enhy
slide
slide
slide
slide
slide
Prev
Next
VIDEOGALLERY

hayfor

ՄԱԿ-ի Պարենի և գյուղատնտեսության կազմակերպության կողմից աջակցվող «Անտառապատում և անտառվերականգնում Հայաստանում» ծրագրի արդյունքները

un2012 թվականի նոյեմբերի 20-ին և 21-ին Ծաղկաձորում տեղի ունեցավ «Անտառապատում և անտառվերականգնում Հայաստանում» ծրագրի և ՀՀ Գյուղատնտեսության նախարարության «Հայանտառ» ՊՈԱԿ-ի կողմից համատեղ կազմակերպված երկօրյա համաժողովը, որի նպատակն էր ներկայացնել «Անտառապատում և անտառվերականգնում Հայաստանում» ծրագրի արդյունքները:
Միջոցառմանը ներկա էին ՀՀ գյուղատնտեսութայն նախարարի տեղակալ Գառնիկ Պետրոսյանը, «Հայանտառ» ՊՈԱԿ-ի տնօրեն Մարտուն Մաթևոսյանը, «Հայանտառ» ՊՈԱԿ-ի գլխավոր անտառապետ, «Անտառապատում և անտառվերականգնում Հայաստանում» ծրագրի ազգային համակարգող Ռուբեն Պետրոսյանը, ՊԳԿ Հռոմի գլխամասային և Բուդապեշտի տարածաշրջանային գրասենյակների անտառային ոլորտի փորձագետներ Վոլտեր Կոլերտը և Նորբերտ Ուինկլեր-Ռատոնյին, ՊԳԿ ներկայացուցչի օգնական Գայանե Նասոյանը, ինչպես նաև անտառային ոլորտի, տարբեր միջազգային կազմակերպությունների, ազգային և տեղական կառույցների, հասարակական կազմակերպությունների և այլ շահագրգիռ կողմերի ներկայացուցիչներ:
Ծրագիրը, որի բյուջեն կազմում է 432000 ԱՄՆ դոլար, մեկնարկել է 2009 թվականին: Ծրագրի հիմնական նպատակն է «Հայանտառ» ՊՈԱԿ-ի «Հրազդանի անտառտնտեսություն» մասնաճյուղում փորձնական ժամանակակից տնկարանային տնտեսության հիմնումը:
Համաժողովի մասնակիցները ծրագրի արդյունքներին ծանոթանալու նպատակով այցելեցին նաև «Հրազդանի անտառտնտեսություն» մասնաճյուղի տնկարանային տնտեսություն, ծանոթացան սերմերի մթերման, պահեստավորման և վերամշակման սարքավորումներին, տնկանյութի աճեցման նոր տեխնոլոգիաներին ինչպես նաև Հայաստանում առաջին ժամանակակից անտառային ջերմոցային տնտեսությանը:
Ծրագրի շրջանակներում որպես ՀՀ գյուղատնտեսության նախարարության ներդրում իրականացվել է «Հայանտառ» ՊՈԱԿ-ի «Հրազդանի անտառտնտեսություն» մասնաճյուղի վարչական շենքի կապիտալ վերանորոգում, ցանկապատի և ոռոգման համակարգի կառուցում, սերմերի վերամշակման սարքավորումների, փոքր անիվավոր տրակտորի ձեռքբերում, ինչպես նաև ընթացքի մեջ են գտնվում 500 քմ ջերմոցային լրակազմի կառուցման աշխատանքները:
Հրազդանի անտառտնտեսությունում կառուցված ժամանակակից տնկարանային տնտեսությունը լուրջ միջազգային ներդրում է, որը թույլ կտա առաջին անգամ Հայաստանում ժամանակակից մեթոդներով աճեցնել փակ արմատային համակարգով բարձրորակ անտառային ծառաթփատեսակների տնկանյութ, որի օգտագործման արդյունքում կբարձրանա անտառվերականգնման և անտառապատման աշխատանքների արդյունավետությունը, կնվազի մեկ հեկտարի վրա օգտագործվող տնկանյութի քանակը, կբարձրանա անտառմշակույթների  կպչողականությունը  և այլն:
Ծրագրի իրականացումը լուրջ խթան կհանդիսանա անտառային ոլորտում ժամանակակից տեխնոլոգիաների ներդրման գործում և «Հայանտառ» ՊՈԱԿ-ի  մյուս տնկարանային տնտեսությունների արդիականացման համար:

