Thailand:

Framework species method for tropical forest restoration

Prasit Wangkapattanawong, Ph.D.

Forest Restoration Research Unit (FORRU.org), Chiang Mai Univ.

Topics

Ecosystem type

Problems and treats

Project description

Project activities

Results

Lessons learned

Ecosystem type

Northern Thailand

Hill evergreen forest, e.g.

Fagaceae

Castanopsis, Lithocarpus, Quercus

Lauraceae (Cinnamomum, Litsea)

Moraceae (Ficus)

Elevation about 1,000 m

Annual rainfall about 1,100 mm

Problems and treats

Illegal logging

Expansion of agricultural areas

(e.g. cash crops and rubber)

Doi Mae Salong, Chiang Rai, Thailand

Doi Mae Salong (Crops and Tea), Chiang Rai, Thailand

Project description

Restoration using “Framework species method”

Adapted from Queensland, Australia

Framework species

Native

Grow fast

Suppress weeds

Resilient to fire

Provide nectar and fruit for wildlife at early age

0 YEARS 2 YEARS 7 YEARS

Project activities (1)

Collect native seeds from remainng

forests

Germinate seeds in nursery for 1

year

Prepare site by weeding (or

applying herbicide) and fertilizing

Project activities (2)

Plant 20-30 framework species

(Fagaceae, Ficus, Leguminosae,

and other native species) at 3,125

seedlings / ha (normally in June)

Weeding/fertilizing 3 times during

rainy season (July-October)

Monitor for survival and size at end

of growing season for 2 seasons

Project results

Biodiversity recovery Plants

Birds

Mammals

6 years after planting

72 new plant species (not planted) within 8-9 years

Aquilaria crassna

Biodiversity recovery (plants)

30 bird species (before restoration) 87 bird species (6 years after

restoration)

Biodiversity recovery (birds)

Biodiversity recovery (mammal returned after 3 years)

Large Indian Civet uses plots as latrine from 5 years after planting. Disperses seeds over at least 10 km from forest into plots..

Hog Badger breeds in the plots 3 years old or older.

Results

Impact on biodiversity: yes

Socio-economic benefits, including livelihoods: no

How replicable is it: yes

Its adoption status: other regions of Thailand, Cambodia, China, and the Philippines (Restoration manuals translated to Chinese, Cambodia, Indonesia, Khmer, and Vietnam)

Has the practice resulted in change in policy and regulatory frameworks, or such potential exists: no. There is a potential, but the restoration cost is still relatively high (next slide)

Cost of Forest Restoration

ระดบั 1---------------------------------------------------------------ระดบั 4 ระดบั 5

?

Degradation Stage

Method Country Published

Cost (USD/ha)

Date Reference Present-day

costs USD/ha

Stage 1 Protection Thailand Estimated 314 - 367

Stage 2 Assist Natural Regeneration (ANR)

Philippines 607 2006-09 Bagong Pagasa

Foundation, 2009 668 - 774

ANR (Castilo, 1986) Philippines 524-1,048 1983-85 Castilo, 1986 1,862 – 6,080

Stage 3 Framework species method

Thailand 1,700 2006 FORRU, 2006 2,170

Stage 4 Maximum diversity with mine site amelioration

Brazil 2,620 1985 Parrotta et al.,

1997 9,317

Miyawaki method Thailand 9,432 2009 Mitsubishi, pers.

com. 10,398

Stage 5 Site amelioration and nurse plantation

- - -

Cost of Forest Restoration

*Estimated by applying a constant 5% annual inflation rate.

4,512 Current day prices

Lessons learned

Potential for scaling up: high

Reference

FORRU.org