Mt. Merapi | Eruptions damage surrounding forests

The eruption of hot clouds and volcanic ash from Mount Merapi have caused significant damage to forests surrounding the mountain, a government official says.

The current eruptions have damaged at least 400 hectares of forest on the slopes of Merapi, after around 560 hectares were damaged in the 2006 eruptions.

"The damage may grow with later eruptions," Central Java Forestry Agency chief Sri Puryono said Tuesday.

Reforestation efforts were due to commence in November, Pur-yono said.

Central Java and Yogyakarta, where Mount Merapi lies, are home to a total of 6,500 hectares of forest.

The steep gradients and the slow growth of mountainous plants around Merapi would be likely to make the reforestation process slow, he said.

Puryono said the forest could to take up to 10 years to recover.

"Besides pine and rasamala trees, we plan to grow guava trees for the animals," he said, explaining that his office had been informed by residents living around the forests that many monkeys had been venturing into villages because of a scarcity of fruit trees in their habitat.

"The provincial administration has earmarked Rp 4 million [about

US$400] per hectare for the reforestation program," Puryono said.

He added that the economic cost of the environmental damage had not been estimated, but said ecological damage had clearly taken place, especially the death of vegetation and water pollution.

The numbers of animals had declined in affected areas, Semarangs Diponegoro University environmental science Prof. Sudharto P. Hadi said.

This had made it more difficult for local residents to predict volcanic activity since previously birds and animals, would descend from the mountain prior to an eruption, he said.

"The Javanese call it the titen knowledge, or reading the naturalsigns that can be used to predict a natural phenomenon," he said, adding that the community now had to rely solely on official warnings from the government.

The number of animals in the area has reportedly declined drastically because of damage to the forests.

Sand quarrying on the slopes of Merapi, which has now extended to the Merapi National Park, has been blamed for some of this damage.

"The government should take a firm stance on those involved in environmental destruction. Residents around Mount Merapi sometimes still have more faith in natural signs compared to scientific explanations, so both of them need to be in synergy," he said.

Source : The Jakarta Post

Merapi eruption halts social, economic activities in Kebumen

After a series of rain of ashes from the erupting Mount Merapi in Yogyakarta pouring their city in the past three days, residents of Kebumen, Central Java, said they had seen their regular social and economic activities affected by the incident.

Dalyunani, 66, who lives nearby Karanganyar railway station, said she had found only several stalls operating in the Karanganyar wet market since Friday after most vendors in the market had chosen to stay at home following the first heavy rain of ashes the day before.

"It makes the price of many vegetables, like potatoes and water spinach, have increased by double," she told The Jakarta Post Saturday.

Umi, a water spinach farmer from Sruweng district, said she could not sell her product to the market since Thursday after her water spinach field had been covered by volcanic ashes.

"There is no chance I can supply water spinach again until the [Merapi] eruption fully ended," the mother of six said.

Both Umi and Dalyunani said they had also warned their family members to wear mask every time they went for outdoor activities.

Located 120 kilometers away west of Yogyakarta, Kebumen has found most buildings, vehicles, trees and streets in its area covered by a thin layer of volcanic ashes.

Some students met by the Post on Saturday morning said their school had asked them to return home, saying that the teaching activities would be resumed until the situation "get better."

"But no teacher could say when exactly we could go to school again," said Bahtiar, an 8th grader in SMP 4 Kebumen State Junior High School.

Source : http://www.thejakartapost.com

Merapi’s wrath claims more lives

Burned to ash: An Indonesian Red Cross official examines the damage from the plumes of hot ash and lava from Mount Merapi at Bronggang village, Cangkringan, Sleman regency, in Yogyakarta on Friday. The 750 degree Celsius hot gas burned down several villages and killed more than 70 people from Thursday midnight. JP/Slamet Susanto

Hot clouds of ash and lava from smoldering Mount Merapi claimed more victims Friday, torching at least two villages in Yogyakarta and killing dozens of more lives.

