Sunteți pe pagina 1din 104

BAHIR DAR UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES GRADUATE PROGRAM

ASSESSMENT OF DIVERSITY AND STRUCTURE OF WOODY PLANT SPECIES AND LAND COVER CHANGES OF SINKO COMMUNITY FOREST, FOGERA DISTRICT, NORTH WESTERN ETHIOPIA

M.Sc Research Thesis By Abeje Zewdie

October 2013 Bahir Dar

BAHIR DAR UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES GRADUATE PROGRAM

ASSESSMENT OF DIVERSITY AND STRUCTURE OF WOODY PLANT SPECIES and LAND COVER CHANGES OF SINKO COMMUNITY FOREST, FOGERA DISTRICT, NORTH WESTERN ETHIOPIA

M.Sc Research Thesis By Abeje Zewdie Major Advisor: Belayneh Ayele (PhD)

SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE (MSc.) IN LAND RESOURCE ANAGEMENT

October 2013 Bahir Dar

THESIS APPROVAL SHEET As member of the Board of Examiners of the Master of Sciences (M.Sc.) thesis open defense examination, we have read and evaluated this thesis prepared by Mr Abeje Zewdie entitled Assessment of Diversity and Structure of Woody Plant species and Land cover changes of Sinko Community Forest, Fogera district, North western Ethiopia. We hereby certify that, the thesis is accepted for fulfilling the requirements for the award of the degree of Master of Sciences (M.Sc.) in Land Resource Management. Board of Examiners Yeshanew Ashagrie (PhD) Name of External Examiner Berehanu Abraha (PhD) Name of Internal Examiner Getachew Fisseha (PhD) Name of Chairman _______________ Signature _________________ Signature _________________ Signature _______________ Date _______________ Date _______________ Date

ii

DECLARATION This is to certify that this thesis entitled Assessment of Diversity and Structure of Woody Plant species and Land cover changes of Sinko Community Forest, Fogera district, North western Ethiopia Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the degree of Master of Science in Land Resource Management to the Graduate Program of College of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences, Bahir Dar University by Mr. Abeje Zewdie (ID. No. k315/2003 is an authentic work carried out by him under my guidance. The matter embodied in this project work has not been submitted earlier for award of any degree or diploma to the best of my knowledge and belief. Name of the Student Abeje Zewdie Signature & date _____________________ Name of the Supervisors 1) Belayneh Ayele (PhD) (Major Supervisor) Signature & date _____________________

iii

Contents Pages LIST OF TABLES...vii LIST OF FIGURESviii APPENDICES...ix ABBREVIATIONS /ACRONYMS...x ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.xi DEDICATION.xii ABSTRACT....xiii 1. INTRODUCTION.1 1. 1 Background and Justification .......................................................................................1 1.2 Statement of the Problem ..............................................................................................3 1.3 Objectives of the Study .................................................................................................4 1.4 Research Questions .......................................................................................................5 2. LITERATURE REVIEW..6 2.1 Concepts of Biodiversity ...............................................................................................6 2.2 Floristic Diversity of Ethiopia .......................................................................................7 2.3 Threats on Plant Biodiversity in Ethiopia ......................................................................8 2.4 Diversity measurements ................................................................................................9 2.5 Classification of Plant Communities ........................................................................... 10 2.6 Plant population Structure ........................................................................................... 11 2.7 Land use /land Cover .................................................................................................. 12 2.7.1 Land use /land Cover Dynamics ........................................................................... 12 2.7.2 Why is studying LULC need? ............................................................................... 14 2.7.3 Satellite images for LULC .................................................................................... 15 2.8 Forest Management and Administration ...................................................................... 16 2.8.1Participatory Forest Management (PFM) ............................................................... 17 2.8.2 Common resource management ............................................................................ 19 3. MATERIALS AND METHODS..19 3.1 Description of the Study Area ..................................................................................... 19 3.1.1 Geographical location ........................................................................................... 19 3.1.2 Vegetation ............................................................................................................ 20 3.1.3. Climate ................................................................................................................ 21 3.1.4 Topography and soils ............................................................................................ 21
iv

( continued) 3.1.5 Population ............................................................................................................ 22 3.1.6 Livelihoods of the surrounding community ........................................................... 23 3.2 Methods of Data Collection ........................................................................................ 23 3.3 Methods of Data Analysis....................................................................................... 24 3.3.1 Diversity and evenness of species ......................................................................... 24 3.3.2 Measurement of similarity and dissimilarity.......................................................... 25 3.3.3 Classification of Community types ....................................................................... 25 3.3.4 Structural analysis................................................................................................. 25 3.3.5 Analysis of land cover changes ............................................................................. 27 3.4 Socio-Economic Data Analysis ................................................................................... 29 4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION.30 4.1Woody Plant Species Diversity of Sinko community Forest ......................................... 30 4.2 Endemism ................................................................................................................... 32 4.3 Classification of Plant Communities in Siniko community forest ................................ 32 4.3.1 Riverine community type ...................................................................................... 33 4.3.2. Artificial Forest Community type ........................................................................ 34 4.3.3 Pterolobium stellautm- Carissa edulis community type ........................................ 34 4.3.4 Dodonaea viscosa- Osyris quadripartite community type ..................................... 35 4.4 Species richness, Diversity and Evenness of the Plant Community Types ................... 36 4.4.1 Similarity among the plant communities ............................................................... 37 4.4.2 Floristic comparison of Sinko community forest with other forests in Ethiopia ..... 38 4.5 Vegetation Structure ................................................................................................... 39 4.5.1 Tree and Shrub Density ........................................................................................ 40 4.5.2. DBH distribution ................................................................................................. 41 4.5.3 Height distribution ................................................................................................ 42 4.5.4 Vertical structure .................................................................................................. 43 4.5.5 Frequency ............................................................................................................. 44 4.5.6 Basal Area ............................................................................................................ 44

( continued) 4.5.7 Importance Value Index (IVI) ............................................................................... 46 4.6 Land use /land cover changes in the study area ........................................................... 47 4.6.1Rate of land use and land cover changes in the study area ...................................... 52 4.7 Management Practices and Threats to Sinko Cmmunity Forest ................................... 53 5. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION56 5.1 Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 56 5.2 Recommendation ........................................................................................................ 57 6. REFERENCE59

vi

LIST OF TABLES
Table 3.1 Villages that surround the community forest ......................................................... 22 Table 3.2 Summery of data sources and material ................................................................ 27 Table 3.3 Description of land covers categories for change detection between 1985 to 2010 for the study area .................................................................................................................. 29 Table 4.1 Family, Genera and Species distribution of woody plants in Sinko community forest ............................................................................................................................................. 30 Table 4.2 Endemic species in Sinko community Forest .........................................................32 Table 4.3 Number of plots in each community of Sinko Community forest........................... 33 Table 4.4 ShannonWiener indices, Species richness and evenness of the plant Communities ............................................................................................................................................. 36 Table 4.5 Sorensons Similarity coefficient (%) among the four communities. ..................... 37 Table 4.6 the floristic Comparison of Sinko community Forest with other similar Forest in Ethiopia ................................................................................................................................ 38 Table 4.7 Tree density of Sinko community forest and other dry afromontane forests ........... 40 Table 4.8 vertical structure of Sinko Community Forest. ...................................................... 43 Table 4.9 Basl area contributions of species in Sinko community forest................................ 45 Table 4.10 Comparison of the Basal area of Sinko community Forest with area of other Forests in Ethiopia ................................................................................................................ 46 Table 4.11 Summary of overall classification accuracy and kappa coefficient ....................... 47 Table 4.12Land use land cover classes and rate of change between 1985 through 2010....52

vii

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 3.1 Map of the study area20 Figure 3.2 Climadiagram at Debre-Tabor Station (based on 10 years data; from 1997-2006) 21 Figure 3.3. Flowchart............................................................................................................ 28 Fig 4.1Dendrogram of Sinko community forest using Ward Method and Euclidean distance 33 Figure 4.2 Artificial forest type in Sinko community forest ................................................... 34 Figure 4.3 Dodonaea viscosa- Osyris quadripartite community type in Sinko community forest .................................................................................................................................... 35 Fig 4.4 Plant growth forms of Sinko community forest ......................................................... 40 Figure 4.5 DBH class distribution of woody species in Sinko community forest ................... 41 Figure 4.6 Measurment of DBH in sinko community forest .................................................. 42 Figure 4.7 Percentage distributions of trees in height classes in Sinko Community forest...... 43 Figure 4.8 Trends in land use land cover changes of Sinko Community forest from 1985 to 2010 ..................................................................................................................................... 48 Figure 4.9 land use/ land cover map of 1985 ......................................................................... 49 Figure 4.10 Land use land cover map of 2005 .......................................................................50 Figure 4.11 Land use Land cover map of 2010 .....................................................................51 Fig 4.12 Land certificate of Sinko community forest in Alember zuria Kebele ...................... 54

viii

APPENDICES
Appendices 1. Questionnaire survey to investigate the socio-economy of sinko community forest ........................................................................................................................................ 67 Appendices 2. Lists of woody species recorded in Sinko community forest with corresponding family, vernacular name and plant forms ........................................................... 73 Appendices 3. Location of Quadrats in Sinko community forest ............................................... 81 Appendix 4. Frequency distribution of tree/shrub species in sinko community forest ............... 84 Appindex 5 the IVI of species in Sinko community forest (RD, relative density, RF relative frequency, RDO relative dominance and IVI important value index) ........................................ 86 Appendix .6 Different ground control points for classification. ................................................. 88

ix

ABBREVIATIONS /ACRONYMS
a.s.l ANRS BA CSA b.s.l DBH EPA EPI FAO GLCF GPS Ha IBC IVI LULC NMA PaDPA PFM SGAZ RD RDO RF SH T WC m.a.sl m.b.sl Above sea level Amhara national regional state Basal area Central Statistical Authority Below sea level Diameter at Breast Height Environmental Protection Authority Epiphyte Food and Agricultural Organization Global Land Cover Facility Global Positioning System Hectare Institutes of Biodiversity Conservation Important Value Index Land Use Land Cover Changes National Meteorological Agency Parks Development and Protection Authority Participatory Forest Management South Gondar Administrative Zone Relative density Relative Dominance Relative Frequency Shrubs Tree Woody Climber meter above sea level meter below sea level

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
First and foremost, I praise to the Merciful Almighty God who blessed and taking care of me. I would like to express my deepest gratitude and sincere thanks to my advisors to Dr. Belayneh Ayele for his support, constructive comments and devoting precious time in guiding, searching of data, reading, as well as correcting of this thesis.My deepest thanks goes to Ato Birhanu Gedif who guided me the land use land coverches part in my study and commenting correcting of the document without him it was difficult to achieve this work. I am very much indebted to my wife Mastewal Alimaw and my daughter Mahider Abeje for their encouragements, wonderful advises and endless supports; without them this research would not be complete. I want to thank my parents my father ato Zewdie Tewlatu and my mother Zeyene Alene for their motivation, and incredible love. I want to thank my brother Bayebegn Zewudie who bought a laptop for writing the research work and his continuous advice and for his motivation. I want to extend my thanks to ANRS Bureau of Culture, Tourism and Parks development for giving me the opportunity to attend my study and providing me financial support for the whole study and members of wildlife study, development, protection and utilization process for their cooperation and assistance during my study especially I would like to extend my gratitude to ato Kenaw Abeje who prepares the land use land cover maps of the area without him it was difficult to process GIS and remote sensing data. I express my deepest sense of gratitude and acknowledgement to Wubaye Worku for his help during the challenging field survey and arranging the respondents for interview I wish if I could list all individuals who stood by my side, but I simply forward my heartfelt thanks and appreciation.

xi

DEDICATION
The Author is dedicated this work for wildlife scouts who lost their life in the protection of protected areas. May the almighty God rest their soul in heaven?

xii

Assessment of Diversity and Structure of Woody Plant Species and Land Cover Changes Of Sinko Community Forest, Fogera District, North Western Ethiopia By Abeje Zewdie Advisor Belayneh Ayele (PhD)

ABSTRACT
This study was conducted on Sinko Community Forest in Fogera District, North Western Ethiopia with the objective of determining woody plant species diversity and structure, assessing land use land cover changes of the community forest and assessing the forest management practices of the community. Systematic sampling method was used to collect vegetation data. Accordingly, 47 quadrats each with 400 m2 (20 m X 20 m) were used for collection of woody species data .The sampling plots were placed at every 100 m intervals along the transect lines laid at 400 m a part along the slope. The land use land cover changes of the community forest were assessed using supervised image classification of images taken in 1985, 2005 and 2010. A total of 115 woody plant species, representing 91 genera and 61 families were recorded. From the 115 woody plant species, 53 species (46.08%) were trees, 50 species (43.48%) were shrubs, 10 species (8.71%) were woody climbers and 2 (1.74%) were epiphytes. Of all the families, Fabaceae was the most dominant of which contributing 14 species (12.17%) of the total. The forest had the Shannon- Wiener diversity index (H`) of 2.847 and evenness of 0.631. Four plant communities were identified from hierarchical cluster analysis i.e. Riverine, Artificial forest, Pterolobium stellautm- Carissa edulis and Dodonaea viscosa- Osyris quadripartite are the dominant communities. A floristic comparison of Sinko Community Forest with other related forests in Ethiopia revealed relatively high floristic similarity with Bahir Dar Abay Millennium Park with Sorensens similarity coefficient of 65.88%. Concerning the floristic structure of the community forest, all trees and shrubs with diameter at breast height (DBH) >2 .5 cm were measured for height and diameter analysis. The analysis of the diameter at breast height distribution shows normal inverted J-shaped pattern indicating that most of the populations found in lower diameter class. The analysis of the height distribution shows normal inverted J-shaped pattern indicating that most of the populations found in lower diameter class.i.e the first two lower classes contribute 59.2%. The total basal area of all tree species in Sinko community Forest calculated from DBH data was 22.08m2ha-1. Cupressus lusitanica, Syzygium guineense, Ficus vasta, Mimusops kummel and Eucalyptus camaldulensis were the most dominant species in their basal area. The total important value index of Sinko community forest was 299.8 out of these Dodonaea viscosa (42.5), Cupressus lusitanica (34.22) and Syzygium guineense (15.75) had the highest IVI. Threats of Sinko community forest were identified from the analysis of the questionnaire survey and the main threats were firewood, cutting of thorny bushes for fencing and charcoal making. Farmland was expanded at a rate of 11.556 ha/year, grassland increases at a rate of 4.36 ha/year and forest and bush land were reduced at a rate of 15.92 ha/year. Keywords / Phrases: Community forest, Sinko, floristic composition, plant community, population structure, threat and land use land cover changes.

xiii

1. INTRODUCTION
1. 1 Background and Justification Ethiopia is a country of geographical diversity with high and rugged mountains, flat-topped plateaus, deep gorges, incised river valley and rolling plains. It is often known as the roof of Africa due to its mountainous nature (Nievergelt, 1981; Meseret Chane, 2010). The Ethiopian relief includes a range of altitudes from 116 m b.s.l to 4533 m. a.s.l, (Hurni and Ludi, 2000; Britannica academic editions, 2011) and the country consists of many peaks above 2500 m.a.s.l. These extensive plateaus are bisected by the central rift valley. Afework Bekele and Corti, (1997) ; Yalden (1983) stated that Ethiopia is a mountainous country unique by extent of its highland and over 80% of African highland areas above 3000 m altitude are located in Ethiopia. Approximately 15% of Ethiopian highlands are above 3,000 m. The afro-tropical region covers more than 300,000 km2 of land 2000 m asl, 50.4% of which is in Ethiopia and more than 25,000 km2 of land is above 3000 m (Yalden and Largen, 1992; Meseret Chane, 2010). The altitudinal variations within Ethiopia produce a range of climate, which affect every aspect of life in the country; plant and animal distribution , the concentration of people and the types of agriculture; while temperature, rainfall and vegetation play major roles in determining the distribution of fauna and flora including that of endemic mammals (Yalden and Largen, 1992). The flora of Ethiopia is very diverse with an estimated number between 6,500 and 7000 species of higher plants, of which 12 % are endemic to Ethiopia (Yalden and largen, 1992).

Reports on the forest resources of Ethiopia are dominated by the alarming deforestation that goes on unabated and at an accelerating rate. Nationally, the current deforestation rate of natural forests is estimated at 150,000200,000 ha per annum (EPA, 1998; EFAP, 1994; Badege Bishaw and Abdu Abdelkadir, 2003; Shambel Alemu, 2011). Deforestation takes place in both natural forests and from woodlands and it is recognized as the most severe environmental problem in Ethiopia.

