Post on 13-Jul-2018
Concession for multiple-use in the DeramakotForest Reserve, Sabah, Malaysia
Prepared by:Sabah Forestry Department
What Future For Forest Concessions and Alternative AllocationModels For Managing Public Forests Workshop
Porto Velho, State of Rondonia, Brazil13th – 16th September 2016
Sabah“Land Below The Wind”Land area: 7,362,010 ha
consists of 13 states and the consists of 13 states and the Federal Territory of Kuala Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur.Lumpur.
2 east Malaysian state 2 east Malaysian state located on Borneo Island.located on Borneo Island.
forestry is a state matter forestry is a state matter under the jurisdiction of each under the jurisdiction of each
The Federation of Malaysia
SABAH,MALAYSIA
South East Asia
“…The island of Borneo, on which Sabah is situated, has been listed as a key area for conservation. What is lost here is lost to the whole world. Conversely, however, what is achieved in Sabah enhances the health and wealth of global biological diversity…”(Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, United Nations Environment Programme: 15.11.2007)
under the jurisdiction of each under the jurisdiction of each of the (13) states.of the (13) states.
7,362,010 ha – land area 60% - 4,446,000 ha under
forest cover.
53% - 3,889,195.15 ha -permanent forest reserves and parks.
24% - 1,779,030.32 ha of Sabah’s total area are totally protected areas
1,750,521 ha – commercial / production forest
70’s – 80’s – Golden time of
Forestry In SabahForestry In Sabah
Forest Revenue Over Sabah State Revenue Forest Revenue Over Sabah State Revenue 70’s – 80’s – Golden time of timber exploitation (50%-90% of State’s Revenue)
90’s onward – famine period of timber industry (40%-4% of State’s Revenue)
Conventional timber harvesting -Short term licence, immediate economic return, non sustainable practice, neglecting HCVF or environmental condition of residual forest
SFM – the only solution for the continuance Sabah’s forest resources
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
-
500,000,000.00
1,000,000,000.00
1,500,000,000.00
2,000,000,000.00
2,500,000,000.00
3,000,000,000.00
3,500,000,000.00
4,000,000,000.00
4,500,000,000.00
5,000,000,000.00
19
95
19
96
19
97
19
98
19
99
20
00
20
01
20
02
20
03
20
04
20
05
20
06
20
07
20
08
20
09
20
10
20
11
20
12
20
13
20
14
Forest Revenue Over Sabah State Revenue Forest Revenue Over Sabah State Revenue ((19951995--2014)2014)
FOREST REVENUE (RM) STATE REVENUE (RM) PERCENTAGE (%)
• Sabah’s SFM Project – to address depleting forest resources issues and integrity of forest management.
• 1989 - Deramakot Forest Reserve (DFR) developed as a SFM model.
• SFD-GTZ : long term Malaysian - German Sustainable Forest Management Project.
• Technical and financial support
SFM in Sabah – How it Started?
• Technical and financial support
• 4 phasesi. Phase I (1989-1992) - strong research emphasis with a component of
management plan.
ii. Phase II (1992-1994) - management planning, training and consolidation.
iii. Phase III (1995-1998) - institution building, human resource and development, Implementation and extension.
iv. Phase IV (1999-2000) - consolidation, planning and human resource development.
BACKGROUNDBACKGROUND
Area: 55,507 ha, gazetted as PFR since 1960 (Commercial Forest).
Rainfall: 1,700 mm – 5,700 mm Lowland Dipterocarp Mixed Forest
type. Conventional selective timber
harvesting: 1956 to 1989. Timber production (1958-1975) -
3,161,348 m³ or 110 m³/ha3,161,348 m³ or 110 m³/ha 18% well stock with commercial
timber species. 52% lower growing stock. 30% covered by very poor forest with
virtually no mature growing stock left.
FSC Certified – well managed forest (1997-now).
The longest tropical forest certified in the region.
FOREST MANAGEMENT PLANFOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN
Medium term management plan – 10 years. Provide fundamental guidance to plan ahead and operationalize the
annual work plan. Objective: to sustain the production of high value timber and to
improve the growing stock by means of natural forest management while maintaining a high degree of species and structural diversity.
SFM+27 years: 3 FMPs. Multiple use approach of natural forest management.
