AMAZON RIO REDD+ IFM EMISSION REDUCTIONS FROM AVOIDING PLANNED DEGRADATION
Document prepared by:
Reviewed by:
Project Title Amazon Rio REDD+ IFM
Reduction of GHG emissions avoided by degradation
Version V2.0
Date of Issue 09, September, 2016.
Prepared By João Batista Tezza Neto
Contact Email: [email protected] Phone: 0055 92 981590997
Note: The Project Description (PD) Version 1.0 of the Amazon Rio REDD+ IFM Project was prepared by Rosana Della Méa e Virgílio Viana with the technical support from the consultants Mariano Cenamo, Diego Serrano, Bruno Matta, Pablo Pacheco, Thais Megid, Renata Freire, Priscila Barros, Rodrigo Freire and Lucas Rosa, as well as the documents: (i) Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC), (ii) Expeditious Forest Inventory, (iii) Management Plan of the Amazon Rio RPDS Conservation Unit and (iv) vegetation and other maps; that can be found in the Annexes.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Project Title Amazon Rio REDD+ IFM Reduction of GHG emissions avoided by degradation
Localization Rio Amazon I, II, III e IV. Município de Manicoré, Estado do Amazonas, Brasil. Project
Project Proponent EBCF – Empresa Brasileira de Conservação Florestal Contato: Leonardo Barrionuevo (CEO) [email protected] – fone +1 305-321-4577
Auditor Rainforest Alliance (Klaus Geiger [email protected]; Tel: +1 (802)923-3766) e Imaflora (Bruno B. Souza, [email protected]; Tel +55 (19) 98324 5522.
Project start date August 17, 2012; crediting period of 37 years, 37 years of project time (can be extended for longer).
Type validation Complete (Full Validation).
Historical status No history; first proposition (Validation and Initial verification) CCBA
Edition CCBA CCBA. 2013. Climate, Community & Biodiversity Standards Third Edition. Standard CCBA, Arlington, VA, USA. December, 2013. At: www.climate-standards.org
Project summary The EBCF bought the property and its respective management plan. However, it ceased operations management voluntarily. Thus, the GHG emissions that would be generated and environmental impacts on local flora and fauna that occur during harvesting and processing of timber, no longer happen. It is replaced by an alternative use of project land without significant impacts to the environment, involving local communities as decision maker’s agents. Structuring the area for ecotourism and Extractive non-wood products. The project is designed to prevent the emission of approximately 3.2 million tons of carbon, benefiting directly more than 450 families in an area of 20 thousand
2
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
hectares of Amazonian biodiversity.
Gold Level Criteria On the climate issue is understood that balanced ecosystems have greater ecological and social resilience and adaptability to climate change, whether through the protection of water bodies and flow regulation of rivers on the peaks of flood and drought, is the regular supply food products and environmental services. From the social point of view the project has a strong presence along the clearly marginalized populations the social care system of the state and was strategies interact with the communities to give more visibility to women, elderly and children. Exceptional benefits for biodiversity is realized on the fact that the Amazon River project present several qualifying attributes of "High Conservation Values", such as endemic species and / or rare and have several species protected by specific legislation prohibiting cutting, such as the chestnut tree, rubber tree and mahogany.
Given the Project 09, September, 2016. completion
Expected schedule Periodic every 5 years check
3
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
1 SUMMARY
1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...... 11 1.1. Summary Description of the Project (G1, indicator 2, indicator 4, indicator 8) ...... 11 1.2. Projetct Objectives ...... 13 General objective ...... 13 Specific objectives ...... 14 1.3. Project Location (G1, indicator 3, indicator 4) ...... 14 1.4. Conditions Prior to Project Initiation (G1, indicator 3, indicator 4) (B1, indicator 1) ...... 19 1.5. Project Proponent (G1, indicator 1) ...... 29 1.6. Other Entities Involved in the Project ...... 30 1.7. Project Start Date (G1, indicator 9) ...... 31 1.8. Project Crediting Period (G1, indicator 9) ...... 32 2 DESIGN ...... 32 2.1 Sectoral Scope and Project Type...... 32 2.2 Description of the Project Activity (G1, indicator 8)...... 32 2.3 Management of Risks to Project Benefits (G1, indicator 10) ...... 38 2.4 Measures to Maintain High Conservation Values (HCV) ...... 41 2.5 Project Financing (G1, indicator 11, indicator 12) ...... 52 2.6 Employment Opportunities and Worker Safety (G3, indicator 6, indicator 9, indicator 10) ...... 54 2.7 Stakeholders (G1, indicator 5, indicator 6) (G3, indicator 1, indicator 2) ...... 55 2.8 Commercially Sensitive Information ...... 58 2 LEGAL STATUS ...... 58 3.1 Compliance with Laws, Statues, Property Rights and Other Regulatory Frameworks (G3, indicator 11) (G5, indicator 6 e 7) ...... 58 3.2 Evidence of Right of Use (G5, indicator 1, indicator 2ª, indicator 5) ...... 60 3.3 Emissions Trading Programs and Other Binding Limits ...... 62 3.4 Participation under Other GHG Programs ...... 62 3.5 Other Forms of Environmental Credit ...... 62 3.6 Projects Rejected by Other GHG Programs ...... 63 3.7 Respect for Rights and No Involuntary Relocation (G3 indicator 4 e 5) (G5, indicator 2b e 2c, indicator 3) ...... 63 3.8 Illegal Activities and Project Benefits(G5, indicator 4) ...... 66 4 APPLICATION OF METHODOLOGY ...... 66 4.1 Title and Reference of Methodology ...... 66 4.2 Applicability of Methodology ...... 66 4.3 Methodology Deviations ...... 68
4
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
4.4 Project Boundary (G1, indicator 4) ...... 69 4.2 Baseline Scenario (G2, indicator 1) ...... 74 4.6 Additionality (G2, indicator 2) (G5, indicator 8) ...... 75 5 QUANTIFICATION OF GHG EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS AND REMOVALS (CLIMATE) (G5, indicator 9)...... 86 5.1 Project Scale and Estimated GHG Emission Reductions or Removals ...... 86 5.1.1 Reduction of Net Anthropogenic GHG Emissions (G5, indicator 8) (CL2, indicator 2) ...... 86 5.1.2 Required Data Sources ...... 88 5.1.3 Significance ...... 88 5.1.4. VCUs and Percentage of Buffer Reserve ...... 89 5.2 Leakage Management ...... 94 5.3 Baseline Emissions (CL 1, indicator 1) ...... 96 5.3.1 Estimated Emissions from Degradations ...... 97 5.3.2 Calculation of the Main Parameters in the Project Area ...... 99 5.3.3 Changes in Carbon Due to the Degradation Caused by the Baseline Scenario ...... 102 5.3.4 Emissions from the Baseline Activities...... 114 5.4 Project Emissions (CL2, indicator 1) ...... 122 5.4.1 Emissions Resulting from Project Planning ...... 124 5.4.2 Emissions Due to Design ...... 127 5.4.3 Emissions Due to Monitoring ...... 128 5.4.4 Emissions Due to Natural Disturbance ...... 128 5.4.5 Emissions Due to Illegal Deforestation ...... 128 5.5 Leakage (CL3, indicator 2) ...... 129 5.6 Summary of GHG Emission Reductions and Removals (G5, indicator 8) (CL2, indicator 2) .. 132 5.7 Climate Change Adaptation Benefits (GL1, indicators 1, 2, 3) ...... 133 6 COMMUNITY ...... 134 6.1 Net Positive Community Impacts ...... 134 6.2 Negative Offsite Stakeholder Impacts (CM3, indicator 1 e 3) ...... 139 6.3 Exceptional Community Benefits (GL2) ...... 140 7 BIODIVERSITY ...... 141 7.1 Net Positive Biodiversity Impacts (B2, indicator 1, 5, 7) ...... 141 7.2 Negative Offsite Biodiversity Impacts (B3, indicator 1) ...... 143 7.3 Exceptional Biodiversity Benefits ...... 144 8 MONITORING ...... 145 8.1 Monitoring Plan Description ...... 145 8.1.1 Monitoring of Climate Impacts (G1, indicator 9) (CL4, indicator 1 ...... 146
5
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
8.1.2 Monitoring Impacts to Biodiversity (G1, indicator 9) (B4, indicator 1) ...... 152 8.1.3 Monitoring Social Impacts (G1, indicator 9) (CM2, indicator 1) (CM4, indicator 1) ...... 154 8.1.4 Identification of the Organizational Structure and Responsabilities (G4, indicator 1) (G4, indicator 2) ...... 155 8.1.5 Methods for Generation, Record, Storage, Organization and Verification of Monitored Data and Parameters (G4, indicator 2) (CL3, indicator 2) (GL4, indicator 4) (CM4, indicator 1, 2 e 3) (B4, indicator 1) ...... 157 8.2 Data and Parameters Available at Validation ...... 160 8.3 Data and Parameters to Be Monitored ...... 171 REFERENCES ...... 205
FIGURES
Figure 01 - Location of the Municipality of Manicoré - AM...... 15 Figure 02 - Location of Amazon Rio I, II, III, IV...... 15 Figure 03 - Projetct Zone and community’s location in the project área...... 16 Figure 04 - Illegal Wood in the Amazon (2009). SFB/IMAZON (2010) ...... 39 Figure 05 - Areas Amazon Rio II and III located in macro-region classified as extremely high for the conservation of biodiversity in accordance with MMA (2007) (G1, Indicator 7)...... 42 Figure 06 - Location of the communities surrounding the Amazon Rio areas I, II, III and IV...... 56 Figure 07 - Workshop I: Free, Prior and Informed Consent for the development of the REDD+ projectby the community leaders of Democracia, Água Azul, São José do Miriti, Vista Alegre, Jatuarana, Terra Preta do Ramal, Pandegal, Santa Maria, Santa Eva and Terra Preta do Rio Mancoré...... 64 Figure 08 - Workshop II: Free, Prior and Informed Consent for the development of the REDD+ project by the community leaders of Urucury, Mocambo, Boa Esperança and São João & Ponta Grossa...... 65 Figure 09 - Workshop III: Free, Prior and Informed Consent for the development of the REDD+ project by the Kamayuá indigenous community ...... 65 Figure 10 - Project Boundaries. a) Direct Project interference limits. b) Total Project Area (G1, Indicator 7)...... 69 Figure 11 - Project Area forest types ...... 70 Figure 12 - Map of the managed UPAs ...... 72 Figure 13 - Boa Esperança spring ...... 137 Figure 14 - Boa Esperança lake ...... 138 Figure 15 - Sustainability levels in the sustainability matrix ...... 159
6
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
TABLES
Table 01 - Impelementation schedule and next activities ...... 35 Table 02 - Endangered plant species in the areas of the Amazon Rio project (using forest inventory information conducted by EBCF and considering the Red List of endangered species (footnote IUCN)). 44 Table 03 - Endangered animal species in the Amazon Rio project and surrounding areas ...... 46 Table 04 - Species endemic to the Southwest Amazon ...... 48 Table 05 - Project implementation and opperational costs ...... 53 Table 06 - Methodology applicability criteria ...... 67 Table 07 - Greenhouse gas emissions sources and sinks associated with baseline and project activities73 Table 08 - Summary of areas managed since 1999 ...... 75 Table 09 - Internal Rate of Return (IRR) and Net Present Value (NPV) of various SFM activities and REDD+ project activities ...... 78 Table 10 - Sensitivity analysis under different scenarios with variations of +5%, +10% and +20% in CRA prices ...... 80 Table 11 - Sensitivity analysis given variations of -5%, -10% and -20% in the project administrative costs31 ...... 80 Table 12 - Scale of greenhouse gas emissions reduction project ...... 86 Table 13 - Ex-ante net reductions in GHG emissions in tons of CO2e for the first 10, 20 and 37 years of the project...... 88 Table 14 - Annual reduction in anthropogenic GHG emissions, absolute error and relative error related to these emissions, and carbon credits available per year after the reduction in uncertainties ...... 93 Table 15 - Year in which the extraction occurred, logged area, marketable volume, carbon in the marketable volume and carbon contained in the aboveground biomass of the growing stock1 in all sub- areas and the total for the project area ...... 102 Table 16 - Value of carbon emissions from degradation in the project area (calculated from the carbon arising from the decomposition of dead matter, decomposition of long-term wood products and forest regeneration in extraction areas) ...... 113 Table 17 - Emissions due to processes related to baseline activities ...... 121 Table 18 - Calculation of baseline emissions in the project area...... 122 Table 19 - Annual carbon emissions from the project activities, since the year of its inception in 2011 .. 128 Table 20 - Ex-ante estimates summary ...... 133 Table 21 - Description of the organizational structure and actors involved in the project ...... 156
7
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
ANNEXES
ANNEX 1. Operations License Summary (Resumo das LOs)
ANNEX 2. Logging Plan “Valdenor II” (Plano de Manejo Valdenor II)
ANNEX 3. Logging License Registration, PAAM (Cadastro para exploração florestal, PAAM)
ANNEX 4. Operations Licenses and Annual Production Units (LOs and UPAs)
ANNEX 5. Vegetation Maps (Mapas de Fitofisionomia)
ANNEX 6. Annual Operation Plan and Forest Logging Authorization (POAs a AUTEX)
ANNEX 7. Forest Inventory 100% UPA 6 (Inventário Florestal 100% UPA 6 (2007))
ANNEX 8. Expedited Forest Inventory - 2013 (Inventario Florestal Expedito - 2013)
ANNEX 9. Amazon Rio I RPDS Management Plan (Plano de Gestão da RPDS Amazon Rio I
ANNEX 10. Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) (Consentimento Livre Previo e Informado)
ANNEX 11. Land Titles (Escrituras)
ANNEX 12. Support Letters from Government Bodies (Cartas de apoio dos órgãos do Governo)
ANNEX 13. Sales Declaration from Gethal (Declarações de venda Gethal)
ANNEX 14. Gethal SmartWood Certification (Certificação SmartWood Gethal)
ANNEX 15. Greenpeace article on timber companies in the Amazon (Relatório Greenpeace sobre madeireiras da Amazônia)
ANNEX 16. Cash Flow Analysis (Análise fluxo de caixa)
ANNEX 17. Financial Analysis – Baseline and Additionality (Análise financeira – linha de base e adicionalidade)
ANNEX 18. Emissions Calculation Spreadsheet (Planilha de calculos de emissões)
ANNEX 19. EBCF Core-business (Core-business da EBCF)
ANNEX 20. EBCF’s Undertanding of Project Risks and Barriers (Entendimentos da EBCF sobre riscos)
ANNEX 21. EBCF’s Energy Use and Transport (EBCF consumo de energia e transporte)
ANNEX 22. Non-Permanence Risk Analysis/Buffer (Análise de risco de não permanência/buffer)
ANNEX 23. Forest Biomass Inventory - 2016 (Inventário de Biomassa Florestal - 2016)
ANNEX 25. Consultive Consill (Documento do conselho consultivo)
ABBREVIATIONS
AFOLU: Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use ANTAQ: National Agency for Waterway Services (Agência Nacional de Transportes Aquaviários) AP: Project Area IFM: Avoided Planned Deforestation APP: Areas of Permanent Preservation (Áreas de Preservação Permanente)
8
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
ATER Technical Assistance and Rural Development (Assistência Técnica e Extensão Rural) AUTEX: Logging Authorization (Autorização de Exploração Florestal) CAAD: Council of Agro-Extrativist Associations of Democracia (Conselho das Associações Agroextrativistas de Democracia) CAAM: Council of Agro-Extrativist Associations of Manicoré (Conselho das Associacoes Agroextrativistas de Manicoré) CDM: Clean Development Mechanism CFI: Continuous Forest Inventory CNS: National Council of Extractivist Populations (Conselho Nacional das Populações Extrativistas) CRA: Environmental Reserve Quotas (Cotas de Reserva Ambiental) DBH: Diameter at Breast Height DETER: Real Time Deforestation Detection System DOF: Document of Forest Origin (Documento de Origem Florestal) EIA: Environmental Impact Assessment FAS: Amazonas Sustainable Foundation (Fundação Amazonas Sustentável) FSC: Forest Stewardship Council FUNAI: National Indigenous Peoples Foundation (Fundação Nacional do Índio) GHG: Greenhouse Gases GIS: Geographic Information System HCV: High Conservation Value IBAMA: Brazilian Institute of Environment and Renewable Natural Resources (Instituto Brasileiro do Meio Ambiente e dos Recursos Naturais Renováveis) ICU: Intensive Care Unit IDAM: Institute of Agricultural and Forestry Development of the State of Amazonas (Instituto de Desenvolvimento Agropecuário e Florestal do Estado do Amazonas) IEA: International Energy Agency IEB: International Institute of Education of Brazil (Instituto Internacional de Educação do Brasil) IFM-LtPF: Improved Forest Management - Logged to Protected Forest IMAZON: Institute of Man and Environment in the Amazon (Instituto do Homem e Meio Ambiente da Amazônia INPE: National Institute for Space Research (Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais) IPAAM: Amazon Institute of Environmental Protection (Instituto de Proteção Ambiental do Amazonas) IPCC: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change LR: Legal Reserve (Reserva Legal)
9
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
MCT: Ministry of Science and Technology (Ministério da Ciência e Tecnologia) MMA: Ministry of Environment (Ministério do Meio Ambiente) MP: Monitoring Plan NTFP: Non-Timber Forest Product PD: Project Description PES: Payment for Environmental Services POA: Annual Operational Extraction Plan (Plano Operacional Anual de Extração) PPE: Personal Protective Equipment PROARCO: Program for the Prevention and Control of Forest Fires in the Arc of Deforestation (Programa de Prevenção e Controle às Queimadas e Incêndios no Arco do Desflorestamento) PROBUC: Program for Monitoring Biodiversity and Use of Natural Resources in Conserveation Units (Programa de Monitoramento da Biodiversidade e Uso do Recursos Naturais em UCs) PRODES: Program to Calculate Deforestation in the Amazon (Programa de Cálculo do Desflorestamento da Amazônia) RDS: Sustainable Development Reserves (Reservas de Desenvolvimento Sustentável) RPDS: Private Reserves for Sustainable Development (Reserva Particular de Desenvolvimento Sustentável) RPPN: Private Reserve of Natural Heritage (Reserva Particular do Patrimônio Natural) SAD: Deforestation Allert System (Sistema de Alerta de Desmatamento) SDS: Secretary of the State for the Environment and Sustainable Development of Amazonas (Secretaria de Estado do Meio Ambiente e Desenvolvimento Sustentável do Amazonas) SEUC: State System of Conservation Units (Sistema Estadual de Unidades de Conservação) SFM: Sustainable Forest Management SFMP: Sustainable Forest Management Plan UC: Conservation Units (Unidade de Conservação) UEA: State University of Amazonas (Universidade Estadual do Amazonas) UFAM: Federal University of Amazonas (Universidade Federal do Amazonas) UNFCCC: United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change UPA: Annual Production Unit (Unidade Produtiva Anual) VCU: Verified Carbon Unit WBCSD: World Business Council for Sustainable Development WRI: World Resources Institute
10
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
1.1. Summary Description of the Project (G1, indicator 2, indicator 4, indicator 8)
The Amazon Rio project consists of the conservation of a mosaic of four private areas called Amazon Rio I, II, III and IV, which add up to 20,387 hectares (ha) of primary forest, located in the municipality of Manicoré in the state of Amazonas. The project's target area is characterized by being a region of sedimentary Solimões Basin, dominated by Alluvial Holocene, Içá formation and Detritus-lateritic formation. The relief is of the flat type with primary vegetation formation consisting of areas of land, floodplain and some formations igapó due to the influence of Rio Manicoré.
The Amazon Rio areas dominated forests of humid tropical rainforest Lowlands emerging Canopy and Forest Open Rain Lowlands with palm trees (79%), the Atlantic rain forest Alluvial emerging canopy (11%), Rain Forest Open Alluvial with palm trees (8%), Pioneer formations influenced fluvial and /or lacustrine - herbaceous and shrubby with palm trees (1%).
The main focus of the project is: (i) the conservation of forest ecosystems and biodiversity; (ii) the sustainable social development of the region, including the promotion of ecotourism and scientific
research, and (iii) the reduction in carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions through the prevention of deforestation and forest degradation.
In 1998, a logging plan for logging activities was approved by the authorized environmental agencies on 19,800 ha of land over a period of 25 years (the total area does not include Permanent Preservation Areas (APP) and water bodies. Between 1999 and 2010, 4,347.69 ha were degraded due to an authorized logging operation (Annexes 1, 2, 3 and 4). In February 2011, the area was acquired by the Empresa Brasileira de Conservação de Florestas (EBCF) which, in order to implement the objectives of the project, made two important decisions: to suspend the logging operations underway in the project areas since 1999 and transform them into Private Reserves for Sustainable Development (Reservas Particulares de Desenvolvimento Sustentável - RPDSs), supported by State Law no. 53 of June 2007 and Decree no. 30,108 of June 2010.
It is important to mention that only the Amazon Rio I area was approved in June 2013 by the Secretary of Environment and Sustainable Development of Amazonas (SDS), through Directive/SDS/no. 86/2013. The other Amazon Rio II, III and IV private areas are in the process of
11
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
analysis within the SDS for future approvals. The proposal is that the four areas form an integrated system of private conservation units managed by EBCF through one Management Plan1.
With this new land use strategy 20,387 ha of primary forest will be preserved, avoiding the CO2 emissions that would have occurred without the implementation of the project. Revenues obtained from the carbon credits will be used to maintain the primary forest with the implementation of the activities described in the Reserve’s Management Plan (Annex 9), including social programs and environmental monitoring.
The project intends to maintain financial sustainability through the sale of carbon credits obtained from the conservation of the area and maintenance of environmental services. Another source of income planned by the project relates to the national market for legal reserve compensation (Environmental Reserve Quota (Cotas de Reserva Ambiental (CRA) in Portuguese)2. Using these two financial mechanisms for conservation, the emission of approximately 3.2 million tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere over a period of 37 years will be avoided.
It is important to emphasize that the project area is crucial for conservation, especially considering its characteristics, such as (i) high biological diversity and concentration of endemic and pharmacological species (Section 7); (ii) extensive areas of plains, which are important for the reproduction and survival of many species of plants and animals, especially birds and reptiles, and (iii) high potential for ecotourism and environmental education, including scientific research.
The creation of these private reserves also contributes to the consolidation of a strategy to establish ecological corridors and mosaics in the region, creating a territorial connection between public and private conservation areas. This situation reduces potential conflicts between the state, landowners and residents in the buffer areas and creates opportunities for implementing integrated actions, optimizing human and financial resources for environmental monitoring and control actions.
1 Although the Management Plan (Annex 9, in draft and now awaiting approval from CEUC) formally addresses the Amazon Rio I Private Reserve, the other areas, Amazon Rio II, III, IV, were included in the study. The strategy is that with future homologations the other Reserves will be formally included in the same Management Plan. 2 § 2, Art. 15 of the new Brazilian Forest Code (Law 12.651/2012) provides for voluntary forest reserves, i.e., the excess of forest required by law on rural property. According to this law all preserved area that exceeds the minimum required by law may be used for creation of environmental easement or Environmental Reserve Quotas in the same biome and State.
12
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Another important fact to consider is the surrounding communities who use the project areas for their own subsistence, extracting non-timber forest products (e.g., nuts, fruits, oils, vines), fishing and hunting. For that reason they have direct interest in the conservation of the forest to obtain food, economic security and maintain their cultural practices.
The environmental benefits that the communities receive make them "guardians" of the forest, contributing significantly to the monitoring and controlling of illegal activities practiced in the region such as logging, fishing and poaching, as well as supervision and control of forest fires. In this context, the Amazon Rio project plays a role of great environmental importance for the region, also contributing to the improvement of livelihoods of the local population and, consequently, to the conservation of the forest.
A population of 450 families distributed among 15 communities is estimated to reside around the area of the Amazon Rio project. Communities are typically "caboclo", whose main economic activity is the family farm cultivation of small-scale, especially cassava for the production of flour and banana. The relationship with the forest is the extraction of non-wood products such as the extraction of copal and collection of Amazonian brown and subsistence hunting. Fishing is also a very important economic activity. The environmental benefits provided by the implementation of the project and Amazon Rio I RPDS Management Plan, and posteriorly including Amazon Rio II, III and IV, demonstrate a strong social development component and includes several socio-economic support programs to local communities which promote sustainable development in the region.
The project will be implemented starting from the introduction of participatory processes, ensuring active involvement of the local communities around the area, as in the aforementioned development programs and in decision-making. The community programs that aim to improve access to health, education and income generation will use the “Bolsa Floresta” program as reference, a program of great relevance for payments for environmental services (PES) in the state of Amazonas. In the medium and long terms these programs intend to significantly improve the living conditions of these communities, strengthening their organizational and institutional capacity, including their productive, environmental and financial sustainability.
1.2. Projetct Objectives
General objective
13
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
The objectives of this project takes a holistic approach to the region and keep full affinity to the recent statement of the United Nations in the design of the seventeen goals of Sustainable Development3 (ODS). In this sense, the project objectives have a direct relationship with some of the ODS and take others as a source of inspiration for the implementation of activities in partnership with local communities. These guidelines will be key elements in the local discussion process around the project activities. Thus, it is assumed as a general objective of the project "contribute to the maintenance of global climate (goal 13), through the implementation of activities to prevent the emission of greenhouse gases locally by replacing the forest selective logging for a project conservation of forest biodiversity (goal 15), preserving the traditional culture of the population of surrounding communities (goal 3), promoting income generation (goal 1, 8) and contributing to local social development (goals 2, 5, 4, 6, 7) ".
Specific objectives Specifically, the project aims to:
1. Implement economic alternative activities to selective logging to generate revenue for the project, benefiting at least 300 families surrounding the target area; 2. Reduce approximately 3.2 million tons of carbon dioxide as a result of project activities; 3. To contribute to the maintenance of regional biodiversity through the preservation and conservation of the forest; 4. Contribute to improve educational processes and attention to regional health; 5. Promote the inclusion and women's empowerment in the project area communities.
1.3. Project Location (G1, indicator 3, indicator 4)
Location
3 The seventeen Sustainable Development Goals at the United Nations are: (1) Ending poverty in all its form everywhere; (2) Ending eat hunger, achieve food security, improve nutrition; (3) To ensure a healthy life and promote well-being for all; (4) To ensure inclusive education, equitable and quality; (5) Achieving gender equality and empower all women; (6) Ensure availability and sustainable water management; (7) Ensure acessoà energy, reliable and sustainable; (8) To promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth; (9) Building resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive industrialization; (10) To reduce inequality between and within countries; (11) Making cities inclusive human settlements, secure, resilient; (12) To ensure standards of sustainable consumption and production; (13) Take urgent action to combat climate change; (14) To preserve and promote the sustainable use of the oceans; (15) To protect, restore and promote the sustainable use of forests; (16) To promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development; (17) To strengthen the implementation mechanisms and revitalize the global partnership.
14
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
The Amazon Rio Project is located in the southern region of the state of Amazonas in the municipality of Manicore (Figure 01). The waterway and air constitute arrival means to the city, with approximate distance of 333 km by air and 427 km by river is the starting point for the city of Manaus, the state capital. The Project areas are near the Madeira River and between the Sustainable Development Reserves (RDS) Rio Madeira and Rio Amapá (Figure 02).
Figure 1 - Location of the Municipality of Manicoré - AM.
Figure 2: Location of Amazon Rio I, II, III, IV.
15
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
The four project areas include 15 surrounding communities (buffer zone), totaling more than 450 families. The populations living in the buffer zone of the Amazon River areas are known as "caboclo" and are distributed in fifteen communities, as listed below:
1. Urucury 2. Água Azul 3. Vista Alegre 4. Boa Esperança 5. Santa Eva 6. Santa Maria 7. Pandegal 8. Democracia 9. Jatuarana 10. Terra Preta do Ramal 11. Kamayuá e São José do Miriti 12. São João 13. Ponta Grossa 14. Terra Preta do Rio Manicoré 15. Mocambo
Figure 3: Projetct Zone and community’s location in the project área.
16
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Geology and geomorphology
The state of Amazonas is characterized by an extensive phanerozoic sedimentary layer (Paleozoic Era), distributed among the Acre, Solimões, Amazonas and Alto Tapajós basins, deposited on a Precambrian bedrock of igneous, sedimentary and metamorphic rocks (CPRM, 2013).
Particularly, the Amazon Rio areas are located between the Rio Amapá RDS and the municipality of Humaitá and are located in the same sedimentary basin as the Solimões river, with similar soil characteristics: holocenic alluvial soils, Içá Formation and the Dendritic-Lateritic Formation.
The regions where holocenic alluvial soils predominate are characterized by recent detrital deposits of a fluvial, lacustrine or marine nature, consisting of gravel, sand, silt and clay, and transported by water flows over the floodplain. These deposits can be found along the rivers of the region and especially along the Madeira River. In turn, the regions where the Içá Formation prevails are covered by wind-driven deposits, whose rocks and sediments are an important part of the far southeast of the morphoescultural unit of the Amazonic Depression. The endritic-lateritic sediments are covered by layers or levels of sandy and clay soils, composing layers of deep weathered red latosols.
The project area also stands out for being located along a swath of landscape units composed of plateaus with NE-SW directional structures. This aspect contrasts with the plateuas of the southern depression (NNW-SSE directional structures), demonstrating that the Madre de Dios – Itacoatiara segment, which governs the entire Madeira river fluvial subsystem – has been an important tectonic agent in controling the flood accumulation areas since the Cenozoic (IGREJA & CATIQUE, 1997).
Topography and soil
This region is characterized by a flat topography and primary vegetation types consisting of areas of dryland (terra firme), floodplains (várzea), and some blackwater flooded Amazonian forests formations (igapó) due to the influence of the Manicoré River. Plains predominate and are characteristically flat and usually rise only a few meters above sea level, but they may also rise to higher altitudes. In this form of topography, the deposition of materials outstrips erosion.
Specifically in the Amazon Rio area the dense Primary Tropical Ombrophylous Lowland Forest and open Primary Tropical Ombrophylous Lowland Forest with palm trees (79%), Dense Primary Tropical Ombrophylous Alluvial Forest (11%), Open Primary Tropical Ambrophylous Alluvial Forest
17
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
with palm trees (8%), Pioneer Formations with fluvial and/or lacustrine influence - herbaceous and shrubby vegetation with palm trees (1%) (Annex 5).
According to IBGE's soil database (2000), the Manicoré region is formed mainly of Latosols and Argisols. Also soils such as Gleysols, Spodosols, Alluvial soils, Neosols, Planosols, Plinthosols and Nitosols can be found. The Brazilian Soil Classification System, produced from surveys by the Brazilian Agricultural Research company (EMBRAPA), between 2001 and 2006, corroborates the classification information for that region.
Latosols are deep mineral soils that have suffered heavy weathering and so are virtually devoid of primary or secondary minerals, in addition to presenting low nutrient reserves. As a consequence of the high degree of weathering and poor source of material, these soils are generally very acidic, low in available nutrients and feature high exchangeable aluminum content. As in most weathered soils, organic matter plays a fundamental role in the process of plant nutrition and nutrient cycling.
Argisols generally vary with respect to depth. Their drainage quality can vary from high to poorly drained. Morphologically, they feature yellowish or reddish tones, but can also be brown or gray. These soils have a very low natural chemistry with the absence of mineral nutrients reserves.
Alluvial soils are very common in this region. These soils are found mainly on the banks of the Madeira River. The fertility levels are dystrophic and located on flat terrain. Agricultural and livestock activities are almost always practiced along the main alluvial stretches of the region. The most fertile soils that occur on the floodplains (várzea) are widely cultivated for temporary crops such as beans, rice, watermelon and cassava.
Climate and hydrography
The climate in the region of the Madeira River is humid equatorial (IBGE, 2011), with an average temperature of 27°C, relative humidity ranging between 85 and 90% and annual rainfall between 2,200 to 2,800 mm/year (RADAMBRASIL, 1974). Studies from the Amapá Rio RDS area indicate that between the months of January and March rainfall intensity is greater, with monthly rainfall between 300 and 350 mm, while the driest months are July and August, with monthly averages around 50 mm.
Geographically, the Amazon region is defined by watersheds formed by the rivers, which flow into the Amazon Rio and its mouth, along the entire East coast of Brazil (RIBEIRO et al., 1999). The city of Manicoré is influenced mainly by the Madeira and Manicoré rivers which are, respectively,
18
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
white and black water rivers and contribute to the local climatic conditions, combined with the characteristics of the vegetation that includes forests, meadows, savanna (cerrado) and floodplains (várzeas).
The Madeira River drains three main morpho-structural units: the Andes (15%), the Brazilian shield (41% of the basin) and the Amazon plain (44%). The Manicoré River is located in the last two formations. The smaller rivers, or tributaries of Madeira River are: Manicoré River, Aripuanã River, Marmelos River and Canumã River, all located along its right bank.
1.4. Conditions Prior to Project Initiation (G1, indicator 3, indicator 4) (B1, indicator 1)
Before the conservation project, the most important economic activity in the area was timber logging using a sustainable logging plan and authorized by government environmental agencies in 1998 (Appendices 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6).
This activity began in 1999 after authorization for selective logging was granted on 97% of the property for a period of 25 years and concluded in 2010 with the initiation of discussions about the creation of private conservation units. On the occasion of the approval of the timber logging plan, the project proponent (EBCF) still had no knowledge of the area, nor did it plan to purchase the land for conservation purposes or non-timber forest management. Therefore the timeline and duration of events described above rule out any doubts as to the possible implementation of a timber logging plan with a view for creating a baseline scenario for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, for further development of an emissions reduction project.
Economic context of land use
Southern Amazonas is an important region strategically to prevent advances in deforestation in the Amazon. However, in recent years, the region has been suffering successive deforestation events from expanded farming activities, contributing to the so-called "arc of deforestation" toward the state of Amazonas. Historically, the "arc of deforestation" has advanced with the expansion of agriculture in the states of Pará, Mato Grosso, Rondônia, Tocantins and Maranhão. In recent years, pressures on forests have increased with the globalization of markets for meat and soybeans in the Amazon and international development policies for the region (IDESAM, 2011).
In this scenario of increasing deforestation, the forests in southern Amazonas are critically endangered, as well as the great biological diversity harbored within its heterogeneous
19
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
environments, including endemic species of extreme relevance to the conservation of the Amazonian biodiversity (IDESAM, 2011).
Timber companies from the states of Rondônia and Mato Grosso have migrated into the region near the project area in the municipality of Manicoré, spurring the construction of unofficial roads and contributing to the local economy of the municipality. The migratory flow of people from Rondônia to Manicoré also contributes greatly to the expansion of illegal activities and land conflicts in the region (IDESAM, 2011).
In the Amazon, the timber market has great influence, particularly in the system of land use and occupation which direct impacts the conservation of natural resources. The Brazilian Amazon is among the main producers of tropical wood in the world along with Malaysia and Indonesia, and timber production in Brazil is confined mainly to the states of Pará, Amazonas and Mato Grosso. Production there remains relatively stable, at around 24.5 million m3 between the years 2010 and 2011 (ITTO, 2011). Logging and industrial wood processing are among the main economic activities along with mining and farming (LENTINI et al., 2005). The timber sector is a direct driver of the economy of dozens of municipalities in the Amazon, including Manicoré. According to Lentini et al. (2005) in 2004 this sector generated almost 400,000 jobs in the region, equivalent to 5% of the economically active population, and its gross revenue was R$ 2.3 billion.
The last survey on the Amazon wood market, performed by SFB/IMAZON (2010) reveals significant changes in the market for processed wood. In 1998 only 14% of the total volume produced was exported. In 2004, factors such as a favorable exchange rate and increased demand for Amazonian wood in the European, North American and Asian markets raised the proportion of timber exported to 36%. By 2009, however, the participation of native wood in foreign markets had decreased to 21% of the total production. In that same year, the timber market was essentially domestic, as approximately 79% of the wood volume produced was destined for Brazilian markets. The state of São Paulo (17%) and southern Brazil (15%) were the largest consumers of wood from the Amazon. Another 16% were consumed in producer states (rising from 11% in 2004).
In this context the prevention of deforestation on private lands through mechanisms of conservation is a major challenge to sustainable development in the Amazon and vitally important.
The four properties that belong to the project area were acquired in February 2011 by Empresa Brasileira de Conservação de Florestas (EBCF) with the main objective to implement forest
20
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
conservation activities, aiming the protection and enhancement of biodiversity, as well as improving the quality of life of communities living in this environment. These communities have used the non-timber forest resources for generations, within and outside of the project area, as part of their livelihood. Until 2011 and for more than a decade, the project area mainly extracted wood through a sustainable forest logging plan, on a 25-year cycle. In 1998 a selective wood harvest was allowed on 97% of the property, respecting this cycle of 25 years. By 2010, 4,347.69
hectares had been logged and, if the scenario were to continue, an estimated 2 million tons of CO2 would be released into the atmosphere over the next 37 years.
Biological characteristics of the region4
The Amazon is a geographic region that consists of the Amazon tropical rainforest that covers most of the Amazon basin in South America and is distributed among nine countries. It is the largest watershed on the planet, and the Amazon Rio basin itself is approximately 6.9 million km2, draining 1/3 of South America’s waters. The Amazon territory is also home to the largest rivers in the world: the Amazon Rio, Solimões River, Negro River, Madeira River and the Tapajós River. This profusion of rivers holds 15% of the planet's surface fresh water in liquid form – the world's largest reserve (MEIRELES FILHO, 2006).
The Amazon also has immense biological diversity. It is estimated that its forests and rivers harbor approximately 25% of the known species on the planet, with approximately 60,000 plant species (of which 30,000 are higher plants, including 2,500 species of trees and representing 10% of the world’s plant species), 2,000 species of fish, 300 species of mammals (ALBAGLI, 2001), and over 1000 species of birds (10% of the world).
The Amazon Rio Reserves are located in the Purus-Madeira interfluve, a region of intense ancient anthropic activity, including agriculture, livestock and timber extraction, which is compromising the quality of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems, such as rivers and streams. However, areas protected by private conservation units still found in an excellent state of preservation, with a great diversity of plants and animals.
Regional studies carried out in South-West Amazon and, particularly near the Madeira River, have shown some of the highest levels of biodiversity in the world. For greater detail on the animal diversity of the Amazon Rio and its surroundings information from surveys and biological
4 This topic is thoroughly discussed in Section 7 of this document.
21
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
inventories conducted in the Rio Amapá RDS were used, which is located near the areas in question.
The data used to analyze the plant biodiversity of the Amazon Rio areas were previously collected from forest inventories of logging on properties in 2007 (Annex 7), as well as from an expedited forest inventory in 2013 (Annex 8) to record forest species richness, following the recommendations of Filgueiras et al., (1994). The existing trail system was used to conduct the inventory.
For the analysis of the animal biodiversity, biological inventory information were used from the Rio Amapá RDS, conducted in 2009 by the Amazonas State Secretary of Environment and Sustainable Development (SDS) and available in the Management Plan (GOVERNO DO ESTADO DO AMAZONAS, 2010).
FLORA
Dryland (Terra firme) forest
The forest inventory of 100% registration of trees in dryland (terra firme) in one of the logged areas Annual Production Unit (Unidade Produtiva Anual - UPA) of the Amazon Rio I (Annex 7) identified 87 species belonging to 30 families and 26 occurrences of the same unidentified species. The forest inventory carried out on a dryland area about 4 km long west of Amazon Rio I yielded 43 species in 20 families, where Fabaceae (16%), Sapotaceae (15%), Arecaceae (12%), Burseraceae (9%) and Lecytidaceae (8%) were predominant. Within these families the main tree species include copal (Protium sp.) and abiurana (Pouteria sp.), species that are abundant and frequently found throughout the region.
The most common species found in the dryland inventory were abiurana branca (Micropholis mensalis), acariquara (Minquartia guianensis), cedrinho (Erisma uncinatum), maparajuba (Manilkara paraensis), massaranduba (Manilkara huberi), pau marfim (Calycophyllum acreanum) and tacacazeiro (Sterculia speciosa). The presence of species of great ecological importance are worth noting, such as Brazil nut (Bertholletia excelsa), copaíba jacaré (Ducke Eperua oleifera), tento (pavonina Adenanthera L.), fava (Abarema sp.), pajurá (Prance Licania laevigata), tauarí (Couratari guianensis Aubl.), arurá (Osteophloeum platyspermum) and jutaí (Pterocarpus sp.).
Among these species, the Brazil nut has contributed significantly to the economy of local residents due to the large-scale commercialization of the seed, which is conducted through a cooperative agreement, COVEMA, and which will be described later.
22
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
There was also record of palms such as açaí (Euterpe precatoria), babaçu (Attalea speciosa), caramuri (Pouteria elegans) and patauá (Oenocarpus bataua), widely used as food and caranaí palm (Lepidocaryum tenue), whose seeds are used for making handicrafts and its leaves used to cover housing communities in the interior of Amazonas. In general, palm trees species contribute significantly to the plant diversity of the whole region where the Amazon Rio areas are located.
Floodplain (várzea) forests
The expedited inventory in floodplain (várzea) areas found that they are forested with heterogeneous formations, which include tree and shrub species. 103 forest species in 29 families where identified in these forests, including 27 trees not necessarily of the same species and not identified by the local residents.
On floodplains the most abundant plant families are Arecaceae (18%), Euphorbiaceae (15%), Moraceae (9%), Myristicaceae (7%), Chrysobalanaceae (6%), Fabaceae (6%), Sapotaceae (4%), Meliaceae (4%) and Lecythidaceae (4%), mainly represented by seringa or rubber tree (Hevea pauciflora), seringa barriguda (Hevea spruceana), jataúba (Guarea guidonia), apuí (Ficus sp.), assacu (Hura crepitans), andiroba (Carapa guianensis), cedro (Cedrela odorata), muirapiranga (Brosimum angustifolium), muiratinga (Maquira sclerophylla) and virola (Virola cuspidata), also known by the name of ucuúba. All these species are tree species and used for various purposes such as construction, shipbuilding, furniture, packaging and seeds for handicrafts.
On the floodplains large rubber plantations exist with a history of tapping where old and new cuts can be seen in the same tree. Also notable is the occurrence of other species which were logged in the past for their timber value, such as paricá (Schizolobium amazonicum), copaíba mari-mari (Copaifera reticulata), envira de cutia (Scleronema micranthum), garrote (Brosimum utile) e copaiba jacaré (Eperua oleifera), representing approximately 89% of the volume of harvested species, according to the post-exploratory 2006 report of the logging plan (Annex 6 - Vald. II T05 POA, POS, REV. 2006), currently suspended.