The death toll from the disaster climbed to 122 on Friday, forcing authorities to expand the danger zone to a 20-kilometer radius from the mountain.

Ash showers spread to most cities in Central Java and Yogyakarta, where Indonesia’s most active volcano is located, and even reached as far as Bandung and Bogor, West Java.

Energy and Mineral Resources Ministry Geological Agency head R. Sukhyar said Merapi’s eruption could be heard up to 20 kilometers away while volcanic ash had reached as far as Bandung.

“Merapi’s eruption on Friday was the biggest in the country since Mount Galunggung’s eruption in 1982.

It is the biggest for Merapi in the past century,” he said Friday. Sukhyar said it was hard to calculate when the volcano would cease activity. “Do not ask us when it will stop. We really don’t know. Magma continues spilling.”

Before Friday’s eruption, the volcano had killed 44 people, mostly in its first eruption on Oct. 26, which destroyed two villages, Kaliadem and Kinahrejo, both in Cangkringan district, Sleman regency, Yogyakarta.

Two more villages, Bronggang Suruh in Argomulyo and Slodokan in Wukirsari, were completely devastated by the volcano’s hot clouds of ash and lava Friday.

“We did not predict hot clouds would reach Argomulyo, which is not located inside the 20-kilometer danger zone,” said Argomulyo resident Nur Syamsu Hadi on Friday. “The blast was very frightening. It was so loud and strong.”

He said most residents did not flee to safety, believing they were in the safe zone. The subdistrict is just 14.2 kilometers from the crater.

“People should have known to leave areas within 20 kilometers of Merapi. We have informed them,” Sleman administration spokeswoman Endah Sri Widiastuti said.

Volcanology and Geological Disaster Mitigation Center (PVMBG) head Surono said the magma supply from Friday’s eruption had risen from a depth of 7 kilometers beneath the crater. Previously, the eruptions’ magma came from a 2-kilometer depth. “That’s why the tremor could be heard up to a radius of 20 kilometers from the volcano,” he said.

Friday’s eruption also disrupted traffic and forced Yogyakarta’s Adi Sutjipto Airport authority to temporarily close the airport Friday. It is scheduled to resume activity Saturday morning.

National flag carrier Garuda Indonesia spokesman Pujobroto said in a statement that all passengers can reschedule their flights or refund their tickets by calling the Garuda Call Center at 08041807807.

Retno, a passenger of a Yogyakarta-Jakarta flight, said she was told her flight was canceled. “I have to wait until tomorrow for my flight.”

Soekarno-Hatta International Airport authority also canceled all flights leaving for Yogyakarta for safety reasons. The cancelation affected a total of 41 flights bound for Yogyakarta, causing thousands of passengers to be stranded for hours at Terminal 1.

Panti Nugroho Hospital on Jl. Kaliurang also decided to close operation Friday and evacuated its patients to Panti Rapih Hospital in downtown Yogyakarta.

“We made the decision as the site is no longer safe,” said the hospital’s director, Tendean Arif Wibowo.
Rescuers worked hard to evacuate survivors and the dead, struggling to cope with thick, hot volcanic dust and smoke from burning material.

“Evacuating victims is difficult since the condition is still dangerous. We prioritize survivors so they can immediately be sent to hospital,” said Purwo Gogon of Yogyakarta’s search and rescue team.

Victims, with clothes, blankets and even mattresses fused to their skin from 750 degree Celsius heat, were evacuated on stretchers following the explosion, The Associated Press reported.

Soldiers joined rescue operations in hardest-hit Bronggang village, pulling at least 78 bodies from homes and streets blanketed by ash up to 30-centimeters deep.

“The heat surrounded us and there was white smoke everywhere,” Niti Raharjo, 47, who was thrown from his motorbike along with his 19-year-old son while trying to flee, told the AP.

“I saw people running, screaming in the dark, people were so scared they fell unconscious,” he said from his hospital bed. “There was an explosion that sounded like bombs during a war ... and it got worse with ash and debris raining down.”