ForestForest Timber Timber Timber StandTimber Stand
ForestForestManagementManagement
PlanPlan
ForestForestRestorationRestoration
Timber Timber HarvestingHarvesting
EcoEco--TourismTourismCommunityCommunity
ForestryForestry
ResourceResourceProtectionProtection
Research & Research & DevelopmentDevelopment
InfrastructureInfrastructureDev. & main.Dev. & main.
Timber StandTimber StandImprovementImprovement
FOREST MANAGEMENT PLANFOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN
Prescribed Activity1st FMP 2nd FMP 3rd FMP
(1995-2004) (2005-2014) (2015-2024)
Managed Area 55,083 ha 55,139 ha 55,507 ha
No of compartments 134 135 136
Annual Allowable Cut 20,000 m³ 17,600 m³ 17,600 m³
Forest Zoning
Production 51,478 ha 51,592 ha 49,942 ha
Conservation 3,605 ha 3,473 ha 5,547 haConservation 3,605 ha 3,473 ha 5,547 ha
Community Forestry 0 ha 18 ha 18 ha
Net harvesting area 6,465 ha 11,026 ha 10,581 ha
Timber stand improvement 4,387 ha 10,222 ha 11,037 ha
Forest Restoration 3,057 ha 2,000 ha 563 ha
TIMBER HARVESTINGTIMBER HARVESTING
Harvestable area: 49,942 ha or 90 % of DFR Reserve growing stock: 155 m³ to 220 m³ AAC: 15,000 m³ to 20,000 m³ (average: 17,500 m³) AAC based on DIPSIM (Dipterocarp Forest Growth Simulation Model).
Initially 20,000 m³, then revised to 15,000 m³ Cutting cycle: 30 years (economic viability, self sufficient and
profitable returns) Eco-friendly harvesting – 100% RIL (Reduced Impact Logging) Eco-friendly harvesting – 100% RIL (Reduced Impact Logging) Activity involved:-
Opening (Comprehensive Harvesting Plan - CHP) preparation Monitoring (harvesting) Closing (mitigation)
CHP prepared by SFD staff Harvesting done by qualified logging contractor Harvesting method: crawler tractor, skyline and log-fisher Contract rate:RM180.00/m³
RIL HARVESTINGRIL HARVESTING
Pre-harvest planning. Tree marking
Road alignment
CHP document
Harvesting.
Post-harvest planning. Mitigate soil
erosion by constructing cross drains and water
Harvesting. Monitoring
Directional felling
Daily felling record
Grading & measurement
Auction
drains and water bumps.
Removal of culverts that may impede flow of water.
Actual Production versus Annual Allowable Cut (AAC)Actual Production versus Annual Allowable Cut (AAC)
10-yr planning Period Year Compartment AAC (m3)Actual Volume
Harvested (M3)
FMP1
1995 59,54 20,000 188.61
1996 59,54,50,51 20,000 15,463.40
1997 59,54,50,51,61 20,000 13,794.16
1998 59,38 20,000 12,235.95
1999 38,53 20,000 914.8
2000 38,29,35,53 15,000 12,928.43
2001 35,31,30 15,000 10,741.83
2002 22,30,32 15,000 17,196.44
2003 18,34 15,000 14,554.78
2004 34,55 15,000 19,821.38
Total 10-yr allowable harvest 175,000 117,839.78Total 10-yr allowable harvest 175,000 117,839.78
FMP2
2005 85,33 17,600 11,425.08
2006 85,33,57,56 17,600 16,129.14
2007 56,57,58 17,600 13,662.78
2008 58,83,62 17,600 5,816.27
2009 62,58,83,49 17,600 11,636.23
2010 49,74 17,600 16,528.66
2011 49,42 17,600 9,185.61
2012 42,49,48,63A 17,600 12,546.75
2013 48,63 17,600 11,562.91
2014 76 & 77 17,600 18,084.03
Total 10-yr allowable harvest 176,000 126,577.46
FMP32015 76 &77 17,600 20,677.71
2016 72 17,600 8,112.86
Total 2-yr allowable harvest 35,200 28,790.57
Grand Total 386,200 273,207.81
HARVESTED VOLUME BY CRAWLER TRACTOR, SKYLINE/LOG FISHERHARVESTED VOLUME BY CRAWLER TRACTOR, SKYLINE/LOG FISHER
