MAAP #141: Protected Areas & Indigenous Territories Effective Against Deforestation in the Western Amazon

Base Map. Primary forest loss across the western Amazon, with magnified visualization of the data. Click to enlarge. See Methodology for data sources.

As deforestation continues to threaten primary forest across the Amazon, key land use designations are one of the best hopes for the long-term conservation of critical remaining intact forests.

Here, we evaluate the impact of two of the most important land use designations: protected areas and indigenous territories.

Our study area focused on the four mega-diverse countries of the western Amazon (Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, & Peru), covering a vast area of over 229 million hectares (see Base Map).

We calculated primary forest loss over the past four years (2017-2020) across the western Amazon and analyzed the results across three major land use categories:

1) Protected Areas (national and state/department levels), which covered 43 million hectares as of 2020.

2) