yacumama forest carbon project - amazon s3...project description vcs version 3, ccb standards second...
TRANSCRIPT
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
1
YACUMAMA FOREST CARBON PROJECT
Document Prepared By Conservation Management Institute at Virginia Tech-College of Natural Resources and Environment
Project Title Yacumama Forest Carbon Project
Version 1.1
Date of Issue DD-Month-YYYY this version of the document issued
Prepared By Dr. Verl Emrick, Research Scientist Virginia Tech Conservation Management
Institute
Contact Verl Emrick Ph.D. Research Scientist-Ecologist Conservation Management Institute Virginia Tech College of Natural Resources and Environment 1900 Kraft Drive Blacksburg,VA 24061 540-231-8851 cmi.vt.edu
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 General .................................................................................................................................... 4
1.1 Summary Description of the Project (G3)........................................................................ 4 1.2 Project Location (G1 & G3) ............................................................................................. 4
1.3 Conditions Prior to Project Initiation (G1) ..................................................................... 12 1.4 Project Proponent (G4)................................................................................................... 23 1.5 Other Entities Involved in the Project (G4) ................................................................... 23 1.6 Project Start Date (G3) ................................................................................................... 24 1.7 Project Crediting Period (G3) ........................................................................................ 24
2 Design ................................................................................................................................... 25 2.1 Sectoral Scope and Project Type .................................................................................... 25
2.2 Description of the Project Activity (G3) ........................................................................ 25 2.3 Management of Risks to Project Benefits (G3) ............................................................. 27 2.4 Measures to Maintain High Conservation Values (G3) ................................................. 27 2.5 Project Financing (G3 & G4) ......................................................................................... 27
2.6 Employment Opportunities and Worker Safety (G4) .................................................... 27 2.7 Stakeholders (G3) ........................................................................................................... 29
2.8 Commercially Sensitive Information ............................................................................. 32 3 Legal Status ........................................................................................................................... 32
3.1 Compliance with Laws, Statues, Property Rights & Other Regulatory Frameworks (G4
& G5) 32 3.2 Evidence of Right of Use (G5) ....................................................................................... 33
3.3 Emissions Trading Programs and Other Binding Limits (CL1) .................................... 33
3.4 Participation under Other GHG Programs (CL1) .......................................................... 33
3.5 Other Forms of Environmental Credit (CL1) ................................................................. 33 3.6 Projects Rejected by Other GHG Programs (CL1) ........................................................ 33
3.7 Respect for Rights and No Involuntary Relocation (G5) ............................................... 34 3.8 Illegal Activities and Project Benefits (G5) ................................................................... 34
4 Application of Methodology ................................................................................................. 34
4.1 Title and Reference of Methodology ............................................................................. 34 4.2 Applicability of Methodology ........................................................................................ 35 4.3 Methodology Deviations ................................................................................................ 36 4.4 Project Boundary (G1) ................................................................................................... 36
4.5 Baseline Scenario (G2)................................................................................................... 38 4.6 Additionality (G2) .......................................................................................................... 39
5 Quantificaton of GHG Emission Reductions and REmovals (Climate) ............................... 43
5.1 Project Scale and Estimated GHG Emission Reductions or Removals ......................... 43 5.2 Leakage Management (CL2) .......................................................................................... 44 5.3 Baseline Emissions (G2) ................................................................................................ 44 5.4 Project Emissions (CL1) ................................................................................................ 47
5.5 Leakage (CL2)................................................................................................................ 48 5.6 Summary of GHG Emission Reductions and Removals (CL1 & CL2) ......................... 49 5.7 Climate Change Adaptation Benefits (GL1) .................................................................. 51
6 Community ........................................................................................................................... 51
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
3
6.1 Net Positive Community Impacts (CM1) ...................................................................... 51 6.2 Negative Offsite Stakeholder impacts (CM2) ................................................................ 54 6.3 Exceptional Community Benefits (GL2) ....................................................................... 55
7 Biodiversity ........................................................................................................................... 55
7.1 Net Positive Biodiversity Impacts (B1) ......................................................................... 55 7.2 Negative Offsite Biodiversity Impacts (B2)................................................................... 56 7.3 Exceptional Biodiversity Benefits (GL3) ....................................................................... 56
8 Monitoring ............................................................................................................................ 56 8.1 Description of the Monitoring Plan (CL3, CM3 & B3) ................................................. 56
8.2 Data and Parameters Available at Validation (CL3) ...................................................... 60 8.3 Data and Parameters Monitored (CL3, CM3 & B3) ...................................................... 64
9 References and Literature Consulted ................................................................................... 70
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
4
1 GENERAL
1.1 Summary Description of the Project (G3)
The overall goal for the Yacumama Forest Carbon Project (“Project”) is to protect and conserve the
tropical lowland floodplain forest on Yacumama, a privately held lodge, research, education, and
conservation area, in the Amazon Basin of Peru, for long-term carbon sequestration. In addition, the
Project also serves to protect, maintain, and (for some taxa) improve native biodiversity while supporting
local community livelihoods by increasing sustainable economic opportunities. The climate objective for
the Project is to avoid emissions from deforestation and degradation. The entire property including the
Project Area will, by economic necessity, be sold by the owners in the absence of funding from carbon
financing. Because the owners have legal permission to harvest the entire property, which under
Peruvian law transfers with the sale, the most likely buyer would be a company who would harvest the
entire property, sell the valuable wood, burn the remaining woody biomass, and implement agricultural
conversion on the fertile floodplain soils.
There are three explicit Project objectives:
The climate objective is to avoid emissions from land clearing and conversion to agriculture.
The community objectives are to increase economic opportunities for local villagers through
employment and increased access to health care.
The biodiversity objective is to protect and maintain the native biodiversity.
1.2 Project Location (G1 & G3)
The Yacumama Forest Carbon Project is located in the Peruvian Amazon Basin approximately 15 km
straight line upstream from the confluence of the Rio Marañon and Rio Ucayali which join to form the
Amazon River. The Yacumama property boundary encompasses (3,299 ha) of tropical rainforest, of
which (2,992 ha) are available for conversion to agricultural uses in the absence of carbon financing. The
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
5
Project Area is located at latitude -4° 34’ 03.26’’ North, and at longitude -73° 27’ 04.64’’ East in the Loreto
District, Peru roughly 90 km south of the city of Iquitos (Figures 1, 2, 3).
Figure 1: Yacumama Forest Carbon Project location at a continental scale.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
6
Figure 2: Yacumama Forest Carbon Project location at a regional scale.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
7
Figure 3: Yacumama Forest Carbon Project at a local scale.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
8
Climate, Soils and Hydrology
The upper Peruvian Amazon Basin (Figure 2) where the Project is located has a lowland tropical climate
characterized by high heat / humidity and substantial rainfall throughout the year. Mean annual
temperature in Jenaro Herrera1 is 25.9°C with a mean annual rainfall of 2715 mm (Kvist and Nebel 2001).
While precipitation occurs throughout the year April typically has the highest rainfall and July the lowest
rainfall.
Soils of Yacumama are classified as entisols which are soils of recent origin that developed from
unconsolidated parent material that have little development of pedogenic horizons except an “A” horizon.
Within the Project area there are two identified soil subgroups Typic Hydraquents and Typic Fluvaquent
(Nebel et al. 2001b). Each subgroup has an upper “A” horizon 5–10 cm thick above an incipient “B”
horizon extending to approximately 150 cm. The “B” horizon has a high clay content (generally exceeding
50%), but the fraction of sandy material increases with depth (Nebel et al. 2001b). These subgroups are
characterized by little faunal activity in all horizons likely due to yearly inundation.
The upper Peruvian Amazon Basin, defined as the region above the confluence of the Rio Ucayali and
Rio Marañon (Figure 2), is affected by significant yearly flooding events that temporarily inundate large
tracts of tropical forest. On average, flood stages peak in April and drop to their lowest in August (Lamotte
1990), but can be quite variable from year to year (Kvist and Nebel 2001). It is estimated that about 12%
of the region (over 60,000 km2) are exposed to annual flooding in the Peruvian Amazon Basin (Kvist and
Nebel 2001, Salo et al. 1986). Water levels on the Ucayali can shift 9-10 m per year from its lowest to
highest points (Lamotte 1990). The annual flooding is a natural part of the system and integral to
ecosystem processes. Flood waters originating in the Andes Mountains carry large sediment loads that
deposit essential plant nutrients as the flood waters recede. During the highest peak of flooding, almost
the entire Yacumama property can be inundated. Thus, depending upon the time of year, the forest at
Yacumama provides critical habitat for not only terrestrial species but aquatic species as well.
1 The closest town with climate information available is Jenaro Herrera, a small river town situated on the
Rio Ucayali, approximately 44 km southwest of the Yacumama Lodge.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
9
The color of the streams and rivers of the Amazon Basin (i.e. white-water, black-water, and clear-water)
provide important clues to the origin, nutrient content, and even fish species assemblages (Kvist and
Nebel 2001, Saint-Paul et al. 2000). White-water rivers are turbid, nutrient rich, and muddy in color due to
the large amount of suspended sediment from runoff originating in the Andes Mountains (Kvist and Nebel
2001). White-water rivers are the most common type in the Peruvian Amazon Basin, including the two
major tributaries forming the Amazon River, the Rio Ucayali and the Rio Marañon. Clear-water rivers
originate in geologically older areas with little erosion, hold little suspended sediments, are nutrient poor,
and are a fairly uncommon river type in Peru. Black-water rivers which are common in the Peruvian
Amazon Basin get their color from slowly degrading phenolic substances in leaves (e.g. tannins)
originating in poorly drained swampy areas (Kvist and Nebel 2001). The Rio Yarapa on which Yacumama
in located and which bisects much of the Project Area (Figure 3) is considered a black-water river.
However, streams and rivers may also change water types during different times of the year which is true
of the Rio Yarapa (Kvist and Nebel 2001). A river that is black-water for the majority of the year can
become white-water during the annual flood stage due to the increased sediments collected during high-
water periods. Portions of the Yacumama property are influenced by white-water coming from the nearby
Rio Cumaseba and Rio Ucayali which mix with the Rio Yarapa during high flood stage.
Project Zone and Project Area
The Project Zone (Figure 4) for the Project encompasses three lodges on the Rio Yarapa and nearby Rio
Cumaseba in addition to the village of Puerto Miguel. The Project area for the Project encompasses the
entire Yacumama property with the exception of a small parcel on which the lodge buildings and other
infrastructure are situated (Figure 5).
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
10
Figure 4: Project Zone for Yacumama Forest Carbon Project.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
11
Figure 5: Project Area for Yacumama Forest Carbon Project.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
12
1.3 Conditions Prior to Project Initiation (G1)
The property now known as Yacumama was purchased in in 1992 with the intent of developing a lodge
and private conservation area to support ecotourism and promote education, research, and conservation
of biodiversity (Table 1). From 1992-1994 lodge buildings and other infrastructure were constructed to
support the ecotourism operation. In addition the relationship with the local village of Puerto Miguel
(Figure 5) began in earnest as workers were hired and local goods and services were procured. By 1995
the lodge was fully operational and being promoted internationally. From 1995-2001 business was
running smoothly for Yacumama and there were continued improvements to infrastructure and expanded
lodge facilities were constructed. During this time period, Yacumama management built and supplied a
health care clinic in Puerto Miguel and assisted in the development of a local women’s cooperative to sell
local arts and crafts to visitors. In September 2001 the terrorist attacks in the United States caused an
immediate cessation of new reservations and cancellation of all previously booked guests. Because of the
absence of business, the lodge was forced to close and the facilities were ‘mothballed’ from 2002-2004
leaving only a skeleton staff to provide security and limited maintenance. During 2005-2006 the lodge
underwent renovations and updates in anticipation of re-opening. By 2007 as the world economy
experienced recession the management of Yacumama began to promote and focus on conservation
education and scientific research instead of tourism as a strategy to expand their clientel. However in
2008 a fire in the main lodge damaged much of the building and other infrastructure prompting the
management to again close Yacumama. By 2009 Yacumama management had determined that the
ecotourism model for maintaining the property was uncertain and a different approach was required.
