Effect of Climate Change and Carbon sequestration in Chure range of Nepal Todays Hot Issue in climate change

Developing countries like Nepal has the potentiality to earn money from the carbon sequestration if the forest are managed properly but my research visit on the Chure of Terai area ( Dhanusa, Sharlahi ) has shown the massive deforestation in Dhanusa district. The ten days visit for the chure range area clearly denotes that no trees will be remaining after few years if the government became unable to take the serious action. The research basically focuses on the current situation of the forest and to calculate the total carbon sequestrated in the terrestrial environment. Scientists from the NAST (Nepal Academy of Science and Technology) and the students from TU along with me approached for the real research in Chure range. Let’s know about the carbon sequestration and different perspectives on the carbon sequestration.

Simply, it’s very easy to understand about the carbon. We people are exchanging the oxygen and carbon-dioxide during respiration. Thus, Carbon is the foundation of life. All living tissues have carbon atoms in their composition and the cycle of this element is basically the cycle of life in our planet. The carbon cycle involves the soil and all vegetation and animal life on earth. Plants absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and through photosynthesis, capture the carbon molecules for energy and build up of structural components. Part of this carbon returns to the atmosphere soon after being processed through respiration. Other parts stay as standing biomass for some time, returning to the cycle as organisms die and decompose. Some of the standing biomass will eventually be eaten by animals, with half of it exhaled immediately, the other returned as bodily wastes to the soil later in time. Once in the soil, microorganisms metabolized them, gradually returning them to the atmosphere, or leaching out as carbonates through the soil.

Forest ecosystems have essentially three carbon pools: the living biomass, detritus (debris from dead plants and animals) and soils. Soils contain almost twice as much carbon as the aboveground vegetation and the atmosphere carbon combined (Brady 1996). Through the decomposition and the accumulation of organic matter, soils have a major effect on the regulation of the carbon cycle. When soil and aboveground organic matter decline, atmospheric carbon increases, with global consequences, such as the greenhouse effect. Potential mechanisms for reducing net carbon emissions through increased carbon sequestration include the forest ecosystem together with the forest socio-economic system, with both of those systems dynamic's affecting the carbon cycle. Conservation and adaptive management of existing forests, the establishment of new forests (forest ecosystem level) and the substitution of fossil fuel based energy and products by wood biomass (forest socio-economic system) could further increase the fixation of carbon from the atmosphere (Kohlmaier et al 1998). 

Forests store carbon as they accumulate biomass, but forests are also commercial sources of timber and wood fiber. In most carbon accounting budgets, forest harvesting is usually considered to cause a net release of carbon from the terrestrial biosphere to the atmosphere (Houghton et al 1983, Harmon et al 1990). As the debate about controlling or mitigating atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations moves from the study of the scientific issues to a search for practical solutions, a central question becomes whether commercial use of forests could be managed to contribute to terrestrial sequestration of carbon. Can forest management practices be developed so that they meet the multiple goals of providing wood and paper products, economic returns from natural resources, and also sequester carbon from the atmosphere? In managed forests, the amount of additional carbon sequestered will be determined by three factors: the increase of standing carbon biomass due to land use changes and increased productivity, the amount of carbon remaining below ground at end of rotation, and the amount of carbon sequestered in products and energy, including their disposal (Johnsen et. al. 2001). 

As stated previously, forests represent a huge storage of carbon since they hold about 80 % of the carbon fixed in the living biota, and much interest and effort has been put into their study, because of the possibility of being directly altered by human activity (Apps & Price 1996). The role of forests, as sink and sources of carbon in the carbon cycle, is not static at any spatial or temporal scale. Temporal changes in the forest ecosystem carbon pools are mainly driven by the dynamics of the carbon pools. Keeping track of the ecosystem processes, including population dynamics, is a crucial part of the carbon assessment. This assessment should be done at the stand level, which is believed to be the appropriate scale for such analysis (Apps & Price 1996; Harmon 2001). Forest ecosystems are complex, dynamic and diverse. Forest stands can be complex, dynamic and diverse. They all have however, three carbon pools: the living biomass, detritus and soil pools. All of these components have a role in the carbon cycle dynamics. The soil, a natural body of organic and inorganic materials and living forms, provide the substrate for plant growth. Detritus, the debris from dead plants and animals, is a source of storage as well as a source of food. The live biomass, which includes above and below ground pools, composed of coarse and fine roots, under story and canopy, captures carbon dioxide while releasing oxygen, and also respires, releasing part of the carbon dioxide previously absorbed. A more detailed literature review will be given first for soil, followed by above and below live biomass. Lastly, the detritus component will be explored, including plant debris (litter fall) and harvest residuals (slash).