Police officer Col. Tjiptono told AP that most bodies were found in front of houses and on streets, adding it appeared many villagers died from searing gas while trying to escape.

In Semarang, head of Central Java Disaster Mitigation Body Djarot Nugroho said the eruption was beyond the calculations of PVMBG, the authority responsible for the regional administrations’ disaster mitigation plan.

These miscalculations, he said, were responsible for the failure to implement disaster mitigation plans, mainly in regards to refugees.

“Makeshift tents are unavailable since the area where they were deployed is now included in the danger zone,” he said Friday.

Source : http://www.thejakartapost.com

Flood in West Papua | Forest Damages Have Caused Flood in Wasior

Forest damages assumedly have caused flood in Wasior, West Papua, according to the Coordinator of Social and Environmental Advocacy Network in Papua (Jasoil) Pitsaw Amafnini.

Pitsaw explained that flood has inundated Wasior Kota and Wondiwoi District.

“Flooding is from overflowing Wasior and Dusner River. These rivers are overflowing because it cannot accommodate water, because soil of forest in Wasior cannot absorb the water after trees in the forest had been cut down,” said Pitsaw on Tuesday, 5 October 2010.

Residents of Wasior fled from their home, and now they stay at a temporary shelter. 57 injured people had been evacuated to Nabire Hospital. Until Tuesday evening, 56 residents of Wasior reportedly died in the flood. (E4). VHRmedia, Manokwari

Source: http://www.vhrmedia.com/Forest-Damages-Have-Caused-Flood-in-Wasior-news6086.html

Environment Ministry: forest conditions in Wasior good

Jakarta (ANTARA News) - The environment ministry (KLH) says that the condition of the forest above Wasior, the capital of Teluk Wondama district in West Papua is still good.

The office`s assistant deputy for lake and river damage control, Antung Deddy Radiansyah, said at the office here on Thursday a team of Green Indonesia Program had checked several days before the flash flood occured.

"A team from KLH conducted a field check several days before the flood and saw 90 percent of forest coverage was still good," Andung said.

He said the flood occured after the steep slope in the upstream area of Wasior River slided to cover the river.

"The landslide covered the river like damming it up to cause a flash flood," he said.
Andung also predicted the slope had fallen because of the effect of a recent earthquake in Papua.

According to data from satellite imaging the Wasior river was unable to hold rainwater after it was covered by soil from the landslide.

He said KLH had already made a map of areas vulnarable to landslides and floods across the country, also making a note of environmental destructions found in the areas.

"The man has been made known to all local governments since January 2010 including the Papua administration," he said.

Based on it he said local governments had to conduct delineation and identify areas vulnarable to natural disasters.

"Based on the map local governments must make an adaptation program to face climate change problems that may happen in their regions," he said.(*)

Source : http://www.antaranews.com/en/news/1286483438/environment-ministry-forest-conditions-in-wasior-good

Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in developing countries (REDD) - the link with wetlands

Wetlands and the REDD negotiations

Voluntary carbon trading schemes

Before briefly outlining potential links with wetlands in the negotiations on REDD in the Kyoto CDM-funded sense described in section 1 above, it should be noted that a number of voluntary carbon trading initiatives of relevance are also in existence. Some of these may continue outside the UNFCCC regulatory regime; while others are conceived as pilots for what could eventually be embraced by that regime.

For example, the World Bank launched its first prototype carbon fund in 2000, and now has ten carbon funds, including BioCarbon (BioCF) which is financing 3 pilot REDD projects. In 2007 the Bank launched the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility, designed to give pilot experiences of REDD in a few countries as background for the UNFCCC negotiations (the payment structures are based on options under discussion in the Convention), as well as helping to build capacity on the issue (World Bank, 2007). Indonesia has recently (March 2009) asked for support under this programme for reducing emissions from loss of both forests and peatlands. The FAO, UNDP and UNEP are also collaborating in a joint UN REDD programme, financed by a multi-donor trust fund established in 2008.