Starting from the beginning of civilization, human-beings have deliberately managed and converted the landscape to utilize and exploit natural resources mainly to derive basic needs such as food, shelter, fresh water, and pharmaceutical products (Menale Wondie et al, 2011). However, the increase in population has proportionally increased the demand for resources for centuries; leading to the conversion of natural environmental conditions. Ecological processes and human interventions are facilitating ecosystem changes as a whole and land cover change in particular. In particular term, LULC is a dynamic phenomenon occurring within the interface between human agricultural and ecological systems. In most parts of the world, agriculture is the primary driver of land use change. The main pressure is to convert forests to agricultural uses in order to meet the increasing demands caused by human population growth (Goldewijk and Ramankutty, 2004). The physical, social and economic situations in Ethiopia have contributed to the degradation of resources. There are different types of land cover formed by both human activities and natural factors over the last centuries. Population pressure accompanied by sedentary agriculture, extensive animal husbandry, settlement and socio-political instability have resulted in heavy deforestation, forest fragmentation, loss of biodiversity and undesirable changes in the natural ecosystem, including LULC(Menale Wondie et al, 2011). It has been noted that optional and existence value of species that is not known for their direct economic benefit today may turnout to be economically important in the future (IBC, 2005; Abraham Marye, 2009). Hence the study of diversity and structure of woody species, land use and land cover changes is relevant because woody plants (trees and shrubs) are essential structural components of the ecosystems they occur in, and they cater essential resources for a host of smaller organisms. Plants (with few exceptions) are also primary producers and therefore fundamental to the productivity of almost all ecosystems. Thus, plant species monitoring believed to show changing in plant and ecosystem at what rate and with what result. Sinko community forest has relic biodiversity with significant natural forest and mid -altitude grassland flora and fauna but the area is under continuous human pressure. The major objective of this study is therefore; to explore diversity and structure of woody species in different

communities of Sinko community forest and to evaluate land use/ land cover changes of the study area. 1.2 Statement of the Problem Sinko community forest was demarcated as a community forest in 1981. After one year the forest was administered by Fogera Woreda Office of Agriculture as woreda owned state forest and it was protected for 10 years in this category. After the down of the military gov`t, the forest was renamed as community forest in 1992, during this time the forest was completely degraded and only remnants were left. After 20 years (in 2012) the frost was re-demarcated and given to Amhara Forestry Enterprise as plantation site. The site doesnt have enough protection even though it is demarcated. It is being continuously exploited by the surrounding people for fuel wood, charcoal production, agricultural land, cutting of thorny species for fencing and other purposes. The firewood and charcoal supply for the nearby Alember town is mainly obtained from this community forest. Moreover, little is known about the Community Forest as there is no floristic and structural study of the forest conducted before. The availability of accurate data on forest resources is an essential requirement for management and planning within the context of sustainable development (FAO, 2010). Assessments such as woody species diversity and structural studies are essential in understanding the extent of plant diversity in forest ecosystem (Shambel Alemu, 2011). Knowledge of floristic composition and structure of forest resources is also useful in identifying important elements of plant diversity, protecting threatened and economic species and monitoring the state of reference among others. Reduction in forest cover has a number of consequences including soil erosion and reduction capacity for carbon sequestration, loss of biodiversity and instability of ecosystems and reduced availability of various wood and non-wood forest products and services (Shambel Batiwalu, 2010).

Unmanaged land use resulted in ecological degradation and loss of unique ecosystems with their endemic components of biodiversity. So land use and land cover change is increasingly recognized as an important driver of environmental change on all spatial and temporal scales (Behailu Assefa, 2010). Land use and land cover changes contribute significantly to earth atmosphere interactions, forest fragmentation and biodiversity loss. It has become one of the major issues for environmental change monitoring and natural resource management. Its impact on terrestrial ecosystems including forestry, agriculture, and biodiversity have been identified as high priority issues in global, national, and regional levels (Goldewijk and Ramankutty,2004). This thesis work is very important to fill a knowledge and information gaps that provide detail information on biodiversity (plant species richness) and structure of the forest and land cover changes. The knowledge gained can be used by policy makers and the local community for resource conservation and use of resources in a sustainable way. In addition to filling the information and knowledge gaps, it is important for pland replantation of the area since the study identifies the species that are under threat in the last 30 years 1.3 Objectives of the Study General Objective The general objective of this study is to assess the Diversity and Structure of Woody Plant species and Land cover changes of Sinko Community Forest. Specific Objectives The specific objectives of the study are: To evaluate woody plant species diversity and structure To examine land cover changes of the forest To assess the forest management practices of the community

1.4 Research Questions This study tried to address the following critical questions What does the diversity and structure of woody plant species in Sinko Community forest looks like? What does the trend in land cover change of the area look like? What kinds of management practices are being percieved?

2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Concepts of Biodiversity The debate over the concept of diversity and its measurement is not new. According to Hammond and Daniel, (1997) stated diversity is simply a synonym for variability, where as biodiversity encompasses all biotic components of ecosystems and includes the diversity of genes, species, plant and animal communities, ecosystems, and the interaction of these elements. Or it is the variability among living organisms from all sources, including inter-alia, terrestrial, marine and other aquatic ecosystems and ecological complexes of which they are part; this includes diversity within species, between species and ecosystems (UNEP, 1992; Aleminew Alelign, 2001). Ecologists investigating terrestrial systems often focus on species diversity of plant communities since green plants usually account for an overwhelming proportion of the biomass in a given system. In forests, biological diversity allows species to evolve and dynamically adapt to changing environmental conditions (including climate), to maintain the potential for tree breeding and improvement (to meet human needs for goods and services, and changing end-use requirements) and to support their ecosystem functions (FAO, 2010). Plant biodiversity is one of the major groups of biological diversity. Plant diversity can be affected by different biotic and abiotic factors. The plant communities and their component species are exposed to changes in the environmental, physical, biological, technological, economic or social factors (Frankel et al., 1995). Globally, patterns of plant species diversity are influenced by altitudinal and soil gradients apart from other factors. Locally, in mountainous ecosystems at high rate of change in altitude, slope and moisture gradients, temperature, rainfall and drainage, the diversity of plants may also change within a short distance (Hammond and Daniel, 1997). The other factors that highly influence plant diversity are human beings, as destructive factor (Ababu Anage, 2009). So, the fate of plant communities in a given area can be determined by these and other different factors. In this case, diversity and distribution patterns of species should be studied to clarify the plant diversity in certain area and to determine major factors influencing the diversity.

2.2 Floristic Diversity of Ethiopia Ethiopia has a large natural and cultural diversity with a wide range of climate, which results from its topography and altitudinal position. It has diverse vegetation types in which diverse flora and fauna exist. The great plains of Ethiopia occur on top of massive highland plateaus like slopes of the Simien Mountains National Park, Bale Mountains National Park and other mountain ranges, where as the lowlands are dividing the highlands and the whole country into two by the Great Rift Valley. Many of these mountain ranges reach over 4000 m a.s.l. and are home to numerous endemic species of flora and fauna (Dinkisa Beche, 2011) The differences in altitude have resulted in a wide variation of climate parameters i.e., rainfall, humidity, temperature and exposure to wind, etc. These differences along with edaphic variations form the basis for the wide biodiversity of the country. This geographical and ecological diversity of Ethiopia, with extraordinary range of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems, contributed to the high rate of endemism and diversity (Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection, 1993; Dinkisa Beche, 2011) Ethiopia is one of the twelve known ancient countries for crop plant diversities in the world and has valuable reserves of crop genetic diversity, of which 7 cultivated crops have their centre of origin or primary gene center while 26 crops have secondary gene center or center of diversity in the country (IBC 2005; Birhanu Gebre et al, 2007 ; Abraham Marye, 2009). The extensive and unique conditions in the highlands of the country have contributed to the presence of a large number of endemic species. The vegetation of the country is very heterogeneous. It varies from semi-desert to Afro-alpine vegetation type (Friis et al., 2010). There are more than 6500 to 7000 higher plant species in Ethiopia of which about 12 % are endemic .These species represent 104 families and 387 genera (Vivero et al., 2005 and IBC, 2009). The country has also over 300 tree species of which a few are used for construction and industrial purpose. The total number of woody species of Ethiopia is estimated to be 1017, out of which 29 tree species, 93 shrub species and 2 liana species are

endemic (IBC, 2009). The Forest and woody vegetation resources of Ethiopia for 2010 were estimated to cover greater than 11.13 % of the total land area of Ethiopia (FAO, 2010). At present, the Ethiopian vegetation is broadly divided into nine major types of vegetation zones (Friis, 1986 ; Abate Ayalew, 2003); These are afroalpine and sub-afroalpine vegetation, the dry evergreen montane forest and grassland, moist evergreen montane forest, evergreen scrub, Combretum- Terminalia (broad-leaved) deciduous woodland, Acacia - Commiphora (smallleaved) deciduous woodland, lowland semi-evergreen forest, the desert and semi-desert scrubland, and riparian and swamp vegetation. The Ethiopian highlands contribute large coverage of land area with Afromontane vegetation, of which Dry Evergreen Afromontane Forests form the largest part. Dry Evergreen Afromontane Forest and Grassland complex vegetation type is complex system of succession with grassland rich in legume shrub and small to large trees to closed forest with a canopy of several strata. It occurs in an altitudinal range of 1800-3000 m a.s.l with average annual temperature and rainfall of 14-250C and 700-1100 mm, respectively (Abate Ayalew, 2003 and Dinkisa Beche, 2011).About 460 species, subspecies and varieties of woody plants occur in this vegetation type, from these 128 (28%) are reported only from this vegetation zone. This indicates that this vegetation zone is rich with species composition (Friis et al., 2010). 2.3 Threats on Plant Biodiversity in Ethiopia The rich biodiversity of the country is under serious threat from deforestation, land degradation, overexploitation, overgrazing, habitat loss and invasive species (EPA, 1998; EPA, 2003; IBC ,2005). In most cases, the major destructive factor of plant diversity is deforestation caused by agricultural land expansion and fuel wood scavenging. In current situations, Ethiopia is in the track of high investment rate, agro-industry expansion and population migration to a fragile ecosystem like forests and related resources. However, almost all of these huge activities were done without prior environmental impact assessment (Dinkisa Beche, 2011). As a result, many virgin and irreplaceable forests are cleared for different investment sectors like livestock ranching, coffee and tea plantations and other cash crops.

The other threats to the plant biodiversity of the country are unsustainable utilization of natural resources, forest fires, land degradation, habitat loss and fragmentation, extensive replacement of farmer's /local varieties/ breeds by improved ones, invasive species, wetland destruction , resettlement programs which cleared forest in the green belt areas of the country and climate change. But all these are related to the root causes of poverty, which are lack of alternative viable livelihoods, increasing population pressure and inadequate awareness of the threats (EPA, 1998; IBC, 2005). These different threats are in rapid progress threatening the conservation status of Ethiopia's plant diversity. The challenges to conserve and sustainable use of Ethiopias biodiversity are very complicated and interlinked (Dinkisa Beche, 2011) 2.4 Diversity measurements Biological diversity can be quantified in different ways. A diversity index is a mathematical measure of species diversity in a community. The two main factors taken into account when measuring diversity are richness and evenness. Species number was defined by Fisher et al. (1943), is simply the number of species found in a given community. Due to the implication that the exact number of species could be determined for a boundless community, the concept was later referred to as species richness index, (Hammond and Daniel, 1997). Evenness, on the other hand, refers to the degree to which dominance is distributed among the species in a community. Evenness is highest if all species in the community are equally represented. Species richness is a measure of the number of different species in a given site and can be expressed in a mathematical index to compare diversity between sites. A richness index may simply coincide with the number of species present in a community, but may also be a function of the number of all the individuals in the community. The species richness of each community is simply the number of species present with at least one individual in a given area (Hammond and Daniel, 1997). The index is essential in assessing taxonomic and ecological values of a habitat. The second factor, evenness, measures a relative abundance of different species. This refers to the degree to which dominance is distributed among the species in a community (Hammond and Daniel, 1997 ; Dinkissa Beche, 2011). According to Frosini (2006), an evenness index is a

function of the frequencies or proportions pertaining to the species; such an index increases when the proportions tend to be equal or perfect homogeneity and decreases when one species tend to dominate all the others. The interpretation of evenness is strictly dependent on the richness. Species diversity is the product of species richness and evenness. Species diversity index provides information about species endemism, rarity and commonness (Frosini, 2006). Diversity indices also provide more information about community composition than simply species richness and relative abundances of different species (Kent and Coker, 1992; Frosini, 2006). The ability to quantify diversity in this way is an important tool for biologists trying to understand community structure. And also measuring diversity has been of historical significance due to the obvious declines in habitat diversity (Frosini, 2006). Among many species diversity indices the most widely used ones are Shannon-Wiener index, Simpsons index of Similarity and Sorenson`s index of similarity (Hammond and Daniel, 1997 ; Dinkisa Beche, 2011). 2.5 Classification of Plant Communities A community, also known as biotic community or ecological community or biocoenosis, refers to a group of co-existing and interacting populations in a given space and time (MuellerDombois and Ellenberg, 1974; Kohli et al, 1999). A forest community is reflection of coexistence and interactions of a variety of populations; the trees, shrubs, herbs, grasses, animals, and microorganisms. In other words, it is the biological part of the ecosystem distinct from the abiotic part. Each community has spatial limits or boundaries. Community is a group of organisms representing multiple species living in a specified place and time .Each community should be named with two or more dominant species within a group (Shambel Bantiwalu, 2010). When an ecologist stands on a hilltop and surveys a landscape dominated by natural or semi -natural vegetation in any part of the world, the main differences in pattern visible in the landscape will be those of plant communities (Kent and Coker, 1992; Fekadu Gurmessa, 2010). Major distinction among plant communities will be conducted on the bases of physiognomy or the growth form of the vegetation. Plant communities are conceived as
10

types of vegetation recognized by their floristic composition. The species compositions of communities better express their relationships to one another and environment than any other characteristic (Kent and Coker, 1992). 2.6 Plant population Structure Population structure is defined as the distribution of individuals of each species in arbitrarily diameter-height size classes to provide the overall regeneration profile of the study of species (Peters, 1996; Simon Shibru and Girma Balcha, 2004; Dereje Mekonnen, 2006; Semere Beyene, 2010). Information on population structure of a tree species indicates the history of the past disturbance to that species and the environment and hence, used to forecast the future trend of the population of that particular species (Peters, 1996). Population structure is extremely useful tool for orienting management activities and, perhaps most important for assessing both the potential of a given resources and the impact of resource extraction (Peters, 1996). The population structure of a given species can be roughly grouped in to three types: Type I, II and III. Type I, shows the case in which diameter/height size class distribution of the species displays a greater number of smaller trees than big trees and almost constant reductions in number from one size class to the next (Peters, 1996; Simon Shibru and Girma Balcha, 2004; Abeje Eshete et al., 2005 Dereje Mekonnen, 2006; Semere Beyene, 2010). Such a pattern skewed to a reversed J-shape distribution in a forest are considered to have a favorable status of regeneration and recruitment and hence, stable and healthy population (Kindeya G/Hiwot, 2003). Type II, is characteristic of species that show discontinuous, irregular and/or periodic recruitment. In this type, the frequency exhibited, for instance, in diameter /height size class causes discontinuities in the structure of the population as the established seedlings and saplings grow in to larger size classes. Type III, reflects a species whose regeneration is severely limited for some reasons (Peters, 1996). Hence, knowledge about the category in which our study species fall is important issue before planning to utilize the resources.

11

2.7 Land use /land Cover 2.7.1 Land use /land Cover Dynamics Land is the major natural resource that economic, social, infrastructure and other human activities are undertaken on. Thus, changes in land-use have occurred at all times in the past, are presently ongoing, and are likely to continue in the future (Lambin et al., 2003; Behailu Assefa 2010). These changes have beneficial or detrimental impacts, the latter being the principal causes of global concern as they impact on human well-being and safety. For instance, deforestation and agricultural intensification are so pervasive when they aggregate globally and significantly affect key aspects of earth systems (Lambin et al., 2003). Land use is the term that is used to describe human uses of the land (Lappiso Shamebo ,2010), or the social, economic, cultural, political or other value and function of land resources. Land use is considered a central part of the functioning of the Earth system and reflects human interactions with the environment at scales from local to global (Lappiso Shamebo ,2010). Land cover is a biophysical characteristic which refers to the cover of the surface of the earth, whereas land use is the way in which humans exploit the land cover. Land use and land cover changes are caused by natural and human drivers, such as construction of human settlements, government policies, climate change or other biophysical drivers (Lambin et al., 2003; Behailu Assefa, 2010 ) or it is the attributes of the earths land surface captured in the distribution of vegetation, water, desert and ice and the immediate subsurface, including biota, soil, topography, surface and groundwater, and it also includes those structures created solely by human activities such as mine exposures and settlement (Lambin et al., 2003; Hussien Ali, 2009). Changes in land cover involves both conversion and modification of cover (EU, 2001) and may be gradual or episodic (Lambin et al., 2003). Land cover change is associated with changes in biotic diversity, actual and potential primary productivity, soil quality, and runoff and sedimentation rates. Biodiversity is reduced when land is changed from relatively undisturbed state to more intensive uses like farming, livestock grazing, selective tree harvest, etc (Hiywot Menker and Rashid ., 2002).

12

Land use and land cover change (LULC) is the human modification of the earths surface to expand production of many ecosystem services and economic benefits (Lovett, 1990). Currently the rate of land use change is causing undesirable effects on ecosystems observed at local, regional and global scales. Land use and land cover change is responsible for global warming through the emission of greenhouse gases (Lambin et al., 2003; Hiywot Menker and Rashid, 2002). Land use affects land cover and changes in land cover affect land use. A change in either however is not necessarily the product of the other. Changes in land cover by land use do not necessarily imply degradation of the land. However, many shifting land use patterns driven by a variety of social causes, result in land cover changes that affects biodiversity, water and radiation budgets, trace gas emissions and other processes that come together to affect climate and biosphere (Lappiso Shamebo ,2010). Starting from the beginning of civilization, human-beings have deliberately managed and converted the landscape to utilize and exploit natural resources mainly to derive basic needs such as food, shelter, fresh water, and pharmaceutical products (Menale Wondie et al 2011). However, the increase in population has proportionally increased the demand for resources for centuries; leading to the conversion of natural environmental conditions. Ecological processes and human interventions are facilitating ecosystem changes as a whole and land cover change (LULC) in particular. In particular term, LULC is a dynamic phenomenon occurring within the interface between human agricultural and ecological systems (Agrawal et al, 2002). In most parts of the world, agriculture is the primary driver of land use change. The main pressure is to convert forests to agricultural uses in order to meet the increasing demands caused by human population growth (Goldewijk and Ramankutty, 2004). A review of research on Ethiopian highlands showed that from 1860s to 1980s there had been decline in shrub land, woodlands and forestlands whereas cultivated land had increased considerably. This decline worsened between the 1980s and 2000s due to expansions in cultivated area especially on steep slopes and in marginal areas. In the highlands of Ethiopia land use and cover change has reduced surface run-off and water retention capacity and stream flow leading to loss of wetlands and dying of lakes (Alemayehu Muluneh and Arnalds, 2011; Hiywot Menker and Rashid ., 2002).