Conversion of natural to agricultural ecosystems has lead to drastic perturbations in the processes governing the soil organic carbon dynamics. Deforestation, biomass burning, plowing, residue removal, fertilization and single crop cycles have been depleting the earth's soils in most agro-ecosystems by 50 to 70% (Lal 1995). The effects of forest management on carbon soil storage are not as clear nor as well understood as in agricultural systems. Estimated carbon storage in below-ground components is known and has been measured (Brady 1996), but it is mostly how harvesting and management affects the soil carbon where knowledge is lacking. 

World perspective in accounting for the sequestered carbon

The Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (1998) prescribes that net flows into or out of the biosphere will be represented by the changes in carbon stocks. This notion simplifies the measurements and accounting processes. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2000) is consistent with this prescription, defining carbon sequestration as an increase in carbon stocks anywhere but in the atmosphere. The important issue is "additionality" (Chomitz 2000). Additionality addresses the idea that carbon sequestration or reduced emissions can result from a management change. Management alternatives can be compared against a base line, to measure the change from "business as usual". Afforestation of grazing land for example, is a one time huge addition of carbon pools and if reforested after disturbance, the carbon pools can be maintained through a long period of time. 
How do we measure carbon and how can we estimate the variations in the different terrestrial pools? Biomass is one of the key characteristics of forest ecosystems because it contributes in the definition of carbon flux and nutrients, as well as the potential standing and dead organic matter in a particular site. Biomass studies are essential for understanding ecosystem dynamics. Biomass studies are static however, describing and estimating living and dead material in a particular stand at a particular time (Santantonio et al 1977). Combining biomass studies with growth models seems to be the most straightforward manner for estimating component masses at different points in time at the stand scale. The carbon storage pattern simulated by the model is static, meaning productivity of site is assumed constant as embedded in the original inventory in question, without possible changes associated to different temporal scales, like the global warming issue. The Kyoto Protocol specifies integration of greenhouse emissions with corresponding offsets credits if carbon is removed from the atmosphere on a 5-year commitment period. Integration over spatial scale might be used as well to decrease the costs in accounting, monitoring and verification.

Nepal’s perspective in carbon sequestration

Nepal contributes the least to climate change, yet is likely to experience the most severe impacts. The latest report on world’s most vulnerable region to climate change is truly abysmal. Nepal is the 4th most vulnerable country to climate change, according to British-based global risks advisory firm, Maplecroft. Nepal has lost 1.23 per cent of forest per year between 1990 and 2010 leaving only 25.4 percent of its forest cover. Model-based approach and satellite imagery tools used to study change in soil carbon stocks in different regions of Nepal show huge loss of SOC in terrestrial ecosystems primarily due to deforestation and land use changes. However, there are windows of opportunities to sequester carbon by managing forests and restoring degraded lands. There is limited research on soil carbon sequestration in Nepal. Past and present researches are concentrated on forest carbon stocks. The focus needs to be stretched out into other systems like grasslands or croplands. Carbon sequestration presents opportunities to receive credit under Kyoto Protocol. Similarly, Reducing Emission from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) offers multiple benefit including carbon payments for carbon stocks (Source: Himalayan times, 2011)

The Kyoto Protocol recognized the importance of forest in mitigating the greenhouse gas emission (i.e. carbon dioxide, methane and other compounds) and has included forest and soil C sequestration in the list of acceptable offsets (UNFCCC, 1997). Thus, reducing emission from deforestation and forest degradation has emerged as an incentive mechanism for developing countries. However, updated national forest inventory data and technical capacity is poor and accounting of changes in forest cover biomass stock, carbon emission and carbon removal are limited in the developing countries like Nepal (Dangi and Acharya, 2009). Therefore, this study has endeavored to assess the carbon of the Chure range.

