MONITORING FRAMEWORK FOR REPLANTED MANGROVE AREAS SHARING THE - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

INTERNATIONAL UNION FOR CONSERVATION OF NATURE

MONITORING FRAMEWORK FOR REPLANTED MANGROVE AREAS –

SHARING THE EXPERIENCES FROM PAKISTAN

Syed Ghulam Qadir Shah IUCN Pakistan Karachi

2

PRESENTATION OUTLINE

• 1. ABOUT MANGROVE ECOSYSTEM OF PAKISTAN
• 2. NEED FOR M&E FRAMEWORK
• 3. ADOPTED M&E FRAMEWORK IN INDUS DELTA
• 4. FINDINGS
• 5. CONCULSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

3

MANGROVE ECOSYSTEM OF PAKISTAN

• In Pakistan, 97%

mangroves are found in Indus Delta

• Thousands of acres

planted over past three decades

• Absence of M&E

mechanism has resulted in criticism of such restoration works

4

NEED FOR MONITORING & EVALUATION (M&E) FRAMEWORK

• Realising the need, IUCN developed and adopted a framework for

M&E for the Indus Delta that encompassed,

– Assessment of success / failure of replanted areas – Generate feedback on adaption of corrective measures – Producing cost effective and reliable assessments

• Applied to 6000 ha replanted during 2009-2011 in Indus Delta
• First of its kind experience of an independent M&E of any large

scale mangrove replanting

5

ADAPTED M&E FRAMEWORK IN INDUS DELTA

• FREQUENCY

– Literature suggests ten assessments over five years – Such a frequency may be cumbersome for large areas – We adopted annual monitoring frequency

• PARAMETERS ASSESSED

– Survival % – Species composition – Plant growth – Natural regeneration

6

INTERNATIONAL UNION FOR CONSERVATION OF NATURE

Keti Bundar Shah Bundar Map of Indus Delta Showing Location of Planted Areas

7

ASSESSMENT AREAS

# Name of Site Year Wise Actual Area Planted (ha) Total Area (ha) 2009 2010 2011 i. Keti Bundar 832.5 716.5 1300 2849 ii. Shah Bundar 967.5 683.5 1500 3151 Grand Total 1800 1400 2800 6000

8

INTERNATIONAL UNION FOR CONSERVATION OF NATURE

M&E of mangrove areas is a challenging task;

• Intertidal characteristics
• Remoteness and difficult access
• Absence of reference points
• Limitations in technological applications, high cost and expertise

9

STEPS IN MONITORING

• 1. Random Selection of Sample Plots
• Simple random sampling approach
• For randomisation purpose, coordinates (East and North)

encompassing planted areas were used

• Differences in extreme ranges of North and East coordinates were

calculated and used as sampling space

– Difference in ranges (minutes and seconds) was converted into seconds – From this range, random numbers were generated as per sample size – Each random number was reconverted into minutes and seconds and added to the lowest degree of respective North and East coordinates to generate a list of random coordinates

10

Lists OF Random ly Selected Coordinates Shah Bundar Keti Bundar North Latitude (Extent 240 03’ 40” to 240 05’ 40”) East longitude (Extent 680 01’ 30” to 680 03’ 50”) North Latitude (Extent 240 08’ 58” to 240 10’ 23”) East longitude (Extent 670 25’ 22” to 670 27’ 14”) # North Latitude East Logitude North Latitude East Longitude 1 24 05 34 68 03 32 24 09 25 67 26 78 2 24 04 36 68 02 55 24 09 73 67 26 05 3 24 05 27 68 02 34 24 09 49 67 25 58 4 24 05 15 68 03 36 24 09 11 67 26 44 5 24 05 01 68 02 36 24 09 87 67 26 83 6 24 04 32 68 02 52 24 09 67 67 26 56 7 24 04 34 68 02 18 24 09 61 67 26 88 8 24 04 58 68 03 20 24 09 91 67 25 57 9 24 05 20 68 03 26 24 10 40 67 26 47 10 24 04 35 68 03 08 24 09 33 67 26 59 11 24 05 18 68 02 06 24 09 38 67 26 58 12 24 05 28 68 02 09 24 09 40 67 26 68 13 24 04 51 68 02 48 24 09 51 67 26 73 14 24 04 22 68 02 38 24 09 59 67 25 31 15 24 05 35 68 02 45 24 09 88 67 25 45 16 24 04 46 68 03 02 24 09 53 67 26 13 17 24 04 34 68 02 42 24 09 16 67 26 33 18 24 04 48 68 02 40 24 09 77 67 25 50 19 24 05 19 68 02 46 24 09 83 67 25 39 20 24 04 17 68 03 10 24 09 24 67 25 25 21 24 05 11 68 02 25 24 10 10 67 25 49 22 24 05 02 68 03 46 24 09 73 67 26 07 23 24 04 13 68 03 30 24 10 02 67 26 50 24 24 04 23 68 02 08 24 10 01 67 25 57 25 24 05 07 68 02 16 24 09 58 67 27 10