Because of the cost of maintaining the facility, Yacumama and the surrounding property would have to be
sold if alternative income was not realized. Yacumama management decided to undertake limited logging
operations and obtained necessary permits from the Government of Peru. After initial logging and
exporting of lumber, Yacumama management came to the conclusion that to make sufficient income to
maintain the property a large-scale logging operation was required which left two options: 1) contract a
logging company to cut, mill and export the lumber, or 2) sell the property. Yacumama management
considered option 2 the best alternative from an economic standpoint for several reasons. First and
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
13
foremost the property has abundant and valuable hardwood trees, the property can be sold at a premium
since logging and exporting of wood products had already been approved by the Government of Peru,
and Yacumama management could recoup their entire financial investment. As a result, at the end of
2009 management concluded that there were two economic options: 1) sell the property which would
result in the large-scale logging of the property, or 2) pursue carbon financing to maintain and protect the
property and the associated biodiversity and ecosystem services.
Table 1: History of Yacumama lodge and conservation area.
Year Event Notes
1992-1993
Purchase of property
Property was purchased from the Government of Peru for the purpose of developing an ecotourism lodge to provide income to conserve the
property. Official land survey was conducted.
1993-1994
Infrastructure development
Building of lodge, bungalows and infrastructure to support ecotourism operation. Interaction with local communities begins in earnest (i.e. local
workers, purchasing agricultural goods etc.).
1994-1995
Opening of Yacumama lodge
Promotion and client development focusing on educational tourism.
1995-2001
Yacumama lodge operation
Expansion of lodge facilities to meet the needs of larger groups. Continued improvement in infrastructure.
2001-2002
Tourism declines substantially
The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 caused an immediate cessation of tourism for Yacumama. All previously booked groups cancel. Lodge closes due to lack of bookings and is mothballed.
2002- 2004
Yacumama lodge closed
Skeleton staff is maintained for security and maintenance of lodge facilities. Core infrastructure is maintained by cannibalizing other
superfluous facilities.
2005-2006
Yacumama lodge refurbishment
Based upon improving economic conditions and the potential for increased tourism Yacumama refurbishes and updates lodge facilities in anticipation of re-opening. During this period Yacumama also funds the
building of a health clinic in the village of Puerto Miguel.
2007-2008
Yacumama lodge refocus
Because of the international economic slowdown bookings were reduced. Yacumama management decides to increasingly focus on
education and scientific research.
2008 Partial destruction of lodge facilities
by fire
Fire partially destroys lodge facilities and results in closure as a tourist lodge. Lodge is mothballed and skeleton staff is maintained for security
and maintenance of lodge facilities.
2009 Alternative income from logging
Due to the cost of maintaining the facility Yacumama and the surrounding property would have to be sold if alternative income is not realized. Yacumama management undertakes logging operations and
obtains necessary permits from Government of Peru. After initial logging and exporting of lumber Yacumama management came to the
conclusion that to make sufficient income to maintain the property a large-scale logging operation was required.
2009-2010
Forest management
At the end of 2009 management decided that there were two economic options:1) engage in the large-scale logging of the property, or 2) pursue
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
14
PROJECT ZONE (Figure 4)
Current Land Use
The Project does not encroach upon community property. The property is privately held, and no
approvals are required from the Government of Peru or the local communities. There is no historical
context of communities living on the property and no ongoing property disputes with the Project property.
Within the Project Zone there are three active lodges; Dolphin Corners, Renaco, Jungle Walk, and the
village of Puerto Miguel.
Land use related to ecotourism in the Project Zone involves activities to support tourists and gathering of
forest products to support lodge infrastructure and operations. Tourists travel through the area by boat for
variety of activities such as bird watching, photography and sport fishing. Small trails near the lodges are
used but generally have minimal impact on forest resources. Lodges do gather palm fronds for roofing
material and some wood is harvested to build and maintain lodge infrastructure in the immediate vicinity
of the lodges.
Puerto Miguel, with a population of approximately 1000 individuals, uses the land within the Project Zone
to provide a variety of resources. Wood and palm fronds are harvested and used to build and roof
houses, local meeting establishments and build boats. While non-timber forests products are gathered for
both food and medicine. Intensive agriculture is practiced in the cleared areas surrounding the village and
along the major rivers as yearly floodwaters subside. Farming is supplemented by subsistence fishing
and hunting throughout the Project Zone though hunting pressure is most intense near navigable rivers
and streams. Increasingly the local population combines agriculture, fishing, hunting, and extraction of
forest resources into a suite of products that they can bring to market. The growing population coupled
with the increased need for monetary incomes combined with external economic interests will increasingly
endanger important resources within the Project Zone (Kvist and Nebel 2001).
decisions forest carbon financing to maintain the property.
2010-Present
Forest carbon project
Yacumama explicitly begins a forest carbon project.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
15
Current Biodiversity within Project Zone
The Project Zone is located in the western Amazon Basin which is widely considered one of the most
biodiverse regions on the planet with a high diversity of plants, insects, mammals, amphibians and birds
(Finer et al. 2008, Schulman et al. 2007). The floodplain ecosystems of the Peruvian Amazon Basin have
the highest species richness compared to all other floodplain forests worldwide (Wittman et al. 2011,
Finer et al. 2008). The Yacumana Project Zone and Project Area represent typical species richness of the
western Amazon Basin in their diversity of fauna and flora.
PROJECT AREA (Figure 5)
Vegetation
Yacumama is part of the Amazon Basin mixed-water flooded forest and riparian vegetation ecological
system as defined by Josse et al. (2007) (Figure 6). More commonly, the forests at Yacumama are
described and classified as tropical lowland floodplain rainforest. The floodplain forests of this region
alternate between terrestrial and aquatic phases, impacted by floodwaters from 1-6 months per year
based on topography. Nebel et al. (2001b) provides thorough treatment of the tree species composition
on the floodplain forests of the Peruvian Amazon. The nutrient availability of the soils of floodplain forests
are heavily influenced by the type of stream or river that seasonally floods the forest (Kvist and Nebel
2001). The relatively nutrient rich white-water rivers supply more sediment to forests than clear-water or
black-water rivers. The Rio Yarapa is generally classified as a black-water river but during flood stage the
Rio Yarapa carries a significant amount of sediment and resembles a white-water river thus increasing
the amount of sediments and nutrients delivered to the forests of Yacumama.
Within the floodplain forests, two different habitat types have been described primarily based on the
duration of inundation, restinga and tahuampa. Restinga is a riverine mixed forest habitat that occurs on
the highest portions of the flood plain forest and is only inundated for 1-3 months a year (Kvist and Nebel
2001). Tahuampa is also a riverine mixed forest habitat, occurs on lower terrain than restinga, and is
typically inundated from 3-6 months a year. Soils of both restinga and tahuampa are usually well-drained,
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
16
and the tree species are resilient against long periods of inundation. Factors such as amplitude,
frequency, and duration of flooding play a role in determining species composition, due to the fact that
different species have varying tolerances to flooding (Kvist and Nebel 2001). There are no clear cut
transitions between habitat types, and intermediate zones will have a mix of species from both restinga
and tahuampa (Kvist and Nebel 2001). Nebel et al. (2001b) examined in detail the floristic composition of
both restinga and tahuampa habitat types. In addition, Nebel et al. (2001b) found the highest species
richness in the low restinga, and tahuampa, suggesting that plant diversity is related to inundation period.
The proximity of habitat types to a river system is often an indicator of the age of the forest because of the
constantly changing course of the river. The meandering nature of rivers in the floodplain contributes to
the diversity of the region, creating a mosaic of different aged forests as it migrates (Salo et al. 1986).
Communities
There are no communities located within the Project Area.
Carbon Stocks
The approach to measuring carbon stocks in the Project Area is based upon the Sourcebook for Land
Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry Projects (Pearson et al. 2005). These methods comply with the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s 2006 Guidelines for National GHG Inventories for
Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
17
Figure 6: Land Cover at Yacumama Forest Carbon Project
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
18
Carbon Pools
The carbon pools selected for measurements were the above ground tree > 5 cm diameter-at-breast-
height (DBH) and below ground biomass. Aboveground non-tree biomass (lianas and palms), down or
standing dead wood, and leaf litter were not measured, which resulted in a conservative estimation of
carbon stocks (Table 2).
Table 2: Carbon pools measured and excluded from the baseline analysis for the project.
Carbon Pools Included / Excluded Justification / Explanation of Choice
Above ground biomass. Included. A major component of Project.
Below ground biomass. Included. A major component of Project.
Dead-wood. Excluded. Excluded to be conservative and make the monitoring cost-effective.
Harvested wood products. Excluded. The standard practice in Peru for conversion of forest to agricultural lands is to remove valuable timber species and then bulldoze
and burn the remaining trees. This pool was analyzed for significance and found to be de
minimis.
Litter. Excluded. Excluded to be conservative and make the monitoring cost-effective.
Soil organic carbon. Excluded. Excluded to be conservative and make the monitoring cost-effective.
Current carbon stocks in the above ground and below ground pools on Project site were determined to be
103.74 tons carbon per hectares.
Field Measurements
The estimated number of forest plots needed for the Project Area was calculated using published forest
biomass data (Nebel et al. 2001a) and the Winrock International Sampling Calculator.2 Nebel et al.
(2001a) reported mean above-ground biomass with 95% confidence limits from a 4-year study near
Jenaro Herrera, Peru, a town estimated to be roughly 50 km southwest of Yacumama Lodge. The study
included means for restinga, tahuampa, and all sites. The mean for all plots was used since both restinga
and tahuampa occur on Yacumama property, and the inability to distinguish and map vegetation types
2 http://www.winrock.org/Ecosystems/tools.asp
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
19
using remote sensing. Based on 1 ha forest plots, Nebel et al. (2001a) reported 39,682 ± 2894 g / m2,
which converts to 198.41 carbon tons/ha with a 22.15 ton / ha standard deviation. Using the total area of
the Yacumama property, the Winrock International Sampling Calculator estimated 19 forest plots were
needed to achieve a 95% confidence interval. CMI allocated 26 forest plots to ensure the full range of
variability was captured. Using an automated random point generator, the plots were distributed
throughout the Project Area (Figure 3).
Because destructive sampling was not practical to measure above ground carbon stocks, published
allometric equations were used to determine aboveground biomass based upon the DBH of hardwood
trees. Field data collection was based on the nested circular plot design described in Pearson et al.
(2005). All living trees within 4 m radius of the plot center with a minimum diameter of 5.0 cm DBH were
measured using a DBH tape. Each tree was examined to make sure it was alive, and identified by local
guides whenever possible. Trees greater than or equal to 5.0 cm DBH were labeled with a unique
numbered tag, and the DBH, local name, and tag ID were recorded. Once all of the trees within the 4.0 m
radius were measured, trees greater than or equal to 20.0 cm DBH were measured and recorded within
14.0 m radius of the plot center. Once all of the 20.0 cm DBH trees were measured within 14.0 m of the
plot center, any trees within 20.0 m of the plot center greater than or equal to 50.0 cm DBH were
measured.
Carbon Stock Calculation
Data collected were entered into spreadsheets following field data collection. Unaltered field data
underwent quality assurance / quality control analysis by another CMI staff, double checking all diameter
values, and tree tag numbers. For each tagged tree, aboveground biomass (kg) was estimated using the
tropical wet forest equation from Pearson et al. (2005). The aboveground biomass for each tree was
converted from kilograms to tons (divided by 1000), followed by a conversion of total aboveground
biomass to aboveground carbon stock by multiplying the mass by the carbon fraction of biomass (0.47).
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
20
Belowground biomass for each tree was estimated by multiplying the aboveground biomass of the tree by
the tropical rainforest root to shoot ratio 0.37 presented in Table 4.4 of the IPCC GL AFOLU.
Table 3: Potential allometric equations available for Yacumama forest carbon calculations.
Type Rainfall (mm / yr)
Source Equation
Tree (AGB) Moist
Tropical
1500-4000 Pearson et al. 2005
AGB = exp(-2.289 + 2.649 * ln(D) - 0.021 * ln(D2)
Tree (AGB) Wet Tropical
>4000 Pearson et al. 2005
AGB= 21.297 – 6.953 * (D) + 0.740 * (D2)
Tree (AGB) Moist
Tropical
1500-3000 Chave et al. 2005
AGB = ρ * exp(-1.499 + 2.148 ln(D) + 0.207 (ln(D))2 - 0.0281
(ln(D))3)
AGB = aboveground biomass
D = diameter at breast height
ρ = wood density (0.55 from Reyes et al. 1992)
Legal Property Rights
The entire Yacumama property is privately owned and is divided into three parcels (Table 4)
Table 4: Land ownership for the entire Yacumama lodge property.