Armenian National Program Advisory Committee’s Second Meeting Discusses Forest Law Enforcement and Governance

Yerevan (Armenia), January 15, 2014— Today, the second meeting of the European Neighborhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI) Forest Law Enforcement and Governance (FLEG II) National Program Advisory Committee (NPAC) was held at the World Bank Yerevan Office. At the meeting the implementing organizations (IOs) presented their planned activities for the first year of Program implementation and sought the advice of NPAC members to facilitate collaboration and synergy with other on-going Projects and Programs in the field.
The participants were presented with the main results of the ENPI FLEG II First Steering Committee meeting organized last October, where the Country Work Plans (CWP) for each participating country were approved.
The parties present at the meeting identified some of the priority activities for Phase II of the Program that needed to be discussed distinctly, as these were facilitating recent developments in the forest sector, based on experience and lessons learnt by the Implementing Organizations in the course of the program. The discussed activities fell within these five identified topics, to be elaborated upon throughout Phase II of the EU financed ENPI FLEG II program:
1. There is a need for legal and institutional review and reforms, due to the current quite significant discrepancies in different legislative documents regarding the forestry field.
2. Human resource capacity should be built to address FLEG issues. There is a need for an education and knowledge exchange (forestry specialists, journalists, university lecturers and students), and training of trainers (TOT) programs. Education and experience exchange, both within country between sector specialists, journalists, and academia, and internationally between ENPI FLEG countries and with EU member states, with regards to relevant EU processes.
3. Public awareness and public monitoring of the forestry sector.
4. Strengthening sustainable forest management in Armenia through activities with model forest units such as forest protected areas and activities for sustainable use of forest resources with the involvement of adjacent communities.
5. Improving FLEG planning and monitoring at the national, regional (local) and international levels.
The Chair of the NPAC meeting, Mr. Martun Matevosyan, the Head of the State organization ”Hayantar”, and the FLEG II Focal point in Armenia, said: “It is important to once again mention the significance of the continuity of the Program, which allows broadening the scope of activities and ensures sustainability of results”.
The participants of the meeting included: representatives of the SNCO “Hayantar”, the EU Delegation, the Ministry of Nature Protection (MONP), the Ministry of Agriculture, the State Forest Monitoring Centre, NGOs (Transparency International, Armenian Forests, Sustainable Human Development), the Forest Research and Education Centre, The Regional Environmental Centre for the Caucasus, Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ), TGS company, IUCN, WB, WWF.
The activities of the ENPI FLEG II CWP will be implemented over the next 3.5 years, covering the five priority areas identified by the Republic of Armenia. The activities are designed in a way to cover and build on the successful results of the Phase I of the FLEG program, as well as to address priorities identified for Phase II. The progress of the program implementation will be presented and discussed at the National Program Advisory Committee (NPAC) meetings on a regular basis, in order to make recommendations when and if a justified need for adjustments to the CWP occurs.

ILLEGAL LOGGING HAS DECREASED

cutMartun Matevosyan, Director of “Hayantar” SNCO answers the questions of “Hetq

Ecologists assert that forest lands have decreased. How much was the decrease according to your calculations?
Qualitative changes have taken place in the forest, but forest lands have not decreased. Forest area now is as much as it was in 1988. Several forestry branches are still implementing their forest management plans, and I hope they will accomplish them in 2011. Then it will be possible to give precise figures on how much land area forests cover. The level of forest supply hasn’t decreased in Tavush and Lori as compared to 1988 and 2006; the level is the same despite of the extensive use of forests in recent years. Forest grows in the meantime. Natural re-growth is faster in the logged areas.

