Disturbance and forest recovery in the Monarch Butterfly Biosphere Reserve, Mexico

Abstract

Analysis of the change in forest cover is important to determine stand dynamics and the processes involved in disturbance and recovery. Forests of the core zone of the Monarch Butterfly Biosphere Reserve were studied using photo interpretation techniques, considering biennial changes between 1999 and 2013 and changes over the whole period of study 1999–2013. Error matrices were elaborated to determine the processes of change involved in both recovery and disturbance. The biennial changes for the whole period amounted to 2274 ha; 343 ha accounted as degraded in more than one biennial period. The total changes in forest cover between 1999 and 2013 involved 4902 ha, out of which, 2912 ha were affected by disturbance, and 1990 ha were recovered. For density and 2013 vegetation cover maps, the overall accuracy was 95.6% and 90.2%, respectively. By combining both maps, gradual processes were revealed that were not evident in separate analyses. This methodology is useful for the management and conservation of natural protected areas.

Keywords

Illegal logging / Forest density change / Forest recovery / Conifer forests / Monarch Butterfly Biosphere Reserve

References

[1] Alcántara-Ayala I, López-García J, Garnica R. On the landslide event in 2010 in the Monarch Butterfly Biosphere Reserve, Angangueo, Michoacán, Mexico. Landslides, 2012, 9: 263-273.

[2] Anderson-Teixeira KJ, DeLucia EH. The greenhouse gas value of ecosystems. Glob Change Biol, 2011, 17: 425-438.

[3] Angelsen A, Wertz-Kanounnikoff S (2008) What are the key design issues for REDD and the criteria for assessing options? In: Angelsen A (ed.) Moving ahead with REDD: Issues, options and implications, pp 11–21. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR)

[4] Avery TE (1969) Forester’s guide to aerial photo interpretation. Agriculture Handbook No. 308, p 40. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Washington, D.C.: Forest Service. U.S. Government Printing Office

[5] Brower LP, Castilleja G, Peralta A, López-García J, Bojorquez-Tapia L, Diaz S, Melgarejo D, Missrie M. Quantitative changes in forest quality in a principal overwintering area of the monarch butterfly in Mexico, 1971–1999. Conserv Biol, 2002, 6(2): 346-359.

[6] Brower L, Taylor O, Williams E, Slayback D, Zubieta R, Ramírez M. Decline of monarch butterflies overwintering in México: is the migratory phenomenon at risk?. Insect Conserv Divers, 2012, 5: 95-100.

[7] Champo-Jiménez O, Valderrama-Landeros L, España-Boquera M (2012) Pérdida de cobertura forestal en la Reserva de la Biósfera Mariposa Monarca, Michoacán, México. (2006–2010). Revista Chapingo. Serie Ciencias Forestales y del Ambiente 18(2):143–157

[8] Dahdouh-Guebas F, Verheyden A, De Genst W, Hettiarachchi S, Koedam N. Four decades vegetation dynamics in Sri Lankan mangroves as detected from sequential aerial photography: a case study in Galle. Bull Mar Sci, 2000, 67(2): 741-759.

[9] FAO (2000) On definitions of forest and forest change. Forest resources assessment. Working Paper 33, 14p. Rome, Italia

[10] FAO (2010) Global forest resources assessment 2010. Main report. FAO Forestry Paper No. 163, 378p. Rome, Italy

[11] FAO (2012) Terms and definitions. Forest resources assessment Working Paper 180,31p. Rome, Italy

[12] FAO (2015) Global Forest Resources Assessment 2015. Desk Reference. (Main report.) FAO. Rome, Italy, 253p

[13] Fensham R, Fairfax R. Aerial photography for assessing vegetation change: a review of applications and the relevance of findings for Australian vegetation history. Aust J Bot, 2002, 50: 415-429.

[14] Figueroa F, Sánchez-Cordero V, Illoldi-Rangel P, Linaje M. Evaluation of protected area effectiveness for preventing land use and land cover changes in Mexico. Is an index good enough?. Revista Mexicana de Biodiversidad, 2011, 82: 951-963.

[15] Garduño BN. Diagnóstico fitosanitario forestal, 2011, México: Reserva de la Biosfera Mariposa Monarca en el Estado de México p106

[16] Honey-Rosés J. Illegal logging in common property forests. Soc Nat Res, 2009, 22: 916-930.