Among NGOs, Wetlands International operates a Global Peatland Fund for investing in peatland restoration and conservation projects with associated socioeconomic development goals, initially in Indonesia, which are designed to generate verified and tradeable carbon credits (Voluntary Emission Reductions, or VERs). The Fund will trade the VERs on international voluntary carbon markets, with a portion of profits going to the Fund’s investors and the rest being used to support community development projects. The UK’s Royal Society for the Protection of Birds is active with partner organisations in Europe on peatland restoration schemes (in Belarus, in particular) designed to operate in similar ways.

REDD in the post-2012 regime for the Kyoto Protocol

UNFCCC COP13 Decision 1/CP.13, known as the Bali Action Plan, sets out the process for preparing decisions to be made at COP15 in Copenhagen in December 2009 which will frame implementation of the Convention and the Kyoto Protocol in the period beyond 2012. The scope of this mandate includes deliberations on “various approaches, including opportunities for using markets, to … promote mitigation actions”.

Numerous proposals have been developed by a variety of governments and organisations for schemes to institutionalise and finance REDD formally in the post-2012 regime. Parker et al (2008) give a guide to 33 of these proposed schemes, with cross-references to the UNFCCC technical documents relating to each of them. In addition, an open source data set and model to evaluate the carbon emission and financial implications of alternative approaches to providing positive economic incentives for REDD has been built by the Collaborative Modelling Initiative on REDD Economics, a consortium including the Terrestrial Carbon Group, Conservation International, the Environmental Defense Fund, the University of East Anglia and Woods Hole Research Center, with input from the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis and the Prince's Rainforests Project.

Aspects of the legal options for an international agreement on REDD have also been reviewed by FIELD (2008). An agreement could take any one of a number of forms, including amendments to the Kyoto Protocol, a separate Protocol, or other decisions under the parent Convention. FIELD point out that in some places there are already relatively comprehensive frameworks of national nature conservation and forestry legislation that could provide an entry point. They also point out however that many indigenous peoples and local communities whose livelihoods depend on forests are not supportive of current proposals for REDD, because of concerns about their involvement and the frequent lack of good institutional structures for cascading benefits to them. FIELD therefore emphasise the need for REDD funds not to be focused solely on reducing emissions, but also to contribute to the improvement of forest governance and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals. Moreover, a badly designed REDD mechanism could reinforce the perception of forests as valuable only or mainly in terms of the carbon that they contain, rather than taking into account other ecosystem services and types of values.

First wetland dimension: wetland forests

There are perhaps three potential dimensions to a linkage between wetlands and the concepts for REDD that are currently being advanced. First, as explained in section 1 above, some forests are also wetlands. UNFCCC Decision 2/CP.13 recognised that “reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries can promote co-benefits and may complement the aims and objectives of other relevant international conventions and agreements”, and this would be a basis for perceiving one form of synergy between REDD and the Conventions on wetlands (Ramsar) and biodiversity (CBD), for example. Avoiding deforestation can support conservation of soil, water, biodiversity and non-timber forest products.

As has been pointed out, however (Ecosystems Climate Alliance 2009), the carbon in natural ecosystems is resilient, and it might be more proper to consider biodiversity conservation as a core benefit rather than (in the terms of Decision 2/CP.13) a “co-benefit”.

Moreover, given the different carbon storage potential of different soil types, and the high capacity for example of peatlands in this regard, the primary emission reduction objective itself can be enhanced in forests which are also wetlands (such as peatswamp forests). Hence even in terms solely of the achievement of Kyoto targets, there may be good reason (ie greater carbon benefit per dollar) to give priority to forested wetlands in implementing schemes for REDD.

Second wetland dimension: forest hydro-security

The functioning of any forest system that is subject to measures for REDD will be dependent on a range of external influences. A key one of these is the hydrological context: every forest exists in a water catchment, and the management of that catchment, of its water resources and all activities that can affect these will be a crucial part of the equation. This in turn is heavily bound up with the functioning of wetlands in the landscape. Forest management that involves replenishment planting may be particularly dependent on adequate water supplies for supporting young trees; but more generally too, forest areas involved in REDD should be more viable in areas where there is better wetland conservation and river basin management.

