Upload
others
View
3
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Kick off Meeting on
Rural Development and Natural Resource Management
policies in SEE
Towards the European Integration
FORESTRY, WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AND
NATURAL HAZARDS
19th – 20th May, 2016
Goč, Serbia
prof. dr Ratko Ristić, full professor
University of Belgrade, Faculty of Forestry
Forest resources
Serbiaforest and forest land area
2.252.400 ha 29.1%
state forests
53,0 %
private forests
47,0 %
Forests by species
Tree species Area (ha) %
Oak forests 720,800 32.0
Beech forests 660,400 29.3
Other
broadleaves 580,000 25.8
Conifers 243,200 10.8
Poplar
plantations 48,000 2.1
TOTAL 2.252.400 100.0
Stand origin
Stand origin ha %
Natural high
stands 621,200 27.6
Coppice stands 1,456,400 64.7
Artificially
established stands 174,800 7.8
TOTAL 2.252.400 100.0
Forest ownership
Ownership ha %
State 1.194.000 53.0
Private 1,058,400 47.0
TOTAL 2.252.400 100.0
The total volume of state-owned
forests is 221,417,935.90 m3
(61.1%), and of private forests
141,069,481.70 m3 (38.9%), i.e. the
total volume in the whole territory of
Serbia is 362,487,417.60 m3.
• Density - 939 trees per ha,
• Average volume - 161 m3/ha,
• Average annual increment - 4,0 m3/ha
o Annual increment
• State owned forests - 4,5 m3/ha,
• Private forests – 3,5 m3/ha.
productive functions - 77.8%
protective - 14.6%
special usage - 7.6%
Protected areas in Serbia
1.040 (547.176 ha) protected areas
• Forest ecosystems are the most complex land
ecosystems
• Their functions are public goods:
- protection against natural hazards
(soil erosion and desertification, mud flows,
torrential floods, landslides, avalanches)
- biological diversity
- water supply
- recreation
- carbon-dioxide fixation
- education
• In the same time they are row material basis
• Protective, productive and social functions offorest ecosystems have to be harmonized throughthe concept of Sustainable Utilization
• Sustainable Utilization means:
“…to meet the needs of the present withoutcompromising the ability of future generations tomeet their own needs by practicing a landstewardship ethic which integrates thereforestation, managing, growing, nurturing andharvesting of trees for useful products with theconservation of soil, air and water quality, wildlifeand fish habitat, and aesthetics”
• Forest ecosystems and Water Supply
- Serbia has evident lack of quality drinking water (region ofKolubara, eastern and southeastern Serbia)
- Strategy of Water Supply is based on concept of surfacereservoirs in the upper parts of the watersheds
- Watershed areas of formed and planned water supplyreservoirs take 12752 km2 and has to be protected byfulfillment caused by erosion
• Forest Ecosystems are endangered by:
- Climate changes (increment of mean annual temperature ofair; redistribution of precipitation with more precipitation inperiod spring – summer, during short intensive events;decrement of annual precipitation and soil moisture)
- Air pollution
- Forest fragmentation
Change in mean annual temperature by the end of this
century
control period:
1961-1990 and
2071-2100;
IPCC SRES
scenario A2.
(HadCM3
global
circulation
model;
HIRHAM
regional climate
model in 12km
resolution)
Change in mean annual precipitation by the end of this
century
control period:
1961-1990 and
2071-2100;
IPCC SRES
scenario A2.
(HadCM3
global
circulation
model;
HIRHAM
regional climate
model in 12km
resolution),
Temperature and precipitation annual change for period
2001-2030 according to A1B scenario.
Regional climatic model Djurdjevic (SEEVECCC), University of Belgrade
Temperature and precipitation annual change for
period 2071-2100 according to A1B scenario.
