1.2 Contact details of resource persons and institutions involved in the assessment and documentation of the Technology

Name of project which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)

DESIRE (EU-DES!RE)

Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)

University of Aveiro (University of Aveiro) - Portugal

Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)

Forest Association of Mação (Aflomação) (Aflomação) - Portugal

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

The compiler and key resource person(s) accept the conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT:

Yes

1.5 Reference to Questionnaire(s) on SLM Approaches (documented using WOCAT)

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Linear strips are strategically located in areas where total or partial removal of the forest biomass is possible. This technology contributes towards preventing the occurrence and spread of large forest fires and reducing their consequences for the environment, people, infrastructures, etc.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

There are three types of strip for fuel management in forest areas: primary, secondary and tertiary, defined by the Law 17/2009. The most important differences between them are in terms of size (primary being the widest and the tertiary the narrowest) and scale (primary referring to the district level, secondary to the municipal level and tertiary to the parish level). The primary strip network system for fuel management (RPFGC) is integrated in the National System to Prevent and Protect Forest against Fires and it is defined by the National Forest Authority (AFN).

Purpose of the Technology: The RPFGC aims to re-arrange landscape elements, through the establishment of discontinuities in the vegetation cover, in forest areas and in the rural landscape (for example using water bodies, agricultural land, pasture, rocky outcrops, shrubland and valuable forest stands). Land tenure is private in most of the areas covered by the RPFGC. The main objectives of this technology are: to decrease the area affected by large fires; to enable direct access by fire fighters; to reduce fire effects and protect roads, infrastructures and social equipment, urban areas and forest areas of special value; and to isolate potential fire ignition sources.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: These primary strips are ≥ 125 metres wide and preferably between 500 and 10,000 ha in area. The tree cover should be less than 50% of the area and the base of the tree canopy should not be lower than 3 metres. The RPFGC concept should include the adoption of a maintenance programme. The implementation and maintenance operations can be performed through different agro-forest technologies, such as clearance of bushes and trees, pruning, prescribed fire, harrowing and cultivation of the ground beneath the trees. Timber products can be sold and the removed litter can be used in a biomass power plant or applied to the fields to improve soil fertility, using mulching technology.

Natural / human environment: This SWC Technology needs considerable financial resources in terms of labour and equipment at the implementation phase. Costs, however, undergo considerable reduction thereafter. The implementation of this infrastructure to prevent and protect the land from forest fire is entirely funded by the government and implemented by the forest municipal services.

2.3 Photos of the Technology

2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Technology has been applied and which are covered by this assessment

2.6 Date of implementation

If precise year is not known, indicate approximate date:

• less than 10 years ago (recently)

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• through projects/ external interventions

3.2 Current land use type(s) where the Technology is applied

Land use mixed within the same land unit:

Yes

Specify mixed land use (crops/ grazing/ trees):

• Silvo-pastoralism

Comments:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): Forest fires increase due to rural depopulation and to land management abandonment.
Other grazingland: silvo-pastoralism: Goats and sheep.
Selective felling of (semi-) natural forests: Pine.
Clear felling of (semi-)natural forests: Eucalyptus.
Other type of forest: clear felling of (semi-)natural forests: Eucalyptus.
Forest products and services: timber, fuelwood
Constraints of settlement / urban: Proximity of forest to urban areas.
Constraints of infrastructure network (roads, railways, pipe lines, power lines): Ignition sources.

Number of growing seasons per year: 2
Longest growing period in days: 1Longest growing period from month to month: 1 per year
Livestock density: 1-10 LU /km2

3.4 Water supply

Comments:

Water supply: rainfed, rainfed

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• natural and semi-natural forest management
• ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

Comments:

Main measures: structural measures

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

Comments:

Main type of degradation addressed: Bf: detrimental effects of fires

Main causes of degradation: deforestation / removal of natural vegetation (incl. forest fires) (Forest fire frequency and intensity.), Property size (Small pieces of land (< 0.5 ha).)

Secondary causes of degradation: Population density (Ageing population structure and depopulation.)

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

Specify the goal of the Technology with regard to land degradation:

• prevent land degradation

Comments:

Main goals: prevention of land degradation

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

other/ national currency (specify):

Euro

If relevant, indicate exchange rate from USD to local currency (e.g. 1 USD = 79.9 Brazilian Real): 1 USD =:

0.76

4.3 Establishment activities

	Activity	Timing (season)
1.	Primary System design	n. a.
2.	Shrubs cleaning + Thinning (reduction of fuel load) + Pruning	Dry season
3.	Removing the cut waste material
4.	Litter Shredding
5.	Transport to the Biomass Plant

4.4 Costs and inputs needed for establishment

	Specify input	Unit	Quantity	Costs per Unit	Total costs per input	% of costs borne by land users
Labour	Labour	ha	1.0	1076.0	1076.0
Equipment	Machine use	ha	1.0	568.0	568.0
Equipment	Transport	ha	1.0	100.0	100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					1744.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD					2294.74

4.6 Costs and inputs needed for maintenance/ recurrent activities (per year)

Comments:

The costs calculation was made for the implementation of the first section of the RPFGC. The implementation phase lasted for 2 or 3 months during the dry season. This section included 28 ha and 4 teams of forest sappers were involved.