Threats to the local flora
In the Amazon Rio project areas the forest species of economic interest have suffered successive removals through selective logging, mainly Eperua oleífera (copaíba jacaré), Brosimum utile (garrote); Scleronema micranthum (envira cutia), Copaifera reticulata (copaíba mari-mari) e Schizolobium amazonicum (paricá), Simarouba amara (marupa), Parkia paraenses (paricarana), Brosimum parinarioides (amapá), Couratari guianensis (tauari branco) and Anacardium giganteum
23
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
(caju-açu). These were the 10 most logged species in the year 2006 in the areas that are now part of the Amazon Rio RPDS I. These 10 species accounted for 96% of all wood removed from the total of 19 species logged.
FAUNA
Regarding animal species, biological inventories carried out in the Rio Amapá RDS in the immediate vicinity of the project area indicated the presence of 29 species of mammals, 210 species of birds, 18 species of amphibians and 85 species of fish (GOVERNO DO ESTADO DO AMAZONAS, 2010). Pacas, agoutis, armadillos, deer, spider monkeys, howler monkeys, capuchin monkeys, tapirs, peccaries and catitus are among the main species of animals mentioned by the community during the participatory workshops.
Mammals
Over the course of 82 km of dryland forest, 47 records of medium to large mammals were obtained through visual observation and collected material such as tracks, droppings, and skulls. The presence of 29 species distributed among seven orders were confirmed, as presented in the Rio Amapá RDS Management Plan (2010).
The presence of large carnivores, such as jaguar (Panthera onca) and cougar (Puma concolor), indicates high environmental quality, and may be linked to low anthropic pressure, thus allowing the perpetuation of viable populations of these carnivores (CULLEN JR. & VALLADARES-PÁDUA, 1999). Moreover, the presence of giant otter (Pteronura brasiliensis) in surrounding rivers, as in the Amapá River, can be considered a good indicator of environmental balance and water quality.
Bird species
In the Rio Amapá RDS 210 species of birds have been recorded, four of which are new species: the hawk (gavião in Portuguese) (Leucopternis sp), the antwren (chororozinho in Portuguese) (Herpsilochmus sp.), the tody-tyrant (maria in Portuguese) (Hemitriccus sp), and jay (gralha in Portuguese) (Cyanocorax sp). The geographic distribution of these four new species is limited, probably due to the small Madeira-Purus interfluve.
Another important result was the extent of the distribution of five species along hundreds of kilometers of forest: ocellated crake (maxalalagá in Portuguese) (Micropygia schomburgkii), least nighthawk (bacurauzinho in Portugues) (Chordeiles pusillus), black antbird (chororó-preto in Portuguese) (Cercomacra serva), citron-bellied attila (tinguaçu-de-barriga-amarela in Portuguese)
24
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
(Attila citriniventris) and wedge-tailed grass finch (canário-do-campo in Portuguese) (Emberizoides herbicola), which indicates the heterogeneity of the area and the availability of resources throughout its length. According to Menger (2011), in the study of the interfluve area of the Purus- Madeira, the inequality in the distribution of species can be explained, in part, by the sensitivity of the species to environmental variations, represented by the composition of palm trees, which are very abundant throughout the region, as stated by the floristic inventories conducted in the region.
Reptiles
In the Rio Amapá RDS 18 amphibian species belonging to five families were recorded, the most frequent being Hylidae and Leptodactylidae. The dryland forest harbors high richness of poison dart frogs. Colostethus caeruleodactylus has been found in the Autazes region and recently along the Purus River, was found in large numbers on dryland with Brazil nuts trees, near the Amapá River. The area of occurrence of the species has expanded to about 210 km to the South.
Three species of snakes were also identified: Brown-banded water snake (Helicops angulatus), Dendrophidion dendrophis and the pitviper (jararaca in Portuguese) Bothrops sp. in dryland forests. The smooth-fronted caiman (Paleosuchus trigonatus) was registered on the banks of the Amapá River, a species that lives on dryland streams and near larger rivers.
Fish species
The biological inventory of fish in the Rio Amapá RDS surveyed Igarapés (seasonally flooded streams), 9 of which are small streams (1st/2nd order) and two intermediate-sized streams (3rd/4th order).
Spot checks took place on the Amapá River, divided into five parts. 133 species were found, belonging to seven orders and 28 families. These include the contributions of the Characiformes (73 species), Siluriformes (27 species), Gymnotiformes (15 species), Perciformes (14), Beloniformes (2 species) and Synbranchiformes and Cyprinodontiformes (1 species each).
Six species were highly abundant, representing 46.26% of all individuals collected. The most notable were Physopyxis ananas and Hypopygus lepturus, representing 11.28% and 10.99% respectively, followed by the Hyphessobrycon sp. (9.49%), by Apistogramma cf. agassizii (6.09%), the butterflyfish (Carnegiella strigata) (4.54%) and by Hemigrammus gr. Belottii) (3.88%). The number of species recorded in each stream sampled ranged from 16 to 45. The recording of at least three species described as Gladioglanis sp. n., Gymnotus sp. n. "brindle" and Synbranchus sp. is worth noting.
25
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
The diversity and distribution pattern of these individuals in relation to their species were very high, and dominance was extremely low, indicating that the water bodies surrounding the Rio Amapá RDS, and near the Amazon Rio areas, shows an excellent state of conservation. In addition, the presence of several species considered rare and even new species with the same genetically viable populations, with an area of reproduction and development of young individuals was confirmed.
However, according to studies by Cardoso (2008), Manicoré presents great diversity of fish species, contributing significantly to the local economy. The main destinations for fishing expeditions are the rivers: Madeira (29.5%), Manicoré (16.2%) and Atininga (8.0%), lakes Acará (9.8%) and Boquerão (8.8%) and the Matupiri igarapé (8.1%). The most frequently marketed species are Semaprochilodus spp, pacu (Mylossoma duriventre), Prochilodus nigricans, sardine (Triportheus spp.), jatuarana (Brycon spp.), Curimatidae, Brachyplatystoma rousseauxii, Pseudoplatystoma tigrinum, Anostomidae and Pseudoplatystoma fasciatum. The first 5 species listed are the most heavily commercialized, which represent 75% of the fish marketed in the region.
These numbers may represent, in the medium and long terms, a threat to the conservation of fish species in the region, when management strategies will be necessary to selectively fish the most heavily consumed species.
Threats to local fauna
According to the Chico Mendes Institute for Biodiversity Conservation (ICMBio) the largest biodiversity in the world is located in Brazil. There are more than 100 thousand species of invertebrates and approximately 8,200 vertebrate species: 713 mammals, 1,826 birds, 721 reptiles, 875 amphibians, 2,800 freshwater fish and 1,300 saltwater fish. Within this list, a significant number (627) are listed as endangered species.
The participatory mapping of the natural resources usage system of the surrounding communities of the Amazon Rio areas, conducted by EBCF in 2013, shows that the ,most serious threats to local wildlife are overharvesting of local populations, mostly by commercial fishing and poaching.
According to this map, the fish most commonly caught in streams and lakes are: Cichla sp, Arapaima gigas, tambaqui (Colossoma macropomum), pirapitinga (Piaractus brachypomus), silver arowana (Osteoglossum bicirrhosum), Matrinchã (Brycon amazonicus), jatuarana (Brycon sp) and spotted sorubim (Pseudoplatystoma corruscans). Monitoring the population viability of these
26
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
species of fish is fundamental for determining if overharvesting of its individuals is occurring, in the sense of direct actions on sustainable management of these resources in the Amazon Rio areas. As for the hunting of wild animals, the communities surrounding the RPDS put pressure mainly on primate populations such as the howler monkey (Alouatta seniculus), Lagothrix cf., capuchin monkey (Cebus apella); felines like the jaguar (Panthera onca) and cougar (Puma concolor); and herbivores such as tapir (Tapirus terrestres), deer (Mazama sp.) and boar (Pecari tajacu). The hunting activities in the surrounding communities of the Amazon Rio should be constantly monitored, in order to facilitate the implementation of an efficient management system for wild animals. This would ensure the population viability of species that suffer intense pressure, and supply animal protein to local communities.
Socio-economic, political and cultural characteristics of the communities5 (G1, indicator 4) (CM1, indicator 1)
Resident populations in the buffer zone of the Amazon Rio are known as "caboclas” and are divided into fifteen communities, with twelve communities (Urucury, Água Azul, Vista Alegre, Boa Esperança, Santa Eva, Santa Maria, Pandegal, Democracia, Jatuarana, Terra Preta do Ramal, Kamayuá and São José do Miriti) located near Amazon Rio areas I and III and in the Rio Amapá RDS on the Madeira River and its tributaries. A community formed by the residents of the Agroextractivist Association São João e Ponta Grossa, is located in the surroundings of the area Amazon Rio IV. Two communities, Terra Preta do Rio Manicoré and Mocambo, are located in the surroundings of the Amazon Rio II by the riverbank of Manicoré River.
The dwellings are built, preferentially facing the river and are suspended about one meter above the ground. They are usually built of wood and roofed with asbestos or zinc shingles, clay or straw. Few are made of concrete and the poorest families build houses with walls and roofs of straw. In floodland areas, when the flooding is greater than expected, families suspend the floors of houses and in severe cases are forced to migrate to dry land.
The religious orientation of these communities is predominantly Roman Catholic, with only one Evangelical church, located in the community of Terra Preta do Ramal. The Catholicism practiced by these communities is traditional with emphasis on devotion of the Saints and performing rituals such as raising the flag, recitation of novenas and religious festivals of arraias. Many families
5 This topic is thoroughly discussed in Section 6 of this document.
27
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
celebrate annual festivities to honor the patron saints, considered to be the protectors of the communities.
In June of 2013 an update of the number of households, families and population was held in 14 of the 15 surrounding communities of the Amazon Rio, pointing to a total of 1436 people, being the most populous communities: Vista Alegre, Jatuarana, Democracia and Água Azul. As for the age group, during the census conducted in 2013 537 children (0 to 14 years) were recorded, 329 teenagers (15 to 24 years), 484 adults (24 to 65 years) and 99 elderly individuals (over 65 years). (Table 4 of Annex 9).
Almost every community in the surrounding Amazon Rio areas has an elementary school (up to fourth grade) bound to the local authority of the Municipality of Manicoré, with the exception of Santa Eva Community and São João e Ponta Grossa Agroextractivist Association. The main educational centers are the communities of Democracia and Água Azul that offer distance education with High School classes televised at night. The communities of Vista Alegre, Santa Maria, Urucury, Mocambo and Jatuarana have up to the fifth grade of elementary school. There are education programs for young people and adults in four communities: Democracia, Jatuarana, São José do Miriti and Mocambo, although often discontinuous.
Community health workers and midwives are responsible for community healthcare. Almost every community has health workers, with the exception of the communities of Santa Maria, Pandegal and the Agroextractivist Association São João e Ponta Grossa, although this last one, due to its proximity to Manicoré, has easy access to health services. The only clinic available is located in Jatuarana, but it is currently deactivated. Health workers use their own residences, offering a room for emergency care. In more severe cases the health worker accompanies the patient to Manicoré. Generally, residents complain of the lack of support from the Government in providing medicine and the lack of training among health workers.
Most communities, except for Democracia, Vista Alegra, Boa Esperança, Pandegal e Água Azul, use river or igarapé water for human consumption and cooking, very often without proper treatment. This situation significantly raises the occurrence of waterbourne diseases, especially among children. Furthermore most families dig shallow trenches to store water, bringing serious risks of contamination. The most common diseases are endemic, or related to sanitation and nutrition.
Every community has a president for the Community and Church Association, who is chosen by
28
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
the locals. Community leaders, who can have more than one leadership position, have very defined obligations and are respected for their ability to mediate internal conflicts and to represent the interests of the community with external institutions. They organize parties and seek partnerships to develop social and productive projects that benefit all residents.
As occurs in other regions of the Amazon, these people engage in various activities to assist vulnerable or at risk community members, to increase food security and improve the quality of their lives. They share their time between extractivist, agricultural, fishing and hunting activities. Their cultivation and harvesting practices are predominantly traditional, comprising a rich native heritage.
The communities maintain strong ties to productive activities linked to agriculture, especially the cultivation of cassava used as flour, as well as banana and watermelon, and the extraction of non- timber forest products such as Brazil nuts and to a lesser degree acai, tucuman, rubber and copaiba oil. Meanwhile, the community of Pandegal is exceptional as they engage heavily in mining, though extractivism is also practiced. Apart from agriculture and forestry, governmental aid in the form of social security benefits are important sources of income for these communities.
Despite the wide variety of activities, most families consider the trade in Brazil nuts as their main activity, especially in the communities of São José do Miriti, Democracia, Boa Esperança, Jatuarana, Urucury, Santa Eva and Terra Preta, in which Brazil nuts are harvested preferentially from the Rio Amapá RDS and from the Amazon Rio I Private Reserve.
Currently, all the communities surrounding the Amazon Rio areas have associations that form a Council of Agro Extrativist Associations of Democracia (Conselho das Associações Agroextrativistas de Democracia – CAAD), which in turn is linked to the Council of Agro Extrativist Associations of Manicoré (Conselho das Associacoes Agroextrativistas de Manicoré – CAAM) and to COVEMA6, responsible for the purchase, processing and marketing of nuts in the region.
1.5. Project Proponent (G1, indicator 1)
Organization Name Empresa Brasileira de Conservação de Florestas S.A. (EBCF)
6 COVEMA assists all communities around the reserves, as well as 40 other communities in the municipality, within and outside of Conservation Units and Settlement Projects. There are more than 500 registered Brazil nut harvesters, the second largest job generating institution in the city of Manicoré, just behind the City government. Such performance grants it a preeminant position in the state of Amazonas. In 2011, COVEMA expanded its operations to the neighboring municipality of Novo Aripuanã, to purchase the production of the Madeira and Juma RDSs.
29
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Contact Person Leonardo Barrionuevo
Title President
Address Curitiba-PR: Al. Dr Carlos de Carvalho 555, Conj. 231 Centro, Curitiba – PR, CEP 80430-180, Brazil Escritório Manaus: Av. Djalma Batista 1661, Conj. 1409 A, Bloco B, Ed. Business Tower, Millenium, Cep 69.050-010, Manaus-AM, Brazil
Telephone +55 41 3158 9800 | +55 41 9943 8005
Email [email protected]
1.6. Other Entities Involved in the Project
Organization Name Original Trade Consulting
Role in the Project Update of the Amazon Rio REDD+ IFM Project Description (PD) (V2.0) and coordination of certifcation process
Contact Person João Batista Tezza Neto
Title Director
Address Avenida André Araújo, 2936 – Edifício Incubadora do INPA, sala 10, Cep. 69.060-000, Manaus-AM, Brazil.
Telephone +55 92 981590997
Email [email protected]
Organization Name CO2X Conservação de Florestas Ltda.
Role in the Project Tecnical coordination of the Amazon Rio REDD+ IFM Project Description (PD) Version 1.0, including the Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC), the Expeditious Forest Inventory and the Management Plan of the Amazon Rio RPDS Conservation Unit.
Contact Person Rosana Della Méa
Telephone +55 11 98493 9237
30
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Email [email protected]
Organization Name Renascer Desenvolvimento Humano
Role in the Project Social programs implementation
Contact Person André Albuquerque
Title Director
Address Rua Coronel Dulcídio 62, Bairro Batel, Curitiba - PR CEP 80420-170
Telephone +55 41 97030248
Email [email protected]
1.1
Nome da empresa HDOM
Função Degradation and deforestation report; Forest inventory for biomass calculation purposes in the project area and support the PD review
Contato Francisco Higuchi
Cargo Director
Endereço Av. Mário Ypiranga, 315. Ed. The Office, sala 609. Adrianópolis. CEP 69.057-002
Telefone + 55 92 98128 2561
Email [email protected]
1.7. Project Start Date (G1, indicator 9)
The project began on August 17, 2012, when the board and EBCF shareholders formally approved the company's Business Plan (Annex 27), which set out the objectives of conserving forests through the REDD + , provision of services and sustainable use of forest resources excluded logging activities.
31
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
1.8. Project Crediting Period (G1, indicator 9)
The first crediting period of the project is 37 years, beginning on August 17, 2012 and ending on 17 August 2049. This period is equivalent to the remaining 12 years of the first authorized management plan (25 years from 1998) added to another 25 years in respect of a new forest management plan that was intended, as the common practice of forestry in Brazil. The logging activities could continue beyond 37 years, aiming for a second crediting period.
2 DESIGN
2.1 Sectoral scope and project type
Project Scope: Agriculture, Forest and other Land Use (AFOLU) Project Category: Reduction Emission from Deforestation and Degradation from Planned Deforestation (REDD-IFM) Type of Activity: Improved Forest Management - Logged to Protected Forest (IFM LfPF)
2.2 Description of the project activity (g1, indicator 8)
The Amazon Rio project expects greenhouse gas emissions reductions from the Amazon Rio I, II, III and IV areas by promoting forest conservation activities instead of the logging, licensed in August 1998 and beginning in 1999. Forest conservation activities are important to the project region, an ecologically significant landscape that is well preserved, and has high biological diversity, outstanding endemism, as well as economic and pharmacological potential. These characteristics created the opportunity to plan activities related to ecological, educational and scientific tourism initiatives, as well as technical and scientific research related to natural resource management. However, as they are part of a strategy aimed at strengthening income generation for communities, revenues of these initiatives are more difficult to quantify and therefore were not considered in the economic analysis. Nor were they taken into account in the decision to create the private reserves and to cease timber management activities.
The only source of income considered by the proponent of the project comes from payments for environmental services (PES), from the sale of Environmental Reserve Quotas (CRAs) and carbon credits. With regard to legal reserve compensation, it has been recognized in the new Forest Code
32
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
(Law no. 12.651/ 2012)7 as an opportunity to take advantage of the surplus of forest cover of a rural property to compensate for the absence of legal reserve in another property, provided that they belong to the same biome. These offset areas are considered to be securities representing vegetation cover that can be used to fulfill the obligation of the legal reserve on another property. This mechanism offers the possibility to add market value to the forest areas of a property, which exceed the legal requirements (RL and APP).
The Forest Code sets forth that CRAs can be created in the areas of: Forest easement; Legal reserve voluntarily instituted on the vegetation that exceeds the statutory percentage; Conservation unit in the public domain which has not yet been expropriated; Private Reserve of Natural Heritage (Reserva Particular do Patrimônio Natural - RPPN) - which holds a legal status similar to the RPDS, though more restrictive, since it fits a category of conservation units of permanent protection, while the RPDS belongs to the category of protected areas of sustainable use.
The income from carbon credits result from the reduction in emissions from deforestation, as well as the sale of CRAs that will create the financial conditions with which to implement the activities in the Management Plan of the Amazon Rio I Private Reserve and the future Amazon Rio II, III and IV Reserves. Although they are private areas, which do not host traditional communities within its boundaries, a deliberate decision was made to include them as active participants in the planning and implementation of programs and projects included in the Management Plan. Actions of this Plan support sustainable business practices and seek to significantly improve the quality of life of these populations.
To efficiently and successfully implement the Plan, preliminary activities such as inventories, research, diagnostics and training courses must be carried out. Concurrently, projects that provide rapid returns should be implemented, such as school renovations and construction of wells, construction of warehouses, Brazil nut warehouses (paióis), acquiring ambulance boats8, among others, in order to motivate and engage communities. In the medium and long term, efforts and investments should be focused on innovative projects that generate income, such as tourism, agroforestry systems, consolidation of productive chains of non-timber forest products, among
7 http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2011-2014/2012/lei/L12651compilado.htm 8 Ambulance boats are vessels equipped to act as mobile ICUs. They are widely used in the Amazonas State, that uses waterways as the main type of transport between municipalities.
33
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
others, and the implementation of all infrastructure and equipment acquisition necessary for its proper operation.
In addition, programs will be deployed to monitor the use of the plants, animals and various natural resources systems by surrounding communities, similar to the Program for Monitoring Biodiversity and Use of Natural Resources in Conserveation Units (ProBUC), and the Voluntary Environmental Agent (AAV) both developed by the Secretary of Environment and Sustainable Development of the Amazon (Secretaria de Meio Ambiente e Desenvolvimento Sustentável do Estado do Amazonas - SDS)
ProBUC is a participatory program in which the involvement of community extends beyond the training for biodiversity and natural resources use data collection. In this program, local people are involved and encouraged to participate in all stages, from planning to results evaluation. The program allows local people to see the importance and responsibility of their actions for the maintenance of ecosystem integrity and thereby ensure their livelihoods in a sustainable manner (MARINELLI et al., 2007).
By focusing on threats, monitoring seeks to understand the status of biodiversity and use of community resources of UC to plan measures to mitigate and prevent the overharvest of wildlife and local plants. The deployment of ProBUC ensures better planning and management of hunting and fishing activities by communities, thus avoiding overharvest of animals such as tapirs, deer, monkeys, birds and wild boar. Within its scope are the following elements: i) awareness, ii) training and iii) environmental monitoring.
The objective of the Voluntary Environmental Agent Program (Programa Agente Ambiental Voluntário - AAV) will be to train and support the formation of the surrounding residents of Amazon Rio Reserves in community mobilization actions seeking solutions to environmental problems. Environmental education, conflict mediation and joint efforts for surveillance in the Reserves and its surroundings will be developed, in particular in the areas of collective use by households. It is important to emphasize that these actions should not set control actions, but to support environmental protection and surveillance activities. Therefore, this program will give local people the opportunity to assist their communities in environmental education, protection, preservation and conservation of natural resources. After the implementation of these two programs in the Amazon Rio areas and its surroundings, the creation of fishing agreements will be encouraged in Matupiri, St. John and Jatuarana lakes to control the commercial and exploratory fishing by boats from other regions, including the headquarters in the city of Manicoré. It is also intended to support
34
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
the organization of the traditional system of fishing of communities to prevent overfishing of locally important food and commercial species, such as pirarucu, tambaqui, tucunaré and others, thus ensuring the balance and maintenance of fish stocks for food and sale.
To evaluate the success and progress of these initiatives throughout the development of the project, we used the methodology of the Sustainability Matrix developed by the Amazonas State Secretary of Environment and Sustainable Development (Secretaria de Meio Ambiente e Desenvolvimento Sustentável do Estado do Amazonas - SDS). This tool was applied in 15 communities, taking into account the local socio-economic aspects that motivated the development of 20 parameters considered of major importance for community development, described by specific indicators. The Sustainability Matrix is a visual tool well suited to traditional communities, such as the coastal and indigenous communities surrounding the Amazon Rio I and other areas of the project. In addition, the Matrix provides interesting opportunities for discussion owing to the participatory nature of its construction.
Using the Sustainability Matrix built from community collaboration, projects, activities and implementation strategies could be identified. Meanwhile project budgets, verification and evaluation methods will be detailed later in Annual Operational Plans and monitored in due course. In total four programs and nine sub-management and community development programs (Annex 9) were defined.
Implementation schedule
Table 1 - Implementation schedule and next activities
Ano Atividade
EBCF performs the symbolic protocol creation of the first RPDs during the 2010 seminar results and perspective of the State of Amazonas Conservation Units held by the SDS.
2011 EBCF submits the formal protocol to CEUC.
Meeting presentation EBCF for communities near the Amazon River I, II, III 2011 and IV.
2011 EBCF attended the informal invitation made by the management of RDS
35
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Rio Amapá and representative CEUC - Silvia Elena, the training workshop and delivery portfolios ENVIRONMENTAL VOLUNTEERS AGENTS held in the Boa Esperança community.
EBCF participated in the event organized by the CAAD which had the agenda: General Assembly, accountability of CAAD year 2009/2010, RDS Management Plan Amapá Rio, Bolsa Floresta, Municipal Management, 2011 IDAM contribution, contribution Covema, IEB's contribution and delivery of equipment for processing of acai, held on 24/03/2011 in the community of Democracy and 25/03/2011 in the Boa esperança Community.
2011 Inspection of CEUC on farms for approval on RPDs.
2011 The board of EBCF makes his 1st visit the communities and farms.
EBCF in partnership with the Municipal Government of Manipur, perform the recovery local road (approximately 20KM) linking Democracia 2011 community, Jatuarana communities, Terra Preta Community, Santa Eva and Vista Alegre.
Visit of the president and directors of EBCF the communities surrounding the reserves, together with the president of PATAC Marcelo Marder and 2012 Andre Albuquerque president for socioeconomic communities report presentation.
Business Plan Project approval and EBCF shareholders agreement, 2012 authorizing the start of the REDD project.
Workshop I - Diagnosis for the development of areas of the Amazon River 2013 Management Plan I, II, III & IV.
Visit communities to complement the workshop I for interviews with the 2013 locals.
Meeting in CEUC after the second workshop to update the work with the 2013 communities and the progress of the approval of the areas.
Technical meeting with the team CO2X, Renascer and Human 2013 Development EBCF in Curitiba for the review and evaluation of the first part
36
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
of the Management Plan (diagnosis); Definition of programs and subprograms of the Plan; identification of key issues, potential threats and opportunities with the creation of RPDSs; definition of vision and action strategy.
The Secretary of State for the Environment (SDS) officiated at the World 2013 Environment Day, the first Private Reserve Sustainable Development (RPDs) of the Amazon with the signing of the decree no. 86.
Workshop II - presentation of the carbon project as one of the fundraising 2013 programs for the implementation of the Management Plan.
Field work with communities and farms for mapping biodiversity and 2013 hunting and fishing grounds.
The EBCF performs a complete socioeconomic census in the surrounding 2013 communities of RPDs.
Meeting with CEUC for delivery and presentation of the draft of RPDs 2013 Amazon River Management Plan I.
Supplementary Meeting to communities who could not attend the 2013 Workshop II & III Workshop Creation of the Advisory Council for RPDs Amazon River I.
2013 The EBCF performs social and economic Census in Kamayuá community.
2015 Realization of field activities for "Biomass Inventory Estimation".
2016 Vitor Belfort visit and launch of income-generating initiatives.
Distribution of medical kits for community health workers and launching the 2016 Health Program in the Amazon.
2016 Deforestation Report.
2016 PD Review and preparation of the monitoring report.
2016 REDD + Project Certification (VCS and CCV).
37
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Project planning for structuring the supply chain of vegetable oils 2016 certificates.
2017 Fundraising from the REDD project.
2017 Ecotourism Project Design.
Workshop Achievement "Participatory Planning Project REDD + activity 2017 EBCF".
2017 ProBUC Deployment.
2018 Implementation of Voluntary Environmental Agent program.
2.3 Management of Risks to Project Benefits (G1, indicator 10)
Authorized timber extraction
The authorized extraction of timber should not be considered a risk to the project, since the initiative intends to transform the areas into conservation units. Thus, terminating the logging activities was the initiative of the applicant itself, who is the legal owner of the areas.
In 1998, a 25-year logging plan was approved for the four areas of the project on a total licensed area of 19,800 ha. Between 1999 and 2010, about 4,347.69 ha were logged (and partially degraded). This same area (19,800 ha) was then donated to the Empresa Brasileira de Conservação de Florestas (EBCF) in 2011 for conservation purposes, by then owner Valdenor Campos da Costa, a founding partner of EBCF. The purpose of this donation was to preserve the forests of the region, transforming the four areas into a mosaic of conservation units. In this way, the GHG emissions associated with logging activities (baseline scenario) would not longer be generated and since timber management does not figure among the activities envisaged by the Reserve’s Management Plan, such emissions are not expected to re-occur in these areas.
Illegal logging
Illegal logging is perhaps one of the greatest risks to the permanence of carbon stocks of any conservation project in the Amazon, including the Amazon Rio project. Because it is often associated with indiscriminate hunting, illegal logging also presents serious risks to biodiversity especially for maintenance and balance of plant species.
38
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Illegally extracted Amazonian wood is today one of the main sources of raw materials supplying the domestic wood market. According to data from SFB/IMAZON (2010), 35% of wood produced from the Amazon region is logged illegally. However, it is important to note that even legally produced wood has faced supervisory and control difficulties regarding its forest source documents (DOF). Thus, once should expect that the sale of “legal wood” through falsified DOFs may actually underestimate the true volume of illegally logged timber. Data from ADEOTADO et al. (2011) shows that 33% of Amazon wood consumed in the state of São Paulo – the largest consumer in the internal market – is sourced illegally. Figure 04 - Illegal Wood in the Amazon (2009). SFB/IMAZON (2010)
In the case of the project areas, the prospect is that over the medium and long term, carbon certificates (Verified Carbon Units - VCU’s) and CRAs generated by project activities will subsidize investments in the surveillance of project areas and the development of sustainable income- generating programs, as envisioned in the Management Plan.
In this context, the RPDS Management Plan predicates the involvement of communities, public environmental protection agents, and environmental volunteers to the formation of an active board to protect and supervise the Reserves. The fact that the project area is located adjacent the Rio Amapá RDS which is in a public domain, contributes to the protection and surveillance activities on the private reserves. Besides this factor, the plans are to construct floating docks from which to monitor boat traffic in the vicinity of the Reserves, thus helping to combat illegal logging.
39
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Forest fires
Forest fires also represent a frequent risk to agriculture, forestry and other land use projects (AFOLU), and represent a major threat to the surrounding communities and to their livelihoods. Besides natural and criminal causes, fires can also be caused by the traditional activities of opening and clearing new areas for agriculture and renewing pastures. Such practices should therefore be subject to the control and adoption of management systems.
The fact that the project area is neighboring the Rio Amapá Sustainable Development Reserve (RDS), a synergy is expected between the two conservation units in terms of monitoring illegal activities in the region, especially illegal logging and forest fires. Additionally, the Management Plan foresees training of local people in agricultural techniques that do not require the use of fire for opening and clearing (slash and burn) the cultivation areas, as well as the installation of an efficient system for preventing and fighting forest fires, which should rely on trained teams, installation of observation towers and environmental education programs.
Impacts to surrounding communities
Any project that relies on external support, no matter how well-intentioned and planned, interferes with local systems of use and ownership of natural resources, especially for traditional populations. This is probably the biggest risk associated with the implementation of project activities which should be carefully considered and enlist the support of sustainable rural development experts, social scientists, and anthropologists.
So that the project contributes to a more equitable division of resources and its benefits external agents that recognize local systems of use and ownership of resources are vital, so that internal conflicts do not escalate, but rather establish actions that favor the collective interests of the groups involved. Poorly prepared and executed projects may introduce new conflicts or aggravate existing ones. Conversely, projects that rely on community participation in its early stages of development and consider the conflicts and their systems of land division and resource usage can help reduce and prevent disputes.
As estimated in the Management Plan to improve the traditional systems of production and management, from the increase in productivity, employment of conservation measures, including new species and varieties, expansion of the range of forest species and greater spatio-temporal planning of project activities, adaptations and adjustments in these traditional systems should occur. Such measures, even if done cautiously, will affect the local institutional arrangements
40
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
involved in production and management systems, and could potentially change the way they fuction. These changes should be strictly monitored so there are no negative impacts on livelihoods of local populations.
Predatory exploitation of plant and animal resources
An imminent risk to biodiversity is the predatory exploitation of natural resources, especially fish stocks, hunting and timber and non-timber forest resources. This risk will be mitigated through the implementation of biodiversity monitoring programs and the use of natural resources in the Amazon State conservation units (ProBUC), and Voluntary Environmental Agent program (AAV), in addition to the hunting and fishing agreements to be implemented at the main entry points these for these resources in the project area.
Such initiatives will assist in the monitoring of the most commonly used natural resources, in evaluating their availability, and enable the proposition of best practices and management systems that respect minimum viable populations, reproductive periods of animals and fish, as well as the ability to support timber and non-timber forest resources.
2.4 Measures to Maintain High Conservation Values (HCV)
The concept of HCV was originally introduced as a forest management certification by the FSC, with the objective to define forest areas of extraordinary importance, mostly for primary and intact forests.
However, due to the significant direct and indirect impacts caused by human activities on natural environments, it is virtually impossible to find a forest that has not undergone any anthropogenic change in its form and so the concept must be adjusted. Currently, the approach of HCV refers to six key attributes related to forest area, involving biological, ecological, social value and cultural materials of extraordinary significance or critical importance in national, regional or global scale, which are explained below.
At the time of the preparation of this document, specific surveys to identify the HCVs within the limits of the project have not been done conducted. However, it is expected that with the gradual implementation of the Management Plan, such studies will be carried out in order to map any HCVs in the project area, adding value to the forests of the RPDS. Description of high conservation value (HCV) present in the project area and its surroundings (CM1, indicator 2) (B1, indicator 2)
41
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
I. Protected areas
The objective of the project areas is to contribute effectively to the maintenance of the forests of the South-Central State of Amazonas. They are therefore established as priority areas to be protected for nature conservation, through the creation of Private Sustainable Development Reserve (RPDSs), provided for by the State System of Protected Areas of the Amazon (SEUC).
The project areas are strategic for environmental conservation, for harboring approximately 20,000 hectares of well-preserved forests, and for ensuring connectivity between large blocks of protected forests under the Federal Government jurisdiction (Lago Caparanã Grande RDS) and under the State of Amazonas’ jurisdiction (Rio Amapá RDS, Rio, Matupiri State Park RDS and Juma RDS). For this reason, the reserves have high conservation value over an ecologically varied landscape, facilitating gene flow between animals and plants through these protected forest tracts, especially in light of possible future scenarios of intensive land occupation and conversion of forests into agriculture and livestock production. The location of the Amazon Rio II and Amazon Rio III areas is also of importance within a macro-region of the municipality of Manicoré, on the right bank of the Madeira River, which considered to be of extremely high biological significance by the Ministry of the Environment and a priority area for conservation in Brazil (MMA, 2007). See map below.
Figure 05 - Areas Amazon Rio II and III located in macro-region classified as extremely high for the conservation of biodiversity in accordance with MMA (2007) (G1, Indicator 7).
42
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
The areas identified were classified according to degree of importance for biodiversity and the urgency in implementing the suggested actions. For this purpose, the following typology was adopted: extremely high, very high, high, and insufficiently known.
The methodology used by the MMA to define priority areas for conservation, sustainable use and benefits sharing from the biodiversity found in Brazil considers:
Biodiversity targets: endemic species, endangered or species of limited distribution, biologically exceptional or rare phenomena; Targets for sustainable use: species of economic or medicinal importance; areas/species important to traditional populations and for the maintenance of their traditional knowledge; flag- ship species that motivate conservation and sustainable use activities; key species on which the sustainable use of biodiversity components depends; important areas for conservation- based development; areas that provide environmental services to agricultural areas (such as those dependent on pollination and biological control); important areas for the cultural and social diversity associated with biodiversity; Target persistence and processes: important areas for the maintenance of environmental services (maintenance, biogeochemical cycles, climate hydrological processes, groundwater recharge areas); centers of endemism; evolutionary processes; important areas for species and migratory pollinating species; climate havens; areas import for connectivity and gene flow; protective areas for watersheds; important areas for maintenance of the flood pulse in floodplains; extensive areas for species with large habitat requirements.
After the priority areas for biodiversity conservation in Brazil were identified, the MMA (2007) recommends the following action strategies to improve territorial management and the sustainable use of natural resources:
Establishment of conservation units, expansion of existing conservation units, establishing fishing exclusion zones, encourage the establishment of mosaics of protected areas, surveillance and control; Implementation and consolidation of protected areas, watershed and water resources management, establishment of ecological corridors, sustainable management of natural resources, management of invasive species or pests, resolving management conflicts in protected areas, supervision and control; Biological inventorying, biodiversity monitoring, analysis of specific population dynamics, long- term research
43
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Approval of indigenous lands, recognition of Quilombos lands, deployment of watershed committees, ecological-economical zoning, environmental education programs, implementation of economic mechanisms to support biodiversity conservation.
The creation of sustainable use UCs was the most recommended priority action, followed by the creation of protected areas in other categories, spatial planning, formation of mosaics or ecological corridors and recovery of degraded areas.
II. Endangered species:
FLORA
About 5% of the tree species identified in the project areas are on the Red List of endangered species, according to the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). They are either critically endangered (CE) with extremely high risk of extinction in the wild; endangered (ED) with very high risk of extinction; or vulnerable (VU) with a high risk of extinction in the wild. The following table lists the endangered species of trees in the region of the Amazon Rio project:
Table 02 - Endangered plant species in the areas of the Amazon Rio project (using forest inventory information conducted by EBCF and considering the Red List of endangered species (footnote IUCN)). Common Red Common Year name list Kingdom Order Family Species name assess (Portugues stat (Inglês) ed e) us Chrysophyl SAPOTACE PLANTAE EBENALES lum Abiurana CE 1998 AE superbum Micropholi SAPOTACE PLANTAE EBENALES s Abiurana CE 1998 AE grandiflora Aniba LAURACEA PLANTAE LAURALES rosaeodor Pau rosa ED 1998 E a LEGUMINO Inga PLANTAE FABALES Inga ED 1998 SAE suberosa PLANTAE EBENALES SAPOTACE Pouteria Abiurana ED 1998
44
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
AE fulva SAPOTACE Pouteria PLANTAE EBENALES Abiurana ED 1997 AE juruana Pouteria SAPOTACE PLANTAE EBENALES tarumanen Abiurana ED 1998 AE sis Virola MAGNOLIA MYRISTICA Ucuuba, Baboonw PLANTAE surinamen ED 1998 LES CEAE virola ood sis LECYTHIDA LECYTHIDA Bertholletia Brazil nut PLANTAE Castanheira VU 1998 LES CEAE excelsa tree Louro fofo LAURACEA Aniba PLANTAE LAURALES (Ocotea VU 1998 E ferrea aciphylla) Aniba LAURACEA PLANTAE LAURALES santalodor Louro rosa VU 1998 E a LECYTHIDA LECYTHIDA Cariniana Couroupita PLANTAE VU 1998 LES CEAE integrifolia guianensis Cariniana LECYTHIDA LECYTHIDA Couroupita PLANTAE pachyanth VU 1998 LES CEAE guianensis a LECYTHIDA LECYTHIDA Cariniana Couroupita PLANTAE VU 1998 LES CEAE uaupensis guianensis Eschweiler LECYTHIDA LECYTHIDA a Ripeiro PLANTAE VU 1998 LES CEAE rhododend branco rifolia Abiu, abiurana, SAPOTACE Pouteria abiurana- PLANTAE EBENALES VU 1998 AE lucens abiu, jaraí, abiurana bacurl
* CE: at extremely high risk of extinction, ED: very high risk of extinction, VU: Vulnerable
45
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
These species have become endangered for their productive and cultural importance of local communities. In general, all plant parts are used either in construction (timber species) or in the essence, resin, bark, fruit and tannin industries (multiple use species).
FAUNA
According to MMA (2008) 627 animal taxa are considered endangered in Brazil, including 61 Amazon species, using the IUCN methodologies that created the classifications of vulnerable (VU), endangered (EN) and critically endangered (CE). Of all 627 endangered taxa, 69 are mammals (11% of the total); 160 (25.5%) are birds; 20 (3.2%) are reptiles; 16 (2.5%) are amphibians; 154 (24.6%) are fish, and 208 (33.2%) are invertebrates.
Within these endangered animals, mammals, especially primates and carnivores, are proportionally more endangered. Forests are the exclusive habitat of primates and therefore they exhibit very low tolerance to forest destruction. Carnivores, which are predominantly predators have low population densities and large habitat requirements. Both also suffer from hunting pressure: primates are hunted by humans as a food source while carnivores are hunted for the losses they supposedly cause to ranchers and other livestock breeders (MMA, 2008).
The following table presents the endangered animals in the Amazon Rio project areas and their surroundings, using the biological inventories of RDS of Rio Amapá and the endangered species database available from IUCN9 and ICMBio10 as references.
Table 03 - Endangered animal species in the Amazon Rio project and surrounding areas Common Red Year Common name Kingdom Order Family Species name list asses (Inglês) (Port.) status sed Pteronura Giant Otter, CARNIVO MUSTELI ANIMALIA brasiliensi Ariranha Giant Brazilian ED 2008 RA DAE s Otter Puma, Montain Least CARNIVO Puma lion, Cougar, ANIMALIA FELIDAE Onça parda Conce 2008 RA concolor Red Tiger, Deer rn Tiger
9 http://www.iucnredlist.org/ 10 http://www.icmbio.gov.br/portal/biodiversidade/fauna-brasileira/lista-de-especies.html
46
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Amazonian Barred DENDRO Dendroco PASSERIF Arapaçu-da- Woodcreeper, ANIMALIA COLAPTID laptes EN 2008 ORMES taoca Amazonian AE certhia Barred- Woodcreeper DENDRO Dendroci PASSERIF Arapaçu-da- White-chinned ANIMALIA COLAPTID ncla EN 2012 ORMES taoca Woodcreeper AE merula Lowland Tapir, PERISSO TAPIRIDA Tapirus South American ANIMALIA Anta VU 2008 DACTYLA E terrestris Tapir, Brazilian Tapir MYRMEC Myrmeco Tamanduá- ANIMALIA PILOSA OPHAGID phaga Giant Anteater VU 2007 bandeira AE tridactyla Long-haired PRIMATE Ateles Macaco Spider Monkey, ANIMALIA ATELIDAE ED 2008 S belzebuth aranha White-bellied Spider Monkey White Saki, Parauacu, PRIMATE PITHECIID Pithecia Buffy Saki, Buffy ANIMALIA macaco- VU 2008 S AE albicans Saki, White velho Sakia Woolly Monkey, PRIMATE Lagothrix Macaco ANIMALIA ATELIDAE Geoffroy's ED 2008 S cana barrigudo Woolly Monkey Juruá Red Least PRIMATE Alouatta Howler Monkey, ANIMALIA ATELIDAE Guariba Conce 2008 S juara Juruá Red rn Howling Monkey Guianan Red Alouatta Least PRIMATE Howler Monkey, ANIMALIA ATELIDAE macconn Guariba Conce 2008 S Trinidad Howling elli rn Monkey ANIMALIA PSITTACI PSITTACI Guaruba Ararajuba or Golden VU 2013
47
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
FORMES DAE guarouba guaruba Parakeet, Golden Conure
As it can be seen in the table, 12 endangered animals threatened with extinction were identified in the Amazon Rio project area and its surroundings, of which 9 are mammals and 3 are birds. The carnivores and primates are most noteworthy among the threatened species. Among the carnivores, the presence of the giant otter is particularly important as an indicator of continental aquatic ecosystem quality. Since it is a carnivore that feeds on large quantities of fish, small mammals, birds, reptiles and invertebrates (ROSAS et al., 2008) and it is easily impacted by local ecological disturbances. In addition, it is a species which is easily captured by hunters who can recognize the loud vocalizations over long distances.