13

The physical, social and economic situations in Ethiopia have contributed to the degradation of resources. There are different types of land cover formed by both human activities and natural factors over the last centuries. Population pressure accompanied by sedentary agriculture, extensive animal husbandry (livestock herding), settlement and socio-political instability have resulted in heavy deforestation, forest fragmentation, loss of biodiversity and undesirable changes in the natural ecosystem, including LULC (Menale Wondie et al 2011). 2.7.2 Why is studying LULC need? The need for optimal use of the land resources and for balance of Land-Cover capability with anthropogenic stress is one of the mega-scale issues of mankind. The way people use the land has become a source of widespread concern for the future of the world. The inability of many countries to balance environmental and production needs, as well as Land Cover capability and anthropogenic stress, emphasize these mega-scale issues. More than ever, therefore, the need for rational planning of land use/land cover development and optimal use of the land resources is evident. Thats why precise and credible data on land use/land cover change and their trends are necessary for understanding global, regional and local environmental problems (Jensen, 2003; Netsanet Deneke, 2007; Behailu Assefa, 2010; Lappiso Shamebo ,2010). Land use data are also needed in the analysis of environmental processes and problems that must be understood if living conditions and standards are to be improved or maintained at current levels. One of the prime prerequisites for better use of land is information on existing land use patterns and changes in land use through time (Anderson et al., 1976). Information on land use/land cover in the form of maps and statistical data is very vital for spatial planning, management and utilization of land for agriculture, forestry, pasture, urban, industrial, environmental studies, economic production, etc. Today, with the growing population pressure, low land to man ratio and increasing land degradation, the need for optimum utilization of land assumes much greater relevance (Anderson et al., 1976; Kasay Berhe, 2004). Documentation of the land use and land cover change provides information for the better understanding of historical land use practices, current land use patterns and future land use trajectory. Land use/land cover change contributes significantly to earth atmosphere interactions,

14

forest fragmentation, and biodiversity loss (Jansen and Gregoria, 2003). It has become one of the major issues for environmental change monitoring and natural resource management. Identifying, delineating and mapping of the types of land use and land cover are important activities in support of sustainable natural resource management (Zhang et al, 2004). 2.7.3 Satellite images for LULC Remote sensing and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) are providing new tools for advanced ecosystem management. The collection of remotely sensed data facilitates the synoptic analyses of earth-system function, patterning, and change at local, regional, and global scales over time. Such data also provide a vital link between intensive, localized ecological research and the regional, national, and international conservation and management of biological diversity (Ernani and Gabriels, 2006; Behailu Assefa, 2010). Remote Sensing is the science and art of obtaining information about an object, area, or phenomenon through the analysis of data (images) acquired by a device that is not in contact with object, area, or phenomenon under investigation (Lillesand et al, 2004). It provides a large variety and amount of data about the earth surface for detailed analysis and change detection with the help of various space borne and airborne sensors ;For this research the researcher used data from space born sensors i.e. satellites . It presents powerful capabilities for understanding and managing earth resources. Remote Sensing has been proven to be a very useful tool for LULC change detection. Change detection and monitoring involve the use of several multi-date images to evaluate the differences in LULC due to various environmental conditions and human actions between the acquisition dates of images (Singh, 1989 and Behailu Assefa, 2010). Successful use of satellite Remote Sensing for LULC change monitoring depends upon an adequate understanding of landscape features, imaging systems, and methodology employed in relation to the aim of the analysis (Yang & Lo, 2002 and Behailu Assefa, 2010). With the availability of historical Remote Sensing data, the reduction in data cost and increased resolution from satellite platforms, Remote Sensing technology appears poised to make an even greater impact on monitoring land-cover and land-use change (Rogan & Chen, 2004). In general, change detection of LULC involves the

15

interpretation and analysis of multi-temporal and multi-source satellite images to identify temporal phenomenon or changes through a certain period of time. Remote Sensing data are the primary source for change monitoring in recent decades and have made a greater impact for different planning agencies and land management initiatives (Yang and Lo, 2002; Behailu Assefa, 2010). Remotely sensed satellite images provide valuable datasets that can be used to analyze, evaluate, and monitor changes in ecosystems. One of the major hurdles of any satellite image analysis is how to accurately compensate for atmospheric effects. Several studies have investigated the ability of satellite imagery, including TM (thematic mapper) and TM+ (thematic mapper plus), to perform change analysis. The most commonly used remote sensing data for the extraction of earth surface feature for the classification of LULC are: Landsat, SPOT, Radar, Aerial Photography, IKONOS, MODIS, AVHRR, etc (Lillesand et al, 2004) 2.8 Forest Management and Administration The use of the forest resource depends on the way in which it is controlled. The nature of this control, in particular the form of ownership, provides the essential link between the forest resource and its use (Chauhan, 2007). Regimes of control or ownership also have a strong influence on the condition of the resource. Whilst the relationship between control, use and condition of the resource is not constant, broad correlations exist between systems of control and patterns of use of natural resource. Political history determines the character of landownership in general and the control of the forest resource in particular. The Constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia contains clauses relating to land ownership, and ultimately ownership of the natural resources contained on the land. Along with the Constitution, the Federal Government has issued proclamations in support of land ownership rights. Article 40 of the Constitution proclaims that land is a common property of the Nations, Nationalities and Peoples of Ethiopia and is not subject to sale or other means of exchange. Proclamation no. 456 /2005 authorizes communal ownership of forests, wherein rural land is given to local communities for livestock grazing, forestry and other social services.
16

This

proclamation sets a precedent for communal forestry. Other laws under the constitution do not recognize communal rights over land and forests as widely as the constitution. However, that does not mean that these laws prohibit the rights of communities to own and use forest resources through their customary ways of management. But, based on the forest development, conservation and utilization proclamation No. 542/2007 of Ethiopian article 3 there are two types of forest ownership: i.e private forest and state forest. Based on the proclamation, community forests are grouped under private forests according to article 4 of sub-article 1 and 2 of the proclamation. Private individuals, associations, governmental and non-governmental organizations and business organizations who want to develop forest shall have the right to obtain rural land in areas designated for forest development in accordance with regional land administration and utilization laws; The management plan shall be developed, with participation of the local community, for forests that have not been designated as protected or productive state forests, and such forests shall be given to the community, associations or investors so that they conserve and utilize them in accordance with directives to be issued by the appropriate body; Proclamation no. 542 / 2007 (the Forest Proclamation) does not mention communal ownership of forests, only private and state ownership is mentioned. 2.8.1Participatory Forest Management (PFM) Ethiopian Forest development, conservation and utilization proclamation No. 542/2007 and Forest Development, and the Conservation and Utilization Policy and Strategy of Ethiopia didnt directly state the application of Participatory Forest Management (PFM) but it was started by different NGO`S in collaboration with the government and local communities. Participatory forest management is a strategy to achieve sustainable forest management by encouraging the management or co-management of forest and woodland resources by the communities living closest to them, supported by a range of other stakeholders drawn from local government, civil society and the private sector (Kerry et al, 2006). Participatory forest management incorporates two modes of management: i.e. Community-Based Forest Management and Joint Forest Management; A. Community-Based Forest Management refers to a forest management regime in which forestlocal communities are owner-managers of the Village Community Forest or Private Forests.

17

B. Joint Forest Management refers to a forest management regime in which forest-local communities are co-managers of Village Forest resources.Under Joint Forest Management Agreements with Ministry of agriculture or different levels of agricultural organizations. The specific objectives of PFM are different in each country. Protection of national forest degradation and rural poverty alleviation were the main motivation behind leasehold forestry in most countries. (Alemtsehay Jima, 2010). In Ethiopia PFM was recommended by NGO`s to solve the problem of forest degradation (Mustalahti, 2006). The motivation behind PFM program in Bale region was to conserve the unique biodiversity and ecological functions of the Greater Bale Mountains Ecoregion, whilst establishing and enhancing sustainable local community livelihoods (Alemtsehay Jima, 2010). Sustainable forest management is not only a tool to improve livelihoods and conservation of forest resources but also is central to the achievement of many of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Almost all MDGs are related to forests in one way or the other (Alemtsehay Jima, 2010). Community forestry is contributing to livelihood promotion in many ways. These include fulfilling the basic needs of local communities, investing money in supporting income generation activities of the poor people and providing access to the forestland for additional income or employment (Mustalahti, 2006). Participatory forest management can help for forestry based poverty alleviation which is defined as use of forest resources for the purpose of lessening deprivation of well-being on either a temporary or lasting basis, and when applied at household level (Kerry et al, 2006), is divided into two types Poverty mitigation or avoidance: the use of forest resources to meet household subsistence needs, to fulfill a safety net function in times of emergency, or to serve as a gap filler in seasonal periods of low income, in order to lessen the degree of poverty experienced or to avoid falling into poverty; and Poverty elimination: the use of forest resources to help lift the household out of poverty by functioning as a source of savings, investment, accumulation, asset building, and lasting increases in income and well-being. Forestbased poverty alleviation can be realized in four ways (Kerry et al, 2006): A. Converting forests to non-forest land uses such as permanent agriculture;
18

B. Assuring access to forest resources and achieving this either by protecting the existing benefits that forests provide forest-local people, or by redistributing access to, and benefits from, forest resources; C. Making transfer payments to forest-local people who protect forests environmental services; and D. Increasing the value of forest production through technologies that increase physical forest output, higher prices for forest products, increased processing and forest-based value-adding activities, and the development of new products. But PFM is incompatible with converting forest to non-forest land uses. 2.8.2 Common resource management Common resource management requires collective action, which in turn requires member cooperation to manage their resource effectively (Brian, 1999; Alemtsehay Jima, 2010).The effort of commons in collective action is directed towards the achievements of common goals. Participants in common resource management face the dilemma of how to increase their own share of profit and at the same time contribute their best to the management of forest resource to stop further degradation through collective action (Mustalahti, 2006). This raises a question on how to alleviate the problem of common good when managed by collective action. (Wade, 1987) recommended that, resource users need to develop a set of coordinated strategy on how to change the overexploitation activities in managing common resource and resolve their common dilemma. The coordinated strategy involves formulation of rules of restrained access to common pool resource and inspection of that rule (Wade, 1987). Developing a strategy to resolve the common good dilemma creates a public good from which everyone may get a benefit regardless of her/his contribution to the management (Alemtsehay Jima, 2010).

3. MATERIALS AND METHODS


3.1 Description of the Study Area 3.1.1 Geographical location

19

The study was conducted at Sinko community forest which is one of the community forest of Fogera woreda. Sinko is situated between the uplands of Chalm-Mintura Kebele and low laying areas of Alember zuria Kebele. It is located about 75 km North of Bahir Dar and about 22 km west of Deber Tabor, capital of South Gondar Administrative and altitude ranges from 2072 to 2370 m.a.s.l Zone. The area is located 1105323.61 to 1105505.11N and 3704942.93 to 3705253.31E with the total area 1797.1 ha

Figure 3.1 Map of the study area

3.1.2 Vegetation The natural vegetation of Sinko community forest represents Dry Evergreen Montane Forest and woodland complex (Abrham Marye, 2010). It successions represents a complex system of involving extensive evergreen upland and rivrine forests, shrubs and small to

20

large-sized scattered trees; seasonal dense shrub lands with ground cover vegetation. The highest dry upland areas are dominated with Mountain chains at the edge of cultivated areas. 3.1.3. Climate Agro ecologically, the study area is classified as Woina Dega (sub-humid). There is no metreological station in the study area but the rainfall and the temperature condition of the area was described based on the data collected from 1997-2006 by the National Meteorological Agency (NMA) from Debre-Tabor Station which is the nearest NMA station 22 k.m to the study area. According to the data from NMA, the average annual minimum, maximum and mean temperatures were 9.540C, 22.110C and 15.80C, respectively. The rainfall pattern is unimodal, stretching from May to September. Annual rainfall ranges between 1097 and 1954 mm with a long term average of 1448 mm (Nigussie Amsalu, 2010).

Figure 3.2 Climadiagram at Debre-Tabor Station (based on 10 years data; from 1997-2006) Data Source: NMA 3.1.4 Topography and soils The soils of the study area are mainly dominated by Eutric Nitosol but at the foot slops of the area it is covered by Orthic Luvisol (FOA, 2005). Topographically, Sinko community forest is generally characterized by undulating to steep topography and inclined towards to East and

21

north. The slope of the study area ranges from 6 to 75%; and within altitudinal range of 2072 to 2370 m a.s.l. 3.1.5 Population According to the Central Statistical Agency of Ethiopia (CSA, 2010) the 4 Kebeles that have direct influence on the community forest had an estimated total population of 31,094 of whom 15,753 were males and 15,341 were females. There are 6,951households in the surrounding Kebeles. Based on the 2012 reports of Alember zuria and Chalma Mintura Agricultural office, the community forest is directly bordered by 13 villages which harbor 354 households which are directly dependant upon the community forest (Table 3.1). From the villages, Bekilo Mankia is at the core area of the forest which separates the community forest into two. Table 3.1 Villages that surround the community forest S/N Name of the village Number of households 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Bastekua Awusiraji Girar Minch Gib warka Adamu Lay mender Bikat Hurichi Tid mender Merina Bekilo Manekiya Kulinta Kerete mariyam 23 19 22 22 21 24 21 39 35 31 22 46 29

Remark Alember zuria Chalma and Mintura

22

Total

354

3.1.6 Livelihoods of the surrounding community It is difficult to directly measure the contribution of the forest to the livelihoods of the community living close to the forest but reports from Alem Ber Zuria office of Agriculture and Chalma Minitura Office of Agriculture indicated that the farming system of the surrounding villagers are mixed farmers that grows field crops like millet, barley, teff, maize etc. and rear animals especially of cattele and goat are the major agricultural activities in the study area that support the local community. The report also indicated that before 2012 fuelwood and charcoal selling from the community forest was one of the important livelihood options of the area especially for the poor households. Before 2012 the main source of animal feed was grazing in the community forest and now the area is the main source of hay which alleviates the deficiency in animal feed. In general the forest products that are of highest importance for household needs and income generation include firewood which is the most important forest product for household needs, closely followed by hay and construction wood. 3.2 Methods of Data Collection It is important to know the size of the vegetation as well as the number of plots to be laid out per hectare before data collection (As Panwar and Bhardwaji, 2005 cited in Shamble Batiwalu, 2010). Therefore reconnaissance survey was conducted from January 20-27/ 2013 to be familiarized with vegetation communities, topography, floristic structure soils and other environmental factors. During the survey lists of plant species were recorded by local names. The vegetation data collection was made from February to March 2013. A total of 47 sample plots were established systematically in 11 transect lines following the Braun-Blanquet approach (Mueller-Dombois and Ellenberge, 1974; Kent and Coker, 1992). The plots were laid at every 100 m interval along the transect lines, which were laid at 400 m apart. The data of major vegetation attribute were measured for trees, shrubs and woody climbers and recorded using twenty by twenty (20 m x 20 m) size plots which were established along the transect. In each plot structural attributes: such as diameter and height were recorded. Diameter was measured for all individual trees and shrubs having DBH (Diameter at Breast Height) greater than 2.5 cm

23

using a caliper. If the tree branched at breast height or below, the diameter was measured separately for the branches and averaged. Trees and shrubs with DBH less than 2.5 cm were counted. Height was measured for individual tree and shrub with DBH greater than 2.5 cm using Clinometers. At aplace where topographic was difficult, visual estimation was undertaken. Perception of the local community and socio economic Data were collected using questionnaire from 184 respondents from 13 villages that were selected randomly. Three group discussants were used to explore the data and 6 key informants were used to enrich the data. Images were downloaded from GLCF http://glcf.umiacs.umd.edu/ accssed in December 10/2013. For different dates the procedure followed in this study was presented using the flow chart. It shows the steps followed beginning from the acquisition and classification of multi temporal satellite image of the study area to the extraction of the required information both secondary and primary data to answer the research questions. 3.3 Methods of Data Analysis 3.3.1 Diversity and evenness of species The quantitative indices of species diversity, richness and evenness were measured using diversity index formula by Shannon and Wiener (1949). The minimum value of H' is 0, which is the value for a community with a single species, and increases as species richness and evenness increases (Shambel Alemu, 2011). The Shannon Diversity Index (H) was calculated using the following formula.

Where S= total number of species; Pi abundance of the ith the proportion of each species (individuals) or the i= is species expressed as proportion of total cover; and ln= log base n

24

High values of Shannon- Wiener diversity index is a representative of more diverse communities (Frosini, 2006). Shannons Equitability (EH) or Evenness is given by

The value of EH is between 0 and 1 with 1 being complete evenness. If the species are evenly distributed then the H value would be high. So the H value allows us to know not only the number of species but how the abundance of the species is distributed among all the species in the community (Frosini, 2006, Dinkissa Beche 2011 and Shambel Alemu, 2011) 3.3.2 Measurement of similarity and dissimilarity Similarity indices measure the degree to which the species composition of quadrats or samples is alike, whereas, dissimilarity coefficient assesses which two quadrats or samples differ in composition (Dinkissa Beche 2011; Shambel Alemu, 2011) Sorensens similarity index was used to determine the pattern of species turnover among successive communities and to compare the forest with other similar forests in the country. It is described using the following formula (Kent and Coker, 1992).

