Technologies

SELECTIVE CUTTING [Italy]

technologies_1610 - Italy

Completeness: 69%

1. General information

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

Key resource person(s)

SLM specialist:
SLM specialist:

Quaranta Giovanni

University of Basilicata

Italy

Name of project which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
Catastrophic shifts in drylands (EU-CASCADE) {'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 1085, 'label': 'Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)', 'text': 'University of Basilicata - Italy', 'template': 'raw'}

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. Description of the SLM Technology

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

SELECTIVE CUTTING OF FOREST TREES TO PREVENT FIRES AND AVOID THE RISK OF DAMAGED TREES FALLING DOWN.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

The technique consists of cutting down and removing damaged trees from the forest (for example those damaged by snow) or dried trees, which tend to fuel fires and increase their spread.

Purpose of the Technology: Protection of woods in case of fire and promoting the natural regeneration of forests.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: Clearing activities carried out periodically.

Natural / human environment: The technique is applied in timber forests. The context of production is characterised by a medium level of mechanisation (only the most demanding operations are carried out using mechanical means), the production system is essentially mixed, a small part is destined for personal consumption whilst the bulk of production is destined for local markets. The property is predominantly privately owned but also includes some public land, especially in the case of pasture land. Most farms in the area are livestock farms whilst the agricultural component is destined exclusively for private consumption.

2.3 Photos of the Technology

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

Country:

Italy

Region/ State/ Province:

Basilicata

Further specification of location:

Castelsaraceno

Specify the spread of the Technology:
  • evenly spread over an area
If precise area is not known, indicate approximate area covered:
  • 0.1-1 km2

2.6 Date of implementation

If precise year is not known, indicate approximate date:
  • more than 50 years ago (traditional)

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:
  • as part of a traditional system (> 50 years)

3. Classification of the SLM Technology

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

Forest/ woodlands

Forest/ woodlands

  • (Semi-)natural forests/ woodlands
(Semi-)natural forests/ woodlands: Specify management type:
  • Clear felling
Products and services:
  • Fuelwood
  • Grazing/ browsing
  • Recreation/ tourism
Comments:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): In the timber forests the presence of damaged trees promotes the spread of fires and the increase the risk of fallen trees.
Major land use problems (land users’ perception): Fire risk and risk of fallen trees.

Number of growing seasons per year: 1
Longest growing period in days: 120 Longest growing period from month to month: March to august

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

  • natural and semi-natural forest management
  • Fire prevention

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

management measures

management measures

  • M7: Others
Comments:

Main measures: management measures
Specification of other management measures: Reduction of risk of fire and better quliaty and value of forest.

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

biological degradation

biological degradation

  • Bf: detrimental effects of fires
Comments:

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

Secondary causes of degradation: other human induced causes (specify) (Spontaneous combustion.), other natural causes (avalanches, volcanic eruptions, mud flows, highly susceptible natural resources, extreme topography, etc.) specify (Snow, estreme winter weather)

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

Specify the goal of the Technology with regard to land degradation:
  • prevent land degradation
  • restore/ rehabilitate severely degraded land
Comments:

Main goals: prevention of land degradation

Secondary goals: rehabilitation / reclamation of denuded land

4. Technical specifications, implementation activities, inputs, and costs

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

{'additional_translations': {}, 'content_type': None, 'preview_image': '', 'key': 'Technical drawing', 'value': None, 'template': 'raw'}
Technical specifications (related to technical drawing):

Technical knowledge required for land users: low

Main technical functions: control of fires, reduction of dry material (fuel for wildfires)

Secondary technical functions: improvement of ground cover

Major change in timing of activities: Cutting of trees damaged or dead.

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 =:

0.74

Indicate average wage cost of hired labour per day:

81.08

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

Activity Timing/ frequency
1. Cutting of trees damaged or dead by mechanical equipment (chainsaw). Regularly

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

Specify input Unit Quantity Costs per Unit Total costs per input % of costs borne by land users
Labour Cutting of trees damaged or dead by mechanical equipment (chainsaw). ha 1.0 270.27 270.27 100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology 270.27
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD 365.23
Comments:

Machinery/ tools: Hedge cutter

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

Manual labour and fuel for chainsaw.