Parcel Owners Area (ha) Within Project Area (y / n)
1 (Yacumama) Yacumama Ltd. 300 No
2 (Yacurana) Lawrence Bishop 1499 Yes
3 (Santuario Privado) Lawrence Bishop & Adriana Bishop 1500 Yes
Project Area Biodiversity
As previously discussed the Peruvian Amazon Basin in general has a high level of biodiversity and
specifically the “Amazon mixed-water flooded forest and riparian vegetation ecosystem” in which the
Project is located is considered the most bio-diverse floodplain ecosystem in the world (Wittman et al.
2011). Biologists from the Virginia Tech Conservation Management Institute (CMI) documented
vertebrate fauna in two separate field trips in 2013 to support the Project. These fauna included incidental
observations of birds, mammals, reptiles, amphibians and fish. CMI biologists identified 106 bird species,
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
21
19 mammal species, 7 reptile species, 7 amphibian species, and 20 fish species. In addition, the
Peruvian ornithologist Thomas Valqui conducted a survey of the birds surrounding the Yacumama lodge
in1995 and identified 220 bird species (Valqui 1996). Biologists with CMI added an additional 26 species
that had not been previously documented, bringing the total documented bird species to 246.
According to the IUCN Red List of threatened and endangered species (v 3.1 31 July 2013), 4 species
CMI observed are classified and Near Threatened (NT) and 5 as Vulnerable (VU) (Table 5). The NT
species include: White-Throated Tinamou (Tinamus guttatus), Marbled Wood-Quail (Odontophorus
gujanensis), Orange-Cheeked Parrot (Pyrilia barrabandi), and Jaguar (Panthera onca). The VU species
were: Great Tinamou (Tinamus tao), Agami Heron (Agamia agami), White-Bellied Parrot (Pionites
leucogaster), Common Wooly Monkey (Lagothrix lagothricha), and Brazilian Tapir (Tapirus terrestris). Of
the species detected whose status and population trends have been evaluated by IUCN, 51% were
experiencing population declines, 12% are increasing and 36% are stable (v 3.1 31 July 2013) (Table 5).
CMI also detected 11 species (3 bird and 8 mammal species) that were identified as important faunal
resources within the region each which are currently negatively influenced by human activities (Kvist and
Nebel 2001, Soni et al. 1996).
High Conservation Values
An assessment and evaluation of High Conservation Values (HCV) within the Project Zone and Project
Area is shown in Table 6. This Project addresses multiple HCV in the form of threatened species (8.1.B)
support significant concentrations of Pink River Dolphins (Inia geoffrensis) (8.1.B). In addition, the Rio
Yarapa which bisects the property and Project Area is an important subsistence fishing resource for the
local population (8.5).
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
22
Table 5: Summary of IUCN Near Threatened and Vulnerable species identified in the Project Area.
Common Name
Scientific Name IUCN Red List Classification
Population Trend
With Project
Without Project
Common Wooly
Monkey
Lagothrix lagothricha
Vulnerable A3cd Decreasing Reduction in hunting
pressure
Illegal hunting and Habitat
loss
Great Tinamou
Tinamus tao Vulnerable A3c Decreasing No change Habitat loss
Agami Heron Agamia agami Vulnerable A3c Unknown No change Habitat loss
White-Bellied Parrot
Pionites leucogaster
Vulnerable A3c Stable No change Habitat loss
Brazilian Tapir
Tapirus terrestris Vulnerable A2cde+3cde
Decreasing Reduction in hunting
pressure
Illegal hunting and Habitat
loss
White-Throated Tinamou
Tinamus guttatus Near Threatened Decreasing No change Habitat loss
Marbled Wood-quail
Odontophorus gujanensis
Near Threatened Decreasing Reduction in hunting
pressure
Illegal hunting and Habitat
loss
Orange-Cheeked
Parrot
Pyrilia barrabandi Near Threatened Stable No change Habitat loss
Jaguar Panthera onca Near Threatened Decreasing Reduction in hunting
pressure
Illegal hunting and Habitat
loss
Table 6: High Conversation Values within the Project Area and Project Zone
High Conservation Values
Project Description
8.1. Globally, regionally or nationally significant concentrations of biodiversity values: A. Protected areas, B. Threatened species, C. Endemic species, and D. Areas that support significant concentrations of a species during any time in their lifecycle.
A. No protected areas are included in the Project Zone. B. 9 IUCN species listed as either VU or NT are documented to occur on the site. An additional 17 species are listed by IUCN that also occur on the site. C. No endemic species. D. Pink River Dolphin (Inia geoffrensis) utilizes the Rio Yarapa and the flooded forest as a nursery and important feeding area.
8.2. Globally, regionally or nationally significant large landscape-level areas where viable populations of most if not all naturally occurring species exist in natural patterns of distribution and abundance.
None noted.
8.3. Threatened or rare ecosystems. None noted.
8.4. Areas that provide critical ecosystem services. None noted.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
23
8.5. Areas that are fundamental for meeting the basic needs of local communities.
The Rio Yarapa is very important for subsistence fishing for the local population.
1.4 Project Proponent (G4)
Lawrence Bishop (Yacumama Lodge) PO Box 1098 Nashville, Indiana 47448-1098 812-988-2056 [email protected]
Mr. Lawrence Bishop hired the Virginia Tech Conservation Management Institute to support the
development of the project design document, collect data supporting the Project, design the project
monitoring plan and implement the project monitoring plan. Implementation decisions regarding Project
activities are the sole responsibility of Lawrence Bishop (Yacumama Lodge).
1.5 Other Entities Involved in the Project (G4)
Mr. Norman Walters Director Yacumama S.R. Ltda. Peru SA Norman E Walters Designs 644 NW 18th St. Homestead, FL 33030 786-376-1072 [email protected] Verl Emrick Ph.D. (Technical Lead and Project Manager) Research Scientist-Ecologist Conservation Management Institute Virginia Tech College of Natural Resources and Environment 1900 Kraft Drive Blacksburg,VA 24061 540-231-8851 [email protected] cmi.vt.edu
The key technical skills to implement the Project are:
The business skills required to successfully manage a large and complex operation,
The managerial skills to manage the property effectively,
The diplomatic and language skills to successfully interact with the local communities, and
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
24
The technical skills to conduct monitoring on a periodic basis.
The leadership team at Yacumama has over twenty years of experience working in Peru and has
significant skills in managing the property. The property has been owned and managed by the
Yacumama team for over 20 years.
The Virginia Tech Conservation Management Institute (CMI) serves as technical support for Project
design and monitoring. CMI is a research center within the College of Natural Resources and
Environment at Virginia Tech in Blacksburg, VA. CMI has extensive experience in the development and
implementation of carbon offset projects in addition to experience in monitoring protocol development and
implementation for natural resources throughout North America with additional experience in Belize,
Dominican Republic, Peru, and Nepal.
1.6 Project Start Date (G3)
Project start date is January 1, 2010. Project start date is based upon decisions made by the Yacumama
management team to cease pursuing timber harvesting operations and pursue carbon financing as a
more sustainable long-term solution to their financial situation.
1.7 Project Crediting Period (G3)
Project crediting period start date is January 1, 2010 with an end date of December 31, 2039 resulting in
a Project length of 30 years (Table 7). This Project will be validated using the CCBA protocol Climate,
Community, and Biodiversity Project Design Standards Second Edition, and validated and verified to the
Verified Carbon Standard.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
25
Table 7: Project Implementation timeline
*Verification audits will occur at least once every 5 years.
2 DESIGN
2.1 Sectoral Scope and Project Type
This Project will be verified to the Verified Carbon Standard Version 3.2 as an Agriculture, Forestry, or
Land Use (AFOLU) Project using a strategy of reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation
(REDD). This Project is not a grouped project.
2.2 Description of the Project Activity (G3)
The Project will use carbon financing to protect the forest and avoid selling of the Yacumama property,
and subsequent harvesting of the forest, and conversion to agriculture. The primary methods employed to
achieve the desired result is maintaining a robust presence both at the main facility and patrols of the
property to prevent incursions and illegal logging. In addition, an integrated monitoring program that
addresses both carbon and biodiversity will be implemented to insure permanence for the climate and
biodiversity benefits. Furthermore, the need to staff the facility, patrol the forest and river and monitor the
forest biomass and biodiversity will require hiring and training of additional staff. Finally, Yacumama
Milestone 2010 2012 2013 2039
Project start
Crediting period begins
Initial CMI background work
Field GIS and plot work
CCBA Validation / VCS Validation and Verification*
Project Ends
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
26
management will be able to continue supporting health care for local communities by providing facilities
for Amazon Promise and furnishing monetary support to the local clinic in Puerto Miguel. Table 8
summarizes activities planned for Project implementation and climate, community, and biodiversity
benefits.
Table 8: Activities planned for Project implementation and climate, community, and biodiversity, benefits.
Activity Climate Benefits Community Benefits Biodiversity Benefits
Maintain a permanent presence at the main
facility in order to discourage illegal hunting and tree
removal and serve as point of contact.
Carbon sequestration. Provide employment
opportunities.
Reduced poaching of both forest products and
animals.
Control access to the forest at Yacumama
through regular patrols both riverine and
terrestrial.
Carbon sequestration. Provide employment
opportunities.
Reduced poaching of both forest products and
animals.
Maintain habitat for
native flora and fauna
including IUCN listed
species.
Carbon sequestration. Maintain HCV for high
profile species. Protect habitat.
Maintain current forest structure and biomass.
Carbon sequestration Maintain HCV for high
profile species. Protect habitat.
Monitor forest composition and
biomass. To insure permanence.
Provide livelihoods for communities. Provide
employment opportunities.
Protect habitat.
Biodiversity data collection and
monitoring.
To insure permanence and provide critical
scientific information on species diversity.
Train staff to assist ecologists in monitoring
forest biomass and diversity.
Develop human capital and provide capabilities for future employment.
Train staff in the maintenance and care
of lodge facilities.
Develop human capital and provide capabilities for future employment.
Provide healthcare opportunities to local
communities
Improve general health of communities.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
27
2.3 Management of Risks to Project Benefits (G3)
Risks to the Project from instability in the Government of Peru, changes to Peruvian natural resource laws
or a change in leadership at Yacumama are considered minimal. To the best of the Project proponent’s
knowledge no oil or mineral resources occur on the Project site and exploration for mineral resources is
not occurring. The greatest risk to the Project is reversals due to illegal timber extraction. Given the low
population levels and remoteness of the site, this risk is considered to be low.
2.4 Measures to Maintain High Conservation Values (G3)
The primary strategy for maintaining HCVs is protection through patrolling and managing the property for
existing forest biomass and high quality habitats with no reduction in forest cover. Patrols will prevent
illegal hunting by preventing incursions from hunters. Maintaining habitat will prevent the loss of HCVs by
maintaining the landscape components necessary for each species to complete its life cycle. No
enhancement of HCVs is required or anticipated.
2.5 Project Financing (G3 & G4)
Primary expenses are to pay for maintaining a physical presence at the Project site, patrols, and funds to
pay for biodiversity, carbon sequestration, and community monitoring expenses. Carbon financing
received after contractual obligations will fund Yacumama to pay for the management and monitoring
activities.
2.6 Employment Opportunities and Worker Safety (G4)
The Project will employ individuals from the local village of Puerto Miguel which has been a source of
workers for Yacumama for 20 years. Employment opportunities will be advertised. Employment at
Yacumama will follow Peruvian labor law and codes. Staff will be chosen based on capacity to meet the
needs of Yacumama as a tropical education and research center.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
28
The current staff employed by Yacumama are local, all from the village of Puerto Miguel and are
representative of the general population in the area. Jobs at Yacumama are prized by the local population
and Yacumama managers are well-regarded in Puerto Miguel from years of interaction and support to the
community. Some staff turnover is inevitable over such a long time period however, and when there is
staff turnover, measures will be taken not to lose local capacity and skills by providing training to new staff
(Table 9).