Another animal of note is the tapir, a mammal species that suffers severe population pressures and, consequently, is at risk of extinction. It is a herbivore and its meat is particularly appealing to and therefore much sought after by locals. The Golden conure (Guaruba guarouba) bird has always been a species much coveted by illegal bird traders, who have contributed significantly to the reduction in their populations in Brazil and in the Amazon, including the project area.
III. Endemic and/or rare species
Endemic species have not yet been identified in the Amazon Rio project area, however, according to the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), in the South-West Amazon (Amazonas, Acre and Rondônia states) 42 endemic species have been found, as shown in the following table.
Table 04 - Species endemic to the Southwest Amazon Scientific name Common name Class 1 Eleutherodactylus skydmainos Amphibia 2 Leptodactylus didymus Amphibia 3 Hyla walfordi Hyla walfordi Amphibia 4 Osteocephalus pearsoni Pearson's Slender-legged Treefrog Amphibia 5 Bufo castaneoticus Para Toad Amphibia 6 Hyla allenorum Cuzco Reserve Treefrog Amphibia 7 Epipedobates simulans Amphibia 8 Caecilia marcusi Villa Tunari Caecilian Amphibia 9 Scinax pedromedinai Henle's Snouted Treefrog Amphibia 10 Dendrobates biolat Biolat Poison Frog Amphibia
48
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
11 Eleutherodactylus buccinator Amphibia 12 Epipedobates macero Manu Poison Frog Amphibia 13 Altigius alios Amphibia 14 Scinax parkeri Amphibia 15 Scinax icterica Amphibia 16 Thryothorus griseus Gray Wren Aves 17 Eubucco tucinkae Scarlet-hooded Barbet Aves 18 Cacicus koepckeae Selva Cacique Aves 19 Conioptilon mcilhennyi Black-faced Cotinga Aves 20 Formicarius rufifrons Rufous-fronted Antthrush Aves 21 Simoxenops striatus Bolivian Recurvebill Aves 22 Todirostrum pulchellum Black-backed Tody-Flycatcher Aves 23 Nannopsittaca dachilleae Amazonian Parrotlet Aves 24 Grallaria eludens Elusive Antpitta Aves 25 Picumnus subtilis Fine-barred Piculet Aves 26 Lophotriccus eulophotes Long-crested Pygmy-Tyrant Aves 27 Percnostola lophotes White-lined Antbird Aves 28 Myrmeciza goeldii Goeldi's Antbird Aves 29 Micronycteris matses Matses' big-eared bat Mammalia 30 Scolomys ucayalensis Ucayali Spiny Mouse Mammalia 31 Neusticomys peruviensis Peruvian Fish-eating Rat Mammalia 32 Apostolepis tenuis Ruthven's Burrowing Snake Reptilia 33 Helicops yacu Peru Keelback Reptilia 34 Apostolepis nigroterminata Peru Burrowing Snake Reptilia 35 Stenocercus scapularis Reptilia 36 Neusticurus ocellatus Reptilia 37 Neusticurus juruazensis Reptilia 38 Atractus nigricaudus Black-headed Ground Snake Reptilia 39 Bothrops sanctaecrucis Bolivian Lancehead Reptilia 40 Anolis dissimilis Odd Anole Reptilia 41 Anolis scapularis Reptilia 42 Mabuya nigropalmata Black Mabuya Reptilia
49
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
IV. Areas that contain significant concentrations of species during any period of their life cycle (e.g. migration, feeding grounds and nesting areas)
According to the information from the RDS Rio Amapá Management Plan (GOVERNO DO ESTADO DO AMAZONAS, 2010) the lakes and streams in the areas surrounding the Amazon Rio project are rich in fish biodiversity. That was demonstrated by obtaining 1,675 specimens distributed across 85 different species belonging to six orders and 19 families, carried out in 25 sampling points.
The acidic blackwater lakes are important shelters for the reproduction and development of the local fish species during the summer. In winter (October to March) the rising waters establish links between the lakes and the local igarapés (streams), bringing a great diversity of fish which breed and grow on the banks can disperse and populate bodies of running water.
The lakes and streams located within and around the Amazon Rio project areas present excellent state of conservation and fishing activities seem controlled, being held only for livelihood of residents of the region.
V. Rare or endangered ecosystems
Tropical forests are ecosystems considered rare and threatened globally, but the Brazilian Amazon forests and tropical forests of Asia suffer the greatest pressure from deforestation due to logging and subsequent conversion into agricultural landscapes.
The Amazon Rio project areas located in the vicinity of the municipality of Manicoré, the municipality with the third highest rates of deforestation in the state of Amazonas (INPE/PRODES, 2012), with approximate clear-cutting rates of 61 Km2 of the forest per year.
This deforestation pressure in the municipality is due to the movement of livestock, especially beef cattle, into the territory from the states of Rondônia, Acre and Mato Grosso. To stop these deforestation fronts, it is essential to consolidate the conservation unit mosaic, whether in the public and private domain, in the South Central region of the State of Amazonas.
VI. Ecosystem critical services
The Amazon Rio project promotes the conservation of large areas of primary forest with climatic benefits such as the carbon dioxide (CO2) sequestration. The project will also provide a range of other critically important ecosystem services, including:
Soil erosion control by maintaining the forest integrity, including the banks of bodies of water;
50
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Cycling, filtering and storing water; Oxygen production; Nutrient recycling and improvement of soil characteristics; Management of important environmental services such as pollination and seed dispersion; Gene bank for medicinal plants; Food for the 15 surrounding communities, through the continuous provision of fishing, hunting and extractivism resources from the forests. The most important food items obtained from the forest are: Forest extractivism: Brazil nuts, acai, pataua, tucuman, bacaba, pupunha, and bee honey. Hunting: paca, agouti, armadillo, deer, monkeys (spider, howler, capuchin), tapir and wild boar. The locals traditionally hunt alligators and turtles on the banks of rivers and lakes; Habitat for an extraordinary diversity of plants and animals;
VII. Hydrological services
The rivers, streams and lakes inside and around the Amazon Rio project areas are essential for the basic needs of 15 local communities, as well as the traditional and cultural identity. The communities also depend on the Madeira and Manicoré rivers for drinking water, cooking, personal hygiene, and as the primary means of transportation.
The Madeira and Manicoré rivers are the two main sources for the communities who harvest fish around the project areas and from the municipality of Manicoré. The most abundant fish species are: Surubim, Pacu, Piau, Jaraqui, Branquinha, Sardinha, Pirapitinga, Caparaí, Jatuarana, Matrinxã, Curimatá, Traíra, Dourada, Mandii, , tucunaré, Pirarucu, Tambaqui, Aruanã, , Aracu, and Jeju.
VIII. Fuel and fodder
The communities depend on forest products to obtain fuel and animal feed. They use mainly dry wood as fuel for cooking.
IX. Medicine
Given the difficulty of the local community in accessing pharmacies and hospitals in the urban center of Manicoré, many families use a wide variety of medicinal plants found in the forest and around the Amazon Rio project areas, some of the most widely used are:
Copaiba oil: used as anti-inflammatory treatment;
51
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Andiroba oil: used as a mosquito repellent and as treatment for gastrointestinal problems; Jatobá: used to combat anemia, increasing red blood cells; Cedar bark: used as a tooth pain reliever and antipyretic.
X. Building materials
Amazonian communities use a variety of forest materials to build and conserve their homes, such as wood and straw, thus reducing the need to purchase supplies in urban centers. In addition, wood is a staple used in constructing houses, schools, community centers, canoes for fishing, and fences for livestock.
XI. Traditional cultural significance
Natural environments and resources used by the local communities of the project areas have great cultural significance to these populations. Many parts of the forests, lakes and rivers, in addition to providing high-value resources which are described in more detail in Section 6.1, are havens for beings with supernatural powers according to local folklore. This is the case of the “curupira”, a mystical being known as the "mother of the forest", which protects the animals from "bad hunters" (those who hunt excessively), disorienting them in such way that they become lost for hours or even days in the forest and are unable to return home. Another prevailing belief is that some people who exhibit bad social behaviors or other unknown reasons, become "panemas", i.e. are unlucky in their hunting and fishing excursions.
2.5 Project Financing (G1, indicator 11, indicator 12)
The carbon project integrates a broad vision of territorial management as part of the Management Plan of the Amazon Rio Private Reservation I. Accordingly, it stipulates that all actions necessary to implement this Plan should be enabled from resources obtained by payments for environmental services, such as carbon credits and CRAs.
The idea is for the plan to serve as a management tool to provide technical and political support support to negotiations with support institutions to receive investments that can make projects and programs viable. The expected revenues in the short and medium term to implement the Management Plan will mostly come from payments for environmental services such as negotiated carbon credits and CRAs, in addition to projects that generate long-term income exclusively for the communities, such as: ecotourism, scientific research and harvest of non-timber forest products.
52
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
In this context, the main difference between a permanent protection private reserve (e.g. RPPN) and a private sustainable development reserve (e.g RPDS) is that the long-term financial viability of sustainable reserves usage comes from the marketing of non-timber forest products with high added value and other sustainable businesses in compensation for environmental services. This flow of resources is expected to occur during and after the implementation period. The proposal is that with external support and through their political representatives, local communities will be able to establish partnerships and contracts with companies, cooperatives and industries interested in supporting social and environmental initiatives in the project areas.
The external support initially offered in the previous paragraph, consists basically of the voluntary contribution of the project partners, which in turn believe in the proposition and the potential of the project to provide a return on the investment, both monetary and especially in less tangible dividends, such as corporate marketing and institutional visibility. At the time of the preparation of this document an initial contribution of R$ 3,963,000 was made to the project for the first 3 years, which will be used to defray initial expenses with the preparation of technical documents, management and implementation of the first activities.
As for the revenues obtained from the market for greenhouse gase emissions reductions, a projection using two prices for carbon credits was considered, considering ‘future’ (USD 4/VCU) and issued credits (USD 7/VCU).
These items are briefly listed below with their respective values regarding the implementation and execution of the project, part of which will be initially financed by the contribution of the partners, as mentioned above.
Table 05 - Project implementation and opperational costs11 Component Value (R$) Share (%) Pre-Operating expenses R$ 1,561,904.00 3.61% Administrative expenses R$ 24,069,915.00 55.68% Costs of VCS + CCB certification R$ 456,670.00 1.06% Monitoring R$ 2,820,000.00 6.52% Social program related expenses R$ 6,050,000.00 13.99% Carbon trading R$ 1,188,536.60 2.75% Taxes on income R$ 1,680,219.65 3.89%
11 Annex 16
53
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Taxes on profit R$ 5,008,435.56 11.59% Interest 10% return on investment of shareholders R$ 396,300.00 0.92% TOTAL R$ 43,231,980.80 100.00%
2.6 Employment Opportunities and Worker Safety (G3, indicator 6, indicator 9, indicator 10)
Despite the considerable local knowledge of the region’s ecosystems and environments, technology is lacking, related to the value added to products and environmental conservation projects. Besides these difficulties, public service agents frequently indicate the use of techniques and management practices that require high external inputs and major investments.
To overcome these limitations the project intends to promote specific and culturally relevant trainings that include workshops, meetings, courses and extended technical assistance to improve the knowledge and skills of community leaders, residents and employees of the project. To complement such trainings, we intend to install diversified agroforestry systems, to restore and reuse degraded areas, to encourage handicrafts and tourism, and to improving the management of non-timber forest products, with emphasis on Brazil nuts, andiroba, copaiba and Acai. As a result management practices are expected to improve in the long-term, as well as and the fostering of local culture, combining technical and scientific knowledge with traditional knowledge.
In addition to the technical knowledge geared toward production and operations, the project will promote organizational and administrative training in participatory and democratic management based on the Management Plan, including training in accounting, conflict management, techniques and procedures for obtaining consensus and greater participation in decisions.
Additional effort will be made to empower minorities such as women and young people to have equal opportunity in training events, programs and projects to be developed, including activities related to environmental monitoring, such as the Volunteer Environmental Agents Program, ProBUC and other programs related to fishing and game hunting. It is important to mention that any and alls endeavors should meet the social requirements of labor legislation, health and worker safety.
Apart from the training courses for the groups directly involved, learning materials about the project are to be distributed in schools, associations and cooperatives to disseminate its goals, activities and results. Other materials and journalistic texts will be developed and broadcasted in local communication media, such as radio, newspapers and television, with more comprehensive and informative content.
54
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
To avoid risky situations during workers’ activities and assignments, specific training in worker safety will be offered. This training will include a series of operating procedures to minimize accidents on the job, especially in occupations that require the use of production equipment and machinery for extraction and processing. In addition, workers will receive first aid training and will be required to use personal protective equipment: boots, helmets, special clothing, tools, medicines, etc. (G3, indicator 12)
2.7 Stakeholders (G1, indicator 5, indicator 6) (G3, indicator 1, indicator 2)
Consultation prior to the beginning of the project
The populations involved in the carbon project are direct users of forest resources that are present in the Amazon Rio I, II, III & IV areas for the practice of plant and animal extraction. Initially they were indicated by the Council of Agro-Extrativist Associations of Democracia (Conselho das Associações Agroextrativistas de Democracia - CAAD), which gathers associations of residents from ten communities located near the Amazon Rio I Reserve. Following this indication, the EBCF hired the services of the consulting company CO2X Conservação de Florestas Ltda to perform a series of workshops and meetings to prepare the Amazon Rio I Management Plan (Annex 9) and to develope the Amazon Rio REDD+ IFM project. In these meetings different forms and spaces of participation of the people and government and non-governmental institutions were discussed to support the development and implementation of the Management Plan, culminating in the creation of an Advisory Council.
In these events, conservation and fundraising strategies were presented to the community, among them the marketing of avoided emissions resulting from the suspension of timber management activities. The conduct of the Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) process was done in the communities surrounding the Amazon Rio I, II, III and IV areas during three workshops in 2013, which had a very inclusive and participatory nature. This document, as well as the minutes of the workshops, participatory mapping, Sustainability Matrix, questionnaires and presentations in PPT slides are available in Annex 10.12
Identification of stakeholders
There are 15 communities that will benefiot from the activities of the project and 12 of them (Urucury, Água Azul, Vista Alegre, Boa Esperança, Santa Eva, Santa Maria, Pandegal,
12 This topic is thoroughly discussed in Section 3.7 of this document.
55
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Democracia, Jatuarana, Terra Preta do Ramal, Kamayuá and São José do Miriti) are located in the region surrounding Amazon Rio areas I and III and in the Rio Amapá Reserve on the Madeira River and its tributaries. One of the communities is formed by residents that integrate the Agroextractivist Association São João e Ponta Grossa, which is located in the surroundings of the Amazon Rio IV area. Two communities, Terra Preta do Rio Manicoré and Mocambo, are located in the region surrounding the Amazon Rio II on the bank of the Manicoré River (Figure 05).
Figure 06 - Location of the communities surrounding the Amazon Rio areas I, II, III and IV.
Except for Terra Preta do Rio Manicoré, Mocambo, and São José do Miriti, all of the communities utilize the Rio Amapá RDS area, either on a sporadic or seasonal basis, to meet their food needs (collecting various fruits, fishing and hunting); for household and medicinal use (bark, leaves and plant parts considered by medical practices and traditional knowledge); and primarily for the sale of various non-timber products, especially the harvesting of Brazil nut, açaí and copaíba oil. However, the trails, roads and paths that provide access to the Amapá Rio RDS and Amazon Rio areas are in a poor state of repair, which hinders extraction practices, especially the production of Brazil nuts.
In addition to the 15 communities surrounding the Amazon Rio areas, government organizations directly involved with environmental issues in the region, such as SDS, the National Indian Foundation (Fundação Nacional do Índio - FUNAI), City Hall and the City Council of Manicoré, the
56
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Secretary of Environment and Sustainable Development of Manicoré, ICMBio and non- governmental organizations, such as FAS, IEB, CAAD, CNS, UFAM, UEA were identified and contacted to participate in the entire process of preparation of the Management Plan.
Stakeholder meetings
To present and discuss the project in detail with representatives of 15 communities surrounding the project area and support institutions three workshops in different locations were conducted. The subjects were presented in straightforward language, in a culturally appropriate way so that community representatives could understand relatively complex and unusual concepts such as climate change, greenhouse effect and payments for environmental services.
The importance of forests for the mitigation and adaptation to climate change was emphasized to convey the main objectives of the project to community representatives, and in particular their role in: (i) absorbing carbon dioxide and release oxygen; (ii) helping control climate processes on a regional scale; (iii) regulating the flow of rivers and erosion control; and (iv) providing shelter and food for most animals and plants on the planet. The fact that 20% of global greenhouse gas emissions come from the destruction of forests and in Brazil 70% of emissions come from deforestation was also mentioned.
During the workshops participants learned that steps can be taken to reduce the emissions of greenhouse gases by investing in renewable energy sources such as solar energy, wind energy, hydroelectric power plants, electric cars and other more efficient ones. Another option that mitigates climate change was also highlighted that relates to the Amazon: forest conservation and the restoration of degraded areas through reforestation, management of agricultural land, and establishment of agroforestry systems.
After concepts were discussed it was explained to those present that the proposed project to be carried out in the RPDS Amazon Rio I, recently approved at the time, and in the creation process in the other Reserves has essentially one goal: to financially reward those who preserve and protect a forest threatened with deforestation and degradation. The two main objectives of the project are: (i) raise funds for the implementation of the Management Plan programs and (ii) conservation of the forest and the associated biodiversity. It was also mentioned that the project is part of a new vision of the business strategy, since a logging plan was operational until 2010, associated with the emissions of greenhouse gases. In 2010 the practice was suspended by the owner, who began investing in the creation of a project focused on conservation and payment for environmental services, with emphasis on the voluntary carbon market.
57
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Conflict resolution (G3, indicator 8)
To be adequately solved, conflicts and complaints should be reported immediately to the field coordinator of the project, which will be established in Manicoré. If the conflict involves residents of more than two communities, their representatives shall be notified to make the necessary arrangements.
If the issue raised has more complex implications and involve broader actions under the project, it will be directed to the Advisory Council. This forum will act as a democratic space for formal representation of communities and governmental and non-governmental institutions for support. The Council aims to conduct mediation between the coordination of the project and other social actors involved in the implementation of the project. It therefore serves as an instrument for monitoring, supervision and conflict resolution. If necessary the Advisory Council may create specific fora to represent social groups with less power and standing to voice their needs and interests.
All complaints and their solutions should be registered and filed in properly organized folders in the project's office location so that they are readily available for consultation. These records also serve as a way to ensure that its contents are reviewed by external consultants so they can take lessons learned from these events and develope strategies to prevent or minimize future conflicts and disputes.
2.8 Commercially Sensitive Information
Not applicable.
3 LEGAL STATUS
3.1 Compliance with Laws, Statues, Property Rights and Other Regulatory Frameworks (G3, indicator 11) (G5, indicator 6 e 7)
Considering that the project is based on the conservation activities and sustainable use of non- timber forest products, there is no conflict between these activities and any legislation (municipal, state or federal), international laws and regulations for the implementation of the activities proposed by the project. Listed below are the relevant laws and regulations that support the activities:
58
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Federal law no. 12.651 of 2012 - establishes the new Forest Code Federal law no. 12.187 of 2009 - establishes the National Climate Change Policy and the Federal Decree no. 7390 of 2010 - regulates the National Policy Climate Change Federal Law No. 9.985 of 2000 - establishing the Private Natural Heritage Reserve Federal law no. 6.938 of 1981 - establishing the National Environmental Policy The country's commitment to the UNFCCC, ratified by Decree no. 1 of 02/03/1994 State law no. 53 of June 2007 - established the State System of Conservation Units (Sistema Estadual de Unidades de Conservação - SEUC) and Decree No. 30.108 of June 2010 - regulates private Special Reservations for Sustainable Development (Reserva Particular de Desenvolvimento Sustentável - RPDSs) State law no. 3135 of June 2007 - establish the National Climate Change Policy, environmental conservation and sustainable development in the state of Amazonas CONAMA Ruling - nº. 406/2009 - establishes technical parameters to be adopted in the preparation, presentation, technical evaluation and implementation of the Plan for Sustainable Forest Management (Plano de Manejo Florestal Sustentável) for the logging of native forests and their forms of succession in the Amazon Decree 5.975/2006 - regulates forestry through forest logging plans, following Art. 19 of Law 4771/1965, as well as the implementation of Articles 15, 16, 20 and 21 Rule No. 5 11/12/2006/MMA, Ministry of Environment - this law provides for all the technical procedures for the preparation, presentation, implementation, and technical assessment of forest logging plans and sustainable forms of succession in the Amazon Decree-Law No. 5452/1943 - approves the Consolidation of Labor Laws (CLT)
To date, no legal framework at the national or international level has established laws, legislation and policies related to REDD+ mechanism. There are, however, some ongoing processes, which were considered in this study.
The current negotiation in the UNFCCC indicates an implementation of the REDD+ mechanism with a gradual approach, in which pilot projects will also be considered. The Amazon Rio REDD+ IFM project is a pilot initiative and the first of its kind in Brazil due to the fact that it is being carried out on a private reserve for sustainable use, therefore the first private area in the country using this approach. The new model will likely assist in the construction of a national REDD+ mechanism. The total project area is made up of 12 distinct properties, which together represent four adjacent areas. Twelve public deeds were issued on behalf of the project proponent EBCF (Annex 11).
59
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
The Brazilian labor system is governed by the rules set by Decree-Law No. 5.452, of May 1, 1943, approving the Consolidation of Labor Laws (CLT). This is the main piece of legislation relating to Brazilian labor law and establishing the rules governing individual and collective labor relations (G3, indicator 11).
In the specific case of the project, hiring of community residents to perform various activities and functions under the Management Plan will be a priority. Labor will be contracted from the associations of communities/CAAD and EBFC, which manages the Amazon Rio I Reserve. The contracts will be established according to the appropriate mode (CLT, temporary contract, consulting, etc.) in accordance with Brazilian law. When engaging the residents of Kamayuá Indigenous Community, FUNAI will be the intermediary. In both cases, contractors will be informed of their rights at the time of contracting.
Appropriate authorities’ approval, including formal and/or authorities required by traditional communities (G5, indicator 7)
The project has been widely discussed with the Government of the State of Amazonas, through the Amazonas State Secretary of Environment and Sustainable Development (Secretaria de Meio Ambiente e Desenvolvimento Sustentável do Estado do Amazonas - SDS) under the Amazonas State Center of Protected Areas (Centro Estadual de Unidades de Conservação - CEUC) and has the support of the State Government (Annex 12). FUNAI is also accompaning the process, and has appointed a local representative from the municipality of Manicoré to participate in workshops and meetings with the Kamayuá Indigenous Community.
Formal authorization was obtained from representatives of the surrounding traditional river and indigenous communities through a consultation process. At the end of this process we obtained the approval and signature of a "Free, Prior and Informed Consent" document (Annex 10) by the representatives of 15 neighboring communities who participated in the workshops that addressed the objectives, activities and forms of participation and monitoring of the project.
3.2 Evidence of Right of Use (G5, indicator 1, indicator 2ª, indicator 5)
For nearly four decades the project area was in the possession of Valdenor Campos da Costa's Family. In 2011, the properties were transferred to the Empresa Brasileira de Conservacão de Florestas (EBCF), in which Valdenor Campos da Costa Junior became a founding partner, with the goal of transforming these areas into four Private Sustainable Development Reserves (RPDSs). The land titles and other documents are registered in the Land Registry Office of the
60
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Municipality of Manicoré, Amazonas, with the following registration numbers: 2045, 2046, 2047, 2048, 2049, 2050, 2052, 2053, book 2-6, pages 116-123 (Annex 11).
The land use rights within the limits of the project are set by the State System of Protected Areas of the Amazon (Centro Estadual de Unidades de Conservação - SEUC), in the category of conservation for sustainable use, establishing the Private Sustainable Development Reserve, and regulated by Decree 30.108 of June 2010. This category is defined as a private conservation area created by voluntary manifestation on the part of the owner with the intent to promote the conservation of natural resources and the practice of sustainable development. The right to use these areas may also be granted to the communities who use their natural resources for their production, economic and cultural means.
From the legislation point of view on carbon credits generated by the project, EBCF benefits forom the exclusivity in the ownership and commercialization of reduced emission certificates, i.e. the VCUs, since the baseline activities, the property deed, the emissions reduction activities and the process of creation of the RPDS are concentrated on the legal form of the Company.
From the point of view of land use and natural resources, although the communities surrounding the Amazon Rio areas occupy a common territory (unoccupied private areas) and share the use of existing resources there, it does not follow that all resources are communally managed. The rights to use the space and the resources are complex and varied: the land is owned by the State and/or private owners, but the resident families retain traditional rights over them. Internally, the resources are appropriated according to local rules and agreements.
There are basically three types of rights of possession and use of resources in these communities: single use, common use and open use. The single use areas are family owned areas and include gardens, fields, pastures, retreats, Brazil nut caches, rubber plantations, and secondary forests and woodlands (used in extracting straw, oils, timber for building houses, boats and canoes), and the expansion or establishment of new gardens or management units. The common areas include forest reserves, açaí and buriti planting grounds, lakes, flooded forests and streams, and are appropriate for all residents of the same community that are governed by the agreed-upon rules and procedures.
However, not all common use areas have the same level of control and restriction as other communities and external users. Generally the more distant areas are more difficult to control and, in certain circumstances, are considered open access areas, characterized by little or no
61
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
control or restrictions on use and access. This is the case in some areas of use of the Amazon Rio IV, like the areas adjacent to Lake São João, whose surrounding residents cannot control fishing, logging and gathering of açaí, which is conducted in a predatory manner by outsiders due to its proximity to the city of Manicoré.
This over-harvesting compels residents to walk more than two hours inside the forest in search of forest products and wood "suitable" for making boats, canoes and houses. According to the leaders, residents have filed several complaints, signed several "petitions" and submitted them to the municipal authorities who took no action. These areas are rich in rubber trees, açai and wood (such as cedar, andiroba, virola, itaúba, angelim, marupá, among others) and thus subject to invasion. Illegal logging occurs especially during the flood period, when planks and boards cut by chainsaws at the extraction site, can be floated downstream. According to the residents, no family commercially harvests Brazil nuts due to the distances to the Brazil nut trees.
3.3 Emissions Trading Programs and Other Binding Limits
Brazil does not belong to Annex I group of the Kyoto Protocol and as such did not make compulsory commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions under the UN Climate Convention. Likewise, EBCF, a Brazilian company, also lacks any mandatory requirements to reduce greenhouse gases, and so any VCUs generated by the project activities will be the result of a voluntary initiative an unrelated to the mandatory target program for the reduction in GHGs.
3.4 Participation under Other GHG Programs
Not applicable.
3.5 Other Forms of Environmental Credit
One of the strategies to generate revenue to finance the Management Plan activities is the sale of Environmental Reserve Quotas (CRA)13 arising from the surplus of the forest cover in the RPDS and subject to negotiation in the legal reserve compensation market.
13 § 2, Art. 15 of the new Brazilian Forest Code (Law 12.651/2012) provides for voluntary forest reserves, i.e., the excess of forest required by law on rural property. According to this law all preserved area that exceeds the minimum required by law may be used for the creation of environmental easements or Environmental Reserve Quotas in the same biome or State.
62
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
3.6 Projects Rejected by Other GHG Programs
Not applicable.
3.7 Respect for Rights and No Involuntary Relocation (G3 indicator 4 e 5) (G5, indicator 2b e 2c, indicator 3)
In the three workshops explaining the Carbon project to 15 communities, the eight REDD+ principles and the social and environmental safeguards were presented. Those safeguards were previously established in a series of meetings throughout the Amazon between 2009 and 2010, and included several Civil Society Organizations.
It was emphasized in the workshops that compliance with these principles and safeguards under REDD+ projects, such as the Amazon Rio carbon project, contributes to improving local governance, transparency of information, public participation in decision-making, coordination of actions among different actors and respect and recognition of the rights of indigenous peoples and traditional populations.
More directly, it was explained that these eight principles and safeguards guarantee that the rights of local populations (river dwellers, rubber tappers, indigenous peoples, farmers, and others) involved in REDD+ projects are respected, especially with respect to their rights to use the natural resources. It was also reinforced that these principles ensure that no community can be transferred to another location and/or prevented from continuing to practice their traditional extractivist activities. Emphasis was placed on the fact that REDD+ actions should respect the Brazilian law, especially labor rights and laws relating to environmental conservation. Furthermore, international agreements ratified by Brazil must be respected. Also fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the implementation of REDD+ project must also be ensured, focusing on disadvantaged groups in communities, such as women, young and old people and low income families.
Finally, the importance of ensuring the effective participation of communities in all steps of the REDD+ project, especially decision making, was stressed. Communities must have access to information related to the project, in a language that is easy to understand, including permited and prohibited activities, and the main results.
Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC)
During the project workshops the concept of "Free, Prior and Informed Consent" was presented to the participants, as well as the importance of social and environmental safeguards to ensure the
63
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
rights of communities in designing and developing the REDD+ project, explained in the eight principles. The participants were asked whether they were in agreement and if there were other principles or rights that should be included. Some community individuals expressed their agreement to the safeguards. All participants at the three workshops raised their hands in support of REDD+ project. The consent was unanimous. A separate document describing the whole process of the "Free, Prior and Informed Consent" has been prepared and is available in Annex 10.
Figure 07 - Workshop I: Free, Prior and Informed Consent for the development of the REDD+ projectby the community leaders of Democracia, Água Azul, São José do Miriti, Vista Alegre, Jatuarana, Terra Preta do Ramal, Pandegal, Santa Maria, Santa Eva and Terra Preta do Rio Mancoré.
64
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Figure 08 - Workshop II: Free, Prior and Informed Consent for the development of the REDD+ project by the community leaders of Urucury, Mocambo, Boa Esperança and São João & Ponta Grossa.
Figure 09 - Workshop III: Free, Prior and Informed Consent for the development of the REDD+ project by the Kamayuá indigenous community
65
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
3.8 Illegal Activities and Project Benefits(G5, indicator 4)
Some illegal activities performed by some residents of the surrounding communities, such as the sale of game meat and wood, may negatively affect the project. Although these events are sporadic and localized, they will be restrained by the awareness and environmental control campaigns provided in the Management Plan.
Other more widespread and intense negative impacts may occur with the paving of State Highway AM-174 provided by the government in the near future in order to link Federal Highway BR-319 to the municipality and region of Manicoré. While this initiative represents an opportunity for the flow of production and facilitates supervision of the project, it poses a threat if the access to the Amazon Rio I Private Reserve is not strictly controlled. In this situation the RPDS may be subjected to pressures such as land grabbing, burning of forests, deforestation, timber extraction, capture of animals for sale and other environmentally harmful activities.
It is therefore essential that the project invest in a control and surveillance system that is effective and permanent. This system should rely on a modern system to acquire and update images to identify any environmental damage, as well as a land-based patrol system using 4WD vehicles. Surveillance and control based on participation and direct involvement of voluntary environmental agents should also be implemented. Such actions will bring direct and indirect benefits to the project area, from the environmental point of view as well as the social point of view.
4 APPLICATION OF METHODOLOGY
4.1 Title and Reference of Methodology
VCS VM0011: Methodology for Improved Forest Management – Logged to Protected Forest (LtPF): Calculating the GHG Benefits from Preventing Planned Degradation, version 1.0
4.2 Applicability of Methodology
The project activity is in full compliance with each of the applicability criteria stated in v.1 of the VM0011 methodology, as follows:
66
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Table 06 - Methodology applicability criteria Conditions of applicability of Criteria Justification Methodology Improved Forest Management - Logged to Protected Forest; with no removals (e.g. harvesting, planned biomass The project activity consists in the burning) occurring in the project area complete cessation of the selective Project Type upon implementation of the actual logging plan activities, operational project (with the exception of felling between 1999 and 2009 (11 years for sample trees for validating or deriving the purpose of baseline calculations). project-specific parameters presented in Section 7.2.4). The project area (which had a license Intact forest or previously logged forest for the logging plan) encompasses (also known as forest degraded due to 19,800 ha of primary Amazon logging). rainforest, of which 4,347.69 ha were Condition of Land within the project area must have degraded due to the logging the Forest qualified as forest at least 10 years operation between 1998 and 2009. before the project start date. Nonetheless the total area of project was forested 11 years before the project start date (August 2012). Tropical forests including evergreen tropical rainforests, moist deciduous The vegetation cover in the project Type of forests, tropical dry forests and tropical area is Tropical Ombrophylous Forest Forest upland forests (see Annex A for (Amazon Rainforest). definition), except peat swamp forests. The logging plan approved in 1998 Harvested wood products i.e., lumber, encompasses harvested timber for Forest wood pulp, and commercially harvested wood products purposes. The Product Type fuelwood harvested wood was sold as lumber
to be used in civil construction. Legally sanctioned logging (timber and The project area was legally Driver of commercially harvested fuelwood) sanctioned for selective logging in Degradation undertaken in accordance with the accordance with the relevant laws
67
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
relevant laws, regulations and codes of and regulations in Brazil, approved in practice of the country in which the 1998 by IPAAM14 and IBAMA15 Methodology is being applied. (Annex 5). Baseline Legally sanctioned selective logging for The project area is legally sanctioned Activities to specific forest product types presented for selective logging for commercial be Displaced above. timber purposes. The project area was designated, Must be designated, sanctioned or sanctioned and authorized by the Project Area approved by the relevant authority in the relevant authority in Brazil for the host country for the selective logging. selective logging of 19,800 ha, which represents exactly the project area. Carbon Pools considered: • Aboveground biomass (AGB) of all trees as defined by the relevant authority in the host country The only carbon pools considered • Harvested wood products (HWPs) are: aboveground biomass (AGB), based on domestic production not harvested wood products (HWPs) Carbon domestic consumption based on domestic production not Pools • Deadwood (DW) domestic consumption, and Carbon Pools not considered: deadwood (DW). • Aboveground biomass (non-trees) • Belowground biomass • Soil • Litter
4.3 Methodology Deviations
Whereas the VM0011 was developed in a context of homogeneous forests of temperate regions, some methodological adjustments were made related to the direct survey biomass in the field, since the project areas are comprised of very heterogeneous areas of rainforest including dryland and floodplains. Any technical documentation related to these methodological adjustments and their justifications appear in Annex 23 (Forest Inventory 2016) prepared by the consulting firm HDOM.
14 Environmental Protection Institute of Amazonas, http://www.ipaam.am.gov.br/ 15 Brazilian Environmental Protection Agency, www.ibama.gov.br
68
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
4.4 Project Boundary16 (G1, indicator 4)
The total area of the property is 20,387 ha (Figure 1) and a buffer zone was established around each of the four areas in order to include communities that use the resources within their boundaries (Figure 7a). Project activity areas (for purposes of calculating the emissions reductions called the project area or PA) are only those for which logging is permitted, a total of 19,800 ha (Figure 7b), excluding the Permanent Preservation Areas (APPs) and bodies of water. A logging plan has been approved for this area for selective logging (Annexes 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7).
Figure 10 - Project Boundaries. a) Direct Project interference limits. b) Total Project Area (G1, Indicator 7).
Stratification of the project area
For purposes of inventorying local carbon stocks and project management, the project area was stratified into 3 groups of different forest types, as indicated by the VM0011, according to the vegetation map SIPAM/RADAM (DPI, 2002). The forest types present in the area are rain forest types, divided into 3 categories as follows:
16 Ref.: section 2.2 of VM0011
69
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Dense Primary Tropical Ombrophylous Alluvial Forest Dense Primary Tropical Ombrophylous Lowland Forest Pioneer Formations
Figure 11 - Project Area forest types
Leakage areas
There is no direct leakage resulting from planned project activities, since there will be neither displacement of management activities to other areas after the cessation of the activities within the project area, nor market leakages. The project Management Plan includes the monitoring of possible unanticipated leakages around the project area, as well as the need to report to the competent authorities whenever logging activities are identified in these areas. For more information on leakage, see chapters 5.2 and 5.5 of this document.
Temporal boundaries(G1, indicator 9)
Crediting period of the project
The first crediting period of the project is 37 years, beginning on August 17, 2017 and ending on Agoust 16, 2049. This period corresponds to the remaining 12 years of the first management authorized plan approved by IPAAM and IBAMA (25 years from 1998) plus another 25 years that
70
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
refers to a new forest logging plan, according to common forestry practices in Brazil. The logging activities may continue beyond the established 37 years into a second crediting period.
Monitoring and Reporting Period (G1, indicator 9) a) Monitoring of Baseline Emissions
The monitoring of Baseline Emissions must demonstrate that the protected forest area is in accordance with the one specified in the PD. The project limit will be monitored before each verification throughout the crediting period through new inventory information and remote sensing and GIS, as applicable. Thus, the project will be able to update the baseline calculations based on the actual remaining forest area (in case of loss of forest cover by disasters, for example) and that would be subject to forest management under a “without project” scenario. b) Monitoring of Project Emissions
Project emissions will be monitored annually and compiled in every monitoring report that will detail in particular the:
Monitoring of possible illegal harvesting of timber; Monitoring of areas subject to natural disturbances; Monitoring and quantification of emissions related to air and land travel related to project activities. c) Monitoring of Leakage
Since there will be no leakages according to the VM0011 and AFOLU Requirements, no leakage monitoring will be necessary. However, to be conservative the project intends to monitor any disturbances that might affect the carbon reservoirs. Once some disturbance is registered, the project will report the incident to the relevant authorities and make the necessary adjustments to the baseline. For more details about the monitoring of leakages, see chapters 5.2 and 5.5 of this document.
Historical reference period
The approval of the timber logging plan in the project area occurred in 1998. By the end of 2009, six Annual Production Units (UPAs) had been logged. Thus, the historical reference period of the
71
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
project (baseline) is 11 years. However the beginning of the project to date is August 17, 2012, when EBCF approved the business plan with its shareholders.
Figure 12 - Map of the managed UPAs
Between 1999 and 2005 (i.e. seven years), more than 50% of the timber was sold by the Gethal company to overseas markets as plywood (pg 51 of Annex 13, Annex 14 and Table 4 of Annex 15). The logging plan was certified by Smartwoods with annual reports and audits, as shown in the document gethal.pdf 17 (Annex 14). In this scenario, given that less than 5% of the timber production is certified in Brazil and less than 2% of the wood is marketed in Brazil18, it follows that the wood from this area was sold at a very early stage and to very restricted domestic market. The next harvest cycle was 2006 to 200919 where 100% of the timber was sold on the domestic market without certification.
17 Forest Management Public Summary for Gethal Amazonas SA Plywood Industries 18 http://www.institutocarbonobrasil.org.br/noticias6/noticia=119796 ou http://www.greenpeace.org.br/amazonia/face_destruicao.pdf 19 Since the Autex (ACOF) of UPA 5 and 6 was issued in February 2008, lasting 2 years, management continued to the end of 2009.
72
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Carbon stocks
The biomass reservoirs considered by the project are related to above-ground and underground biomass. Sources and sinks of GHGs
Table 07 below describes the emission sources and sinks of greenhouse gases associated with the baseline activities and with the project
Table 07 - Greenhouse gas emissions sources and sinks associated with baseline and project activities
Source Gas Included? Justification/Explanation
CO2 Yes Main source of project emissions, through forest degradation, harvested and commercialised wood products, deadwood and forest regrowth Biomass CH4 No Conservatively excluded
N2O No Conservatively excluded
Other No -
CO2 Yes Main source, through fossil fuel use in machinery and transportation of timber Fossil Fuel
consumption CH4 Yes Conservatively included
N2O Yes Conservatively included
Other No -
CO Yes Main source 2
Electricity CH4 No - Baseline consumption N2O No -
Other No -
CO2 Yes Main source, through unexpected natural disturbances, such as forest fires, etc.
Biomass CH4 Yes Included but subject to significance
N2O Yes Included but subject to significance
Other No _
Fossil Fuel CO2 Yes Main source, through flights and ground travel Project
73
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Source Gas Included? Justification/Explanation
consumption CH4 Yes Included but subject to significance
N2O Yes Included but subject to significance
Other No _
CO2 Yes Main source Electricity CH4 No _ consumption N O No _ 2 Other No _
4.5 Baseline Scenario (G2, indicator 1)
The choice between alternative baseline scenarios was taken together with the analysis of additionality using the latest version of the VCS Tool for the demonstration and assessment of additionality in "Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use" VCS projects in this case, VT000120,21 (VCS, 2012a). All possible scenarios as well as the analysis of methodology barriers (steps 2.1.1 and 2.1.2 of the VM0011) are present in the chapter below. In this sense, to avoid redundancy of information, refer to additionality analysis to find the steps 2.1.1 and 2.1.2 of the VM0011.
The baseline scenario for the project identified as the most likely to occur was selective logging22 (continuation of Business As Usual - BAU). The reference scenario assumes 37 years of selective logging, according to the 25 year logging plan, approved in August 1998 (Annex 6 - document: "Vald.II T01 POA 1998") that in the absence of project activities would be renewed in 2024 for another 25 years until 2049.
Under this scenario, the full implementation of the timber logging plan occurs and which has already resulted in the degradation of 4347.69 ha (see table below). The area would be harvested selectively for timber sold in lumber markets. Below is a summary of harvest areas between 1999 and 2010, showing the managed plots and the dates on which the harvests were authorized.
20 Tool for the demonstration and assessment of an additional to the VCS project activities in Agriculture, Forestry and Other Uses (AFOLU) (V 3.0) 21 Adapted from “Tool for the Demonstration and Assessment of Additionality in A/R CDM project Activities” (V.02) 22 Additional information about choosing the baseline are presented in section 4.6 (steps 1 and 2)
74
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Table 08 - Summary of areas managed since 1999 Date Managed/ logged area (ha)
1999 586.69 (Plot 1)
2000 688.0 (Plot 2)
2001 – 2002 831.5 (Plot 3)
2003 – 2004 750 (Plots 3 and 4)
2005 – 2007 1082 (Plot 5)
2008 – 2009 490.50 (Plots 5 and 6)
TOTAL 4,347.69
4.6 Additionality (G2, indicator 2) (G5, indicator 8)
The additionality analysis of the Amazon Rio project REDD+ IFM was conducted with the latest version of the VCS Tool for the demonstration and assessment of additionality in Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use VCS projects, the VT0001,2021 (VCS, 2012a).
