ENS 202 EF

Christmas Term 2020

Mid Term Exam

Mini-Proposal
Landscape Analysis and Climate Change:
KALAHAN FOREST RESERVE AS A POTENTIAL CARBON SINK
FOR CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION

I. Introduction

Forests and climate change are directly linked to one another. The forests ability to
deliver its environmental services are affected by changes in climate. Likewise, forest
denudation caused carbon dioxide (CO2) emission into the atmosphere that will bring
about climate change. The decline in forest area will also decrease the ecosystem
services benefits it provides such as water supply, biodiversity habitat, carbon
sequestration, soil protection, climate regulation, recreational, spiritual, and cultural
services.

Globally, the loss of forests contributed to 30% of global greenhouse emissions each
year (Johnson, 2009). This is because a large quantity of carbon is sequestered in
natural forests (up to 250 MgC per hectare) which could be released as CO2 gas to the
air through deforestation (Lasco et al, 2008).

On the other hand, forests could also absorb 2.6 billion tonnes of CO2, which is one-
third of the carbon dioxide released from burning fossil fuels, every year (IUCN, 2017).
Trees that are planted in forests have a high carbon sequestration rate (mean of 4.3
MgC per hectare per year) which provide greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation services
(Lasco et.al, 2008).

The Philippines, which has a forest cover of 7,014,152 hectares as of 2015 (DENR-
FMB, 2019), could offer areas that could serve as carbon sinks. Among them is the
Kalahan Forest Reserve (KFR) in Northern Philippines. The existing dense forests of
KFR should be protected and sustained to avoid carbon dioxide emissions.

This proposal would like to explore the dynamics of land cover changes happening in
the Kalahan Forest Reserve from 1989 to 2010. Attributing the land cover change as
an important factor on the carbon mitigation potential of KFR, this study would like to
find out the land cover changes and fragmentation of the forest, which are crucial in
determining the potential of KFR as a carbon sink.

1
a. Background

The KFR is part of the Ikalahan-Kalanguya Ancestral Domain situated in the

mountainous lands of Nueva Vizcaya and Pangasinan provinces in Northern Luzon. It
covers 14,730 hectares with an altitude of 600 to 1,717 meters above sea level (Pulhin
et al, 2017). The average annual rainfall is 4,000mm while temperature ranges
between 8°C to 24°C (KEF, 2010).

The KFR covers seven barangays, six (6) of which are under the municipality of Sta.
Fe in Nueva Vizcaya province, while one (1) barangay belonged to the municipality of
San Nicolas in Pangasinan province. It sustains three rivers: the Talavera River located
in Nueva Ecija, the Magat River in the provinces of Nueva Vizcaya and Isabela; and
the Pampang River in Pangasinan (RUPES-Kalahan). It hosts a diverse floral and
faunal species, with 286 species of vascular plants belonging to 75 families, eight
species of which are critically endangered based on the IUCN Red lists (KEF, 2010).
Aside from flora, KFR is also rich in wildlife species such as birds (Pulhin et al, 2017).
Figure 1. Location Map of Kalahan Forest Reserve (Source:researchgate.net)

The KFR is managed by the Kalahan Educational Foundation (KEF) which was
established in 1973 to protect the ancestral lands and the culture of the people living
in it. The KEF entered into a Memorandum of Agreement on May 13, 1974 with the
Bureau of Forest Development (now the Forest Management Bureau) to establish KFR
and manage all the natural resources within the reserve (Dolom and Serrano, 2006).

The people residing in KFR are called Ikalahans, and more than 90% of the population
are connected to the Kalanguya tribe (Encarnacion, 1999). In the Kalanguya dialect,
Kalahan means “forest” and I means “living in”; thus the term Ikalahan means “people
living in the forest”.

The Ikalahans are recognized for their “indigenous knowledge practice systems” that
are environment-friendly. Among these practices are: (a) day-og and gengen, a
primitive composting method on flat and sloping lands, respectively, to reinstate soil
fertility within three months; (b) pang-omis, a system of accelerating the fallow that was
devised by a tribal elder; and (3) balkah, a contour line of deep-rooted plants that catch
eroded topsoil at the belt line (Rice 2000).
2
b. Review of Literature

It is important to understand land cover changes in forests and the part that forests
play in the carbon cycle since forests are both carbon sources and carbon sinks. It also
helped maintain Earth’s carbon balance and is a stabilizing force in climate change.