H` H/lnS Hmax

Where c=number of species with common to both communities; a= number of species unique to community 1; and b = number of species unique to community 2 3.3.3 Classification of Community types Hierarchical cluster analysis was performed using SPSS v16 to classify the vegetation into plant community types based on abundance data of the species in each quadrat and the Euclidean Distance measures using Wards method were used in the current study.
3.3.4 Structural analysis

The structure of the vegetation was described using frequency distributions of DBH, height and Importance Value Index (IVI). Tree or shrub density and basal area values were computed on hectare basis. Importance value indices (IVI) were computed for dominant woody species based
25

on their relative density (RD), relative dominance (RDO) and relative frequency (RF) to determine their dominance, and also the species were classified into three forms (tree, shrub, woody climber and epiphytes). Importance value index was used to determine the overall importance of each species in the community structure. In calculating this index, the percentage values of the relative frequency, relative density and relative dominance were summed up together and this value is designated as the IVI of the species (a) Relative density. Relative density is the study of numerical strength of a species in relation to the total number of individuals of all the species and can be calculated as: Relative density (b) Relative frequency. The degree of dispersion of individual species in an area in relation to the number of all the species occurred. Relative frequency (c) Relative dominance. Dominance of a species was determined by the value of the basal cover. Relative dominance is the coverage value of a species with respect to the sum of coverage of the rest of the species in the area. Total basal area of species X100 Total basal area of all species Frequency of a species X100 Total frequency of all species Number of individuals of the species X100 Number of individuals of all species

Relative Dominance

The total basal area will be calculated from the sum of the total diameter of immerging stems. In trees, poles and saplings, the basal area will be measured at breast height (1.3m) and by the formula

or A=0.785DBH2 by using calipers.

So Importance value index = Relative density+ Relative frequency+ Relative dominance

26

3.3.5 Analysis of land cover changes ArcGIS 9.3 and ERDAS 9.1 software were used for satellite image analysis and mapping. Present and past information on land cover and land use change for the study area was generated from remotely sensed data. The image data used for this study were Landsat Themathic Mapper 1985, ETM+ 2005 and ETM+ 2010 which was obtained from GLCF http://glcf.umiacs.umd.edu/ accssed in December 10/2013 (Table 3.2). Table 3.2 Summery of data sources and material Satellite Image Data Image Type LandsatTM LandsatETM+ LandsatETM+ Path and Row 169/52 169/52 169/52 Date of Acquisition 09/11/1985 23/10//2005 16/12/2010 Resolution (meter) 30X30 30X30 30X30 GLCF GLCF GLCF

Source

The procedure followed in this study was presented using the flow chart (Figure 3.3). It shows the steps followed beginning from the acquisition and classification of multi temporal satellite image of the study area to the extraction of the required information both secondary and primary data to answer the research questions.

Data sources and collection

Satellite image Landsat (1985, 2005&2010)

Field Survey GPS Data

27

Digital image Preprocessing Image interpretation And classification (Supervised classification) Land-use /land cover map 1985, 2005&2010 Figure3.3. Flowchart Image Enhancement and Interpretation Satellite image contains a detailed record of features on the ground at the time of data acquisition. Lillesand et al (2004) suggested that image interpreters should have good power of observations coupled with imagination and it is important that the interpreters have a careful understanding of the phenomenon being studied as well as knowledge of the geographic region under study. To do so, digital image enhancement and interpretation techniques were used in this study. To increase the visual interpretability of the satellite images and the amount of information that can be visually interpreted from the data both True Colour Composite (RGB 3, 2, 1) and False Colour Composite (RGB 4, 3, 2) were produced. Digital image enhancement techniques such as contrast stretching and histogram equalization were used.

Classification Accuracy Assessment

Ground Truthing The two primary reasons for visiting the area that is being mapped were to collect data that can be used to train the algorithm or the interpreter and to collect data that can be used to evaluate the land cover map and estimate the accuracy of the individual classes (a process called

28

validation). The data was collected from the study area and used as ground control points during classification. Appendix 6 shows different ground control points for classification. Description of land covers classes As there are some differences between the land classes in the historical land cover maps of 1985, 2005 and 2010 land cover classes, which can be discriminated from the satellite image, recoding was needed to create a common classification for change detection purposes. This section describes the land classes, which are only used for land-cover mapping from satellite images (Table 3.3). Table 3.3 Description of land covers categories for change detection between 1985 to 2010 for the study area Land cover Farmland General description Areas of land ploughed/prepared for growing rain fed or irrigated crops. This category includes, land currently under agricultural crops or temporarily unplanted land, excluding grassland areas Areas covered with trees and shrubs mainly the Riverine community type, Artificial forest Community type, Pterolobium stellautm- Carissa edulis community type and Dodonaea viscosaOsyris quadripartite community type All areas covered with mainly natural pasture, but also other small sized plant species

Forest and bush land

Grassland

3.4 Socio-Economic Data Analysis Data about the importance and impacts of the study area were collected by using semistructured interview and tallied after it has been checked as filled properly. The local communities perception data on the community forest were fed to Excel spread sheet and described in descriptive statistics

29

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION


4.1Woody Plant Species Diversity of Sinko community Forest A total of 115 woody plant species belonging to 91 genera and 61 families were recorded and identified from Sinko community forest (Appendix 2). Out of these, 53 species were trees, 50 species were shrubs, 10 species were woody climbers and 2 were epiphytes. Ninety one species were recorded in the study quadrats the rest were recorded along the transect line outside the study quadrats. Of all the families, Fabaceae was the most dominant with each contributing 14 species to the total and followed by Euphorbiaceae, Moraceae and Verbenaceae with 6 species, 6 species and 5 respectively. Thirty eight families consisted of only 1 species each. The number of species and genera for the rest of the families are given in (Table 4.1.) In addition, from the species data collected in the study area, 98.26 % were flowering plants out of which, 94.78% were dicots and the remaining 3.48% were monocots. The result agreed with the results obtained by Aleminew Alelign (2001) in Zegie peninsula he had got 113 woody plant species representing 52 families. Even if there is a high level of disturbance in Sinko community forest it is possible to say that woody species richness is high.The area is not only known by its species richness but also the number of families in the study area is diverse.Of all the total woody species recoreded in the study quadrats, trees constitute the highest number of species (46.08%) over the life forms. Table 4.1 Family, Genera and Species distribution of woody plants in Sinko community forest No 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Family Acanthaceae Agavaceae Anacardiaceae Apiaceae Apocynaceae Araliaceae Arecaceae Asteraceae Bignoniaceae Boraginaceae Genera Number 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1
30

Species % 2.20 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 2.20 1.10 1.10 2.20 1.10 Number 3 1 2 2 1 1 1 4 2 1 % 2.61 0.87 1.74 1.74 0.87 0.87 0.87 3.48 1.74 0.87

No 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59.

Family Buddlejaceae Cactaceae Caesalpiniaceae Capparidaceae Casuarinaceae Celastraceae Combretaceae Cupressaceae Ebenaceae Euphorbiaceae Fabaceae Flacourtiaceae Hypericaceae Icacinaceae Lamiaceae Liliaceae Longanaceae Loranthaceae Malvaceae Meliaceae Melianthaceae Moraceae Myricaceae Myrsinaceae Myrtaceae Oleaceae Oliniaceae Papilionaceae Phytolacaceae Pittosporaceae Poaceae Polygonaceae Proteaceae Ranunculaceae Rhamnaceae Rhizophraceae Rosaceae Rubiaceae Rutaceae Santalaceae Sapindaceae Sapotaceae Scrophulariaceae Simaroubaceae Solanaceae Sterculiaceae Tiliaceae Ulmaceae Urticaceae

Genera Number 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 6 7 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 3 1 1 1 1 3 2 3 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 % 1.10 1.10 2.20 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 2.20 1.10 6.59 7.69 1.10 1.10 1.10 2.20 1.10 1.10 2.20 3.30 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 3.30 2.20 3.30 1.10 2.20 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 2.20 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10

Species Number 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 1 6 14 1 1 1 3 1 1 2 3 1 1 6 1 3 3 3 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 % 0.87 0.87 1.74 0.87 0.87 1.74 0.87 1.74 0.87 5.22 12.17 0.87 0.87 0.87 2.61 0.87 0.87 1.74 2.61 0.87 0.87 5.22 0.87 2.61 2.61 2.61 0.87 1.74 0.87 1.74 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 1.74 0.87 1.74 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 1.74 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87

31

No 60. 61.

Family Verbenaceae Vitidaceae Total

Genera Number 4 1 91 % 4.40 1.10 100.00

Species Number 5 1 115 % 4.35 0.87 100.0

4.2 Endemism Sinko community Forest contains a number of flowering plant species that are endemic to Ethiopia. Endemic plant species of Ethiopia and their level of threat have been given in Ensermu Kelbessa et al. (1992) ;Vivero et al. (2005). Accordingly, (3.5%) endemic species, some of which are in the IUCN Red data list, were identified in Sinko community forest. Based on available literature (Vivero et al., 2005), the endemic species and their status are given in Table (4.2).The results of the study agrees with Dikissa Beche (2011) he identifies 9 endemic woody species this indicates that dry evergreen afromontane forests are not only the centers of diversity but also it harbors some endemic and threatened species that needs conservation Table 4.2 Endemic species in Sinko community Forest No. 1 2 3 4 Scientific Name Achanthus sennii Clemanths longicauda Milletia ferruginea. Rhus glutinosa Family Acanthaceae Ranunculaceae Fabaceae Anacardiaceae Local Name Status

Sete kusheshilie NT Azo hareg Birbira Embus NT LC VU

(EN= Endangered, LC= Least concerned, NT=near threatened, VU= Vulnerable, CR= critically endangered) 4.3 Classification of Plant Communities in Siniko community forest Based on hierarchical cluster analysis using Wards method in SPSSv16 four clusters were identified in the study area. Communities were named based on the dominant species and nature of the community. The four plant communities identified were riverine (community I), artificial forest (community II), Pterolobium stellautm - Carissa edulis type (community III) and Dodonaea viscosa- Osyris quadripartite type (community IV). The number of plots in each community is located in table (4.3) and the Dendrogram of Sinko Community forest is attached in figure (4.1)

32

Table 4.3 Number of plots in each community of Sinko Community forest s/n Community types Remark (Quadrats) CI CII CIII Riverine Artificial forest 1,2,13,15,22,40 3,4,12,14,23,24

Pterolobium stellautm- 5,7,8,11,16,18,26,28,29,30,35,37,38,41 Carissa edulis type ,42,43,44,46,47

CIV

Dodonaea Osyris type

viscosa- 6,9,10,17,19,20,21,25,27,31,32,33,34,3 quadripartite 6,39, 45,

4.3.1 Riverine community type This community type was represented by 46 species. The altitudinal range of this community was from 2072 to 2187 m a.s.l and at a slope of 10 to 70%. Woody species (trees, shrub and woody climbers) associated with this community especially with large trees

Figure 4.1Dendrogram of Sinko community forest using Ward Method and Euclidean distance (C1= Community type 1, C2= Community type 2, C3= Community type 3 and C4= Community type 4) such as Syzygium guineense, Mimusops kummel, Rhus vulgaris from the shrubs and woody climbers Pterolobium stellautm, Carissa edulis, Hibiscus ludwigil, Capparis tomentosa,

33

Achanthus sennii, Bersama abyssinica, Osyris quadripartite, Grewia ferruginea, Dombeya quinquesteta, Jasminum abyssinicum, Maytenus gracilipes, Embelia schmperi, Ficus sur and Ficus sycomorus are the dominant species of this community. 4.3.2. Artificial Forest Community type This community comprised 23 species. The community is distributed between the altitudinal ranges of 2097 to 2186m a.s.l. and at a slope of 6 to 25% .As shown in (figure 4.2) this community is mostly dominated by Cupressus lusitanica and Eucalyptus camaldulensis in addition to these dominant specie the following species are of this community type Achanthus eminens, Achanthus sennii, Vernonia auriculifera, Carissa edulis, Maesa lanceolata, Acacia nilotica, Ocimum lamiifolium, Premna schimperi, Rumex nervosus, Vernonia adoensis and Maytenus arbutifolia

Figure 4.2 Artificial forest type in Sinko community forest 4.3.3 Pterolobium stellautm- Carissa edulis community type This community type was distributed and is situated at altitudinal ranges from 2008 to 2370 m a.s.l and at a slope of 12 to 60%. The community is comprised of 68 species. This community type is mainly comprised Pterolobium stellautm, Carissa edulis,Osyris quadripartite in addition

34

to the above dominant species the community comprised Dodonaea viscosa , Achanthus sennii, Vernonia auriculifera, Capparis tomentosa, Bersama abyssinica, Maytenus gracilipes, Premna schimperi, Maesa lanceolata, Grewia ferruginea, Rosa abyssinica, Combretum molle, Calpurnia aurea, Myrsine africana, Clemanths longicauda, Croton macrostachyus, Protea gaguedi charachterize this community. 4.3.4 Dodonaea viscosa- Osyris quadripartite community type This community type was distributed and is situated at altitudinal ranges from 2142 to 2322 m a.s.l and at a slope of 40 to 75%. As shown in figure 4.3 this community comprised of 55 species. This community type is mainly comprised of Dodonaea viscosa and Osyris quadripartite. In addition to these dominant species, the community is comprised of Carissa edulis, Pterolobium stellautm, Bersama abyssinica, Achanthus sennii, Myrsine africana, Maesa lanceolata, Vernonia auriculifera, Rhus vulgaris, Achanthus eminens, Maytenus gracilipes, Otostegia integrifolia , Jasminum abyssinicum, Rosa abyssinica, Protea gaguedi and Capparis tomentosa

Figure 4.3 Dodonaea viscosa- Osyris quadripartite community type in Sinko community forest

35

4.4 Species richness, Diversity and Evenness of the Plant Community Types A combination of the number of species and their relative abundance defines species diversity. The values of species diversity depend upon levels of species richness and evenness (Manuel and Molles, 2002 cited in Dinkessa Beche, 2011). The Shannon Wiener diversity index (H) was computed for each plant community types. Based on the outcome of the Shannon-Weiner diversity index analysis, Sinko community forest had the Shannon diversity index of 2.843 and evenness of 0.631. From the communities; community type I had the highest species diversity followed by communities III, II and IV. The highest species richness was obtained for community type III then followed by IV, I and community type II was least in its species richness. Community type I had the highest in its evenness community type II was the least in its evenness. A research conducted for 28 churches in South Gondar by Alemayehu Wassie (2007) indicated that species richness varies between 15and 78 while the Shannon index of diversity varies between 1.6 and 3.8 for different churchs, the highest was 3.8 at Wonkishet Gebriel. His research also indicated that as the altitude increases the species richness and diversity since his study was undertaken at an altitude between 1800-3000 m.a.s.l but in the current research undertaken at an altitude between 2072-2370 m.a.s.l. In the current study the difference in species richness and diversity is due to change in slope but not the difference in altitude. Table 4.4 ShannonWiener indices, Species richness and evenness of the plant Communities Communities Altitude Species Diversity Hmax Species (m) richness index (H) evenness 3.829 0.884 I 2072-2187 46 3.384 II III IV For the whole stand 2097-2186 2008-2370 2142-2322 2072-2370 23 1.941 68 3.271 55 1.789 91 2.847 3.135 4.220 4.007 4.511 0.619 0.775 0.446 0.631

36

4.4.1 Similarity among the plant communities The Sorensons similarity coefficient was used to detect similarities among the plant communities. The distribution of species among the communities showed significant dissimilarity. This was observed from the computed Sorensons similarity coefficient (Table 4.5). The overall similarity values in species composition between the communities ranged from
37.68 to 74.19. High similarity coefficient (Sc= 74.19) was observed between community type III

and IV and low similarity (Sc = 37.68) was observed between community type I and community type II. Thus, the dissimilarity accounts for 25.81% for the most similar communities (community III and IV) and 62.32% for those that share least similarities (community I and II). The relatively higher similarities between community types III and IV is probably due to the similar slope of the area. As it was reported by (Fekadu Gurmessa, 2010; Shambel Bantiwalu ,2010; Dinkessa Beche, 2011;Shambel Alemu, 2011),in addition to altitudinal gradient, other environmental factors such as aspect, slope, and soil physical and chemical properties have sound effects on patterns of vegetation in communities. For all communities,having the Sorensons similarity coefficient values below 0.5, indicating the existence of low similarities among the recognized communities which implies that all the communities are important in terms of floristic diversity and needs attention from a conservation point of view. Table 4.5 Sorensons Similarity coefficient (%) among the four communities Communities I II III I II III IV 37.68 55.65 61.38 41.30 46.15 74.19 62.32 44.35 58.7

IV 38.62 53.85 25.61

*Values in bold refers to Sorensens dissimilarity coefficients.

37

4.4.2 Floristic comparison of Sinko community forest with other forests in Ethiopia Sinko community Forest was compared with other similar dry Afromontane Forests found in different localities in Ethiopia. These include: Menagesha Suba State Forest, Bahir Dar Nile River Millennium Park, Denkoro Forest and Zegie peninsula forest near to Bahir Dar the results of the comparison shown in (Table 4.6) Table 4.6 the floristic Comparison of Sinko community Forest with other similar Forest in Ethiopia
No. Forest Location Between 37019to 37021E and 11 40 to 11 43 Between 3702437.2 and 37036 34E and 110 2940.2 and 110 37 27.9N Between 38031 and 38035 E and 90 89 and 90 00 N Between 100 35 110 15N and 380 30 390 07E 1500 -3500 2200-3385 68 77 65 136 47 38 41.41 26.30 Dinkissa Beche , 2011 1830-1937 31 56 84 65.88 Abrham Marye ,2009
0 0

Alt (m) 1770-1975

Sc %

Sources

Zegie

57

55

58

50.88

Aleminew Alelign,2001

Bahir Dar Abay millennium park Menagesha suba State forest Denkoro chaka

Abate Ayalew ,2003

Where (a) is species unique to Sinko community forest, (b) is species unique to the forest under comparison and (c) is species common to both, Sc is similarity coefficient.)