To generate the reductions in GHG emissions for the project, the planned baseline activities (sustainable forest management) were terminated by the project proponent, and supplanted by environmental conservation activities. In this sense, the project will be managed by EBCF, with the goal of creating a fund for administrative and accounting management, especially to promote environmental management and monitoring activities of carbon pools within the project area.
Alternative activities planned in the project are the provisioning and valuation of environmental services, via carbon credits (VCUs) in conjunction with the sale of Environmental Reserve Quotas (CRAs).
The evaluation and determination of additionality of the project are shown in the "Step-by-step instructions" below:
Step 1) Identification of alternative scenarios and proposed land use activities in AFOLU projects
Sub Step 1a) Identification of credible alternative scenarios for land use activities proposed in the REDD+ project
75
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Scenario 1 - Maintenance of Pre-Project Activities (Sustainable Forest Management - SFM) This is the most probable land use scenario to occur, since before the start of the REDD+ project the area in question was subject to a forest management regime since 1999 and was suspended entirely in 2010 to give rise to the conservation project (REDD+). Under this scenario forestry activities would continue throughout the areas to sell timber in accordance with the Sustainable Forest Management Plan (SFMP) and their Annual Operational Plans (Plano Operacional Anual de Extração - POAs), already approved by the environmental agencies (Annexes 1, 2, 4 and 6).
Scenario 2 - Sustainable Forest Management and Farming The sale of timber in accordance with the Sustainable Forest Management Plan (SFMP) and their Annual Operational Plans (POAs) on 80% of the PA and the clearing of forest cover on the remaining 20%23 for agricultural activities.
Scenario 3 - Farming without Forest Management Complete cessation of the Sustainable Forest Management activities on 80% of the AP, removal of forest cover on the remaining 20% allowed by law for farming and grazing activities, and use of wood harvested from cleared land.
Scenario 4 - Environmental Conservation Unregistered in VCS Complete cessation of the Sustainable Forest Management activities and incentive of environmental conservation activities in a Private Sustainable Development Reserve (RPDS) without being registered as a VCS AFOLU project.
Sub Step 1b) Consistency of possible alternative scenarios with applicable legislation and standards
Federal and state law does not restrict any of the four scenarios described in the previous step. All the above options were available to the applicant at the time of the decision to create the RPDS. All four scenarios were therefore legally supported by regulations of the Forest Code in force at the time, a fact that has not changed with the publication of the new Forest Code 24 published in 2012. It is important to remember that the Forest Code regulates precisely what can and what cannot be done with respect to land use on private properties.
23 The new Brazilian Forest Code permits clearing on 20% of properties (multiple use area) that are within the Amazon biome 24 Law No. 12651 of Friday, May 25, 2012.
76
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Native vegetation logging activities, represented by scenarios 1, 2 and 4 are also in perfect accord with the Federal Decree that regulates logging activities 25 (Chapter II) and native vegetation clearing regime and alternative land use (Chapter III).
Based on the above, one can concluded that the four alternatives listed in sub-step 1a do not conflict with any requirement or legal regulations of the host country, and are therefore plausible and applicable under the additionality analysis options.
Sub Step 1c) Selection of the Baseline Scenario
According to IBGE Cidades (2013), the main economic activities of the municipality of Manicoré are linked to Plant Extraction and Forestry26, the city is one of the major leaders in the production of roundwood and fuelwood in the state, also corroborated by IDESAM 27 (Vianna, 2013).
In going against the EBCF business strategy and statute (Annex 19), the project proponent is not expected to exercise his right to clear the forest cover on 20% of the property for agricultural activities, and so scenarios 2 and 3 are unlikely from both business strategy and profitability28 perspectives and may be discarded.
Given this context and the associated historical activities in the PA (licensed SFM), the most likely future scenario, in the absence of the IFM project, would be the continuation of logging activities (scenario 1) and the GHG emissions associated with it.
In steps 2 and 3 below the additionality of the project compared to the baseline scenario will be verified judiciously, and evidence will be presented to support this scenario as the most likely to occur if the project could not rely on the VCS/CCB certification and the revenues from the sale of VCUs.
Step 2) Investment analysis to determine that the project activity is not the most economically or financially attractive of the identified land use scenarios
25 Decree No. 5.975 of November 30, 2006 26 IBGE Cities - Plant Extraction and Forestry (2011) 27 Forest diagnosis of the state of Amazonas - 2010 and 2011 28 As a premise it is assumed in this case that the most common agricultural activities alternatives in the region offer lower profitability than the SFM.
77
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Sub-step 2a) Analysis of the Appropriate Comparison Method
Whereas the project provides for the revenue generation from the ARCs sale, as well as VERs sale, the option that makes the most sense under the VT0001 v.3, is Option II (economic investment comparison analysis).
Sub-step 2b) Option II - Application for Investment Comparison Analysis
The IRR (Annual Internal Rate of Return) was chosen as the economic indicator, as this is a consolidated economic indicator and one of the most widely used for making investment decisions. NPV was chosen as the corroborating indicator. Thus, the project IRR was compared without the revenue from VER’s (Annex 16), with the SFM economic activity in a "without project" scenario (Annex 17).
Sub-step 2c) Calculation and Comparison of Financial Indicators
The comparative analysis between scenarios was done by comparing the IRR and NPV economic indicators of the project IFM (Annex 16) and the SFM obtained from historical data in the pre- project (Annex 17). In order to improve the robustness of the comparative analysis and its conclusions, references to IRR/NPV from other SFM projects were included, obtained from an extensive literature review on the subject. The following table presents a comparison of REDD+ project financial indicators and the baseline scenario (SFM).
Table 09 - Internal Rate of Return (IRR) and Net Present Value (NPV) of various SFM activities and REDD+ project activities
Activity29 IRR (%) NPV Scenario Source
EBCF Baseline (2013) - Forest Management* 22.2% R$ 11,117,123.26 1 Annex 17
Forest Management* 5.9% - 1 FSM (2012)
Timofeiczyk, Júnior, R. et Forest Management* 1.7% -R$ 37,083,362.00 1 al. (2008)
29 All references cited adopt Reduced Impact Logging premises in the SFM.
78
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Timofeiczyk, Júnior, R. et Forest Management 27.5% R$ 3,857,823.00 1 al. (2008)
Forest Management 22.9% R$ 2,328,833.55 1 IFT (2010)
Forest Management* 5.1% -R$ 6,650,133.10 1 IFT (2010)
REDD+ project (with 18.5% R$ 157,315.51 4 EBCF (2013) - Annex 16 VERs) REDD+ project - -R$ 3,695,704.78 4 EBCF (2013) - Annex 16 (without VERs) * Initial investment considering land with forest purchase
As shown in the above table, the economic attractiveness varies greatly in an IRR and NPV analysis in different possible SFMs and in carbon and Environmental Reserve Quotas (CRAs) trading. However, the table clearly shows that economic analyses of SFM activites without exception, are more attractive with respect to return on investment, compared to Scenario 4, or no sale of VERs (only CRAs). This is because, while unregistered in VCS, the project relies exclusively on the revenue from the sale of CRAs, which is the economically less attractive scenario of those analyzed.
Therefore SFM, the most likely baseline scenario for the RPDS, appears to be the activity with the highest financial returns.
The comparative analysis presented in this section clearly shows that without carbon credits (VERs), the project is economically unsustainable, and so will give way to the alternative scenarios, becoming additional. In other words, the project depends entirely on the VCS/CCB registration to become minimally attractive30 and competitive in relation to possible alternatives. To confirm this hypothesis, the next step presents a sensitivity analysis for CRAs price changes and the project's administrative expenses, in order to verify whether value fluctuations interfere in the outcome of this analysis.
Sub-step 2d) Sensitivity Analysis
30 It is Important to emphasize that at the time the decision was make to create the RPDS to replace the SFM, which occurred in 2010, the voluntary carbon market was much more attractive, with prices and demand for VCUs, much more favorable than the current ones.
79
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
For sensitivity analysis, variations in the CRA (main source of income) prices use and in the RPDS administrative expenses (main source of costs), since this value was the main parameter determining project costs (approximately 70%).
This variation was applied to the cash flow in Scenario 4 (CRAs sold without VERs), identified as the most likely baseline scenario. The results of the sensitivity analysis are presented in the following tables:
Table 10 - Sensitivity analysis under different scenarios with variations of +5%, +10% and +20% in CRA prices31 Sensitivity IRR (30 NPV (12%) CRA price (R$/ha) Scenery Analysis years) -* -R$ 3,695,704.78 R$ 120.00 Current Variation in the CRA -* -R$ 3,589,373.72 R$ 126.00 +5.0% price -* -R$ 3,483,042.67 R$ 132.00 +10.0% -* -R$ 3,270,380.56 R$ 144.00 +20.0%
* IRR could not be calculated, since the project is not profitable.
The sensitivity analysis demonstrated above showed no impact on the project IRR, since even in a scenario where CRAs are sold at a value 20% higher than the one adopted, the project still remains economically unfeasible, preventing an analysis via IRR. On the other hand, NPV allows variations resulting from increased CRA values to be explored. Even in the best case scenario (+20% in value), the project remains economically unfeasible, even if "less unfeasible."
Table 11 - Sensitivity analysis given variations of -5%, -10% and -20% in the project administrative costs31 IRR (30 Administrative Costs Sensitivity Analysis NPV (12%) Scenery years) Price (R$) -* -R$ 3,695,704.78 R$ 24,069,915.00 Current Variation in -* -R$ 3,459,326.38 R$ 22,866,419.25 -5.0% Administrative Costs -* -R$ 3,222,947.98 R$ 21,662,923.50 -10.0% -* -R$ 2,750,191.19 R$ 20,579,777.33 -20.0%
* IRR could not be calculated, since the project is not profitable.
31 See Annex 16.
80
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Whereas similar to the previous approach, reductions in -5%, -10% and -20% in administrative costs were analyzed, in order to explore the viability of the project against reductions in fixed costs of greater impact on the activities total costs (70% of total). Even in the face of a 20% reduction scenario in this item of expenditure, the project still cannot acheive a minimum IRR with which to compensate its investors.
It is clear from the sensitivity analysis shown above that a project unregistered with VCS/CCB has no chance of becoming economically attractive, and in fact represents a loss to its investors. A project configuration that prioritizes the marketing of CRAs without carbon credits sales, is not feasible, nor is it able to compete with the economic attractiveness of the baseline scenario based on the continuity of the SFMP (see Annex 17).
Step 3) Barrier analysis
In purely economic and financial terms – as presented in Step 2 (Investment Analysis) – the activities proposed by the project (environmental conservation and CRA sales) are not economically attractive. This is especially clear when the project scenario is compared with the baseline scenario (already licensed logging management - Scenario 1), which from an economic point of view, emerges as the most likely scenario. Additionally, there are a number of non- economic barriers that render the REDD+ project implementation more difficult without carbon credits. This was widely discussed by members of EBCF, project proponent and described in Annex 20.
Therefore, the main identified barriers that may prevent the continuation of the project by the proponent, which could be mitigated once the project is registered to VCS/CCB standards are: i) investment barriers; ii) institutional barriers; iii) technological barriers; iv) barriers related to local traditions; v) barriers related to common practices
Sub-step 3a. Identification of barriers that may prevent implemention of proposed project activities a) Investment barriers
81
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
As this is a project that relies on a single source of revenue, which is still rather uncertain32, the investment profitability, besides being low, is also risky. For this reason, the applicant has encountered difficulties in finding investors interested in supporting this environmental conservation project. Initially, EBCF had plans to invest in sponsorship for areas under its management, as is the case of this project, to fund socioenvironmental programs and activities, however, the strategy has not attracted investors as originally planned. In this case, it is believed that the visibility generated from the project registration in VCS/CCB can partially reverse this situation.
Another investment barrier is the fear of potential investors’ of participating in a pioneering project. The project includes the first Private Sustainable Development Reserve in the world, according to information released by the Government of the State of Amazonas33, in which case there is no case study to serve as a model or example, making the initiative more risky from the investment return point of view. In this case, it is also believed that the registration with the VCS and CCB standards would bring more credibility to the project as a whole, since the carbon credits would emerge as an additional source of revenue, in addition to increased visibility (and greater marketing appeal) to the project.
b) Institutional barriers
When analyzing the current situation of other protected areas in the state of Amazonas, the institutional setting is revealed as unfavorable to the creation of new conservation units. According to a recent State Audit Court report (TCE/TCU34) the management and implementation of 41 State conservation areas created and implemented since 2003 lack adequate financial resource allocations from the state. The amount transferred by the state government was BRL 540.3 thousand, making them highly dependent on external resources. Between the years 2008 and 2012, these conservation areas received BRL 90.7 million from public and/or private partnerships, and the Government was responsible for the resource management.
32 Despite already having legal framework, there is still no consolidated market for CRAs, so there is huge uncertainty about the value and liquidity of shares. 33 http://www.amazonas.am.gov.br/2010/11/amazonas-o-pioneiro-na-criao-de-reserva-particular-de-desenvolvimento- sustentvel/ ; http://acritica.uol.com.br/amazonia/manaus-amazonas-amazonia-Reserva-Particular-Desenvolvimento- Sustentavel-meio_ambiente-Governo_0_932906709.html 34 http://www.tce.am.gov.br/portal/?p=8848 ; http://portal2.tcu.gov.br/portal/page/portal/TCU/imprensa/noticias/detalhes_noticias?noticia=4913062
82
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
However, the transfer amount has not been sufficient to meet the needs of the state’s conservation areas. The lack of staffing and infrastructure are among the most serious problems, resulting in reduced effectiveness in the process of land titling and reduced control and protection, leading to land grabbing, especially in protected areas located in the south of the state of Amazonas.
Besides these difficulties, there are also problems with biodiversity monitoring mechanisms and insufficient access to public policy. The river bases that support the supervision of conservation units have been abandoned and in disrepair. Such abandonment scenarios in conservation areas reveal the challenges that the project will face. Although some of the institutional barriers listed above are associated with the lack of priority in the political sections, the lack of resources emerges once again as basis for the formation (or increase) of new barriers. In this case as in the previous one, carbon credits would emerge as an element with the power to "compensate" through revenue, some barriers of institutional character.
In the political-institutional context, the discontinuity of actions and policies to support the maintenance and creation of conservation units (public and private) is also apparent, mainly due to the change of governments, focus and objectives. Another barrier, of a political character, which already affects the project, is the incipient National and Subnational regulation regarding incentives and financing programs aimed at climate change mitigation and valuation of environmental services.
Laws concerning the establishment of a REDD+ mechanism and a compensation system for environmental services have been discussed for some time with the civil society and the state governments, but they are still under consideration by the National Congress and the Federal Senate, with no definite date for approval. c) Technological barriers
The technological barriers referenced herein are associated mainly with the "social technologies", e.g., the project’s ability to harmoniously manage the non-timber management activities of traditional communities, as well as strategies for managing conflicts that may arise among and within communities. In this case, it is believed that the registration of the project under the CCB standard and the subsequent activities in line with the guidelines of this standard will serve as an important tool to overcome this barrier. d) Barriers related to local traditions
83
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Because it is a pioneering initiative, the project is subject to a number of adverse situations which, due to the lack of similar references, cannot be fully planned, but that should arise mainly because of the unfamiliarity of the communities involved, as well as the proponent regarding the new management dynamic which includes, among other challenges:
The regulation of non-timber management, devoid of any prior control; Social monitoring, biodiversity and carbon stock activities; Tighter control of non-timber extraction activities; Compulsory use of personal protective equipment (PPE) in field operations; Suspension of any clearing and coivara35 within the project area.
e) Barriers related to common practice
Since it is the first initiative of its kind (converting a SFM area to RPDS), it is expected that the project will face problems of all kinds by not conforming to common practices in the region. Unlike other activities (SFM, for example), the project cannot rely on any reference cases that may offer solutions to the conflicts and problems that may arise from the creation of RPDS and/or the implementation of the Management Plan.
The creation of four private sustainable use reserves in the Amazon, the first private areas designed to be follow a sustainable use program, resists common practices in that region, which includes illegal logging, among other 36,37 activities. Even the most recent activities introduced in recent years in the region, such as SFM, can be considered commonplace (thougth it has a learning curve) in the context of the state, when compared to the initiative to create a RPDS.
Thus, the project will be a conservation "island" with activities regulated by a Management Plan within a context of logging (legal and illegal) and uncontrolled non-timber management to which community residents have become accustomed.
35 Use of fire as a management tool for clearing new areas 36 Lábrea, Humaitá and Manicoré take actions against deforestation - http://www.amazonas.am.gov.br/2011/05/lbrea- humait-e-manicor-recebem-aes-contra-desmatamento/ 37 Government sends 'National Force' to a community in Manicoré (AM) - http://acritica.uol.com.br/noticias/Governo- Forca-Nacional-Manicore-AM_0_566943618.html
84
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
However, the management of this conservation unit is expected to be more efficient, especially due to the fact that the market revenue from the carbon market and CRAs will be managed by a company – whose main business is reinvest in conservation activities – and not by public institutions that usually lack infrastructure and adequate staffing.
However, it is important to note that the sale of CRAs has only recently been regulated with the enactment of the new Forest Code in 2012, and on that account it is not yet widespread nor can it be considered established practice, reinforcing the importance of the sale of VCUs as a source of revenue.
f) Barriers due to social conditions and land use practices Finally, besides the barriers described above, others of a more comprehensive social nature are highlighted, such as: the tendency for the local population to increase which will lead to greater demand for goods and services in the project areas and will intensify activities (legal and illegal), such as land grabbing, logging, harvesting of NTFPs, fishing, among others.
This increase in the demand for products and services currently offered by the project areas, tends to generate and enhance future conflicts between beneficiaries and communities. Thus, strengthening the project management capacity which, in turn, is directly related to the VCS/CCB registration and the revenue from VCU's sales, is critical so that such conflicts will not undermine the implementation and continuity of the project.
Step 4) Common practices analysis
As previously discussed, the creation of an RPDS does not constitute common practice in the Legal Amazon, and it is in fact the first initiative of its kind in the country38. Thus, the project as a whole, composed of an RPDS to replace previously licensed logging activities, not only contradicts common practice in the country, but it is pioneering and therefore innovative.
Moreover, efforts to combat deforestation and forest degradation are still rare in the project region, a claim reinforced by Soares-Filho 39 et al. (2010) who demonstrate heavy deforestation pressures to which the UCs of the Legal Amazon UCs are subject.
38 http://www.ebcf.com.br/blog/2013/06/24/criacao-da-primeira-reserva-particular-de-desenvolvimento-sustentavel-do- mundo-na-floresta-amazonica/ 1 39 Role of Brazilian Amazon Protected Areas in Climate Change Mitigation
85
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
The urgent need for investments for the maintenance of the biodiversity and forests with the objective of reducing deforestation and forest degradation, especially in the arc of deforestation40, is another factor that illustrates the discrepancy between the project activities and common practice in the region.
An IDESAM study (VIANNA, 2013) also concludes that the city of Manicoré contributes significantly to the timber industry in the state and has been considered a strategic hub mainly due to its geographical location and accessibility. An IBGE survey (2013) also corroborates the claim that Scenarios 1, 2 and 3 are common practices (step 1), since the agricultural sector was an important contributor to the GDP of the city in 2010 (approximately R$ 170,000.00.) Domingues et al. (2012) lists the most common practices in the area: a) selective logging and subsequent deforestation for farming activities; b) itinerant agriculture, with a low technological level that uses fire to clear pasture; c) low technical level and damaging cattle ranching.
The above elements demonstrate the project’s additionality, aligning step 4 findings with those obtained in steps 2 and 3.
5 QUANTIFICATION OF GHG EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS AND REMOVALS (CLIMATE) (G5, INDICATOR 9)
5.1 Project Scale and Estimated GHG Emission Reductions or Removals
Table 12 - Scale of greenhouse gas emissions reduction project Project X
Large Project
5.1.1 Reduction of Net Anthropogenic GHG Emissions (G5, indicator 8) (CL2, indicator 2)
Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction is first calculated by estimating the emissions associated with the baseline scenario and then subtracting that number from the project emissions, replacing selective extraction activity with a protected forest and adding further leakage emissions, as shown in the following equation:
40 O arco de desflorestamento na Amazônia: da pecuária à soja.
86
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Equation 1 – Calculation of emissions reductions from the replacement of selective extraction activities for the permanent protection of forests.
In which:
C'IFM_LtPF,t – Total net annual reduction in anthropogenic GHG emissions in the year t (where t=1,2,3 ... t*years elapsed since the start of the project activities IFM-LtPF) in tCO2e.
C'baseline – Total annual carbon emissions associated with the baseline in the year t (where t=1,2,3
... t* years elapsed since the start of the project activities IFM-LtPF) in tCO2e.
C'actual,t – Total annual carbon emissions associated with the project activities in the year t (where t=1,2,3 ... t* years elapsed since the start of the project activities IFM-LtPF) in tCO2e.
C’leakage,t – Total annual carbon emissions related to the baseline in the year t (where t=1,2,3 ... t* years elapsed since the start of the project activities IFM-LtPF) in tCO2e.
The calculation of the emissions reductions assumes the harvest period approved in the EIA related to the environmental licensing of the Sustainable Forest Management Plan (SFMP) in the first 25-year cycle – from 1999 to 2023 (Appendices 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6), followed by the renewal of another 25-year management cycle, from 2024 to 2048.
The Operating Authorizations - AUTEX and Annual Operational Plans - POAs (Annex 6) cover the period from 1999 to 2010. Within this period six POAs were utilized in the project area, during six different years. Thus, we assumed that the carbon emitted due to the forestry operations in each UPA was the same as the average value for that period. Thus, the continuity of the common practice of forest management based on historical licensing data in the project area was assumed for the duration of the project (2011-2048).
Therefore, the area would continue to be logged at the same historical rate, hence the annual avoided emissions were equal to the calculated average emissions that occurred in the 11 years of extraction, as explained above. The Avoided Planned Deforestation project activities (IFM acronym in English) began in 2011. Therefore the remaining time in the first licensed period (13 years) and, the next second cycle period (25 years) were considered in the calculations of emissions reduction, for a total crediting period of 37 years.
The results obtained by Equation 1 are presented annually for the years 2011-2020 as well as for the years 2030 and 2048 in the table below.
87
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Table 13 - Ex-ante net reductions in GHG emissions41 in tons of CO2e for the first 10, 20 and 37 years of the project
Estimated GHG emissions Year reductions or removals (tCO2e) 2012 86,770 2013 86,729 2014 86,755 2015 86,755 2016 86,755 2017 86,755 2018 86,755 2019 86,755 2020 86,755 2030 86,755 2048 86,755 Total estimated ERs 3,209,909
Total number of crediting years 37
Average annual ERs 86,754
5.1.2 Required Data Sources
The calculation of the project reduction in emissions is linked to the emissions of the baseline activities, which depends on the emissions related to the implementation of such activities, as well as the degradation caused by the implementation of the baseline activities. Because the calculation also depends on the amount and quality of available information, it can follow two paths - that which relies on an existing inventory or that which relies on measurement collected in the field. The use of both of these paths in each calculation are explained below.
5.1.3 Significance
A tool was used to test the significance of GHG emissions sources considered in the development of this PDD (Tool for testing significance of GHG emissions in A/R CDM project activities) by the UNFCCC (Annex 18 - Significance Analysis tab). The main parameters of the equations that
41 See section 5.6 and Annex 18.
88
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
calculate emissions caused by the degradation resulting from baseline activities, emissions from the baseline activities, as well as the emissions related to the project activities were transformed into tCO2e, when necessary and ranked in decending order with respect to their emissions. The values must then sum to 0.95. All those below the 5% significance level are considered non- significant. The non-significant parameters are featured in their own sections.
5.1.4 VCUs and Percentage of Buffer Reserve
Uncertainty assessment
- Total IFM-LtPF project uncertainty
Having calculated the reduction in net anthropogenic GHG emissions due to the project actions, the overall uncertainty associated with it must be calculated by propagating the error using the following equation:
Equation 2 – Calculation of the uncertainty related to the net GHG anthropogenic emissions reduction by the project activities.
In which:
σIFM_LtPF,t– Annual uncertainty (absolute error) for the total amount of IFM_LtPF in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t* years elapsed from the start of the project activities IFM-LtPF), in tCO2e.
σbaseline,t– Annual uncertainty in the annual total of GHG emissions as a result of the baseline scenario in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in tCO2e.
σatual, t– Annual uncertainty in the real activities (from the project) in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the project activities IFM-LtPF), in tCO2e.
σleakage, t– Annual uncertainty in the carbon leakage in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the project activities IFM-LtPF), in tCO2e.
The absolute error is defined as the absolute difference between the exact value and its mean approximated value, (i.e. always a positive number). To track changes in the uncertainty associated with the project activities relative error instead of the absolute error should be used, which is calculated using the following equation:
89
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Equation 3 – Calculation of the uncertainty related to the project IFM_LtPF activities.
In which:
UIFM_LtPF,t– Annual uncertainty (relative error) for the total IFM_LtPF project in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the project IFM-LtPF activities), in %.
σIFM_LtPF,t– Annual uncertainty (absolute error) for the total amount of the IFM_LtPF in the year t
(where t=1,2,3... t* years elapsed from the start of the project activities IFM-LtPF), in tCO2e.
C'IFM_LtPF,t – Total net annual reduction in anthropogenic GHG emissions in the year t (where t=1,2,3 ... t*years elapsed since the start of the project activities IFM-LtPF) in tCO2e.
- Uncertainty in the Baseline Accounting
The total uncertainty related to the baseline is calculated according to the degradation related uncertainty caused by the baseline activities and the uncertainty in estimates from emissions sources related to the implementation of baseline activities, and uncertainty is given by the formula:
Equation 4 - Calculation of the uncertainty related to the activity of the baseline.
In which:
σbaseline,t– Annual uncertainty in the annual total of GHG emissions as a result of the baseline scenario in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in tCO2e.
σdegradation,t– Annual uncertainty in the annual emissions produced by the degradation due to the baseline activity: selective extraction in the project area in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in tCO2e.
σemission,t– Annual uncertainty in the annual emissions of the baseline activities: selective extraction operations in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in tCO2e.
90
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
- Degradation Uncertainty
The total uncertainty in the degradation is obtained by summing the uncertainties in each individual component that contributes to the degradation from baseline activities:
Equation 5 – Uncertainty related to degradation caused by the baseline activities.
In which:
σdegradation,t– Annual uncertainty in the annual emissions produced by the degradation due to the baseline activity: selective extraction in the project area in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in tCO2e.
σDWdecay,t– Annual uncertainty in the dead wood carbon reservoir due to the degradation in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the project IFM-LtPF activities), in tC.
σLtHWPoxidation,t– Annual uncertainty in long-term wood products carbon reservoir due to oxidation in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the project IFM-LtPF activities), in tC.
σStHWPoxidation,t– Annual uncertainty in short-term wood products carbon reservoir due to oxidation in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the project IFM-LtPF activities), in tC.
σgrowth_foregone,t– Annual uncertainty in carbon lost due to the foregone net annual growth in the area from extraction in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the project IFM- LtPF activities), in tC.
σregrowth,t– Annual uncertainty in the regrowth of the biomass carbon due to the regeneration that follows the extraction in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the project IFM-LtPF activities), in tC.
44/12 = Ratio of the molecular weight of carbon dioxide to carbon, in tCO2e and tC.
The calculation of the absolute errors in each of the components was estimated in hectares for standardization. The estimated value per year, for each parameter, minus the average of all the years resulted an annual absolute error for each parameter. The uncertainty in degradation was obtained by taking the average of the uncertainties in each year. The σStHWPoxidation member,t was not considered because there are no short-term wood products.
91
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
- Uncertainties in Baseline Emissions Sources
The uncertainties in emissions caused by implementing the baseline activities are calculated as follows:
Equation 6 – Calculation of the uncertainty related to the implementation of the baseline activities.
In which:
σemission,t– Annual uncertainty in the annual emissions of the baseline activities: selective extraction operations in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in tCO2e.
σbaseline_source,g,t – Annual uncertainty in the sources of greenhouse gas emissions g (Where g=1,2,3 ... G sources of emission) associated with the baseline activities in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in tCO2e.
Again the average of estimated emissions was taken. The estimated value per year, for each parameter, was subtracted from the mean. Uncertainties in emissions from the baseline activities were calculated for each year and an average was used for future estimates.
- Uncertainty in project accounting in real terms
The uncertainty related to emissions caused by the implementation of project activities are calculated from the individual uncertainty in each emission source related to the project activities, as shown in the following equation:
Equation 7 – Calculation of the uncertainty in the project activities.
σactual,t– Annual uncertainty in the project activities in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the project activities IFM-LtPF), in tCO2e.
σbaseline_source,g,t – Annual uncertainty in the sources of emissions of greenhouse gases g (Where g=1,2,3 ... G sources of emission) associated with the project activities in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in tCO2e.
92
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
The uncertainties in the project activities were calculated per year and an average of three years was used for the estimates from 2014.
- Uncertainty Deduction
The percentage of relative error of the total uncertainty in the project was less than 10% (Table 14), so no discount is applied by uncertainty. Thus the carbon credits after reducing uncertainties
(CCIFM_LtPF,t)are equivalent to annual anthropogenic reductions in GHG(C’IFM_LtPF,t).
The table below shows the results for total absolute error of the project (annex 18), its relative error and carbon credits, equivalent to the net annual GHG emissions reductions. The values are presented annually from 2011 to 2020 and also for the years 2030 and 2048. Values are cumulative.
Table 14 - Annual reduction in anthropogenic GHG emissions, absolute error and relative error related to these emissions, and carbon credits available per year after the reduction in uncertainties
Year C'IFM_LtPF σIFM_LtPF UIFM_LtPF,t CCIFM_LtPF,t
2012 86,770 576.55 0.66449354 86,770
2013 173,499 1,153.59 0.66476704 173,499
2014 260,264 2,306.86 0.66476704 260,264
2015 347,018 2,883.58 0.66476704 347,018
2016 433,773 3,460.29 0.66476704 433,773
2017 520,527 4,037.01 0.66476704 520,527
2018 607,282 4,613.73 0.66476704 607,282
2019 694,037 5,190.44 0.66476704 694,037
2020 780,791 5,767.16 0.66476704 780,791
2030 1,648,337 11,534.32 0.66476704 1,648,337
2048 3,209,919 21.915,20 0.68273372 3,209,919
93
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
5.2 Leakage Management
As shown in chapter 5.5, the implementation of the project should not generate any kind of leakage of the following reasons:
1. EBCF acquired the land for the sole purpose of preserving the forest, promoting income generation without relying on timber management activities, and proposing a conservation project for the area; 2. The EBCF does not practice selective logging in any other area and sale of wood products does not, nor ever was, a part of the core business of EBCF (Annex 18). The company will therefore not shift its management activities to other forest areas; 3. The EBCF does not own other properties intended for timber management; 4. The timber market in Manicoré is much more dependent on illegal logging than SFMP, following a different pattern of supply and demand and so will not be impacted by the absence of MF caused by the project; 5. The regional forest sector mainly produces wood for the Brazilian domestic market, and exports to other countries such as those which Gethal’s operations supply, is not a common practice in the city of Manicoré and in the region.
Even considering the scenario above, the project has adopted a conservative approach, since according to VM0011, leakage monitoring is not necessary. However, the project will include some punctual monitoring activities and mitigation of leakages, based especially on the use of remote sensing and GIS tools and auxiliary data from official disturbance databases. In addition, the RPDS Management Plan includes leakages and emissions mitigation activities, such as support for small farmers from the surrounding communities to reduce the need for clearing (deforestation to clear new areas).
Activities to mitigate leakage and emissions include: 1. Empowering of communities and dissemination of the project coupled with environmental education and awareness of indirect users; 2. Creation of jobs for the community, such as rangers, environmental agents and community managers (alternative income generation not associated with change of the land use); 3. Agricultural extension and technical support to increase productivity in the areas of consolidated cultivation (thus reducing pressure on forests within the project area and its surroundings when expanding gardens); 4. Technical Assistance and Rural Development through two government agencies, IDAM and ATER-AM, for all segments of the rural population;
94
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
5. Mobilization, communication and strengthening of community organizations; 6. Strengthening of the Manicoré State Plan for Prevention and Control of Deforestation and Burning;42 7. Pressring the State of Amazonas to implement the PPCD-AM (Amazonas State Plan for Prevention and Control of Deforestation); 8. Monitoring of illegal deforestation 43 , degradation 44 and hotspots 45 in the project area and surrounding regions by the proponent of the project, pledging to record and report such incidents to the relevant state authorities.
Leakage management activities from deforestation which targets local agents (community living in the vicinity of the project area) are described in more detail in Section 6.1.
Moreover, being a conservation area recognized by the state legislature of Amazonas (SEUC46 - State System of Conservation Units), in the category of Private Sustainable Development Reserve, established by the SDS Directive no. 86 of June 5, 2013, the following procedures described below must be adhered to:
Art. 22. The Private Sustainable Development Reserve (RPDS) is private land, voluntarily created by the owner and recorded in perpetuity and may, or may not contain a user population, whose objective is to promote nature conservation and sustainable development through the direct use of natural resources. § no. 1 The establishment and functioning of RPDS is predicated on the following: I - the encumbrance of the caput consists of Letter of Commitment signed by the owner before the Environmental Agency to certify the existence of public interest, and will be recorded in the margin of registration with the Public Registry of Property; II - management Plan will define the areas of permanent protection, sustainable use and, if possible, ecological corridors;
42 http://www.mma.gov.br/redd/index.php/informma/item/47-mma-desenvolve-acao-norte 43 http://www.obt.inpe.br/prodes/index.php, http://www.obt.inpe.br/deter/, http://www.imazongeo.org.br/ 44 http://www.imazongeo.org.br/ & http://www.obt.inpe.br/degrad/ 45 http://www.dpi.inpe.br/proarco/bdqueimadas/ 46 State Decree no. 30,108 of June 22, 2010.
95
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
III – intended to be compatible with permanence and use and a contract between the owner and the traditional communities as well as the user population will be signed; IV - the RPDS may overlap with an Evironmental Protection Area (APA). § no. 2 Throughout the process of creating the RPDS, the Governing Body should assess, for the purpose of analyzing the viability of its proposal, the existence of conflicts between the owner and resident local populations, including in the surrounding area, making the creation of the Conservation Unit impossible.
Also according to the SEUC, a RPDS is one of perpetuity and should have a Management Plan. Both constraints alone would ensure forest conservation and maintenance of its carbon stock through legal means.
The Amazon Rio project consists of the first RPDS38 in the country. The initiative of the proponent himself, is in perfect accordance with state and federal laws (Climate Change Law of the State of Amazonas 47 National Climate Change Policy48 and State System of Conservation Units - SEUC49 and the National System of Conservation Units - SNUC)50, which regulate the activities related to conservation and sustainable use of protected areas and policies on climate change.
5.3 Baseline Emissions (CL 1, indicator 1)
For the project baseline calculation, guidelines, criteria and assumptions contained in Section 3 – Baseline Accounting - from the VCS VM0011 methodology were used. The following are the equations contained in this section that were used in the calculations of emissions in this study with their respective purposes and justifications.
All calculations presented in this section were made for annually harvested area from the beginning of the logging project. The Amazon Rio Reserves I, II, III and IV areas, formerly belonging to the Valdenor II farm, contained 6 plots where forest management occurred. The calculations and the results of the steps presented in this section are more fully described in the emissions spreadsheet (Annex 18).
47 http://www.ipaam.br/legislacao/ESTADUAL/ 48 http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2007-2010/2009/lei/l12187.htm 49 http://www.sema.rs.gov.br/conteudo.asp?cod_agrupador=12 ; http://www.4shared.com/office/7VSHmQmDce/SEUC.html 50 http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/l9985.htm
96
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Plots 1 and 2 are physically well defined and separate from the others. Plot 3 has both a POA itself and a POA shared with plot 4. Thus, it is considered separately in one year and together (plots 3 and 4) in another year. The same is the case of plot 5, which also has a POA itself and another which it shares with plot 6. Thus, the analyses were conducted by sub-areas: plot 1, plot 2, plot 3, plot 5 and paired plots 3/4 and 5/6. Each sub-area was logged only once in a given year. The total emissions for the total logged area is the sum of the values found for each sub-area.
5.3.1 Estimated Emissions from Degradations
For the purposes of calculating baseline emissions, the start of the project was considered the year in which the project area ceased to be logged and not 2011 (official year of the beginning of the IFM project). This is justified by the fact that the methodology VM0011 assumes that selective logging ceases only when the project activities begins. This is not the case of this project in which the last date of the logging operations was 201051.
To calculate the total carbon emitted associated with the baseline scenario equation 8 was used as follows:
Equation 8 – Calculation of carbon emitted related to the baseline activities.
In which:
C'baseline – Total annual carbon emissions associated with the baseline in the year t (where t=1,2,3
... t* years elapsed since the start of the project activities IFM-LtPF) in tCO2e.
C’degradation, t– Annual total carbon emissions associated with the degradation due to the baseline activity in the year t (where t=1,2,3 ... t*years elapsed since the start of the project activities IFM-
LtPF) in tCO2e.
C’emissions,t - Annual total carbon emissions associated with baseline activity operations of selective extraction in the year t (where t=1,2,3 ... t*years elapsed since the start of the project activities
IFM-LtPF) in tCO2e.
To use the formula above, the carbon generated by degradation caused by baseline activity has to be calculated, as well as the carbon emitted by such activities, represented in equations 9 and 28.
51 License issued in 2008, but valid for 2 years (Annex 5, doc. "ACOF and LO SFMP Valdenor II 2008")
97
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
To calculate the carbon generated by the degradation caused annually by baseline activity for selective extraction, equation 9 was used:
Equation 9 – Calculation of carbon released by degradation resulting from the baseline activities.
In which:
C’degradation,t - Annual total of carbon emissions associated with the degradation due to the baseline activity in the year t (where t=1,2,3 ... t*years elapsed since the start of the project activities IFM-
LtPF) in tCO2e.
CDWdecay,t - Annual carbon escaping the dead wood reservoir due to the decay of the dead wood in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the project IFM-LtPF activities), in tC.
CltHWPoxidation,t- Annual carbon referring to the combined action of delayed oxidation of long-term wood products and immediate oxidation of long-term wood product residues in year t (where t = 1,2,3 ... t*years elapsed from the start of project activities LtPF-MFIs) in tC.
Cgrowth_foregone,t- Annual loss of carbon due to the foregone above-ground biomass growth in the project area in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the project IFM-LtPF activities), in tC.
Cregrowth,t- Annual increase in carbon biomass due to regeneration after the extraction in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the project IFM-LtPF activities), in tC.
44/22 = Ratio of the molecular weight of carbon dioxide to carbon, in tCO2e and tC.
For the calculation of equation 9, primary parameters, such as the carbon contained in the above- ground biomass in marketed logs and the annual extraction area must first be calculated.
There are two ways to obtain the expected results:
1) the method that uses data from an existing forest inventory and;
2) the method of measuring data in the field. The forest inventory of the area exists, but it is more than five years old. Pearson (2005) argues that forest processes are usually measured every five years and for verification and certification purposes in Clean Development Mechanism projects (CDM), they should conducted at least as often. At a minimum the dominant biomass (the trees) can reasonably be measured that often. As the permanent plots for data measurement were not
98
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
installed, we chose to validate the data in Baccini (2012) to estimate this parameter, following the section 2.2.1.1.1 of the VM0011.
5.3.2 Calculation of the Main Parameters in the Project Area
Existing forest inventory data validation
Firstly, the area was stratified in terms of vegetation types: Dense Primary Ombrophylous Tropical Alluvial Forest, Dense Primary Ombrophylous Tropical Lowland Forest and Pioneer-herbaceous formations with fluvial and/or lacustrine influence. Ten random plots in each vegetation type were then established, of which biomass values and their respective confidence intervals of 95% were taken. The entire procedure was done using ArcGIS software. The data was then compared to HDOM (2012) data which revealed the confidence interval computed abve. Thus, the average biomass values were used as conservative estimates.
All other parameters calculated in this PD followed the path of option 1, which is further divided into two others options: i) detailed, which includes all information relating diameter at breast height (DBH) and tree height, and ii) low detail, in which this information is missing. The calculations presented here followed the latter, since such detail was not available for all POAs.
Carbon from marketable logs using wood density method in which inventory data do not distinguish between different types of forest products
POAs were used to obtain the volume of potentially marketable timber. For planning purposes appropriate forest surveys were conducted to estimate the diversity and measurements of the trees in the area (Appendices 2 and 7). The commercial timber volume was taken to mean all the extracted volume allowed by the AUTEXs (Logging Permits), presented in Appendices 4 and 6. To calculate the carbon contained in the commercial timber per hectare in the project area a formula was applied that makes no distinction between timber products since all the timber had the same purpose: construction. This equation uses the wood density and the fraction of carbon contained in it, as well as the volume of marketable wood to obtain carbon in the logs:
Equation 10 - calculation of the average carbon level per hectare in marketable logs.
In which: merch, j,t =0 – Average carbon per hectare in marketable logs in stratum j (where j=1,2,3... stratum j), determined before the beginning of the project activities IFM-LtPF, therefore t=0 years, in tC/ha.
99
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
D – Density of wood for a tropical forest with corresponding climate region and ecological zone in (t d m)/m3.
CFWood – Carbon fraction in rainforest wood in tC/(t d m).
merch, j,t =0 – Average amount of the marketable logs per hectare in stratum j (where j=1,2,3... stratum j), determined before the beginning of the project activities IFM-LtPF, therefore t=0 years, in m3/ha.
The values of the parameters D and CFwood were taken from Annex B of the methodology (REYES et al. 1992 and HUGHES et al., in IPCC, 2006 apud VCS, 2011) and were 0.6 and 0.49, respectively. Since wood was extracted only in Dense Primary Ombrophylous Lowland Forest, j = 1.
The average carbon per hectare in the project area is then calculated by the following equation:
Equation 11 - Average carbon per hectare calculation in marketable timber throughout the project area.
In which:
merch,t=0 - Average carbon per hectare in marketable logs in the project area, determined ex ante - before the start of IFM-LtPF project activities, therefore t = 0 years, in tC per ha.