What measures does “Hayantar” take to prevent illegal logging?
Illegal logging is the main forest management problem. I used to think that no illegal logging took place during the Soviet period, but when we consult the archives, it becomes evident that it existed in that period as well, particularly in the forest-adjacent areas of the communities.
Of course, the volume of illegal logging increased due to a number of objective and subjective reasons – energetic crises, blockade of Armenia, etc. According to the figures, forest use volume has exceeded 1 million cubic meters since 2003. Priority objective of “Hayantar” is the conservation of forests. Analyses are being conducted to identify how successful is “Hayantar” in solving that problem, based on the situation, obstacles, salaries of foresters and forestry employees, and distribution of rights and competencies among other organizations involved in forest conservation in general.
“Improving Forest Law Enforcement and Governance in the European Neighborhood Policy East Countries and Russia” program is now being implemented by the assistance of World Bank, the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and World Wildlife Fund (WWF). This infers that an action plan and analyses plan will be developed, problems related to illegal logging will be revealed and recommendations will be provided for solving the problem. The main problem is in the society –public awareness on illegal logging and forest use should be increased. We have taken a number of measures; we have sent letters to the communities to inform people of the compensations of the damage caused to the nature by illegal logging. It would have been easy to solve this problem if it were an easy one. That’s the reason why international organizations emphasize the importance of this problem.

Would you admit that Armenia cannot to ensure the “safety” of the forests and is unable to prevent illegal logging?
This opinion is a little extreme. Armenia is not the only country to face this problem. Prevention of illegal logging is issue number one at every European or worldwide conference. It is particularly an issue for the countries with serious social problems. Volume of illegal logging has considerably decreased within recent years. At the inspections conducted in 1994 by “Hayantar”, 454233 illegally logged trees were recorded, in 1995 – 232933 trees. (See the table of illegal loggings for 2004-2009).

What is the percentage of unrecorded illegal logging?
A monitoring should be conducted to determine the volume of unrecorded illegal logging.
For example, Monitoring Center conducted a research in 2007; the volume of wood used as fuelwood in Armenia is approximately 300-350 thousand cubic meters, including the wood used by the households of forest adjacent communities. If we consider the use of fuelwood by the forest adjacent community households, it will be 150-200 thousand cubic meters. But this doesn’t mean that these villagers cut all these trees, because there is also waste wood available in the forest- trees damaged by snow, rotten trees, and branches. For example, projected volume of waste wood in forest management plan of Sevkar forestry branch is approximately 40 thousand cubic meters.”Hayantar” sells 70-75 thousand cubic meters of wood annually, of which 20 thousand cubic meters is waste wood, and the rest is legally logged timber.

Which countries do you export to?
We export a certain amount of beech boards, because the Government decree placed a ban on the export of logs; it was also our initiative. “Hayantar” exports to Iran only. The dynamics shows that the volume of export is much lower now, because the volume of logging is low. (See the chart of the volume of timber export from Armenia to Iran for 2005-2010).

Is there a demand?
Export of timber has not been regulated until the year 2005. The Government adopted a resolution to regulate the export, according to which timber can be exported exceptionally legally. The demand has decreased because the quality of our timber doesn’t meet their requirements. They imported beech logs not to use as board, but to use them in furniture industry. There was a demand for logs but not for boards. The quality of timber is not high at sanitary felling. We haven’t yet performed regeneration felling, the purpose of which is to get quality timber.
Even though regeneration felling is included in the forest management plans, we can only now start performing it, but it may bring about a number of infringements. The areas where regeneration felling may be performed are inaccessible; there are no roads or new tree felling technologies and equipment available; that’s why we abstain from major tree felling.

How much do you charge for wood?
Oak is unreasonably expensive. The price of wood increases after it has been processed. We have set prices for standing timber, for example, oak, linden, ash above 25 cm – 70 thousand AMD for the first-grade, 56 thousand AMD for the second grade and 48 thousand AMD for the third grade (the grade of timber depends on the existence of knots on the wood). Beech is 32, 26, 22 thousand drams, hornbeam and other varieties – 18, 15, 13 thousand drams respectively, etc. 12-14 thousand drams add to the price if they are delivered from the upper or lower storages. We are also planning to conduct auctions for logging areas next year.

