitable for forest production(Classes VI and above), processingof a maximum of 200 m' per farm each year is authorized A maximumof two permitsper farm can be granted without exceedingthe, volume assigned.As indicatedby the Forest Law,there must be a regenerationof the cleared areas acceptingthe relationshipof 20 trees planted for I tree harvestedin the tegeneration of the volumegranted for those permits that aliow cuttingof less than 40 trees, where the selection,the marking,numbering, and volumedetermination of the trees for cutting can be carried out by an authorizedforest inspector. For quantities greater than 41 trees, those interested in harvestingtimber must have a forest inventorydone by an authorized professionalforester and clearlyexpress the type of mechanismsused for regeneratingthe affected areas and other steps taken for maintainingan adequate forest cover of these areas. Forest regencywould be required.
On 'ands suitablefor agriculturalproduction (Classes I-V), the processingof a maxmum volumeof 400 m per farm each year is authorized.Greater quantities can be authorized with the approvalof the DGF.
For such requests that consistof less than 40 trees, the selection,marking, numbering, and determiningthe cubic content of the trees to be cut can be carried by the authorized forest inspector. For harvestingmore than 41 trees, those interested must have a forest inventorydone by a professionalforester or the equivalent.
1.3 Type A3 permits.These permitsare authorized on municipallands (parks and green areas) and other public institutions(schools, high schools,universities, parishes, etc.). The selection, marking,and determiningthe cubiccontent wili be the responsibilityof the DGF and can be carried out by a forest inspector,mainly to ensure that no protected zones are affected.
2 Type B permits. These permitsauthorize harvestingon natural forestland.
2.1Tpe Bi permits. These are permitsfor harvestingin the natural forest located on lands suitable for agriculturalproduction. They are granted when the land is proved suitablefor agriculture,based on the methodologythat is officiallyapplied.
On forestlandssuitable for agricultureproduction, where the owner has interest in extractingtimber without convertingthe land, the DGF would offer the technicalsupport for markingand determiningthe cubiccontent of trees through their forest technicianswhen the area ANNEX 2 Page S does not exceed five hectares. When interventionis required in areas greater than indicated, the owner must contract the servicesof a private technicianto carry out the correspondingstudy.
When there is a desire to change the land, the verificationof the studyof land use capacityand inventoryshould be carried out by an authorized technician.
In protected areas administeredby the DGF, changesin land use and clear-cuttingare restricted to the maximum,since there is a desire to manage the remainingnatural forest.
2.2 Type B2 permits Tnese permits are authorized for the managementof the natural forest and the silviculturaltreatment solicitedshould be fullyjustified for guaranteeingthe permanence or increase of the resource of natural forests located on lands suitablefor forest production,in which the regeneration of the areas intervened is obligatory.Changes in land use and clear-cuttingare prohibited.
Forest management,whatever the area, should include technicalforest servicesfor the period indicatedby the managementplan. The technicianacts as a forest regent.
All exploitationof the forest withina protected area administeredby MIRENEM must be carried out through a managementthat has the objectiveof a sustainedyield in an integral way for which,besides the aspects previouslyindicated, the acceptabilityof the property, the environmentalimpact that the exploitationimplies, and the objectivesthat are pursued in the area wiflbe considered.For exploitationwithin the protected areas administeredby the DGF, consultationis obligatoryand must be carried out through the SubdirectorateGeneral of Forestry.
2.3 Type B3 permit These permits are authorizedfor exploitingother products from the forest that are not timber for sawing,palmheart, and products from the thinningof plantations.
On lands inside the protected areas administratedby the DGF, authorizationis required to transport the foliowingproducts: vines, charcoal,fuelwood, varilla para puntales,ornamental plants, palm-heart,wool, and mangrovebark.
This type of permit will be processedand authorized by the administratorof the protected area with communicationto the correspondingRegional Forest Office.
2.4 Type B4 permits. These permits authorize the harvestinginside forest areas for the constructionof trails and roads for accessto farms,population centers,or caserfos.They are only granted in the area correspondingto the right of way,which for rural roads is 14 meters wide.
The constructionof accessroads that affect forest areas will be restricted and willbe oriented towardspecial objectives that willbe evaluatedcarefully. The main considerationswill be the importanceof accessand the possibledamage it maycause.