38

Direct comparison of species diversity with some other forests is not feasible due to differences in size of the forests, survey methods and objectives of the study, so that only certain phytogeographic comparison will be practically possible. As indicated above in (Table 4.6,) Sinko community forest has higher similarity (65.88 similarity coefficient) with Bahir Dar Abay Millennium Park and high dissimilarity with Denkoro chaka with 73.7% of dissimilarity. The higher similarity between Sinko community forest and Bahir Dar Abay Millennium Park is due to similar management practices undertaken in the area where as the dissimilarity between Denkoro chaka and Sinko Community forest is that the altitude range of the two areas are byfar different and in Denkoro chaka some herbaceous plants are included in the study report 4.5 Vegetation Structure In the analysis of vegetation structure, the growth stages of trees as seedlings, saplings and mature trees as the distribution of size classes within a population can be one of the elements of diversity that allows or denies the chance of rapid recovery after disturbances (Harper, 1982 and Shambel Bantiwal, 2010). The population structures of trees have a significant implication to their management, sustainable use and conservation. The structural patterns that are obtained from measured data can be used for checking the variations in population dynamics that may arise from inherent characters or human interventions and their livestock Description of growth forms of species recorded from Sinko community forest are presented in (Figure 4.4). Accordingly, the highest proportion (46.08) was trees. In addition shrubs, woody climbers and epiphytes comprised 43.48, 8.71 and 1.74% respectively of the total.

39

50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 T Sh Plant form wc epi

Figure 4.4 Plant growth forms of Sinko community forest 4.5.1 Tree and Shrub Density Tree and shrub density, expressed as the number of individuals with DBH greater than 2.5 cm was 498/ha and those individuals with DBH between 10 and 20 cm and with DBH greater than 20 cm were 394/ha and 104/ha, respectively (Table 4.7). The ratio described as a/b, is taken as the measure of size class distribution (Breitenbach, 1963 and Fekadu Gurmessa, 2010). Accordingly, the ratio of individuals with DBH between 10 & 20 cm (a) to DBH > 20 cm (b) was 3.8 for Sinko community Forest. This indicates that the proportion of medium sized individuals (DBH between 10 and 20 cm) is greater than the large sized individuals (DBH > 20 cm) but the ratio is relatively lower than the results obtained for other forests (Chilimo and, Menagesha Suba ) but larger than Wofwasha and Denkoro chaka (Table 4.7). The proportion of small sized individual (DBH<10 cm) was much larger (91.9%) although the above ratio is higher indicating that Sinko community Forest is at stages of secondary regeneration. Table 4.7 Tree density of Sinko community forest and other dry afromontane forests Forest DBH between 10 and 20 cm(a) DBH>20cm(b) a/b Chilmo Menagesha Wof-Washa 638 484 329 250 208 215 2.6 2.3 1.5

%of species

40

Denkoro chaka Sinko

526 206

285 104

1.9 1.98

Source (Abate Ayalew, 2003) and field observation 4.5.2. DBH distribution Total number of trees in each DBH class decreased with an increasing tree diameter classes (Figure4.5). A total of 498 individuals with height >2 m and DBH >2.5 cm were recorded in Sinko community Forest. For DBH analysis, six DBH classes were established i.e class I) 2.5-10 cm, class II) 10.01-20.0 cm, class III) 20.01-40.0 cm, class IV) 40.01-60.0 cm, class V) 60.0180.0 class VI) 80-100.0 cm, Few individuals of Juniperus procera, Ficus sur, Ficus sycomorus, Ficus vasta and Mimusops kummel trees are in the higher DBH classes. The middle DBH class trees were dominated by Cupressus lusitanica, Syzygium guineense Buddleja polystachya Acacia nilotica and Croton macrostachyus. The lower classes were dominated by Eucalyptus camaldulensis, Rhus vulgaris and Maesa lanceolata. The total number of trees in each DBH class decreased with and increasing tree diameter
250 200 150 No of trees/shrub 100 50 0 2.5-10 10.01-20 20.01-40 40.01-60 Diameter class (cm) 60.01-80 80-100

Figure 4.5 DBH class distribution of woody species in Sinko community forest The majority of the populations, 394 (79.1%), were found in the first two lower DBH classes.

41

The results of DBH study revealed a normal DBH distribution pattern when viewed from the whole set of plant community, confirming inverted J shape (Figure 4.5) but there would be variation with respect to individuals species when it was analyzed separately. As the graph of DBH class distribution of woody species in Sinko community forest is inverted J shape, the forest is in normal condition for future regeneration.

Figure 4.6 Measurment of DBH in sinko community forest 4.5.3 Height distribution About 37 woody species having 902 individuals were selected to describe the structure of Sinko community forest plant communities; Six height classes, class 1) 2.0-5.0 m, 2) 5.01-10.0 m, 3) 10.01-15.0 m, 4) 15.01-20.0 m, 5) 20.01-25.0 m, 6) 25.01-30.0 m, were conventionally established (Figure 4.7). The numbers of individuals in each height class should generally show a decreasing trend. Of the six height classes conventionally established to describe the structure of plant communities, the majority of individuals contributing to the first height class came from individuals from Bersama abyssinica, Acacia nilotica, Rhus vulgaris, Maesa lanceolata and Eucalyptus camaldulensis. For the second height class Eucalyptus camaldulensis was contributing 52.58% of the height class. The third and the fourth height classes were contributed mostly by Cupressus lusitanica.

42

40

% of Abundance of tree

35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Height class Figure 4.7 Percentage distributions of trees in height classes in Sinko Community forest 4.5.4 Vertical structure Population vertical structure refers to the distribution patterns of individuals of each species within arbitrarily defined height classes. According to Lamprecht (1989) height classification scheme, there were three vertical hierarchies of trees in the forest community.These are 1) upper storey-tree with height >2/3 of the top upper height, 2) middle storey trees with height between 1/3 and 2/3 of top upper height; and 3) lower story tree height < 1/3 of top height). Based on the above classification the share of trees /shrub in the upper, middle and lower storey is 13.5%, 29.4% and 57.1%, respectively (table 4.8). This indicates the dominance of lower storey species. Table4.8 Vertical structure of Sinko Community Forest Height Class % Class interval (m)
Lower storey Middle storey

Density 515 265 122 57.1 29.4 13.5

Upper storey

<9 9-18 >18

43

4.5.5 Frequency Frequency is the number of quadrats in which a given species occurred in the study area. It gives an approximate indication for homogeneity and heterogeneity of vegetation. The frequency of all the woody species in study area is given in appendix 4. Carissa edulis was the most frequently occurred species with 80.9 % (in 38 quadrats out of 47). The trees/shrubs species with more than 50% distribution were Pterolobium stellautm (74.5%), Osyris quadripartite (63.8%) and Dodonaea viscosa (61.7%). The woody species with the least occurrence were Acacia seyal, Apodytes dimidiata,Caesalpina spinosa, Celtis africana,Clerodendron myricoides,Clutia abyssinica, Ekebergia

capensis,Erythrina abyssinica, Eucalyptus camaldulensis, Euphorbia candelabrum ,Ficus sur,Ficus sycomorus,Ficus thonningii, Juniperus procera, Justicia schimperiana, Lippia raineriana , Milletia ferruginea ,Opuntuia ficus-indica, Phragmanthera regularis, Rhamnus prinoides, Schefflera abyssinica, Sesbania sesban, Solanum marginatum,Verbascum sinaiticum and Vernonia amygdalina each contributing 2.13%. 4.5.6 Basal Area Basal area is the cross-sectional area of all of the stems in a stand at breast height (1.3 m above ground level). Basal area is used to explain the crowdedness of a stand of forests. A stand of large trees is more stocked than with the same number of trees of smaller diameter (Shambel Bantiwalu, 2010). The total basal area of all tree species in Sinko community forest was found to be 22.08 m2 ha-1. According to Dawins (1959) cited in Shambel Bantiwalu (2010), the normal basal area of virgin tropical forest in Africa is 23-37m2 ha-1. Basal area provides a better measure of the relative importance of the species than simple stem count (Fekadu Gurmessa, 2010). Therefore, species with the largest contribution in basal area can be considered as the most important woody species in the forest. Accordingly, Cupressus lusitanica, Syzygium guineense, Ficus vasta, Mimusops kummel and Eucalyptus camaldulensis were the most dominant species in their basal area. They constitute 67.34% of the total basal area (Table 4.9).

44

Table 4.9 Basal area contributions of species in Sinko community forest S.no Species Basal area m2/ha 6.425001 1 Cupressus lusitanica 3.052740 2 Syzygium guineense 2.421972 3 Ficus vasta 1.544613 4 Mimusops kummel 1.425082 5 Eucalyptus camaldulensis 1.025930 6 Ficus thonningii 0.780647 7 Albizia schimperiana 0.676436 8 Juniperus procera 0.640506 9 Croton macrostachyus 0.578081 10 Ficus sycomorus 0.354162 11 Maesa lanceolata 0.339121 12 Stereospermum kunthianum 0.332009 13 Ficus sur 0.314231 14 Acacia nilotica 0.272829 15 Acacia abyssinica 0.270307 16 Combretum molle 0.206113 17 Celtis africana 0.205630 18 Rhus vulgaris 0.181886 19 Apodytes dimidiata 0.168458 20 Bersama abyssinica 0.161026 21 Schefflera abyssinica 0.092701 22 Acacia brevispica 0.078196 23 Ximenia americana 0.077170 24 Milletia ferruginea 0.075371 25 Buddleja polystachya 0.073861 26 Pittosporum abyssinicum 0.073763 27 Rhus glutinosa 0.040419 28 Euphorbia candelabrum 0.039288 39 Olea europaea 0.028227 30 Ekebergia capensis 0.027109 31 Steganotaenia araliaceae 0.023427 32 Acacia sieberiana 0.020026 33 Nuxia congesta 0.013529 34 Hibiscus ludwigil 0.012841 35 Ricinus communis 0.010983 36 Clausena anisata 0.008017 37 Acacia seyal 0.006629 38 Capparis tomentosa 0.003860 39 Vernonia amygdalina 0.002672 40 Erythrina abyssinica 0.001544 41 Clerodendron myricoides

45

Table 4.10 Comparison of the Basal area of Sinko community forest with other forests in Ethiopia Forest Basal area (m2/ha) Wof Washa Menagesha Amba Mariam Dindin Denkoro Menagesha Suba Sanka Meda Chilimo Sinko community forest (present study) Source (shamble Bantiwalu, 2010) and field survey From this comparison, all the forests had greater basal area than sinko community forest (Table 4.10). Woody species belonging to higher DBH class in Sinko community forest were fewer but contributed considerably to the total basal area. The basal area of a stand is simply the sum of the basal area value of all trees in that stand. The basal area increment response of trees is correlated with climatic and topographic factors (Spiecker et al., 1996). The total basal area of Sinko community forest is less than 23 m2 ha-1. Tthis is the result of extraction of large trees for charcoal making and fuel wood. 4.5.7 Importance Value Index (IVI) Importance value index combines data for three parameters (relative frequency, relative density and relative dominance). That is why ecologists consider it as the most realistic aspect in vegetation study (Dereje Denu, 2006; Fekadu Gurmessa, 2010; Shambel Bantiwalu, 2010; Dinkessa Beche, 2011 and Shambel Alemu, 2011). It is useful to compare the ecological significance of species (Lamprecht, 1989). The importance value index for woody species in Sinko community forest is shown in (Appendix 5). Dodonaea viscosa (42.5), Cupressus lusitanica (34.22), Syzygium guineense (15.75) , Carissa edulis (13.25), Pterolobium stellautm (12.94) and Ficus vasta (12.34), all got IVI value above
46

101.80 84.17 49.00 45.00 36.10 34.71 30.10 22.08

10. They all summed up to give 131 IVI value (43.67%). The reason why Dodonaea viscosa has the highest IVI value was that it had the highest relative density (37.97); higher IVI value for Cupressus lusitanica and Syzygium guineense were due to their high relative dominance with (29.09) and (13.82) respectively was the reason for their high IVI. Species like Rhamnus prinoides, Solanum marginatum and Erythrina abyssinica have the lowest IVI (0.18) each. The result indicates that much of IVI was attributed by few species. These species were those well adapted to the high human pressure (disturbance), natural and environmental factors. Species like Dodonaea viscosa having high IVI are dominant in the study area where as species like Erythrina abyssinica that had the least IVI which are the least dominant. IVI indicates priorities for conservation. 4.6 Land use /land cover changes in the study area Land cover maps derived from remote sensing always contain some sort of errors due to several factors which range from classification technique to method of satellite data capture. In order to wisely use the land cover maps which are derived from remote sensing and the accompanying land resource statistics, the errors must be quantitatively explained in terms of classification accuracy. The image classification accuracy calculated from ERDAS is summarized in Table
4.11

Table 4.11 Summary of overall classification accuracy and kappa coefficient Year 1985
2005 2010

Overall Classification Accuracy (%)


97.62 90.48 95.24

Overall Kappa Coefficient


0.9628 0.8388 0.9222

As shown in the table 4.11, the lowest overall classification accuracy was 90.48% in 2005 and the highest was 97.62 % for the year 1985. The highest kappa coefficient was 0.9628 and the lowest was 0.8388 for the year 2005. The reason for relatively low accuracy for the image taken in 2005 was due to the cloud cover which made the process of identifying different land use/land cover difficult. According to (Rahman, et al, 2006) kappa values are characterized into 3 groups: a value greater than 0.80 represents strong agreement, a value between 0.40 and 0.80 represents

47

moderate agreement, and a value below 0.40 represents poor agreement. Therefore, the images used for the current study had strong agreement between the classification map and the ground reference information as the whole kappa coefficient was above 0.8. The study area had three types of land use land cover categories: forest and bush land, grassland and farmland based on the analysis of Landsat satellite images of the year 1985, 2005, and 2010. The description of these land cover categories is presented in figure 4.8
70 60 50

In %

40 Farmland 30 20 10 0 1985 2005 2010 Grassland Forest and Bush land

Years Figure 4.8 Trends in land use land cover changes of Sinko Community forest from 1985 to 2010 The intension of the study was to see the changes in land use that affects the biodiversity of the area. Time series land use/land cover map of the study area is presented in figures 4.9, 4.10 and 4.11.

48

Figure 4.9 land use/ land cover map of 1985

From the 1985 land use and land cover map interpretation, the area coverage of forest and bush land is accounted for 65.48% from the total study area. The farmland land and grasslands accounted for about 11.45% and 23.7 %, respectively.

49

Figure 4.10 land use land cover map of 2005 From the 2005 land use and land cover map interpretation, the area coverage of forest and bush land is accounted for 47.64% from the total study area. Farmland land and grasslands accounted for about 14.51% and 37.85 %, respectively.

50

Figure 4.11 land use Land cover map of 2010 From the 2010 land use and land cover map interpretation, the area coverage of forest and bush land is accounted for 43.34 % from the total study area. The farmland and grasslands accounted for about 27.52% and 29.14 %, respectively As indicated in /Figure 4.9, 4.10 and 4.11/, most of the forest and bush land converted to grassland and farmland. The share of farmland in 1985 was 11.45%, but during the years 2005 and 2010 the share of farm land were 14.51 % and 27.52% respectively. This increase was at expense forest and bushland /Figure 4.10, 4.11 and 4.12/. Between 1985 and 2005 about 265.5 hectare of forest and bush land was converted into grassland. Fuelwood selling was the primary caus for the conversion of the forest and bushland into other forms of land use. First, the land was cleared by fuelwood and charcoal sellers then the land was converted into grassland. The surrounding communities then converted the open space into farmland.

51

4.6.1Rate of land use and land cover changes in the study area The rate of change was calculated for each land use and land cover using the following formula: Rate of change (ha/year) = (A-B)/C Where A = Recent area of land uses (covers in ha.), B = Previous area of land use (cover in ha) and C = Time interval between A and B in years Table 4.12 Land use land cover classes and rate of change in between 1985 through 2010
Land use land cover Land cover (ha)in the three years Year I Year II Year III (1985) (2005) (2010) Rate of change of land cover/ use From 1985 To 2005 (ha/yr) 2.75 9.675 -16.03 28.455 0.48 1.7 -2.81 LULC change (%) 2005 to 2010 (ha/yr) LULC change (%) 1985 to 2010 (ha/yr) LULC change (%)

Farmland Grassland Forest and Bush land Total change

205.7 414.6 1176.8 1797.1

260.7 680.2 856.2 1797.1

494.6 523.7 778.8 1797.1

46.78 -31.3 -15.48 93.56

10 6.69 3.3

11.556 4.36 -15.92 31.836

1.45 0.55 -2.03

Rate of change in percent is calculated as change between the two study years per total change of these years divided by the time interval times 100. Between 1985 and 2005, farmland increased at a rate of 2.75 ha/year and further increased in 2010 at an accelerated rate of change 46.78 ha/ year. The expansion of agricultural land was at the expense of forest and bush land .On the contrary, bush and forest land had decreased from 1985 to 2005 at 16.03 ha/year rate of change and further decreased in 2010 at the rate of 15.48 ha/year. The change was induced by the conversion of shrub and forest land to agricultural and grassland.