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

The costs include the activities to ensure the vertical and horizontal discontinuity of the fuel load and also the activities needed to manage the waste produced from the shrubs cleaning and thinning.

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Indicate if the Technology is specifically applied in:

• concave situations

5.3 Soils

If available, attach full soil description or specify the available information, e.g. soil type, soil PH/ acidity, Cation Exchange Capacity, nitrogen, salinity etc.

Soil depth on average is very shallow: Thin and stony terrains
Soil fertility is low
Soil drainage/infiltration is poor
Soil water storage capacity is low

5.4 Water availability and quality

5.5 Biodiversity

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

Land users applying the Technology are mainly common / average land users
Population density: 10-50 persons/km2
Annual population growth: negative; 2%
50% of the land users are average wealthy and own 50% of the land.
50% of the land users are poor and own 50% of the land.
Level of mechanization is manual labour or animal traction (Small machines are used)
market orientation is mixed (more subsistence than commercial).

5.7 Average area of land used by land users applying the Technology

5.8 Land ownership, land use rights, and water use rights

Land ownership:

• individual, not titled
• individual, titled

Land use rights:

• individual

Water use rights:

• open access (unorganized)

Comments:

Individual, not titled: Usually, legal documents for the property are missing.

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Income and costs

Other socio-economic impacts

Socio-cultural impacts

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

Soil

Biodiversity: vegetation, animals

Climate and disaster risk reduction

Other ecological impacts

6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown

6.3 Exposure and sensitivity of the Technology to gradual climate change and climate-related extremes/ disasters (as perceived by land users)

Gradual climate change

Gradual climate change

	Season	increase or decrease	How does the Technology cope with it?
annual temperature		increase	well

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Meteorological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
local rainstorm	not well
local windstorm	not well

Climatological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
drought	not well

Hydrological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
general (river) flood	not well

Other climate-related consequences

Other climate-related consequences

	How does the Technology cope with it?
reduced growing period	well

6.4 Cost-benefit analysis

How do the benefits compare with the establishment costs (from land users’ perspective)?

How do the benefits compare with the maintenance/ recurrent costs (from land users' perspective)?

Comments:

The maintenance will only start 2 or 3 years after the technology implementation, so no returns are expected at short-term.

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

Comments:

Comments on acceptance with external material support: 100% of the technology was implement by local administration, with support from the government.

There is a strong trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

Comments on adoption trend: After the implementation period there was a high local acceptance of the technology. It is also expected that grazing activities contribute to the technology maintenance

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Fuel load reduction How can they be sustained / enhanced? This will be achieved using prescribed fire and specialised machinery. The efficacy of prescribed fire depends on the collaboration of technicians and forest sapper teams. To guarantee the effectiveness of RPFGC implementation, long-term maintenance has to be ensured.
Reinforcement of the forest path system How can they be sustained / enhanced? Clearing the strips of the RPFGC can enhance the forest track network.
Forest fire prevention and fighting How can they be sustained / enhanced? The know-how of the local stakeholders and communities will contribute to the design of the RPFGC . This information should be integrated into the Municipal Plans to Prevent and Protect Forest Against Fires (PMDFCI). Any further information should be provided to the Civil Protection Agencies and to the Forest Technical Office and also to the local fire-brigade team.
Increase in landscape resilience How can they be sustained / enhanced? This will only be effective if the RPFGC is continuous and without gaps. The acceptance of the RPFGC by the landowners is fundamental to widespread the use of this technology. Information and awareness about the need to change vegetation cover is also very important, in order to avoid extensive areas of monoculture.

6.8 Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks of the Technology and ways of overcoming them

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
Soil erosion increase	Forestry good practices should be used in the RPFGC implementation, especially concerning the use of machinery and avoiding disturbance of soil at depth. Soil cover after the removal of the existing vegetation should be promoted (by seeding, mulching or creating a low intensity pasture).
Soil cover reduction	Soil cover after the removal of the existing vegetation should be promoted (by seeding, mulching or creating a low intensity pasture).
Runoff increase	Soil cover after the removal of the existing vegetation should be promoted (by seeding, mulching or creating a low intensity pasture). Excessive vegetation removal should be avoid, especially near water courses where the removal should be nil or minimum.
Budget for implementation and maintenance	European and national funds. Collaboration of the local government providing equipment and labour force. Information and awareness to the landowners about the importance of this technology. Campaigns of national awareness and definition of this technology as ‘public use’ to overcome some potential social conflicts concerning the land rights.

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Decree-Law n. 124/2006, 28 June. Official Gazette n. 123 – I series: 4586-4599; Decree-Law n. 17/2009, 14 January. Official Gazette n. 9 – I series: 273-295.