All local, district, and national workplace standards will be met at the moment of hiring of each staff
member. Local regulations and safety concerns will be discussed with each staff member with an
emphasis on guaranteeing workplace safety according to Peruvian law. Staff will be made aware of
workplace hazards and safety precautions and equipment provided by Yacumama (Table 10).
Table 9: Basic training for jobs at Yacumama. Many individual employees are cross-trained in a variety of jobs and will receive specialized training from Yacumama management when necessary.
Training Type Topics Covered Personnel Frequency
Rangers and patrols.
First aid and orientation / navigation.
Four individuals. Initial training as staff are employed and periodic refreshers as needed or for recertification of first aid training.
Hand held equipment (power saws, drills etc.) for operations and maintenance.
Safe operation. Situational effectiveness of equipment.
Four individuals. Initial training as staff are employed and periodic refreshers as needed.
Assisting forest carbon data and biodiversity data collection.
Data collection. Use of GPS for navigation to plots. Maintaining plot markings.
Two individuals. Initial training as staff are employed and periodic refreshers before data collection events.
Cook. Nutrition and hygiene.
Two individuals Initial training as staff are employed and periodic refreshers as needed.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
29
Table 10: Workplace hazards and safety precautions and equipment provided by Yacumama
2.7 Stakeholders (G3)
Stakeholders were identified using the procedural steps found in the “Community Development Toolkit”
methodology.3 Yacumama management has actively sought to inform and engage local stakeholders of
the Project and encourage comments on this combined VCS / CCB Project Design Document (PDD). The
primary local stakeholders are the employees of the lodge. Several of the local lodge staff were actively
involved in the collection of forest biomass data and will play a key role in patrolling the property and
biodiversity monitoring. Other stakeholder involvement has been solicited formally and informally over a
period of time to inform stakeholders of the Project and solicit feedback. Because local stakeholders in
Puerto Miguel and Yacumama lodge do not have access to digital information, except through cell
phones, a considerable effort was expended by Yacumama management and CMI to explain in detail the
overall Project in person. In addition, both Spanish and English language flyers describing the Project
were posted and circulated both among lodge employees and in the village of Puerto Miguel. Furthermore
a Spanish translation of the English PDD will be placed at the lodge and the village. A yearly update on
the status of the Project will be provided to all identified stakeholders.
Project Zone stakeholder groups are:
Yacumama management and staff
The village of Puerto Miguel Loreto Province, Peru
Amazon Promise
Dolphin Corners Ecolodge
3 http://www.icmm.com/page/629/community-development-toolkit-c
Hazard Safety Strategy and Equipment
Snake bite. First aid training, adequate boots, radios, minimum two-person crews.
Poachers. Radios, minimum two-person crews.
Fire. First aid training, first aid kit, radios.
Machete cuts. First aid training, first aid kit, radios, minimum two-person crews, boots, gloves.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
30
Renaco Lodge
Jungle Walk Lodge
Peruvian Forestry Department
Stakeholder meetings were held at the Yacumama Lodge on Tuesday June 25, 2013 with both short-term
and long-term employees of Yacumama. A second Community Meeting was held on Wednesday June
26, 2013 4:00pm at the Artisans Committee Pavilion, Puerto Miguel, Loreto Province, Peru.
Approximately 70 men, women and children were in attendance form the village. Three village officials
oversaw the meeting and notes were taken and entered in the official community ledger (Figures 7- 9).
Figure 7: Stakeholder meeting held on Wednesday June 26, 2013 4:00pm at the Artisans Committee Pavilion, Puerto Miguel, Loreto Province, Peru.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
31
Figure 8: Yacumama management (Norman Walters) discussing project with local stakeholders in Puerto Miguel.
Figure 9: Receiving input from local stakeholders in Puerto Miguel at the meeting conducted on June 26, 2013.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
32
Yacumama publicized its CCBA Project for public comment in the following manner:
Direct email and phone contact with: Amazon Promise, Dolphin Corners Ecolodge, Renaco
Lodge, Peruvian Forestry Department and the Designated National Authority.
The PDD was made available on the CCBA webpage and open to public comments.
2.8 Commercially Sensitive Information
Not applicable.
3 LEGAL STATUS
3.1 Compliance with Laws, Statues, Property Rights & Other Regulatory Frameworks
(G4 & G5)
Ley Forestal y de Fauna Silvestre and its Reglamento: Ley Nº 27308 y Decreto Supremo Nº N° 014-
2001-AG. These also are relevant since they establish specific means for use of timber and non-timber
forest resources, and for the establishment of timber and non-timber concessions in appropriate regions.
Legal and other requirements relating to biodiversity:
Red List of endangered species and other threats category - IUCN Red List
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora - CITES
Peruvian law (Supreme Decree No. 034-2004-AG).
Legal and other requirements relating to workers’ rights:
Current Constitution (Art.25) Workshop, resting right, regulating compensation.
D.S. N ° 003-97-TR, Competitiveness Act and Labor Productivity.
o Promoting job training and education of workers;
o Provide transfer of persons engaged in urban and rural areas of low productivity and
income to other more productive activities;
o Ensure the incomes of workers and protection against arbitrary dismissal;
o Unify works procurement rules and strengthen existing social benefits.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
33
D.S. N ° 007-2002-TR Amended Text of Legislative Decree. Act No. 854 Workshop, Modification
by Law No. 27,671.
D. Leg. No. 910, General Law on Labour Inspection and Labor Defense
D. Leg. No. 728 Ley de Fomento al Empleo
3.2 Evidence of Right of Use (G5)
The Project proponent owns the land on which the Project is located fee simple (Table 4). Yacumama
follows all applicable environmental laws including the General Environmental Law (2005) which sets
national environmental policy and management and ties together all previous legislation. The
Government of Peru ratified the Kyoto Protocol in 2002 as a non-Annex I country.
3.3 Emissions Trading Programs and Other Binding Limits (CL1)
Not applicable.
3.4 Participation under Other GHG Programs (CL1)
The Project is not registered nor is seeking registration under any other GHG programs.
3.5 Other Forms of Environmental Credit (CL1)
All of the Project’s emission reductions will be registered and held by an independent third-party registry,
Markit Environmental Registry, to guarantee avoidance of double-counting.
3.6 Projects Rejected by Other GHG Programs (CL1)
The Project has not been previously rejected by other GHG programs.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
34
3.7 Respect for Rights and No Involuntary Relocation (G5)
The Project site does not have human inhabitants besides laborers, management, and owners. The
Project does not involve the relocation or inward migration of any people. If immigration were to occur, the
Project’s monitoring teams will work with all stakeholders using appropriate tools to engage towards a
resolution. The Project proponent owns the property fee simple and titles reviewed by the auditor. The
Project does not encroach upon private property, community property, or government property.
3.8 Illegal Activities and Project Benefits (G5)
Project will include regular patrols to address illegal hunting, timber poaching, or wood gathering.
4 APPLICATION OF METHODOLOGY
4.1 Title and Reference of Methodology
This Project is designed for validation and verification under the Verified Carbon Standard Version 3.1,
AFOLU Requirements Version 3.0 and utilizing methodology and modules:
VM0007 REDD Methodology Module, REDD Methodology Framework (REDD-MF), version 1.3.
M-MON VMD0015 Methods for monitoring of greenhouse gas emissions and removals, version
2.1.
X-UNC VMD0017 Estimation of uncertainty for REDD project activities, version 2.0.
X -STR VMD0016 Methods for stratification of the project area, version 1.0.
CP-AB VMD0001 Estimation of carbon stocks in the above- and belowground biomass in live tree
and non-tree pools, version 1.0.
T-SIG CDM Tool for testing significance of GHG emissions in A/R CDM project activities, version
1.0.
LK-ASP VMD0009 Estimation of emissions from activity shifting for avoided planned, version1.1.
BL-PL VMD0006 Estimation of baseline carbon stock changes and greenhouse gas emissions
from planned deforestation and planned degradation, version 1.2.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
35
T-ADD VT0001 Tool for the Demonstration and Assessment of Additionality in VCS Agriculture,
Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU) Project Activities
.
4.2 Applicability of Methodology
Based on the methodology and the reference for the methodology, VCS “Tool for AFOLU Methodological
Issues”, this Project qualifies because of a reduction in emissions of carbon dioxide from planned
deforestation in the with-Project scenario. This methodology is applicable because:
Land in the Project Area qualified as forest at least 10 years before the Project start date based
on definition of forest land in FAO Forest Resource Assessment of 2000 and remote sensing
analysis.
No peat soils are present on the Project site.
Project proponent can show ownership of the Project site and ownership of the carbon rights for
the Project Area.
Baseline deforestation in the Project Area falls within the category of planned deforestation (VCS
category avoided planned deforestation).
Baselines will be renewed every 10 years after the start of the Project except where triggers lead
to a more frequent renewal.
No areas registered under the Clean Development Mechanism or any other carbon trading
scheme are included within the Project site; validation under the Climate, Community, and
Biodiversity Alliance for co-benefits has been disclosed.
The baseline condition is conversion of the property to a permanent deforested state of
agriculture.
No reforestation is proposed for the Project; and leakage avoidance activities do not include
either agriculture lands flooded to increase production, or intensifying livestock production.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
36
The Project is considered under the VCS category Avoided Planned Deforestation. This Project qualifies
because:
Conversion of forestlands to a deforested condition is legally permitted.
Documentation is available to clearly demonstrate with credible evidence that the land would
have been converted to non-forest use if not for the Project.
Post deforestation land use does not include reforestation.
4.3 Methodology Deviations
Not applicable.
4.4 Project Boundary (G1)
The spatial boundary for the Project is presented in Figure 5 and has been provided as a .kml file. The
sources of GHG emissions for both the baseline and Project scenario are presented in Table 11.
Table 11: GHG emissions for both the baseline and Project scenario.
Source Gas Included? Justification / Explanation
Baselin
e
Aboveground
Tree Biomass
CO2 Yes Required pool.
CH4 No
N2O No
Other No
Belowground
Tree Root
Biomass
CO2 Yes Pool calculated based upon aboveground biomass.
CH4 No
N2O No
Other No
Soil Carbon
CO2 No Conservatively excluded.
CH4 No
N2O No
Other No
Dead Wood CO2 No Conservatively excluded.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
37
Source Gas Included? Justification / Explanation
CH4 No
N2O No
Other No
Harvested
Wood
Products
CO2 No In Peru the standard practice for conversion of forest
to agricultural lands is to remove valuable timber
species and then bulldoze and burn the remaining
trees. This pool was analyzed for significance and
found to be de minimis.
CH4 No
N2O No
Other No
Litter
CO2 No Conservatively excluded.
CH4 No
N2O No
Other No
Fuel Wood
Collection
CO2 No Fuel wood collection is limited to small down trees and
branches for small campfires for fisherman. The
number of campfires and wood gathering is small and
the pool is de minimis.
CH4 No
N2O No
Other No
Biomass
Burning
CO2 No Emissions are accounted for through changes in
above and below ground pools. No biomass burning
will occur as a Project activity. CH4 No
N2O No
Other No
Combustion of
Fossil Fuels
CO2 No Conservatively omitted from both scenarios.
CH4 No
N2O No
Other No
Pro
ject
Aboveground
Tree Biomass
CO2 Yes Required pool.
CH4 No
N2O No
Other No
Belowground
Tree Biomass
CO2 Yes Pool calculated based upon aboveground biomass.
CH4 No
N2O No
Other No
Project CO2 Yes Leakage addressed using LK-ASP.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
38
Source Gas Included? Justification / Explanation
Leakage CH4 No
N2O No
Other No
4.5 Baseline Scenario (G2)
The estimation of carbon stocks in the with-Project scenario requires the identification of a reasonable
and credible alternative land use scenario (i.e. baseline scenario). The analysis conducted by CMI (using
BL-PL) of potential alternative land use scenarios identified conversion to agriculture as the most likely
land use alternative for the baseline scenario. There are a variety of crops that can be grown in the
region both on a commercial and individual scale. Commonly grown crops of the region include rice, corn,
beans, and peanuts particularly in riparian areas, and manioc, plantains and bananas on upland soils
(McClain and Cossio 2003). All of these crops are grown within the Project Zone. In addition, oil palm
plantations are increasing at a relatively rapid rate in the Peruvian Amazon Basin (Gutierrez-Velez et al.