Year Crawler Tractor
(m3) Skyline (m3)
Combine system (m3)
Salvage Harvest Residue (m3)
Total Volume (m3)
1995 0 188.61 0 0 188.61
96 - 97 28,386.56 871 0 0 29,257.56
1998 12,204.56 31.39 0 0 12,235.95
1999 914.8 0 0 0 914.8
2000 8,144.85 569.15 4,214.43 0 12,928.43
2001 11,978.50 157.07 539.64 124.35 12,799.56
2002 16,882.43 0 0 0 16,882.43
2003 14,554.78 0 0 822.44 15,377.22
2004 19,821.38 0 0 1,808.85 21,630.23
2005 11,259.50 128.75 36.83 483.47 11,908.55
2006 16,129.14 0 0 1,869.15 17,998.29
2007 13,362.78 0 0 705.3 14,068.08
2008 8,678.06 0 0 1,375.60 10,053.66
2009 8,599.70 3,036.53 0 941.62 12,577.85
2010 16,528.66 0 0 1,307.66 17,836.32
2011 10,132.47 0 0 942.03 11,074.50
2012 12,546.75 0.00 0 822.32 13,369.07
2013 9,754.11 1,808.80 0 0 11,562.91
2014 18,084.03 0 0 0 18,084.03
2015 20,677.61 0 0 0 20,677.61
TOTAL 258,640.67 6,791.30 4,790.90 11,202.79 281,425.66
TIMBER HARVESTING COST AND PROFITTIMBER HARVESTING COST AND PROFIT
YEARPRODUCTION
(m3)
HARVESTING FEE CONTRACTOR
(RM)
SFD INDIRECT COST (RM)
TOTAL COST (RM)
TIMBER SALES (RM)
PROFIT / LOSSAVG PRICE (RM/M3)
1995 188.61 23,576.25 1,386,900.00 1,410,476.25 50,924.70 -1,359,551.55 270
1996 15,463.40 1,659,632.50 1,590,000.00 3,249,632.50 3,468,392.40 218,759.90 267
1997 13,794.16 1,558,740.00 1,560,000.00 3,118,740.00 3,385,354.58 266,614.58 245
1998 12,235.95 1,357,701.01 1,980,000.00 3,337,701.01 4,841,866.97 1,504,165.96 396
1999 914.8 101,506.21 1,508,991.00 1,610,497.21 918,459.20 -692,038.01 1,004
2000 12,928.43 1,434,538.60 2,518,148.50 2,857,595.79 5,820,059.73 2,962,463.94 468
2001 10,741.83 1,191,913.46 1,730,430.00 2,922,343.46 3,610,665.03 688,321.57 339
2002 17,196.44 1,908,116.98 1,534,500.00 3,442,616.98 7,910,208.28 4,467,591.30 468
2003 14,554.78 1,614,998.39 129,040.00 2,643,294.29 8,034,006.94 5,390,712.65 5522003 14,554.78 1,614,998.39 129,040.00 2,643,294.29 8,034,006.94 5,390,712.65 552
2004 19,821.38 2,199,380.33 173,160.00 3,274,647.33 10,987,950.04 7,713,302.71 554
2005 11,425.08 1,485,260.40 221,931.00 2,530,244.99 7,011,212.93 4,480,967.94 614
2006 16,129.14 2,096,788.20 250,137.00 3,227,061.49 11,531,808.47 8,304,746.98 705
2007 13,662.78 1,776,161.40 397,799.00 2,796,047.21 11,135,748.86 8,339,701.65 809
2008 5,816.27 872,440.50 252,436.00 1,822,883.97 5,469,865.00 3,646,981.03 940
2009 11,636.23 1,745,434.50 522,723.40 2,866,947.45 6,634,296.42 3,767,348.97 771
2010 16,528.66 2,479,299.00 598,329.89 3,488,880.61 9,892,842.74 6,403,962.13 599
2011 9,185.61 1,470,102.60 423,414.40 2,239,608.05 5,999,223.53 3,759,615.48 592
2012 12,546.75 2,258,415.00 608,890.72 3,365,141.34 6,877,173.10 3,512,031.76 548
2013 11,562.91 2,081,323.80 553,185.95 3,335,630.77 5,470,703.53 2,135,072.76 473
2014 18,084.03 3,570,460.50 886,786.34 4,457,246.84 9,214,173.01 4,756,926.17 510
2015 20,677.61 3,729,213.00 708,691.39 4,437,904.39 15,487,507.15 11,049,602.76 744
TOTAL 273,207.71 37,176,284.03 19,535,494.59 62,435,141.93 143,752,442.61 81,317,300.68 539
with sound forest management and with sound forest management and certification, the ecocertification, the eco--dividends may dividends may have finally arrived.have finally arrived.
good prices (average 30% higher good prices (average 30% higher than unthan un--certified timber).certified timber).