Carbon Cycle and Climate Change

“Carbon cycle” relates to the cyclical carbon movement from land and water to the
atmosphere and the living organisms. The uptake of carbon by forests decreases the
rate of accumulation of carbon in the atmosphere, that resulted to the slowing down of
the rate of climate change occurrence.
Figure 2. The Carbon Cycle (Source: https://medium.com)

A forest becomes a carbon source when it emits more carbon than it stores. Carbon
from forests is emitted when trees are burned or died due to old age or, fire, insect
attacks or other natural and man-made disturbances.

On the other hand, a forest becomes a carbon sink when it soaks up more carbon from
the air than it emitted. Forests soak up carbon from the air through photosynthesis,
which are then stored in the trees’ biomass (branches, trunks, leaves, and roots), in
decaying organic matter (dead wood and litter) and in the soils. This whole process of
carbon assimilation and discharge is called carbon sequestration.

Thus, the determination of whether a forest is a source or a sink of carbon is dependent

on the net balance of all of these carbon exchanges.

Carbon Sequestration Projects in the Philippines

As of 2008, there were three carbon sequestration projects that were being developed
in the Philippines to qualify for registration to the United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change. The projects were the following:

3
1) The Laguna Lake Development Authority (LLDA)-Tanay Streambank Rehabilitation
Project proposed by LLDA and the Municipality of Tanay to reduce GHG emissions,
restore the Tanay watershed, and provide social and economic benefits to the local
community through the (a) reforestation of 70 hectares of private lands; (b)
establishment of 25 hectares of agroforestry farms in public lands; and (3)
sequestration of 10,000-20,000 tons of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere in 20
years. The project area will also be increased to 1,000 hectares.

Figure 3. Net Carbon Sequestration under Various Scenarios of the LLDA Project in Tanay, Rizal (Lasco, et al, 2008)

2) The Kalahan Forestry Carbon Projects proposed by the KEF that actively seeks
prospective collaborators and buyers of carbon through two (2) markets: the
regulated carbon market through the Kyoto’s Clean Development Mechanism
(CDM), and the voluntary carbon market.
 For the Kyoto market, KEF seeks to convert 900 hectares of marginal and idle
agriculture lands through reforestation and agro-forestry that will boost the
livelihood in the locality and protect the watershed, preserve the biodiversity, and
enhance the land beauty of tourism areas through community-based forest
management.
 For the voluntary carbon market, the KEF aims to preserve 10,000 hectares of
secondary forests for production and carbon sequestration services through the
rigid implementation of Forest Improvement Technology (FIT) established by the
Ikalahans.

Figure 4. Estimated Net Cumulative CO 2-e removals by the Proposed Kalahan Reforestation Project, Philippines
(Villamayor and Lasco, 2006)

4
 3) Conservation International Philippines Sierra Madre Project to restore and preserve
12,500 hectares within the Sierra Madre Biodiversity Corridor broken down as
follows: (a) protection of 5,000 hectares of natural forests scheduled for cutting; (b)
establishment of an agroforestry project on 2,000 hectares of brush land areas that
will give a more steady income to the people and minimize dependence on forest
products, and (c) restoration of 5,500 hectares of grassland areas to hardwood
forests by planting a mixture of fast-growing and native species through community-
based forest management.

The project is expected to sequester a total of 512,000 tons of carbon, mostly

coming from the reforestation component (453,000 tons of carbon) after 30 years
(Lasco et al, 2008).

II. Statement of the Problem

This proposal is experimental and investigative, and seeks to answer the following
questions:
1) Are there any significant land cover changes on Kalahan Forest Reserve?
2) What are these changes and how much change was detected?
3) What are the impacts of the land cover changes detected on Kalahan Forest
Reserve?
4) What are the implications of land cover changes to the community and its
stakeholders?

a. Hypothesis

Land cover changes on any spatial unit suggest an alteration to the area’s processes.
It is assumed that any changes in the land cover of Kalahan Forest Reserve (pattern)
will significantly affect its carbon sequestration capacity (process). A forest reserve
should therefore maintain or increase its land cover to continuously provide such
service.

b. Objectives

The study intends to establish the importance of monitoring land cover changes in
Kalahan Forest Reserve. Specifically, it aims to:
1) Measure land cover changes on Kalahan Forest Reserve;
2) Assess and evaluate potential impacts of the land cover change on KFR’s
capacity as a carbon sink; and
3) Analyze implications of the changes and provide possible recommendations

c. Theoretical Background and Conceptual Framework

The assessment of the land cover changes in KFR will be considered as anthropogenic
in origin. Hence, human activities will be at the center of the analysis, and will look at
its potential effect to the ecosystem’s provisioning services of carbon sequestration,

5
 and its implications to the well-being of the community, especially to the direct
stakeholders of the said resource.