Cmerch, j,t =0 – Average carbon per hectare in marketable logs in stratum j (where j=1,2,3... stratum j), determined before the beginning of the project activities IFM-LtPF, therefore t=0 years, in tC/ha.
Aproject,j,t=0 - Project Area within each stratum j (where j=1,2,3... stratum j) which will be implemented in the IFM-LtPF project activities; determined before the commencement of IFM-LtPF project activities therefore t = 0 years, in ha.
Aproject,t=0 - Project Area where the IFM-LtPF project activities will be implemented; determined ex ante - before the start of IFM-LtPF project activities therefore t = 0 years, in ha.
As mentioned, the extraction was done in a single layer. Each subarea extraction provided in the POAs was considered separately, then the amount of carbon in marketable logs of each subarea was multiplied by their respective extraction areas and the resulting value was divided by the sum
100
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
of all extraction areas. All of these values, with the exception of Cmerch, j, t = 0, once calculated, were removed from the POAs and operating licenses (Appendices 4 and 6).
Carbon in the growing stock biomass using the biomass allometric method
For the average carbon per hectare in the growing stock1 aboveground biomass, the equation for allometric method was used, where biomass is calculated from field data from which to obtain the carbon value. As explained earlier, we used the biomass value calculated based on Baccini's data et al. (2012) obtained by a weighted average of biomass values from Dense Primary Ombrophylous Tropical Alluvial Forest and Dense Primary Ombrophylous Tropical Lowland Forest, vegetation types where selective logging occurred.
Equation 12 – Average carbon per hectare in the aboveground biomass of the growing stock.1
In which:
1 AGB_gstock, j, t = 0 - Average carbon per hectare in the aboveground growing stock biomass in the project area, determined ex ante - before the start of IFM-LtPF project activities, thus t = the year in tC/ha.
1 AGB_gstock,t=0– Average biomass per hectare in the aboveground growing stock in the project area, determined ex ante - before the start of IFM-LtPF project activities, thus t = the year in t.d.m./ha.
CFAGB - carbon fraction in the aboveground biomass of tropical forest trees in tC by t.d.m.
The fraction of carbon value in tropical forest trees (CFAGB) was taken from the values provided by the IPCC (IPCC, 2006).
Similar to the the volume per hectare, the annual harvest area (ANHA _ annual,t) was also obtained from each of the POAs and operating licenses. The total managed area is calculated by summing the areas of all the POAs. Again it was assumed that the entire extraction area authorized by AUTEXs (Annex 1 and 6) was managed.
The estimated stock of carbon removed from the biosphere, through selective logging (the management activity) was based on information available in the POAs and Autex proponent. Based on the stratified estimate for the group of exploited species (as shown in Autex's) and diametric class (DAP minimum cut, defined by law), a factor of transformation was generated (ft) of volume of wood exploited for carbon stock. The product of the total volume explored in UPA and ft results in carbon emission estrimativa, referring to the exploitation of wood (Table 14).
101
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Table 15 - Year in which the extraction occurred, logged area, marketable volume, carbon in the marketable volume and carbon contained in the aboveground biomass of the growing stock1 in all sub-areas and the total for the project area52
Sub-areas Logging year ANHA_annual,t Vmerch,t Cmerch,t CAGB_ gstock,t
Plot 1 1999 586.69 30,970 14,401.79 70,872.15
Plot 2 2000 688 21,094 9,809.16 83,110.40
Plot 3 2001 – 2002 831.5 1,566 728.01 100,445.20
Plots 3/4 2003 – 2004 750 60,184 27,986.71 90,600.00
Plot 5 2005 – 2007 1,082 32,230 14,987.69 130,705.60
Plots 5/6 2008 – 2009 409.5 38,895 18,087.09 49,467.60
Total - 4,347.69 184,939 86,000.45 525,200.95
ANHA_annual,t – annual extraction area;Vmerch,t – annual amount of Marketable timber;Cmerch,t – total
annual carbon in Marketable timber; CAGB_ gstock,t – total annual carbon in the aboveground biomass of growing stock.
1 All trees with DBH>25 cm
5.3.3 Changes in Carbon Due to the Degradation Caused by the Baseline Scenario
The primary parameters calculated above are used to calculate the other parameters of equation 9 and get the value of carbon emitted due to degradation.
Net carbon in the dead wood reservoir
The dead wood reservoir of a particular area refers all the carbon contained in branches and dead trees, which are not considered in the litter or on the ground. The methodology assumes that wood naturally entering this reservoir and its decomposition are the same for both the baseline scenario and the project scenario. Therefore the reservoir as a whole is not considered in the calculations.
The difference between the selective extraction baseline scenarios is the addition of branches and cuttings taken from uprooted trees and the ones that were left standing, but damaged due to forest management. In both cases there is an increase in the dead wood reservoir. Therefore, the
52 See Annex 18
102
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
biomass resulting from such damage is considered as input to the deadwood reservoir baseline logging scenario. The calculation of the carbon in this case is a function of that input of wood due to harvest damage and the respective decomposition rate. The first step is therefore to calculate the carbon entering the dead wood reservoir using the following equation:
Equation 13 – Calculation of the carbon input form the dead wood reservoir.
In which:
CDwin,t- Total annual input of carbon in the deadwood reservoir in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the project IFM-LtPF activities), in tC.
Cregrowth,t- Annual increase in carbon biomass due to the regeneration after extraction in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years passed from the start of the project IFM-LtPF activities), in tC.
Cbranch _ trim,t – Annual carbon in branches and cuttings left in the forest after the extraction in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years passed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in TC.
To solve equation 13, a separate calculation of the carbon values resulting from damage to the standing forest by felling of trees and the carbon emitted from branches cut from felled logs is made, which are presented in the following equations.
Carbon related to residuals damage to the forest
Equation 14 – Calculation of carbon resulting from forest damage residuals left in the forest after trimming the extracted logs.
In which:
CRSD,t- Annual increase in carbon biomass due to the regeneration after the extraction in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the project IFM-LtPF activities), in tC.
fRSD – Damage factor to the remaining forest, based on the carbon fraction resulting from the damage to the remaining forest to the carbon in the extracted marketable logs. Non-dimensional.
Cmerch,t - Total annual carbon in marketable logs extracted in the project area in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in tC.
The remaining forest damage factor was obtained by Feldpausch et al. (2005). The authors of this study made several carbon analyses in low impact selective areas in southern Amazonia, the
103
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
same biome and the same method used in the Amazon Rio Reserves I, II, III and IV areas. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that the factor calculated by Feldpausch and his collaborators is applicable to the project areas.
Carbon contained in wood chips left in the forest after extraction
The crooked branches, canopies, and trunks cut of harvested trees are also removed in log preparation at the extraction site itself. The material removed and left in the forest is accounted for in the following equation:
Equation 15 – Calculation of carbon present in the branches and chips removed from extracted marketable logs.
In which:
Cbranch _ trim,t – Annual carbon in branches and cuts left in the forest after the extraction in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in TC.
Cmerch,t – Total annual carbon in marketable logs extracted in the project area in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in tC.
fbranch _ trim – Fraction of remaining branches and chips in the aboveground biomass after cutting marketable logs and transferring them to the deadwood reservoir. Non-dimensional.
The branch and chip factor – fbranch_trim- must be derived from the ratio between the trimmed branches biomass to the total tree biomass. In a literature review, a lack of data and studies related to this factor for the Amazon biome and Brazil was observed.
A means to overcome this lack of data was to search the literature for data applicable to the project conditions, which would allow an estimate of this factor. First, we used a study from the Eastern Amazon (KELLERet al., 2004), which compares the amount of wood residue (pieces of lying deadwood 2 cm or larger in diameter) in areas with conventional selective extraction, selective extraction of low impact and undisturbed sites, all in the same area.
To reach the factor, first the difference between the average residues in selective extraction of low impact sites53 and the average residues in non-disturbed disturbed sites was calculated. This difference represents the volume of the branches resulting from the trimming of extracted logs.
53 Project Baseline.
104
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Keller's (2004) and his collaborators' study showed only the extracted timber volume, but not the tree total volume. Usable timber proportions of 47% was used for trees in the Amazon (IMAZON, 2002) to estimate the total amount, thereby obtaining the total timber amount.
The difference between wood residues from the forest subjected to selective low impact logging and forest undisturbed by the total amount of wood per hectare was divided and calculated based on the proportion of usable wood removed, according to IMAZON (2002). An value of 0.67 was found for fbranch_trim, which was used in the present study
Carbon emissions due to the decomposition of the deadwood reservoir
For the calculation of carbon in the deadwood reservoir, the following 16 -19 equations were used. According to the decay rate, we calculated the remaining carbon fraction in the deadwood reservoir:
Equation 16 – Carbon contained in the deadwood reservoir.
In which:
FDW_remain,t - Annual fraction of carbon in the deadwood reservoir that will remain in the reservoir in the year t, (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities) after applying the decomposition rate. Non-dimensional.
kdecay– Yearly deadwood reservoir decomposition rate. t – 1,2,3 ... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities.
The deadwood decomposition rate, kdecay was extracted from a work performed in the Central Amazon rainforest (CHAMBERS et al., 2000).
To calculate the carbon input in the deadwood reservoir, equation 3.22 in VM0011 (Equation 17 of this report) was used. Although this equation must be used when removed wood values are annually constant, it can be used in the approach of this PD, which although different volumes are taken from each subarea, they were treated separately for environmental licensing (each subfield with its specific POA). Thus, to each withdrawn volume a unique decomposition factor was applied based on the year in which the extraction was made. The sum of the values results in the amount of deadwood carbon in the area as a whole (Annex 18).
105
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Equation 17 – Carbon in the deadwood reservoir.
In which:
CDWpool,t– Cumulative carbon remaining in the deadwood reservoir in the year t, (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in tC.
FDW_remain,t - Annual fraction of carbon in the deadwood reservoir that will remain in the reservoir in the year t, (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities) after applying the decomposition rate. Non-dimensional.
CDwin,t- Total annual input of carbon in the deadwood reservoir in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the project IFM-LtPF activities), in tC.
From the values of carbon entering the dead wood reservoir and its accumulated carbon it is possible to calculate the amount of carbon leaving the deadwood reservoir and returning to the atmosphere (Equation 18).
Equation 18 – Carbon emitted to the atmosphere from the dead wood reservoir.
In which:
CDWout,t – Cumulative carbon left in the dead wood reservoir and released in the atmosphere in the year t, (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in tC.
CDwin,t- Total annual input of carbon in the deadwood reservoir in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the project IFM-LtPF activities), in tC.
CDWpool,t– Cumulative carbon remaining in the deadwood reservoir in the year t, (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in tC.
To calculate the carbon that leaves the dead wood reservoir due to wood decomposition (Equation 19).
Equation 19 – Carbon that leaves the dead wood reservoir annually due to decomposition.
In which:
106
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
CDWdecay,t - Annual carbon leaving the dead wood reservoir due to the decay of the dead wood in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the project IFM-LtPF activities), in tC.
CDWout, t – Cumulative carbon which leaves the dead wood reservoir and released in the atmosphere in the year t, (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in tC.
CDWout, t-1 – Cumulative carbon leaving the dead wood reservoir and released in the atmosphere in the year t-1, (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in tC.
As explained above, each area that suffered selective logging has its own Annual Operational Extraction Plan (POA), and thus operates individually. Thus, carbon which annually leaves the reservoir (CDWdecay,t) is considered the same as the carbon leaving the reservoir in the year t
(CDWout, t), since the subareas suffered extraction only once. t-1(CDWout, t-1) therefore does not exist.
Net carbon from the long-term timber products reservoir
All wood extracted from the project area was to be used construction, so the entire extracted amount was recorded as long-term wood products, e.g., with half-life greater than 30 years in carbon estimates emitted by wood products. Thus, short-term wood products (with a 2-year half- life or less) were not considered as carbon sources in this PD and so the CstHWPoxidation parameter was absent from equation 20.
The carbon emitted from long-term wood products is the sum of the carbon emitted by the rapid decomposition of wood processing residues and the carbon emitted by the slow product decomposition itself:
Equation 20 – Annual carbon from the oxidation of long-term timber products.
In which:
CltHWPoxidation,t- Annual carbon referring to the combined action of delayed oxidation of long-term wood products and immediate oxidation of long-term wood products residues in year t (where t = 1,2,3 ... t*years elapsed from the start of IFM-LtPF project activities) in tC.
CltHWPresidues,t- Annual carbon due to the immediate oxidation of long-term wood product residues in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in tC.
107
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
CltHWPnet_out,t- Annual liquid carbon due to the late oxidation of long-term wood product residues leaving the wood product reservoirs in the year t (where t=1,2,3 ... t*years elapsed from the start of IFM-LtPF project activities), in tC.
Carbon resulting from long-term wood product residues
It is assumed that the residues from sawmills undergoes oxidation in the same year it is processed, so that the carbon released by them is calculated by the following equation:
Equation 21 – Carbon released due to immediate oxidation of long-term wood product residues.
In which:
CltHWPresidues,t– Annual carbon due to the immediate oxidation of residues from long-term wood products in year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in tC.
Cmerch, p,t =0– Average carbon per hectare in marketable log forest products type p=log, in the project area, determined in advance – before the beginning of IFM-LtPF project activities, so t=0 years. in tC/ha.
flumber_recovery– Sawn wood recovery factor for the proportion of marketable logs converted into harvested wood products. Non-dimensional.
ANHA _ annual,t– Net annual harvest area for the project area in year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in ha.
The lumber recovery factor was obtained from Annex B of the methodology used (VERISSIMO et al., 1992 apud VCS, 2011) and was calculated for the Amazon.
Carbon due to the oxidation of long-term wood products reservoir
The average carbon input of timber products in the wood reservoir remaining long-term is calculated as follows:
Equation 22 – Annual carbon input into the long-term timber products reservoir.
In which:
108
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
CltHWPin,t– Annual carbon input in the long-term harvested wood reservoir from lumber in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in tC.
merch, p,t =0- Average carbon per hectare in marketable log forest products type p=log in the project area, determined in advance – before the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities, so t=0 years, in tC/ha.
flumber_recovery- Lumber recovery factor for the proportion of marketable logs converted into harvested wood products. Non-dimensional.
ANHA _ annual,t- Net annual harvest area for the project area in year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in ha.
The recovery factor of lumber is the same used in the previous equation.
According to IPCC, the individual values for oxidation of different long-term wood products do not vary significantly. A constant product disposal rate is applied to the carbon contained in the reservoir (IPCC, 2006). Thus, only one oxidation factor for all long-term timber products may be used.
Equation 23 – Long-term wood product fraction that continue in the long-term wood products reservoir.
In which:
FltHWP_remain,t– Annual ItHWP fraction remaining in the reservoir in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities) after applying the oxidation rate. Non-dimensional.
kltHWP_ox– Yearly oxidation rate for long-term harvested wood products. t - 1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project.
The oxidation rate of long-term wood products was obtained from the GHG National Guide for Inventories (IPCC, 2006).
It is then possible to calculate the carbon that accumulates in the long-term timber products reservoir with the following equation:
109
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Equation 24 – Remaining carbon in the long-term timber products reservoir.
In which:
CltHWPpool,t– Cumulative carbon remaining in the ItHWP reservoir in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the project IFM-LtPF activities), in tC.
FltHWP_remain,t– Annual ItHWP fraction that remains in the reservoir in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities) after applying the oxidation rate. Non-dimensional.
CltHWPin,t– Annual carbon input in the long-term harvested wood reservoir from lumber in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in tC.
And the cumulative carbon leaving the long-term timber products reservoir:
Equation 25 – Carbon leaving the long-term timber products reservoir.
In which:
CltHWPout,t– Cumulative carbon leaving the ltHWP reservoir and released in the atmosphere from the year t=1 to year t (where t=1,2,3... t* years elapsed from the start of the project activities IFM- LtPF), in tC.
CltHWPin,t– Annual carbon input in the long-term harvested wood reservoir from lumber in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in tC.
CltHWPpool,t– Cumulative carbon remaining in the ItHWP reservoir in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the project IFM-LtPF activities), in tC.
Finally, to calculate annual emissions that leave the long-term timber products reservoir due to slow decomposition the following equation is used.
Equation 26 – Annual net carbon from the delayed oxidation of long-term timber products.
In which:
110
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
CltHWPnet_out,t– Annual net carbon due to the delayed oxidation of long-term harvested wood products leaving the long-term harvested wood products in year t (where t = 1,2,3 ... t*years elapsed from the start of IFM-LtPF project activities), in tC.
CltHWPout,t– Cumulative carbon leaving the ltHWP reservoir and released in the atmosphere from the year t=1 up to year t (where t=1,2,3... t* years elapsed from the start of the project activities IFM-LtPF), in tC.
CltHWPout,t-1– Cumulative carbon leaving the ltHWP reservoir and released in the atmosphere from the year t=1 up to year t-1 where t=1,2,3... t* years elapsed from the start of the project activities IFM-LtPF), in tC.
In the same way that there is no CDW_out, t-1, there is also no CltHWPout,t-1, as each sub-area suffered extraction only once over the years, as mentioned before. Thus, the net annual carbon due to delayed long-term wood products oxidation leaving the long-term wood products reservoir has a value of CltHWPout, t.
Missing carbon growth due to selective extraction
Missing carbon growth (Cgrowth_foregone) or growth that did not occur in trees that were extracted and consequently ceased to store biomass, is calculated after two consecutive monitoring periods. The aboveground biomass of all marketable trees within the permanent sample plots should be measured in these two periods. It is also necessary to make further calculations using the comparison between these values, which are used to obtain the average annual growth of biomass per hectare ( growth_foregone). With this value the carbon from lost growth can be found through the following equation:
Equation 27 – Lost growth carbon calculation from extracted trees.
In which:
Cgrowth_foregone,t- Annual carbon lost due to the aboveground biomass growth foregone in the project area in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the project IFM-LtPF activities), in tC.
growth_foregone, t– Average annual growth of the aboveground biomass of marketable trees in the project area in the year t (where t = 1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of IFM- LtPF project activities) in t.d.m./ha/year.
111
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
CFAGB - carbon fraction in the aboveground biomass of trees for tropical forests. In tC by t.d.m.
ANHA _ annual,t- Net annual harvest area for the project area in year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in ha.
Since the monitoring phase has not begun yet, we used a default value for the aboveground biomass average growth per ha per year in areas of over 20-year-old tropical forest regeneration (IPCC, 2006). The default value is supplied for the growth of all aboveground biomass. A calculation to transform this factor to suit the biomass growth of only marketable trees (Annex 18) was made. Thus, it was possible to obtain an estimate of the missing carbon due to the absence of growth in harvested trees.
Regeneration carbon after selective logging
The methodology presents a conservative approach to calculate the carbon contained in regeneration, taking into account the regeneration that occurs throughout the managed area. The calculation of the carbon present in forest regeneration after selective logging is given by the following equation:
Equation 28 – Carbon from forest regeneration.
In which:
Cregrowth,t- Annual increase in carbon biomass due to the regeneration after the selective logging in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the project IFM-LtPF activities), in tC.
regrowth, t– Average yearly regeneration per hectare of aboveground biomass after selective logging in year t (where t = 1, 2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of LtPF-MFI project activities) in t.d.m./ha/year.
CFAGB– Carbon fraction in the aboveground biomass of trees in the rainforest, in tC/t.d.m.
ANHA_annual,t- Net annual harvest area for the project area in year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in ha.
The average annual regeneration of aboveground biomass per hectare after the extraction ( regrowth, t) was taken from a study performed in eastern Amazon on dynamics of the aboveground biomass after low impact selective extraction (MAZZEI et al., 2010), in other words, the same as in the
112
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
present study. The carbon fraction in aboveground biomass in tropical forest trees (CFAGB) was obtained from Annex B of the methodology (ANDREAE AND MERLET, CHAMBERS et al, LASCO and PULHIN in IPCC, 2006a apud VCS 2011.).
This regeneration parameter was considered insignificant according to the tool explained in section 5.1.3.
From the calculations above, it is possible to obtain the value of carbon emissions due to degradation (Equation 9). The table below (Table 15) includes the main reservoirs and the result calculated in Equation 9. Notably, the two reservoirs are absent: the lost growth carbon and carbon released by the oxidation of short-term timber products. The first one will only be calculated when monitoring activities begin. The latter is zero because there are no short-term timber products from the extraction activities in the area.
Table 16 - Value of carbon emissions from degradation in the project area (calculated from the carbon arising from the decomposition of dead matter, decomposition of long-term wood products and forest regeneration in extraction areas)
Sub-areas CDWdecay,t CltHWPoxidation,t Cgrowth_foregone Cregrowth,t C'degradation
Plot 1 25,641.13 6,074.44 64.63 716.94 113,898.65
Plot 2 17,182.04 4,089.31 44.02 840.74 75,073.66
Plot 3 1,145.74 288.39 3.27 1,016.09 1,544.80
Plots ¾ 48,070.53 11,527.08 125.60 916.50 215,624.62
Plot 5 20,030.04 5,684.39 67.26 1,322.20 89,684.77
Plots 5/6 19,852.08 6,644.51 81.17 500.41 95,616.96
Total 131,921.56 34,308.13 385.96 5,312.88 591,443.47
CDWdecay,t – annual carbon which leaves the dead wood reservoir; CltHWPoxidation,t – annual carbon
related to the oxidation of long-term wood products; Cgrowth_foregone – annual carbon loss due to the
growth that ceased to occur in the extracted area; Cregrowth,t – increase in annual biomass carbon
due to regeneration; C'degradation – total annual carbon emissions due to the degradation caused by the baseline activities.
113
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
5.3.4 Emissions from the Baseline Activities
Besides the emissions produced by the extraction itself, all emissions caused by the implementation of baseline activities must be taken into account, e.g., fuel consumption and electricity demand of such activities. The following equation includes all these additional emissions:
Equation 29 – Carbon emitted due to the baseline activity implementation.
In which:
C’emissions,t - Total annual carbon emissions associated with baseline activity operations of selective extraction in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed since the start of the project activities IFM-
LtPF) in tCO2e.
Eharvest, t – Annual emissions due to harvest operations, such as uprooting and logging in the year t
(where t=1,2,3... t* years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities) in tCO2e.
Eonsiteprep,t- Annual emissions due to the preparations in the area, such as canopy, roots, branches and defective component removal in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t* years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in tCO2e.
Ehauling,t– Annual emissions due to the dragging of logs in the year t (where t=1,2,3 ... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities) in tCO2e.
Etransport, t – Annual emissions due to log transportation from the collection site to the processing site in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities) in tCO2e.
Eprocessing,t– Annual emissions due to the electricity consumption in the sawmill in the year t (where t=1,2,3 ... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities) in tCO2e.
Edistribution, t – Annual emissions due to lumber transportation from the sawmill to the port for exportation or to a warehouse for local use in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities) in tCO2e.
Emissions due to logging operations
Logging is a mechanized process and therefore contributes to the emission of greenhouse gases. In tropical forests, the most common logging method used including the project area is the
114
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition chainsaw. The following formula is used to calculate the contribution of carbon released into the atmosphere due to selective logging operations:
Equation 30 – Calculation of emissions from extraction operations.
In which:
Eharvest, t – Annual emissions due to harvest operations, such as uprooting and logging in the year t
(where t=1,2,3... t* years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities) in tCO2e.
3 FC harvest - Equipment fuel consumption used for logging and uprooting per m of marketable logs in kL/m3
EFfuel – Emissions factor for fuel in tCO2e/kL.
Vmerch,t– Annual volume of marketable timber in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t* years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in m3.
The chainsaw fuel consumption was taken from a dissertation written in the Amazon, which calculated the fuel and oil used in logging operations for this biome (Campos, 2012).
Both fuel and diesel oil emission factors were removed from the table presented by the IPCC (IPCC, 2006). All VM0011 methodology instructions contained in Annex C (C.2 and C.3) for the conversion of other gases emitted due to the extraction process (CH4 and N2O) equivalent to CO2
(CO2e) were followed. For such conversion, a Global Warming Potential (PAG) value is required for each fuel, obtained from the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change website (UNFCCC, 2013). Transformation of the emission factor to the correct units also requires knowledge of the calorific value and the fuel density. These values were again obtained from the IPCC = (IPCC, 2006). The above explanation applies to all equations referring to the emission factor of a fuel (EFfuel).
This parameter was considered insignificant using to the tool explained in section 5.1.3.
Emissions due to the preparation of logs at the extraction site
Preparation of logs in the extraction site consists of trimming branches, removing canopies and dead parts of the trunk. For all these procedures, the use of chainsaws was also considered. Thus, we adopted the same fuel consumption value for machinery presented earlier (CAMPOS, 2012). Equations 31 and 32 were used to calculate the carbon from these activities. The first equation
115
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition calculates the volume of branches and wood chips removed from the timber to calculate the total emissions from site preparations using the second equation.
Equation 31 – Calculation of the amount of branches and wood chips taken from the timber.
In which:
Vbranch _ trim,t – Annual volume of branches and trimmings produced by logging in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t* years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in m3.
Cbranch _ trim,t – Annual carbon in branches and trimmings left after the extraction in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in TC.
CFWood – Carbon fraction of wood in the rainforest in tC/(t d m).
D – Density of tropical forest wood with corresponding climate region and ecological zone in (t d m)/m3.
The carbon and wood density fraction values for tropical forests were both taken from Annex B of the methodology.
Equation 32 – Emissions from the preparation of the logs at the extraction site.
In which:
Eonsiteprep,t- Annual emissions due to the preparations in the area, such as trimming the canopy, roots, branches and defective components in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t* years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in tCO2e.
3 FCtrim_equip – Fuel consumption of the equipment used for trimmings per m of trimmed material, in kL/m 3.
EFfuel – Emission factor for fuel in tCO2e/kL.
Vbranch _ trim,t – Annual volume of branches and trimmings produced from logging in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t* years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in m3.
This parameter was considered insignificant according to the tool explained in section 5.1.3.
116
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Emissions due to dragging logs
To calculate the emissions due to dragging logs one must know the fuel consumption per m3 of the the skidder, or the vehicle used for such an operation, Since a specific value for the brand or model used in the area (skidder Muller TS 22) could not be found or obtained from the manufacturer itself, a value found for a Grapple Skidder was used. A conservative approach was adopted using the lowest value from a range of values provided in the study (SMIDT E GALLAGHER S/A) in equation 33:
Equation 33 – Calculation of carbon emissions from dragging extracted logs.
In which:
Ehauling,t– Annual emissions from dragging logs in the year t (where t=1,2,3 ... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities) in tCO2e.
3 3 FC hauling - Equipment fuel consumption used for dragging a m of marketable logs in kL/m .
EFfuel – Emission factor for fuel in tCO2e/kL.
Vmerch,t – Annual volume of marketable timber in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t* years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in m3.
This parameter was considered insignificant according to the tool explained in section 5.1.3.
Emissions due to log transportation
Emissions due to log transportation from the extraction sites to the factories were calculated using the following equations. Timber was shipped either on trucks or ferries, both using diesel fuel. Part of the timber was trucked to a sawmill in Manicoré (2%), and the rest went to the Gethal factory in Itacoatiara (98%) by ferry.
The first step is to calculate the number of trucks and/or ferries required to transport the timber, according to its load capacity:
Equation 34 – Formula to estimate the number of trucks/ferries needed to transport the amount of wood extracted.
In which:
117
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Ntrucks_transport,t – Number of trucks/ferries required to transport logs from the collection warehouse to the processing sites in year t (where t = 1,2,3... t* years elapsed from the beginning of the IFM- LtPF project activities) in number of trucks/ferries.
Vmerch,t – Annual volume of marketable timber in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t* years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in m3.
3 Captruck – Truck/ferry load capacity in m per truck/ferry.
The load capacity of each vehicle was provided by the institution, which proposed the project.
Then the total kilometers driven can be calculated according to the round trip distance between the sites and the number of transport vehicles needed.
Equation 35 – Total of kilometers driven in transporting logs.
In which:
KMtransport_total,t – Total annual distance in the transport of logs in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t* years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in km.
KMtransport,t – Annual distance of log transported from the collection warehouse to the processing sites in year the t (where t = 1,2,3... t* years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities) in km for transportation vehicle.
Ntrucks_transport,t – Number of transport vehicle trips required to transport logs from the collection warehouse to processing sites in year t (where t = 1,2,3... t* years elapsed from the beginning of the IFM-LtPF project activities) in number of trucks/ferries.
2 - Constant, indicating the return trip. Non-dimensional.
The distance between sites was also provided by the proposing institution.
Emissions related to the transportation of logs can be calculated in terms of mileage, efficiency of vehicles and their emission factors, as shown in the following equation:
Equation 36 – Calculation of carbon emissions due to extracted logs transport.
118
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
In which:
Etransport, t – Annual emissions due to log transportation from the logging site to the collection warehouse/sawmill in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities) in tCO2e.
KMtransport_total,t – Total annual distance in the transport of logs in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t* years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in km.
Eff vehicle - Fuel efficiency by vehicle type in miles per kL.
EFfuel – Emission factor for fuel in tCO2e/kL.
Truck consumption was obtained by querying the websites of several manufacturers, which indicate an efficiency of 2 km traveled per liter of diesel. A ferry’s fuel consumption was obtained from a study by Barros and Uhl (1997).
Emissions due to wood processing where a power grid is available
The energy used in processing wood comes from the power grid and steam turbines from the burning of non-usable wood. As the wood used for the generation of steam has been accounted for in the calculation of long-term wood products residues (CltHWPresidues, t) it is not considered again in this section to avoid double counting.
Emissions from wood processing depend on the source of electricity available and it is a function related to the processed amount, the demand for electricity and the electricity emission in the country where the IFM project is performed. The steps for calculation are found in equations 37 and 38.
Equation 37 – Calculation of electricity consumption required for wood processing.
In which:
Qprocessing,t – Annual amount of electricity consumption for processing in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t* years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in kWh.
Vmerch,t – Annual volume of marketable timber in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t* years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in m3.
3 edemand - Electricity demand for processing by the processed amount in kWh per m .
119
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
The electricity demand factor (edemand) was removed from Annex B of the VCS-VM0011 methodology itself (POOLE AND PINE, 2003 apud VCS, 2011).
Equation 38 – Calculation of emissions from the harvested wood processing.
In which:
Eprocessing,t – Annual emissions due to the electricity consumption in the sawmill in the year t (where t=1,2,3 ... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities) in tCO2e.
Qprocessing,t – Annual amount of electricity consumption for processing in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t* years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in kWh.
EFelectricity – Emission factor of electricity to the host country in tCO2e per kWh.
The electricity emission factors for Brazil each year were obtained from the Ministry of Science and Technology websie (MCT, 2013), and the publication of the International Energy Agency (IEA) - Agência Internacional de Energia (IEA, 2012). The IEA provides values for electricity emissions factor for the years 1990, 1995, 2000 and annually from 2002 to 2009. As much as possible we chose to use the value corresponding to the logging year, otherwise, we used the value of the closest year. Emissions were calculated up to year 2003. The MCT website is more accurate with respect to information for its own country, but only emission factors beginning in the year 2006 is presented and so only information from the years 2006-2008 was used.
Emissions due to distribution of logs
To calculate emissions from the distribution of the factory logs/sawmills to their destination, the amount of long-term wood products is first calculated by the following equation:
Equation 39 – Amount of long-term wood products.
In which:
– CltHWP,t Annual amount of long term wood products from wood harvested in year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities) in tC.
CltHWPin,t – Annual carbon input in the long term harvested wood reservoir from lumber in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities), in tC.
120
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
D – Density of wood for tropical forest with corresponding climate region and ecological zone in (t d m)/m3.
CFWood – Carbon fraction of wood in the rainforest in tC/(t d m).
The wood density values (D) and the wood carbon fraction in tropical forests (CFwood) were taken from Annex B of the VCS-VM0011 methodology.
Harvested wood was directed to two locations, as mentioned above. The 2% transported to the sawmill in Manicoré were distributed throughout the municipality. There is no information about the distances to local wood dealers. Conservatively, the 2% was considered to be zero, as suggested by the methodology. The calculation of emissions due to wood distribution focused on the 98% of the remaining wood, which was distributed from the Gethal factory in Itacoatiara to domestic and international destinations.
Domestic destinations included the ports of Santos, in São Paulo, Paranaguá, in Paraná and Itajai, in Santa Catarina, which were intended for 50% of the wood coming out of the Gethal factory. The information on the volume of wood sent to each of these ports is unknown, so an average distance of 313 km between these ports for shipping timber was considered, with a maximum difference in distance between the path of the Itacoatiara port to all the others,. The remaining 50% were exported to the United States and Germany, each receiving half of total exports. The entire plywood volume, both domestic and international, was sent in cargo ships.
Port distance estimates were taken from the National Agency for Waterway Transportation (ANTAQ, 2004), which are more accurate. International distances were estimated in a straight line using Internet tools (http://www.cidademapa.com.br/). The ships were able to transport between 600 and 1000 m3 of wood each trip, however, it is not known what type of ships were used and which or how many trips were made. Thus we decided to use a value of 1000 m3 as a conservative estimate. Ship fuel consumption was calculated based on the ANTAQ data (2009). Table 16 presents the compiled values of emissions caused by the project activities.
Table 17 - Emissions due to processes related to baseline activities
Sub-areas Eharvest,t Eonsiteprep,t Ehauling,t Etransport,t Eprocessing,t Edistribution,t C'emissions,t
Plot 1 11.42 4.33 19.69 127.53 54.51 818.42 1,035.90
Plot 2 7.78 2.95 13.41 86.86 37.13 835.80 983.93
Plot 3 0.58 0.22 1.00 6.45 2.44 62.03 72.71
121
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Plots 3/4 22.18 8.42 38.27 247.83 105.92 2,384.63 2,807.26
Plot 5 11.88 4.51 20.50 132.72 20.78 1,240.94 1,431.32
Plots 5/6 14.34 5.44 24.73 160.17 22.79 1,497.56 1,725.03
Total 68.17 25.87 117.61 761.56 243.57 6,839.37 8,056.15
Eharvest,t – yearly emissions related to logging operations; Eonsiteprep,t – yearly emissions due to
logging site preparations; Ehauling,t – yearly emissions due to the dragging of wood logs; Etransport,t –
yearly emissions due to the transportation of logs; Eprocessing,t – yearly emissions due to timber
processing; Edistribution,t – yearly emissions due to timber transportation; C'emissions,t – total yearly emissions related to the baseline activities for selective extraction.
Having calculated the emissions from degradation due to extraction activities and emissions caused by activities related to such operations, we obtained the total emissions of the baseline, presented in table 17.
Table 18 - Calculation of baseline emissions in the project area
Sub-areas C'degradation C'emissions,t C'baseline
Plot 1 181,641.87 1,035.90 182,677.77
Plot 2 120,510.03 983.93 121,493.96
Plot 3 4,608.88 72.71 4,681.59
Plots ¾ 342,932.64 2,807.26 345,739.89
Plot 5 144,645.02 1,431.32 146,076.34
Plots 5/6 152,277.08 1,725.03 154,002.11
Total 946,615.51 8,056.15 954,671.65
C'degradation – total annual carbon emissions due to the degradation caused by baseline activities;
C'emissions,t – annual total carbon emissions associated with the operations of the baseline activities
of selective extraction; C'baseline – total annual carbon emissions associated with the baseline scenario.
5.4 Project Emissions (CL2, indicator 1)
The project activities effectively begin when the logging activities end and forest carbon stocks are
122
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
stored by suspending emissions from forest management. In the case of the Amazon Rio areas I, II, III and IV, the official start of the project is 2011, though logging activities were suspended in 2010. It was only in 2011 that the areas were acquired by the project proponent, with a view to turn them into conservation units54, the moment they in fact will be considered protected. At the start of the project, carbon emissions related to planning and implementation were also generated, in addition to emissions caused by natural disturbance and the illegal deforestation that may occur in the area. These emissions must also be accounted for and are considered in this section.
The general equation for emissions generated by the project is as follows:
Equation 40 – Total annual emissions related to project activities.
In which:
C'actual,t – Total annual carbon emissions associated with the project activities in the year t (where
t=1,2,3 ... t* years elapsed since the start of the project activities IFM-LtPF) in tCO2e.
Eprojplan,t – Total annual carbon emissions due to the project's administration and planning in the
year t (where t=1,2,3 ... t* years elapsed since the start of the project activities IFM-LtPF) in tCO2e.
Edesign,t – yearly emissions due to annual trips for the project's design and creation in the year t
(where t=1,2,3 ... t* years elapsed since the start of the project activities IFM-LtPF) in tCO2e.
Emonitoring,t – Total annual carbon emissions due to monitoring and field work in the year t (where
t=1,2,3 ... t* years elapsed since the start of the project activities IFM-LtPF) in tCO2e.
Cnatdisturb,t - Annual carbon losses due to to natural disturbances in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the project IFM-LtPF activities), in tC.
Cillegal_harvest,t - Annual carbon losses due to natural illegal deforestation in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t*years elapsed from the start of the project IFM-LtPF activities), in tC.
44/12 = Ratio of the molecular weight of carbon dioxide to carbon, in tCO2e and tC.
Following the protocol given by the World Business Council for Sustainable Development in conjunction with the World Resources Institute (WBCSD and WRI, 2005), the primary and
54 The process of application for RPDS approval was submitted to the CEUC in February 2011.
123
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
secondary effects of the project activities among the emission sources listed above was determined.
The main activity of the project is to transform areas previously used for selective extraction in protected areas, i.e., a change in forest management. The primary purpose of the project is to
increase the forest carbon stock, since the project activity increases the storage and reduces CO2 emissions to the atmosphere by biological processes from the regeneration resulting from suspending extraction activities. The side effects of the IFM project are only upstream, i.e., they are related to inputs used in the activities that generate emissions. These effects would include the fuel spent on transportation for the administration, planning, design and monitoring of project activities.
5.4.1 Emissions Resulting from Project Planning
The emissions from project planning come from its administrative activities and trips for this purpose:
Equation 41 – Issues related to project planning.
In which:
Eprojplan,t – Total annual carbon emissions due to the project's administration and planning in the
year t (where t=1,2,3 ... t* years elapsed since the start of the project activities IFM-LtPF) in tCO2e.
Eadmin,t – Annual emissions related to electricity consumption required for the administration of the project activities in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t* years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF
project activities) in tCO2e.
Eplan_travel – Annual emissions related to travel for the planning of the project in the year t (where
t=1,2,3... t* years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities) in tCO2e.
Emissions due to administration
The calculation of emissions generated by administrative activities are related to the consumption of electricity and are distilled in the following equation:
Equation 42 – Calculation of emissions generated by the management of project activities.
124
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
In which:
Eadmin,t – Annual emissions related to electricity consumption required for the administration of the project activities in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t* years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities) in tCO2e.
Qadmin,t – Annual electricity consumption due to administration of the project activities in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t* years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities) in kWh.
EFelectricity – Emissions factor of electricity to the host country in tCO2e per kWh.
Emissions related to the administration of the project related to electricity consumption (Qadmin,t) can be accounted for by summing the energy bills of the office that administers the project.
EBCF supplied the values in kWh for its office in Manaus on the monthly bills from June 2012 to July 2013, and for the office in Curitiba from December 2012 to September 2013 (Annex 18). Before this period the EBCF had no office, which complicates the measurement of energy spent in planning the project previously. The values for the year 2012 and 2013 are 1,296 kWh and 2,962 kWh respectively, totaling 4,376 kWh.
The emission factor for electricity was obtained from the Ministry of Science and Technology (MCT 2013) website. The corresponding annual values were used. The factor for the year 2013 was calculated as the average of the values for January and September, corresponding to the months in which EBCF made the energy bills available for that year (Annex 21).
Emissions Due to Travel
Emissions from travel for project planning are divided into air and ground:
Equation 43 – Emissions related to trips made for project planning.
In which:
Eplan_travel – Annual emissions related to travel for the planning of the project in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t* years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities) in tCO2e.
Eplan_flight,t – Annual emissions due to flights in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t* years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities) in tCO2e.
125
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Eplan_ground,t – Annual emissions related to land transport in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t* years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities) in tCO2e.
Emissions related to flights
Emissions due to air travel are calculated depending on the distance and the CO2 emission factor per passenger, per km:
Equation 44 – Calculation of emissions related to trips made for project planning.
In which:
Eplan_flight,t – Annual emissions due to flights in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t* years elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities) in tCO2e.
KMplan_flight, y,t - Annual distance traveled per trip y (where y = 1,2,3 ... Y trips) in year t
Nplan_flight, y,t - Annual passenger quantity per trip y (where y = 1,2,3 ... Y trips) in year t (where t = 1,2,3 ... t * years elapsed since the beginning of IFM-LtPF project activities).
Eflight, y - Emissions factor of flight for the yth trip (where y=1,2,3… Y trip) in tCO2e for each passenger per km.
Distances were calculated from Google Maps, using a straight distance between the points of departure and arrival. EBCF provided the number of passengers in each segment, for each year (Annex 21). In cases where planes were chartered for the Manaus – Manicoré segment, maximum occupancy on flights was assumed for both outbound and inbound flights. The emission factors for flights were obtained from Ross (2009).
Emissions related to land transport
The project related land transport activities were made by car and boat, both using gasoline. Emission calculations were made by the following equation:
Equation 45 – Calculation of the project related land transport activities.
126
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
In which:
Eplan_ground,t – Annual emissions related to land transport in the year t (where t=1,2,3... t* years
elapsed from the start of the IFM-LtPF project activities) in tCO2e.
Vfuel_plan_ground,y,t – Annual volume of fuel consumption per trip y (where y = 1,2,3 ... Y trips) in year t (where t = 1,2,3 ... t * years elapsed since the beginning of IFM-LtPF project activities) in kL.
EFfuel – Emission factor for fuel in tCO2e per kL.
The volume of fuel consumed in trips per year was provided by the proposing institution (Annex 21). The values for emission factors were obtained from the IPCC (2006).
5.4.2 Emissions Due to Design
Emissions related to project design are related to stakeholders’ travels to the country where the project is developed and are divided into land and air transport:
Equation 46 – Emissions related to project design.
In which:
Edesign,t – yearly emissions from annual trips for the project's design beginning in the year t (where
t=1,2,3 ... t* years elapsed since the start of the project activities IFM-LtPF) in tCO2e.
Edesign_ground,t – Total annual emissions due to ground transportation related to design steps in the
year t (where t=1,2,3 ... t* years elapsed since the start of the project activities IFM-LtPF) in tCO2e.