MerbauMerbau logs from logs from DeramakotDeramakot sold sold at RM 1,390 / mat RM 1,390 / m33 (USD 460 / m(USD 460 / m33), ), a record price.a record price.
Vietnam Vietnam –– irony.irony.
Green Premium for Certified Timber?
SALES OF LOGS BY AUCTION (1995 to 2015)SALES OF LOGS BY AUCTION (1995 to 2015)before before && after after certificationcertification
TIMBER STAND IMPROVEMENT OR SILVICULTURE
Objective: to improve the growth & survival of commercial species, ensure adequate stocking of PCT.
Selective removal of competing vegetation competing vegetation (e.g. woody vines and climbing bamboo).
30% of DFR required TSI Implementation:
contracted out to local entrepreneur and provide employment for community.
Contract rate: RM350/ha.
The cost and achievementThe cost and achievement NOTENOTE Bad Logging Practices Bad Logging Practices = =
Have to plant = 10 Have to plant = 10 times times more expensive more expensive than than silviculturesilviculture (TSI).(TSI).
The future picks up the The future picks up the bill.bill.
Planting with fast growing Planting with fast growing species.species.
REHABILITATION PLANTING AND MAINTENANCEREHABILITATION PLANTING AND MAINTENANCE
species.species. Average contract rate: Average contract rate:
RM4,000/ha.RM4,000/ha. Site specific approach.Site specific approach.
FOREST PROTECTIONActivities:-
Boundary demarcation.
Aerial surveillance.
River patrols.
Guard posts.
SMART patrol
Threats:-
ILLEGAL FELLING, 1995 – 2015
Year Volume (m3)
1995 – 1999 4,353
2000 3,027
2001 214
2002 14.7
2003 - 2015 0
TOTAL 7,594Threats:-
Poaching.
Cultural harvesting.
Illegal cultivation
Forest fires.
TOTAL 7,594
FIRE
Year Area Burnt (ha)
1997 250
Wildlife MonitoringWildlife Monitoring
Rich in biodiversity.Rich in biodiversity. 85% of mammals in 85% of mammals in
Sabah, recorded in DFR.Sabah, recorded in DFR. RIL is compatible with RIL is compatible with
wildlife conservation.wildlife conservation. Activities: Activities:
i.i. opportunistic sightingopportunistic sightingi.i. opportunistic sightingopportunistic sightingii.ii. camera trapscamera trapsiii.iii. saltlicks monitoringsaltlicks monitoringiv.iv. orang orang utanutan nest countingnest counting
Engagement with Local CommunitiesEngagement with Local Communities
consultation
employment
contracts
No indigenous people lived within the area.
5 villages on the fringe of forest About 82 households. Engagement:-
water supply
training
Socio economic benefits to the local communitySocio economic benefits to the local community
Year Type of contractNo. of people
involved
Sum of Contract (RM)
Average income earned (RM)
2008-2010 Forest Restoration 15 220,000.00 14,667.00
2011-2013 Forest Restoration 25 63,000.00 2,520.00
2014-2016 Forest Restoration 40 199,392.00 4,984.00
2008-2016Forest Reserve Boundary Clearance
20 267,187.00 13,359.00
TOTAL 749,579.00
FOREST CERTIFICATIONFOREST CERTIFICATION
Certification for builds credibility, continuous improvement and higher standard of responsible forestry.
Standard: FSC Certifying body: SGS (since 1997). FSC Certification obtained for BMP for the
period 1997 – 2002. RM105,000 (USD34,000).
Re-certified: 2003 – 2008.RM207,704 (USD68,000). RM207,704 (USD68,000).
Re-certified: 2008 – 2013. RM210,000 (USD69,000).
Re-certified: 2014 – 2019 RM120,370 (USD29,648) as of year 2016.
Attain good forest management. Quality management under real world
conditions. Certification – logical conclusion.