52

4.7 Management Practices and Threats to Sinko Cmmunity Forest As it was observed during field work, and information collected from the respondents, Sinko

community forest was demarcated as a community forest in 1981. After one year, the forest was administered by Fogera Woreda Office of Agriculture as woreda owned state forest and it was protected for 10 years in this category after the down of the military gov`t. The forest was renamed as community forest in 1992. Between 1981and 2012, the forest was completely degraded and only remnants were left and all the stakeholders consider the area as ownerless. After 20 years in 2012, the frost was re-demarcated and given to Amhara Forestry Enterprise for plantation site without the consent of the local community and local administration. Despite this fact the local community still belive the area is their own land and land certificate of the community forest is found at the hand of respective Kebeles (Figer 4.12) Tenure insecurity is a problem for the protection of the forest. For the last three years, the community started to protect the forest properly and have gotten hay from the forest for their livestock but now The Woreda Administration and the Woreda Office of Environmental Protection, Land Administration and Land use gave the community forest for Amhara Forestry Enterprise for plantation and this has created disparity. Ninety two or 50% of the respondents responded firewood or Kitkit as a primary source of deforestation, 46(25%) of the respondents responded cutting of thorny species for fencing was the cause for the deforestation of the forest. All the respondents were agreed firewood was the primary threat of the area followed by cutting of thorny bushes for fencing is the second threat next to this charcoal was the threat of the community forest. Even if its contribution for deforestation for agriculture was less as compared to the above factors agriculture was the other threat for the deforestation of the area.The forest was first deforested by fuelwood scavenging and then converted into Grazing land and then to agricultural land. So fuelwood extraction is the primary causes of deforestation in Sinko community forest.

53

Figure 4.12 Land certificate of Sinko community forest in Alember zuria Kebele When we see the levels of threats for different woody species, Echinops kebericho was locally disappeared from the community forest due to continuous extraction for smoking of their house and equines. Due to the Extraction of Combretum molle for charcoal, Myrica salicifolia for fuel wood and Phoenix reclinata for making of mats; these three species are decreased their population from time to time. As the degradation of the forest the size of Pterolobium stellautm increases. For proper management of community forests clearly defined boundaries of the area managed should in place but all the respondents didnt know the exact boundaries of the area. In addition, appropriate rules for exploiting and conservation of resources should be in place but there is no separate bylaw for Sinko community forest rather they use the watershed bylaw. Concerning responsibility for the protection and conservation of the forest, 133(72.3%) respondents responded the responsibility was for the government, 38(20.65%) for the community and 13(7.05%) for both community and government The main source of the feed before 2012 was grazing in the community forest but now 76 of the respondents buy hay from the community forest and graze their cattle from their own land. Ninety two of the respondents get the feed for their domestic stock from the community grazing

54

lands, 166 the respondent use crop residue as additional feed. During my field work I have counted 18 bundles of fuel wood transported from the community forest to Alember town for selling. Concerning on the management of the community forest before 1973 shifting cultivation (menter) was exercised for the production of millet that degrades the natural ecosystem of the area. During the reign of military government it was demarcated as woreda owned state forest at this period the area was used as a plantation site. After downfall of the military government the area was served as a community forest and undertaken a replacement plantation by local youths but the plantation was not effective. In the last three years to rehabilitate the degraded parts of the community forest physical soil and water structures such as trench bunds, eye-brow basin and micro basins were constructed that helped for the planting of species like Sesbania sesban, Spathodea campanulata, Acacia saligna, Cordia africana, Casuarina equisetifolia and Cupressus lusitanica. Concerning the protection of the community forest there were 18 forest rangers were elected for the protection of the community forest. Out of the the forest rangers 12 were community rangers they hadnt get salary from the government but they had gotten from selling of hay. In general the area is protected with the woreda government and the local community

55

5. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION 5.1 Conclusion Sinko community forest had high species diversity and Fabaceae was the most dominant contributing the large proportion of species. Trees accounted the largest proportions of the growth forms of woody species followed by shrubs. Sinko community Forest is also important reservoir of endemic and thereatend woody plants species some of which are in the IUCN Red data list. Generally the vegetation of Sinko community forest was grouped into four plant community types (Community type I, II, III and IV) with type III exebiting the highest species richness and type I exebiting the highest diversity. . The density of woody species (trees, shrubs and woody climbers) in Sinko community forest decreases with increasing DBH and height classes (high density of trees and shrubs in the lower classes). The DBH and Height class distribution of Sinko community forest showed that inverted J shaped which has the capacity for regeneration. The total basal area of all tree species in Sinko community Forest was found to be 22.08m2 ha-1 but most of the basal area was contributed by few large sized individuals. Carissa edulis was the most frequently occurred species (80.85 % in 38 quadrats out of 47). Trees/shrubs with more than 50% frequency distribution were Pterolobium stellautm (74.47%), Osyris quadripartite (63.83%) and Dodonaea viscosa (61.70%). Dodonaea viscosa (42.5%), Cupressus lusitanica (34.22%), Syzygium guineense (15.75%), Carissa edulis (13.25%), Pterolobium stellautm (12.94%) and Ficus vasta (12.34%), had the highest IVI in the study area. The study area currently is experiencing high rate of degradation because of the unwise use of the forest resources from nearby village dwellers which resulted in the depletion of the forest, thereby causing damage to both plant and animal diversity of the area. Sinko community forest is poorly protected by all the concerned bodies including local communities. Firewood was the primary threat of the community forest next to that cutting of thorny bushes for fencing. The results of land use land cover dynamics showd that size of farmland increased by11.556 ha annually where as the size of forest and bush land decreased by15.92 ha annually.

56

Concerning on the management of the community forest before 1973 shifting cultivation was exercised for the production of millet. During the reign of military government it was demarcated as woreda owned state forest and used as a plantation site. After downfall of the military government the area was served as a community forest and undertaken a replacement plantation by local youths. Water harvesting structures were constructed for plantation. Concerning the protection of the community forest the area was protected by the woreda government and the local community 5.2 Recommendation Based on the above conclusion the following recommendations are made Although the Present study can contribute towards the understanding of plant species diversity and structure further study on soil seedbank, detailed important Identification alternative livelihoods to the community, selection of species for enrichment planting, the use of the community forest for carbon sequestration and carbon trading are also important for the management and conservation endeavors of Sinko community forest. Establishing Participatory Forest Management in Sinko community forest may help for the conservation of the threatened biodiversity of the area and improving livelihood of the community. Raising awareness of local communities on the value of forest resources, ecological consequences of deforestation and device mechanisms by which human impacts can be minimized through discussion and consultation with the local communities. The government and its institutions should play their pivotal roles and responsibilities in strengthening as well as in correcting the gaps and in creating integrated mechanisms at national, regional and local levels for conservation and sustainable use of forest resources. The demarcation of the forest is yet not completed, so it needs to be complete for further planning of the area The planning and management of the forest should be assisted by research findings, such as detailed ecological studies in relation to various environmental factors such as soil type and properties. Therefore, more basic and applied researche should be promoted land use and land cover changes is

57

The ownership issue should be resolved Benefit sharing mechanism should be put in place for the sustainability of the community forest.

58

6. REFERENCE
Ababu Anage (2009), Capacity Building for Regional Council Members, Sector Offices, and Academic Institutions and CSOs of Oromiya, Gambella and Benshangul-Gumuz National Regional States on UNCCD/NAP in Ethiopia, pp. 1-84, DCG Proceedings Number.25 Abate Ayalew (2003), A floristic composition and structural analysis of Denkoro Forest, South Wollo. A Thesis Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Addis Ababa University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Dry land Bio-Diversity, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Abeje Eshete, Demel Teketay and Hulten, Hakan, H. (2005). The Socio-Economic Importance and Status of Populations of Boswellia papyrifera (Del.) Hochst in Northern Ethiopia: The Case of North Gondar Zone. Forests Trees and Livelihoods, 15: 55-74, Abraham Marye (2009), Diversity, Relative Abundance and Utilization of Woody Plants and Habitats in Bahir Dar Nile River Millennium Park, A Thesis Submitted to Graduate School of Bahir Dar University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree of Master of Education (MED) in Biology,Bahir Dar,Ethiopia Abrham Marye (2010), Wildlife and Natural Habitats Assessment in Highlands of South Gondar administration zone, ORDA, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia Afework Bekele and Corti, M. (1997), Forest blocks altitudes as indicator of Myomys albipes (mammalian rodentia) distribution in Ethiopia. Trop. Zool. 10: 287-293. Agarwal, C., Green, G., Grove, J., Evans, T. and Schweik, C. (2002), A Review and Assessment of Land-use Change Models: Dynamics of Space, Time, and Human Choice, US Dept. of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station. Alemayehu Wassie (2007), Ethiopian church forests opportunities and challenges for restoration, PhD thesis, Wageningen Univeristy, Wageningen, The Netherlands. Alemayehu Muluneh and lafurArnalds (2011), Synthesis of Research on Land Use and Land Cover Dynamics in the Ethiopian Highlands; Geophysical Research. http://meetingorganizer.copernicus.org/EGU2011/EGU2011-10829.pdf, Accssesed on March, 12, 2013 Alember zuria Kebele Agricultural development office (2012), First Quarter report of 2012, Worota Alemnew Aleligne (2001), Diversity and Socio-economic importance of woody plants on the peninsula of Zegie northwestern Ethiopia: Implications for the sustainable utilization: MSC thesis submitted to Swedish university of agricultural science, Wondogent, Ethiopia.

59

Alemtsehay Jima (2010), Determinating Factors for a Successful Establishment of Participatory Forest Management: A Comparative Study of Goba and Dello Districts, Ethiopia, MSC thesis submitted to The University of Agder, Kristiansand, Norway Anderson, R..; Hardy, E.; Roach, T.; and Witmere.E (1976), A Land Use and Land Cover Classification System for Use with Remote Sensor Data Geological Survey Professional Paper 964, United States Government Printing Office, Washington Azene Bekele. (1993), Useful Trees and Shrubs for Ethiopia: Identification, Propagation and Management for Agricultural and Pastoral Communities, World Agroforestry Center, RELMA, ICRAF Eastern Africa Region, Nairobi, Kenya. Azene Bekele. (2007), Useful Trees and Shrubs for Ethiopia: Identification, Propagation and Management for 17 agroclimatic zones, World Agroforestry Center, RELMA, ICRAF Eastern Africa Region, Nairobi, Kenya. Badege Bishaw and Abdu Abdulkadir (2003), Agroforestry and Community Forestry for Rehabilitation of Degraded Watersheds on the Ethiopian Highlands, International Symposium on Contemporary Development Issues in Ethiopia, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Behailu Assefa (2010), Land Use and Land Cover Analysis and Modeling in South Western Ethiopia: The Case of Selected Resettlement Kebeles in Gimbo Woreda, A Thesis Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Addis hool Ababa University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree of Master of Science in Environmental Science, Addis Ababa ,Ethiopia Breitenbach, V.F. (1963), Forests and woodlands of Ethiopia: A geobotanical contribution to the knowledge of the principal plant communities of Ethiopia with special regard to forestry. Ethiopia. For.Rev. 1:5-16. Brian .T .B (1999), Community-based Natural Resource Management in Botswana and Namibia: an inventory and preliminary analysis of progress, Evaluating Eden Series Discussion Paper No.6 Birhanu Gebre, Kassie Dessie, Mequanint Gebeyehu, Negash Atinafu, Wondyifraw Molla and Yitayal Abebe (2007), Establishment of Abay River Side Milliniem Park, ANRS, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia, Unpublished, Field Report. Britannica academic editions, (2011), Ethiopian mountains, http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/1572433/Ethiopian-Mountains, accssesed on November11 2012 Chalma Mintura Kebele Agricultural development office (2012), First Quarter report of 2012, Woreta

60

Chauhan R.N, (2007), Global Forest Resources (Geographical Approach), Oxford Book Company 267, 10-B-Scheme, Opp. Narayan Niwas, Gopaipura by Pass Road, Jaipur302018 CSA (2010), Central Statistical Agency, 20111 National Statistics (Abstract), http://www.csa.gov.et/index.php?option=com_rubberdoc&view=category&id=75&Ite mi d=561 , Accssesed on August 20/2012 Derje Denu (2006), Floristic composition and ecological study of Bibita Forest (Gura Ferda), Southwest Ethiopia, MSC thesis submitted Addis Ababa university Department of biology, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Dereje Mekonnen (2006), Woody Species Composition of Dilfaqar Regional Park and its Socioeconomic Importance a Thesis submitted to School of Graduate Studies of Addis Ababa University, in partial fulfillment of masters degree in Dryland Biodiversitry, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Dharani N. (2005), Filed guide to common trees and shrubs of east Africa, Hirt& Carter cape ltd., Cape Town (pty)

Dinkissa Beche (2011), Floristic Composition, Diversity and Structure of Woody plant Species in Menagesha Suba State Forest, Central Ethiopia. MSC thesis submitted to Addis Ababa university faculty of life science EFAP (1994), Ethiopian Forestry Action Program, Volume III, the Challenge for Development, Ministry of Natural Resources, Addis Ababa Ernani,M. and Gabriels,D .(2006), Detection of land cover changes using Landsat MSS, TM,ETM+ sensors in Yazd-Ardakan basin, Iran Proceedings of Agro Environ
Ensermu Kelbessa, Sebsebe Demissew, Zerihun Woldu and Edwards, S. (1992), some Endemic Plants of Ethiopia. NAPRECA Monograph, Series 2:35-55. threatened

EPA (1998), National Action Program me to Combat Desertification, Protection Authority, Addis Ababa EPA (2003), State of the Environment Report of Ethiopia, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Environmental

ERDAS Field Guide (1999), Leica Geosystems Geospatial Imaging, Norcross, GA 30092-2500 ,USA EU (2001) Manual of concepts of Land cover and Land use information systems, ISBN 92894-0432-9, Luxembourg FOA (2005), Digital soil map of Ethiopia, Rome, Italy FAO (2010), Global Forest Resources Assessment Main Report, Forestry pa aper 163, Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, 00153 Rome, Italy

61

Fekadu

Gurmessa (2010), Floristic composition and structural analysis of Komto Afromontane Rainforest, East Wollega Zone of Oromia Region, West Ethiopia , MSC thesis submitted to Addis Ababa university Department of biology, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Fisher, R.A., Corbet, A.S. And C.B. Williams (1943), the relation between numbers of species and the number of individuals in a random sample of an animal population, J. Anim. Ecol. 12: 42-58. Frankel, O.H., Brown, A.H.D and Burdon, J.J. (1995), the Conservation of Plant Biodiversity, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge Friis, I., Sebsebe Demissew and van Bruegel, P. (2010), Atlas of the Potential Vegetation of Ethiopia, The Royal Danish Academy of Science and letters, Biologiske Skrifter 58 Friis, I. (1986), the Forest Vegetation of Ethiopia. Symb Bot. Ups 26, 2: 31-47. Uppsala. Frosini, B. V, (2006), Descriptive Measures of Ecological Diversity: Environmetrics, p 149, (Jureckova, J. & El-Shaaraw, A. H, Eds.). Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems, Oxford Global land cover, GLCF http://glcf.umiacs.umd.edu/.Accssesed December 10/2012 Goldewijk, K.and Ramankutty, K, (2004), Land cover change over the last three centuries due to human activities: The availability of new global data sets. Geojourna, 61, 335-344. Hammond. N. Daniel (1997), Characterization of Vascular Plant Species Composition and Relative Abundance in Southern Appalachian Mixed-Oak Forests, Thesis submitted to the Faculty of Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia Hurni.H and ludi.E (2000), Reconciling Conservation with Sustainable Park Development: Aparticipatory study inside and around Simien Mountains National, Center for Development and Environment, Universty of Berne, Switzerland Harper.J.L. (1982), Population biology of plants, Academic press, London Hiywot Menker and Rashid (2002), Drivers of land use change in the Southern Nations and Nationalities Peoples Region of Ethiopia Hussien Ali (2009), Land use and land cover change, drivers and its impact: a comparative study from Kuhar Michael and Lenche dima of Blue Nile and Awash basins 0f, Ethiopia, A thesis presented to the faculty of Cornell University, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of master of professional studies IBC (2005), National Biodiversity strategy of Ethiopia, IBD, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

62

IBC (2009), convention on biological diversity (CBD) Ethiopias 4th country report, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Jansen, L.J.M & Gregoria A. (2003), Land-use data collection using the land cover classification system: results from a case study in Kenya, Land Use policy, 20,131148. Kahsay Berhe. (2004), Land use and land cover changes in the central highlands of Ethiopia: The case of Yerer Mountain and its surroundings, Addis Ababa University, Environmental Science,Addis Ababa,Ethiopia Kent, M. and Coker, P. (1992) Vegetation Description and Analysis, A Practical approach, Bent Haven Press, New York. Kerry A. Woodcock, Charles M. and Camilla B. (2006), Review of Tanzanian Forest Conservation group-Facilitated Participatory Forest Management in the Eastern Arc and Coastal Forests of Tanzania, Technical report NO. 12, DSM, Tz.1-115 pp Kindeya G/Hiywot (2003), Ecology and Regeneration of Boswellia papyrifera, Dry forest of Tigray, North Ethiopia, Doctoral dissertation, Georg-August University of Gottingen, Germany Kohli .R.K., Batish .D.R. and H.P. Singh, (1999), Population and Community Ecology, Centre for Environment and Vocational Studies, Panjab University, Chandigarh Department of Botany, Panjab University, Chandigarh Lambin, E.F., Geist, H.J. & Lepers, E. (2003), Dynamics of land-use and land-cover change in Tropical regions, Annual Review of Environment and Resources 28(1), 205-241 Lamprecht, H. (1989), Silviculture on the Tropics. Tropical forest ecosystems and their tree species Possibilitiesand methods for their long term utilizations, GmbH, Rossdort, Germany. Lappiso Shamebo (2010), Assessment of Land Use Land Cover Dynamics and Its Impact on soil loss: Using GIS and Remote Sensing, in Shashogo Woreda, Southern Ethiopia. A Thesis Submitted to School of Graduate Studies of Addis Ababa University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement of the Degree of Masters of Science in Environmental Science. Lillesand T.M, Kiefer, R. & Chipman, J.W. (2004), Remote Sensing and Image Interpretation (5th edition).John Wiley & sons Inc. New York. Lovett, J. C. (1990), Altitudinal variation in large tree community associations on the West Usambara Mountains. In: Research for Conservation of Tanzania Catchments Forest, pp.134-135, (Hedberg, I. and Persson, E., Eds.)

