A historical investigation of forest management in Gojjam, Ethiopia: Utilization - annihilation - recuperation nexus

Abstract

Contemporary environmental historiographies make an effort to describe current challenges in forest settings and act as the main source of information for resolving current issues. As a result, one of the key topics in the environmental theme of the Ethiopian sub-national region, Gojjam is the study of forests and forest management. However, no research has yet been done on the empirical nature of government policies regarding forests as a source of income and, subsequently, their destruction, and practices of reforestation against deforestation. This essay’s objectives are to review the province’s pre-1941 forest management practices, to compare and contrast implementations of policies of management and conservation of forests, to examine the economic and environmental roles of government and community forest enterprises and to compare the success and failure of reforestation in comparison to the deforestation process. The researcher used the qualitative approach because it is a naturalistic strategy that aids in understanding historical processes and human experiences in a particular historical context. For the study’s qualitative analysis, both primary and secondary data sources were utilized. Therefore, it is hoped that this research would significantly advance our understanding of how forest management has changed and remained consistent as well as enhance the environmental history of Gojjam Province.

Keywords:

• Forest
• forest management
• environmental
• reforestation
• forest setting, forest policy, degradation

1. Introduction

One of Ethiopia’s administrative regions, Gojjam, can be found along the Blue Nile’s arc from its source at Lake Tana to the western border of contemporary Sudan. The area’s precise coordinates are between 10° and 12° N latitudes and 35° and 39° E longitudes. The country of M eroe in contemporary Sudan was its westernmost frontier at the time. The final limits of Gojjam, however, were later thought to be Quara and Agaw Midir in the northwest and southwest, respectively (Muse, 1993). Provinces Gondar in the north, Wollo in the east, Showa, and Wollega in the south border the province after the Abay River. The province has a total surface area of around 64,500 sq. km (6,450,000 hectares), and its physical features include highland, plain, and lowland., (UNDP and FAO, 1984a; DMUAC, Archive, 1986).

Man uses his dominance to exert influence on forest ecology, resulting in critical environmental damage. Since the twentieth century, the demand for forests for domestic purposes such as building, poles, fuel, charcoal, grazing land, cultivation, and settlement has grown at an alarming rate (McCann, 1995; Zewde, 2008, Myllyntaua and Saikku, 2001).

On the other hand, human activity not only has a negative impact on forest resources but also has a positive impact on how different cultures approach the preservation of forests and other natural resources. In the 1950s, Ethiopian governments began paying attention to prevent environmental diversions. Environmental scholars and policy officials asserted these ecological catastrophes and created legislation to reduce them with long-lasting repercussions. For instance, “the Ethiopian Wildlife Conservation Organization (EWCO) created an exclusionary protected areas policy that safeguarded human access and required compulsory resettlement when it was established in 1965.” (Bahru, McCann, 1995; Patterson, 2007; Zewde, 2008).

Throughout the imperial era, forests were a part of both common and governmental assets. The management and exploitation of woodlands under this broad ownership paradigm resulted in significant harm and heedless exploitation. The majority of Gojjam’s measures for forest development, prevention, and management were centred around the main thoroughfares. For little payment, forest seedlings have been planted and given at agricultural plantation centres for both urban and rural residents. Farming technic workers, forest guards, and temporary workers prepared and distributed forest seedlings (DMUAC, Archive, 1972).

Prior to the droughts of the 1970s and 1980s, Ethiopia’s vast savanna woodland covered much of the nation. Gojjam also offered potential recognised natural forest resources. The 1970s saw the destruction of forests despite the fact that only the forest covers in Metekal and Agaw Midir Awrajas were protected. Similar to other regions of the country, the province’s peasants have primarily relied on agricultural revenues, which has resulted in significant deforestation as trees have been cut down to make room for agricultural and grazing pastures (DMUAC, Archive, 1972).

When deforestation became out of control, the monarchial authority created restrictions to safeguard forest resources. The government issued a decree in 1965 to protect forests that were both owned by the government and privately. It began to explicitly shift from forest preservation to forestation and reforestation activities in the late 1960s and early 1970s. In August 1975, the military administration also announced a commitment to safeguarding the environment, particularly forests. After that, society took measures to curb the destruction of trees for fuel and other purposes. In 1979–1980, the Community Forest Strategy was introduced. Despite official efforts, significant forest degradation persisted even as the rule came to an end (Zewde, 2008).

In 1997, the EPRDF administration unveiled a new environmental plan. The fundamental objective of the strategy was to increase the standard of living in Ethiopian society by promoting the sustainability of natural resources like forests. An emphasis is placed on “preserving fundamental ecological processes, the life support system, biological diversity, reforestation and the construction of erosion control structures, sustainable exploitation of non-renewable resources, improvement of human society’s environment, etc.” in the adopted policy. However the government’s attempts to accomplish these objectives at the local level failed (Patterson, 2007).

As a result, this study attempts first to focus on the analysis of government policy scenarios on forestation and reforestation in comparison to deforestation processes. Second, analyze the change and continuity of forest resource management in Gojjam, focusing on the destruction and recovery processes, as well as the role of governments and communities in forest management. Although there have been several studies on Ethiopian forestry at the world, national, regional, and sub-regional levels, there have been relatively few studies on the province of Gojjam’s forest resources and management practices. In the area that was originally known as Gojjam province, forests are a natural resource whose past and present conditions have gotten little attention from scholars. This study will thus make an effort to close a gap in the knowledge of Gojjam’s forest management. It might also act as a catalyst for new forestry research, adding to the body of work already done on Ethiopian history and bridging a knowledge gap in the study of this area of the environment.

