Establishing local seed banks by planting native trees (Hreinn Óskarsson)

Planting birch trees to establish local seed banks (Iceland)

Description

The technology is supposed to increase afforestation with native species within the area by supporting natural seed dispersal

Areas to be replanted are pre-selected based on local conditions and optimal rates of potential seed dispersal (prevailing dry-wind direction, distance to remnant seed banks etc.). The areas are partially vegetated or have previously been treated with fertilizer (and seed) to facilitate surface stabilization, improved soil qualities and vegetation succession. Only native species are planted in these seed bank "islands": mainly birch and a mixture of willow species. The islands/patches are scattered within the restoration area in order to maximise the effectiveness of the technology in the long term.

Purpose of the Technology: The purpose of the technology is to halt further land degradation and facilitate natural succession within the area undergoing restoration. In the long-term, it should substantially reduce wind and water erosion. It should also lead to increased biodiversity, enhanced water availability and accelerated carbon sequestration (in soil and vegetation). The overall restoration task is to increase the resilience of the ecosystems against natural hazards, such as volcanic activity.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: For the first years, the plants in the seed banks islands are treated annually with a small amount of fertilizer. The nutrient level within the areas is still very low and barely enough to support adequate annual plant growth.

Natural / human environment: In the long-term, the technology is expected to substantially increase biomass production, re-build soil qualities, accelerate carbon sequestration and secure water availability within the rangeland and the adjacent ecosystems. Increased tree and diverse vegetation cover will have the effect of reducing and even halting the sand drift that still creates challenges for inhabitants in adjacent villages, on farmsteads and within the summerhouse clusters, scattered around the area. As the degraded rangeland is in the vicinity of an active volcano (Mt Hekla) the technology is also expected to increase ecosystem resilience against natural hazards like ash and pumice drift and reduce potential offsite damage caused by these materials. Planting areas are pre-selected based on local conditions and optimal rate of potential seed dispersal (prevailing dry-wind direction, distance to remnant seed banks etc.). The areas are partially vegetated or have previously been treated with fertilizer (and seed) to facilitate surface stabilization, improved soil qualities and vegetation succession. Only native species are planted in these seed bank "islands"; mainly birch and a mixture of willow species. The islands/patches are scattered within the restoration area in order to maximise the effectiveness of the technology in the long-term.

Location

Location: Rangarvellir, Rangarthing Ytra, Iceland

No. of Technology sites analysed:

Geo-reference of selected sites
  • -20.40049, 63.8332

Spread of the Technology:

In a permanently protected area?:

Date of implementation: 10-50 years ago

Type of introduction
Establishing local seed banks by planting native trees (Hreinn Óskarsson)

Classification of the Technology

Main purpose
  • improve production
  • reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
  • conserve ecosystem
  • protect a watershed/ downstream areas – in combination with other Technologies
  • preserve/ improve biodiversity
  • reduce risk of disasters
  • adapt to climate change/ extremes and its impacts
  • mitigate climate change and its impacts
  • create beneficial economic impact
  • create beneficial social impact
Land use

  • Forest/ woodlandsProducts and services: Nature conservation/ protection, Recreation/ tourism, Protection against natural hazards
  • Unproductive land - Specify: Wastelands, deserts, glaciers, swamps, recreation areas, etc

Water supply
  • rainfed
  • mixed rainfed-irrigated
  • full irrigation

Purpose related to land degradation
  • prevent land degradation
  • reduce land degradation
  • restore/ rehabilitate severely degraded land
  • adapt to land degradation
  • not applicable
Degradation addressed
  • biological degradation - Bc: reduction of vegetation cover, Bq: quantity/ biomass decline, Bs: quality and species composition/ diversity decline
  • water degradation - Hs: change in quantity of surface water, Hg: change in groundwater/aquifer level
SLM group
  • improved ground/ vegetation cover
  • ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction
SLM measures
  • vegetative measures - V1: Tree and shrub cover
  • management measures - M1: Change of land use type

Technical drawing

Technical specifications
An example showing the development of a local seed bank at a previously eroded area.

