Treatment of Reverting Scrub and Indigenous Forests
- "We support the inclusion of regenerating scrubland and indigenous forest as providing tradable carbon credits."
- "Sinks other than forests also need consideration. Carbon sequestration also takes place under land allowed to revert to scrub, and eventually (hopefully) native forest. Should carbon trading be permissible under these circumstances?"
- "It is probable that carbon credit and cash for allowing reversion to scrub/forest would be an extra incentive to remove land unsuitable for farming from the agricultural system."
- "Permanent setting aside of land should also be included under any sinks trading environment when considering managed forests. In the discussion document that is produced it is suggested that a separate section on allowing land to revert (along with its carbon credit attributes) be included."
- "Where is there any consideration of removing plantations (eg inaccessible, erodible sites) and replacing them with native vegetation. this is probably the best interpretation of reforestation, but appears to have been overlooked internationally, can we address this in the domestic system?"
- "It is understood that upon the Kyoto Protocol entering into force so too will Article 3.3 of the Kyoto Protocol. The Government will then have created "forest sinks" from this country's post-1990 production forests. It is further understood that for any forests to qualify as "forest sinks" they must first meet the definition of a "forest" under Article 3.3. In most cases the dimensional and direct human action requirements will result in production forests of exotic species of trees (predominantly pinus radiata) becoming the only qualified "forest sinks" in New Zealand.
- This requirement under Article 3.3 fails to account for the carbon stock increase in the indigenous forestry and scrubland estate occupying a land area approximately five times that of production forests in New Zealand. Including such lands under the definition of "forest sinks" under article 3.3 of the Kyoto Protocol should in no way impact on emitters facing the full costs of their emissions, assuming sources and sinks are addressed separately.
- We consider the variables within Article 3.3's definition of a "forest" should allow New Zealand to account for carbon sequestration in indigenous forestry and shrublands. Increasing the scope of forest sinks will not impact on emitters facing the full costs of their emissions.
- Farmers have always considered biodiversity and indigenous forestry an issue of importance. Maintaining a diversity of species, ecosystems and gene pool is an integral part of achieving sustainable management of resources. Sustainable management is fundamental to the philosophy of the New Zealand farmer - their business and lifestyle requires that natural resources be sustained for the current and future generations. Including indigenous forestry and scrublands under the definition of "forest sinks" in Article 3.3 will create an incentive for landowners to sustainably manage their indigenous biodiversity.
- We acknowledges that protecting and managing our biodiversity resource is necessary, not only environmentally, but also economically and socially. There is however a concern for the interface between biodiversity conservation and property rights as indigenous forest owners. Secure property rights are essential to achieving sustainable management of biodiversity on private land. Addressing such concerns will contribute to encouraging landowners to invest in increasing New Zealand's forest sinks and also increase the sustainability of this country's indigenous biodiversity.
- Indigenous biodiversity is a resource, in its productive capacity (that is the timber value) and its conservation values (including genetic, ecological, and aesthetic values). Including indigenous forestry under the Article 3.3 definition of a "forest sink" will add to the resource capacity of New Zealand's biodiversity estate.
- There are 1.4 million hectares of privately owned indigenous forest in New Zealand. This is almost equivalent in area to exotic forests, which cover 1.7 million hectares. The 1.4 million hectares equate to 22 percent of all New Zealand's indigenous forests or 5.2 percent of New Zealand's land cover. It is a significant resource that is renewable and has potential to be a large contributor to many small rural communities if managed on a sustainable basis. The issue of permanence for forest sinks can easily be addressed in ensuring the sustainable management and harvest of indigenous forestry.
- It is our opinion that the sustainable use of the productive capacity of indigenous biodiversity must be seen as a tool to achieve the sustainability of the conservation capacity and permanence in New Zealand's forest sinks. Productive use and conservation can and do exist within the same area of forest.
- Much of the indigenous biodiversity on private land is in isolated remnants. Article 3.3 relies on direct human action for forested areas to qualify as "forest sinks". To maintain the resource requires positive management in the form of weed and pest management, fencing and restoration plantings. A key finding of the Bio What? Report, released December 2000, is that where indigenous biodiversity remains on private land the goodwill and buy-in of the landowner is crucial to successful outcomes. Sink credits will aid in the recovery of costs for the direct human management and development of the indigenous biodiversity.
- The sustainable harvesting of indigenous vegetation should be seen as an economic instrument to be used, both for the carbon value and timber value of the forest sink. This allows landowners to realise some of the economic value of the resource and be a means to fund the maintenance of the conservation and carbon sink values of the resource.
- The current disincentives in regards to the sustainable harvesting of indigenous forestry also provide a disincentive to increase the total area of indigenous biodiversity and potential forest sinks in New Zealand. It is our opinion that if sustainable harvesting of indigenous forestry was encouraged or even promoted it is likely to encourage further plantings of indigenous forest sinks. The current regime acts as in incentive to displace and replace indigenous forest species with exotic species, or other land uses. Addressing the existing iniquities in landowners realising the full economic potential of their indigenous biodiversity will encourage an increase in sustainable, long-term forest sinks."
Contact for Enquiries
MAF Information Services
Pastoral House
25 The Terrace
PO Box 2526
Wellington, NEW ZEALAND
Fax: +64 4 894 0721
Contact this person
