Standards for optimum forest cover. Is there any minimum standard prescribed by a United Nations (UN) body or any other international organization regarding the "optimum percent area of a country that should be under the forest/tree cover to maintain a healthy environment, and ecological balance?" -- Jagdish Kishwan, New Delhi, India
It is not possible to set a uniform standard for forest cover across all countries. FAO certainly would not take such position nor would any other responsible UN or international organization. What might be "optimum" in one country may be unreasonable, or even ridiculous, in another. For example, many countries with large areas of desert that may not be able to reasonably achieve even a 5 percent forest cover. Some mountainous countries may find it "optimum" to have a very high forest cover to help protect against soil erosion, landslides, etc. Countries with flat topography may find that a lower percentage of forest cover is "optimum."
There are also "optimums" for different objectives. A country that has a thriving forest-based economic sector will want to maintain more forest cover than a country without such dependence. You are asking about minimum standards of forest cover "to maintain a healthy environment," but again, I would contend these range greatly from location to location depending on the fragility of the environment, the amount of biodiversity to be protected, etc. - Patrick B. Durst, Senior Forestry Officer, FAO/RAPO
APANews in Chinese. We have a national agroforestry and vetiver network with over 1 000 members. We would like to request more copies of APANews to be distributed more widely in China. At present, we are considering translating APANews into Chinese. We produced Agroforestry Today in Chinese for eight years (1993 to 2000). In the first three years, we got support from ICRAF, but later we generated our own funds. With ICRAF, we also organized an International Workshop on Alternatives to Slash-and-Burn Agriculture in Kunming in 1995 and published the book entitled "Alternatives to slash-and burn agriculture" in both Chinese and English in 1996. By translating APANews into Chinese, we can introduce foreign experience to China (e.g. chestnut/wheat/sweetpotato intercropping) and we can also collect China’s experience and extend them to foreign countries. We hope FAO/RAP could kindly provide limited financial support for the production of APANews into Chinese since Chinese people (including scientists) have difficulty reading English books. APANews in Chinese will surely help promote agroforestry research and development in China and the pacific Region. -- Prof. Liyu Xu, China Vetiver Network
Indeed, it would be a great compliment to our ongoing efforts and a privilege for us if you would translate APANews into Chinese and distribute it to your domestic Chinese network. As you pointed out, this would serve well to inform Chinese agroforestry practitioners of developments in other parts of the region and the world, and open the window to increased collaboration between Chinese agroforestry specialists and others outside the country. I would like to explore options on how FAO might support the translation of APANews. It would be helpful if you could provide us with a simple proposal including costs for translation, production, distribution, and the costs that your institution could provide. - Patrick B. Durst, Senior Forestry Officer, FAO/RAPO
Erratum in APANews No. 21. In the article "Important fodder trees in Nepal" on page 18, the name of the native fodder tree should be badhar (Artocarpus lakoocha). -
Rameshwar Singh
Pande
([email protected])