2011).
The land within the Project Area is ideal for conversion to agriculture since the annual inundation of
floodwaters results in deposition of nutrient rich sediments carried by rivers, resulting in some of the most
fertile soils of the Amazon Basin (Kvist and Nebel 2001, McClain and Cossio 2003). These areas are
widely acknowledged for their agricultural productivity, and in 1997 Peruvian Amazon Research Institute
(IIAP) called for intensified agricultural development in the floodplains of the Loreto Department due to the
more favorable edaphic conditions when compared to terra firma (Kvist and Nebel 2001).
Baseline Scenario Effect on Communities
The community of Puerto Miguel, the staff at Yacumama and the other tourist lodges in the Project Zone
will be affected in a number ways under the baseline scenario. Under the baseline scenario, the owners
of Yacumama will be forced, for economic reasons, to sell the property most likely to a company that will
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
39
harvest the valuable hardwoods and burn the remaining trees. The cleared land, a scarce resource in the
Peruvian Amazon Basin, would then be subject to large-scale conversion to mixed agricultural uses due
to fertile soils and ease of access. The loss of forest cover would have substantial negative impacts on
the local lodges whose business is predicated on locally intact tropical forests. The land clearing process
and subsequent agricultural exploitation would likely result in an influx of workers attracted by available
low wage and low skill jobs. The clearing of a substantial portion of the forest within the Project Zone and
subsequent influx of workers and equipment in close proximity to lodges catering to ecotourism would
considerably reduce the desirability of these lodges, reduce guest nights and likely result in reduction in
operations if not outright closure. Furthermore, the Yacumama lodge would be permanently closed
resulting in the loss of desirable temporary and permanent employment for Puerto Miguel residents. In
addition, fishing on the Rio Yarapa is a critical food and increasingly economic resource for the local
community. The denuding of the riparian area for a substantial distance along the Rio Yarapa will
negatively affect productivity of this locally important fishery. In addition, during the periods of inundation
the forest provides critical ‘nursery’ habitat for many fish species which would be lost under the baseline
scenario.
Baseline Biodiversity
Biodiversity loss will be substantial in the baseline scenario due to the complete clearing of the Project
area forests and conversion to mixed agriculture. All the IUCN NT and VU confirmed at Yacumama will
experience adverse effects under the baseline scenario (Table 5). The mechanical clearing of the Project
area forests would result in significant landscape level fragmentation and habitat loss. Each of the
species listed is either associated directly with mature tropical forest, or is directly dependent on prey
species that are associated with Tropical forest.
4.6 Additionality (G2)
Because of the loss of substantial capital investment in the Yacumama lodge due to multiple economic
downturns and a fire which destroyed significant infrastructure Yacumama owners do not have the
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
40
financial means to reinvest the necessary capital in the lodge to rebuild the business. Currently there are
substantial costs just to maintain the property which is a significant drain on the financial resources of the
owners of Yacumama. Because no income is currently being generated, the owners by economic
necessity will be forced to sell the entire property. The Project proponent and property owner has clear
title to Project property and legal permission to harvest timber from the Government of Peru. As result
there is a high likelihood of selling the property to a company that would harvest the valuable trees and
clear the land of remaining woody vegetation. This action will create open land with fertile soils that would
be suitable for extensive commercial agriculture. Conversion of the forest includes harvesting
merchantable trees, bulldozing, piling, and burning the remaining vegetation. No part of the Project Area
is currently restricted from development due to government regulation or other legal requirement.
Additionality Analysis
The following analysis was conducted to determine alternative baseline scenarios according to the
procedure presented in “VT0001 Tool for the Demonstration and Assessment of Additionality in VCS
Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU) Project Activities.” This tool is applicable because a)
the proposed Project activities will not violate any Peruvian law, and b) the use of this tool results in
identification of the most plausible baseline scenario of the several possible baseline scenarios identified
below.
Step 1: Identification of alternative land use scenarios to the AFOLU Project activity.
The following is a “ranking” of the most likely alternative land uses.
Sub-step 1a. Identify credible alternative land use scenarios to the proposed VCS AFOLU project
activity.
A. Conversion to Agriculture
Conversion to agriculture is the most probable land use under the baseline scenario. Large-scale
cultivation, cattle ranching with expansion of areas under pasture, production of annual crops using slash
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
41
and burn agriculture, and large-scale cultivation of oil palm are all primary agricultural drivers of
deforestation in the Peruvian Amazon Basin (Verlarde et al. 2010). The underlying driver of deforestation
and conversion to agriculture in the Peruvian Amazon Basin is population increase. Population has grown
from 1,772,000 inhabitants in 1981 to 4,115,000 in 2007 according to the Peruvian National Institute of
Statistics and Informatics (Verlarde et al. 2010). Concurrent with the increase in population is an increase
in rural poverty in the Peruvian Amazon Basin, increasing from 68%, in 1985, to 69% in 2000 thus further
creating pressure to generate income from forest resources (Verlarde et al. 2010). By 2010, 5% of the
original forest cover in the Peruvian Amazon Basin had been lost and Soares-Filho et al. (2006) estimate
in just the next 20 years that figure will at least double.
The available land at Yacumama is suitable for land conversion to agriculture since the annual inundation
of floodwaters results in deposition of nutrient rich sediments carried by nearby rivers, resulting in some of
the most fertile soils of the Amazon Basin (Kvist and Nebel 2001, McClain and Cossio 2003). These
areas are widely recognized for their productivity, and in 1997 IIAP called for intensified agricultural
development in the floodplains of the Loreto Department due to the more favorable edaphic conditions
when compared to terra firma (Kvist and Nebel 2001).
B. Purchase of the Land by another Entity to Re-open Lodge for Ecotourism
An alternative land use involves the selling of the land and lodge to another entity to refurbish and re-
open the lodge. There are several ecotourism lodges in the region which are currently operating and this
is a potential alternative land use. However, most of the value associated with the property is in the timber
and timber concession. Presuming a buyer can be found that would refurbish and operate the lodge, the
current owners likely would have to sell at below market value.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
42
C. Purchase of the Land as a Conservation Area
Privately owned conservation areas exist in Peru. However, there is no tangible income to offset the
purchase price, maintenance, protection, and tax burden that accompanies owning a private conservation
area. Therefore this alternative is considered highly unlikely.
D. Continuation of Pre-Project Land Use
The Project Area has been in forest as far as the historical record goes back. The baseline plan will result
in the current owners selling the property to an entity that would harvest the valuable hardwoods and
clear the land for agriculture. Current income from the Project Area is zero. Property taxes, maintenance
and patrolling are still required expenses, therefore continuation of the pre-Project land use is
unsustainable.
E. Project activity on the land within the Project boundary performed without being registered as the VCS AFOLU project
This alternative land use is essentially continuation of the pre-Project land use. Income from the Project
Area is zero, while expenses for this scenario include property taxes, maintenance, patrolling, and
monitoring. Therefore conducting the Project without registration as a VCS AFOLU Project is
unsustainable.
Sub-step 1b. Consistency of credible land use scenarios with enforced mandatory laws and
regulations.
All alternatives presented are legal under Peruvian law.
Step 2. Investment Analysis
Sub-step 2a. Determine appropriate analysis method
Because the Project generates no financial or economic benefits other than VCS related income, simple
cost analysis is selected.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
43
Sub-step 2b. Option 1. Apply simple cost analysis.
Costs have been documented for the Project and audited to demonstrate no financial benefits other than
VCS related income.
Step 4. Common Practice Analysis
There are multiple private properties officially recognized as private protected areas and numerous
privately held preserves within national protected areas in Peru (Solano 2009). A key distinction between
the Project and other lands managed as private protected areas is that, at least in some cases, other
areas are able to support the annual costs of management through outside means such as non-
governmental organization (NGO) supported and endorsed ecotourism (e.g. the American Bird
Conservancy), direct support by NGO’s, or private funds. Income from these sources is not available to
Yacumama landowners and therefore the Project activity is additional.
5 QUANTIFICATON OF GHG EMISSION REDUCTIONS AND REMOVALS (CLIMATE)
5.1 Project Scale and Estimated GHG Emission Reductions or Removals
Mean annual GHG emission reductions were estimated 738,257 mtCO2e annually (Table 12).
Project
Large project X
Table 12: Summary of estimated GHG emission reductions (t CO2 e).
Years Estimated GHG emission reductions or removals (mtCO2e)
2010 53,959
2011 414,812
2012 774,248
2013 774,248 2014 774,248 2015 774,248 2016 774,248 2017 774,248 2018 774,248 2019 774,248
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
44
2020 774,248 2021 774,248 2022 774,248 2023 774,248 2024 774,248 2025 774,248 2026 774,248 2027 774,248 2028 774,248 2029 774,248 2030 774,248 2031 774,248 2032 774,248 2033 774,248 2034 774,248 2035 774,248 2036 774,248 2037 774,248 2038 774,248 2039 774,248
Total estimated ERs 22,147,735
Total number of crediting years 30
Average annual ERs 738,257
5.2 Leakage Management (CL2)
The portion of the Yacumama property that is not included in the project area will be monitored to insure
no deforestation will occur. No income generated by the project will be used for activities that will result in
GHG emissions from deforestation.
5.3 Baseline Emissions (G2)
In order to estimate GHG loss und the baseline scenario the following variables are required:
Area of forest available for conversion.
Baseline carbon stocks.
Deforestation / conversion rates.
Carbon stocks in agro-ecosystems.
Fate of commercial timber and long-lived wood products.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
45
Losses of biomass attributable to fuel-wood collection.
Avoided emissions from fertilizer use.
Avoided emissions from biomass burning.
Avoided emissions from transportation fuel use.
1. Area of forest available for conversion
The entire Yacumama property boundary encompasses (3,299 ha) of tropical rainforest, of which (2,992
ha) are available for conversion to agricultural uses.
2. Biomass Baseline Carbon Stocks
Baseline biomass carbon stocks were the above ground tree > 5 cm DBH and below-ground biomass.
Aboveground non-tree biomass (lianas and palms), down or standing dead wood, and leaf litter were not
measured, which resulted in a conservative estimation of carbon stocks in the project area. The mean
total carbon pool in 2013 was based on field data collected in 2013 and independently verified.
Aboveground biomass (kg) was calculated using the tropical wet forest equation from Pearson et al.
(2005). The aboveground biomass for each tree was converted from kilograms to tons (divided by 1000),
followed by a conversion of total aboveground biomass to aboveground carbon stock by multiplying the
mass by the carbon fraction of biomass (0.47). Belowground biomass for each tree was estimated by
multiplying the aboveground biomass of the tree by the tropical rainforest root to shoot ratio 0.37
presented in Table 4.4 of the IPCC GL AFOLU. Aboveground and belowground biomass attributed to
non-tree biomass (palms and lianas) and soil carbon was conservatively excluded. Accuracy of the
equation was validated using the procedure described in module CP-AB “Estimation of carbon stocks in
the above- and belowground biomass in live tree and non-tree pools”.
An uncertainty level of 5% was calculated using module Estimation of uncertainty for REDD project
activities (X-UNC).
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
46
3. Rate of Deforestation and Agricultural Conversion
Deforestation rates were calculated based upon 6 proxy areas located in the Amazon basin of Peru and
neighbouring areas of Brazil. The calculated deforestation rate was 33.3% per year.
4. Carbon stocks in agro-ecosystems
Conversion to agriculture is the most probable land use under the baseline scenario. While it is likely that
large areas of the Project would be subject to conversion to monocultures of rice or other intensive
cropping system, under the baseline scenario we identified a ‘multi-crop / short-term fallow’ as our
baseline agriculture system. The ‘multi-crop / short-term fallow’ agriculture system is the most widespread
in the Loreto province followed by intensive cropping systems (Henman et al. 2008). Baseline carbon
stocks for ‘multi-crop / short-term fallow’ agricultural system in the Loreto district, where the project is
located, is 18 mt C ha-1
(Henman et. al 2008).
5. Fate of Forest Resources Lost to Agricultural Conversion (Long-lived Wood Products)
The standard practice in Peru for conversion of forest to agricultural lands is to remove valuable timber
species and then bulldoze and burn the remaining trees. An analysis was conducted using module CP-W
(Estimation of carbon stocks in the long-term wood products pool) based on the inventory data and found
that the available timber for a long-lived wood products pool was de minimis.