5. Natural and human environment

5.1 Climate

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
Specify average annual rainfall (if known), in mm:

1519.00

Specifications/ comments on rainfall:

68% in winter and 15% in summer

Agro-climatic zone
  • sub-humid

Thermal climate class: temperate

5.2 Topography

Slopes on average:
  • 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
Altitudinal zone:
  • 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.

5.3 Soils

Soil depth on average:
  • 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):
  • fine/ heavy (clay)
Topsoil organic matter:
  • medium (1-3%)
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 fertility is medium-high
Soil drainage/infiltration is good
Soil water storage capacity is medium

5.4 Water availability and quality

Ground water table:

5-50 m

Availability of surface water:

medium

Water quality (untreated):

good drinking water

Comments and further specifications on water quality and quantity:

Availability of surface water: Medium (minimum during month of September and October)

5.5 Biodiversity

Species diversity:
  • medium

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Market orientation of production system:
  • commercial/ market
Off-farm income:
  • 10-50% of all income
Relative level of wealth:
  • average
Individuals or groups:
  • individual/ household
Gender:
  • men
Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

Land users applying the Technology are mainly common / average land users

Difference in the involvement of women and men: active farmers are present only males; women are not actively involved in land management

Population density: 10-50 persons/km2

Annual population growth: negative; 2%

90% of the land users are average wealthy.
10% of the land users are poor.

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

  • < 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
Is this considered small-, medium- or large-scale (referring to local context)?
  • small-scale

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

Land ownership:
  • communal/ village
  • individual, titled
Land use rights:
  • communal (organized)
  • individual

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

health:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
education:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
technical assistance:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
employment (e.g. off-farm):
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
markets:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
energy:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
roads and transport:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
drinking water and sanitation:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
financial services:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good

6. Impacts and concluding statements

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

wood production

decreased
increased

risk of production failure

increased
decreased

Socio-cultural impacts

cultural opportunities

reduced
improved
Comments/ specify:

Aesthetic value

Improved livelihoods and human well-being

decreased
increased

Ecological impacts

Soil

soil organic matter/ below ground C

decreased
increased
Comments/ specify:

The trees harvested trees in the wood would contribute to increase the soil organic matter if left in place.

Climate and disaster risk reduction

fire risk

increased
decreased
Other ecological impacts

Hazard towards adverse events

improved
reduced

6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown

damage on neighbours' fields

increased
reduced

damage on public/ private infrastructure

increased
reduced

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 well
local windstorm well
Climatological disasters
How does the Technology cope with it?
drought well
Hydrological disasters
How does the Technology cope with it?
general (river) flood 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)?
Short-term returns:

slightly positive

Long-term returns:

slightly positive

How do the benefits compare with the maintenance/ recurrent costs (from land users' perspective)?
Short-term returns:

positive

Long-term returns:

positive

Comments:

The value of the wood harvested is higher than the costs of felling

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many did so spontaneously, i.e. without receiving any material incentives/ payments?
  • 11-50%
Comments:

50% of land user families have adopted the Technology with external material support

Comments on acceptance with external material support: Contributions through rural development measure (200 € per hectare)

50% of land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support

There is a moderate trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
The technique is useful particularly in areas nearest public roads to prevention the spread of wildfires and to decrease risk of damaged trees falling.
Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Selective cutting of damaged trees is a useful tool in preventing the growing spread of wildfires and promotes a more homogenous and regular growth in the forest.

How can they be sustained / enhanced? The resources forseen under the RDP to support this action have not led to the its spontaneous adoption.

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

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the land user’s view How can they be overcome?
There are no disadvantages to this technique.

Links and modules

Expand all Collapse all

Modules