Regional climatic model Djurdjevic (SEEVECCC), University of Belgrade
Areas in the territory
of Serbia vulnerable
to landslides
(Source: Lazić M.,
Božović D., 2010)
Regional distribution
of drought in Serbia
(Source: Rakićević
T., 2011)
Forest ecosystems and Erosion Control
- 76355 km2 (86.4% of total area) is endangered by erosion processes
- annual yield of erosive material amounts to 37.25.106 m3 (487.8 m3.km-2)
NOVI SAD
BEOGRAD
NI[
REPUBLIC OF SERBIA
WATER MASTER PLAN
EROSION MAP
0 50 100 k m
21°30 '
Ins titute for D evelopment of Water Res our ce "Jaroslav Cerni"19°30 '
43°00 '
42°30 '
42°00 '
21°00 '20°30 '20°00 '
45°00 '
44°30 '
44°00 '
43°30 '
19°30 '19°00 '
46°00 '
45°30 '
21°00 '20°30 '20°00 '
43°00 '
42°30 '
42°00 '
23°00 '22°30 '22°00 '21°30 '
44°00 '
43°30 '
44°30 '
45°00 '
46°00 '
23°00 '22°30 '22°00 '
SPECIFIC PRODUCTI ON Wsp> 3300 m / km / year
SPECI FI C PRO DUCTIO N Wsp= 80 m / km / year
SPEC IFI C PRODUCTIO N Wsp= 400 m / km / year
SPEC IFI C PRODUCTIO N Wsp= 950 m / km / year
SPECIFIC PRODUCTI ON Wsp= 1800 m / km / year
M INIMUM ERO SION Z=0.10
SMALL ERO SION Z=0.30
MED IUM ERO SION Z=0.55
STRONG ERO SION Z=0.85
EKSC ESI VE ERO SION Z=1.25
V
IV
I II
II
I
EROSIO N CATEGORY
LEGEND
23
23
23
3
3
2
2
Soil erosion map of Serbia (WRMP, 2010)
• 2021 wildfires with a total area of 32.136 ha (Forests habitats)
Wildfires in Serbia
•Ove dve fotke su ti bolje rezolucije
•Odaberi jednu
• Coniferous forest 365 fires (4 375 ha)
• Deciduous forest 1656 fires (27 761 ha)
• Shrubby areas 3247 fires (15 732 ha)
• Grasslands 6 989 fires (23 880 ha)
Wildfires in open space
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
Olf + Oh 0-5 5.0-10 10.0-20 20-40 40-60
Pb (FG1)
Pb (CV1)
Pb (CV2)
Pb (Iv)
Pb (G2)
[mg.kg
-1]
[cm]
Content of Pb in forest soil
Spatial disposition of the most destructive torrential floods in Serbia from 1950 to 2014
● - material damage
and
loss of human lives;
● - material damage
Torrential floods have
caused death of more than
130 people in the last 64
years and material damage
estimated at more than 10
billion euros.
Integral vulnerability map
of the natural hazards in
the territory of Serbia
Catchment
area
M
km2
L
km
P
km
D
km.km-2
T
masl
C
masl
St
%
Sa
%
MI 0.076 0.400 1.075 6.25 925 835 27.1 22.50
MII 0.0635 0.325 0.875 8.35 922 862 14.9 18.46
MIII 0.0843 0.625 1.300 6.76 982 780 33.0 32.32
Vaona IV 0.0986 0.500 1.100 6.78 910 810 33.4 20.00
Main hydrographic characteristics of
experimental watresheds
Watershed Forest cover Parent rock Soil conditions
MI Artificial plantings of Pinus nigra,
Pinus silvestris, Picea abies
and Quercus petraea, 34 years
old, 3500 plants per hectare,
canopy is 53-95%.
Serpentine
and
peridotite
Five types of soil, from
genetically weakly
developed (skeletal
silicate soil), up to
developed brown soils
(with layer of litter up
to 12 cm deep).
MII Autochtonous meadow-pasture
association Helleboro serbicae,
with dominant species
Danthonietum calycinae.