2.5 Type B5 permits.These permits authorize exploitationof a maximumof 10 marked trees for each farm per year in the natural forest when the needed species is not found in the unforested areas. The constructionof trails or the use of mechanicaltraction (chapulfn,skidder, and caterpillar)are prohibited.The timber can be processedin the farm. ANNEX 2 Page 6
Trees must be marked and numbered,and the cubiccontent determined by an authorized professionalforester from the DOF, and when possibleshould be marked in the periphery of the forest.
The request of a permit for cutting more than 10 trees must be processedas Bi or B2.
3I1v C pRrnmis&.These permits authorize the harvestingof trees in plantationsand windbreaks, located on lands suitable for agriculturalproduction. They can be processedthroughout the entire year. ANNEX 3 Page1
ANNEX 3: POPULATIONDYNAMICS
Costa Rica has the mortalityrate of an industrialnation, with life expectancyof 77 years, while the birth rate resemblesmore those of developingcountries. Between 1900 and 1950 the populationincreased from 304,000to 862,000inhabitants; in the subsequent40 years the absolute growthwas much greater, arrivingat 3 millioninhabitants at the end of 1990.This coincidedwith a significantdecrease in forest area (Annex Table 3.1). It is this backgroundthat gives rise to the hypothesisof an inverse relationshipbetween the growth in population and the forest cover.
Annex Table 3.1 Estimateson Popation and ForcstAwer in Costa Rica for the SelectedYears
Year Population' Ha. of Foreste
1950 861,800 3,400,000 1973 1,868,100 2,000,000 1977 2,087,000 1,790,000 1984 2,568,900 1,520,000 1987 2,790,635 1,475,940
Sources: ' CELADE, MIDEPLAN,DGEC, 1988.Estimaciones y proyeccionesde problacion.San Jos., CR 2 AMo1950-84, promedio calculado por A. Mata con base en las fuentes: Fournier (1985), Junkov (1984),Perez y Protti (1977), Joyce (1969),Flores-Rodas (1985), Rodriguezand Varga (1988).AMo 1987, Boletin EstadisticoForestal No. 4. DGF.
Population growth and migratoryflows vary from one zone to another. In the country,the internal mobilityof the population is high and is seen to be promoted by different reasons:hope for a better way of life and search for work or educationalopportunities, among others. In Annex Table 3.2, it is possibleto observe that in the Atlanticand Northern zone, the demographic growth is greater than in the other regions.This is part due to internal migration.
A studycarried out by MIDEPLAN,CELADF., and the DGF (1987) divdes the growth rate in the natural growth and the effect of migrationfor the intercensusperiod of 1973-84. Accordingto the study,in the dry Pacificregion, migration acts as a reducing factor of 58% in the natural growth of the population.At the other extreme,in the Atlantic region, the growth rate is acceleratedby 45% due to migration.
Annex Table 32 Demographic Idkator Seected From the Forest Regions and Planningin Costa Rica Around1980-85 ANNEX3 Page 2
Average Net Rate Numberof of Net Rate Children % Rural Women's Rate of Growth of (Fertility Popula- Partici- % of Total Natural Migration rate) tion pation Literacy (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (t) (g)
Regionsof Study
Atlantic Zone 3.43 2.38 1.08 4.53 70 12.30 89 Northern Zone 3.37 3.21 0.15 4.37 87 15.60 87 South Pacific 2.33 2.44 -0.12 4.55 86 11.00 89 Dry Pacific 0.80 1.93 -1.13 4.14 73 12.60 90
Other Regions
Central 2.43 2.34 0.08 3.14 44 24.50 95 Central Pacific 1.02 1.51 -0.50 3.65 64 14.60 89
Total Costa Rica 2.30 2.30 3.50 55 20.70 93
(a) Annual average for the period 1973-85,rate x 100 (b) Estimatefor the period 1979-84,rate x 100 (c) Period 1979-84,rate x 100 (d) Averagenumber of children for every woman (e) 1984,rate x 100 (f) 1984,population in 10 years or more