2. Overview of Forest Management and Utilization Policy Scenarios

Despite a long history of forest degradation caused by the negative effects of unplanned land-use types, an effort to design a long-term forest policy was a relatively new phenomenon. The first forest policy was announced in 1962, during the Second Five Year Development Plan (1963–67). (UNDP and FAO, 1984c). Prior to this, the imperial government prioritised natural resource conservation, including the issue in article 130 of the revised constitution, which states that “the government shall take necessary and proper measures for conservation of natural resources and that none of said resources shall be exploited in violation of the conservation principles established by Imperial Law.” In line with this constitutional consideration, the government declared state forests.

In 1965, the government repealed all written and conventional laws, orders, and regulations that had previously been in effect, with the exception of a 1944 in-game proclamation, and announced state forest proclamation, private forest conservation proclamation, and protective forests percolation. This was done in accordance with the constitutional considerations raised. According to Forest Proclamation No. 225 of 1965, all forests now or in the future owned or managed by the government (and not owned/possessed by or on behalf of any individual) are classified as state forests and must be preserved, developed, and used in accordance with this proclamation. It delegated sole authority to the Ministry of Agriculture for the conservation, protection, management, and utilisation of state forests. Proclamation No. 226 of 1965 states that all forests not owned by the state are the property of the owners, but no one may remove, use, or destroy any forest product from a private forest unless he obtains a forest exploitation permit from the minister. Similarly, Proclamation No. 227 of 1965 deals with the declaration of protective forests throughout the empire. It was stated that “any land on which the minister deems the creation and maintenance of permanent vegetative cover in the form of trees and shrubs to be indispensable” (Negarit Gazeta (News Paper) (1965), Proclamation No. 226 and 227; Negarit Gazeta (1968), Legal Notice No. 343, 344, 345 and 346).

In general, the 1965 declarations state that forests are under the sole control of the state and should be conserved, developed, and used in accordance with scientific principles to protect soil erosion, balance the status of water, and thus preserve natural beauty while promoting empire development. The other central subject decided in these decrees was the penal decisions thereby “any person who shall be guilty of an offence and upon conviction shall be liable to punishment under the provisions of the penal Code. Anyone who alters state, private, or controlled forests by grazing animals, entering forest plantations, spreading forest parasites, lighting fires, or engaging in other similar acts would be directly subject to criminal charges. The same would apply if they removed, destroyed, or falsified any government-defined forest boundaries or removed, utilized, processed, or destroyed any forest products outside of the legal boundaries established by the edicts of 1965.

In accordance with the 1965 private forest conservation and protection proclamation, regulations were released in 1968. According to the authority granted by articles 6(e) of the Private Forest Conservation Proclamation No. 226 of 1965 and article 8(f) of the Protective Forests Proclamation No. 227 of 1965, the Ministry of Agriculture issued these proclamations. To further enhance private and governmental forest management regulations, Law Notice Nos. 343 and 344 of 1968 were issued. It talks about the dangers of forest fires, how to put them out, the role of the Teqilay Gizat and Awraja policies, grazing permits, and how to chop and haul the forests. The regulations outlined in Legal Notice No. 345 and 346 of 1968 govern the exploitation of state and private forests. The main focuses in the declaration of these regulations were the forest operation plan, methods of exploitation, marking trees for cutting, the process of marketing forest products, and the penal procedures. This year, the imperial government also declared succeeding successive. The declaration of legal Notice No. 348 announced the establishment of the community (Qebele) forest. The edict established a community forest committee comprised of the woreda governor, the head of the area’s agricultural community, the local school director, three elders, the provincial forest commissionaire representative, and a representative from the ministry of community development and social affairs. The committee completed responsibilities like creating a common fundraising organisation and a development area for forests, among others. According to the authority granted by articles 7(d), (e), and (k) of the state forest proclamation no. 225 of 1965, legal notice declarations no. 349 and 350 of 1968 clearly stated the establishment, powers, and authority of rangers and forest guards (1965, Proclamation no. 225; 1968, Legal Notice no. 349 of 1968, Legal Notice no. 350).

The imperial government’s forest declarations had two main goals: to protect forests and to provide legal footing for the launch of commercial enterprises. These assertions, meanwhile, were not backed up by a clearly defined ownership, conservation, and management programme. In 1975, the military government issued the Land Reform Proclamation, which eliminated all rist land ownership by nationalizing the farms, grazing fields, and forests and converting them into the state’s sole property. Forest governance was converted to state ownership, just like land (Stellmacher, 2007).

In 1980, the Forest Proclamation No. 192 of 1980, which offered suggestions for the preservation and development of forest and animal resources, was published. The Derg government’s announcement was based on the idea that associations of peasants and city inhabitants or the state controlled the forests. This order did not, however, avow woods to private ownership, in contrast to the other pronouncements. On the other hand, the government’s policies did not promote or encourage the role of peasant associations in the development and usage of the forest. Based on the declarations’ authority to rule, they did not formally control the forests in their territory ((1980), Proclamation No. 192).

The proclamation also encouraged the creation of forestry and wildlife conservation and development authority to safeguard, manage, and enhance the nation’s forest and animal resources. The proclamation specified the authority’s authority and obligations. As can be seen in Chart 1, the staff and agencies in the office were organized hierarchically, with the general manager at the top. The decree permits relevant governmental and community organizations to work together with the authority to maintain and develop the area’s forest and wildlife resources (DMUAC, 1982).

According to Stellmacher, the passing down of forest property rights from one generation to the next shows not just an emotional connection and bond between forest owners and their forest plot but also a commitment to sustainability that is likely to guide their behavior. However, local forest governance was not adequately strong because there was no clear enforcement following the revolution of 1975. For institutions to be effective, uniform enforcement and implementation techniques must be used (Stellmacher, 2007).