What is your evaluation of tree felling business in Armenia?
It isn’t a well established business. It is our task, as well as the task of the country to develop it as a business- logging, delivery, use. We hope this process will start after the approval of the forest management plans, and the government will announce a tender. Forest governing body will not have to wait for a new decree every year; it is a common practice throughout the world that forest management plan, which is the document issued to the forest governing body, is valid for a period of 10 years. Our objective is to get this area up-graded. We hope that “Hayantar” will not be responsible for performing logging next year. We also have a lack of specialists, especially logging area determination specialists. Unfortunately “Hayantar” employs only 10 per cent of the required number of specialists. It is worth mentioning that only a few of our foresters have forestry education.

Isn’t the volume of sanitary logging big? How much is it?
Logging area fund is 35 thousand cubic meters in 2010, of which 20,050 is improvement felling and 14, 950 is sanitary felling. The volume was about the same last year. This is to the benefit of the forest – these loggings contribute to the improvement of the quality. It is necessary to increase the volume of legal logging in order to prevent illegal logging. After all, villagers will cut the trees if they need it. If the villagers have cut one or two trees, they will have to pay a fine of 300 thousand AMD. That’s why our foresters may not report these cases of tree felling. Will a forester fine his fellow villager? If he does so, the villager is in big trouble. No logging has been performed in pine forest stands of Aparan and along the highway Vanadzor-Dilijan for many years.

It is a crime from the forest management standpoint. There have always been pointless alarms and criticism. An expert from Germany, who is one the the best forestry experts in Europe, said to me after his visit to Kapan; “It is a crime towards the forest to keep so many overmature forests”. We have oak stands where absolutely no natural regrowth takes place, because no logging has been performed in those areas for years.

How much was the volume of industrial logging?
It is Teghut now. 55 ha area has been logged. Logging is also performed in hydroelectric power plant construction areas, but these companies reimburse us if they sign an agreement with us. A couple of trees may be cut during the road construction process; for example, a new road was constructed due to the collapse of Ijevan road, but the volume of such felling is low.

How did the natural gas price increase affect the volume of logging?
The pressure of big cities on the forests reduced as a result of extensive installation of natural gas pipelines; the demand for fuelwood decreased. We were hoping that the volume of logging would decrease in forest-adjacent communities. Unfortunately our hopes didn’t come true, because natural gas, due to its high price, became unaffordable to the people living in forest adjacent communities.

The Monitoring Group didn’t report the actual number of the logged trees in Gugark forestry. Does this mean the the Monitoring Group generally doesn’t reveal the actual numbers? How trustworthy are the results?
I have sent our experts for that purpose; employees of the Department of State Nature Protection Inspection and members of legislative body have been inspecting the areas since morning – trees should be measured and marked, the loss should be calculated; the matters have already been taken to the public prosecutor’s office.

In which areas is illegal logging performed most?
Yeghegnut, Vahagni, Gugark have been the most vulnerable areas for years. So many people- foresters and forest guards have been prosecuted since 1990-s in Vahagni and Yeghegnut forestry branches, and now everybody is so scared that nobody wants to work as a forest guard.

How much is the salary of forester?
The salary of forester is 60-75 thousand AMD, forest guard’s salary is 40-45 thousand AMD. This is a serious issue. Inspectors’ salary is about the same. Low salary infers additional corruption risks in the system. Throughout the world illegal logging control starts not from the forest, but from the roads through which illegally cut trees are hauled. 8000 hectares is the area allocated to each forest guard to control. It is impossible to control such a vast area particularly in our forests that are extended on the hills and mountains.

The Control Service of the President of Armenia has commenced inspections in “Hayantar”. What violations have been detected?
The Control Service of the President is conducting inspections. These are routine inspections. The last one was conducted in 2003, which resulted in structural changes – “Hayantar” was transferred from the Ministry of Nature Protection to the Ministry of Agriculture, thus separating forest management from inspection. We knew in advance about the inspection. It was included in President’s Control Service Action Plan approved in January. We have been meeting with the Control Team Leader every week, and we haven’t been notified of any violations. This means that no violations were detected.

You have been holding this office for many years. How would you evaluate your work?
It is the Director’s drawback if the problems that require administrative solutions don’t get solved, whereas if there are problems in the system, they should be solved by introducing reforms in the system. My self-evaluation is not important. Evaluations may vary from extremely good to extremely bad.