Source: MIDEPLAN,CELADE, DOEC, 1989:Migracion interna per regiones,provincies y cantones 1968-1984(a,b,c,fg). CELADE, MIDEPLAN,DGEC, 1988:Estimaciones y proyeccionesregionales de poblacion1975-2000 (d); DGEC: censo de poblacionde Costa Rica 1984 (e)
It is important to analyze the migratoryvariable in relation to the economicactivity of the regionssince employmentis one of the main motivationsfor migration(MIDEPLAN, CELADE, DGEC, 1989).In the period 1979-84,the dry Pacificor Chorotegaregion was descnbed as having the highest index of emigrationrepresented by a net rate migrationof -1.3%. The region expanded its rice cultivation,which is highlymechanized, thereby requiringless labor. On the other hand, the Atlantic region,considered as the most attractivein terms of migratoryflows (the net rate of migrationequalled 1.08%)coincides with the region in which the most important economicactivity requires a greater participationof labor banana cultivation(see Annex Table 3.3). ANNEX3 Page3
Amcm Table3.3 Demogaphicndicator and Agriltmal Production of ForestRegions and Plnning in Cota RicaArond 198085
Net rate of % AgriculturalDistribution Migration(1) in Immigrants of Some (2) Products (a) (b) Per Region (3) Banana Rice Cattle (c) (d) (e) Regionsof Study
AtlanticZone 1.08 66.5 76.1 7.8 7.8 NorthernZone 0.15 66.9 7.3 5.3 26.5 SouthPacific 0.12 56.3 15.0 10.6 12.8 Dry Pacific 1.13 41.5 0.1 54.9 27.3 Other Regions Central 0.08 16.5 1.2 0.8 14.3 CentralPacific -0.50 40.2 0.3 20.6 11.3
(1) Period1979-84, rate x 100 (2) Period1979-84, percentage of immigrantsfor everyactmty agriculture,hunting and fishing (3) 1984,percentages Source: MIDEPLAN,CELADE, DGEC, 1989 internalmigration per region,province, and central1968-84: (a); calculatedon the basisof the 1984population census. DGEC (b); MIDEPLANControl information system (c,d,e). ANNEX 4 Page-I
ANNEX 4: POSSIBBILTIESAND DIFFICULTIESOF ASSESSINGDEFORESTATION IN COSTA RICA W1THGIS INFORMATION
Studiesof deforestationtrends in Costa Rica have been conductedin the past, but many are outdated, referring to deforestationfrom before 1980.An update based on more recent satellite imagerywas therefore attempted. However,for recent years insufficientscenes were availablewith an acceptablecloud cover percentage.So Landsat scenes from 1986 and 1987 had to be used. Results were comparedwith existingland cover data from 1978to assessdeforestation.
For one region, the Atlantic Zone, the spectraldata for 1978 and 1988were also available, aside from 1986 data. This made a comparisonof forest cover between 1978,1986, and 1988 possible.
The generalizationentails the mappingof the set of originalcover classesto a set of more general cover classes.In Annex Table 4.1 the general classesfor the national and regionalland cover inventoryare given.
Annex Table 4.1 Land CDvr Chases,1986
Classvalue Description 0 Background 1 Forest 2 Dense WoodyVegetation 3 Dense SecondaryVegetation, Plantation crops (e.g. Banana) 4 Scrublandand cropland 5 Grassland 6 Open Woodyor Open Shrub Vegetation 7 Bare Soil and Built-uparea 8 Waterbodies 9 Wetlandvegetation (e.g. 'Yolillal), Mangroveforest 10 Clouds 11 Shadowof clouds
For each Landsat-MSSscene, land cover is thus describedin terms of these cover classes.For the land cover inventoryof the Atlantic Zone a set of more specificland cover classeswas applied. Page,2 Methodsfor Asesing Deforestation Three methodswere usedto assessnational and regionaldeforestation between 1978 and 1986. (a) Throughsubtracting the 1986total forestcover area fromthe 1978total forestcover area. Thismethod only considers map statistics and not the locationof the forest areas.The methodis referredto hereafteras comparingmap statistics. (b) Throughthe overlayingof both mapsand identificationof areasof changewith associatedtype of