Two decades of community forestry in Nepal: What have we learned?

Two decades of community forestry in Nepal: What have we learned?
Indra B. Shrestha, a member of Golamtar Palekoban CFUG, explains how this is handled
in her CFUG. “We carry out cleaning operations annually in various blocks in a rotational
basis, and have harvested almost half the large trees in the area. They have been replaced
by more and diverse tree species. It is now so visible that these operations have enhanced
forest health in terms of diversity, as well as fulfi lling users’ demands for forest products.
Rotational grazing has been promoted in certain months, when people are allowed to graze
a limited number of animals in particular blocks.”
Narayan Khadka, member of Sakshat Seti Devi CFUG, Ramechhap, comments “…we have
put fi re line construction as an important activity in our annual plan. We do it and it has been
effective, because unlike in the past we have had few incidences of fi re in recent years, and
we have been able to fi ght against it on the few occasions that it has occurred.”
Similarly, Thulo CFUG in Rampur, Ramechhap, has on its own initiative undertaken actions
to minimize the impact of landslides along a road corridor of some 1.5 km. The CFUG
collaborated with the District Soil Conservation Offi ce to plant grasses and bamboo. These
provide the dual benefi ts of soil stabilisation and fodder that can be cut for livestock.
As part of project support for innovative community forest management, a number
of demonstration plots – known as Community Forest Management School
(CFMS) plots - were established in the three project districts. The idea, borrowed
from the well-known concept in the agricultural sector of Farmer Field Schools,
was to give forest users the opportunity to test different management regimes.
Five CFMS were established with project support in each district; in Ramechhap,
a further fi ve were established through DFO support. In all cases the
differentiated management was started with enthusiasm, and records maintained
for a few years. After this, however, the rigour of management declined – mainly as
a result of the diffi culty (near impossibility) for project or DFO staff to visit the plots,
which led to a drop in the motivation of CFUG users.
“In most cases Community Forest Management School (CFMS) plots were established and
measurements taken for some years, but later they were left unattended and unmanaged.
It was diffi cult for villagers to maintain them with all the tables and fi gures in the register
without technical support from the DFO staff. Although villagers were still willing to continue
the management of the experimental plots, they had diffi culties in understanding technical
terms and volume tables, and no incentive to do so. In one case the person who was
trained for the CFMS left the village for [employment in] the Gulf and his replacement has
not yet received training”.
Surya Kumar Maharjan, Forest Consultant for NSCFP
It was unfortunate that at the same time that knowledge and skills in multi-purpose
forest management were being harnessed in the project area, the civil confl ict was
escalating. This meant that visits to forest areas by project or Forest Department
staff – or indeed gatherings of forest users – became dangerous. Forests were
perceived by the security forces as being hiding grounds for Maoists, and as a
result sometimes community forests were felled, or at least the understory removed.
Over the period 2003 – 2006, the project was strongly hindered from conducting
any innovative forest management activities. During and after that time, the project
focus shifted to other issues such as gender, equity and poverty (in line with SDC
55