 

KRISTINE AGHAGULYAN

2010.09.17

TO THE WOOD WITH SAW

to-forestRealistic projection

“Most communities of Syunik Marz, around 79 communities, are not provided with natural gas. Would you, please, assist these community households to obtain fuelwood for the winter at a relatively affordable price (2000 AMD per cubic meter) from Syunik Marz Forestry branches?”

The author of this letter of request or memo is Surik Khachatryan, the Governor of Syuinik Marz, and the addressee is Gerasim Alaverdyan, Minister of Agriculture. A question arises; why should the governor write such a memo pointing out the names of all the 79 communities, particularly nowadays, when media are swamped with publications on tree-felling. I wonder whether or not these publications are at all of any interest to the villagers, who have numerous problems on the eve of the winter; soon they are going to face the urgent need of solving their everyday household needs – personal hygiene, heating the house, cooking and laundry.

This is true for all the villagers, whether they live in the communities with natural gas system or in communities without gas. We want to emphasize this, because we have gas subscribers using only 1200-1500 AMD worth of gas a year in the villages that are provided with natural gas. This means that the villagers have alternative ways to solve their problems. Of course that alternative is neither electricity nor solar energy; once and again socially vulnerable villager’s hope is and will be the forest, regardless of the media publications, alarms raised by international and local environmental organizations, monitorings and researches.

And if we view this in the context of this year’s unpleasant surprise – increase in gas prices, future prospective looks even worse. The example of the Governor of Syunik is not unprecedented; a similar letter of request had been received from Tavush Marz as well. Consequently this issue requires a systematized solution of the Government. Therefore we would recommend the Governor of Syunik Marz to send his memo to the Prime Minister of Armenia within the program “Winter 2010” if, of course, our government has at all such a program this year or is seriously concerned about the forests of Armenia. Simple as it is, otherwise villagers will have to rely on their own “Winter 2010” program. And that program will offer only one solution – to the wood with saw.

ROMIK SARGSYAN
Hayots Ashkharh 01.10.2010

WE OWE A DEBT TO THE FOREST

debtEven though certain changes have been introduced in the forest management system recently, the exploitative approach of people to forests has remained almost the same.

United Nations announced 2011 as the year of forest conservation. Forest conservation year, which started on January 24, has the objective of consolidating sustainable forest management practices of people.

What are the prospectives of “Hayantar” for 2010? By saying prospective we mean both illegal logging and reforestation and forest conservation plans.

RUBEN PETROSYAN, chief forester of “Hayantar” SNCO stated that World Bank is now conducting a forestry research; “World Bank conducted its last research on the forests of Armenia in 2003”.  According to that research 1 million cubic meters of wood is used (not illegally logged) annually in Armenia, of which 100 thousand cubic meters was logged legally. We will soon have the results of the new research and will be able to make a comparison.

It is evident that trends today are conditioned by the increase of gas prices, i.e. wood consumption increases along with the increase in the price of natural gas. Of course wood is used not only due to the increase in the gas price, but also due to the low standard of living of people. A sizable group of people can’t afford paying for natural gas”.

A great number of alarms on illegal loggings were raised particularly at the end of the year. What are the official data of “Hayantar”? According to R. Petrosyan, “2310 illegally cut trees were recorded in 2010. I should state that according to the statistical data, illegal loggings have improved the situation in the forest. In 1994, during the period of energetic crisis, 454 thousand illegally logged trees were recorded in “Hayantar, 32, 7 thousand trees were recorded in 2004, whereas in 2008-2010 these numbers are in the range of 2080-2310 trees”.

As to the alarms and the media coverage, “Hayantar” officials have long been announcing that it is to their benefit. The organization is implementing a program of forest law enforcement and struggle against illegal logging within FLEG Program and with the assistance of World Bank.

R. Petrosyan presented reforestation and forest conservation projects implemented jointly with a number of international organizations; “In 2010 reforestation activities, funded by various programs, were implemented on 150 ha area in Gugark, Gyumri, Syunik and Kapan forestry branches of “Hayantar”. In the outcome of another cooperation effort (with the assistance of FAO) a modern nursery was established in Hrazdan forestry branch.