63

Menale Wondie , Werner Schneider , Assefa Melesse and Demel Teketay (2011) , Spatial and Temporal Land Cover Changes in the Simen Mountains National Park, a World Heritage Site in Northwestern Ethiopia, Remote Sens(3) 752-766 Meseret Chane (2010), Mammalian Diversity in Borena-SayintNational Park, South Wollo, Ethiopia, and MSC thesis submitted Addis Ababa university Department of biology, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection (1993), Ethiopian Forestry Action Plan Program vol. II, Addis Ababa, MoA Mintura and Chalma Kebele Agricultural development office, (2012), First Quarter report of 2012, Worota Mueller-Dombois, D. and Ellenberg, H. (1974), Aims and Methods of Vegetation Ecology. John Wiley & Sons Inc. New York. Mustalahti, I. (2006), How to handle the stick: Positive processes and crucial barriers of Participatory Forest Management. Forests, Trees and Livelihoods 16(2), 151-165 Netsanet Deneke(2007), Land Use and Land Cover Changes in Harenna Forest and surrounding area, Bale Mountains National Park, Oromia National Regional State, Ethiopia Nigussie Amsalu (2010), An Ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants in Farta woreda, South Gondar zone of Amhara region, Ethiopia, Unpublished, MSC Thesis, Addis Ababa University, Ethiopia. . Nivergelt, B. (1981), The separation in the habitat of the Walia ibex, the klipspringer, the gelada baboon, the bush buck, the colobus monkey, the semien fox and the golden jackal. In: Ecological Studies, Analysis and Synthesis, pp111-120 Peters, C. M. (1996), The Ecology and Management of Non-Timber Forest Recourses. World Bank Technical Paper 322, ISBN 0-8213-3619-3, Washington Rahman, M.M, Csaolovics B. Koch, and Kohl. M (2006), Interpretation of Tropical Vegetation Using Landsat ETM+ Imagery. http://gis.vsb.cz/GIS_Ostrava/GIS_Ova_2013/proceedings/print_with_cover.pdf, Accessed on Feb 10, 2013 Rogan,J. and Chen,D.(2004), Remote sensing technology for mapping and monitoring land cover and land-use change ,Clark School of Geography, Clark University, Progress in Planning 61 Semere Beyene (2010), Floristic Composition and Structure of Yangudi-Rassa National Park Vegetation, Northeastern Ethiopia, A Thesis submitted to School of Graduate Studies

64

of Addis Ababa University, In partial fulfillment of masters degree in Science, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Environmental

Shambel Alemu (2011), Woody species composition, diversity and structural analysis of Angada forest in Merti wereda, Arsi zone of Oromia region, Ethiopia, MSC thesis submitted Addis Ababa university Department of biology, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Shamble Bantiwalu (2010), Floristic composition, structure and regeneration status plant species in Sanka Meda Forest, Guna District, Arsi zone of Oromia region, Southeast Ethiopia. MSC thesis submitted to Addis Ababa University Department of biology, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Shannon CE, Wiener W. (1949), The Mathematical Theory of Communication. University of Illions Press, Urbana, USA Simon Shibru and Girma Balcha (2004), Composition, structure and regeneration status of woody plant species in Dindin natural forest, southeast Ethiopia: An Implication for conservation. Ethiopian Journal of science, 2(1): 31-48. Addis Ababa Singh, A. (1989), Review Article Digital change detection techniques using remotely sensed data, International Journal of Remote Sensing 10(6): 989-1003. Spiecker, H., Mielikaeinen, K., Kohl, M., Skovsgaard, P. (eds) (1996), Growth trends in European forests: Studies from 12 countries. European Forest Institute Research Report No. 5. Springer.Berlin, Germany. Takhtajan A. (2009), Flowering Plants Second Edition, Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009 UNEP (1992), Conventions on biological diversity, No.30619, Rio de Janeiro Vivero, J.L., Ensermu Kelbessa and Sebesebe Demissew (2005), The Red List of Endemic Trees and Shrubs of Ethiopia and Eritrea, Fauna and Flora International, Cambridge. Wade,R.(1987), The management of common property resources: collective action as an alternative to privatisation or state regulation, Cambridge Journal of Economics 1987, 11, 95-106 Wolde Michael Kelecha (1987), A Glossary of Ethiopian plant names, 4th edition, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Yalden, D. W. (1983), The extent of high ground in Ethiopia compared to rest of Africa. SINET: Ethiop. J. Sci. 6: 35-38. Yalden, D. W and Largen, M. J. (1992), Endemic mammals of Ethiopia, Mamm Rev. 22: 115150

65

Yang, X. and C. Lo. (2002), Using a time series of satellite imagery to detect land use and land cover changes in the Atlanta, Georgia metropolitan area. International Journal of Remote Sensing 23(9): 1775-1798. Zhang, Z.; Peterson, J; Zhu, X. and Wright, W. (2004), Modeling Land Use and Land Cover Changes in the Strzelecki Ranges .An overview. Centre for GIS, School of Geography and Environmental Science Monash University, Melbourne, Australia

66

Appendices Appendices 1. Questionnaire survey to investigate the socio-economy of sinko community forest PART I. Livelihood on resources Woreda __________________peasant association ________________ village_____________ 1. Characteristics of the respondent 1) Name of the respondent_______________________________________________ 2) Gender a) male b) female b) 19-40 c) 41-60 d)>60

3) Age of the respondent a) <18

2. For how long have you lived in the area? a) Since birth, b) Since look for occupation____ years c) After marriage____ years 3. Major occupation: if you have more than on job put in ranking order _____1) Crop grower _____3) Firewood seller _____5) Cloth weaving _____7) Artesian (handcraft) ____ 9) Casual laborer _____ 2) Animal husbandry _____4) Charcoal production _____ 6) Trader ____8) Fruit and vegetable production _____10) Apiculture

_____11) others________________________________________________________________ 4. What is the main income source (s) and how much is the total annual gross income amount in Birr? 1) Crop selling _______________ 2) Animal product selling _______________

67

3) Forest wood and product selling_______________ 4) Charcoal selling and firewood ____________________ 5) Cloth weaving rent and selling_______________ 6) Selling of goods____________________ 7) Sell of handcraft on pots, metals and plant products ___________________________________ 8) Selling fruit and vegetable ______________ 9) daily casual labor ______________________ 10) Honey and honey bee selling _______________ 11) Honey and honey bee selling __________12) Other ______________________ 13) Total _______________

5. Where do you get feeds for your domestic stock? If more than one source put in rank 1) Crop residue 2) from the community 3) From part of my own land 4) Purchased formulated feed 5) purchasing forage grass straw 6) Other (Specify) 6. How is the land used? For local unit putting equivalent metric units 1) For cultivated annual crop ________________ 2) Cultivated Perennial Crop ______________3) For Vegetables ________________________ 4) Wood lot __________________________5) Fallow ___________________________ 6) Pasture land _________________________7) Others (specify) _______________________ 7. Who is responsible for the protection and conservation of the forest? 1) Government 2) Local community 3) Both government and local community 7.1 If the community forest is managed by the community is the boundaries of the area clearly known? A/ yes we know the boundary B/ we dont know the boundary

68

7.2 Is there a community bylaw for the management and utilization of the community forest? A/ yes there is B/ no there isnt

7.3 Is there any right for the local community in participating for the management and utilization of the resource? A/ yes B/ no C/ Have no idea

7.4 Resource users must have the right of exclusion of outsiders from using the resource? A/ Yes we have B/ No we havent

8. What is the major problem associated with your land use? If more than one put in rank 1) Shortage of land 2) Low productivity 3) Tenure Insecurity 4) lack of water _______________________________________________________________________ 8.1. What measure do you take to alleviate the problem __________________________ 9. Is there any change of land use from the research area? If your answer is yes how many hectares of land changed from one use to another A. from forest to farmland _____________ B. from forest land to grazing land__________ C. others (specify)__________________ Part II. Forest resource utilization from the community conservation area 1. From where do you get wood for various purposes? Put in rank 1) Natural forest 2) Community plantation 3) Private plantation 4) Purchase 2. What do you benefit from nearby forest resource? Put in rank _____1) Fuel wood _____2) Construction wood _____3) Timber _____4) Charcoal

69

_____ 5) Sell wood ____6) Farm or other implement _____7) House furniture _____8) Fence _____ 9) Medicine _____10) Other (Specify) ____________ 3. Do you have free access to use the natural forest 1) Yes 2) No 4. Which five tree species (in order of priority) are most preferable for the following uses? Name of tree Species in order of rank Uses 1 2 3 4 5 1) Fuel wood ______ _______ _________ _______ _________ 2) Construction ______ _______ _________ _______ _________ 3) Charcoal ______ _______ _________ _______ _________ 4) Timber ______ _______ _________ _______ _________ 5) Farm implements ______ _______ _________ _______ _________ 6) Medicine ______ _______ _________ _______ _________ 7) Other ______ _______ _________ _______ _________ 5. Is the natural forest cover of the community forest? 1) Still intact 2) Decreasing 3) Increasing 4) No idea Change 5.1 What are the species locally disappeared? Why? ___________________________________________________________________________ 5.2 Which species are decreased time to time? Why? ___________________________________________________________________________

70

5.3 Which species increase in its population? Why? ___________________________________________________________________________ 6. What are the main reasons for deforestation? Uses Rank 1) Fuel wood ______ 2) Cultivation _______ 3) Settlement _______ 4) Construction _______ 5) Grazing ______ 6) Charcoal ______ 7) Timber ______ 8) Farm implements ______ 9) Medicine ______ 10) Other ______ 7. How much do you benefit from the forest resource? Put in rank _____1) Fuel wood _____2) Construction wood _____3) Timber _____4) Charcoal _____ 5) Sell wood _____6) Farm or other implement _____7) House furniture _____8) Fence _____ 9) Medicine _____10) Other (Specify) ____________

71

8. Was there any plantation activity undertaken in the last 20 years at the community conservation area? a) Yes b) no

72

Appendices2. Lists of woody species recorded in Sinko community forest with corresponding family, vernacular name and plant forms S/N Scientific Name Family Name Local Name Plant form

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Acacia abyssinica Hochst. ex Benth Acacia albida (Faidherbia albida) (Delile) A.Chev. Acacia brevispica Harms Acacia nilotica (L.) Willd. ex Delile Acacia seyal Del. Acacia sieberiana DC. Achanthus eminens C.B Clarke Achanthus sennii chiove. Agava sisalana Perr. ex Eng./ Albizia schimperiana Oliv. Apodytes dimidiata (A.Rich)Boutque Arundo donax L. Schum. Aspargus aethiopicus L

Fabaceae Fabaceae Fabaceae Fabaceae Fabaceae Fabaceae Acanthaceae Acanthaceae Agavaceae Fabaceae Icacinaceae Poaceae Liliaceae

Bazira girar Gimarda Kontir Timbilka Key Girar Nechi Girar

Tree Tree Tree Tree Tree Tree

Wondie kosheshela Shrub Setie kosheshela Kacha (Chiret ) Sesa Donga Shembeko Yeset kest Shrub Shrub Tree Tree shrub shrub

73

S/N

Scientific Name

Family Name

Local Name

Plant form

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Bersama abyssinica Fresen. Bridelia micrantha (Hochst.) Baill. Brucea antidysenterica J.F. Miller Buddleja polystachya Fresen. Caesalpina spinosa (Molina) Kuntze Calpurnia aurea (Alt.) Benth. Capparis tomentosa Lam. Carissa edulis (Forssk.) Vahl Cassia didymobotrya (Fresen.) H.S.Irwin & Barneby. Cassia singueana (Del.) Cassipourrea malosana (Bak.) Alston Casuarina equisetifolia L. Celtis africana Burm. f. Clausena anisata (Wild.) Benth. Clemanths longicauda Steude. Ex. A. Rich

Melianthaceae Euphorbiaceae Simaroubaceae Buddlejaceae Caesalpiniaceae Fabaceae Capparidaceae Apocynaceae Caesalpiniaceae Fabaceae Rhizophraceae Casuarinaceae Ulmaceae Rutaceae Ranunculaceae

Azamir Yenebir Tifer Waginose Anfar Yeferenji gumero Zegeta Gemero Agam Serkabeba Bisbisha Shewashewe Kewoot Limich Azo hareg

Tree Tree Shrub Tree Woody Climber Shrub Woody Climber Shrub Shrub Shrub Shrub Tree Tree Shrub Woody Climber

74

S/N

Scientific Name

Family Name

Local Name

Plant form

29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43

Clerodendron myricoides (Hochst.) R.Br.ex Vatke. Clutia abyssinica Jaub & Spach Combretum molle (R.Br. ex Don.) Engl. & Diels Cordia africana Lam. Croton macrostachyus Del.Hochest. ex. Del. Cupressus lusitanica Mill Dodonaea viscosa L.f. Dombeya quinquesteta (Del.) Exell. Dovyalis abyssinica (A. Rich.). Warb. Ekebergia capensis Sparrm. Embelia schmperi Vatke Erythrina abyssinica Lam. ex Dc Eucalyptus camaldulensis Dehnh Eucalyptus globulus Labill. Euclea racemosa subsp. schimperi (A.DC.) F.White

Verbenaceae Euphorbiaceae Combretaceae Boraginaceae Euphorbiaceae Cupressaceae Sapindaceae Sterculiaceae Flacourtiaceae Meliaceae Myrsinaceae Papilionaceae Myrtaceae Myrtaceae Ebenaceae

Misrich Feyelefej Avalo Wanza Bisana Yeferenj Tid Keteketa Wulkefa korshim Lol Enkoko Kuwara key bahirzaf Nech bahirzaf Dedeho

Shrub Shrub Tree Tree Tree Tree Shrub Tree Tree Tree Woody Climber Tree Tree Tree Shrub

75

S/N

Scientific Name

Family Name

Local Name

Plant form

44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58

Euphorbia candelabrum Kotschy. Ferula communis L. Ficus carica L. Ficus ovata Vahl. Ficus sur Forssk Ficus sycomorus L. Ficus thonningii Blume Ficus vasta Forssk Gardenia termifolia Schumach. & Thon Grewia ferruginea Hochst .ex. A. Rich Hibiscus ludwigil Eckl & Zeyha Hypericum quartinianum A Rich Jacaranda mimosifolia D. Don. Jasminum abyssinicum Hochst .ex Dc. Juniperus procera Endl

Euphorbiaceae Apiaceae Moraceae Moraceae Moraceae Moraceae Moraceae Moraceae Rubiaceae Tiliaceae Malvaceae Hypericaceae Bignoniaceae Oleaceae Cupressaceae

Kulkual Dog Belese Bambula shola Bamba Chibha Warka Gambilo Lenkuwata Nacha Amja Jacaranda Tembelel yehabesha Tid

Tree Shrub Tree Tree Tree Tree Tree Tree Tree Shrub Shrub Shrub Tree Woody climber Tree

76

S/N

Scientific Name

Family Name

Local Name

Plant form

59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73

Justicia schimperiana (Hochst. ex Nees) T. Anders. Kosteletzkya virginica (L.) K. Presl ex Gray Lantana trifolia L. Leucaena leucocephale (Lam,) De Wit Lippia citriodora Kunth. Lippia raineriana De Visiani var.rugosa (Benth.) Cuf. Maesa lanceolata Forssk. Maytenus arbutifolia (Hochst ex. A. Rich.) Wilczex. Maytenus gracilipes Supsp arguta (Loes.) Sebsebe Milletia ferruginea (Hochst.) Bak. Mimusops kummel A.DC. Myrica salicifolia Hochst. ex A.Rich. Myrsine africana L. Nuxia congesta Fresen. Ocimum lamiifolium Hochst. ex Benth.

Acanthaceae Malvaceae Verbenaceae Fabaceae Verbenaceae Verbenaceae Myrsinaceae Celastraceae Celastraceae Fabaceae Sapotaceae Myricaceae Myrsinaceae Longanaceae Lamiaceae

Semisza Yewusha nacha Yeregna Kollo Lukinia Kesie Eyohakot Kuraba/kilabo Sete Atat Wondie Atat Birbera Ishe Shinet Kechem Atikuar Dama kessie

Shrub Shrub Shrub Tree Shrub Shrub Shrub Shrub Shrub Tree Tree Tree Shrub Tree Shrub

77

S/N

Scientific Name

Family Name

Local Name

Plant form

74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81

Olea europaea (Wall. ex DC.). Ciofferri Olinia rochetiana A. Juss. Opuntuia ficus-indica (L) Miller Osyris quadripartita Decn. Otostegia integrifolia Benth. Otostegia tomentosa subsp ambigiens (chiov.) Sebald Phoenix reclinata Jacq. Phragmanthera regularis (Sprague) M. Gilbert

Oleaceae Oliniaceae Cactaceae Santalaceae Lamiaceae Lamiaceae Arecaceae Loanthaceae

Woyira Tife Beles Kulkual Keret Tinjut Tinjut Mesel Zembaba/ Selen teketela

Tree Tree Tree Tree Shrub Shrub Tree Epiphyte

82 83 84 85 86 87

Phytolacca dodecandra L. Her Pittosporum abyssinicum Hochst. ex Del. Pittosporum viridifolium Sims. Premna schimperi Engl. Protea gaguedi Gmel. Pteroloblum stellautm (Forssk.) Brenan.