The idea that declarations were made to provide a better means of forest protection, development, and usage is what gives the forest management situation that followed the military rule its legal concerns. The 1994 Forest Edict, issued by the transitional administration, outlined major forest development and conservation initiatives to counter expanding deforestation and soil degradation. In addition to consolidating current legislation, it offers fresh strategies for better forest management with public involvement, as opposed to the flawed plans announced under the military dictatorship. State, regional, and private forests are the three categories of forest ownership listed in the proclamation. The ministry must designate, demarcate, register, and protect state forests, according to the declaration’s second section. Additionally, it promotes and provides technical help for the development, preservation, and sustainable use of state and local forests. Private forest owners are allowed to expand their land, replace logged areas with new ones, and keep their land free from pests and fire. The 2007 forest directive is another factor that strengthens this assertion. ((1994), Proclamation No. 94; (2007), Proclamation No. 542).

In general, it makes sense that neither formal laws (constitutions, regulations, and policies produced by the legal system) nor informal laws (customs, codes of conduct, traditions) of institutions could be effective in preventing the destruction of forest resources on their own. Instead, their appropriate and formal interactions are taken as a fundamental factor for the success of organizations. The Derg government undervalued (ignored) the local-level governing practices when it came to policy tenure on forest resources. Despite formal and informal institutions being permitted to administer and use forest and agricultural land during the imperial period, the community, the gultegna, and the renter lost ownership rights on forest parcels. Legal plurality without clear enforcement was a defining feature of both regimes’ approaches to managing the forest. Organizations that manage forest resources in a top-down manner are ineffective.

The majority of Ethiopia’s forests have undergone a drastic depletion despite the fact that forest lands and forests are officially declared to be the common property of the nation’s nationalities and are overseen by various laws and institutions. These practical shortcomings of forest development, management, and utilization have extended to the ruling regime after the military government, (Stellmacher, (2007), Proclamation No. 542).

3. Forest Utilization and Conservation practice: An Analytical Approach

3.1. Assaying Deeds of Forest Conservation

Given that Gojjam has fertile soil that is ideal for growing crops, it makes sense that almost all of its regions are excellent for the development of agriculture. There are also several water sources, the majority of them are perennial springs and mains. The area experiences normal rainfall and a pleasant environment. But the degree of agriculture as it stands today is still quite underdeveloped. In Gojjam, the vast majority of farmers are small-holders with a few gashas of land who pay their rent to the government directly; there are hardly any huge landowners who frequently fail to show up for work. Land has been distributed irregularly in the past. Many peasants simply have a shirt on their backs and lack the knowledge necessary to farm their land. (Asefa, 1988; DMUAC, 1977; Mooney, n.d.).

Conservation techniques for both the land and the forest ought to be combined. In order to prevent soil erosion, the first thing to do is to set aside at least 20% of the current forest as a reserve. Closed forest areas should be reserved for more than ten gashas. As contrast to other areas of the country’s land, the land near streams and river channels is heavily watered. This section should also have a reserve for the forest. Formatting laws that would allow for the effective preservation and management of forests is the first fundamental problem in forest administration and management (Mooney, n.d.).

The imperial government issued a regulation between 1950 and 1963 mandating Teqlay Gizats evaluate and record in the voucher (cash receipt) the forest lands held by the ministry of agriculture in order to produce a specified map for forest holdings. The government believed that the absence of a permanent forest map with intelligible data and delineated borders left woods open to reckless exploitation for fuel wood, building materials, crop cultivation, grazing, and other community needs. ((1971), Archive).

By making subsequent proclamations, the government strengthened the ministry of agriculture’s sole jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, management, and use of forests. For example, the ministry is reauthorized to “arrange for the delimitation of all state, private, and protective forests by the placing of boundary markers and to arrange all state, private, and protective forests in the register of movable property established by the civil code as well as in a Central Forest Cadastral Register to be established within the ministry to include all the information concerning state, private, and protective forests” by virtue of art.7(a) and (b) of proclamation No. 225, 2.” Negarit gazeta (1965), Proclamation No.225, Proclamation No. 226, Proclamation No. 227). Due to these authorizations, the ministry made an effort in 1970 to enhance its ownership of forest land and steer clear of issues with forest management. The Gojjam Teqlay Gizat agricultural office received a letter from the ministry in September 1971 requesting the voucher (receipt) proving that the forest areas had been assessed and registered in accordance with the 1950 and 1963 regulations. However, the Gojjam Teqlay Gizat’s agricultural and financial offices responded to the lack of receipts as a result of a malfunction to carry out the task of estimating forest areas in the province. (DMUAC, 1971; 1975, Archive).

After the monarchial authority was overthrown, efforts to locate and protect the province’s natural forest lands continued. The provincial administrative office was asked to locate, estimate the size, and compile a report on the natural forest land cover in the Gojjam province in 1975 by the state forest development office. However, only a few woredas and awrajas (the Ankasha and Banja woredas from Agew Midir, the Guangua and Dangur woredas from Metekel, and the Shebel Berenta, Enemay, Debay Tilatgin, and Enarj Enawga woredas from Bichena awrajas) gave responses with some extent of natural forest lands) responded with this information. Table 1 shows the extent of these local forest cover lands in three Awrajas (Ibid).

Table 1. Forest Cover Lands in 1971

No.	Awraja	Wereda	Forest cover Area/Kumele
1	Agew Midir	Ankkasha	99
		Banja	23
2	Metekel	Guangua	28
		Dangur	1600
3	Bichena	Shebel Berenta	10
		Enemay	10
		Debay Tilatgin	22
		Enemay	5
Total Cover			21300

Source: Archives from the Awraja administration office of Gojjam province

In terms of the province’s overall land area, Metekel Awraja makes up 47% of it (2868100 hectares). The Awraja was mostly covered in natural forests and had a sparsely populated populace in the 1980s. Yet, in contrast to other awrajas, not much effort was made to protect and manage natural resources. Surprisingly, state forests were only established on 4080 hectares of natural forestland (0.15%). Neither peasant association forest development nor soil and water conservation were practiced in this sub-region. No effort was made to protect woods from wildfires or mass extinction in order to produce lumber and charcoal. Sudan also cut down trees for lumber, according to a report from the provincial forest development office. In general, some of the most urgent issues for the management, development, and, and conservation of forest resources in Gojjam are discussed below.