Hence, this proposal will use the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Framework as its
conceptual framework in its analysis.

Figure 5. The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Framework

d. Fragstats Analysis

1) Metrics Selected and Rationale for Selection

This study will use landscape analysis on a Class Level through Fragstats. The
following metrics will be used:

NP (Number of Patches) – count of patch per class; using 8-neighbor rule to include
adjacent patches
LPI (Largest Patch Index) – for the determination of largest patch existing per class
and its percent in area which can be compared between the two temporal
data for detecting further fragmentation or recovery; can also show
dominant patch type
CLUMPY (Clumpyness) – will be used as an additional indicator of fragmentation
FRAC_MN (Fractal Shape Mean)- for measuring complexity of patches which can
help indicate severity of fragmentation and its potential for further loss or
recovery
PLAND (Percentage of Landscape) – to compute for the percentage of area covered
per class type
TA (Total Area) – to compute for total area covered per class type
6
 To analyze the effect of landscape change to the carbon sequestration capacity of
KFR, data such as biomass and carbon densities of the forests will be collected. The
land use plan of KFR will also be included in the analysis to establish whether the
decrease or increase in the forests area could be attributed to the land use plan of the
community.

Secondary data on carbon sequestration computation from previous studies conducted

on KFR will also be utilized to establish the potential of KFR as a carbon sink for climate
change mitigation.

2) Results

Forests need to keep their land cover to continuously provide carbon sequestration
services. Thus, a change in the land cover could significantly affect its capacity.

To detect changes in KFR’s land cover, analysis was conducted using the Fragstats
software. Comparing the available data from the maps generated for 1989, 2002, and
2010, the temporal changes and measurements per indicator are as follows:
Table 1. Fragstats Result for Kalahan Forest Reserve, 1989, 2002 and 2010 Land Cover

Land Cover TA PLAND NP

1989 2002 2010 1989 2002 2010 1989 2002 2010
Bare Soil 1,823.3449 1,716.6380 197.5810 13.3901 12.5912 1.4491 1,205 459 343
Pine Dominant 3,009.4332 2,888.7351 2,842.0870 22.1004 21.1882 20.8441 1,092 684 197
Grass/Brush 3,786.1364 4,386.3628 5,377.7677 27.8043 32.173 39.4409 1,422 729 770
Dipterocarp 2,646.8723 2,042.3553 2,491.3028 19.4379 14.9802 18.2714 529 455 617
Mossy Forest 2,121.4527 2,599.5817 2,726.2547 15.5794 19.0674 19.9945 272 462 169
Cloud 229.8303 1.6878 54
Land Cover LPI FRAC_MN CLUMPY
1989 2002 2010 1989 2002 2010 1989 2002 2010
Bare Soil 1.6974 4.0940 0.0939 1.0430 1.0563 1.0400 0.6505 0.7702 0.5448
Pine Dominant 7.1903 5.2639 7.2403 1.0371 1.0423 1.0371 0.7516 0.7560 0.8801
Grass/Brush 16.3356 22.7714 30.6380 1.0465 1.0428 1.0433 0.5883 0.7219 0.8012
Dipterocarp 11.4270 8.8427 10.9772 1.0593 1.0484 1.0497 0.7550 0.8100 0.8061
Mossy Forest 8.9494 15.6138 10.9334 1.0518 1.0425 1.0465 0.7926 0.8301 0.9079
Cloud 0.4761 1.0547 0.8424

As shown in Table 1, it is very noticeable how bare soil, as well as pine dominant forest,
have been significantly decreasing from 1989 to 2010. On the other hand, the
grass/brush land and mossy forests are also significantly increasing from 1989 to 2010.
However, the dipterocarp forests had decreased from 1989 to 2002, but had been
increasing from 2002 to 2010. A cloud cover of approximately 230 hectares was also
captured in the 1989 map.

The dominant land cover is grass/brush lands as shown by the LPI, with the highest
fragmentation from 1989 to 2010 based on the NP. All patches of land cover are also

7
maximally aggregated as shown by Clumpyness, with a slight shape complexity as
shown by FRAC-MN, indicating a high fragmentation of the land cover.