“We owe a debt to the forest; forest has saved us for 20 years, particularly the first decade, and it is our turn now. Forest needs serious investments – financial, technical, etc., and if we don’t do that, it will not save us for the second time”,- stated R.Petrosyan.

Lusine Hovhannisyan
“Hayots Ashkharh”, http://www.armtown.com/news/am/has/20110129/4032124582/
January 29, 2011

Fallen wood for fuel-wood free of charge for the forest communities

Recently the Government of RA has discussed and approved the Draft Decree on “Providing privileges to the forest communities of RA for the use of non-industrial fallen wood as fuel-wood” drafted by “ArmForest” SNCO of Ministry of Agriculture of RA.

The above-mentioned Decree foresees, in case of availability, provision of up to 8m3 of fallen wood to the families of forest communities free of charge. Currently the list of communities which will be the beneficiaries of the program is being finalized.

“ArmForest” SNCO is in process of drafting the Charter, which will describe the scope, terms, roles and responsibilities of the parties concerned (ArmForest” SNCO and the forest communities).

By bringing the issue of providing the fallen wood to the forest communities free of charge, not only  a social issue is being covered, but this will also decrease  the likelihood of illegal logging for fuel-wood.

During upcoming weeks, right after finalization and approval of the Charter, “ArmForest” SNCO will carry out a public awareness campaign to inform stakeholders about the new possibilities arising from the Decree.

Armenian National Program Advisory Committee’s Second Meeting Discusses Forest Law Enforcement and Governance

Yerevan (Armenia), January 15, 2014— Today, the second meeting of the European Neighborhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI) Forest Law Enforcement and Governance (FLEG II) National Program Advisory Committee (NPAC) was held at the World Bank Yerevan Office. At the meeting the implementing organizations (IOs) presented their planned activities for the first year of Program implementation and sought the advice of NPAC members to facilitate collaboration and synergy with other on-going Projects and Programs in the field.
The participants were presented with the main results of the ENPI FLEG II First Steering Committee meeting organized last October, where the Country Work Plans (CWP) for each participating country were approved.
The parties present at the meeting identified some of the priority activities for Phase II of the Program that needed to be discussed distinctly, as these were facilitating recent developments in the forest sector, based on experience and lessons learnt by the Implementing Organizations in the course of the program. The discussed activities fell within these five identified topics, to be elaborated upon throughout Phase II of the EU financed ENPI FLEG II program:
1. There is a need for legal and institutional review and reforms, due to the current quite significant discrepancies in different legislative documents regarding the forestry field.
2. Human resource capacity should be built to address FLEG issues. There is a need for an education and knowledge exchange (forestry specialists, journalists, university lecturers and students), and training of trainers (TOT) programs. Education and experience exchange, both within country between sector specialists, journalists, and academia, and internationally between ENPI FLEG countries and with EU member states, with regards to relevant EU processes.
3. Public awareness and public monitoring of the forestry sector.
4. Strengthening sustainable forest management in Armenia through activities with model forest units such as forest protected areas and activities for sustainable use of forest resources with the involvement of adjacent communities.
5. Improving FLEG planning and monitoring at the national, regional (local) and international levels.
The Chair of the NPAC meeting, Mr. Martun Matevosyan, the Head of the State organization ”Hayantar”, and the FLEG II Focal point in Armenia, said: “It is important to once again mention the significance of the continuity of the Program, which allows broadening the scope of activities and ensures sustainability of results”.
The participants of the meeting included: representatives of the SNCO “Hayantar”, the EU Delegation, the Ministry of Nature Protection (MONP), the Ministry of Agriculture, the State Forest Monitoring Centre, NGOs (Transparency International, Armenian Forests, Sustainable Human Development), the Forest Research and Education Centre, The Regional Environmental Centre for the Caucasus, Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ), TGS company, IUCN, WB, WWF.
The activities of the ENPI FLEG II CWP will be implemented over the next 3.5 years, covering the five priority areas identified by the Republic of Armenia. The activities are designed in a way to cover and build on the successful results of the Phase I of the FLEG program, as well as to address priorities identified for Phase II. The progress of the program implementation will be presented and discussed at the National Program Advisory Committee (NPAC) meetings on a regular basis, in order to make recommendations when and if a justified need for adjustments to the CWP occurs.