1. Organizational weaknesses: Effective management and conservation of natural resources, particularly forest resources, require a solid organizational framework and time-bound plan implementation. The Awraja Agricultural Development Office’s natural resource development and preservation sub-sector is in charge of managing s

tate forests, peasant and urban dweller associations’ forests, as well as soil and water conservation tasks. Under such an organizational structure, the Awraja and Woreda offices of the forest departments lacked adequate forest specialists, employed personnel, and forest guards to protect natural and plantation forests. Only Awraja-level forest service employees had access to specialists, and forest guards had no way of defending themselves or the forest from those who would hurt them by recklessly using it for fuel wood, charcoal, or other purposes.

Among the departments in charge of natural resource protection and development, there were no effective horizontal and vertical dialogues, coordination, or collaboration among players at different levels. In addition, there were no papers that would have recorded daily activities, issues that arose during the implementation process, and the fixes that were made.

2. Less emphasis is paid to the development of natural resources and conservation methods. Experts in natural resource management talk about the deterioration of the soil and loss of forest cover as a result of the sector’s neglect. Yet, it necessitates a strong commitment, mobilization through dialogue and education, as well as the participation of management, experts, and the general public.

3. Peasant settlement culture: In Gojjam, the vast bulk of the peasants reside in sparsely inhabited, naturally mountainous, steep terrain. The province’s natural resources are being dangerously depleted by this peasant settlement culture, on the other hand. Peasant communities can be found all around Gojjam, but significant instances of this settlement culture include Askuna, Dinkara, and the Fuji mountain chains of Agew Midir Awraja.

4. Lack of agricultural land: It is confirmed that, despite the peasants’ awareness that crop productivity declines when forests are destroyed, they have continued to extensively use forest area for grazing and agriculture since they have no other options for survival. In this regard, government efforts to restore the degraded highland forest area were impeded by peasant opposition, which was a recognized barrier to the success of the natural resources rehabilitation program.

5. Lack of a watershed and land use plan: The research report on Gojjam’s forest development, written in 1987, gives the impression that the ministry of agriculture has not set up a map showing the patterns of the watersheds and made efforts to conserve natural resources, including forests, as well as the watershed areas. The lands utilized for farming, grazing, forests, agriculture, and other land-use categories in Gojjam are not precisely designated and planned.

6. Dearth of strong and uniform policy: Notwithstanding a national decree for the preservation and development of forests and wildlife, uniform rules and procedures pertaining to the achievement of natural resource preservation and development are not set up at different office hierarchical levels. Variations in the success of projects were caused by the failure to create universal forest development guidelines and regulations for all Awrajas and Woredas. Naturally, some analysts attribute the strengths and weaknesses of Awrajas to this inconsistency. A realistic reflection of the effectiveness gap between Qolla Dega Damot’s strengths and Metekel Awrajas’ weaknesses provides support for this theory. In general, these are the contributing factors to the ongoing decline in natural resources, particularly the amount of forest land cover in the province of Gojjam. (Abebe, 1988).

3.2. Appalling Nostalgia of Natural Resources: Deforestation in Gojjam

Due to a number of variables, there is a significant rate of forest degradation throughout the world. The removal of timber, grazing, shifting agriculture, conversion of natural forest areas into plantations for sugar, rubber, or oil palm, and shifting agriculture are the main drivers of forest degradation. The prevalence of environmental devastation brought on by civilization entirely retards the economic expansion of natural resources, especially the forest land cover in Gojjam Province, (Gadow, 2001).

There is no reliable source that offers details on the historical state of Ethiopia’s forests with regard to deforestation. H. F. Mooney, a forestry expert, has claimed that Ethiopia was a territory covered with thick forest from ancient to relatively current eras, despite the fact that there is no tangible evidence to pinpoint the time period or the volume of deforestation that occurred. Nonetheless, it is well known that populated areas in the country’s mountainous regions are considerably harmed and losing more and more of their forest cover. The steep area first lost its forest cover due to human activity, its fertile soil flowed away, and just a few plants and grasses were left. (Mooney, n.d.; Pankhurst, 1995).

Wood was in short supply in Ethiopia’s medieval settlement regions, as well as in the royal and military camps. According to what has been said, one of the main causes of the kings’ capital moving was a lack of firewood. According to the Portuguese Jesuit Manoel de Almeida in Pankhurst, “in the early 17th century, there was not much woods in the country that was well stocked with trees.” This was caused by society’s routine practices of taking down trees for fuel and other uses without replanting a single one (Pankhurst, 1995).

Gojjam, which has a total land area of 6,450,000 hectares, is renowned for the output of diverse agricultural products and the export of surplus produce for internal use and national currency. Although it has been threatened by the custom of removing forest cover to make way for farmland and the absence of proper policies that treat proper utilization of forests and land use, the elegantly illuminating study of Gete and Humi in the northwest Ethiopian highlands, representing the Gojjam region, gives an idea about the productivity of land. The results show a decline in the area’s natural forest cover from 27% in 1957 to 2% in 1982 and 0.3% in 1995. The entire area of forest removed between 1957 and 1995 was roughly 7259 hectares. It demonstrates that 99% of the entire land cover in 1957 was cleared of trees throughout this time. Contrary to the loss in forest area, the amount of land used for farming climbed from 39% to 70% between 1957 and 1982 and then further increased to 77% in 1995. This striking alteration shows how the Gojjam province’s land was degraded throughout these times due to the high rate of deforestation that prevailed at the time. (Zelekke & Humi, 2001).