[17] Honey-Rosés J, López-García J, Rendón-Salinas E, Peralta-Higuera A, Galindo-Leal C (2009) To pay or not to pay? Monitoring performance and enforcing conditionality when paying for forest conservation in Mexico. Environ Conserv 36:120–128 http://www.ciesin.columbia.edu/docs/002-471/002-471.html. Accessed 09 May 2015

[18] López-García J (2009) Análisis de cambio en la cobertura forestal en la zona núcleo de la Reserva de la Biosfera Mariposa Monarca: 2003-2006. In: Conceptos y aplicaciones de la geomática en México. México: Instituto de Geografía, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, [Aguirre R (ed.)] pp 195–210

[19] López-García J. Deforestation and forest degradation in the Monarch Butterfly Biosphere Reserve, Mexico, 2003–2009. J Maps, 2011, 7(1): 626-633.

[20] López-García J, Alcántara-Ayala I. Land-use change and hillslope instability in the Monarch Butterfly Biosphere Reserve, Central Mexico. Land Degrad Dev, 2012, 23: 384-397.

[21] López-García J, Vega A. Vegetation and land use 2009: Monarch Butterfly Biosphere Reserve,Mexico. J Maps, 2010, 6(1): 665-673.

[22] López-García J, Manzo-Delgado L, Alcántara-Ayala I. Rural aquaculture as a sustainable alternative for forest conservation in the Monarch Butterfly Biosphere Reserve, Mexico. J Enviro Manag, 2014, 138: 43-54.

[23] López-García J, Prado Molina J, Manzo-Delgado LL, Peralta Higuera A. Monitoring changes of forest canopy density in a temperate forest using high-resolution. Boletín del Instituto de Geografía, Investigaciones Geográficas, 2016, 90: 59-74.

[24] Lund HG. What is a forest? Definitions do make a difference: an example from Turkey. Avrasya Terim Dergisi, 2014, 2(1): 1-8.

[25] Manzo-Delgado L, López-García J, Alcántara-Ayala I. Role of forest conservation in lessening land degradation in a temperate region: the Monarch Butterfly Biosphere Reserve, Mexico. J Environ Manag, 2014, 138: 55-66.

[26] Merino-Pérez L, Hernández-Apolinar M. Destrucción de instituciones comunitarias y deterioro de los bosques de la Reserva de la Biosfera Mariposa Monarca, Michoacán, México. Revista Mexicana de Sociología, 2004, 66: 261-309.

[27] Miller AD, Dietze MC, DeLucia EH, Anderson-Teixeira KJ. Alteration of forest succession and carbon cycling under elevated CO2. Glob Change Biol, 2016, 22: 351-363.

[28] Navarrete JL, Ramírez M, Pérez-Salicrup D. Logging within protected areas: spatial evaluation of the monarch butterfly biosphere reserve, Mexico. For Ecol Manag, 2012, 262: 646-654.

[29] Pan Y, Richard A, Birdsey RA, Fang J, Houghton R, Kauppi PE, Kurz WA, Phillips OL, Shvidenko A, Lewis SL, Canadel JGI, Ciais P, Jackson RB, Pacala SW, McGuire AD, Piao S, Rautiainen A, Sitch S, Hayes D. A large and persistent carbon sink in the world’s forests. Science, 2011, 333: 988-993.

[30] Ramírez MI, Giménez A, Luna L. Effects of human activities on monarch butterfly habitat in protected mountain forest, Mexico. For Chron, 2003, 79: 242-246.

[31] SEMARNAT (2010) Norma Oficial Mexicana NOM-059-SEMARNAT-2010, Protección ambiental– Especies nativas de México de flora y fauna silvestres– Categorías de riesgo y especificaciones para su inclusión, exclusión o cambio– Lista de especies en riesgo. Diario Oficial de la Federación 30 diciembre, 2010. México, 77p

[32] Venegas PY, Rodríguez S, López DT (2011) Análisis base para el diseño de la estrategia de reforestación de la Reserva de la Biosfera Mariposa Monarca. http://monarchbuterflyfund.org/sites/default/files/Analisis_Reforestacion_RBMM_MBF_2011.pdf. Accessed 19 June 2015

[33] Verheyden A, Dahdouh-Guebas F, Thomaes W, De Genst S, Hettiarachchi S, Koedam N. High Resolution vegetation data for mangrove research as obtained from aerial photography. Environ Dev Sustain, 2002, 4(2): 113-133.

[34] Vidal O, López-García J, Rendón-Salinas E. Trends in deforestation and forest degradation after a decade of monitoring in the Monarch Butterfly Biosphere Reserve in Mexico. Conserv Biol, 2014, 28: 177-186.