Serpentine Browned humuse-silicate
soil
MIII Artificial plantings of Pinus nigra,
17 years old, 3000 plants per
hectare, canopy 40.3-71.9%.
Serpentine From initial phase of soil on
serpentine up to
skeletal brown soil in
depressions.
Forest cover, geology and soil conditions on
experimental watersheds
0
50
100
150
200
250
1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998
MI
MII
MIII
T [days]
Year
Duration of runoff on micro-watersheds
0
5
10
15
20
25
1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998
MI
MII
MIII
Vaona IV
l.s
-1.km
-2
year
Specific runoff on micro-watersheds
0
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.1
0.12
0.14
0.16
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
MI
MII
MIII
Q [m3.
s-1
]
T [h]
Qmax(MI)= 0.047 m3.s
-1
Qmax(MIII)= 0.102 m3.s
-1
Qmax(MII)= 0.138 m3.s
-1
Hydrographs of maximal discharges on experimental
watersheds (MI, MII, MIII)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
V VI VII VIII IX X V VI VII VIII IX X V VI VII VIII IX X V VI VII VIII IX X V VI VII VIII IX X V VI VII VIII IX X
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Ic1
Ic2
Ic3
Ic [mm]
Measuring points: 1, 2, 3
species: Abies alba
Monthly values of interception at measuring points 1, 2, 3
1
10
100
1000
1 10 100 1000
Ic [mm]
Pb [mm]
Ic=0.646 Pb0.932
R=0.939
Measuring points: 1, 2 i 3
species: Abies alba
Relation between interception and total precipitation
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
V VI VII VIII IX X V VI VII VIII IX X V VI VII VIII IX X V VI VII VIII IX X V VI VII VIII IX X V VI VII VIII IX X
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Ic4
Ic5
Ic [mm]
Measuring points: 4, 5
species: Fagus moesiaca
Monthly values of interception at measuring points 4, 5
1
10
100
1000
1 10 100 1000
Ic=0.498 Pb0.788
R=0.827
Ic [mm]
Pb [mm]
Measuring points: 4, 5
species: Fagus moesiaca
Relation between interception and total precipitation
DOMINANT NATURAL HAZARDS IN
SERBIA
Torrential floods
Destructive erosion processes
Landslides
Forest fires
• Serbia doesn’t have practice standards like BMPs
• Public Enterprises “‘Serbian Forests” and“Vojvodina Forests” don’t have experts for erosioncontrol works in official scheme of workingpositions.
Serbian Experiences in Conflicts between Forestry and
Erosion Control
• In the period from 2006 to 2013 a historically low
level of funding of erosion control works was
recorded, with annual funding ranging from 0,101-
0,822 euros, although annual needs amount to about
30 million euros (Ministry of Agriculture and
Environment Protection, Department for Water).
• in the same time Department for Forestry didn’t
support any kind of erosion control works
CONCLUSIONS
Generally, forest vegetation intensifies processes of
transpiration and interception, but decreases loss of water
by evaporation. Also, influences on development of soil
layer and especially on its infiltration capacity.
Duration of runoff is longer on stands with developed
forest cover. Values of specific runoff decrease on stands
with quality forest cover and soil, because of high
retention, same as maximal discharges. Interception
depends on total precipitation, kind of trees, shape and
density of the crown, position in the stand and age.
Type of forest management, and especially silvicultural
measures strongly influences on sediment production and
discharge.
• Integrated management in torrential watersheds
encompasses technical works in a hydrographic network
and soil bioengineering works on the slopes, protective
forest measure on slopes, within a precisely defined social,
administrative and spatial framework
• The main goals of forest management from the aspect of
prevention of natural hazards are: to achieve maximum
security for people and their property; to be complementary
with other demands such as environmental protection,
sustainable soil usage, drinking water supply, local
economic development, biodiversity sustaining and
mitigation of climate changes effects, etc.
CONCLUSIONS
Thank you for your attention!