Edesign_flight,t – Total annual emissions due to flights related to design steps in the year t (where
t=1,2,3 ... t* years elapsed since the start of the project activities IFM-LtPF) in tCO2e.
Emissions related to flights
Emissions of flights related to the design of the project are calculated the same way that emissions of flights related to planning:
Equation 47 – Calculation of emissions from flights related to issues concerning the design of the project.
127
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
In which:
Edesign_flight,t – Total annual emissions due to flights related to design steps in the year t (where
t=1,2,3 ... t* years elapsed since the start of the project activities IFM-LtPF) in tCO2e.
KMdesign_flight,y,t – Annual distance traveled per trip y (where y = 1,2,3 ... Y trips) in year t (where t = 1,2,3 ... t * years elapsed since the beginning of IFM-LtPF project activities) in km.
Nflight,y,t – Annual passenger quantity per trip y (where y = 1,2,3 ... Y trips) in year t (where t = 1,2,3 ... t * years elapsed since the beginning of IFM-LtPF project activities).
EFflight,y – Emission factor of flight for the y trip (where y=1,2,3… Y trip) in tCO2e for each passenger per km.
Emissions from land transport that are project design related are also calculated in the same way as emissions from land transport that are project planning related, so it was not possible to separate which land transport were related to each. Thus, both were calculated together in planning emissions. The final result is not affected since all the carbon emissions related to project activities result from the sum of each emissions component.
5.4.3 Emissions Due to Monitoring
Monitoring activities in the project area have not yet started, so the Emonitoring,t parameter in the general emissions project activities equation was assumed to be zero. 5.4.4 Emissions Due to Natural Disturbance
The natural disturbances that the methodology VM0011 foresee are: volcanoes, landslides, tornadoes and wildfires. Among these, the one that applies to the project area is forest fires. 5.4.5 Emissions Due to Illegal Deforestation
Emissions due to illegal deforestation after the beginning of the project (2011) are equal to zero. Consolidated data from the 2012 Monitoring Program of Deforestation in the Legal Amazon (INPE / Prodes) were analyzed and 10 deforestation alerts within the IFM project area were found prior to 2011, and 2010, 2004, 2000 and 1997. The table below summarizes the annual emissions from project activities since its inception in 2011.
Table 19 - Annual carbon emissions from the project activities, since the year of its inception in 2011
128
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Ano Eprojplan Edesign Cactual,t
2012 8.86 6.95 15.81
2013 46.36 8.21 54.57
Total 66.56 27.42 93.98
Eprojplan – yearly emissions due to the project's administration and planning; Edesign – yearly
emmissions due to annual trips for the project's design and creation; Cactual,t – annual carbon emissions associated with project activities.
5.5 Leakage (CL3, indicator 2)
According to VM0011 methodology for quantification of leakages, the following possibilities should be considered: i) Leakages due to displacement of baseline activities (logging) to other areas; ii) Market leakage due to changes in supply and demand for the products and services affected by the project activity (wood).
Thus, the leakage of the design is the combined total of leakage parameters described above:
Equation 48 – General calculation for quantifying leakages.
In which:
= Total annual carbon emissions associated with the leakage in year t (where t = 1,2,3 ... t * years elapsed since the start of the IFM-LtPF project activity)
= Annual carbon loss due to displacement of baseline activity to other lands, owned or operated by the proponent of the project, in year t (where t = 1,2,3 ... t * years elapsed since the start of the IFM-LtPF project activity)
= Annual carbon due to the market leakage effect in year t (where t = 1,2,3 ... t * years elapsed since the start of the IFM-LtPF project activity)
129
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
= Annual emissions due to baseline implementation activity on other lands, owned or operated by the proponent of the project, in year t (where t = 1,2,3 ... t * years elapsed since the start of the IFM-LtPF project activity)
44/12 = Ratio of molecular weight of carbon dioxide to carbon, in tCO2e and tC.
Leakage due to displacement activities
Leakage situations related to activity displacement becomes evident where the proponent of the project:
(I) intensifies selective logging operations. That is, there is legal authorization to selective log and the logging increases on other lands to recover the harvest losses due to IFM-LtPF project or (Ii) selective logging activities are displaced from the project area to another forest area within the same country.
Thus, the carbon losses by displacement activity can be assessed by the following equation:
Equation 49 – Annual carbon losses due to the baseline activity displaced to other lands managed or operated by the proponent of the project.
In which:
= Annual carbon losses due to baseline activity departure to other lands, owned or operated by the proponent of the project, in year t (where t = 1,2,3 ... t * years elapsed since the start of the IFM-LtPF project activity)
= Annual carbon losses of activity displacement due to the intensification of harvest volume in year t (where t = 1,2,3 ... t * years elapsed since the start of the IFMLtPF project activity )
= Annual carbon losses of activity displacement due to the new area harvest movement in year t (where t = 1,2,3 ... t * years elapsed since the start of the IFMLtPF project activity )
130
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
The proponent of the project (EBCF) does not own or operate any other area with plans for forest logging management, nor is this activity feature among the ones the company has proposed55. Thus there is no possibility of: a) intensified logging in other areas to compensate for the activities suspension in the project area; or b) transfer of logging operations from the project area to any other forest concession in the country.
In this context equation 49 does not apply to the project scenario, since all the parameters are zero (0), as well as the parameter 56, of the equation 5-7 of VM0011 is also zero.
It is worth reiterating that EBCF acquired the areas for conservation purposes, with the intent to develop a strategy for generating revenue through conservation and avoided logging. In this context, EBCF's focus on the project area will be dedicated exclusively to emissions reduction activities and trading of VCUs and CRAs, while allowing the surrounding communities to extract non-timber forest products (NTFPs) and conduct community-based ecotourism.
Since there is no possibility of leakages due to displacement of baseline activities (logging management) to other areas, they will be zero.
Market Leakage
VM 0011 methodology suggests quantifying market leakages, whereas changes in demand and supply of the products affected by the project activities, in this case, wood availability and consumption on the market.
The project will only analyze the risk of leakage from activity displacement, since the market approach is not realistically applicable to the project conditions. This is explained by the fact that demand for wood in the regional market is inelastic compared to supply, i.e., demand tends to keep pace with supply (when there is high availability and consequent decline in prices). The opposite, however, is not true, since the supply does not keep up with the pace of demand, which occurs, among other factors, because various market substitutes exist for wood in general (reforested wood, steel, masonry, reclaimed wood; etc.). The regional market lacks purchasing power capable of boosting supply or matching the amount paid on the international tropical wood market, especially when the supply of Asian or African tropical wood is reduced and the price of the dollar increases. In other words, the local market buys local wood when it is available, often
55 http://www.ebcf.com.br/ebcf/quem-somos/ 56 = harvest volume total annual intensification per year, in year t (where t = 1,2,3 ... t * years elapsed since the start of the IFM-LtPF project activity)
131
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
from illegal sources, and with prices comparable to local substitutes. This can also be observed in the stable demand observed in the region over the past few years. Thus, factors that tend to "regulate" the decision to log new areas in the Amazon for timber production are scarcely, if at all based on regional demand. On the other hand, the availability of regularized land tenure areas, with licenses for clearing forested land, conditions of access and logistics, the agility of licensing bodies, as well as less rigorous inspection (in the case of illegal wood), become the true drivers of increased local demand for timber. In sum, the regional market for tropical timber is dictated by supply and not by demand, besides being subjected to prices abroad. Thus, the decrease in local wood supply due to the deactivation of the management plan by the project, in addition to being insignificant against the total volume in the region, should not be characterized as the factor inducing new logging due to "decreased wood supply", precisely because this is an inelastic relationship. In this case, it is not possible to infer a direct or even indirect relation of leakages between the market aspects of the timber production chain in the Amazon forest and the decommissioning of forest management of the Amazon Rio project.
5.6 Summary of GHG Emission Reductions and Removals (G5, indicator 8) (CL2, indicator 2)
The ex-ante calculation of Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions reductions was made according to the steps and equations presented in sections 5.1 to 5.4, i.e., from estimated baseline emissions, from which the project emissions were subtracted (Annex 18), according to equation 50 below:
Equation 50 – Calculation of emissions reductions from the replacement of selective extraction activities for the permanent protection of forests.
In which:
C’IFM_LtPF,t– Total net annual reduction in anthropogenic GHG emissions in the year t (where
t=1,2,3 ... t*years elapsed since the start of the project activities IFM-LtPF) in tCO2e.
C’baseline,t – Total annual carbon emissions associated with the baseline in the year t (where t=1,2,3
... t* years elapsed since the start of the project activities IFM-LtPF) in tCO2e.
C’actual,t –Total annual carbon emissions associated with the project activities in the year t (where
t=1,2,3 ... t* years elapsed since the start of the project activities IFM-LtPF) in tCO2e.
C’leakage,t – Total annual carbon emissions relate to the baseline in the year t (where t=1,2,3 ... t*
years elapsed since the start of the project activities IFM-LtPF) in tCO2e.
132
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Thereby, from values calculated in the Emissions Calculation Spreadsheet ("Planilha de cálculos de emissões" - Annex 18) applied to the above equation, we reached the following values (ex- ante):
Table 20 - Ex-ante estimates summary
Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated net project baseline leakage GHG emissions Year emissions or emissions or emissions reductions or removals removals (tCO2e) (tCO2e) removals (tCO2e) (tCO2e) 2012 86,755.00 15.81 0 86,739.19 2013 86,755.00 54.57 0 86,700.43 2014 86,755.00 4.84 2,962.96 83,787.20 2015 86,755.00 6.20 0 86,748.80 2016 86,755.00 21.00 0 86,734.00 2017 86,755.00 21.00 0 86,734.00 2018 86,755.00 21.00 0 86,734.00 2019 86,755.00 21.00 0 86,734.00 2020 86,755.00 21.00 0 86,734.00 2030 86,755.00 21.00 0 86,734.00 2048 86,755.00 21.00 0 86,734.00 Total 3,123,180 252.03 2,962.96 3,119,989
5.7 Climate Change Adaptation Benefits (GL1, indicators 1, 2, 3)
There is a relatively widespread understanding in the scientific community that balanced ecosystems have greater ecological and social resilience and adaptability to climate change, whether through protection of water bodies and regulation of river flows during peak flood and drought, or through the regular supply of environmental services, products and services.
Thus, once the project is designed to conserve an area of native forest, which in the absence of the project scenario would remain subject to the pressures of timber management (baseline) and consequent degradation resulting from these activities, it is understood that mere protection of these areas alone would offer communities and the ecosystem itself better adaptability compared to the baseline scenario.
Moreover, the project has an Activity Management Plan (Annex 8), which details, among other
133
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
initiatives, the promotion of sustainable use of ecosystem resources through direct support in some activities related to income generation and conservation, along with community training. Thus, it is believed that, in addition to ensuring a more balanced (and therefore more resilient) environment, the project will expand the options for generating income among the communities, making them more resilient and preparing them to face the greater and already discernable challenges posed by climate change.
6 COMMUNITY
6.1 Net Positive Community Impacts
The programs provided by the project will be implemented in collaboration with residents' associations of the 15 communities in a 34 year time horizon and will rely on partnerships with governmental and nongovernmental organizations, as well as supporters and investors interested in sustainable businesses. Various environmental conservation and rehabilitation programs, multiple use of forests, increased income and quality of life of communities are planned (Table 8 of Annex 9).
Community enterprises that harvest non-timber forest products can contribute to reducing the pressure on forests, to the preservation of sensitive areas from an ecological viewpoint, and to the improvement of family income in extractivist communities. However, the adoption of practices of forest multiple-use management, so that they are effective in all these aspects, is required. For this, theoretical and practical training courses for the development of models for use, handling and marketing of forest multiple-use products are planned, in addition to the preparation of business plans to improve the integration of communities in supply chains of major products.
Specifically, the projects and land use and natural resources activities, such as agroforestry systems, the management of lakes, restoration and improvement of plantations and gardens, will be developed from the generation of adapted technologies. This approach aims to strengthen the capacities of local populations to experiment and innovate. The experiments will be conducted in real situations to encourage a more realistic set of recommendations that are relevant, inexpensive and can be easily applied and adjusted by the local population, according to their own knowledge and value systems.
To reduce the impacts of slash and burn agriculture and the consequent emergence of areas with little productive potential, a set of production and management practices geared toward agricultural intensification will be encouraged, including abandoning the use of fire, management of organic
134
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition matter, the use of leguminous species, the implementation of agroforestry systems, the enrichment and management of secondary forests, among other practices.
In the interested communities, pilot areas for agricultural intensification and the recovery of degraded areas will be identified through the adoption of systems and alternative practices of land use mentioned above. After rigorous training and planning, experiments in the areas of farming of the families will be set up, and a control area to assess the production and recovery potential of these initiatives. The families involved in the experiment will attend courses and specific guidelines. There will also be technical visits to other communities in the region that have similar experiences to share.
After the confirmation of some promising results, new areas will be progressively installed and monitored with the use of innovative systems and practices in accordance with the interest, commitment and levels of return of the communities. At first, the families and groups that show interest and action will have priority so that later they can act as multipliers of these initiatives elsewhere.
Environmental awareness and education activities will also be developed. These activities will contribute to the conservation of biodiversity, for individual and community self-fulfillment and reflection, as well as for the political, economic and organizational self-management of the communities. In this sense, we intend to analyze the relationship between environmental conservation and productive and cultural practices, and the social well being of these communities. To achieve this, training events, such as courses, lectures, workshops, field visits etc. will be organized to enable new insights and understandings of the sustainability of natural environments when properly managed.
Communication equipment to be operated in communities, especially by teachers, community health workers and the leaders will also be acquired. These facilities will be used for various collective interests, including educational use, prosecution of environmental crimes, dealing with medical emergencies, in the communication of recreational and religious parties such as patron parties, camps and soccer tournaments, among others.
Scientific and ecological tourism are alternatives that must be explored by the project. The proposal aims to structure experiential, educational and research activities, including technical visits, field visits and courses with special focus on biological and forest areas besides other specific interests such as bioconstruction, agroecology, management of lakes, agroforestry
135
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition systems, among others. Previously selected areas, including forests, secondary forests, plantations, lakes, etc., will be visited by groups of students and researchers from public and private universities for knowledge exchange and analysis of technical and scientific conservation strategies, and sustainability and natural resource management in protected areas.
With tourism, we intend to create economic opportunities that will support agroextractivism, encouraging the active involvement of local communities in various activities that include: (i) leading tourists in interpretive trails and nature walks, adding to the technical-scientific knowledge elements of traditional knowledge about the environment and natural resources; (ii) the reception of tourists in the families' houses or "traditional inns", built with local materials, to experience the daily life of a "caboclo", including the local cuisine based on fish, cassava flour and tropical fruit; (iii) visiting points of local social importance especially in regions of "Indigenous black earth", floodplains (várzea) and flooded forests (igapós) and areas beyond the traditional parties and (iv) visits to places of ecotourism interest such as sport fishing, turtle conservation beaches, bird watching, canopy tours, points of scenic beauty etc.
Besides these activities, tourism will provide the means for locals to sell their handicrafts produced with local resources such as cipó-titica, cipó-ambé and titicão, including paneiros, sieves, tipiti, fans, fish traps, brooms and other household utensils and seeds of several native species such as açaí, tucumã, jarina used in the manufacture of necklaces, earrings, bracelets, known as "jewels of the forest."
Considering the poor health living conditions in the communities surrounding Amazon Rio areas, like many others in the Amazon, due to the dearth of public investment in sanitation and the high logistical costs of sending SUS health teams there, we intend to invest in preventive care for simple diseases, such as malnutrition and child mortality due to diarrhea and infectious diseases. Actions to improve the education of the communities include three main interventions in the partnership with the city government and local communities: (i) construction of new schools and restoration of existing school buildings with the supply of school and learning materials which are appropriate for the local culture and reality; (ii) improvement of school transport, given that many children and young people travel to other communities to study in unsafe vessels and (iv) construction of Study Centers with vocational courses adapted to the local reality, guided by the appreciation of the natural potential and socio-cultural needs of the region.
All programs and activities in different degrees of accuracy will be documented and systematized throughout the Carbon project, through the development of an efficient monitoring system, which is
136
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition able to support planning and decision-making by providing information and adjustments to changing situations. This systematic monitoring is described in detail in Section 8 of the Management Plan.
High Conservation Value (HCV) related to the welfare of the community
During the preparation of the Management Plan several participatory mapping workshops were conducted (Annex 10) in which areas used for plant extraction, including Brazil nuts, andiroba, copaíba, acaí and seringa, preferably, were identified, in addition to strategic areas for subsistence hunting. In general, these activities are performed by communities in extensive management systems, throughout most of the project area.
Although these areas are considered to be of high value to the means of economic, cultural and social reproduction of these populations, for the purpose of this document, for which the concept of High Conservation Value Forests is relevant, we prioritized areas that concentrate scarce and/or strategic resources. Hence, areas designed for water supply, fisheries and floodplain agriculture were identified through preliminary investigations, whose ecological attributes shall be protected with additional safeguards to ensure that their value is not degraded or adversely affected during the project.
In areas dominated by flooplain forests (várzea) and campinaranas, communities cultivate crops such as cocoa, banana and most preferably açaí. These areas can be considered High Conservation Value Forests, since there are few flooplain areas near the villages which are conducive to the cultivation of commercial crops and income generation.
In general, local communities have trouble collecting clean water for drinking and cooking. Many capture water directly from the Madeira River and creeks near the villages. In this context, the existence of springs protected by adjacent forests constitute priority areas for conservation. This is the case of Comunidade Boa Esperança which captures drinking water from a nearby spring close to a forest area.
Figure 13 - Boa Esperança spring
137
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
This spring feeds a lake that is protected by the residents during the ebb tide. During this period, the locals do not fish to prevent the fish dammed there from "fleeing" towards the Madeira River. At the beginning of the flooding, a time when fish are scarce, the residents use the lake as a way to supplement their protein needs.
Figure 14 - Boa Esperança lake
Besides this case, other areas formed by lakes must be protected and considered High
138
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Conservation Value Forests as is the case in the vicinity of Comunidade e São José do Miriti, where the complex of lakes interconnected by canals and streams represents valuable fishing resources. Similar situations also occur in the region of the Jatuarana community, whose productive areas are divided by a river which, in some places, forms expanded lakes where fish are plentiful.
Another area of ecological importance is the São José Lake located in the vicinity of Ponta Grossa Association. Use of the lake is disputed by outsiders and other groups, which the locals have called "invaders" who practice fishing, logging and predatory açaí berry extraction. In this particular case, environmental monitoring programs of the project will help to control this type of unsustainable use.
At the beginning of the implementation of the project, surveys to identify other areas of conservation value forests will be conducted through field reconnaissance and prior consultations with stakeholders and/or directly affected groups. These areas are critical so that the livelihoods of local communities are adequately protected, as well as their identity and forms of cultural reproduction, especially considering that there is an indigenous community located near the Amazon Rio I Reserve.
6.2 Negative Offsite Stakeholder Impacts (CM3, indicator 1 e 3)
With the implementation of the project, one of the main results to be obtained is the effective conservation of the Amazon Rio areas, where only activities that have already been carried out by the surrounding communities and others that shall be proposed and improved are allowed. It is important to highlight that these activities should be linked to the management systems of non- timber forest products, ecotourism, agro-ecological practices, environmental education, environmental control and monitoring systems. Therefore, this change may cause impacts to external social actors that do not depend on the project areas for their economic and social reproduction, but practice extraction sporadically, most often in a predatory way without the prior permission of the communities. The "invaders" (groups and people known by the communities, who engage in the illegal sale of bushmeat and timber) will also be affected.
The negative impacts relate to the prohibition of illegal activities (both from the viewpoint of environmental legislation and tacit internal agreements). Therefore, it makes little sense for the project to be responsible for their mitigation. The proposal is that the project will serve as a regional model for other similar experiences, whose appropriate technical and legal procedures, with their corresponding prohibitions and limitations should be supported and encouraged.
139
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
One of the most complex and important components of the project are the systems for monitoring, control and surveillance. These systems involve various actions, including surveys, mapping and assessments of external actors that are directly and indirectly linked to the project areas, as well as their strategies for management and production. This information will subsidize the formulation of risk management and negative impact mitigation programs by the Advisory Council and the coordination of the project. In addition, the information will signal external demands that can be translated into sustainable programs and projects for the external groups in conjunction with the local and the state government and other support and research institutions.
6.3 Exceptional Community Benefits (GL2)
In general, environmental projects perceive rural communities as undifferentiated social units, without a diversity of interests and needs, especially the most remote ones, as is the case of the communities surrounding Amazon Rio I Reserve. Based on this assumption, they attribute equal power and resources, and therefore, the same level of opportunities to all residents. Without the recognition of differences, however, projects fail to propose alternatives to meet the needs and expectations of disparate groups, especially marginalized and less visibie or weaker ones, such as women, elderly and indigenous people.
To ensure an equitable distribution of resources and benefits, the project technical team will take courses on the recognition of various local use systems and the appropriation of natural resources.
They will also be suitably trained to identify the different job opportunities and income the local people have access to, so that the project activities do not reinforce internal conflicts, but establish actions that favor the interests and needs of the groups involved.
Therefore, one of the methodological assumptions of the project is to consider within its scope the existence of conflicts within and between communities and with external groups regarding opportunities, distribution and appropriation of resources to ensure equal access to benefits as well as to reduce and prevent any possible disputes.
140
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
7 BIODIVERSITY
7.1 Net Positive Biodiversity Impacts (B2, indicator 1, 5, 7)
The Amazon Rio I, II, III and V areas support a potentially valuable timber, non-timber and wildlife forest resources. According to MMA (2001, 2007), it is a high priority area for biodiversity, especially birds, aquatic biota, mammals, reptiles, amphibians and invertebrates. Therefore, the main recommendations for these environments with their associated plant and animal species to remain protected are: the creation of protected areas of sustainable use, surveys and biological inventories, sustainable use of natural resources and environmental education.
Specifically in the project area, forest, timber and non-timber products are used by fifteen coastal communities in the surrounding landscape, one of which has indigenous features. These products are the main source of income for these people, especially the Brazil-nut, whose sale has the support of the associations and cooperatives. Such aspect contributes greatly to the conservation of forests, since the communities depend on natural resources to maintain their livelihoods.
With the Amazon Rio project, positive net ecological impacts are expected, maintaining forests and thus the protection and natural increase in biodiversity, including areas of high conservation values. The project will not use invasive species, or genetically modified organisms (GMOs).
Another net positive impact of the project refers to the biodiversity monitoring process. Currently, monitoring initiatives of the Amazon rainforest are still nascent and fragmented (FEARNSIDE, 2006). With the implementation of the project, there will be an additional effort in this direction, which will include periodic and precise collection of information on biodiversity and ecological processes of the project, which is located in a region of large deforestation pressures.
Estimated change in biodiversity resulting from the implementation of the project and its positive impacts (B1, indicator 3)(B2, indicator 2)
The project uses the VM0011 Methodology to reduce greenhouse gas emissions through committing to forest management alternatives, and focusing on land use change. In practice, it means replacing the forest management activity with a strategy of legal protection of the forest (IFM-LtPF), promoting biodiversity conservation and sustainable social development in the region, including ecotourism and scientific research.
The "without project" scenario involves the continuity of forest degradation due to the selective
141
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
logging of timber species, the construction of roads to extract the timber, overharvest of forest species of high commercial value, local hunting and fishing, driven by the communities surrounding the protected areas, thus reducing local biodiversity.
In contrast, the project scenario, which proposes conservation of tropical forests, positive impacts for biodiversity are expected, such as:
Reduced pressures on timber species of high commercial value with the cessation of selective logging activities under the forest management plan, especially Eperua oleífera (copaíba jacaré), Brosimum utile (garrote); Scleronema micranthum (envira cutia), Copaifera reticulata (copaíba mari-mari) and Schizolobium amazonicum (paricá) species, which accounts for 89.2% of the timber, according to the Sustainable Forest Management Post-Exploration Report in 2006; Effective reduction in pressure on the fish communities of great interest to local consumption and for commercial fishing, especially tambaqui and pirarucu, by fishing agreements among local fishermen. This will ensure the sustainable use of fishing resources with direct benefit to traditional communities surrounding the Reserves; Reduction of hunting pressure on biological communities of mammals and birds which have traditionally been over-exploited by the surrounding communities. This will occur through the establishment of hunting and monitoring the population variation of the species of interest by the communities themselves (ProBUC Program), thus ensuring sustainable management of wildlife; Ensuring greater preservation of biodiversity as a whole through the training of community volunteers as Environmental Agents, whose engagement will assist with protection and monitoring of natural resource activities. This measure is expected to effectively reduce pressures on resources and promote the growth in the diversity of local plant and animal species, thereby promoting environmental stability in the project area.
High Conservation Values (HCV) related to biodiversity (B2, indicator 3, 4)
The project assumes environmental conservation, and so precludes any negative effects to the environment or feature of high conservation value. Regarding the High Biodiversity Conservation Values (HCVs), the project features several qualities that include the promotion of technical and legal mechanisms that protect endangered species, endangered or rare ecosystems, critical ecosystem services, and the conservation of essential areas for the basic needs of the communities.
142
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
With the cessation of the selective timber harvest, the Amazon Rio areas will gradually undergo a process of ecological improvement. In the process the arboreal and canopy zones over time may recover structures similar to their original state, approaching those of preserved or mildy disturbed forests. In that context the maintenance of the local biodiversity can be fostered, as well as increased nutrient cycling and the promotion of key environmental services such as the provision of food and forest products for the livelihoods of the traditional communities in the area.
To ensure the maintenance of HCVs in the Amazon Rio areas, a monitoring system for the biodiversity will be deployed through biological inventories using the RAPELD methodology (rapid surveys of several taxonomic groups (RAP) for long term ecological studies) (MAGNUSSON et al, 2005).
After deploying this methodology, continuity of these observations will be ensured via community monitoring of the plant and animal biodiversity by AAV and ProBUC programs, including all native species described in the project and others of ecological interest yet unidentified.
Possible adverse effects of non-native species used by the project (B2, indicator 6)
Exotic species will not be introduced in the project areas and in its surroundings, since the main focus of the activities is to maintain the existing native forests by halting selective logging of trees set forth in the timber management plan, and the promotion of better management of non-timber natural resources.
7.2 Negative Offsite Biodiversity Impacts (B3, indicator 1)
The Amazon Rio project does not promote any direct negative impact on the biodiversity in the area surrounding the Reserves, as it features a robust monitoring proposal throughout the area as well as surrounding areas.
However, possible negative indirect impacts on biodiversity can occur through the leakage of timber harvesting, hunting and fishing within the protected areas into the surrounding area. For example, there may be a displacement in timber harvesting activities within the Amazon Rio areas to the surrounding areas, once the monitoring of the areas prevents the entry of surrounding residents for logging.
To minimize these potential impacts, the project proponent has undertaken to monitor illegal logging, hunting and fishing areas within the project areas, as well as the surrounding area, whose
143
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
initiative will include the effective participation of community residents, as mentioned before.
Programs to mitigate possible negative impacts outside the project area
The project proposes: i) training; ii) participatory management; iii) implementation of monitoring projects. I. Training events on best practices for the use of timber and non-timber forest resources will be promoted, as well as hunting and fishing in the communities surrounding the project areas, to promote forest extractivist suitability within the environmental sustainability and social logic; II. The project proponent intends to pursue a collective and adaptive management to address any additional negative impacts on offsite biodiversity to be identified later; III. The project foresees the implementation of projects and initiatives for biodiversity monitoring in Amazon Rio area, which can readily curb predatory activities through the use of remote sensing and terrestrial surveillance technologies.
Project impact on biodiversity related to the original conditions ("without project" scenario) (B3, indicator 3) In general terms, the Amazon Rio project effects both focus areas and surroundings, should be very positive for the local and regional biodiversity, since the 'with-project' scenario is a forest conservation proposal, which aims to reduce forest degradation over nearly 20,000 ha, likely to have occurred in the 'no-project' scenario between 2011 and 2048.
The suspension of logging activities reduces forest degradation, restores the environmental integrity of the area over the medium and long terms. Such a proposition will significantly contribute to nutrient cycling, soil conservation, restoration of the plant biomass, reappearance of removed plant species or plants without commercial value, re-establishment of the local animals, among other benefits and ecologic services in the project area and region.
7.3 Exceptional Biodiversity Benefits
High Conservation Values (AVC)
The Amazon Rio project has various qualification attributes of High Conservation Value (HCV), and it includes the protection of endangered species, threatened or rare ecosystems, and critical ecosystem services. On a global scale, the project significantly contributes to the conservation of
plant and animal diversity and to the reduction in CO2 emissions, as it is located within the
144
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Municipality of Manicoré in southern Amazonas state, which along with the cities of Apuí, Lábrea, Boca do Acre and Canutama form an extremely critical, threatened and subjected to the expansion of indiscriminate logging.
Endemic and/or rare species
The project proposes to protect the Amazon Rio area and its surroundings through an efficient environmental control system that will feature trained staff and specific inspection equipment, as well as through the effective participation of surrounding communities. Therefore real gains will be made in maintaining the population viability of threatened species previously identified as being of High Value Conservation.
Protected species
The Ministry of Environment prohibits the logging of forest species protected by federal law. They are: the Brazil nut (Bertholetia excelsa) and rubber tree (Hevea spp) (Decreto 5.975/2006)57; and mahogany (Swietenia macrophylla) (Decreto 6.472/2008)58. Apart from mahogany, the Brazil nut and seringa species, which are naturally distributed in the forest, were identified in the project areas. In the surrounding areas, besides this natural arrangement, these species form large continuous areas due to successive plantings by community residents. These species have great economic and social importance for the local population. The Brazil nut is marketed in cooperatives and latex from rubber trees is currently used for household consumption, although it was widely harvested in the recent past.
8 MONITORING
8.1 Monitoring Plan Description
Due to its innovative, comprehensive and integrative character, the project needs to be monitored regularly so that its actions, activities and impacts can be constantly measured and evaluated. To meet this requirement, the monitoring process must meet three main objectives:
i. To serve as an internal management project tool;
ii. To collaborate as an instrument of collective learning from the communities and social groups directly involved;
57 http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_Ato2004-2006/2006/Decreto/D5975.htm 58 http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_Ato2007-2010/2008/Decreto/D6472.htm
145
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
iii. To work as a means of communicating results and impacts to interested institutions and society in general. Furthermore, it is important to consider that monitoring, if successful, will transcend the managerial aspects of the project and strengthening the plan.
To facilitate the monitoring process, instead of having a reference line (to compare interventions before and after), the first year of monitoring will serve as the starting point, whose information will be regularly and systematically compared throughout the project.
Next, the initial plans for monitoring benefits to the climate, community and biodiversity are described, wherein the community is committed to participatory precept and to the technical and scientific rigor, which is capable of following the possible negative and positive impacts on environmental and social aspects in the project area and its surroundings.
8.1.1 Monitoring of Climate Impacts (G1, indicator 9) (CL4, indicator 1
The Monitoring Plan (MP) aims to provide security in the periodic estimates of reduction in emissions, especially in monitoring changes in carbon stock. Therefore emissions from the implementation of the project, ex post estimates of the activities and emissions from any leakages and isolated disturbances (e.g., blowdown, fires, pests and diseases, among others) can be calculated.
The construction of the PM of the climate benefits made in full compliance with the methodological framework provided by VM0011 – IFM LPF (VCS 2011) and CCBA (2008), which consists of four specific actions to be monitored:
i. Implementation and execution of the project; ii. Dynamics and stock of the forest biomass; iii. Deforestation and forest degradation; iv. Periodic reviews of ex post emissions.
Remote monitoring and surveillance of the project area
Measurement of alterations and biomass loss quantification present in the PA using land use change detection is critical to make accurate estimates of GHG emissions that account for forest biomass increases and losses.
Thus, the use of remote sensing by satellite images of medium spatial resolution can be applied readily in the PA and surroundings in order to monitor land use dynamics over time, particularly to
146
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
identify risks and threats to forested areas. In situ verification will complement landscape analysis in a GIS environment with the aim of quantifying, spatializing and identifying conversion of forest areas into other land uses, environmental degradation and other possible changes that may occur during the term of the project.
As a complementary monitoring source, the project will rely on the database and information provided by Monitoring Program of the Brazilian Amazon Forest by Satellite 59,60(Prodes Digital), conducted by the National Institute for Space Research (Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais - INPE), according to the Plan for Prevention and Control of Deforestation in the Amazon 61 , 62 (PPCDAm) under the National Policy on Prevention and Control of Deforestation. Such information is available online in63 digital vector files for the public in general.
Other tools will provide complementary information to the monitoring, such as indicators of forest degradation and hotspots (fires and wildfires) obtained from DETER 64 , SAD 65 , and PROARCO66. Information is available online for free in vector format. These results will be systematically related to field data for validating or disproving the occurred event, so that the focuses of deforestation and degradation can be identified, remediated, reported, and consequently avoided as much as possible.
A surveillance system that allows permanent territorial monitoring and inhibits the entry of intruders through entry points in the PA will also be deployed to control the transport flow. In addition, one must investigate and identify risks and threats, e.g., mapping hotspots and areas vulnerable to fire, to illegal logging, to hunting and poaching, and to invasions by third parties, among others.
At first, we estimate an effective demand for structuring the electronic monitoring system, which includes the hiring of skilled professionals, field equipment, electronic equipment (digital cameras, GPS, desktops and notebooks, smartphones, printers, geoprocessing softwares and GIS, among others), vehicles and/or motorcycles, motorized boats for transportation and moving around and the collection of high resolution satellite images. Empowerment and training of all involved staff
59http://www.obt.inpe.br/prodesdigital/metodologia.html 60http://www.obt.inpe.br/prodes/metodologia.pdf 61http://www.mma.gov.br/florestas/controle-e-preven%C3%A7%C3%A3o-do-desmatamento 62http://www.mma.gov.br/images/arquivo/80120/PPCDAm/_FINAL_PPCDAM.PDF 63http://www.obt.inpe.br/prodes/index.html 64http://www.obt.inpe.br/deter/dados/ 65http://www.imazongeo.org.br/doc/downloads.php 66http://www.dpi.inpe.br/proarco/bdqueimadas/
147
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
and the surrounding communities will be necessary to make the system effective67, and a constant stream of information directed to regional actors, and other stakeholders.
Strategic monitoring and access points to RPDS roads will also provide support to other MPs, including social and biodiversity conservation aspects, especially in the logistic support of planned field activities.
Procedures for determining the permanent sample plots (PSPs) and measurement
The calculation of the stock and increase in forest biomass will be subsidized through the installation of PSPs in the PA and its temporal monitoring through the Continuous Forest Inventory (CFI). The methodology proposed by VCS (2011) suggests the use of permanent and/or temporary plots, however, it confirms the efficiency and accuracy of sample plots.
In order to demonstrate the procedural and statistical rigor used, all the sampling procedures, the PA forest stratification, sampling design, calculation of sampling intensity, and other parameters measured in PSPs to monitor biomass balance due to ingress/mortality of individuals, growth in DBH and height will be presented in detail in the Annex (Annex 23 - Forest Inventory 2014).
To promote reliable forest biomass estimates, standard operating procedures (SOPs) (Section 8.2) will be used by the team executing the CFI.
The project provides standardized procedures and routines to improve primary data collection, recording, analysis and quality control, interpretation and systematization, as well as for storage and query of an integrated database, with the clear objective of promoting transparency in the measurement and document traceability of all activities planned. The monitoring review frequency will depend on the monitored parameter, as shown in Section 8.2.
Stratification of the project area
In order to increase the sampling accuracy and precision, we divided the PA into three different strata to reduce both initial FI and monitoring sampling intensity and operating costs. The stratification was based on different vegetation types present in the project area. According to SIPAM / RADAM rating (DPI, 2002). 3 different vegetation types were identified:
67Linking community monitoring to national Measurement, Reporting and Verification for REDD+
148
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
A. Primary Tropical Ombrophylous Alluvial Forest B. Primary Tropical Ombrophylous Lowland Forest C. Pioneer Formations
The characterization of each type of vegetation is shown in Section 4.4 and in the Management Plan (Annex 9).
PSPs shape and size
As it will be shown in Annex 23, plots will be rectangular measuring 125 by 25 meters. Higuchi (1982) affirms that rectangular plots are the ideal size for forest sampling in the Amazon, and provides practical and economical guidelines in choosing plot size for this purpose.
Sampling intensity and number of PSPs
The completion of a preliminary inventory will determine the sampling intensity per stratum to obtain a sample with less than 10% and 95% confidence error. The CFI will be guided through steps 1-9 described in section 7.1.2.3 (VCS 2011), culminating in the application of equation 7.3 to calculate the optimal number of samples per stratum.
PSP sampling design
The methodology is flexible with respect to the sampling design, which can be chosen from among the most common practices, such as random, stratified, systematic stratified, among others. More information availlable in Annex 23.
Parameters measured in the PSPs
The monitoring will be carried out in different stages of succession (different DBH intervals). Parameters for both trees and palms to be monitored are as follows:
Record of each individual measured by numbered aluminum tags; DBH measurement of individuals within each PSP; Location, size and georeferencing of PSP vertices.
All parameters will be recorded in the field in digital and/or analog spreadsheet format. To ensure transparency in the process, responsibilities and obligations shall be clearly defined among the parties involved, especially for recording and presentating all methodological procedures used
149
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition primarily in the implementation of measurement activities in the field. Besides clarity in processing and data entry, an accessible data systematization model will be crucial for future verification of the database. A calculation with all applicable and relevant statistical parameters derived from sampling (error, confidence interval, mean, standard deviation, confidence interval, optimal number of parcels, etc.) is also presented in Annex 23 in order to verify formulas and traceability in the accuracy of the average biomass estimate. That Annex will also include the photographic record, list of materials, references and applied values, and other relevant information.
Monitoring frequency
The monitoring frequency parameters measured in the PSPs will be no greater than 5 years from the first measurement. Other relevant parameters to monitoring the PSPs, like the change in land use in the PA and surrounding areas such as deforestation, forest degradation, fire sources and natural disturbances will be regularly monitored as a project routine operation, organized and archived annually.
QA/QC - Measurement activities in the field
The CFI measurement activities in the field in the IFC will be performed by staff with expertise in the Amazon region. One EBCF staff member will begin monitoring field activities to verify consistency of procedures and general patterns of allocation and sizing of PSPs, identification and DBH measurement of individual trees within the PSPs. Soon CFI best practices will be adopted stated as follows:
Ensure measurement and allocation of PSPs is standardized, does not deviate from procedures, and serves mainly to verify the reliability of field activities, Use of appropriate measuring equipment and utilities (e.g. tape, GPS navigation, compass, red paint, stakes and others); Observations on the positioning of the height measurement of the diameter of the stem to 1.30 meters from the ground (eg, buttresses, bifurcations, relief, slope of the trunk, lianas, among others); Marking of trunk height with red paint where measured for posterior identification; Measuring trunk height (H) of the fallen trees within the PSPs and surrounding areas with tape measure is recommended to assess precise values. Collection and botanical identification (common name, scientific and family) of each individual; Listing with the potential for non-timber use of each species;
150
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Use of paper and digital field spreadsheets customized for recording the parameters measured in the field; Photographic records of the PSPs of all relevant procedures; Marking initial and final vertices of PSPs and internal area of the plots; Demarcation, clearing, and georeferencing of access trails; Mandatory use of personal protective equipment (PPE) and appropriate field clothing for staff, first aid kit, antivenin, water containers, backpacks, proper nutrition, among other precautions.
QA/QC - Selecting values from the literature
This document was developed by a multidisciplinary team with extensive technical experience on this subject. The applied parameters derived from the literature were widely discussed and grounded in an extensive literature review and conservative estimates were always sought. Section 7.2.1 of the VM0011 methodology lists and describes the auxiliary parameters and their technical and scientific sources, which served as the basis for drafting this MP.
QA/QC - Data entry and filing
Usually the input data for estimating biomass are recorded by hand (printed sheets) or digital (tablet+ODK) in field sampling. We intend to hire a team with extensive experience in using ODK to empower EBCF staff. The staff member in charge of this activity should have experience in forest inventories. After field activities, collected data will be taken to the office for data entry and processing.
The possibility of using digital spreadsheets will also be verified68,69 in the field, thus enabling preliminary analysis of the data collected before returning to the office, adjustments in procedures during data collection activities to be made in real-time.
The proponent of the project will also be responsible for the processing, systematization and digital (spreadsheets, photos, GIS files) and analog storage (spreadsheets field books) of information in the appropriate database for at least 2 years after the end of the crediting period, promoting transparency and availability of data in the audit process.
Risk analysis and non-permanence
68Open Data Kit - http://opendatakit.org/ 69ODK Collect - http://opendatakit.org/use/collect/
151
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Determination of buffer reserve was conducted using the AFOLU Non-Permanence Risk Tool V.3.2 (VCS, 2012b)70 considering the leakage and increased emission risk. Annex 22 shows the analysis and respective internal, external and natural weights of the various activities of the project risks.
Ex-post calculations of anthropogenic GHG emissions reductions
The baseline calculation should be updated, if applicable, during the verifications, along with project activity emissions and possible leakages. In this context, any change in land use, changes in the dynamics of forest carbon, or catastrophic events, will be monitored and recorded. In general terms, the behavior of agents and vectors potentially related to forest degradation or any other aspects which may impact the flow of carbon in the PA will also be monitored.
Calculation updates for ex post accounting follow the procedures contained in 1-10 of section 7.4 in the VCS (2011).
8.1.2 Monitoring Impacts to Biodiversity (G1, indicator 9) (B4, indicator 1)
Since animal inventories have not been conducted in Amazon Rio project areas (for this project biological information for the Rio Amapá RDS management plan were used), a biodiversity monitoring system that will follow the RAPELD methodology (Rapid surveys of various taxonomic groups (RAP) for long-term ecological studies) (MAGNUSSON et al, 2005).
The RAPELD method contributes to long-term research using rapid inventory assessments, biotic complementarity, and land use planning in the Amazon. This method increases adequate sampling probability of biologically diverse communities, which require large areas and at the same time minimize variation of abiotic factors that affect these communities with smaller areas sampling.
After the implementation of this methodology in project areas, the observation will be continued by community monitoring of plant biodiversity, which is to be implemented through the project coordination. This should occur after the proposal submission, consent and effective involvement of the surrounding communities that use natural resources reserves for hunting, fishing and forest extraction.