Location: South Iceland

Technical knowledge required for field staff / advisors: high

Technical knowledge required for land users: moderate

Main technical functions: improvement of ground cover, increase of surface roughness, improvement of topsoil structure (compaction), increase in organic matter, increase in nutrient availability (supply, recycling,…), increase of infiltration, increase / maintain water stored in soil, increase of groundwater level / recharge of groundwater, water harvesting / increase water supply, water spreading, improvement of water quality, buffering / filtering water, sediment retention / trapping, sediment harvesting, reduction in wind speed, increase of biomass (quantity)

Secondary technical functions: control of raindrop splash, control of dispersed runoff: retain / trap, control of dispersed runoff: impede / retard, control of concentrated runoff: impede / retard, control of concentrated runoff: drain / divert, stabilisation of soil (eg by tree roots against land slides), promotion of vegetation species and varieties (quality, eg palatable fodder), spatial arrangement and diversification of land use

Aligned: -against wind
Vegetative material: T : trees / shrubs

Scattered / dispersed
Vegetative material: T : trees / shrubs

Trees/ shrubs species: birch and several willow species planted to facilitate natural regeneration of native trees and shrubs

Change of land use type: Protected from sheep grazing
Author: Áskell Þórisson

Establishment and maintenance: activities, inputs and costs

Calculation of inputs and costs
  • Costs are calculated:
  • Currency used for cost calculation: ISK
  • Exchange rate (to USD): 1 USD = 138.0 ISK
  • Average wage cost of hired labour per day: n.a
Most important factors affecting the costs
The most determinate factors affecting the cost are a) the distance from the farmsteads to the eroded areas and b) the time it takes to plant the seedlings; easily accessible areas vs difficult areas
Establishment activities
  1. Planting seedlings (Timing/ frequency: May/June)
Establishment inputs and costs
Specify input Unit Quantity Costs per Unit (ISK) Total costs per input (ISK) % of costs borne by land users
Labour
Planting
Equipment
Machinery
Plant material
Seedlings
Other
Total costs ha 1.0 500000.0 500000.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology 500'000.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD 3'623.19
Maintenance activities
n.a.

Natural environment

Average annual rainfall
  • < 250 mm
  • 251-500 mm
  • 501-750 mm
  • 751-1,000 mm
  • 1,001-1,500 mm
  • 1,501-2,000 mm
  • 2,001-3,000 mm
  • 3,001-4,000 mm
  • > 4,000 mm
Agro-climatic zone
  • humid
  • sub-humid
  • semi-arid
  • arid
Specifications on climate
Thermal climate class: boreal

Thermal climate class: polar/arctic
Slope
  • flat (0-2%)
  • gentle (3-5%)
  • moderate (6-10%)
  • rolling (11-15%)
  • hilly (16-30%)
  • steep (31-60%)
  • very steep (>60%)
Landforms
  • plateau/plains
  • ridges
  • mountain slopes
  • hill slopes
  • footslopes
  • valley floors
Altitude
  • 0-100 m a.s.l.
  • 101-500 m a.s.l.
  • 501-1,000 m a.s.l.
  • 1,001-1,500 m a.s.l.
  • 1,501-2,000 m a.s.l.
  • 2,001-2,500 m a.s.l.
  • 2,501-3,000 m a.s.l.
  • 3,001-4,000 m a.s.l.
  • > 4,000 m a.s.l.
Technology is applied in
  • convex situations
  • concave situations
  • not relevant
Soil depth
  • very shallow (0-20 cm)
  • shallow (21-50 cm)
  • moderately deep (51-80 cm)
  • deep (81-120 cm)
  • very deep (> 120 cm)
Soil texture (topsoil)
  • coarse/ light (sandy)
  • medium (loamy, silty)
  • fine/ heavy (clay)
Soil texture (> 20 cm below surface)
  • coarse/ light (sandy)
  • medium (loamy, silty)
  • fine/ heavy (clay)
Topsoil organic matter content
  • high (>3%)
  • medium (1-3%)
  • low (<1%)
Groundwater table
  • on surface
  • < 5 m
  • 5-50 m
  • > 50 m
Availability of surface water
  • excess
  • good
  • medium
  • poor/ none
Water quality (untreated)
  • good drinking water
  • poor drinking water (treatment required)
  • for agricultural use only (irrigation)
  • unusable
Water quality refers to: ground water
Is salinity a problem?
  • Ja
  • Nee

Occurrence of flooding
  • Ja
  • Nee
Species diversity
  • high
  • medium
  • low
Habitat diversity
  • high
  • medium
  • low

Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Market orientation
  • subsistence (self-supply)
  • mixed (subsistence/ commercial)
  • commercial/ market
Off-farm income
  • less than 10% of all income
  • 10-50% of all income
  • > 50% of all income
Relative level of wealth
  • very poor
  • poor
  • average
  • rich
  • very rich
Level of mechanization
  • manual work
  • animal traction
  • mechanized/ motorized
Sedentary or nomadic
  • Sedentary
  • Semi-nomadic
  • Nomadic
Individuals or groups
  • individual/ household
  • groups/ community
  • cooperative
  • employee (company, government)
Gender
  • women
  • men
Age
  • children
  • youth
  • middle-aged
  • elderly
Area used per household
  • < 0.5 ha
  • 0.5-1 ha
  • 1-2 ha
  • 2-5 ha
  • 5-15 ha
  • 15-50 ha
  • 50-100 ha
  • 100-500 ha
  • 500-1,000 ha
  • 1,000-10,000 ha
  • > 10,000 ha
Scale
  • small-scale
  • medium-scale
  • large-scale
Land ownership
  • state
  • company
  • communal/ village
  • group
  • individual, not titled
  • individual, titled
Land use rights
  • open access (unorganized)
  • communal (organized)
  • leased
  • individual
Water use rights
  • open access (unorganized)
  • communal (organized)
  • leased
  • individual
Access to services and infrastructure
health