Third wetland dimension: extending REDD concepts to cover wetlands

There has been substantial advocacy in recent years for considering the role of ecosystems other than forests in contributing to “avoided destruction and degradation” methods of reducing emissions under the Kyoto Protocol. Peatlands and other wetlands have been acknowledged as obvious contenders for integration into a post-2012 framework (Royal Society, 2008).

Part of this debate relates to land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF) activities of developed countries within their own territory under Articles 3.3 and 3.4 of the Protocol. Discussion has focused in particular on the scope of coverage of emissions from soil and vegetation, where non-agricultural/nonforestry wetland soils and vegetation are not currently covered (Ecosystems Climate Alliance, 2009; Ramsar Secretariat et al, 2007; Wetlands International, 2008b; Wetlands International, 2009b). Since the focus of the present paper is on ideas for Certified Emission Reduction credits to be generated under Article 12 of the Protocol from CDM-funded projects in developing countries, this Art 3.3-3.4 dimension is not considered further here.

An extensive treatment of options for inclusion of peatlands in post-2012 climate agreements is given in Pena (2008), much of which would be relevant to a consideration of the scope for inclusion of other wetland types as well. Pena’s review is critical of the human activity-based approach to addressing land management issues in Kyoto, and suggests for the future that an approach based on land types and sectors would be more effective, on the grounds of burden-sharing advantages and the ability to accommodate multiple-use situations.

Pena also assesses options for improving the effectiveness of the Clean Development Mechanism in this regard, given the potential for problems arising for example from competition between projects, or between CDM investment and investment in mitigation activities in developed (Annex I) countries. Although wetlands could be addressed by the CDM on a project basis, the general discussions on REDD have tended to focus on national-level approaches, which Pena’s review considers attractive in respect of wetlands too.

The review recommends that to be effective it will be important to reduce the effort required to set baselines; to ensure that all relevant gases are within the scope; to cover both conservation and restoration of wetlands, and to minimise negative impacts on prices of land, food, feed and fibre. Further work is also recommended on quantifying relevant wetland carbon balances (see also Lloyd, in prep); among other things to ensure proper valuation of resulting credits.

In terms of instruments, current models for REDD could be expanded to cover wetlands; or analogous/parallel wetlands-specific models could be constructed. There is a concern that given the relatively small number of countries with a significant extent of peatlands compared to those with forests, it may be harder to mobilise a groundswell of advocacy among developing countries for a wetlandspecific mechanism than it has been for REDD. This may make expansion of REDD a more practical option than aiming for a separate mechanism.

Concern about the magnitude of credits that might come to the market was one reason for the original exclusion of avoided deforestation from eligibility under the CDM, and this would need to be addressed for peatlands/wetlands too, perhaps by capping the proportional tonnage of targets that can be met from this source. Pena also considers ways to minimise problems arising from leakage (changes in emission balances that are attributable to projects but which occur outside the project boundaries), and cites some possible differences between forest schemes and peatland schemes in respect of the respective advantages of “project” and “national” approaches.

In the interests of developing countries which have not experienced significant deforestation, approaches to REDD have been suggested which aim to reward conservation of forests that are not currently experiencing deforestation or degradation. These would for example set “forward-looking” baselines that incorporate working assumptions about potential future loss/degradation, by reference to “business as usual” (BAU) scenarios or to historic trends. The same ideas could be applied to a mechanism for wetlands. These ideas are however at the ambitious end of what might be achieved in the current negotiations.

As one indication of the scale of ambition that may or may not be appropriate, at the time of UNFCCC COP14 in December 2008, the working group on methodologies for REDD decided (in relation to pilot projects) only to address above-ground biomass, and not to consider any soil carbon component. It has been said that this is a result of uncertainties surrounding measurement of soil emissions, but Wetlands International maintains that these difficulties have been exaggerated, at least as far as peat soils are concerned (Wetlands International website news item, 10 December 2008).