3) Discussion

Tabel 1 also showed that there are three major forest communities in KFR. These are
(a) the pine (Pinus kesiya) forest located on the western side, (b) the dipterocarp forest
situated on the eastern portion, and (3) the mossy forest (Fagaceous-myrtaceous)
located on the central part of the reserve (Pulhin et al, 2017).
The pine forest is a grassland area dominated by Pinus kesiya trees and hosts 30
species of trees (Pulhin et al, 2017). The dipterocarp or lowland evergreen forest has
the highest species diversity containing a total of 93 different tree species (Pulhin et al,
2017). The mossy forest, which hosts 48 tree species (Pulhin et al, 2017), is part of the
sanctuary forest where human intervention is little or totally none (Pampolina, 2013).
The increasing trend in the area of mossy forests could be attributed to the fact that
mossy forests are part of the sanctuary forests where all human interventions that were
implemented were geared towards the protection, preservation, and sustainability of
the ecological services it offered: as a watershed and as a wildlife habitat.

Figure 6. KFR Land Cover Map, 1989 Figure 7. KFR Land Cover Map, 2002 Figure 8. KFR Land Cover Map, 2010

It is also very noticeable from the land use map and Table 1 that what was once bare
soil in 1989 (Figure 6) and 2002 (Figure 7) were now grass/brush lands in 2010 (Figure
8), with a scatter of some dipterocarp forest trees. This indicated that after 2002, KEF
had implemented some drastic measures to change their land use cover, with respect
to their land use plan in 2000 (Table 2).
Table 2. Land Use Plan in Kalahan Forest Reserve (Rice, 2000)

8
 The impetus for the implementation of such changes in their land use could have been
brought about by the selection of KFR in 2003 as the first pilot area in the country that
would serve as a model for a carbon sequestration payment mechanism (de Luna et
al, 2019). As early as 1994, the KEF had already started data collection on KFR’s tree
growth, and had a good basis to demand for carbon sequestration payments because
of their management of KFR (RUPES-Kalahan). KEF estimated that 38,383 tons of
CO2 were captured by the KFR in 2002 (Villamayor and Lasco, 2006).

Hence, in 2004, the KEF set up two (2) nurseries that supply seedlings of various tree
species for planting within KFR and nearby communities under the ancestral domain.
Around 89,702 assorted forest trees, mostly indigenous species, were planted on
around 40 hectares within the domain, and enhancement plantings were also done in
KFR (Villamayor and Lasco, 2006). These reforestation and rehabilitation activities
were done in grasslands, brush lands and open areas, which contributed to the
decreasing trend of bare soil and an increase in forests areas as shown in Table 1 and
the 2010 KFR map.

The KEF also targeted to implement the following land use plan until the year 2020 to
increase the carbon sequestration potential of KFR.
Table 3. Population and Resource Changes in the Kalahan Forest Reserve, Philippines

The biomass and carbon densities of the three forest communities in KFR were also
computed by a research team who did an onsite study of the forests in KFR. The results
of this study are shown in Figures 9 and 10. The secondary forest referred to in both
figures is the dipterocarp forest.

Figure 9. Biomass Densities of the Forest Communities in KFR Figure 10. Carbon Densities of the Forest Communities in KFR
(Pulhin et al, 2017) (Pulhin et al, 2017)

9
 Based on the result of the study done on the three forest communities, the pine forest
stores the largest amount of biomass and carbon. This forest community has a
biomass density of 324.82 Mg ha–1 (Brown 1997) and a carbon density of 146.17Mg
ha–1 (Brown 1997). About 88% of the biomass is contributed by the trees while the
remaining 13% comes from the roots. The high amount of carbon present in the pine
forest is attributed to the large trees present in the ecosystem, in which 27% have a
diameter at breast height (DBH) higher than 35 cm (Pulhin et al, 2017). Biomass and
carbon of a forest ecosystem is highly influenced by the DBH of trees present in the
said ecosystem (Paoli et al. 2008; Rutishauser et al. 2010)

The secondary forest or dipterocarp forest in KFR ranks second in biomass and carbon
densities. The biomass density is 146.17 Mg ha–1 (Brown 1997) while the carbon
density is 65.78 Mg ha–1 (Brown 1997). These values are lower than the biomass
estimates derived for secondary forest in the Philippines, which could be due to the
absence of large trees in this forest.

Lastly, the mossy forest of KFR has the lowest biomass and carbon density. The
biomass density of mossy forest is 128.84 Mg ha–1 (Brown 1997) while its carbon
density is 57.98 Mg ha–1. Trees inside the mossy forest of KFR are relatively small,
with an average DBH value of 11.9 cm since majority of the total trees belong to DBH
class of 5–15 cm (Pulhin, et al, 2017).

Thus, the results of previous studies conducted on KFR showed that KFR’s forest land
area of 5,087 hectares holds a total carbon of 457,698.79 Mg (Brown 1997). Initial
estimates on KFR’s sequestration potential also showed that the KFR could store 1.7
M t of CO2 for a period of 20 years (Lasco and Villamayor, 2010).