landcover change. Because the comparisonis on a per pixelbasis (areasof 100x 100m),the methodis sensitiveto the geometricinaccuracy of both maps.When the positionsof the sameforest area differthis will result in an area incorrectlyclassified as deforested.This requiresclumping of pixelelements and subsequentsieving of areassmaller than a userspecified threshold (the clumpand sievemethod). Two threshold values were defined: 128 and 320 hectares.Given a relativegeometric accuracy of 400meters, deforestation areas of 128hectares might easilyresult as consequenceof geometricerror. (c) Throughsubtracting the total area of reforestationfrom the total deforestedarea (defor-reformethod). It departsfrom the ideathat a relativeerror in the positioning of the forest areasleads to areas incorrectlyclassified as deforestedand reforested. The drawbackof this methodis that differencein aggregationlevel between both mapswill affect the results,because it maylead to areaswrongly classified as refor- ested. For the AtlanticZone the deforestationwas assessedindependently. This was done by comparingthe statisticsof the 1978and 1986land cover map of the AtlanticZone. Withrespect to the deforestationzones it also involvedthe 1988land cover map. The comparisonof mapstatistics requiresmap correlation, because for each mapa differentset of landcover classes applies. Correlationof land coverclassifications is a rather difficulttask because results might differ considerablyas consequenceof the differentsensor characteristics of the satelliteplatforms. The sensorsmeasure in differentspectral wavebands and differwith respecttu their resolution.It implies that the spectralcharacteristics of a covertype depends on the satelliteplatform used. This influencesthe classificationand herewithalso mapstatistics. These differences should be accounted for whencomparing classification results. (For example,differences in pixelsize imply that certain objectscan be recognizedin a scenewith high resolution while they might not be recognizedin a scenewith lower resolution. An exampleis givenby the lagoonsand drownedvalleys. They were recognizedon the 1986Landsat-TM scene and on the 1988SPOT scene but not on the 1978MSS scene.The forestarea has to be correctedfor the area of lagoonsand drownedvalleys in order to comparethe differentscenes.) Anotherdifficult element is cloudcover. Correction in coverpercentages were made for cloudcover and shadowedparts, as wellas the fringesof clouds,often (incorrectly)classified as one or anothercover type. Pa2e3 NationalDefortation fom 1978to 1986 The three abovemethods were usedto calculatethe nationaldeforestation. The resultsare presentedin Table4.2
AnnexTable 4.2 Deforestationin Qsa Rica from1978 to 1986Applying Different Methods of Calulation
Deforeted area Deforestationrate Method
1. Compasngmap stst. 315450Ha. 39400Ha/Yr
Sievingara < 128Ha. 420449Ha. 52556Ha/Yr 2. Cump and Sieve Sievingarms < 320 Ha.
277509Ha. 34688Ha/Yr
3. Deforestation- Reforestation 158512Ha. 19814Ha/Yr
Aveauge 292980Ha 36622Ha/Yr
The Defor-Reformethods gave the lowestresults. In part thismay be due to the higherlevel of aggregationof the 1978land cover map. The Defor-Refornumber may represent an underesti- mate. The clumpand sievemethod, applying a thresholdof 128hectares, produced the highest estimate.Applying a sievefactor of 128hectares is consideredrather low, given the geometricaccu- racyof 400 metersl/.One wouldtherefore expect that it overestimatesthe deforestationarea. The overestimationmight be partlyoffset by the underestimationof deforestedarea as resultof differ- ence in aggregationlevel of both maps.On averagethe four estimatesamount to 292980ha or 36622ha per year. For comparison,data on deforestationof earlierperiods are given(Annex Table 43).