Phytolacaceae Pittosporaceae Pittosporaceae Verbenaceae Proteaceae Fabaceae

Endod Ankualit dengayie Seber Checho Awura Kentefa

Woody climber Shrub Tree Shrub Shrub Woody Climber

78

S/N

Scientific Name

Family Name

Local Name

Plant form

88 89 90 91 92 93 95 94 96 97 98 99 100 101 102

Rhamnus prinoides L Herit Rhamnus staddo A. Rich. S Rhoicissus tridentate (L.f.) Wild & Drummond. Rhus glutinosa Hochst. ex A. Rich Rhus vulgaris Meikle Ricinus communis L. Rosa abyssinica Lindley Rubus apetalus Poir. Rumex nervosus (Vahl) Schefflera abyssinica (Hochst. ex A.Rich.) Securinega virosa (Roxb. ex. Wild.) Sesbania sesban (L.) Merr. Sida ovata Forsk Solanum marginatum L Solanum indicum L.

Rhamnaceae Rhamnaceae Vitidaceae Anacardiaceae Anacardiaceae Euphorbiaceae Rosaceae Rosaceae Polygonaceae Araliaceae Euphorbiaceae Papilionaceae Malvaceae Solanaceae Solanaceae

Gesho Tsedo Wodel asfes Embus kamo Gulo/ Chakma Kega Enjori Embacho Getem Wonahi sesbania chifreg Geber Embuay Embuay

Shrub Shrub Woody Climber Tree Tree Shrub Shrub Woody Climber Shrub Tree Shrub Tree Shrub Shrub Shrub

79

S/N

Scientific Name

Family Name

Local Name

Plant form

103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115

Steganotaenia araliaceae Hochst. Ex, A. Rich Stereospermum kunthianum Cham Syzygium guineense F. White Tapinanthus globiferus (A.Rich) Tiegh. Urera hypselodendron (A.Rich.) Wedd. Verbascum sinaiticum Benth Vernonia adoensis Sch-Bip ex Walp. Vernonia amygdalina Del. In Caill. Vernonia auriculifera Hiern. Vernonia leopoldii (Sch-Bip. ex Walp.) Vatke Ximenia americana L. Not determined Not determined

Apiaceae Bignoniaceae Myrtaceae Lortanthaceae Urticaceae Scrophulariaceae Asteraceae Asteraceae Asteraceae Asteraceae Oleaceae Fabaceae Fabaceae

Yejib Dola Zana Dokma Teketela Lankuso Kutintina Yeferes zeng Gerawa Kotkoto Chibo Enkoy Debenie Girar Satlash

Shrub Tree Tree Epiphyte Woody Climber Shrub Shrub Shrub Shrub Shrub Tree Tree Tree

Source: Azene Bekele (1993). Azene Bekele (2007), Dharani N. (2005), Wolde Michael Kelecha (1987) and Takhtajan A. (2009) were used for identification and classification of woody plant species.

80

Appendices 3. Location of Quadrats in Sinko community forest Quadrat no Location Alt Community X 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 377715 377663 377575 377625 377444 377381 377320 377359 377240 377261 377285 377307 377108 377191 377088 376797 y 1315732 1315540 1315561 1315682 1315501 1315456 1315375 1315321 1315673 1315825 1315922 1316026 1316093 1316302 1315888 1315950 2072 Riverine community type 2090 2112 Artificial forest Community type 2097 2137 Pterolobium stellautm- Carissa edulis community type 2155 Dodonaea viscosa- Osyris quadripartite community type 2194 Pterolobium stellautm- Carissa edulis community type 2188 2196 Dodonaea viscosa- Osyris quadripartite community type 2164 2134 Pterolobium stellautm- Carissa edulis community type 2102 Artificial forest Community type 2090 Riverine community type 2092 Artificial forest Community type 2093 Riverine community type 2137 Pterolobium stellautm- Carissa edulis community type

No. of species counted 21 16 13 7 21 16 18 20 16 20 20 9 17 7 15 20

81

Quadrat no

Location X y 376712
376388 376276 376276 375903 376184 376373 376595 376774 376870 376885 376969 376572 376373 376097 375850 375683

Alt

Community

No. of species counted 8 15 10 12 12 9 6 6 11 9 9 14 17 15 17 9 13


82

17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33

1316006
1316064 1316360 1316360 1316420 1316502 1316518 1316384 1316459 1316537 1316630 1316622 1316853 1316691 1316602 1316489 1316358

2177 Dodonaea viscosa- Osyris quadripartite community type


2281 Pterolobium stellautm- Carissa edulis community type 2240 Dodonaea viscosa- Osyris quadripartite community type 2240 2233 2187 Riverine community type 2186 Artificial forest Community type 2183 2164 Dodonaea viscosa- Osyris quadripartite community type 2159 Pterolobium stellautm- Carissa edulis community type 2142 Dodonaea viscosa- Osyris quadripartite community type 2116 Pterolobium stellautm- Carissa edulis community type 2069 2133 2165 Dodonaea viscosa- Osyris quadripartite community type 2177 2222

Quadrat no

Location X y
375320 375200 374130 373762 373918 374150 374689 374603 374536 374371 374139 373929 373795 373624 1316322 1316352 1316164 1316407 1316436 1316350 1316500 1316536 1316614 1316591 1316579 1316619 1316689 1316754

Alt

Community

No. of species counted 14 14 15 16 13 13 12 14 22 20 16 14 18 11

34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47

2231 2196 Pterolobium stellautm- Carissa edulis community type 2322 Dodonaea viscosa- Osyris quadripartite community type 2370 Pterolobium stellautm- Carissa edulis community type 2318 2275 Dodonaea viscosa- Osyris quadripartite community type 2090 Riverine community type 2117 Pterolobium stellautm- Carissa edulis community type 2132 2176 2221 2248 Dodonaea viscosa- Osyris quadripartite community type 2245 Pterolobium stellautm- Carissa edulis community type 2241

83

Appendix 4. Frequency distribution of tree/shrub species in sinko community forest %Frequency S.no Species Frequency (in 38 80.85 1 Carissa edulis 35 74.47 2 Pterolobium stellautm 30 63.83 3 Osyris quadripartita 29 61.70 4 Dodonaea viscosa 22 46.81 5 Achanthus sennii 20 42.55 6 Acacia nilotica 20 42.55 7 Croton macrostachyus 20 42.55 8 Grewia ferruginea 19 40.43 9 Capparis tomentosa 19 40.43 10 Premna schimperi 18 38.30 11 Rhus vulgaris 18 38.30 12 Rosa abyssinica 17 36.17 13 Jasminum abyssinicum 15 31.91 14 Maesa lanceolata 13 27.66 15 Combretum molle 13 27.66 16 Maytenus gracilipes 13 27.66 17 Phoenix reclinata 12 25.53 18 Bersama abyssinica 11 23.40 19 Myrsine africana 10 21.28 20 Achanthus eminens 10 21.28 21 Calpurnia aurea 10 21.28 22 Syzygium guineense 10 21.28 23 Vernonia auriculifera 9 19.15 24 Olea europaea 8 17.02 25 Clausena anisata 8 17.02 26 Clemanths longicauda 8 17.02 27 Ficus vasta 8 17.02 28 Pittosporum abyssinicum 8 17.02 29 Protea gaguedi 7 14.89 30 Acacia brevispica 6 12.77 31 Hibiscus ludwigil 6 12.77 32 Rhamnus staddo 6 12.77 33 Rhoicissus tridentate 6 12.77 34 Solanum indicum 5 10.64 35 Acacia sieberiana 5 10.64 36 Brucea antidysenterica 5 10.64 37 Cassia singueana 5 10.64 38 Cupressus lusitanica 5 10.64 39 Maytenus arbutifolia 5 10.64 40 Mimusops kummel

84

S.no 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82

Species Pittosporum viridifolium Stereospermum kunthianum Albizia schimperiana Buddleja polystachya Hypericum quartinianum Lippia citriodora Nuxia congesta Ocimum lamiifolium Otostegia tomentosa Phytolacca dodecandra Rhus glutinosa Rumex nervosus Acacia abyssinica Gardenia termifolia Otostegia integrifolia Steganotaenia araliaceae Ximenia americana Aspargus aethiopicus Dombeya quinquesteta Dovyalis abyssinica Embelia schmperi Euclea racemosa subsp. Kosteletzkya virginica Ricinus communis Rubus apetalus Vernonia adoensis Acacia seyal Apodytes dimidiata Caesalpina spinosa Celtis africana Clerodendron myricoides Clutia abyssinica Ekebergia capensis Erythrina abyssinica Eucalyptus camaldulensis Euphorbia candelabrum Ficus sur Ficus sycomorus Ficus thonningii Juniperus procera Justicia schimperiana Lippia raineriana

Frequency (in 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

%Frequency 10.64 10.64 8.51 8.51 8.51 8.51 8.51 8.51 8.51 8.51 8.51 8.51 6.38 6.38 6.38 6.38 6.38 4.26 4.26 4.26 4.26 4.26 4.26 4.26 4.26 4.26 2.13 2.13 2.13 2.13 2.13 2.13 2.13 2.13 2.13 2.13 2.13 2.13 2.13 2.13 2.13 2.13

85

S.no 83 84 85 86 87 88 8 90 91

Species Milletia ferruginea Opuntuia ficus-indica Phragmanthera regularis Rhamnus prinoides Schefflera abyssinica Sesbania sesban Solanum marginatum Verbascum sinaiticum Vernonia amygdalina

Frequency (in 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

%Frequency 2.13 2.13 2.13 2.13 2.13 2.13 2.13 2.13 2.13

Appindex 5 the IVI of species in Sinko community forest (RD, relative density, RF relative frequency, RDO relative dominance and IVI important value index) Species RD RF RDO IVI Dodonaea viscosa 37.97 4.53 0.00 42.5 Cupressus lusitanica 4.35 0.78 29.09 34.22 Syzygium guineense 0.36 1.56 13.82 15.75 Carissa edulis 7.31 5.94 0.00 13.25 Pterolobium stellautm 7.47 5.47 0.00 12.94 Ficus vasta 0.13 1.25 10.97 12.34 Eucalyptus camaldulensis 2.25 0.16 6.45 8.86 Osyris quadripartita 3.56 4.69 0.00 8.25 Mimusops kummel 0.11 0.78 6.99 7.89 Croton macrostachyus 0.67 3.13 2.90 6.69 Achanthus sennii 2.75 3.44 0.00 6.19 Acacia nilotica 1.21 3.13 1.42 5.76 Maesa lanceolata 1.72 2.34 1.60 5.67 Ficus thonningii 0.07 0.16 4.65 4.87 Rhus vulgaris 1.11 2.81 0.93 4.86 Capparis tomentosa 1.81 2.97 0.03 4.81 Bersama abyssinica 2.06 1.88 0.76 4.7 Grewia ferruginea 1.17 3.13 0.00 4.29 Albizia schimperiana 0.13 0.63 3.53 4.28 Premna schimperi 1.18 2.97 0.00 4.15 Combretum molle 0.83 2.03 1.22 4.09 Vernonia auriculifera 2.35 1.56 0.00 3.91 Rosa abyssinica 1.10 2.81 0.00 3.91 Jasminum abyssinicum 0.92 2.66 0.00 3.57 Maytenus gracilipes 1.29 2.03 0.00 3.32 Juniperus procera 0.03 0.16 3.06 3.25 Myrsine africana 1.17 1.72 0.00 2.89 Achanthus eminens 1.28 1.56 0.00 2.84 Ficus sycomorus 0.03 0.16 2.62 2.8 Stereospermum kunthianum 0.18 0.78 1.54 2.5 Calpurnia aurea 0.76 1.56 0.00 2.33 Phoenix reclinata 0.25 2.03 0.00 2.28 Olea europaea 0.57 1.41 0.18 2.15 Protea gaguedi 0.75 1.25 0.00 2 Hibiscus ludwigil 1.00 0.94 0.06 2 Pittosporum abyssinicum 0.21 1.25 0.33 1.79 Acacia abyssinica 0.08 0.47 1.24 1.79
86

Species Clausena anisata Acacia brevispica Clemanths longicauda Ficus sur Maytenus arbutifolia Rhoicissus tridentate Solanum indicum Buddleja polystachya Rumex nervosus Rhus glutinosa Rhamnus staddo Cassia singueana Lippia citriodora Celtis africana Brucea antidysenterica Pittosporum viridifolium Acacia sieberiana Apodytes dimidiata Ximenia americana Ocimum lamiifolium Schefflera abyssinica Hypericum quartinianum Otostegia integrifolia Nuxia congesta Otostegia tomentosa Embelia schmperi Steganotaenia araliaceae Phytolacca dodecandra Aspargus aethiopicus Kosteletzkya virginica Milletia ferruginea Gardenia termifolia Rubus apetalus Dombeya quinquesteta Ricinus communis Justicia schimperiana Vernonia adoensis Dovyalis abyssinica Euphorbia candelabrum Euclea racemosa subsp. Schimperi Vernonia amygdalina Opuntuia ficus-indica Sesbania sesban Clutia abyssinica Ekebergia capensis Acacia seyal Verbascum sinaiticum Phragmanthera regularis Clerodendron myricoides Caesalpina spinosa Lippia raineriana Rhamnus prinoides Solanum marginatum Erythrina abyssinica

RD

0.46 0.21 0.44 0.01 0.53 0.32 0.29 0.25 0.54 0.19 0.21 0.35 0.50 0.03 0.28 0.28 0.11 0.01 0.15 0.32 0.01 0.26 0.42 0.13 0.19 0.39 0.10 0.03 0.33 0.25 0.04 0.06 0.21 0.18 0.11 0.31 0.14 0.06 0.03 0.04 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.15 0.01 0.04 0.07 0.06 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.01

RF

1.25 1.09 1.25 0.16 0.78 0.94 0.94 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.94 0.78 0.63 0.16 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.16 0.47 0.63 0.16 0.63 0.47 0.63 0.63 0.31 0.47 0.63 0.31 0.31 0.16 0.47 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.16 0.31 0.31 0.16 0.31 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16

RDO

0.05 0.42 0.00 1.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.34 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.93 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.82 0.35 0.00 0.73 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.18 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01

IVI

1.76 1.72 1.69 1.67 1.31 1.26 1.23 1.22 1.17 1.15 1.15 1.13 1.13 1.12 1.06 1.06 1 0.99 0.98 0.94 0.9 0.89 0.89 0.84 0.82 0.7 0.69 0.65 0.65 0.56 0.55 0.52 0.52 0.49 0.48 0.46 0.45 0.37 0.37 0.35 0.34 0.32 0.32 0.31 0.3 0.23 0.23 0.21 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.18 0.18 0.18

87

Appendix .6 Different ground control points for classification. Farm land x y Alt code 640 379132 1317852 2041 643 379249 1318892 1994 644 379149 1319943 1985 645 379525 1319035 2007 646 379546 1318565 2007 663 379146 1316308 2092 680 378797 1316647 2076 681 378224 1316307 2053 698 377616 1316564 2045 714 376803 1317150 2008 722 375012 1316197 2203 Grazingland 641 379287 1318261 2022 648 378903 1316652 2071 652 379165 1316644 2062 653 379124 1316871 2050 654 378983 1317379 2048 655 378993 1317480 2044 670 377940 1316767 2047 679 378840 1316676 2039 728 376949 1317105 2017

location /place name Gibat Meda Adiza adiza Shenti Ayilebso Golem Afaf Godir hurich Agua Near to Medahnialem church Bekilo Manekia Gibat Meda Godir Godir Godir Kanikana Kanikana Agua Godir Sinko

Forestland 649 650 651 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 664 665 666 667 668 669 379786 379887 380093 385181 384794 384814 384651 384740 384521 383666 378781 377610 377447 377331 377267 377202 1316116 1316024 1315860 1318649 1318140 1318001 1317922 1318267 1318109 1317839 1316289 1315776 1315670 1315971 1315989 1316025 2109 2115 2148 2259 2216 2190 2222 2233 2238 2184 2103 2079 2116 2114 2120 2109 kuskuam kuskuam kuskuam Alemsaga Alemsaga Alemsaga Alemsaga Alemsaga Alemsaga Alemsaga Hurch Hurch Hurch Hurch Hurch Hurch

88

671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678

376815 376598 376538 376187 375956 375884 376376 376638

1316561 1316320 1316270 1316507 1316488 1316437 1316554 1316509

2126 2188 2209 2190 2222 2223 2174 2155

Sinko Sinko Sinko Sinko Sinko Sinko Sinko Sinko

89

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH The author was borned in may1971 in Amhara Region, Alember town. He attended his elementary and secondary school education at Alember Elementary school and Theodros II secondary school, respectively. He then joined Asmara University in September 1989 in life science. Due to the current political situations of the country he was transferred to Haramaya university of Agriculture in September 1991 and graduated with BSc Degree in Arid land soil and water conservation in August1992. After graduation, he was employed in Wagihimira Administrative zone and West Gojjam administrative zone where he served as soil and water conservation expert and In Amhara regional state Culture, tourism and parks development Bureau where he was served as wildlife study expert since 2011. The author joined the School of Graduate Studies of Bahir Dar University summer program in 2011 to study his Master of Science degree in Land resource management.

90