These results imply that KFR has a great potential to serve as a carbon sink, which
could still be further improved through protection and rehabilitation activities that
include providing alternative livelihoods to the local communities, thereby minimizing
the demand for forest resources and decreasing shifting cultivation practices in KFR.

III. Literature Cited

1) Brown, S. 1997. Estimating Biomass and Biomass Change of Tropical Forest. A
Primer. FAO Forestry Paper 134. United Nations Food and Agriculture
Organization, Rome.
2) Department of Environment and Natural Resources-Forest Management Bureau
(DENR-FMB). 2019. Philippine Forestry Statistics
3) De Luna, Catherine C. Garcia, Josephine E. and Pulhin, Juan M. October 24, 2019.
The Kalahan Educational Foundation: On the Ground Initiative for Forest
Conservation and Culture Preservation. Food and Fertilizer Technology (FFTC) for
the Asian and Pacific Region Agricultural Policy Platform.
4) Dizon, J.T. Pulhin, J.M. and Cruz, R.V.O. 2008. Impacts of Forest Tenure Reform
in an Ancestral Domain Area: The Case of the Kalahan Educational Foundation in
Nueva Vizcaya, Philippines. Center for International Forestry Research, Rights
and Resources Initiative Project, College of Forestry and Natural Resources and
University of the Philippines Los Banos Foundation, Inc. Philippines.
10
 5) Dolom, B. L. and Serrano, R. C. 2006. The Ikalahan: Traditions Bearing Fruit. In
search of excellence: exemplary forest management in Asia and the Pacific. FAO,
Rome.
6) Encarnacion, C.S. 1999. Community Based Enterprises and Conservation: The
Kalahan Forest Farms Development Project-Natural Resource Management in the
Kalahan Reserve. Unasylva.
7) International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). November 2017. Issues
Brief: Forests and Climate Change.
8) Johnson, Toni. December 21, 2009. Deforestation and Greenhouse Gas
Emissions. Council on Foreign Relations.
9) Kalahan Educational Foundation. 2010. Rapid Agro–Biodiversity Appraisal
(RABA): Kalahan, Nueva Vizcaya, Philippines. Project Report. Imugan, Nueva
Vizcaya, Philippines.
10) Lasco, Rodel D. Pulhin, Florencia B. Sanchez, Patricia Ann J. Villamayor, Grace
B. and Villegas, Karl Abelard L. June 2008. Climate Change and Forest
Ecosystems in the Philippines: Vulnerability, Adaptation and Mitigation. Journal of
Environmental Science and Management.
11) Lasco, Rodel D. and Villamayor, Grace B. 2010. Payments for Ecological Services:
Experiences in Carbon and Water Payments in the Philippines. In, Sustainability
Science for Watershed Landscapes. Roumasset, JA, KM Burnett and AM
Balisacan Eds. ISEAS Publishing, Singapore.
12) Pampolina, N. M., Torres, A. M. and Pulhin, F. B. 2013. Biodiversity Assessment
of the Kalahan Forest Reserve (KFR). Final report. World Agroforestry Center,
International Rice Research Institute, College, Laguna.
13) Paoli, G. Curran, L. and Slik, J. 2008. Soil Nutrients Affect Spatial Patterns of
Aboveground Biomass and Emergent Tree Density in Southwestern Borneo.
Oecologia 155, 287–299.
14) Pulhin, Florencia B. Lasco, Rodel D. Torres, Alfie M. and Pampolina, Nelson M.
October 2017. Carbon Storage of the Trees and Roots of the Different Forest
Communities of Kalahan Forest Reserve, Philippines. Ecosystems & Development
Journal 7(2).
15) Rice, D. 2000. Forest Management by a Forest Community: The Experience of the
Ikalahan. A Study Report of the Project-Planning for Sustainability of Forests
through Adaptive Co-management. Manila: Asian Development Bank.
16) RUPES-Kalahan. Site Profile: RUPES-Kalahan. The World Agroforestry Centre
(ICRAF). Indonesia
17) Rutishauser, E. Wagner, F. Herault, B. Nicolini, E.A. and Blanc, L. 2010.
Contrasting above–ground biomass balance in a Neotropical rain forest. Journal
of Vegetation Science 21, 672 –682.
18) Villamor, Grace B. and Lasco, Rodel D. 2006. Case Study 7: The Ikalahan
Ancestral Domain, the Philippines. Community Forest Management as a Carbon
Mitigation Option: Case Studies. Center for International Forestry Research,
Indonesia.
Submitted by:
Name: MA. RAYSOLYN E. NATIVIDAD
Student No: 1996-91687

11