In 1984, FAO planned to support Ethiopian land use planning based on an inventory of land use, producing regions, and farming techniques. It employed Landsat MSS data from 1973 to 1977 with 1975 as the average reference year, plus some additional ground samples and field tests. In order to study Ethiopia’s areas with forest cover, the project created a map of Ethiopia’s land use and land cover at a scale of 1:1,000,000. As a result, the figures in Table 2 below include the area covered by forests according to the FRA1990 classification, which was derived from the FAO’s baseline paper. (FAO, 1984).

Table 2. Forest Cover Area Data in Ethiopia/1984. (Areas are in 1000‘s of hectares)

National Sub-Unit	Sub-Unit Area		Forest Cover Area
	In hectares	In %	In hectares	In %
Arsi	3 053	2.45	220	1.48
Bale	12 641	10.16	2 833	19.10
Gamo-Gofa	4 061	3.26	1 503	10.13
Gojjam	5 848	4.70	173	1.16
Gonder	7 725	6.21	913	6.15
Eritrea	12 157	9.77	233	1.57
Harerge	26 359	21.19	377	2.54
Ilubabor	5 344	4.29	1 998	13.47
Keffa	4875	3.92	1 628	10.97
Shewa	8531	6.86	653	4.40
Sidamo	11 542	9.28	2 862	19.30
Tigray	6 799	5.46	137	0.92
Welega	7 311	5.87	977	6.58
Welo	8 099	6.51	321	2.16
Total	124 345	100	14 828	100

Source: USAID (www.usaid.gov)

Gojjam is one of the national sub-units, accounting for 4.70 percent of the country’s total area (5848 hectares in 1000 units), as seen in Table 2 and pie chart 2. The province accounts for 5.46 percent of Ethiopia’s total land area and is rated as the 10^th sub-region, just below Tigri. Gojjam, however, places 13^th in terms of its forest land cover according to the FAO’s baseline document. According to reports, the province accounts for 2.95% of the province’s varied land-use types and 1.16% of the nation’s total forest cover. The top three sub regions in Ethiopia’s forest cover are Sidamo (19.30%), Bale (19.10%), and Ilubabor (13.47%), whereas the bottom three are Arsi (1.48%), Gojjam (1.16%), and Tigri (0.92%).

Chart 2. Sub-national area and forest cover in percent.

Chart 1. Administrative Structure of Forestry and Wildlife Conservation and Development Authority.

Humans and other animals have relied on forest goods both directly and indirectly. Man must consequently safeguard and conserve forest resources for both his advantage and the security of his surroundings. Rehabilitation efforts for these resources, which have been ruined by careless use, should be made as a matter of course. Otherwise, he will leave the future generation with serious environmental worries (Asefa, 1988).

Ethiopia’s tropical location is responsible for the occurrence of several environmental conditions favorable to plant and animal survival. The development of geographical areas with various altitudinal settings, which alter tropical habitats and produce a suitable environment for plant and animal survival, is the cause of this beneficial environment. The increase in population size and demand for agricultural land, combined with government policies promoting local ownership, resulted in the degradation of forests and soil, culminating in drought and desertification. This environmental hazard mostly affected Ethiopia’s northeastern area. The 1985 drought in Gojjam (in Mota and Bichana Awrajas) was one of the examples of these environmental problems in Ethiopia (Ibid).

Rapid population growth led to a rise in the demand of agricultural land available for raising crops and livestock. On the other hand, this population growth caused permanent damage to natural resources, particularly to forests. The Ministry of Agriculture provided the statistics on land use and cover expressing different categories of land use/cover types in north-western Ethiopia using tabular and chart organizations.

chart 3. Land Use/Land Cover Types (1985).

The data in chart 3 demonstrates that grazing (46%) and cultivated fields (45%) make up the majority of the land use/cove. Marsh and forest lands, on the other hand, make up the least amount of the provinces’ total land use land cover types, at 1 and 2 percent, respectively. Around 91% of the province’s land is used for farming and animal husbandry, two agricultural industries directly responsible for the severe loss of forest cover and the degradation of the soil.

The revolutionary military government paid close attention to this particularly dreadful type of forest degradation and took steps to reverse it. These forest regulations, however, were not successfully implemented, and the hoped-for objectives were not met.

The 1987 annual land-use data of Gojjam, as shown in chart 4, province shows that six awrajas had covered about 6,122,400 hectares of total area. From this entire area, about 1.04 % and 0.69 % were covered by natural and plantation forests respectively. The highest section is utilized for farmland (33.45%) followed by grazing land covering about 22.89%). It is difficult to recuperate the destroyed forests of the province if it continues at this rate of the destruction. Therefore, it is important to create awareness and mobilize the people at the grassroots level for large-scale reforestation activity. Moreover, raising the morals of forest experts who actively and efficiently perform tasks of professional obligations are also from the measures needed to address forest degradation in Gojjam. Table 3 and table 4 below demonstrates the percentage of total surface area and land use type of the province per awrajas in the year 1985 and 1987 respectively, (Asefa, 1988).

Chart 4. Land Use/Cover Types (1987).