6. Loss of biomass attributable to fuel-wood collection
Minor fuel wood collection for small cooking fires for fisherman was occurring prior to the project and
would continue under the project scenario. However, this was determined to be de minimis.
7. Avoided emissions from fertilizer use
Emissions from fertilizer use was conservatively excluded from the baseline scenario.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
47
8. Avoided emissions from biomass burning
In the baseline scenario, land clearing would include piling and burning of all remaining aboveground
woody biomass on the site after the valuable timber species were removed. Emissions of CH4 and N2O
from biomass burning were conservatively excluded.
9. Avoided emissions from transportation fuel use
Emissions from transportation fuel use are conservatively omitted in both the baseline and project
scenarios.
5.4 Project Emissions (CL1)
The same carbon pools are used in the with-project scenario as the baseline scenario for GHG emissions
and/or removals. In the with-project scenario activity shifting leakage is the only addition.
1. Area of forest available for conversion
Same as baseline.
2. Baseline carbon stocks
Same as baseline.
3. Deforestation/conversion rates
No deforestation is allowed under with-project scenario.
4. Carbon stocks in agro-ecosystems
No conversion is allowed under the with-project scenario.
5. Fate of commercial timber and long-lived wood products
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
48
No reductions or removals are allowed under the with-project scenario.
6. Losses of biomass attributable to fuel-wood collection
No reductions or removals allowed under the with-project scenario.
7. Avoided emissions from fertilizer use
No fertilization will occur under the with-project scenario.
8. Avoided emissions from biomass burning
No biomass burning is allowed under the with-project scenario.
9. Avoided emissions from transportation fuel use.
Conservatively omitted from both the baseline and with-project scenarios.
5.5 Leakage (CL2)
The module Estimation of emissions from activity shifting for avoided planned deforestation (LK-ASP) was
utilized to establish leakage. A specific agent of deforestation was not able to be identified, therefore we
identified a class of deforestation agents.
Step 1: Identify the commodity produced by the baseline class of agent.
The commodity is ‘multi-crop / short-term fallow’ agriculture. This agricultural type is well suited to the
region and is the largest, in terms of area, agricultural system in the region (Henman et al. 2008).
Step 2: Assess proportion of available areas that are forested.
Using NatureServe’s ecosystem map4 for the Andes-Amazon the vegetation type was identified in which
the Project is located and the total area for this type in the Loreto province calculated. This vegetation
4 http://www.natureserve.org/aboutUs/latinamerica/gis_data_downloads.jsp
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
49
type is well suited in terms of soil type, elevation, precipitation and access to markets for ‘multi-crop /
short-term fallow’ agriculture. An indisputably conservative figure of 100% was used for the available area
that is currently forested.
Step 3: Evaluate project area relative to other forested areas for commodity production in the
country.
The available land in the project is highly suitable for agriculture since the annual inundation of
floodwaters results in deposition of nutrient rich sediments carried by nearby rivers, resulting in some of
the most fertile soils of the Amazon region (Kvist and Nebel 2001, McClain and Cossio 2003). These
areas are widely recognized for their productivity, and in 1997 IIAP called for intensified agricultural
development in the floodplains of the Loreto Department due to the more favorable edaphic conditions
when compared to terra firma (Kvist and Nebel 2001).
Step 4: Assess proportional leakage factor.
Average productivity of alternative lands is very similar to the project area therefore a leakage factor of
0.4 was used.
Step 5: Calculate Leakage5
Leakage was calculated at 125,573 t CO2e per year.
5.6 Summary of GHG Emission Reductions and Removals (CL1 & CL2)
The net change in carbon stocks in the with-project scenario before reductions for a risk buffer is
conservatively estimated at 22,147,735 mt CO2 e (Table 12 and 13) for the 30 year life of the project. This
project is designed for validation under the Verified Carbon Standard Version 3.1, AFOLU Requirements
Version 3.0 and utilizing methodology VM0007 REDD Methodology Modules and Climate, Community &
5 All mathematical equations and procedures are provided in an accompanying Excel spreadsheet.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
50
Biodiversity Project Design Standards Second Edition. The following methodology modules were used for
this project: REDD-MF, M-MON, X-UNC, X-STR, BL-PL, LK-ASP, CP-AB, and T-SIG.
Table 13: GHG Emissions the baseline, project, and removals.
Years Estimated Baseline
Emissions or Removals (t
CO2e)
Estimated Project Emissions or
Removals (t CO2e)
Estimated Leakage Emissions (t CO2e)
Estimated net GHG Emission
Reductions or Removals (t CO2e) after Uncertainty
Deductions
2010 182,373 0 125,573 53,959
2011 562,218 0 125,573 414,812
2012 940,572 0 125,573 774,248
2013 940,572 0 125,573 774,248
2014 940,572 0 125,573 774,248
2015 940,572 0 125,573 774,248
2016 940,572 0 125,573 774,248
2017 940,572 0 125,573 774,248
2018 940,572 0 125,573 774,248
2019 940,572 0 125,573 774,248
2020 940,572 0 125,573 774,248
2021 940,572 0 125,573 774,248
2022 940,572 0 125,573 774,248
2023 940,572 0 125,573 774,248
2024 940,572 0 125,573 774,248
2025 940,572 0 125,573 774,248
2026 940,572 0 125,573 774,248
2027 940,572 0 125,573 774,248
2028 940,572 0 125,573 774,248
2029 940,572 0 125,573 774,248
2030 940,572 0 125,573 774,248
2031 940,572 0 125,573 774,248
2032 940,572 0 125,573 774,248
2033 940,572 0 125,573 774,248
2034 940,572 0 125,573 774,248
2035 940,572 0 125,573 774,248
2036 940,572 0 125,573 774,248
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
51
2037 940,572 0 125,573 774,248
2038 940,572 0 125,573 774,248
2039 940,572 0 125,573 774,248
5.7 Climate Change Adaptation Benefits (GL1)
Not applicable.
6 COMMUNITY
6.1 Net Positive Community Impacts (CM1)
The benefits to the community will differentially affect community members based upon their level of
involvement with the Yacumama lodge (i.e. full-time and part-time staff) and the indirect effect of the
continuation of Yacumama as a research and education center. The following analysis follows the Social
Impact and Opportunities Assessment procedures (http://www.icmm.com/community-development-
toolkit) developed by the International Council of Mining and Metals.
Step 1: Review social baseline study and determine areas of concern to the communities,
potential impacts, as well as areas where the project might present opportunities.
Opportunities for the community in the with-Project scenario and concerns for the baseline scenario were
compiled through meetings and communications with stakeholders.
Step 2: Assess potential impacts and opportunities and identify areas needing impact
management programs.
Negative impacts were not identified in the with-Project scenario. The primary impact under the baseline
scenario was the loss in forest cover directly adjacent and in the vicinity of several lodges which would
reduce their viability possibly leading to closure and loss of jobs. The baseline scenario would directly
result in the loss of jobs at Yacumama and negatively impact fishing due to the removal of forest cover
along the Rio Yarapa and other small streams in the project area.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
52
Step 3: Propose measures to manage and if necessary mitigate the identified impacts and
enhance opportunities.
Negative impacts were not identified in the with-Project scenario.
Step 4: Reassess the impacts and opportunities, taking proposed management measures into
account.
The effects of deforestation in the baseline scenario cannot be mitigated.
Step 5: Work with community and other partners on participatory development plans that address
community priority programs (enhancing opportunities) as well as required mitigation programs
(mitigating impacts).
The community suggested that support for the local health clinic be renewed (when Yacumama was an
active tourist lodge the owners financially supported the Puerto Miguel health clinic). The community was
also interested in support for developing a tree nursery and fish farm for both food and income.
Step 6: Review Management Measures and Programs.
At the community meeting those in attendance voiced their support for the Project and it was officially
recorded in the meeting minutes.
A summary of the effects of the with-Project (Table 14) and baseline scenarios (Table 15) clearly
indicates substantial net positive benefits for the community and stakeholders under the with-Project
scenario.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
53
Table 14: The effects on existing community members and stakeholders in the with-Project scenario.
Effect Positive or Negative Impact Significance
Livelihoods *Predicted impacts
*Predicted impacts after mitigation measures
Positive N/A
High N/A
Community Relations *Predicted impacts
*Predicted impacts after mitigation measures
Positive N/A
High N/A
Education *Predicted impacts
*Predicted impacts after mitigation measures
Positive N/A
Moderate N/A
Health *Predicted impacts
*Predicted impacts after mitigation measures
Positive N/A
Very High N/A
Infrastructure *Predicted impacts
*Predicted impacts after mitigation measures
Positive N/A
Moderate N/A
Community Development *Predicted impacts
*Predicted impacts after mitigation measures
Positive N/A
High N/A
Table 15: The effects on existing community members and stakeholders in the baseline scenario.
Effects Positive or Negative Impact Significance
Livelihoods *Predicted impacts
*Predicted impacts after mitigation measures
Negative No impact
Low Low
Community Relations *Predicted impacts
*Predicted impacts after mitigation measures
Negative N/A
High N/A
Education *Predicted impacts
*Predicted impacts after mitigation measures
Negative N/A
Low N/A
Health *Predicted impacts
*Predicted impacts after mitigation measures
Negative N/A
Very High N/A
Infrastructure *Predicted impacts
*Predicted impacts after mitigation measures
Negative N/A
Moderate N/A
Community Development
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
54
*Predicted impacts *Predicted impacts after
mitigation measures
Neutral N/A
Moderate N/A
Benefits to Yacumama Staff Community
In the with-Project scenario the primary and substantial benefit to the Yacumama staff community will be
continued and increased employment opportunities. The Yacumama staff will also receive training in a
variety of fields necessary to support the Project including but not limited to: carpentry, food preparation,
property patrolling, assistance with monitoring, and technical support to visiting scientists and researchers.
Benefits to the Larger Community
For the larger community (i.e. residents of Puerto Miguel, staff and owners of other lodges etc.) there are
direct and indirect benefits under the with-Project scenario. Residents of the village of Puerto Miguel will
directly benefit from the renewed support by Yacumama management to the local health clinic.
Furthermore, Yacumama serves as the logistical base for Amazon Promise6, a non-profit organization
providing needed medical and dental care to remote populations living in the Upper Amazon Basin of
Northeastern Peru. In addition, Yacumama management will work with the Puerto Miguel residents to
develop a tree nursery and fish farm. The environmental effects of maintaining forest cover on the Rio
Yarapa will benefit both the lodges and community of Puerto Miguel through maintenance of water quality
and habitat for the important Rio Yarapa fishery. Furthermore, no community HCV’s are expected to be
affected by the Project.
6.2 Negative Offsite Stakeholder impacts (CM2)
There are no anticipated negative offsite impacts. If a negative offsite impact is identified Yacumama
management will address the problems with affected stakeholders.
6 http://www.amazonpromise.org/
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
55
6.3 Exceptional Community Benefits (GL2)
Not applicable.
7 BIODIVERSITY
7.1 Net Positive Biodiversity Impacts (B1)
The objectives for biodiversity in the with-Project scenario are to maintain the existing biodiversity and
HCV’s on Yacumama property. All of the vulnerable and near threatened IUCN species identified on the
property (Table 5) will be adversely affected though habitat loss and / or illegal hunting under the baseline
scenario.
With-Project Scenario
Under the with-Project scenario the present high quality tropical floodplain forest habitat will remain intact
thus conserving not on the native biodiversity but also the underlying ecological processes. The floodplain
forest habitat is not only important for terrestrial species but for many aquatic species during periods of
inundation. In addition, the with-Project scenario will provide needed funding to allow for increased
patrols and an overall physical presence on the property to discourage illegal hunting and poaching.
Funding under the with-Project scenario will allow Yacumama management to refurbish their remaining
facilities thus encouraging a resumption of biodiversity surveys by university researchers and students.
Furthermore, specific biodiversity surveys for Meso-mammals and birds are an explicit objective of the
biodiversity monitoring.