A/ The CCT landcover map of 1978showed some geometric inaccuracies (distortions) for whichcorrections were made in order to fit the mapto the 1986land covermap. The relativegeometric accuracy of 400 metersresulted, referring to the error in positioningof the 1978map with respectto the 1986land cover map. ANNEXA4 Page4
Ann= Table43 NationalForest Area and Clearing Rates (1940-1983,based on Saderand Joyce, 1988)
Year/Period Forest area Deforestation Clearingrate (kmn) (ha/Yr) (km'/Yr/totalarea) 1940 34206 1950 28642 55,600 1.1% 1961 23035 51,000 1.0% 1977 16154 43,000 0.8%
RegionalBreakdown of DeforestationFgur Forestcover and deforestation rate werecalculated for separateregions as shownin Annex Table4.4. The data showthat the largestdeforestation has occurredin the Zona Norte with an estimatedminimum of 56,416hectares over eightyears and a maximumof 123,107hectares. This is consideredvety high given the relativelysmall size of the region.Visual analyses revealed that deforestationmainly occurred along the San Carlos-LosChiles road, concentrating around the vil- lagesof Conchoand BocaArenal The Zona Sur (8) had a decreasein forestcover between 42,000 and 75,000hectares in the period 1978-86.Deforestation has concentratedin the area connecting the Osa peninsulato the mainland,in the area southof cityof Neily,and in the area stretchingfrom PalmarNorte to PortreroGrande in the CotoBrus valley. Also, the Cordillerade Tilarin(5) showed a decreasein forestcover estimated between 23,000 and 31,000 hectares. Large areas of deforestationwere observed in the area north of the citiesof Miramarand San Ramon.The defor- ested areascorresponded to formerspurs of the forest areacovering the higherparts of the mountainrange. Smaller deforested parts were encountered north of the villageBajo Caliente southeastof Tlarin and near Fortuna.The Zona AtlanticaNorte (1) experienceddeforestation estimatedbetween 10,000 and 26,000hectares. Deforestation has occurredas wellin the agricultural frontier(to be specificin the area north of Ticabanand the CerroNegro and the fringesof the Lomasde Sierpe')as wellas in the agriculturalareas, where remnants of the forest areaswere cut (for example,areas correspondingto the settlementschemes of El Indioin the Nequev). For regions2, 6, and 7, 2mbiguousresults are obtained,and those for region4 are not usable becauseof highcloud cover in 1986.For the CordilleraCentral (2), no deforestationwas estimated giventhe negativevalues for deforestation(indicating 'reforestation'), applying the comparingmap statisticsand the Defor-Reformethods and the relativelylow values obtained with the clumpand sievemethod. Areas indicated as reforestedare due to errorsin either landcover maps. The deforestedarea (clumpand sievemethod) represents less than2% of the sectionarea, whichis withinthe error margin.Also, visual analysis of the resultingmaps did not showlarger deforested areas.In the Guanacasteregion (6) a considerabledeforestation area resultedwhen using the clump and sievemethod, while the resultsof the other methodsindicated a limitedincrease in forestarea. The latter is probablythe consequenceof the stronglysegmented forest area in this section,resulting in manysmall forest areas disregardedin the 1978map. Part of the deforestationarea indicatedby the clumpand sievemethod must be due to the differentmapping conventions. However, some parts
I ANNEX4 Pai-e S de seem to representactual deforestation. These areas are near Cuajiniquil,in the neighbourhoodof the villagePortegolpe, and alongthe road of Carmonato Sta.Cruz. Contradictory results are also obtainedfor the Talamancaregion (7). The areasindicated as deforested,as wellas reforested,are rather smallwhen compared with the total sectionarea. The indicationof deforestedarea is partly due to cloudcover and to differencein mappingconventions. One largerarea, north of Buenos Aires AnnexTable 4.4Area of Deforestation(1978-19) in the EightRegios
Methods of cacu- lation Ar name TotalAea
compeoi- aump & Defor- son Map Sieve Refor Stat.
<128 Ha. <320 Ha.
1. AtlanticZone N. 396,624 2S,S66 27,827 13,820 10,071
2. Cordla Centrl 349,069 -18,649 11,246 5,920 -23,410
3. 'Zoria Note 418,183 123,107 77,812 S6,416 80,972
4. North-West 540,371 93,939 55,944 35,154 24,819
S. Tlarkn 214,114 31,131 32,093 23,590 30,037
6. Guanaaste 793,091 -2,972 74,777 50,317 -21,640
7. Talamanca 1,330,898 -12,037 67,364 41,274 -30,249
& zonaSu' 562,583 74,682 73,386 51,017 42,215
(on the Pacificslopes of the mountainrange) shows actual deforestation, with other areasspread acrossthe section.These are foundaround Palmares; in the Coto Brusvalley, northeast of San Vito in the mountainousarea againstthe Panamaborder; and in the hillssouth of Cartago,near Santa Maria.At the Atlanticside of the Talamancaregion deforestation is onlyindicated in the Talamanca valley.Further assessment of deforestationin thispart is hamperedby the highcloud cover in the 1986scene.