Links between Conventions

The decision tables in Section 3 above provide a stock-take of adopted intergovernmental positions and technical advice on wetlands and climate (mitigation) interactions, which offer several sources of additional political and scientific support for the potential extension of REDD-type concepts to cover wetlands.

Clearly one angle is the scope for synergy and mutual reinforcement among the agendas of the respective Conventions when a REDD or “wetland-REDD” mechanism produces associated benefits for conservation of biodiversity, wetlands, protected areas and so on. As pointed out in this paper, however, the links are potentially significant in a variety of other ways; not least that the implementation of these other Conventions can contribute much to the emissionreduction aims of the UNFCCC, including in ways that support socioeconomic objectives in developing countries at the same time.

The Ramsar Convention in particular is in a position to provide a direct readacross of international concepts, principles, methods and standards for understanding what constitutes avoidance of degradation of wetlands, and for guidance and norms on issues such as inventory, monitoring, vulnerability assessment and hydrological functions. These would be essential ingredients in operating any REDD-type mechanism in relation to wetlands.

Ramsar, like others, is making efforts to improve the science of calculating wetland carbon balances, though the forthcoming Ramsar Technical Report (Lloyd, in prep) and the on-going work of the Scientific & Technical Review Panel. This will offer vital assistance to the moves to address wetlands under Kyoto, and cooperation between the respective Conventions will be of increasing importance as the negotiations for UNFCCC COP15 gather pace.

Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD) in developing countries

REDD can deliver rapid emission reductions as a complement to mitigation in other sectors

Deforestation and forest degradation account for approximately 17% of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. In its Fourth Assessment Report (AR4), the IPCC concluded that ‘forestry can make a very significant contribution to a low cost global mitigation portfolio that provides synergies with adaptation and sustainable development’.

Further scientific research since the IPCC AR4 indicates an even greater urgency to reduce emissions in order to stabilise atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations at safe levels. Given the current rates of deforestation and ongoing forest degradation, IUCN sees the adoption of a carefully designed REDD regime within the post-2012 agreement as a necessary rather than a discretionary mitigation option, complementing ambitious mitigation measures in other sectors. REDD has the advantage that it could deliver urgently needed GHG reductions while other essential mitigation options come on stream. If properly designed, it can provide a bridging mechanism in the transition towards a low-carbon economy whilst increasing resilience and enhancing adaptive capacity to climate change; contributing to rural livelihoods; promoting good forest governance and delivering biodiversity objectives.

IUCN welcomes the broad support from Parties, at the UNFCCC Bonn-1 talks (29 March to 8 April 2009), that recognizes the value of incorporating Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD) in the post- 2012 UN climate change regime, as a possible nationally appropriate mitigation action (NAMA) in developing countries and as a complement to ambitious targets for emissions mitigation in other sectors by developed country Parties.

IUCN welcomes the recognition of the need for adequate, predictable and sustainable finance to support the REDD mechanisms, including for capacity building.

IUCN also welcomes the consensus emerging on the need to address drivers of deforestation; the importance of financing REDD Readiness in implementing countries; the links between governance and an effective REDD framework; the need to preserve the rights of forest dependent communities, with particular attention to the interests of women; the role of forest degradation; the role of conservation, sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest carbon stocks.

IUCN further welcomes other “informal” processes established in support of the formal negotiations and encourages Parties to take note of their outcomes. These include the Collaborative Partnership on Forests’ (CPF), Strategic Framework on Forests and Climate Change1 which clearly outlines how forests, when sustainably managed, can play a positive role in climate change mitigation and adaptation. In addition, The Forests Dialogue (TFD), is currently bringing together forest leaders from the private sector, NGOs, Governments, Indigenous Peoples and forest communities to explore and facilitate consensus on “finance mechanisms for REDD”

Next >>>