The biodiversity monitoring plan of the project is integrated into the Program for Monitoring Biodiversity and Use of Natural Resources in Conserveation Units (ProBUC) from the Secretary of
70http://www.v-c-s.org/sites/v-c-s.org/files/AFOLU%20Non-Permanence%20Risk%20Tool,%20v3.2.pdf
152
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Environment of the State of Amazonas (SDS), created in 2005 by the Amazonas State System of Protected Areas (SEUC) (MARINELLI, et al., 2006). The ProBUC model71, supported by ARPA72, is being implemented in some conservation units of the state of Amazonas, and has proven to be an innovative initiative. This program minimizes costs, provides repid answere and results, and generates reliable and concise data storage. This is because it is conducted by local workers active in their daily work, thus facilitating all the logistics involved in biodiversity monitoring, as well as the social improvement of the communities surrounding the Reserves.
Like ProBUC, the project's community monitoring system will have the following objectives: 1) raise the awareness of communities using the project area about the relevance of monitoring the use of natural resources, with a focus on sustainability; 2) train leaders and interested people to act as biodiversity monitors; 3) monitor species with communities use potential; 4) monitor species of special interest (critically endangered, endangered or threatened with extinction, and 5) monitor land use and land cover changes.
According to the objectives above, field work is directed toward a better understanding of the use of natural resources by the logic of land cover changes dynamics and local animal use in the PA and in places of potential leakages. Such measurements will strengthen the enforcement of existing legislation, ensuring the successful implementation of project activities.
Evaluation and selection of indicators will be conducted in accordance with the ProBUC model, however, applicably to local reality, results will be updated biennially from the first survey. Biodiversity indicators are being designed and planned, as suggested in the Social and Environmental Monitoring System of Protected Areas in the Brazilian Amazon (Sistema de Monitoramento Socioambiental das Unidades de Conservação da Amazônia Brasileira)73,74 and Methodology for Rapid Assessment and Prioritization of Protected Areas Management 75 (Metodologia para Avaliação Rápida e Priorização do Manejo de Unidades de Conservação - RAPPAM) in line with the experiences gained and disseminated by CEUC and ICMBIO previously described.
71PROBUC 72Amazon Region Protected Areas (Áreas Protegidas da Amazônia - ARPA) 73Indicator Design 74Social and Environmental Monitoring of Protected Areas System in the Brazilian Amazon (Sistema de Monitoramento Socioambiental das Unidades de Conservação da Amazônia Brasileira) 75Metodologia para Avaliação Rápida e a Priorização do Manejo de Unidades de Conservação (RAPPAM)
153
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
The empowerment, accountability and shared management of biodiversity conservation is the main focus of the methodological model adopted. These actions create high expectations for environmental management of the area, as the biodiversity monitoring will be conducted by the community members themselves along with the project proponent, promoting a local multiplier effect. It is worth mentioning that strict compliance with these procedures is in within EBCF`s interest since it considers them to be key to the success of the project.
The project begins with the premise that any negative impact on biodiversity in the project area and its surroundings will not occur. In the opposite sense, the project aims to generate and provide greater understanding of the territory, subsidizing proposals for the conservation and sustainable use through adoption of good management practices of natural resources as well as its replication in other locations.
8.1.3 Monitoring Social Impacts (G1, indicator 9) (CM2, indicator 1) (CM4, indicator 1)
The monitoring of social aspects include both the collection of numerical data, such as quantity, volume, weight (quantitative indicators), as well as information expressing opinions and experiences (qualitative indicators), remembering that such measures are compatible and interchangeable. Data collection should be systematic and have a pre-established rate and, most likely, a single indicator will require several data collection instruments such as plans, field records, reports etc.
Social information will be monitored through the use of participatory methodologies. In this sense, the preparation process of the Amazon Rio I RPDS Management Plan was a first step. For the socioeconomic characteristics of communities, several community meetings, land use mapping workshops, and interviews with focus groups were held, in addition to field visits (Annex 10). The main activities of the project were presented and discussed in these events, emphasizing the importance and timeliness of local valuation of environmental services, as well as strategies for raising funds to implement other projects and improvements in social well-being of communities around the PA.
A Participatory Rural Diagnosic (Diagnóstico Rural Participativo) (DRP)76 must be carried out once in possession of information related to social characterization to complement the socioeconomic analysis of local communities. This diagnostic will collect historical, social, environmental, economic and institutional information from the communities surrounding the Reserves, including
76Diagnóstico Rural Participativo – Guia Prático - http://comunidades.mda.gov.br/o/890598
154
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
indicators and related social conflicts and grievances arisen from the implementation of the project parameters. This set of information will provide the "starting point" for monitoring of various production, economic, social, environmental and cultural aspects of the communities around the PA.
Since participatory monitoring is a procedural activity, new collection and analysis skills and tools will be required. Therefore, the monitoring plan will begin simply and include only some aspects of the project and, to the extent that the experience evolves and capacities are built up, monitoring may be slowly expanded to allow a more comprehensive assessment of social impacts.
In view of the adoption of this procedural strategy, the monitoring plan is still under development and thus not all parameters and their sampling methods are defined. The details of the PM will be treated afterwards, considering the following limitations:
Available budget, in view of the high costs in terms of logistics of this activity; Location/mapping of community groups that are users and have an interest to participate in the project; Sampling intensity and frequency of assessment; Methodological adaptation according to local reality and project objectives; Parameter identification and indicators to be analyzed.
Finally, it is important to emphasize that the project does not clearly provide for negative impacts to the PA and local communities in the surroundings. The project aims to be an ally of communities in promoting improved local life quality and social welfare to facilitate, replicate and build new partnerships for sustainable activities, besides proposing and testing best practices management and use of natural resources along with communities.
8.1.4 Identification of the Organizational Structure and Responsabilities (G4, indicator 1) (G4, indicator 2)
The proposed PMs will be directly managed by the staff of EBCF and will be implemented only with prior agreement between responsible technical commission, social actors and leaderships involved. After this agreement, a schedule of activities and actions defined in a detailed work plan will be prepared to meet the objective of the project. The work plan will be rigorously carried out and revisited often in order to assess the achievement of its indicators, and focused on budget management that maintains the financial health of the project. Table 21 shows the actors involved in the project and their representatives and accountabilities.
155
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Table 21 - Description of the organizational structure and actors involved in the project
Institution Representative Responsabilities
Coordinating the review and update of PD Original Trade Consultoria João Tezza Neto (V2.0) Project Amazon River REDD + IFM Especializada and conducting the certification process. Tecnical coordination of the Amazon Rio REDD+ IFM Project Description (PD) CO2X Conservação de Rosana Della Méa Version 1.0, and of the Management Plan Florestas Ltda. for the Amazon Rio RPDS Conservation Unit. Leonardo Management of the Reserves and Project EBCF Curitiba Barrionuevo implementation
Valdenor da Costa Coordination and implementation of the EBCF Manaus Junior Monitoring Plan
Renascer Implementation of socio-environmental André Albuquerque Desenvolvimento Humano programs Forest biomass inventory end technical HDOM Francisco Higushi support to project revew Community Communities Users and implementators Leaders Communities, local RPDS Advisory Board NGOs, government Project facilitators and monitors bodies
The development of the PD Version 1.0 was carried out by the CO2X Conservação de Florestas Ltda and Associated Consultants and included the following professionals:
Rosana Della Méa – Environmental Techniology, MSc – General Coordination Virgílio Viana – Forestry Engineering, PhD – Review and Guidance Mariano Cenamo – Forestry Engineering, MSc – Review and Guidance Renata Freire – Agronomy, PhD Agronomist, PhD Diego Serrano – Forestry Engineering, MSc Bruno Matta – Environmental Engineering Pablo Pacheco - Biology, MSc
156
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Thais Megid – Agronomic Engineering Rodrigo Freire - Biology, MSc Priscila Barros – Forestry Engineering, MSc Lucas Rosa – Geography
The review and update of PD, version 2.0, was performed by Original Trade Consulting and included the following professionals:
João Tezza Neto - Economist, MBA - Review and General Coordination Mariano Cenamo - Eng Eng Forestry, MSc - Review Francisco Higuchi - Eng Forestry, Dr. – Review
8.1.5 Methods for Generation, Record, Storage, Organization and Verification of Monitored Data and Parameters (G4, indicator 2) (CL3, indicator 2) (GL4, indicator 4) (CM4, indicator 1, 2 e 3) (B4, indicator 1)
EBCF will also be responsible for centralizing all the documentary information of the project, including their respective MPs. In this sense, EBCF undertakes to promote training events for the crew involved in the creation of primary data as well as apply methodological verification procedures and calibration. The subsequent systematic analogical and digital storage of information and documentation in general (reports, spreadsheets and field books, electronic spreadsheets, photos, GIS files, bibliography, among other information) in the appropriate database will also be under their responsibility.
Due to the prolonged duration of the project, the storage and systematization of this documentation is essential for the monitoring of actions and its outcomes, whose transparency and accessibility is essential to ensure credibility, engagement and confidence in social actors directly and indirectly involved in the project.
Internal audit procedures and non-conformities
Internal audit and evaluation of the activities of the MP will be performed in the field by the EBCF team. Standardized procedures and routines will be applied to improve primary data collection and recording, analysis and quality control. They will also contribute to promoting transparency and traceability in the measurement of project activities related to estimates of GHG emissions, biodiversity conservation and improvement of local communities` well being. This will require a
157
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition technically equipped specific team to carry out the management of the MP. This team will be responsible for ensuring the continuous improvement of the techniques and procedures of data collection and measurement methods in the field, always seeking to standardize them, as well as the restriction of nonconformities and their adjustments, if necessary.
All information collected, from both the community and consulting firms and research, are intended to contribute to the database managed by EBCF. This information will be evaluated, recorded and then stored and made available for consultation aimed at validating internal and external audits.
Initial plan for choosing social and biodiversity indicators that will be monitored (CM2, indicator 1 e 2)
The social indicators and biodiversity monitoring plans are in original format and in the planning stages. First, a survey was made for secondary information about the plant and animal resources presented in the Amazon Rio I RPDS Management Plan. In a complementary manner, information from various sources and also from scientific articles, government websites and doctoral theses was obtained. In addition, 100% of the data in the forest inventory conducted in 2007, in a particular field of that area located on dry land, was referred to for the timber management plan and a forest inventory conducted in 2013, covering floodpains and dry land (EBCF, 2013) to support the Amazon Rio I Management Plan.
Community-based monitoring will include information about the most hunted and consumed animal groups inhabiting vegetation types and aquatic environments (such as mammals, birds, fish, reptiles and others) in relation to population dynamics, social behavior, breeding, diet etc. and to the plant species, with emphasis on timber and non-timber social, economic and environmental interests in their ecological aspects such as growth dynamic and mortality of individuals of different existing tree species using phytosociological parameters.
Social parameters will be analyzed using the Sustainability Matrix methodology developed by the Amazonas State Secretary of Environment and Sustainable Development. During the preparation of the Management Plan, over twenty socioeconomic parameters, considered of major importance for the community development, were defined and described through specific indicators.
The Sustainability Matrix is a visual tool to help communities track their socioeconomic performance, based on its own criteria for judgment and evaluation. It will also provide an overview of the situation in which each community is in its several aspects of development (parameters), such as agriculture, extraction, marketing, access to credit, processing, management and
158
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition technology, education, health, energy, water, sewage etc. By doing so, it will be possible to see the level of sustainability the communities want to achieve for each parameter considered.
With the identification of the current situation and the desired situation it will be possible to measure the evolution of community development and the social and economic gains during the project. This methodology will also be used to regularly assess the intensity and extent of negative and/or positive impacts arising from the project, based on the following levels of sustainability:
LEVEL 1 – Indicative of an exclusion situation, with incipient and precarious forms of organization, production and social welfare. This is an extreme situation. Subsistence is the only motivation at this level.
LEVEL 2 – Indicative of a basic situation, with simple forms of organization, production and social welfare. This is a situation where social and productive requirements are met on a regular basis.
LEVEL 3 – Indicative of a situation of community development, with more structured forms of organization, social welfare and production. This is a promising development situation.
LEVEL 4 – Indicative of a situation of community independence, with developed and autonomous forms of organization, social welfare and production. This is a desired situation to be reached in the long run.
Figure 15 - Sustainability levels in the sustainability matrix
Other monitoring tools will be used in the analysis including several indicators such as rates of demographics (birth rates/mortality), gender and age, production, increase in social welfare, human development index, increased family income and indicators related to health. These
159
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
environmental performance and community improvement indicators will be re-evaluated periodically.
Initial plan of how the monitored variables will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of the measures employed to maintain or extend High Conservation Value (HCV) areas and the well being of existing communities with regard to global biodiversity, either regional or of national relevance in the project area (CM2, indicator 1 e 2)(B4, indicator 2).
Still in its initial phase, the environmental PM did not map High Conservation Value areas in the PA, however, these areas are considered priorities to project development. It is suggested that a survey of plant and animal species be conducted, to be complemented by PM biodiversity information in order to perform a spatial characterization of biodiversity, as well as the distribution of endemic and endangered species in the PA. These results will contribute to improvements to the PA participatory zoning related to the delimitation of the sustainable use areas and conservation priorities of the local and regional importance areas.
Monitoring, frequency and plans for publishing and disclosure to communities and other actors (CL3, indicator 2; B4, indicator 3)
Disclosure of the monitoring program results will be performed in a participatory manner through formal and frequent meetings, such as meetings, workshops and advice for assessment, improvement and necessary adjustments. Only at a second stage will results be published to widely disseminate and replicate them among nearby communities, actors and institutional partners.
Monitoring frequency will be a variable factor among the monitored parameters. As shown in Section 8.2 below, where each parameter is described and characterized.
8.2 Data and Parameters Available at Validation
Data Unit / Parameter: DBHn,i,s, j ,t=0 Data unit: Centimeters
Description: Diameter at breast height, t=0 years
Source of data: Field measurements in PSPs
Description of measurement methods Validated/verified before the start date of the and procedures to be applied: IFM-LtPF project for PSPs and areas with
160
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
possible disturbances.
Frequency of monitoring/recording: At intervals not exceeding 5 years from the first measurement
Value Applied: -
Monitoring Equipment: Tape measure and calipers
QA/QC procedures to be applied: IFC will be carried out by a technical staff with extensive knowledge of the practice of IFC activities, following the standard procedures below: - height positioning of the measurement of diameter of the trunk at 1.30 meters from the ground (eg, buttresses, bifurcations, relief, slope of the trunk, lianas, among others); - identification with red paint on the stem height where it was measured for identification in later remeasurement;
Calculation method: Measurement in situ in PSPs
Comments: Application of the parameter in equations 3-10; 3-11; 3-12 in VCS 2011
Data Unit / Parameter: DBHtree_ nd,n,i,snd, j ,t Data unit: Centimeters
Description: Height at breast height of an individual tree (n) of species (i) in the sample plot in a naturally disturbed area (snd), stratum (j), year t
Source of data: Measured using measure tape (DBH)
Description of measurement methods Validated/verified only when verifying some and procedures to be applied: disturbance
Frequency of monitoring/recording: At intervals not exceeding 5 years from the first measurement
Value Applied: Minimum of 10 cm of DBH with measurement of
161
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
all individuals within the PSPs
Monitoring Equipment: Diametric or measure tape
QA/QC procedures to be applied: IFC will be implemented by a technical staff with extensive knowledge of the practice of IFC activities, following the standard procedures below: - height positioning of the measurement of diameter of the trunk at 1.30 meters from the ground (eg, buttresses, bifurcations, relief, slope of the trunk, lianas, among others); - identification with red paint on the stem height where it was measured for identification in later remeasurement;
Calculation method: Measurement in the PSPs with proper equipment
Comments: Application of the parameter in equations 3-12 in VCS (2011)
Data Unit / Parameter: And, j ,t Data unit: Hectares
Description: Area of natural disturbance (nd), in stratum j in the year t
Source of data: EBCF
Description of measurement methods Using evaluation and validation by RS/GIS and procedures to be applied: monitoring and ground truthing
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Annual
Value Applied: Only after remote sensing and evaluate in the case of some disturbance.
Monitoring Equipment: Computational resources, satellite images, and specific softwares.
QA/QC procedures to be applied: Validation and evaluation in a GIS environment with the aid of high/medium resolution satellite
162
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
images.
Calculation method: GIS environment
Comments: Application of the parameter in equations 4-15; 4-17a in VCS (2011)
Data Unit / Parameter: fnatdisturb, j ,t Data unit: Non-dimensional
Description: Fraction of the naturally damaged forest in stratum j in the year t
Source of data: EBCF
Description of measurement methods Using RS/GIS monitoring and ground truthing and procedures to be applied:
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Annual
Value Applied: Only after remote and field-based evaluations
Monitoring Equipment: Computational resources and specific software
QA/QC procedures to be applied: Measurement in a GIS environment with the help of high/medium resolution satellite images.
Calculation method: GIS environment
Comments: Application of the parameter in equations 4-16 in VCS (2011)
Data Unit / Parameter: Villegal_ harvest,t Data unit: m3
Description: Volume of illegal timber sold as determined in field survey in year t
Source of data: EBFC
Description of measurement methods Field survey and alternative information and procedures to be applied:
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Annual
163
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Value Applied: -
Monitoring Equipment: Satellite images, computational resources, specific software, and indirect and field observations.
QA/QC procedures to be applied: A team in charge of the RPDS surveillance and the remote monitoring will be trained, specialized in geoprocessing technologies
Calculation method: Through field verification and collection of preliminary information for subsequent measurement in a GIS environment
Comments: Application of the parameter in equations 4-21 in VCS (2011)
Data Unit / Parameter: Aillegal_ harvest,j ,t Data unit: Hectares
Description: Illegal logging area in stratum j in year t
Source of data: EBCF
Description of measurement methods Use of high/medium resolution satellite images in and procedures to be applied: a GIS environment.
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Annual
Value Applied: Only when relevant
Monitoring Equipment: Satellite images, computational resources and specific software
QA/QC procedures to be applied: Visual image interpretation and field verification
Calculation method: Through field verification and collection of preliminary information for subsequent measurement in a GIS environment
Comments: Application of the parameter in equations 4-22 in VCS (2011)
164
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Data Unit / Parameter: Vactual_ harvest,l,t Data unit: m3 ano-1
Description: Real annual logging volume for land tract I, owned or operated by the proponent of the project or the forest with comparable situations and conditions at the local, regional, or national level in year t.
Source of data: EBCF (2013). pre-project disclosure documents
Description of measurement methods 100% inventory and licensing. Ex-ante and procedures to be applied:
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Annual
Value Applied: Varying annually according to the POA
Monitoring Equipment: -
QA/QC procedures to be applied: EBCF and authorized licensing body.
Calculation method: Following state and federal legislation
Comments: Application of the parameter in equations 5-4; 5- 5; 5-6; 5-7; 3-13 in the VCS (2011)
Data Unit / Parameter: As,j,t=0 Data unit: Area in hectares
Description: Total area of sampled plots (s) in stratum (j) at time t = 0
Source of data: Allocation and spatial field in the sample plots
Description of measurement methods A continuous forest inventory for monitoring the and procedures to be applied: dynamics of carbon stocks will be conducted. And if necessary, in disturbed areas.
Frequency of monitoring/recording: At intervals not exceeding 5 years from the first measurement
Value Applied: At least thirty (30) portions
Monitoring Equipment: GPS and measuring tape
165
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
QA/QC procedures to be applied: IFC will be implemented by a technical staff with extensive knowledge of the practice of IFC activities, following the standard procedures below: - ensure measurement and allocation of PSPs is standardized, does not deviate from procedures, and serves mainly to verify the reliability of field activities, - use of appropriate measuring equipment and utilities (e.g. tape, GPS navigation, compass, red paint, stakes and others); - marking initial and final vertices of PSPs and internal area of the parcels; - defense of inclination for correct fit for the the size and shape of PSPs - georeferencing of PSP vertices; - demarcation, clearing, and georeferencing of access trails; Calculation method: Literature review for the application of appropriate methodology
Comments: Application of the parameter in equations 3-10; 3- 11; 3-12 in VCS 2011
Data Unit / Parameter: And,j,t Data unit: Hectares
Description: Area of natural disturbance (nd), in stratum j in the year t
Source of data: Verification and field measurement with the aid of interpretation of satellite images.
Description of measurement methods Significant disturbance events in the PA will be and procedures to be applied: examined and evaluated in field
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Annual
Value Applied: NA (not applicable)
166
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Monitoring Equipment: GPS, GIS, Satellite Images, computational resources and specific geoprocessing softwares, automobiles among others
QA/QC procedures to be applied: A team in charge of the RPDS surveillance and the remote monitoring will be trained, specialized in geoprocessing technologies
Calculation method: GIS Environment and field data
Comments: Application of the parameter in equations 4-15; 4-17a in VCS (2011)
Data Unit / Parameter: fnatdisturb,j,t Data unit: Non-dimensional
Description: Fraction of the naturally damaged forest in stratum j in the year t
Source of data: field data collection
Description of measurement methods Proportion of disturbed area and total area of the and procedures to be applied: stratum
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Annual
Value Applied: NA (not applicable)
Monitoring Equipment: GPS, GIS, Satellite Images, computational resources and geoprocessing-specific softwares
QA/QC procedures to be applied: A team in charge of the RPDS surveillance and the remote monitoring will be trained, specialized in geoprocessing technologies
Calculation method: Quantification with the aid of GIS and field data
Comments: Application of the parameter in equations 4-16 in VCS 2011
Measured-only parameters (will not be monitored)
Data Unit / Parameter: Aproject,t =0
167
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Data unit: Hectares
Description: project area at time t=0
Source of data: Field validation using GPS, GIS thematic maps and satellite images
Description of measurement methods Validated/verified before the start date of the and procedures to be applied: IFM-LtPF project
Frequency of monitoring/recording: NA (not applicable)
Value Applied: 19,800 ha
Monitoring Equipment: Computational resources and appropriate software
QA/QC procedures to be applied: Georeferencing following national land standards
Calculation method: Computational resources with appropriate softwares using SAD 1969 datum and metric projection.
Comments: Application of the parameter in equations 2-1; 3- 4; 3-6; 3-9; 3-13; 3-36b em VCS (2011)
Data Unit / Parameter: Aproject,j,t =0 Data unit: Area in hectares
Description: Project area within each stratum (j) at time t=0
Source of data: SIPAM/RADAM 2002
Description of Validated/verified before the start date of the IFM-LtPF project measurement methods and procedures to be applied:
Frequency of NA (not applicable) monitoring/recording:
Value Applied: Area Phytophysiognomy Area (ha) (%) Primary Tropical Ombrophylous 3043.22 15% Alluvial Forest (Floresta Ombrófila
168
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Densa Aluvial de Dossel emergente)
Primary Tropical Ombrophylous Lowland Forest (Floresta Ombrófila 16615.02 84% Densa Terras Baixas Dossel Emergente) Pioneer forest types with fluvial and/or lacustrine influence – 141.75 1% herbaceous 19800.00 100%
Monitoring Computational resources and appropriate software Equipment:
QA/QC procedures to A team in charge of the RPDS surveillance and the remote be applied: monitoring will be trained, specialized in geoprocessing technologies
Calculation method: Stratification of the PA was conducted using a thematic map of SIPAM/RADAM 2002 vegetation types where the PA was extracted. Procedure in a GIS environment
Comments: Application of the parameter in equations 2-1; 3-4; 3-6; 3-9; 3-13 in VCS (2011)
Data Unit / Parameter: ANHA _ annual,t
Data unit: Hectares
Description: Net logged area for the project area in year t
Source of data: Obtained from the Corporate Sustainable Management Plan. Spatial delimitation of Annual Production Units (UPA)
Description of measurement methods Validated/verified before the start date of the and procedures to be applied: IFM-LtPF project
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Variation by year
Value Applied: According to the Environmental Licensing Annual Operating Plan
Monitoring Equipment: NA (not applicable)
169
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
QA/QC procedures to be applied: Application of the parameter in equations 3- 15a;3-16a; 3-26; 3-27; 3-33; 3-35; 3-37a; 3-38 in VCS (2011)
Calculation method:
Comments:
Data Unit / Parameter: ANHA _ annual,j,t Data unit: Hectares
Description: net annual logging area at the stratum level in year t
Source of data: Obtained from the Corporate Sustainable Management Plan. Spatial delimitation of Annual Production Units (UPA)
Description of measurement methods Validated/verified before the start date of the and procedures to be applied: IFM-LtPF project
Frequency of monitoring/recording: NA (not applicable)
Value Applied: 19,800 ha
Monitoring Equipment: Computational resources and appropriate software
QA/QC procedures to be applied: Use of appropriate software to calculate area using SAD 1969 daturm and metric projection for area calculations.
Calculation method: GIS environment
Comments: Application of the parameter in equations 3-15b; 3-16b; 3-37b in the VCS (2011)
Data Unit / Parameter: Vhistorical_harvest,l,k Data Unit: Volume in cubic meters (m3)
Description: Total volume of harvest for the land (l), which is owned and/or operated by the proponent of the project during the historical reference period
170
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Source of Data: Proponent project records through licensing of the Annual Operating Plan (AOP). Only ex ante information
Description of measurement methods Validated/verified before the start date of the and procedures to be applied: IFM-LtPF project
Frequency of monitoring/recording: NA (not applicable)
Value Applied: 184.939,01 m3
Monitoring Equipment: NA (not applicable)
QA/QC procedures to be applied: Pre-project historical record
Calculation method: Pre-project historical record
Comments: Application of the parameter in the equations 5-3 in VCS (2011)
8.3 Data and Parameters to Be Monitored
Data Unit / Parameter: Deforestation Data unit: Hectare
Description: Conversion of forest-use areas to other uses
Source of data: Primary surveillance data under EBCF’s responsibility and secondary data (Prodes, SAD, DETER and others).
Description of measurement methods Collection and evaluation of field data, various and procedures to be applied: geoprocessing and remote sensing routines and procedures such as: pre-processing of satellite images (geometric and radiometric corrections) and subsequent automatic classification and visual interpretation of temporal series of satellite images over a period of interest and comparison with auxiliary data.
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Early
Value Applied: Ex-post evaluation
Monitoring Equipment: GPS, GIS, Satellite Images, computational resources, specific geoprocessing softwares,
171
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
automobiles, among others
QA/QC procedures to be applied: A team in charge of the RPDS surveillance and the remote monitoring will be trained, specialized in geoprocessing technologies
Calculation method: Geographic Information System (GIS) Environment
Comments:
Data Unit / Parameter: Forest degradation Data unit: Hectare
Description: Remote detection of forest degradation activities (eg, unlawful selective exploitation)
Source of data: Primary and secondary data (DEGRAD, Deter, PROARCO, complaints, among others)
Description of measurement methods Collection and evaluation of field data, various and procedures to be applied: geoprocessing and remote sensing routines and procedures such as: pre-processing of satellite images (geometric and radiometric corrections) and subsequent automatic classification and visual interpretation of temporal series of satellite images over a period of interest and comparison with auxiliary data.
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Early
Value Applied: Ex-post evaluation
Monitoring Equipment: GPS, GIS, Satellite Images, computational resources and specific geoprocessing softwares, automobiles among others
QA/QC procedures to be applied: A team in charge of the RPDS surveillance and the remote monitoring will be trained, specialized in geoprocessing technologies
Calculation method: Geographic Information System (GIS) Environment
172
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Comments:
Data Unit / Parameter: hotspots and fires/wildfires Data unit: Locations (points) and surrounding areas
Description: Remote detection of forest degradation activities (eg, selective exploitation without the adequate legal protection)
Source of data: Primary and secondary data (DEGRAD, Deter, PROARCO, complaints, among others)
Description of measurement methods Collection and evaluation and validation of field and procedures to be applied: data, and various procedures and geoprocessing routines
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Early
Value Applied: Ex-post evaluation
Monitoring Equipment: GPS, GIS, Satellite Images, computational resources and specific geoprocessing softwares, automobiles among others
QA/QC procedures to be applied: A team in charge of the RPDS surveillance and the remote monitoring will be trained, specialized in geoprocessing technologies
Calculation method: Geographic Information System (GIS) Environment
Comments:
Data Unit / Parameter: natural disturbances Data unit: Area in hectares
Description: Remote sensing of natural disturbances affecting the biomass stock of PA (e.g. blowdown, severe weather events, pest attacks, diseases etc.)
Source of data: Primary and secondary data (satellite images, complaints, among others). In the event of
173
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
significant natural disturbances in the PA is also hosting an IFC to quantify biomass loss as well as the dynamic growth and regeneration of the area, using the same sampling IFC methodology in forested areas.
Description of measurement methods Collection and evaluation and validation of field and procedures to be applied: data, and various procedures and geoprocessing routines.
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Annual
Value Applied: Ex-post evaluation
Monitoring Equipment: GPS, GIS, Satellite Images, computational resources and specific geoprocessing softwares, automobiles among others
QA/QC procedures to be applied: A team in charge of the RPDS surveillance and the remote monitoring will be trained, specialized in geoprocessing technologies
Calculation method: Geographic Information System (GIS) Environment
Comments:
Data Unit / Parameter: Stock of woody biomass (ABG) Data unit: biomass tonnage/hectare
Description: GIS, SR and forest inventory - Measuring PSP
Source of data: Source: Satellite images + data re-measured fields
Description of measurement methods By lot, define the parcels to be monitored; and procedures to be applied: remeasure the trees sampled in the plots
Frequency of monitoring/recording: At intervals not exceeding 5 years from the first measurement
Value Applied: 248.4 ton/ha (+-11,2)
Monitoring Equipment: Computational resources and appropriate software
174
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
QA/QC procedures to be applied: Literature review based upon robust scientific work
Calculation method: GIS environment and estimated average stratified
Comments: Application of the parameter in equations 3-8; 3- 9; 3-14; 3-7; 3-13 in the VCS (2011)
Parameters only measured and reviewed in the literature (will not be monitored and only updated when relevant)
Data Unit / Parameter: CFWood Data unit: tC (t d.m.)-1
Description: Carbon fraction of wood in the tropical forest
Source of data: VCS (2011)
Description of measurement methods Literature review to the appropriate value during and procedures to be applied: the monitoring event
Value Applied: 0.49
Comments: Application of the parameter in equations 3-3; 3- 5; 3-41; 3-51; 3-13 in the VCS (2011)
Data Unit / Parameter: CFAGB Data unit: tC (t d.m.)-1
Description: Carbon fraction in above-ground biomass of rainforest trees
Source of data: VCS (2011)
Description of measurement methods Literature review to the appropriate value during and procedures to be applied: the monitoring event
Value Applied: 0.47
Comments: Application of the parameter in equations 3-8; 3- 14; 3-37a; 3-37b; 3-38; 4-15; 4-17a; 4-21; 4-22;
175
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
5-8; 5-9 in (VCS, 2011)
Parameter D Unit (t d.m.) m-3
Description Wood density for tropical forest with corresponding climate and ecological zone
Source of data: VCS (2011)
Measurement methods and procedures Literature review and, where necessary, verify or to be applied: obtain the local value
Value to be applied: 0.6
Comments: Application of the parameter in equations 3-3; 3- 5; 3-41; 3-51; 4-21; 5-8; 5-9 in (VCS, 2011)
Data Unit / Parameter: fV(DBHn,i,s, j,t=0,Hn,i,s, j,t=0 ) Data unit: Non-dimensional
Description: Allometric equation of volume as a function of diameter at breast height and height; t = 0 years
Source of data: Adjusted based on regression analysis with the site itself sampled data
Description of measurement methods Literature review and, where necessary, verify or and procedures to be applied: obtain the local value
Value Applied: Not applicable
Comments: Application of the parameter in the equations 3- 10; 3-11 in (VCS, 2011)
Data Unit / Parameter: fB (DBHn,i,s, j,t=0,Hn,s,i, j,t=0,Di ) Data unit: Non-dimensional
Description: Allometric equation of biomass as a function of
176
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
diameter at breast height and height; t = 0 years
Source of data: Obtained from the literature.
Description of measurement methods Literature review and, where necessary, verify or and procedures to be applied: obtain the local value
Value Applied: To be provided by HDOM before validation
Comments: Application of the parameter in equations 3-12 in (VCS, 2011)
Data Unit / Parameter: kdecay Data unit: yr-1
Description: Dead wood storage yearly decomposition rate
Source of data: Chamberset al. (2000)
Description of measurement methods Literature review to the appropriate value during and procedures to be applied: the monitoring event
Value Applied: 0.167
Comments: Application of the parameter in the equations 3- 17; 3-21 in (VCS, 2011)
Data Unit / Parameter: fRSD Data unit: Non-dimensional
Description: Damage factor to the remaining forest, based on the fraction of the carbon resulting from the damage to the remaining forest by the amount of carbon in the marketable logs extracted.
Source of data: Feldpauschet al. (2005)
Description of measurement methods Literature review to the appropriate value during and procedures to be applied: the monitoring event
Value Applied: 2.4
Comments: Application of the parameter in equations
177
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
3-19; 4-21; 5-8, 5-9 in (VCS, 2011)
Data Unit / Parameter: fbranch _ trim Data unit: Non-dimensional
Description: Fraction of branches and remaining chips in the above-ground biomass after logging the marketable timber and transferring it to the dead wood storage.
Source of data: Keller et al. (2004)
Description of measurement methods Literature review and, where necessary, verify or and procedures to be applied: obtain the local value
Value Applied: 0.67
Comments: Application of the parameter in equations 3-20 in (VCS, 2011)
Data Unit / Parameter: flumber_recovery Data unit: Non-dimensional
Description: Lumber recovery factor for the proportion of marketable logs converted into harvested wood products.
Source of data: Veríssimo (1992) apud VCS (2011)
Description of measurement methods Literature review to the appropriate value during and procedures to be applied: the monitoring event
Value Applied: 0.47
Comments: Application of the parameter in equations 3-26; 3-27 in (VCS, 2011)
Data Unit / Parameter: kltHWP_ ox Data unit: yr-1
Description: Yearly oxidation rate for long-term harvested
178
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
wood products.
Source of data: IPCC (2006) apud VCS (2011)
Description of measurement methods Literature review to the appropriate value during and procedures to be applied: the monitoring event
Value Applied: 0.023
Comments: Application of the parameter in equations 3-28 in (VCS, 2011)
Data Unit / Parameter: Gregrowth, t Data unit: (t d.m.) ha-1 yr-1
Description: Average regeneration per hectare per year of above-ground biomass after selective logging per year t, in t.d.m./ha/year.
Source of data: Mazzeiet al. (2010)
Description of measurement methods Literature review to the appropriate value during and procedures to be applied: the monitoring event
Value Applied: 2.6
Comments: Application of the parameter in equations 3-38 in (VCS, 2011)
Data Unit / Parameter: EFfuel - Gasolina -1 Data unit: tCO2e kL
Description: Emission of fuels factor
Source of data: IPCC (2006)
Description of measurement methods Literature review to the appropriate value during and procedures to be applied: the monitoring event
Value Applied: 2.395
Comments: Application of the parameter in equations 3-40; 3-42; 3-43; 3-46; 3-50; 3-54; 4-8; 4-11; 4-14
179
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
in (VCS, 2011)
Data Unit / Parameter: EFfuel - Diesel -1 Data unit: tCO2e kL
Description: Emission of fuels factor
Source of data: IPCC (2006)
Description of measurement methods Literature review to the appropriate value during and procedures to be applied: the monitoring event
Value Applied: 3.013
Comments: Application of the parameter in equations 3-40; 3-42; 3-43; 3-46; 3-50; 3-54; 4-8; 4-11; 4-14 in (VCS, 2011)
Data Unit / Parameter: FCharvest - Gasoline Data unit: kL m-3
Description: Fuel consumption of the equipment used to cut and drag per m3 of merchantable timber harvested
Source of data: Living Amazon Forest
Description of measurement methods Literature review to the appropriate value during and procedures to be applied: the monitoring event
Value Applied: 0.01
Comments: Application of the parameter in the equations 3- 40 in (VCS, 2011)
Data Unit / Parameter: FCharvest - Diesel Data unit: kL m-3
Description: Fuel consumption of the equipment used to cut and drag per m3 of merchantable timber
180
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
harvested
Source of data: Living Amazon Forest
Description of measurement methods Literature review to the appropriate value during and procedures to be applied: the monitoring event
Value Applied: 0.05
Comments: Application of the parameter in the equations 3- 40 in (VCS, 2011)
Data Unit / Parameter: CAPtruck Carreta Data unit: m3 truck-1
Description: Truck load capacity
Source of data: EBCF (2013)
Description of measurement methods Literature review to the appropriate value during and procedures to be applied: the monitoring event
Value Applied: 30
Comments: Application of the parameter in the equations 3- 44; 3-52 in (VCS, 2011)
Data Unit / Parameter: CAPtruck Balsa Data unit: m3 truck-1
Description: Truck load capacity
Source of data: EBCF (2013)
Description of measurement methods Literature review to the appropriate value during and procedures to be applied: the monitoring event
Value Applied: 500
Comments: Application of the parameter in the equations 3- 44; 3-52 in (VCS, 2011)
181
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Data Unit / Parameter: Eff_vehicle Balsa Data unit: km kL-1
Description: Fuel efficiency in each type of vehicle
Source of data: Barros &Uhl (1997)
Description of measurement methods Literature review to the appropriate value during and procedures to be applied: the monitoring event
Value Applied: 3770
Comments: Application of the parameter in equations 3-46; 3-52; 3-54; 4-7; 4-11; 4-14 em (VCS, 2011)
Data Unit / Parameter: Eff_vehicle Carreta Data unit: km kL-1
Description: Fuel efficiency in each type of vehicle
Source of data: Barros &Uhl (1997)
Description of measurement methods Literature review to the appropriate value during and procedures to be applied: the monitoring event
Value Applied: 2000
Comments:
Application of the parameter in equations 3-46; 3-52; 3-54; 4-7; 4-11; 4-14 em (VCS, 2011)
Data Unit / Parameter: edemand Data unit: kWh m-3
Description: Power demand for processing volume processed
Source of data: VSS (2011)
Description of measurement methods Literature review to the appropriate value during and procedures to be applied: the monitoring event
Value Applied: 20
Comments: Application of the parameter in equations 3-47 in (VCS, 2011)
182
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Data Unit / Parameter: EFelectricity -1 Data unit: tCO2e kWh
Description: Power emission factor in the country of origin
Source of data: IEA (2011) and MCT (2013)
Description of measurement methods Annual review of specific value and procedures to be applied:
Value Applied: 0.000088 (2000), 0.000079 (2003), 0.00003223 (2006), 0.0000293 (2008)
Comments: Application of the parameter in the equations 3- 48; 4-4 in (VCS, 2011)
Data Unit / Parameter: EFflight,y -1 Data unit: tCO2e (passenger.km)
Description: Emission factor of the flight for travel y
Source of data: Value from the literature
Description of measurement methods Annual review of specific value and procedures to be applied:
Value Applied: 0.00026 - Domestic 0.00036 – Short 0.0002 – Medium 0.00023 –Long
Comments: Application of the parameter in equations 4-6, 4-10; 4-13 in (VCS, 2011)
Data Unit / Parameter: Vhistorical_ harvest,l,k Data unit: m3
Description: Total volume of harvest for the land (l), which is owned and/or operated by the proponent of the
183
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
project during the historical reference period
Source of data: Records and licensing documents of project proponent, Operating License (OL) and Explorantion Authorizations (AUTEFs).
Description of measurement methods Validated/verified before the start date of the IFM- and procedures to be applied: LtPF project
Frequency of monitoring/recording: -
Value Applied: -
Monitoring Equipment: Values of environmental licensing shown in the AUTEXs. Pre-project historical records
QA/QC procedures to be applied: -
Calculation method: Sum of all annual AUTEXs
Comments: Application of the parameter in the equations 5-3 in VCS (2011)
MONITORED PARAMETERS OF FLORA
Data Unit / Parameter: Floristic and phytosociological structure of the tree community Data unit: Non-dimensional
Description: IFC PSPs will be checked for incidence of entry and mortality and also for what type(s) of vegetable stand out, as well as the dynamics of growth and increase/decrease of biomass
Source of data: Primary data obtained by EBCF on the field with measurements by PSPs Description of measurement methods Activities complementary to the remeasurement and procedures to be applied: of the IFC, in order to know more about the dynamics, density, dominance and basal area of the species found. Temporal comparisons with previous phytosociological parameters, especially for species of highest and lowest values of Importance Value Index (IVI) and
184
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Coverage Value Index (IVC). Moreover, the red list of endangered and vulnerable species (SEMA, CITES, IUCN and MMA) should be permanently updated through regular consultations Frequency of monitoring/recording: At intervals not exceeding 5 years from the first measurement Monitoring Equipment: Tape-measure, GPS, field spreadsheet, automobile, computer, first aid kit
Data Unit / Parameter: Extraction of timber forest products Data unit: Approximate cubic meters of timber and quantity of species used (common name)
Description: A form containing the descriptions of the varieties of trees extracted, wood volume, wood quality and the goals of its uses (family benefit and/or sale) will be completed during community monitors interviews with families in the areas of the project.
Source of data: Primary data collected by the community monitors through the spreadsheet given by EBCF
Description of measurement methods It is recommended that 2 monitors be trained in and procedures to be applied: each community for the interviews with the families which fish for survival and/or trade within the project areas. The primary data collected must be made available to the EBCF team, which will tabulate such data, making qualitative and quantitative analyzes.
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Community monitors should have the full information registered twice a year, with the first survey during the summer period (between the months of May to October) and the second, in
185
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
the winter period (November-April).
Monitoring Equipment: Tape-measure, GPS, field spreadsheet, computer, first aid kit and camera.
Data Unit / Parameter: Extraction of non-timber forest products Data unit: Quantity of differentiated products and weight in kilogram
Description: A form containing the descriptions of the variety and quality of non-timber forest products extracted, their volumes, weights and use (family benefit and/or sale) will be completed during the community monitors interviews with the families using the natural resources in the project areas.
Source of data: Primary data collected by the community monitors through the spreadsheet given by EBCF
Description of measurement methods It is recommended that 2 monitors be trained in and procedures to be applied: each community for the interviews with the families which fish for survival and/or trade within the project areas. The primary data collected must be made available to the EBCF team, which will tabulate such data, making qualitative and quantitative analyzes.
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Community monitors should have the full information registered twice a year, with the first survey during the summer period (between the months of May to October) and the second, in the winter period (November-April).
Monitoring Equipment: Tape-measure, GPS, field spreadsheet, computer, first aid kit and camera.