Without-Project Scenario
The without-Project scenario will result in the elimination and degradation of tropical floodplain forest
habitat on the property thus eliminating habitat for all of the terrestrial IUCN near threatened and
vulnerable species currently using the property. In addition, the loss of tropical floodplain forest habitat
will also negatively impact aquatic species that utilize the forest as nursery habitat for many fish species
that the local community use as a food and economic resource. Furthermore, patrols to eliminate illegal
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
56
hunting would cease resulting in significant negative impacts to prey and the predators that rely on hunted
species not only on the property but in the overall project zone. Removal of tropical forest component will
severely degrade riparian habitat within the property thus negatively impacting local water quality.
No invasive or genetically modified species will be used under the with-project scenario.
7.2 Negative Offsite Biodiversity Impacts (B2)
No negative offsite biodiversity impacts will occur under the with-Project scenario. The maintenance of
high quality tropical floodplain forest habitat will enhance the off-site habitat and by extension biodiversity.
7.3 Exceptional Biodiversity Benefits (GL3)
Not applicable.
8 MONITORING
8.1 Description of the Monitoring Plan (CL3, CM3 & B3)7
Forest Biomass and Cover Monitoring
Yacumama management and the Project proponent in particular have primary responsibility for
conducting scientifically accurate monitoring of forest cover for the Project. To this end Yacumama
management contracted the Virginia Tech Conservation Management Institute to design and implement
forest biomass and cover monitoring. The initial monitoring of forest biomass and cover was conducted in
June and July of 2013 by the Virginia Tech Conservation Management Institute. Yacumama will contract
the Virginia Tech Conservation Management Institute or other qualified contractor for subsequent
monitoring events.
7 Detailed methods and analyses are provided in the monitoring and implementation report.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
57
The primary monitoring objective is to identify reversals in forest cover for the baseline renewal in 10
years. A series of permanent plots have been established to quantify forest biomass and cover. Remote
sensing will be used in concert with ground data to produce a forest / non-forest geodatabase. The
geodatabase will be produced for each verification audit and the plots will be measured annually and a
report of the results produced for each verification audit.
Monitoring data will be collected annually, except in cases plots are inaccessible due to high water or
other factor making access unsafe, and summarized for periodic 3rd
party independent audits. Audits will
occur no less frequently than every 5 years. It is the responsibility of Yacumama to conduct monitoring.
All data collected as part of the monitoring program will be archived electronically at the Virginia Tech
Conservation Management Institute in Excel compatible spreadsheets or ARC compatible Geodatabases
and kept at least for two years after the end of the project. A mirror copy of the databases will also be
housed with Yacumama management.
All of the data will be monitored if not indicated otherwise in tables below.
Biodiversity Monitoring
Biodiversity monitoring will concentrate of two taxa, meso-mammals and birds (Table 16). In addition
incidental observations of amphibians, reptiles and fish will be collected. A comprehensive biodiversity
monitoring plan will developed no later than 12months form initial validation of the Project.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
58
Table 16: Biodiversity monitoring taxa and objectives.
Taxa Objective Methods Analysis
Meso-mammals. Determine distribution
and abundance of IUCN
and other mammalian
species using the forest
habitat at Yacumama.
Camera trapping array
distributed over the
entire property.
Diversity indices,
species richness,
species heterogeneity,
species evenness,
relative trap success,
and population size
analysis for individually
identifiable species (e.g.
jaguar).
Birds. Develop an atlas of the
birds utilizing the
habitats at Yacumama.
Systematic surveys over
the entire property,
Incidental observations.
Species presence.
Amphibians, reptiles
and fish.
Document presence. Targeted surveys and
incidental observations.
Species presence
Monitoring will occur in a scientifically credible manner in conjunction with each verification event and at a
minimum of every 5 years.
Biodiversity Impact Monitoring Effectiveness
The overall strategy for maintaining biodiversity and HCVs (Table 6) is to protect the property through
patrols and avoid conversion to agriculture. The monitoring metric is presence/absence of the biodiversity
HCVs. Loss of an HCV species is not necessarily considered a failure of the Project if that loss is not
linked to anthropomorphic factors like hunting. Maintenance of the tropical riparian forest habitat is the
primary biodiversity objective of the Project. Monitoring of biodiversity is expected to be 100% effective at
determining presence/absence of HCVs.
Biodiversity Impact Monitoring Implementation
A Biodiversity Impact Monitoring Plan will be finalized and implemented within twelve months of validation
against the CCB standards. The monitoring plan will be disseminated to stakeholders through internet
communication and by hardcopy when requested. The results of monitoring will be disseminated in the
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
59
same manner. After approval the monitoring plan it will be implemented by Yacumama and repeated at
least every five years by qualified trained biologists.
Community Monitoring
Community monitoring metrics must be directly related to the community objectives of the project. A
comprehensive community monitoring plan will developed no later than 12months form initial validation of
the Project.
For community members who are Yacumama staff, the monitoring metrics are:
Payroll records.
Training days.
For community members who are not Yacumama staff, the monitoring metrics are:
Logistical and financial support for the local health clinic in Puerto Miguel.
Continued logistical support for Amazon Promise health care providers.
Logistical and financial assistance in developing a tree nursery and fish farm in Puerto
Miguel.
High Conservation Value Plan
No community HCVs have been identified that will be impacted by the project.
Community Impact Monitoring Implementation
Within twelve months of Project validation a monitoring plan will be developed and implemented. The
monitoring plan will be made publicly available on the internet, and results communicated to all
stakeholders.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
60
8.2 Data and Parameters Available at Validation (CL3)
Data Unit / Parameter: Project Forest Cover Monitoring Map
Data unit: Ha
Description: Map showing the location of forest land within the project area at the beginning of each monitoring period. If within the Project Area some forest land is cleared, the benchmark map must show the deforested areas at each monitoring event
Source of data: Remote sensing in combination with GPS data collected during ground truthing
Value applied: 100%
Justification of choice of data or description of measurement methods and procedures applied:
Required by methodology. The minimum map accuracy should be 90% for the classification of forest/non-forest in the remote sensing imagery. If the classification accuracy is less than 90% then the map is not acceptable for further analysis. More remote sensing data and ground truthing data will be needed to produce a product that reaches the 90% minimum mapping accuracy. Must be monitored at least every 5 years or if verification occurs on a frequency of less than every 5 years examination must occur prior to any verification event
Any comment: If stratification is required in the future due to a reversal, then new strata will be identified using module X-STR.
Data Unit / Parameter: ADefPA,i,t
Data unit: Ha
Description: Area of recorded deforestation in the project area at time t (if any occurs)
Source of data: Remote sensing imagery
Value applied: 0
Justification of choice of data or description of measurement methods and procedures applied:
Required by methodology. Head’s up delineation using GIS and landsat imagery (or higher resolution) using multiple images to get a cloud free image. Must be monitored at least every 5 years or if verification occurs on a frequency of less than every 5 years examination must occur prior to any
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
61
Data Unit / Parameter: CAB_tree,i
Data unit: t CO2-e ha-1
Description: Carbon stock in aboveground biomass in trees in the baseline stratum, i
Source of data: Field measurements applied with allometric equation published in Pearson et. al. (2005)
Description of measurement methods and procedures to be applied:
See field methods section.
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Must be monitored at least every 5 years or if
verification occurs on a frequency of less than
every 5 years examination must occur prior to
any verification event.
Value applied: In 2013, 380.36 t CO2-e ha-1
.
Monitoring equipment: Computer and spreadsheet software.
QA/QC procedures to be applied: Independent 3rd party audit of field
measurements utilizing re-measurement of a
sample of plots.
Calculation method: Calculation method follows Pearson et. al. 2005.
Any comment: Key variable used to calculate with project
carbon stocks and year by year growth rate.
Data Unit / Parameter: CBB_tree,i
Data unit: t CO2-e ha-1
Description: Carbon stock in belowground biomass in trees in the baseline stratum, i
Source of data: CAB_tree,I multiplied by a root to shoot ratio available in the IPCC GL AFLOU
Description of measurement methods and procedures to be applied:
See methods section.
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Must be monitored at least every 5 years or if
verification occurs on a frequency of less than
every 5 years examination must occur prior to
any verification event.
verification event.
Any comment: This is presumed to be zero ex ante
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
62
Value applied: In 2013, 56.2 t CO2-e ha-1
.
Monitoring equipment: Computer and spreadsheet software.
QA/QC procedures to be applied: Independent 3rd party audit of field
measurements utilizing remeasurement of a
sample of plots.
Calculation method: Calculation method follows CP-AB
Any comment: Key variable used to calculate with project
carbon stocks and year by year growth rate.
Data Unit / Parameter: Asp
Data unit: ha
Description: Area of sample plots in ha.
Source of data: Nested plot design published in Pearson et al (2005).
Description of measurement methods and procedures to be applied:
See field method section.
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Must be monitored at least every 5 years or if
verification occurs on a frequency of less than
every 5 years examination must occur prior to
any verification event.
Value applied:
Tree Class
Plot Radius
Plot Area
Proportion of Hectare
>5.0cm 4.0m 50m2 0.005
>20.0cm 14.0m 616m2 0.062
>50.0cm 20.0m 1256m2 0.125
Monitoring equipment: 30m fiberglass tape.
QA/QC procedures to be applied: Not applicable.
Calculation method: Not applicable.
Any comment: Where carbon stock estimation occurs only for determination of the baseline this parameter shall be known ex-ante. Where part of project monitoring, ex-ante the number and area of sample plots shall be estimated based on projected sample effort relative to projections of growth and emissions.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
63
Data Unit / Parameter: N
Data unit: Dimensionless
Description: Number of sample points
Source of data: Published forest biomass and standard deviation from Nebel et al (2001a).
Description of measurement methods and procedures to be applied:
Information from Nebel et al (2001a) was entered into Winrock Sampling Calculator to determine total number of plots needed.
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Must be monitored at least every 5 years or if verification occurs on a frequency of less than every 5 years examination must occur prior to any verification event.
Value applied: 26 forest plots
Monitoring equipment: Not applicable
QA/QC procedures to be applied: Not applicable
Calculation method: Winrock Sampling Calculator
Any comment: Where carbon stock estimation occurs only for determination of the baseline this parameter shall be known ex-ante. Where part of project monitoring, ex-ante the number of sample plots shall be estimated based on projected sample effort relative to projections of growth and emissions.
Data Unit / Parameter: DBH
Data unit: cm
Description: Diameter at breast height (1.3m) of a tree in cm
Source of data: Field measurements in sample plots
Description of measurement methods and procedures to be applied:
Measured at 1.3m aboveground, unless tree has buttresses or irregular growth. Minimum diameter is 5cm. See field methods section for detailed procedures
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Must be monitored at least every 5 years or if
verification occurs on a frequency of less than
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
64
every 5 years examination must occur prior to
any verification event.
Value applied: See database for tree measurements.
Monitoring equipment: Diameter tape incremented in centimeters, 1.3m staff, 30m fiberglass tape, GPS to navigate to permanent plots
QA/QC procedures to be applied: See field methods section
Calculation method: Direct observation
Any comment: Key variable used to calculate with project
carbon stocks and year by year growth rate.
8.3 Data and Parameters Monitored (CL3, CM3 & B3)
Data Unit / Parameter: Project Forest Cover Monitoring Map
Data unit: Ha
Description: Map showing the location of forest land within the project area at the beginning of each monitoring period. If within the Project Area some forest land is cleared, the benchmark map must show the deforested areas at each monitoring event
Source of data: Remote sensing in combination with GPS data collected during ground truthing
Value applied: 100%
Justification of choice of data or description of measurement methods and procedures applied:
Required by methodology. The minimum map accuracy should be 90% for the classification of forest/non-forest in the remote sensing imagery. If the classification accuracy is less than 90% then the map is not acceptable for further analysis. More remote sensing data and ground truthing data will be needed to produce a product that reaches the 90% minimum mapping accuracy. Must be monitored at least every 5 years or if verification occurs on a frequency of less than every 5 years examination must occur prior to any verification event
Any comment: If stratification is required in the future due to a reversal, then new strata will be identified using module X-STR.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
65
Data Unit / Parameter: CAB_tree,i
Data unit: t CO2-e ha-1
Description: Carbon stock in aboveground biomass in trees in the baseline stratum, i
Source of data: Field measurements applied with allometric equation published in Pearson et. al. (2005)
Description of measurement methods and procedures to be applied:
See field methods section.