Table 3. Land-Use/Cover Types in “000 hectares” (1985)

Awraja	Area /hec. in 1000/	Cultivated land			Forest land						Bush land	Shrub land		Grass land			Marsh & swamp
D/Markos	718	-	505	25	-	-	-	-	2	-	-	-	-	9	157	20	-
Bichena	230	-	11	49	1	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Motta	324	-	149	72.6	9	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Bahir Dar	649	-	308	130.4	-	-	-	-	-	-	15.2	-	59.4	62.8	14.2	-	59
Agew Midir	460	40	197	49	-	6	-	-	-	-	6	-	82	72.8	43.2	-	-
Metekel	3179	1.16	242.84	479.2	-	36	75	1	-	-	32.8	29	146	1255.6	880.4	-	-
Q/Dega Damot	783	11.18	442.82	100.8	8	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	10.2	-	197	13	-
Total	6343	52.34	1855.66	906	18	42	75	1	2	-	54	29	279.6	1400.2	1419.6	33	59

Source: Gojjam and Gondar State Farm Enterprises Annual Report 1984

Table 4. Land use/Land cover type in Gojjam per Awrajas (1987)

Awraja	Total Area (Hectare)	Land Use Type & Its Area (%)
		Cropped land	Grazing Land	Forest		Others	Bush land	Utilized Land	Un prod - uctive Land
				Natural	Artificial
D/Markos	690,200	31.40	34.31	-	0.39	2.40	2.40	6.50	2.60
Bichena	312,400	66.5	15.5	-	0.26	2.0	1.4	-	14.34
Mota	391,000	68.52	12.92	0.01	0.29	2.8	5.06	-	10.4
Bahir Dar	827, 400	40.85	17.61	2.28	0.52	3.7	4.00	2.0	29.0
Agew Midir	380,000	57.1	21.98	3.00	0.74	2.9	2.00	2.7	9.5
Metekel	2,868,100	13*	63*	-	-	-	-	-	-
Qolla Dega Damot	653,300	48.3	35	2.8	0.45	2.3	1.25	2.7	7.2
Total	6,122,400	33.45	22.89	1.04	0.69	2.69	2.7	2.32	22.8

Source: Forest Development Research Report in Gojjam

Gojjam has experienced tremendous changes in land use and land cover during the past 50 years as nearly all surface areas were converted to agricultural lands. The custom of removing land for agricultural purposes and the existence of ineffective government policies are two major causes of these shifts. The sources support that the degradation rate has intensified since the 1950s. (Asefa, 1988).

In 1996, the Amhara Regional Council and the UN Economic Commission for Africa worked together to examine the socioeconomic and environmental statistics in the area using 2000 samples. The East, West, and Awi administrative zones of the former Gojjam province were represented by 154 peasant associations and 600 households from this sample size of the region. The program seeks to promote sustainable agriculture while restoring the ecology. The conversation, which was held in collaboration with the Amhara Regional State Council and the UN Economic Commission, mainly concentrated on demographic factors, land use patterns, water resources, forest and wildlife resources, mineral and tourism resources, agriculture, and other economic activities. With regard to land use category and management of forest resources, the analysis has created a variety of land use/cover patterns, which are presented in the chart 5. The data show that of the region’s total land area, about 27.3% is classified as crop land, 30% as grazing land, 2.1% as forest land, 12.6 as herb land, 18.9 as uncultivable ground, and 9.1% as settlement, water body, and swampy regions. The pie chart shows that the region’s land use category is used the most (57.3%), (ARC and UNECA.

Chart 5. Land Use/Cover Types (1996).

The forest cover area stated in the graph below is organized from the 2001/02 report dada of land use management and environmental protection offices of West Gojjam, East Gojjam, and Awi zones. As reported from these zonal offices, from different land-use categories about 13% of the total areas of these zones representing Gojjam were covered by forests (natural and plantation). From the three zonal units of Gojjam, Awi recounts about 28.10% of forest cover followed by West Gojjam (9.36%) and East Gojjam (8.41%).

The Amhara National Regional State Finance and Economic Development Bureau’s annual statistical bulletin for the 2006–2007 fiscal year is used to compile the data shown in table 5 below. It describes the various land use and cover types in the Amhara regional state. (DMUAC, 2008).

Table 5. Land Use/Land Cover Type (2006/7)

Zone	Area/sq.km	Land use/Cover Type in %
		Forest Land		Cultivated land	Grass land	Shrub	Swamp	Water	Others
		Natural Forest	Plantation Forest
Awi	8584.8	46.1	6.8	6.9	4.4	4.0	17.3	-	0.7
West Gojjam	13280.4	11.9	16.5	11.3	8.2	2.6	33.2	-	2.1
East Gojjam	14024.5	30.1	12.7	15.2	11.7	3.1	25.7	-	10.7
South Gondar		5.8	3.2	12.8	7.9	9.6	3.6	-	6.8
North Gondar		127.1	5.8	22.7	22.7	36.5	3.1	-	15.8
Oromia		14.6	2.3	0.9	1.8	5.2	7.9	-	3.6
North Shewa		23.2	17.1	11.5	10.8	7.9	7.1	-	18.5
Waghemra		1.5	0.0	1.6	9.9	9.7	0.0	-	5.8
South Wollo		23	35.6	10.8	15.5	7.9	0.9	-	26.8
North Wollo		16.6	0.0	6.3	7.2	13.5	1.2	-	9.2
Region		7.6	1.2	36.3	17.1	27.6	0.8	2.0	7.5

Source: The Amhara National Regional State Finance and Economic Development 2006/7 Budget Year Annual Statistical Bulletin.

Since it informs us of environmental changes and helps us assess and manage natural resources, the detection of land use/land cover change is a significant issue. It is discovered by examining data gathered from remotely sensed sources (Bottomley 1998). The researcher attempted to reinforce the research findings on the forest condition in Gojjam by examining the remotely sensed photos in addition to archival data and literature analysis on land use/land cover queries in Gojjam areas. Images from two province-wide sample areas,as indicated in figure 1, were used to represent the research area in the years 1973, 1987, 2001, and 2011. These photos, which may be seen in Table 6, cover the main land-use characteristics of forest land, bush and shrub, agriculture, grazing land, and water body. As example areas one and two, respectively, we use about 707,513 hectares of land in the east of Gojjam, primarily highland topographies, including the Choqe mountain group, and 860,587 hectares of land in the west of Gojjam and the Awi Administrative Zones, mostly plain areas. An area of around 1,568,100 hectares (24.31%) of the early Gojjam province’s entire area (6450000 hectares) is selected for the study.