186
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Data Unit / Parameter: Herbaceous shrub layer phytosociology Data unit: Phytosociological parameters of tree species (using the same parameters presented in this report)
Description: Permanent partitions will be checked for incidence of entry and mortality and also for what type(s) of vegetable stand out, as well as the dynamics of growth and increase/decrease of biomass
Source of data: Primary data obtained by EBCF on the field with measurements by PSPs
Description of measurement methods Models of 1X1 meter partitions within PSPs are and procedures to be applied: advisable. It is also recommended to allocate these parts continuously/ juxtaposed or overlapping IFC parts in order to facilitate field logistics, optimizing financial resources. Moreover, the red list of endangered and vulnerable species (SEMA, CITES, IUCN and MMA) should be permanently updated through regular consultations
Frequency of monitoring/recording: At intervals not exceeding 5 years from the first measurement
Monitoring Equipment: Tape-measure, GPS, field spreadsheet, automobile, computer, first aid kit
Data Unit / Parameter: Evaluation of the use of plant products for internal consumption Data unit: Unit / Family / Time
Description: Quantification and qualification of demand of plant products such as roundwood, lumber, NTFPs, vines, palm trees and other forest benefits per family
187
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Source of data: Primary data obtained from EBCF field visits of local communities
Description of measurement methods Participatory rural diagnosis through informal and procedures to be applied: conversations and semi-structured questionnaires with the community
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Annual
Monitoring Equipment: Car for transportation, smartphones, computer and other
MONITORED PARAMETERS OF FAUNA
Data Unit / Parameter: Medium and large mammals Data unit: Number of types
Description: Diversity of medium and large mammal species
Source of data: Biological inventory in the field
Description of measurement methods View of animals via line transects and tracking and procedures to be applied: traces in sampling points, complemented by indirect data from feces and hair, as well as interviews with locals about the species present in the area and on their use of wildlife. The line transect method is standard for systematic inventories of diurnal mammals in the Amazon and other tropical forests. The procedure consists of carefully navigating a straight track - the transect - at an even pace, recording all encounters with the relevant species. At each meeting (sighting) with individuals or groups of target species, you should record: time, location on the track, species, number of individuals and their sex- age classes, animal-track perpendicular distance, observed behavior of the animal, height from the ground and other relevant information, such as the food item being
188
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
consumed. In the case of a group, the data should refer to the first animal sighted. Before starting the course, the date, sample point, observers, weather and start time are recorded. Finally, closing time should also be noted
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Biological inventories, including that of mammals, should be repeated at an interval not exceeding 5 years from the first measurement.
Value Applied: -
Monitoring Equipment: Measuring tape, binoculars, cameras, plastic gloves, magnifying glasses and plastic bags to collect stool and, as well as forms for the interviews.
QA/QC procedures to be applied: The inventory will be conducted by a specialized crew with vast knowledge in the quick inventory of mammals.
Calculation method: -
Comments: Species whose adult weight equals to or is less than one kg will be considered medium and large mammals. The specialized staff to be hired should participate in joint expeditions with other teams of experts in order to identify other animal of interest.
Data Unit / Parameter: Mammals: Chiroptera (bats) Data unit: Number of types
Description: Diversity of bat species
Source of data: Biological inventory in the field
Description of measurement methods The main methodologies used for sampling bats and procedures to be applied: will be based on (1) trapping of animals mid- flight with the aid of mist nets and (2) diurnal
189
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
search and capture in quarries, using nets and hand nets. Samplings will be directed to several types and subtypes of vegetation associated with these, but especially mosaics. Types and subtypes of vegetation should be diagnosed previously by plant teams and landscape studies on the relevant region.
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Biological inventories, including that of chiroptera, should be repeated at an interval not exceeding 5 years from the first measurement.
Value Applied: -
Monitoring Equipment: Tape, mist nets, hand nets, camera, leather gloves, magnifying glass and plastic bags to collect fur and feces
QA/QC procedures to be applied: The inventory will be conducted by a specialized crew with vast knowledge in the quick inventory of bats.
Calculation method: -
Comments: Species whose adult weight equals to or is less than one kg will be considered medium and large mammals. The specialized staff to be hired should participate in joint expeditions with other teams of experts in order to identify other animals of interest.
Data Unit / Parameter: Bird inventory Data unit: Number of types
Description: Diversity of bird species
Source of data: Biological inventory in the field
Description of measurement methods View and sound recording of animals via line
190
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition and procedures to be applied: transect, carefully traversing a straight track - the transect - at an even pace, recording all encounters with the relevant species. At each meeting (sighting) with individuals or groups of target species, you should record: time, location on the track, species, number of individuals and their sex-age classes, animal-track perpendicular distance, observed behavior of the animal, height from the ground and other relevant information, such as the food item being consumed. Before starting the course, the date, sample point, observers, weather and start time are recorded. Finally, closing time should also be noted The methods of visual and sound recording will be used together to survey the bird species of the localities. Where possible, bird vocalizations will be recorded with the aid of an ultra-directional analog or digital recorder. Prior to the field visit, one should proceed with literature searches as aid in order to identify birds in the field, as well as to gather information on the geographical distribution of the species marked for the region.
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Bird inventories should occur every 5 years.
Value Applied: -
Monitoring Equipment: Binoculars, audio recorder, camera, and record spreadsheets.
QA/QC procedures to be applied: The inventory will be conducted by a specialized crew with vast knowledge in the quick inventory of birds.
191
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Calculation method: -
Comments: The specialized staff to be hired should participate in joint expeditions with other teams of experts in order to identify other animals of interest.
Data Unit / Parameter: Fish Species Data unit: Number of species
Description: Diversity of fish species and groupings in lakes, streams and rivers.
Source of data: Biological inventory in the field
Description of measurement Methodology based on the protocol for research on methods and procedures to be fish in RAPELD modules of the PPBio, in grids. applied: RAPELD grids and modules are permanently standardized, 5 km long systems of partitions and trails, spaced 1 km apart. The trails are marked with a picket every 50 meters with the track name and distance along the trail. Aquatic partitions are used for the biological inventory of fish. Each plot corresponds to a stretch of 50m in length following the bed of the creek, stream, river and the measurement is taken by the bank, towards the mouth bedside.
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Preferably performed in the same seasonal period.
Value Applied: -
Monitoring Equipment: 50m tape measure; ½ inch PVC pipes (100 cm long, 8 to 10 units); colored plastic ribbons (easily seen in the vegetation); fine mesh (1 mm) hand nets; small dragnet; formaldehyde 37%; alcohol 96 GL; 90g tracing paper labels; indelible pen or ink; resistant plastic bags; rubber bands.
QA/QC procedures to be applied: The inventory will be conducted by a specialized crew with vast knowledge in the quick inventory of
192
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
ichthyofauna.
Calculation method: -
Comments: For further details, see: http://ppbio.inpa.gov.br/sites/default/files/Peixes.pdf
Data Unit / Parameter: Reptiles Data unit: Number of species of amphibians and reptiles.
Description: Sampling plots and identification of species diversity in the project area.
Source of data: Biological inventory of the field.
Description of measurement 2 methods will be employed: i) Pitfall traps with methods and procedures to be drift-fence and ii) Visual Encounter Surveys, applied: CRUMP; SCOTT, 1994).
Method I) Standardized sampling, appropriate to the collection of frogs, reptiles, mammals and many invertebrates of the litterfall. Provides quantitative data that can be compared across different areas, given that the size of buckets, the distance between them and the design of the traps are the same. At each sampling point are used four 60 liter buckets, arranged in a Y shape, with the central bucket 10 m away from each of the three peripheral buckets. Each peripheral bucket is connected with the central one by a plastic sheet of 50 cm in height, with its lower end buried in the ground. The three sheets form an angle of 120° with each other (JONES, 1981; GIBBONS; SEMLITSCH, 1981; CORN, 1994; RIBEIRO- JUNIOR et al., 2008). During the sampling period, the buckets should be inspected daily in order to collect the stranded animals. Between the sampling periods, the
193
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
buckets should be closed or twigs should be placed in the buckets in order to allow an exit for animals who might fall in. The second option is usually more efficient, depending on how hard it is to close the buckets.
Method II) The method consists of slowly walking along the grid of trails. On each side of the track, an area of 5 meters is sampled to a depth of 3 to 4 meters. The litterfall, decaying trunks, trunk cavities, vegetation within holes in the ground, and other places that can provide shelter for reptiles are surveyed. Time and place are registered for the animals sighted or heard, but not collected, whose identification is secure. This method requires at least 100 hours of research time.
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Preferably performed in the same seasonal period.
Value Applied: -
Monitoring Equipment: Pitfall traps, binoculars, microphone for recording vocalization, plastic buckets of 40 and 100 liters.
QA/QC procedures to be applied: The inventory will be conducted by a specialized crew with vast knowledge in the quick inventory of reptiles.
Calculation method: -
Comments: For further details, see: http://ppbio.museu- goeldi.br/?q=pt-br/protocolo-10-herpetofauna
Data Unit / Parameter: Anurans (amphibians) Data unit: Number of species (richness)
Description: Diversity of anuran species
Source of data: Biological inventory in the field
Description of measurement methods In order to identify anura, you should use the RAPELD methodology with grids and modules
194
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition and procedures to be applied: on standardized permanent trails and plots systems. The rows represent trails, which are usually 5 km long and 1 km apart from each other, with evenly distributed plots. It is advisable to perform at least two surveys, one at the peak of the rainy season and another at the end of the rainy season. This allows species with short and restricted breeding seasons to one of these periods to be detected. Before starting field activities, it is important to collect as much information on species occurring in the study area as possible, using photos and sound files available on the Internet or in specialized literature for mounting boards and collections of reference sounds. The material obtained should be used to start a collection of references, associating photos of individuals of each species and their vocalizations. Photos and sonograms (visual representations of vocalizations) can be arranged on boards of images that can be taken to the field by observers, assisting in the identification of species.
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Biological inventories, including that of Anurans, should be repeated at an interval not exceeding 5 years from the first measurement.
Value Applied: -
Monitoring Equipment: Camera; digital recorder; transparent (5 L) plastic bags used to transport animals collected on the field; adequate thermometer for measuring air temperature; wristwatch; permanent markers; pencil and eraser; clipboards for annotations;
195
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
head flashlight head; and GPS.
QA/QC procedures to be applied: The inventory will be conducted by a specialized crew with vast knowledge in the quick inventory of anuran species.
Calculation method: -
Comments: If the precise identification of the species via sonogram is not possible, naming morphotypes is sufficient. You can use the name of the genus or family of each species, followed by the epithet "sp." More accurate identifications can be made later by specialists in the group. The specialized staff to be hired should participate in joint expeditions with other teams of experts in order to identify other animals of interest.
Data Unit / Parameter: Subsistence and/or commercial fishing Data unit: Number of captured species (common name) and fish weight (in kg)
Description: In interviews with community monitors and families that use the natural resources in the project areas, forms will be filled out containing the descriptions of the species and weights of fish caught in lakes, streams and rivers of the project areas and the surrounding region (buffer)
Source of data: Primary data collected by the community monitors through the spreadsheet given by EBCF
Description of measurement methods It is recommended that 2 monitors be trained in and procedures to be applied: each community for the interviews with the
196
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
families which fish for survival and/or trade within the project areas. The primary data collected must be made available to the EBCF team, which will tabulate such data, making qualitative and quantitative analyzes.
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Community monitors should have the full information registered twice a year, with the first survey during the summer period (between the months of May to October) and the second, in the winter period (November-April).
Value Applied: Tape-measure, GPS, field spreadsheet, computer, first aid kit and camera.
Monitoring Equipment:
QA/QC procedures to be applied:
Calculation method:
Comments:
Data Unit / Parameter: Subsistence and/or commercial hunting Data unit: Number of hunted species (common name), number of individuals hunted by species and animal weight (in kg)
Description: In interviews with community monitors and families that use the natural resources in the project areas, forms will be filled out containing the descriptions of the animals and their respective weights, indicating which locations were hunted and the average frequency of hunting.
Source of data: Primary data collected by the community monitors through the spreadsheet given by EBCF
197
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Description of measurement methods It is recommended that 2 monitors be trained in and procedures to be applied: each community for the interviews with the families which fish for survival and/or trade within the project areas. The primary data collected must be made available to the EBCF team, which will tabulate such data, making qualitative and quantitative analyzes.
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Community monitors should have the full information registered twice a year, with the first survey during the summer period (between the months of May to October) and the second, in the winter period (November-April).
Value Applied: Tape-measure, GPS, field spreadsheet, computer, first aid kit and camera.
Monitoring Equipment:
QA/QC procedures to be applied:
Calculation method:
Comments:
Data Unit / Parameter: Synergistic animals, flagged, threatened or under conflict Data unit: Number of species (common name) sighted and recorded in audio and/or video.
Description: Community monitors will be trained to promote the monitoring of animal species of ecological interest (endangered, of interest to tourisism, under pressure from residents' use (hunting and fishing)). Specific tracks will be defined in various localities that provide access the PA lands. Each trail will be measured.
198
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Source of data: Primary data collected by the community monitors through the spreadsheet given by EBCF
Description of measurement methods The main settlements and access trails to the and procedures to be applied: project areas of interest for monitoring should be identified. Trained community monitors should traverse such tracks with defined frequencies to observe and record animals, to be defined by EBCF.
Frequency of monitoring/recording: To be defined in training workshops promoted by the EBCF and community monitors, according to the species to be monitored.
Value Applied: Binoculars, GPS, field worksheet, computer, first aid, camera and audio recorder.
Monitoring Equipment:
QA/QC procedures to be applied:
Calculation method:
Comments:
SOCIAL PARAMETERS MONITORED
Data Unit / Parameter: Land Use Data unit: Number of production units and management
Description: All production and management units of both private and public use, including plantations, ranches, monoculture or intercropped acai plantations, extractivist areas, lakes etc. will be quantified.
Source of data: Participatory mapping of the Management Plan and primary data to be obtained in the field by EBCF
Description of measurement methods Refinement of participatory maps from the
199
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition and procedures to be applied: interpretation of high resolution satellite images and field visit to production and management units in each community.
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Every three years
Monitoring Equipment: GPS, measuring tapes, satellite images
Data Unit / Parameter: Agricultural, forest and fish production Data unit: Bags, kilos, tons, liters, hectoliters produced
Description: The production of annual and biennial crops such as corn, beans, cassava, fish, as well as non-timber products such as, Andiroba, among other nuts, copaiba will be quantified.
Source of data: Primary data to be obtained in the field by EBCF.
Description of measurement methods Data will be collected from the plots and in the and procedures to be applied: extractivist areas of some families in the community as well as in lakes and rivers.
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Every year or season, depending on the product
Monitoring Equipment: Scales and other appropriate equipment
Data Unit / Parameter: Technological Level Data unit: Description
Description: Technological, management and restoration of employees in production units and approved management plans and implementation systems. Established and implemented fishing rules Source of data: Primary data to be obtained in the field by EBCF.
Description of measurement methods Field visits to production and management units and procedures to be applied: to analyze some indicators such as number of cultivated and/or managed species, cultivation
200
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
techniques employed and/or management, such as intercropping systems and crop rotation, use of organic fertilizers and green, use of mulch, etc.
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Every three years
Monitoring Equipment: Field notebooks
Data Unit / Parameter: Social Organization Data unit: Number of events, associations and community groups. Number and quality of documentation produced, decision making and lessons learned. Number of partnerships and cooperative systems established with other groups and institutions.
Description: Quantitative and qualitative characterization of the level of organization of communities, including the ability to establish partnerships and dealing with conflicts
Source of data: Analysis of documents and interviews with the leadership.
Description of measurement methods Quantification and functional description of each and procedures to be applied: event and/or institution. Participation by gender and age. The capacity of the institutions and groups to develop plans, business plans, reports etc. will also be examined. Existence of approved and ongoing projects and funding.
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Every year
Monitoring Equipment: Field notebooks and recorders, when allowed
Data Unit / Parameter: Demography Data unit: Number of people
Description: Number of male and female population by age
201
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
group
Source of data: Primary data to be obtained in the field by EBCF.
Description of measurement methods Update of the demographic data of the and procedures to be applied: Management Plan through home visits
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Every five years
Monitoring Equipment: Forms
Data Unit / Parameter: Revenue Generation Data unit: Quantity, volume and diversity of traded products Description: All traded products will be quantified. Techniques to add value to products, storage system, marketing strategies, transportation used, and the markets involved will also be identified. Source of data: Existing documents and primary data to be obtained by EBCF. Description of measurement methods Interviews with leaders and visits to storage and and procedures to be applied: marketing places.
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Every five years
Monitoring Equipment: Scales and other appropriate equipment
Data Unit / Parameter: Installed infrastructure and equipment Data unit: Amount, type and status of the installed infrastructure and equipment Description: Identifying the description of the conditions of use and maintenance of the installed infrastructure and equipment such as boats, ambulance boats, schools, libraries, warehouses, sheds, community centers, community kitchens, wells, satellite dishes,
202
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
computers, amateur radio, telephones, internet, electrical network, etc. Source of data: Primary data to be obtained by EBCF.
Description of measurement methods Field visits to communities and procedures to be applied:
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Every three years
Monitoring Equipment: Cameras and field books
Data Unit / Parameter: Health and sanitation Data unit: Identification of the most frequent diseases; description of the state of health of the local population, infrastructure and community health equipment; water supply, sewage and residue systems Description: Survey on the incidence of disease and malnutrition; existence of programs and preventive health initiatives, sanitation and redemption of traditional herbal medicines; existence and training of health workers Source of data: Primary data to be obtained by EBCF.
Description of measurement methods Interviews and questionnaires and procedures to be applied:
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Every three years
Monitoring Equipment: Forms and field books
Data Unit / Parameter: Education Data unit: No. of infrastructure and equipment; no. of teachers and qualification of the educational system Description: Raising the educational level of the population by age and gender and qualitative description of the education system in communities, including
203
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
educational and informational materials and equipment; school transport and teacher training Source of data: Analysis of existing documents and obtaining primary data by EBCF Description of measurement methods Updating information of the Management Plan; and procedures to be applied: interviews with teachers, leaders and students.
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Every three years
Monitoring Equipment: Forms and field books
204
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
REFERENCES
ADEODATO, S. et.al. Madeira de ponta a ponta: o caminho da floresta até o consumo. São Paulo: FGV-RAE, 2011.
ALBAGLI, S. Amazônia: fronteira geopolítica da biodiversidade. Revista Parcerias Estratégicas, n. 12, p.6, set./2001. Centro de Estudos Estratégicos do Ministério da Ciência e Tecnologia.
AMARAL, I. C. Viabilidade de plantio de café na zona da mata mineira. Revista Política Agrícola. Ano xx, n.4, out./nov./dez, 2011. Disponível em: http://www.alice.cnptia.embrapa.br/bitstream/doc/930903/1/Viabilidadedeplantio.pdf. Acesso em: 17 de set. 2013.
AMARAL, P. et.al. Floresta para Sempre: um manual para a produção de madeira na Amazônia. Belém: IMAZON, 1998. 130p.
AMAZONAS. Lei Complementar nº 53/2007 de 05/06/2007. REGULAMENTA o inciso V do artigo 230 e o § 1º do artigo 231 da Constituição Estadual, institui o SISTEMA ESTADUAL DE UNIDADES DE CONSERVAÇÃO - SEUC, dispondo sobre infrações e penalidades e estabelecendo outras providências. Disponível em: http://www.cetesb.sp.gov.br/userfiles/file/mudancasclimaticas/proclima/file/legislacao/estadua l/amazonas/lei/lei_complementar_n_53_2007_amazonas.pdf. Acessado em Setembro 2013.
ANTAQ. Anuário Estatístico 2004. Distância entre os portos. Disponível em: http://www.antaq.gov.br/portal/anuarios/portuario2004/Tabelas/DistanciaEntrePortos.pdf. Acesso em: 23 de out. 2013.
ANTAQ. Panorama Aquaviário. Agência Nacional de Transportes Aquaviários. Volume 3. Brasília – DF, 2009.
AREDES, A. F.; PEREIRA, M, W, G. Análise econômica da produção de café arábica: um estudo de caso com simulações de Monte Carlo para sistemas de baixa e alta produtividade. Informações Econômicas, SP, v.38, n.4, abr. 2008.
ARIMA, E.; UHL, C. Pecuária na Amazônia Oriental: Desempenho Atual e Perspectivas Futuras. Série Amazônia, n.1. Belém: IMAZON, 1996. 40p.
205
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
BACCINI, A. et. al. Estimated carbon dioxide emissions from tropical deforestation improved by carbon-density maps. Nature Climate Change, vol.2, march, 2012. (LETTERS Published Online - DOI: 10.1038/NCLIMATE1354).
BARROS, A. C.; UHL, C. Padrões, problemas e potencial da extração madeireira ao longo do Rio Amazonas e do seu estuário. Série Amazônia, n.4. Belém: IMAZON, 1997. 42p.
BRASIL, Lei 12.187/2009 (Lei Ordinária) 29/12/2009. Institui a Política Nacional sobre Mudança do Clima - PNMC e dá outras Providências. Presidência da República Casa Civil Subchefia para Assuntos Jurídicos. Disponível em:
CAMPOS, E. F. Emissão de CO2 da madeira serrada da Amazônia: o caso da exploração convencional. 2012. 172p. Dissertação - Escola Politécnica, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo.
CARDOSO, R.S. e FREITAS, C. E. C. A pesca de pequena escala no rio Madeira pelos desembarques ocorridos em Manicoré (Estado do Amazonas), Brasil. Revista Acta Amazônica. vol. 38(4) 2008: 781 – 788.
CCBA. Climate, Community and Biodiversity Alliance-CCBA. 2008. Disponível em: http://www.climate-standards.org/ccb-standards/. Acesso em: 03 de set. 2013.
CEPEA. Centro de Estudos Avançados em Economia Aplicada - ESALQ/USP. Economia da pecuária de corte na região norte do Brasil Disponível em: http://goo.gl/L2roiA. Acesso em: 15 de out. 2013.
CHAMBERS, J. Q. et. al. Decomposition and carbon cycling of dead trees in tropical forests of the central Amazon. Oecologia, vol.122. pp.380-388, 2000. Agricultores se queixam de burocracia para contratar crédito sustentável do Programa ABC. Correio Braziliense. Brasília, 26 fev. 2012. Disponível em:
CULLEN Jr., L.; VALLADARES-PÁDUA, C. Onças como detetives da paisagem. Ciência Hoje. Vol. 156, n.26. pp.54-57,1999.
206
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
CPRM - Serviço Geológico do Brasil. Disponível em: http://www.cprm.gov.br. Acesso em: 13 de mar. 2013.
DIAS, F. M.; MORAIS, S. J. S.; REZENDE, R. C. Análise da viabilidade econômica para a produção de melancia e cenoura com financiamento em Anápolis-GO. 2008. Disponível em http://www.prp.ueg.br/06v1/conteudo/pesquisa/iniccien/eventos/sic2008/fronteira/flashsic/ani macao/IIIJORNADA/arquivos/resumos/resumo01.pdf>. Acesso em: 18 de nov.2013.
Divisão de Precessamento de Imagens (DPI). Ambdata. Mapa de Vegetação SIPAM / RADAM.. 2002. Disponível em: http://www.dpi.inpe.br/Ambdata/mapa_sipam.php. Acesso em: 21 de out. 2013.
DOMINGUES, M.S.; BERNMANN, C. O arco de desflorestamento na Amazônia: da pecuária à soja. Ambiente & Sociedade, São Paulo. vol.15, n.2, pp.1-22, maio/ago, 2012.
EBCF. Criação da primeira reserva particular de desenvolvimento sustentável do mundo na floresta amazônica. Disponível em:
EMBRAPA. Sistema Brasileiro de Classificação de Solos. 2ª Ed. Rio de Janeiro: Embrapa Solos, 2006. 306 p.
FELDPAUSCH, T. R., et. al. When big trees fall: Damage and carbon export by reduced impact logging in southern Amazonia. Forest Ecology and Management. Vol. 219, pp.199-215, 2005.
FEARNSIDE, P M.Desmatamento na Amazônia: dinâmica, impactos e controle. Acta Amazônica, vol. 36, n.3, pp. 395-400, 2006.
FILGUEIRAS, T. S. et. al. 1994. Caminhamento: Um método expedito para levantamentos florísticos qualitativos. Caderno de Geociência IBGE, vol.12, pp.39-43, 1994.
Forest Management Public Summary for Gethal Amazonas S.A.: Indústria de Madeira Compensada. Certification Code: SW-FM/COC-119 Date of Certification: October 1, 2000 Date of Public Summary: October 2000 Updated for Annual Audit 2002, Annual Audit 2003 (Gethal.pdf)
207
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
Globo Rural, Linha de financiamento para a agricultura de baixo carbono tem pouca procura, 2011. Disponível em: http://www.rainforest-alliance.org/forestry/documents/gethal.pdf. Acesso em: 16 de nov. 2013.
GREENPEACE. Face a Face com a Destruição. Relatório Greenpeace sobre as companhias multinacionais madeireiras na Amazônia Brasileira, 1999. Disponível em:
Governo do Estado do Amazonas. Plano de Gestao da RDS do Rio Amapá. 2010. Disponível em: http://observatorio.wwf.org.br/site_media/upload/gestao/planoManejo/rio_amapa.pdf. Acesso em: 24 de ago. 2013.
HDOM. Estimates from processing the forest inventories data carried out during the CADAF Project. Final Technical Report, 2012. Disponível em: www.hdom.com.br. Acesso em: 27 de maio 2013.
HIGUCHI, N. 1986-87. Amostragem sistemática versus amostragem aleatória em floresta tropical úmida de terra-firme na região de Manaus. Acta Amazonica, 16/17 (único): 393-400.
HIGUCHI, N.; SANTOS, J.; JARDIM, F.C.S. Tamanho de parcela amostral para inventários florestais. Acta Amazônica, vol.12, n.1, pp.91-103, 1982.
HIGUCHI, F. G.; PINTO, A. C. M.; ISHIZUKA, M.; KAJIMOTO, T.; LIMA, A. J. N.; SANTOS, J.; HIGUCHI, N. Estoque e dinâmica de biomassa acima do solo, das florestas de terra firme do estado do Amazonas. In: Adriano José Nogueira Lima; Flávia Machado Durgante; Moacir Alberto Assis Campos; Joaquim dos Santos; Moriyoshi Ishizuka; Niro Higuchi. (Org.). Dinâmica do carbono das florestas da Amazônia: resultados do Projeto CADAF. 1ed.Manaus: INPA, 2014, v. 1, p. 29-34.
HOLMES, T. P. et.al. Custos e benefícios financeiros da exploração de impacto reduzido em comparação à exploração florestal convencional na Amazônia oriental. 2ª ed. Belém: Fundação Floresta Tropical, 2002, 66p.
208
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
HUSCH, B.; MILLER, C. I.; BEERS, T. W. Forest mensuration. New York. Ronald Press. 1971.
HUSCH, B.; MILLER, C. I.; BEERS, T. W. Forest Mensuration. New York: John Wiley & Sons. 2nd ed., 1972. 402 p.
IBGE. Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. Diretoria de Geociências/Coordenação de Recursos Naturais e Estudos Ambientais: Geologia, Solos, Hidrografia e Vegetação, 2000.
IBGE. Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. Manicoré, 2010. Disponível em:
IBGE. Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística 2011. Disponível em: http://www.ibge.gov.br. Acesso em: 19 de mar. 2013.
IBGE. Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. Extração vegetal e silvicultura para o município de Manicoré. 2011. Disponível em:
IBGE. Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. Censo Demográfico 2010. Disponível em:
IBGE. Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. Censo Demográfico 2010. Disponível em:
IDESAM. Reduções de Emissões do Desmatamento e Degradação Florestal (REDD+): estudo de oportunidades para a região sul do Amazonas. CENAMO, M. Cl; CARRERO, G. C. GANDOLFO, P. (Org.). Manaus, 2011. Disponível em:
209
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition
IDESAM. Semeando Sustentabilidade em Apuí – Resultados e Perspectivas. 2011. Manaus. Disponivel em: IEA. Instituto de Economia Aplicada. CO2 Emissions from fuel combustion. 2012. Disponível em: http://www.iea.org/co2highlights/co2highlights.pdf. Acesso em: 09 de out. 2013. IGREJA, H. L. S.; CATIQUE, J. Análise neotectônica do lineamento de Itacoatiara, centro leste do Estado do Amazonas. In: Simpósio Nacional de Estudos Tectônicos, 6, 1997. Pirenópolis. Anais... Pirenópolis-GO: SBG-Núcleo Brasília,1997. IMAZON. Instituto do Homem e do Meio Ambiente da Amazônia. Fatos Florestais. 2010a. Disponível em: http://www.imazon.org.br/publicacoes/livros/fatos-florestais-da-amazonia- 2010-1. Acesso em: 14 de out. 2013. IMAZOM. Instituto do Homem e do Meio Ambiente da Amazônia. Mercado e preço da madeira amazônica. 2010. Disponível em: http://www.imazon.org.br/publicacoes/precos-de-madeira- em-tora/boletim-de-precos-de-madeira-em-tora-na-amazonia-julho-2010/at_download/file. Acesso em: 23 de nov. 2013. IMAZON. Instituto do Homem e do Meio Ambiente da Amazônia. Portal de Geoinformação sobre a Amazônia. Disponível em: IMAZON. Instituto do Homem e do Meio Ambiente da Amazônia. Transparência florestal Amazônia Legal. 2012. Disponível em: IMAZON. Instituto do Homem e do Meio Ambiente da Amazônia. PEREIRA, D., SANTOS, D.; VEDOVETO, M., GIMARÃES, J.; VERÍSSIMO, A. (Orgs). Fatos Florestais da Amazônia. Belém: IMAZON, 2010. 244p. Disponível em: 210 PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition IMAZON. Instituto do Homem e do Meio Ambiente da Amazônia A Expansão madeireira na Amazônia: Impactos e perspectivas para o desenvolvimento sustentável no Pará. BARROS, A.C.; VERÍSSIMO, A (Eds). Belém: IMAZON, 2002. IMAZON. Instituto do Homem e do Meio Ambiente da Amazônia. Custos e Benefícios do Manejo Florestal Para Produção de Madeira na Amazônia Oriental 1998. Disponível em: INPE. Instituto de Pesquisas Espaciais. Banco de dados PRODES, 2012. Disponível em: INPE. Instituto de Pesquisas Espaciais. Banco de dados DEGRAD, 2009. Disponível em: INPE. Instituto de Pesquisas Espaciais. Banco de dados DETER, 2013. Disponível em: INPE. Instituto de Pesquisas Espaciais. Banco de dados de queimadas e focos de calor/ BDQUEIMADAS, 2013. Disponível em: Instituto Carbono Brasil. Só 2% da produção de madeira é certificada. O Estado de S.Paulo, 2006. Disponível em: IFT. Instituto Floresta Tropical. Diagnóstico do Setor Florestal de Cotriguaçu, Estado do Mato Grosso. 2010. Disponível em: IPCC. Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. In: National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Programme. EGGLESTON, H.S.; BUENDIA, L.; MIWA, K. NGARA, T.; TANABE, K. (Eds). Japan: IGES, 2006. ITTO. Annual review and assessment of the world timber situation. 2011. Disponivel em: http://www.itto.int/annual_review/. Acesso em: 10 de out. 2013. 211 PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition KELLER, M. et. al. Coarse woody debris in undisturbed and logged forests in the eastern Brazilian Amazon. Global Change Biology, vol.10, PP.784-795, 2004. LENTINI, M.; VERISSIMO, A.; PEREIRA, D. A expansão madeireira na Amazônia. O Estado da Amazônia, n.2, 2005. Belém: IMAZON. Disponível em: http://www.imazon.org.br/upload/ea_2p.pdf. Acesso em: 06 de set. 2013. LOETSCH, F.; ZÖHRER, F.; HALLER, K. E. Forest Inventory. Munich, BLV Verlagsgesellschaft. 2nd edition. Vol. II. 1973. 469 p. MAGNUSSON, W.E. et. al. RAPELD: uma modificação do método de Gentry para inventários de biodiversidade em sítios para pesquisa ecológica de longa duração. Biota Neotrop. Jul/Dez 2005, vol. 5, no. 2. http://www.biotaneotropica.org.br/v5n2/pt/abstract?point-of- view+bn01005022005. ISSN 1676-0603 MARINELLI, C. E. et. al. O programa de monitoramento da biodiversidade da biodiversidade e do uso de recursos naturais em unidades de conservação estaduais do Amazonas. Secretaria de Estado do Meio Ambiente e Desenvolvimento Sustentável - SDS. Manaus: SDS, 2007. MARINELLI, C. E.; MALTEZ, M. H. Indicadores de Sustentabilidade para Unidades de Conservação. Documento-Síntese: Workshop. Instituto Socioambiental. Brasília-DF, 2010. 76p. MAZZEI, L. et. al. Above-ground biomass dynamics after reduced-impact logging in the Eastern Amazon. Forest Ecology and Management, vol. 259, pp.367-373, 2010. MEIRELLES FILHO. O Livro de Ouro da Amazônia. 5ª Edição. Rio de Janeiro: EDIOURO, 2007. 422p. Meirelles Filho, J. O Livro de Ouro da Amazônia. 1ª ed. Editora: Ediouro. ISBN: 8500021616. 2007. 450p. MENGER, Juliana da Silva. Fatores determinantes da distribuição de aves no interflúvio Purus- Madeira. Manaus : [s.n.], 2011. 35 fl: il. 212 PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition MCT. Arquivos dos Fatores de Emissão. Disponível em: http://www.mct.gov.br/index.php/content/view/321144.html#ancora. Acesso em: 23 de out. 2013. MMA. Ministério do Meio Ambiente. Avaliação e identificação de ações prioritárias para a conservação, utilização sustentável e repartição dos benefícios da biodiversidade na Amazônia brasileira. Brasília: MMA/SBF, 2001. MMA. Ministério do Meio Ambiente, Secretaria de Biodiversidade e Florestas. Áreas Prioritárias para Conservação, Uso Sustentável e Repartição de Benefícios da Biodiversidade Brasileira: Atualização - Portaria MMA n°9, de 23 de janeiro de 2007. Brasília: MMA, 2007. (Série Biodiversidade, 31) MMA. Livro vermelho da fauna brasileira ameaçada de extinção / editores Angelo Barbosa Monteiro Machado, Gláucia Moreira Drummond, Adriano Pereira Paglia. 1.ed. 2008. Brasília, DF : MMA; Belo Horizonte, MG : Fundação Biodiversitas, (1420 p.) : il. - (Biodiversidade ; 19) OLIVEIRA, M. M.; HIGUCHI, N.; CELES, C. H.; HIGUCHI, F. G. 2014. Tamanho e formas de parcelas para inventários florestais de espécies arbóreas na Amazônia Central. Ciência Florestal. Santa Maria, v. 24, n. 3, p. 645-653. PEARSON, T.R.H.; WALKER S.; BROWN, S.L. The Source Book for Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry Projects. BioCarbon Fund and Winrock International, 2005. 64 pp. PORTAL AMAZÔNIA. Amazônia de A a Z. Disponível em PÉLLICO NETTO, S.; BRENA, D. A. Inventário florestal. Curitiba: Editorado pelos autores, p. 316, 1997. PROJETO SIVAM. Relatório metodológico de trabalho. Revisão 3. Diretoria de Geociência. Rio de Janeiro, 2002. 330 pp. PROJETO SIVAM. Atualização do RADAMBRASIL. Mapa de Vegetacao da Amazonia Legal, Mapa de Fitofisionomias – RADAM/SIPAM. DNPM, Ministério de Minas e Energia, 2002. 213 PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition Disponível em: http://www.dpi.inpe.br/amb_data/Shapefiles/veg_Amz_SIPAM.zip. Acesso em: 21 de jan. 2014 PROJETO FLORESTAL SANTA MARIA (PROJETO FSM-REDD). Plant Inteligência Ambiental – Warwick Manfrinato, 2012. Disponível em RADAMBRASIL. Programa de Integração Nacional. Levantamentos de Recursos Naturais, v. 14 – RADAM. DNPM, Ministério de Minas e Energia. Brasil. 1974. RIBEIRO, J. E. L. et. al. Flora da Reserva Ducke: guia de identificação das plantas vasculares de uma floresta de terra firme na Amazônia Central. Manaus: Editora INPA, 1999. ROSAS, F. C. W.; WALDEMARIN, H.; de MATTOS, G. E. Pteronura rasiliensis (Zimmermann, 1780). In: MACHADO, A. B. M; DRUMMOND, G. M.; PAGLIA, A. P. (eds). Livro Vermelho da Fauna Brasileira Ameaçada de Extinção. Volume II. 1.ed. Brasília, DF: Ministério do Meio Ambiente, 2008. p. 800 - 801. ROSS, D. GHG Emissions Resulting from Aircraft Travel. 2009. Disponível em: http://www.carbonplanet.com/downloads/Flight_Calculator_Information_v9.2.pdf. Acesso em: 14 de out. 2013. SANTOS, A. J. et. al. Viabilidade econômica do sistema agroflorestal grevílea x café na região norte do Paraná. CERNE, vol.6, n.1, pp.89-100, 2000. SANTOS, R. A. Custo do manejo florestal madeireiro: estudo de caso. Floresta Estadual do Antimary. Monografia (Bacharelado em Economia) – Departamento de Ciências Econômicas, Universidade Federal do Acre, 2007.109p. SABOGAL, C., et. al. Manejo Florestal Empresarial na Amazônia Brasileira: restrições e oportunidades (Relatório Síntese). Belém: CIFOR/IMAZON, 2006. 72p. SDS/CEUC. Secretaria Estadual de Meio Ambiente e Desenvolvimento Sustentável – Centro Estadual de Unidades de Conservação. Programa de Monitoramento de Biodiversidade e 214 PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition Uso de Recursos Naturais em Áreas Protegidas do Estado Amazonas (ProBUC). 2006. Disponível em: http://brazil.wcs.org/DesktopModules/Bring2mind/DMX/Download.aspx?EntryId=6168&PortalI d=93&DownloadMethod=attachment. Acesso em: 11 de ago. de 2013. SFB/IMAZON. Serviço Florestal Brasileiro e Instituto do Homem e Meio Ambiente da Amazônia. A atividade madeireira na Amazônia brasileira: produção, receita e mercados. 2010. Disponível em: http://www.mma.gov.br/estruturas/sfb/_arquivos/miolo_resexec_polo_03_95_1.pdf. Acesso em 23 de out. 2013. SILVA, R. P. da. Alometria, estoque e dinâmica da biomassa de florestas primárias e secundárias na região de Manaus (AM). 152 p. Tese de Doutorado. Programa Integrado de Pós-graduação em Biologia Tropical e Recursos Naturais (INPA), Manaus, 2007. SILVA, Z. A. G. P. G.; SANTOS, R. A. Custo do manejo florestal madeireiro em floresta pública: estudo de caso no Acre. 2011. Disponível em: SMIDT, M.; GALLAGHER, T. Factors Affecting Fuel Consumption and Harvesting Costs. Auburn School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences. S/d. Disponível em: http://web1.cnre.vt.edu/forestry/cofe/documents/2013/Smidt_Gallagher.pdf. Acesso em: 21 de out. 2013. SOARES-FILHO, B. et. al. Role of Brazilian Amazon protected areas in climate change mitigation. 2010. Columbia University, NY: Ruth S. DeFries, 2010. SPF. Serviço Público Federal. DVPF, Documento de venda de produto Florestal, (Declarações de venda Gethal.pdf), 14 de julho de 2006. TIMOFEICZYK, JÚNIOR, R. et. al. Rentabilidade econômica do manejo de baixo impacto em florestas tropicais: um estudo de caso. Revista Floresta, Curitiba, v. 38, n. 4, p. 711-725, out./dez. 2008. VCS. Ferramenta para Demonstração e Avaliação de Adicionalidade para Atividades de Projetos VCS em Agricultura, Floresta e Outros Usos (AFOLU). 2012a. Disponível em: http://www.v-c- 215 PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Thrid Edition s.org/sites/v-c-s.org/files/VT0001%20VCS%20AFOLU%20Additionality%20Tool%20v3.0.pdf. Acesso em: 24 de set. 2013. VCS. Ferramenta de Risco e Não Permanência (AFOLU) 2012B. Disponível em: http://v-c- s.org/sites/v-c-s.org/files/AFOLU%20Non-Permanence%20Risk%20Tool%2C%20v3.2.pdf. Acesso em: 13 de set. 2013. VCS. Approved VCS Methodology VM0010 Version 1.0 - Methodology for Improved Forest Management: Conversion to Logged to Protected Forest. Calculating GHG Benefits from Preventing Planned Degradation. PHUA, S.; SHARMA, S.; TELFER, M.; CHANDLER, H (Eds.). Califórnia, EUA: Carbon Planet Limited, 2011.149p. VERDEJO, M. E. Diagnóstico Rural Participativo: um guia prático. Brasília: MDA, 2006. 62p. VIANNA, A. L. M. Diagnóstico Florestal do Estado do Amazonas 2010 e 2011. Manaus-AM: IDESAM, 2013. (Relatório Final do Projeto Fortalecimento da participação da sociedade civil no Amazonas Fórum de Mudanças Climáticas, Transparência Florestal no Estado do Amazonas – Mapeamento de Instrumentos Legislativos no Brasil). WBCSD/WRI. The GHG Protocol for Project Accountin . Washington: World Business Council for Sustainable Development/World Resources Institute, 2005.148 p. WALKER, W. et al. Guia de Campo para Estimativa de Biomassa Florestal e Estoque de Carbono. Woods Hole Center Research, Falmouth, Massachusetts, USA. 2011. Disponível em: http://www.whrc.org/resources/fieldguides/carbon/pdf/WHRC_FieldGuide_PortugueseSM.pdf . Acesso em: 14 de set. 2013. WWF. Metodologia para Avaliação Rápida e a Priorização do Manejo de Unidades de Conservação (RAPPAM). 2010. Disponível em: http://goo.gl/XfDnxs. Acesso em: 30 de set. 2013. WWF-Brasil. Efetividade de Gestão das Unidades de Conservação no Estado do Amazonas. Secretaria de Estado do Meio Ambiente e do Desenvolvimento Sustentável do Amazonas, Instituto Chico Mendes de Conservação da Biodiversidade. Brasília: WWF-Brasil, 2011. 72 p. 216