Annual Expenditure & RevenueAnnual Expenditure & RevenueAnnual Expenditure & RevenueAnnual Expenditure & Revenue
Year Expenditure (RM)Income From Log
Auction (RM)
Income From Logging Residue
(RM)
Income From Eco-tourism
(RM)
Total Income (RM)
Profit(+/-)
1993 2,150,385.57 - - - - (2,150,385.57)
1994 3,988,835.77 - - - - (3,988,835.77)
1995 4,623,000.00 50,924.70 - - 50,924.70 (4,572,075.30)
1996 5,300,000.00 3,468,392.40 - - 3,468,392.40 (1,831,607.60)
1997 5,200,000.00 3,385,354.58 - - 3,385,354.58 (1,814,645.42)
1998 6,600,000.00 4,841,866.97 - - 4,841,866.97 (1,758,133.03)
1999 5,029,970.00 918,459.20 - - 918,459.20 (4,111,510.80)
2000 8,393,828.32 5,820,059.73 - - 5,820,059.73 (2,573,768.59)
2001 5,768,100.00 3,610,665.03 4,115.72 - 3,614,780.75 (2,153,319.25)
2002 5,115,000.00 7,730,603.04 - 1,440.00 7,732,043.04 2,617,043.04
2003 5,916,040.00 8,034,006.94 50,986.62 7,350.00 8,092,343.56 2,176,303.56
2004 4,937,733.54 10,987,950.04 121,696.98 14,295.00 11,123,942.02 6,186,208.48
-
5,000,000.00
10,000,000.00
15,000,000.00
20,000,000.00
Expenditure vs RevenueExpenditure vs Revenue
Expenditure (RM) Total Income (RM)
* Revenue exceeded expenditure for the 1st time in 2002 and this is forecasted to continue for the years ahead.
2004 4,937,733.54 10,987,950.04 121,696.98 14,295.00 11,123,942.02 6,186,208.48
2005 4,506,733.75 7,011,212.93 34,653.19 5,640.00 7,051,506.12 2,544,772.37
2006 6,526,150.00 11,531,808.47 153,434.31 13,630.00 11,698,872.78 5,172,722.78
2007 6,673,315.68 11,135,748.86 65,446.17 10,400.00 11,211,595.03 4,538,279.35
2008 5,303,510.00 5,469,865.00 128,107.20 20,519.00 5,618,491.20 314,981.20
2009 4,495,368.50 6,941,162.72 74,964.98 5,129.70 7,021,257.40 2,525,888.90
2010 5,199,593.33 8,566,652.76 98,765.46 3,731.00 8,669,149.22 3,469,555.89
2011 3,999,908.91 5,999,223.53 81,367.26 9,024.00 6,089,614.79 2,089,705.88
2012 5,700,000.00 6,837,648.85 65,483.25 16,594.00 6,919,726.10 1,219,726.10
2013 4,500,000.00 5,470,703.53 - 39,219.00 5,509,922.53 1,009,922.53
2014 5,500,000.00 9,227,274.58 13,101.57 38,331.00 9,278,707.15 3,778,707.15
2015 7,222,006.89 15,487,507.15 - 75,484.00 15,562,991.15 8,340,984.26
2016(*) 4,140,328.13 5,020,948.27 - 40,880.00 5,061,828.27 921,500.14
TOTAL 126,789,808.39 147,548,039.28 892,122.71 301,666.70 148,741,828.69 21,952,020.30
Major Challenges
Long process of learning and capacity building. Required massive training programme – all aspect of forest
management for ‘knowledge workers’. High turnover workers. Lack of managerial skills in running an enterprise. The acceptance of lower profit margin – to convince the
funders for financing the project.Lower revenue with longer investment period. Lower revenue with longer investment period.
Consistency in maintaining the quality under international forest certification standards.
Over the time, forest certification is more ‘academic approach’ rather operational compliance.
Less demand for ‘green timber’ by local buyers and manufacturers to pay premium prices.
Key success factors in Deramakot over the last 27 years(1989 – 2016)
Willingness to change. Political support and endorsement. Technical support. Continuous capacity building. Financial support – government
project. Continuous stakeholders
consultation.consultation. Multiple use forest approach. Forest certification – lead to
responsible forestry. Incentives – price premium (30%).
Lessons Learned
Short term management practice does not guarantee for responsible forest management.
Changing mindsets is required at all level of management and decision making.
‘Smart partnership’ with credible entities will increase the value of sustainability.
Forest certification can improve good governance, enhance performance and bring credibility.performance and bring credibility.
Good marketing team to aggressively promoting green timber.
Diversify revenue by exploring non timber forest produces, ecosystem services and innovative ideas, i.e. carbon sequestration and biodiversity offset mechanism.
Continuous capacity building programme to maintain the productivity and management effectiveness.
Do not working in isolation, engage with the world.
THANK YOUMUITO OBRIGADO