Figure 1. Map showing location of the two sample Areas.

Table 6. Land Use/Cover Types and Its Area

Land use/cover type	Samples	Land use/cover type and its area per hectare and %
		Class 1973		Class 1987		Class 2001		Class 2011
		In hectare	In %	In hectare	%	In hectare	In %	In hectare	In %
Forest Land	Sample 1	226263	32	219338	31	230989	33	292122	41
	Sample 2	180938	21	190749	22	173927	20	331535	39
	Total	407201	26	410087	26	404916	26	623657	40
Bush & shrub	Sample 1	94527	13	100950	14	94416.5	13	90912.76	13
	Sample 2	268485	31	249083	29	266440	31	137267	16
	Total	363012	23	350033	22	360856.5	23	228179.8	15
Farm land	Sample 1	128953	18	157418	22	138026	20	312642	44
	Sample 2	252023	30	237455	28	253960	30	240130	28
	Total	380976	24	394873	25	391986	25	552772	35
Grazing land	Sample 1	257612	37	228739	33	243428	34	11836.17	2
	Sample 2	113416	13	139959	16	121201	14	108015	13
	Total	371028	24	368698	24	364629	23	119851.2	8
Water body	Sample 1	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
	Sample 2	43206.5	5	40265.6	5	40990.9	5	39373.3	4
	Total	43206.5	3	40265.6	3	40990.9	3	39373.3	2

Source: Satellite image Analysis

Based on this tabula data of the satellite image taken from the two sample areas, the land use/land cover changes are analyzed below.

1. Sample area 1 land use/cover classification : The categories of land use/cover in sample area 1 are bush/shrubland, forest land, farming, and grazing land, as shown in figure 2 and Table 6. Four classes of years—the 1973 class, the 1987 class, the 2001 class, and the 2011 class—are used to collect and analyze the data. Grazing land occupies the largest percentage of the 1973 class (257612 hectares), followed by forest land (226263 hectares), which decreased to 228,739 and 219,338 hectares, respectively, in 1987. In 1973, the bush/shrub land-use category occupied 13% (94527 hectares) of the sample area’s overall land use cover (707513.5 hectares). In terms of the trend of change in land use coverbetween 1973 and 1987, as illustrated in chart 6, agriculture rose while pasture and forest land decreased. Farmland and bushlands have decreased in land use proportions between 1987 and 2001, whereas forest and grazing land cover has increased, albeit at differing rates. Grazing land drastically fell from 34 to 2% between 2001 and 2011. Farmland rose from 22% to 44% between 2001 and 2011, while forest cover also increased by 8% during that time.

Chart 6. Land use/cover trends of sample area 1.

Figure 2. Land use classification of sample area one (Compiled from Satellite Image).

Sample area 2 Land Use/Cover Classification: Bush/shrub, forest land, farming, grazing land, and the area covered by water are included in the land use/land cover classification under-sample area two as made known in figure 3. Bush/shrub and agriculture made up 31 and 30 percent of the sample region’s total cover in 1973, respectively, while water, pasture, and forest land made up 21, 13, and 5 percent of the total area. Farm and bush/shrublands experienced a relative reduction between 1973 and 1987, while the acreage used for grazing and forests increased. Yet, between 1987 and 2001, the amount of farmland and bush/shrubland increased while the amount of woodland and grazing grounds fell by 2%. As farming and bushland use classifications declined from 30 to 28 and 31 to 16 percent between 2001 and 2011, respectively, the area covered by forests rose by 19%. Chart 7 portrayed below is a virtuous validation to show this land use/cover change of the sample area.

Chart 7. Land use/cover change trends of sample area two.

Figure 3. Land use classification of sample area two (Compiled from satellite Image).

Sample Area 1 and 2 Land Use/cover Classification: Human modification and conversion activities result in changes to the land cover. According to scholars, changing the land cover through category modification entails changing the situation within a particular land cover type through deliberate efforts to switch from careless to proper or selective cutting and conversion category as a comprehensive cover change from one category to another (Teshome, 2007). Chart 8 presented below illustrates the average trend of changing land cover in the two sample locations. The status of each land use type did not vary significantly from 1973 to 2001, however from 2001 to 2011, they changed significantly. Bush/shrub and grazing land use types are on the decline, whilst agricultural and forest land use/cover types are on the rise. The need for land for crop production has increased due to an increase in population, which abuses grazing and bush/shrub areas. The research of this sample region, which corresponds to the Gojjam province, revealed that between 2001 and 2011, there was an increase in agricultural land use and a decrease in grazing and bush/shrub land use types. The increase in forest land cover in the sample areas, mostly since 2001, is evidence that society is becoming more aware of the economic benefits of plantation forests, in addition to policy issues that support the preservation and recovery of forests in an effort to prevent environmental calamities.

Chart 8. Land use/cover change of the two sample areas together.

3.3. Forestation and Reforestation Practice

The reforestation/plantation program fell under the category of natural resource development, conservation, and usage and was designed to prevent erosion and provide wood products. Yet, up until the 1970s, the main focus had been on the planting of Eucalyptus trees, which were primarily needed by the urban populace. It was created and run by private individuals until the 1975 rural land proclamation transferred control of these private firewood plantations to peasant groups and urban Kebelles. Since the beginning of a new economic campaign by the socialist government in 1978, peasant associations were encouraged to establish woodlots at the village level for private exploit. This program was realized by the partnership venture with FaWDA. Because of this mission, under technical estimation, about 20,000 hectares of land have been covered with firewood plantations within few years of the government (UNDP and FAO, 1984b).