11

INTERNATIONAL UNION FOR CONSERVATION OF NATURE

2.Sample Plot Location

• Randomly generated

coordinates were marked

• n field map
• Using a GPS sample

plots were located in field

12

• 3. Sample Plot Layout
• Linear (100m) transacts laid during

1st year and 2nd year assessments

• Square 10m x 10m plots used

during 3rd year monitoring

13

STEPS IN MONITORING

• 4. No of Sample Plots

14

FINDINGS

• 1. Survival Trends
• Overall average survival

– 80% at Keti Bundar – 73% at Shah Bundar

• A gradual reduction in survival

was noticed in subsequent years after plantation

• However, any increase in

survival in subsequent years may be due to restocking of planted areas by Coastal Forestry Division

15

FINDINGS

• 2. Species Composition
• At Shah Bundar Avicennia

(61%) and at Keti Bundar Rhizophora (64%) was the species of choice

• Monoculturist trend dominated

in plantations, this may be due to,

– Easiness in planting of Rhziophora propagules – Seed availability

16

FINDINGS

• 3. Site Conditions
• Good survival and growth
• bserved in mixed plantation on

grassy mudflats covered with Arthrocnemum and Aleuropus grasses

• Highest Rhizophoara survival was
• n grassy mudflats (80% and 78%

at Keti Bundar and Shah Bundar, respectively)

• Rhizophora mortality was high in

low-lying mudflats due to fast receding waves, algal growth and barnacle attack

17

FINDINGS

• 4. Natural Regeneration
• Progressively increasing natural

regeneration observed over time

• An estimated 763, 1659 and 3619

saplings/ha were recorded at Keti Bundar against 258, 77 and 512 saplings/ha at Shah Bundar

• Natural regeneration outweighed

artificially planted sapling number

18

FINDINGS

• 5. Plant Growth
• Identical pattern in plant growth was
• bserved
• Avicennia attained average height of

15cm with 6 leaves within six months, reaching to 45cm with 30 leaves at age of 30 months

• Rhizophora propagules attained

average height of 30cm with 6 leaves during six months, reaching to 50cm with 12 leaves at the age of 30 months after planting

19

FINDINGS

• 6. Adaptive Management
• Improved management as a result
• f positive feedback generated by

M&E may have contributed to improvement in survival of areas planted subsequently:

– Better site selection – Better choice of species – Accountability check

• Improved survival rate in

subsequent years plantations

– 76% to 87% at Keti Bundar – 63% to 81% at Shah Bundar

20

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

• The experience gained from use of M&E reveals that;

– SRS approach could be applied for mangrove M&E

• Generated useful and reliable information on monitoring indicators
• Improved management, by implementation agency, as a result of M&E

feedback, leading to improved rate of survival in subsequently planted areas

• Survival rate gradually reduced in subsequent years after plantation.

However, progressively increasing rate of natural regeneration was

• bserved over time in planted areas

– M&E must be an integral part of mangrove restoration strategies – Sustained protection allows better natural recovery of degraded mangrove areas

21

Thank You