poor
good
education

poor
good
technical assistance

poor
good
employment (e.g. off-farm)

poor
good
markets

poor
good
energy

poor
good
roads and transport

poor
good
drinking water and sanitation

poor
good
financial services

poor
good

Impacts

Socio-economic impacts
drinking water availability
decreased
increased

water availability for livestock
decreased
increased

water quality for livestock
decreased
increased

Land price/lease
decreased
increased

Socio-cultural impacts
cultural opportunities (eg spiritual, aesthetic, others)
reduced
improved

recreational opportunities
reduced
improved

community institutions
weakened
strengthened

national institutions
weakened
strengthened

SLM/ land degradation knowledge
reduced
improved

Ecological impacts
water quantity
decreased
increased

water quality
decreased
increased

harvesting/ collection of water (runoff, dew, snow, etc)
reduced
improved

surface runoff
increased
decreased

excess water drainage
reduced
improved

groundwater table/ aquifer
lowered
recharge

evaporation
increased
decreased

soil moisture
decreased
increased

soil cover
reduced
improved

soil loss
increased
decreased

nutrient cycling/ recharge
decreased
increased

soil organic matter/ below ground C
decreased
increased

biomass/ above ground C
decreased
increased

plant diversity
decreased
increased

animal diversity
decreased
increased

habitat diversity
decreased
increased

emission of carbon and greenhouse gases
increased
decreased

wind velocity
increased
decreased

Off-site impacts
water availability (groundwater, springs)
decreased
increased

downstream flooding (undesired)
increased
reduced

downstream siltation
increased
decreased

buffering/ filtering capacity (by soil, vegetation, wetlands)
reduced
improved

wind transported sediments
increased
reduced

damage on neighbours' fields
increased
reduced

damage on public/ private infrastructure
increased
reduced

Cost-benefit analysis

Benefits compared with establishment costs
Short-term returns
very negative
very positive

Long-term returns
very negative
very positive

Benefits compared with maintenance costs
Short-term returns
very negative
very positive

Long-term returns
very negative
very positive

Climate change

Gradual climate change
annual temperature increase

not well at all
very well
Climate-related extremes (disasters)
local windstorm

not well at all
very well
drought

not well at all
very well
general (river) flood

not well at all
very well
Other climate-related consequences
reduced growing period

not well at all
very well

Adoption and adaptation

Percentage of land users in the area who have adopted the Technology
  • single cases/ experimental
  • 1-10%
  • 11-50%
  • > 50%
Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many have done so without receiving material incentives?
  • 0-10%
  • 11-50%
  • 51-90%
  • 91-100%
Has the Technology been modified recently to adapt to changing conditions?
  • Ja
  • Nee
To which changing conditions?
  • climatic change/ extremes
  • changing markets
  • labour availability (e.g. due to migration)
  • climate
using of local birch trees freezing the seadlings (after planting the plants have some water to grow and they can't lose water through evaporation, start growing when the conditions are good for them) --> much better succes

Conclusions and lessons learnt

Strengths: land user's view
  • Trees are less vulnerable to ash falls after volcanic eruptions.
  • The astetic view of landscape is increasing.
  • The trees can store carbon.
Strengths: compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
  • Trees are less vulnerable to ash falls after volcanic eruptions.
  • The astetic view of landscape is increasing.
  • Native Icelandic plants are used.
  • The trees can store carbon.
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: land user's viewhow to overcome
  • It covers land who could be used for other things (grazing). Explain advantages of restore land and save it from wind erosion
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: compiler’s or other key resource person’s viewhow to overcome
  • The soil in certain locations must first be prepared. Through land reclamation activities the soil can be improved. (fertilized and stabilized)

References

Compiler
  • Thorunn Petursdottir
Editors
Reviewer
  • Jan Reichert
  • Hanspeter Liniger
Date of documentation: Junie 1, 2015
Last update: Julie 5, 2020
Resource persons
Full description in the WOCAT database
Linked SLM data
Documentation was faciliated by
Institution Project
Links to relevant information which is available online
This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareaAlike 4.0 International