As per the provisions of Forest Act (1993), traditional forest users form a group to manage their adjoining forest.  To date, 14,500 community forest user groups (CFUGs) are managing more than 30% of national forests. They have access, use, extraction and management rights (Agrawal and Ostrom, 2001) over the forest. Alienation rights are still retained by the state, but more than 7,000 forestry staff and many NGOs support the preparation of forest operational plans and constitutions which are implemented by the local forest users. Forest  user  groups  have  also  formed  the Federation  of  Community  Forest  Users,  Nepal  (FECOFUN)  to  safeguard  their  rights  in  forest governance. The district forest officer hands over the tenure rights of forest management to forest user groups. The user groups then sustainably harvest forest products – fuel wood, poles, timber, grass and tree fodder, herbs etc. for their own use as per the operational plan. The plan specifies the amount of the annual  forest  harvest, which  is  usually  distributed  among  the  users  by  charging  a  nominal  fee. Surplus forest products are sold at competitive market rates.  The income  from  the  sale  of  forest products and from annual membership  fees  raised by the users  is deposited  in  a  fund managed by the  users  themselves.  A  preliminary  study  conducted  by  the  Community  Forest  Division  in  2004 showed that forest user groups of Nepal earn more than US$ 10 million annually (Kanel and Niraula, 2004;  Kanel,  2008). The income is used for community development, forest conservation and management, and livelihood promotion.  Nepal is preparing to collect the money from the developed countries but the scenario of the chure range of the country is totally different. Chisapani area in Dhanusa district has been affected due to massive deforestation. This area lies between the Kamala Mai river and Selar river.  Majority of the people of that area has been migrated from Sindhuli District. The major activity of the people is to cut trees. Length area about 50 to 100 meters area from the river bank has been encroached by the local people. With the 10 km by foot we reached in the Gaichi of Dhanusa district, there we saw massive deforestation. Many bull carts are carrying the timber; numbers of trees were fallen down, many trees area fired etc. Millions of naturally valuable property has been changed in ash and the fertile area is being converting into the desert. It’s difficult to imagine the situation of deforestation; the area may change into desert with in the year. Those locals threatened us saying that we may chase them. They encircled for more than an hour. They are repeatedly saying that the deforestation has increased and we are facing the problem. We realized the situation that without the support of them, deforestation would not be possible. They are pretending upon the situation. The preliminary research report shows that carbon sequestration amount is in decreasing trend. Thus, only 15 to 20 trees are found in the 25*25 m² plot area. This shows that the number of trees has been decreased. Different are being faced by the people in Chure range are scarcity of drinking water, shortage of fodder, increase in temperature, landslide, flooding etc.  The field visit and the informal questionnaires have proved the real scenario. In current situation, the forest of Chure range cannot get the money from Clean Development Mechanism but Nepal has to invest large amount of money to mange the environment of the Chure range with in few years or government has to bear the migrating population from Chure to different areas of Nepal. The area is very fragile in geographical condition. The haphazard extraction of the sand, stones from the river area has shown the real tragedy situation of the people and the environment. Nepal’s President has given interest to mange the problems of Chure but the government initiation is very slow and poor. Much news is being published in different daily news papers related to deforestation but Concerned Authorities hasn’t taken any initiation to control it. Government is beyond the real situation in Carbon sequestration of Chure range and it is only day dreaming to collect money. The concerned authorities are paving the ways on the same situation without the relevant data.

In conclusion, Government of Nepal is beyond the real situation of deforestation of Dhanusa district in Chure rage. The people’s short term desire to be rich, shifting of landless people, poor economic condition of the people, the politicians etc are responsible for the forestation degradation. The situation of the Sarlahi was comparatively satisfactory than Dhanusa district but proper management is to be done. If this type of forest management program is lunched then we can earn money if the forest are managed otherwise we need to invest money for the management of the forest in the real scenario.    

^{rsrajansubedi@gmail.com}

^{Environmental Science}