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Must be monitored at least every 5 years or if
verification occurs on a frequency of less than
every 5 years examination must occur prior to
any verification event.
Value applied: In 2013, 380.36 t CO2-e ha-1
.
Monitoring equipment: Computer and spreadsheet software.
QA/QC procedures to be applied: Independent 3rd party audit of field
measurements utilizing re-measurement of a
sample of plots.
Calculation method: Calculation method follows Pearson et. al. 2005.
Any comment: Key variable used to calculate with project
carbon stocks and year by year growth rate.
Data Unit / Parameter: ADefPA,i,t
Data unit: Ha
Description: Area of recorded deforestation in the project area at time t (if any occurs)
Source of data: Remote sensing imagery
Value applied: 0
Justification of choice of data or description of measurement methods and procedures applied:
Required by methodology. Head’s up delineation using GIS and landsat imagery (or higher resolution) using multiple images to get a cloud free image. Must be monitored at least every 5 years or if verification occurs on a frequency of less than every 5 years examination must occur prior to any verification event.
Any comment: This is presumed to be zero ex ante
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
66
Data Unit / Parameter: CBB_tree,i
Data unit: t CO2-e ha-1
Description: Carbon stock in belowground biomass in trees in the baseline stratum, i
Source of data: CAB_tree,I multiplied by a root to shoot ratio available in the IPCC GL AFLOU
Description of measurement methods and procedures to be applied:
See methods section.
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Must be monitored at least every 5 years or if
verification occurs on a frequency of less than
every 5 years examination must occur prior to
any verification event.
Value applied: In 2013, 56.2 t CO2-e ha-1
.
Monitoring equipment: Computer and spreadsheet software.
QA/QC procedures to be applied: Independent 3rd party audit of field
measurements utilizing remeasurement of a
sample of plots.
Calculation method: Calculation method follows CP-AB
Any comment: Key variable used to calculate with project
carbon stocks and year by year growth rate.
Data Unit / Parameter: Meso-mammals
Data unit: abundance, diversity
Description: Relative abundance, Species richness
Source of data: Camera traps
Description of measurement methods and procedures to be applied:
A systematic array of camera traps throughout the entire property.
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Must be monitored at least every 5 years or if
verification occurs on a frequency of less than
every 5 years examination must occur prior to
any verification event.
Value applied:
Monitoring equipment: Remote Field Cameras
QA/QC procedures to be applied: Each photo will observed independently by two observers to confirm species and/or individual identity.
Calculation method: Direct observation of photos
Any comment:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
67
Data Unit / Parameter: Birds
Data unit: Presence
Description: Species richness
Source of data: Direct observation by sight and/or sound
Description of measurement methods and procedures to be applied:
A systematic survey and incidental observations
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Must be monitored at least every 5 years or if verification occurs on a frequency of less than every 5 years examination must occur prior to any verification event.
Value applied: n/a
Monitoring equipment: Binoculars
QA/QC procedures to be applied: Each photo will observed independently by two observers to confirm species and/or individual identity.
Calculation method: Direct observation
Any comment:
Data Unit / Parameter: Amphibians, Reptiles and Fish
Data unit: Presence
Description: Species richness
Source of data: Direct observation by sight and/or sound
Description of measurement methods and procedures to be applied:
Incidental and targeted observations
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Must be monitored at least every 5 years or if verification occurs on a frequency of less than every 5 years examination must occur prior to any verification event.
Value applied: n/a
Monitoring equipment: Binoculars,
QA/QC procedures to be applied:
Calculation method: Direct observation
Any comment:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
68
Data Unit / Parameter: Yacumama Staff Payroll
Data unit: Number of employees paid
Description:
Source of data: Yacumama Management Payroll Records
Description of measurement methods and procedures to be applied:
Timely payment to staff
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Must be monitored at least every 5 years or if verification occurs on a frequency of less than every 5 years examination must occur prior to any verification event.
Value applied: n/a
Monitoring equipment:
QA/QC procedures to be applied:
Calculation method:
Any comment:
Data Unit / Parameter: Staff Training
Data unit: Training days and training types
Description: Number and type of training days for Yacumama staff
Source of data: Yacumama Management Records
Description of measurement methods and procedures to be applied:
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Must be monitored at least every 5 years or if verification occurs on a frequency of less than every 5 years examination must occur prior to any verification event.
Value applied: n/a
Monitoring equipment:
QA/QC procedures to be applied:
Calculation method:
Any comment:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
69
Data Unit / Parameter: Health Care Support to Community
Data unit: Financial amount provided to clinic; number of days Amazon Promise uses Yacumama lodge facilities and other logistical support
Description: Financial Support to Puerto Miguel Clinic
Source of data: Yacumama Management Records
Description of measurement methods and procedures to be applied:
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Must be monitored at least every 5 years or if verification occurs on a frequency of less than every 5 years examination must occur prior to any verification event.
Value applied: n/a
Monitoring equipment:
QA/QC procedures to be applied:
Calculation method:
Any comment:
Data Unit / Parameter: Financial and logistical support for Puerto Miguel tree nursery and Fish farm
Data unit: Specific financial and logistical support
Description:
Source of data:
Description of measurement methods and procedures to be applied:
Frequency of monitoring/recording: Must be monitored at least every 5 years or if verification occurs on a frequency of less than every 5 years examination must occur prior to any verification event.
Value applied: n/a
Monitoring equipment:
QA/QC procedures to be applied:
Calculation method:
Any comment:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
70
9 REFERENCES AND LITERATURE CONSULTED
Brown, S. 1997. Estimating biomass and biomass change of tropical forests: a primer. FAO Forestry
Paper 134, Rome, Italy.
Chave, J., C. Andalo, S. Brown, M. A. Cairns, J. Q. Chambers, D. Eamus, H. Folster, F. Fromard, N.
Higuchi, T. Kira, J. P. Lescure, B. W. Nelson, H. Ogawa, H. Puig, B. Riera and T. Yamakura. 2005. Tree
allometry and improved estimation of carbon stocks and balance in tropical forests. Oecologia 145: 87-99.
Finer, M., and M. Orta-Martinez.2010 A second hydrocarbon boom threatens the Peruvian Amazon:
trends, projections, and policy implications. Environmental Research Letters. 5:
Gehring, C., S. Park, and M. Denich. 2004. Liana allometric biomass equations for Amazonian primary
and secondary forest. Forest Ecology and Management 195: 69-83.
Gerwing, J.J., and D.L. Farias. 2000. Integrating liana abundance and forest stature into an estimate of
total aboveground biomass for an eastern Amazonian forest. Journal of Tropical Ecology 16: 327-335.
Henman, J.E., S. P. Hamburg, and A. A. Salazar Vega. 2008Feasibility and barriers to entry for small-
scale CDM forest carbon projects: A case study from Northeastern Peru. Carbon and Climate L. Rev.
3:254-263.
Gutierrez-Velez, V., R. DeFries, M. Pinedo-Vasquez, M. Uriarte, C. Padoch, W. Baethgen, K. Fernandes,
and Y. Lim. High-yield oil palm expansion spares land at the expense of forests in the Peruvian Amazon.
Environmental Research Letters 6 (2011) 044029 (5pp) doi:10.1088/1748-9326/6/4/044029
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
71
Josse, C., G. Navarro, F. Encarnación, A. Tovar, P. Comer, W. Ferreira, F. Rodríguez, J. Saito, J.
Sanjurjo, J. Dyson, E. Rubin de Celis, R. Zárate, J. Chang, M. Ahuite, C. Vargas, F. Paredes, W. Castro,
J. Maco y F.Reátegui. 2007. Ecological Systems of the Amazon Basin of Peru and Bolivia.Clasification
and Mapping. NatureServe. Arlington, Virginia, USA .
Kvist, L.P., and G. Nebel. 2001. A review of Peruvian flood plain forests: ecosystems, inhabitants and
resource use. Forest Ecology and Management 150: 3-26.
Lamotte, S. 1990. Fluvial dynamics and succession in the Lower Ucayali River basin, Peruvian Amazon.
Forest Ecology and Management 33/34: 141-156.
Magnussen, S. and D. Reed. 2004. Modeling for estimation and monitoring. National Forest Assessments
Knowledge Reference. FAO-IUFRO. Available online at http://www.fao.org/forestry/8758/en. Accessed
January 9, 2012.
McClain, M. E. and R. E. Cossio. 2003. The use and conservation of riparian zones in the rural Peruvian
Amazon. Environmental Conservation 30:242–248.
Nebel, G. 2001. Sustainable land-use in Peruvian flood plain forests: options, planning and
implementation. Forest Ecology and Management 150: 187-198.
Nebel, G., J. Dragsted, and A.S. Vega. 2001a. Litter fall, biomass and net primary production in flood
plain forests in the Peruvian Amazon. Forest Ecology and Management 150: 93-102.
Nebel, G., L. P. Kvist, J. K. Vanclay, H. Christensen, L. Freitas, and J. Ruiz. 2001b. Structure and floristic
composition of flood plain forests in the Peruvian Amazon I. Overstorey. Forest Ecology and Management
150: 27-57.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
72
Pearson, T., S. Walker and S. Brown. 2005. Sourcebook for land use, land-use change and forestry
projects. Winrock International and the BioCarbon Fund of the World Bank.
Reyes, G., S. Brown, J. Chapman and A.E. Lugo. 1992. Wood densities of tropical tree species. USDA
Forest Service, General Technical Report No. S0-88. Southern Forest Experiment Station, New Orleans.
Saint-Paul, U., J. Zuanon, M. A. Vallacorta Correa, M. Garcia, N. N. Fabre, U. Berger, and W. Junk. 2000.
Fish communities in central Amazonian white- and blackwater floodplains. Environmental Biology of
Fishes 57: 235-250.
Salo, J., R. Kalliola, I. Hakkinen, Y. Makinen, P. Niemela, M. Puhakka, and P. D. Coley. 1986. River
dynamics and the diversity of Amazon lowland forest. Nature 322: 254-258.
Schnitzer, S., S.J. DeWalt, and J. Chave. 2006. Censusing and Measuring Lianas: A Quantitative
Comparison of the Common Methods. Biotropica 38(5): 581-591.
Schnitzer, S., S. Rutishauser, and S. Aguilar. 2008. Supplemental protocol for liana censuses. Forest
Ecology and Management 255: 1044-1049.
Schulman, L., K. Ruokolainen , L. Junikka, I. E. Sääksjärvi, M. Salo, S-K. Juvonen, J. Salo , and
M.Higgins. 2007. Amazonian biodiversity and protected areas:do they meet? Biodiversity Conservation
16:3011–3051
Solano, P. 2009. Legal framework for protected areas: Peru. IUCN-EPLP No. 81:53 pp.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION VCS Version 3, CCB Standards Second Edition
v3.0
73
Soares-Filho, B., et al. 2006. Modelling conservation in the Amazon basin, Nature,
440: 520–523.
Soini, P., Sicchar, L. A., Gil, N. G., Fachin, T. A., Pezo, R., Chumbe, A. M., 1996. Una evaluation de la
fauna Silvestre y su aprovachamiento de la reserve nacional Pacaya-Samiria, Peru. Instituto de
Investigaciones de la Amazonia Peruana, Iquitos. Documento Technico No. 24, 64pp.
Valqui, T. 1996. Preliminary bird list of Yacumama lodge and surroundings. Report submitted to
Yacumama lodge. 10 pages.
Velarde SJ, Ugarte-Guerra J, Tito MR, Capella JL, Sandoval M, Hyman G, Castro A, Marín JA and
Barona E. 2010. Reducing Emissions from All Land Uses in Peru. Final National Report. ASB
Partnership for the Tropical Forest Margins. Nairobi, Kenya. 142 p.
Winrock International. 2006. Carbon Storage in the Los Amigos Conservation Concession, Madre de
Dios, Peru. http://www.winrock.org/ecosystems/files/LACC_Carbon.pdf. Accessed April 4, 2013.
Wittmann, F, J. Schöngart, and W. J. Junk. 2011.W.J. Phytogeography, Species Diversity, Community
Structure and Dynamics of Central Amazonian Floodplain Forests. In: Amazonian Floodplain Forests:
Ecophysiology, Junk et al. (eds.), Biodiversity and Sustainable Management, Ecological Studies 210.