The technical report data from UNDP and FAO ensures that forests were lost due to human and environmental forces, and that they have been recovering in Ethiopia at a very slow rate. When a single tree is destroyed, the recovery process is difficult to fix because it takes a while to see results. The reforestation process looks for an action supported by a quick, wise, and long-term policy and guideline of conservation, usage, reforestation, and regeneration/forestation. (Ibid, pp. 10–11).

About 60,250,045 forest seedlings were planted on an area of 22,452.59 hectares in 1986, and it is estimated that 35% of those seedlings survived. However, this effort and survival rate are not very effective when compared to the rate of forest degradation in the province and the cash allotted for this rehabilitation initiative. This is caused by a lack of effort on the part of guards and managers to maintain and protect the planted woods in the province’s numerous Awrajas, not a lack of available area for plantation (Asefa, 1988).

The department of natural resource development was organized from top to bottom and has carried out three distinct duties, including development and conservation efforts for soil and water as well as state and association forests. Because plastic seedlings are planted, protected from harm by guards, and carried out by financial supports, state forest development and conservation accomplishment are more effective than the other two projects in terms of performance evaluation. Discourses on soil and water conservation performed far better than Typical forest development methods. Due to the fact that its implementation involved peasant provocation through food-for-work and extension programs, the effectiveness of association forest development and conservation should put great weight to the strengths and weaknesses of peasant and urban cooperative associations. Data on soil, water, and forest development up to the fiscal year 1986 are displayed in the table below. (Ibid, pp. 8–9).

The data in table 7 indicates that Motta Awraja was the first location where state and association forest plantations were started. With a 67.5% survival rate, planted forest covered around 1126 hectares of land in 8 years (up to 1986). The Bahir Dar Administrative Zone has the largest area covered by plantation forest (approximately 10,627.8 hectares) and the best seedling survival rate (66.125%), whilst Metekel Awraja has the worst performance and doesn’t begin plantation and conservation projects until 1986. A typical artificial forest has a survival rate of 35% and covers roughly 22,452.49 hectares of land.

Table 7. Forest Seedling Planted in Awrajas of Gojjam (1987)

Awraja	Activity	Planted Seedling (In No.)	Survivals		Covered land (In hectares)	Remark
			In No.	In %
Debre Markos	State forest	-	-	-	-
	Soil & water conservation	-	-	-	-
	Association forest	-	-	-	-
	Total	6877357	-	-	2751.02
Bichena	State forest	1215825	-	-	486.33	Since 1981
	Soil & water conservation	-	-	-	-
	Association forest	2207096	-	-	852. 44	Since 1982
	Total	3422921	-	-	1338.77
Motta	State forest	2202300	2202300	-	880.92	Since 1978
	Soil & water conservation	-	-	-	-
	Association forest	1971552	615050	-	246.02	Since 1978
	Total	4173852	2817350	67.5	1126.94
Agew Midir	State forest	5535508	5060013	86.71	2430.98
	Soil & water conservation	3119472	1370089	43.92	548.04
	Association forest	2382148	-	-	360.60
	Total	11037128	6430102	58	3339.64
Bahir Dar	State forest	21197500	15835125	75	8479
	Soil & water conservation	1518250	1062775	70	607.3
	Association forest	5372000	1611600	30	2148.8
	Total	28087750	18409500	66.12	11235.10
Metekel	State forest	-	-	-	-
	Soil & water conservation	747829	-	-	-
	Association forest	-	-	-	-
	Total	747829	-	-	-
Qolla Dega Damot	State forest	1613380	747221	-	645.35	Since 1979
	Soil & water conservation	2376758	1332734	-	950.7	Since 1982
	Association forest	2662703	1265528	-	1065.08	Since 1984
	Total	6652841	3345483	50	2661.14
Total (Gojjam)		60250049	21087517	35	22452.49

Source: Gojjam Province Forest Development Research Report, August 1987

According to statistics collected in 2010/02 from several districts in the East Gojjam Administrative Zone, plantation forests cover roughly 1602.969 hectares of land there. The zone’s entire area covered by natural woods was assessed to be 124, 6922305 hectars. Hence, plantation and natural forests cover about 140, 735.1995 hectares of land. It makes up around 10.04% of the region’s total area, with the remainder being made up of agricultural, grazing, grass, shrub, bush habitation, water, and other features. Just 8.5% (1934.27  hectares) of the 22,891 hectares of degraded land, according to the zone’s data, have been revived by terracing, replanting, and other operations. The province’s sub region is endowed with a wide range of plant and animal biodiversities. Bibugn, Sinan, Debay Tilatgin, and Hulet Eju Enessie districts in the Choke mountain chain; Aba Felasie, Keremito, Ambalay, and Merqoriyos in the Enarg Enawuga district; Yorge Jegna, Yilk, Tirraram, and Ambalay in the Enemay district; Wurigrig, Yeda, Chemoga, and Komie hot areas in the Basso There are various plant species in these and other regions within the zone. Among of the plantation woods in the area are Wanza, Eucalyptus, Yeferenj Tsid, Salign Dikres, and Woira. (DMUAC, 2010, Archive).

4. Conclusion

It is asserted that Ethiopia, including Gojjam, was a nation-region that was covered in deep forest from ancient to relatively modern ages. Yet, Gojjam clearly justifies the increased pace of forest degradation caused by the rise in demand for land for grazing, farming, and harvesting wood for fuel and building materials. The sub-steep regions have the fastest rate of deforestation and the worst environmental degradation. Governments from different eras have issued natural resource declarations, reorganized management structures, and implemented expansive replanting plans in an effort to revive this discourse on the forest. The rate of recovery actions fails to bring the province’s worn-out forest and other natural resources back into balance, despite the governments’ valiant efforts.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.