imfdom ANNEX 4 Page 6
Deforestation can be assessedwith only a limiteddegree of accuracyfor the following reasons:
* Land cover classificationsthemselves are generallynot very accurate. For the 1986 ZAN classification,a 94 percent accuracywas obtained for the classificationof forest. This is consideredvery high, but it required long preparationand extensivetesting of the training statistics,and the classificationwas carried out in a restrictedarea, limitingthe variationin land cover types. For the 1988 land cover classification,training samples were selected only in the ZAN. It resulted in large forest areas in the Zone Norte to be classifiedas dense woody vegetation,indicating that retraining of the classifiershould be done when new areas are incorporated.The accuracyof the classificationof the different scenes could not be deter- mined because the accuracyof the forest cover maps is unknown.
* One evident source of error is the differencein the materialsused, referring to the resolution and spectral characteristicsof the imageryand level of aggregationof maps. It means that class definitionswilH not correspond for the different classifications,making the correlation between classificationproducts necessary.Thereby an additionalsource of error is introduced. Especiallywith respect to the 1978 land cover map, the lack of informationon the processing steps make the interpretationof results and the statements on the accuracyvery difficult.
* Extrapolationof the results is requiredwhen no data are obtained for part of the area at issue as consequenceof cloud cover or because only part of the area is coveredby the scene. As regards the 1986 landsat-MSS,mosaic cloud cover was considerablefor the extreme northwestarea, the southern region (Zona Sur), and the Talamancaregion. Clouds covered more than 10 percent of the total mosaic,influencing the accuracyof the final results.
* For countrieswith a humidtropical climate,like parts of Costa Rica, optical remote sensing platformsprovide less opportunityfor acquisitionof good qualitydata. This is illustratedby the fact that 1986is the last year for which a mosaiccould be made with an acceptablecloud cover percentage.
For these reasons,different waysof calculatingthe deforestationhave been applied.The results then indicatea wide range in which the actual deforestationmay have taken place. ANNEX 4 Page 7
DeforestationRates 1963-86
In Annex Table 4.5 data on forest cover and clearing rates are presented,based on the CCIT and WRI report (1991) and on our own data. The deviatingfigures for 1986 are related to the inter- pretation of the classof dense woodyvegetation of the 1986 land cover classification.A considerable area is classifiedas such. For correlationof the 1986 data to the data from earlier periods, the class dense woodyvegetation was listed as secondaryvegetation, given its smooth canopysurface in coniparisonto primalyforest. However,the 1986dense woodyvegetation (DWVEG) area correspondsvery well to 1978forest area.
Annex Table 45 DeforestationRates (1963-1986) (basd on OCT & WR1 1991 and own data)
Year/Period Primary Secondary Deforestation Forest Forest (km) (km)
(km2/Yr) (% of nat. ter.)
1963 31,543 2,990 1973 26,660 2,836 488 1.0% 1978 24,498 1,920 432 0.9% 1986 15,582 7,6833 11,115 22%
2394 0.8%
1. Deforestationwhen only consideringprimary forest. Method for calculatingdefcrestation: comparingmap statistics. 2. Deforestationwhen consideringthe total of primaryand secondaryforest. It is assumedto represent the more correct figureson deforestation. 3. Correspondsto the area of dense woodyvegetation, which has a differentlymeaning than secondaryforest.
When DWVEG is taken to denote forest vegetation,a yearlydeforestation of 0.8 percent (or 0.9, dependingon the calculationmethod applied) results.This is in agreementwith the clearingrate of earlier periods.
When only consideringthe 1986area classifiedas forest for the calculationof deforestation, a yearlydecrease of 2.2 percent is obtained, representinga rather sudden and sharp increase in deforestationas from 1978.It would be in agreementwith the 2.4 percent clearing rate for the ANNEX4 Page8 1977-83period, calculated on the basisof data fromthe Saderand Joyce.However, it mustbe remarkedthat their 1983forest cover information is basedon anotherdata sourcethan usedfor the precedingfour dates.Also, the figuresfor forestcover are verylow when compared to the data listed elsewhere. When0.8% is acceptedto representactual deforestation, a decreasein clearingrate would be suggested.However, this decrease cannot be consideredsignificant.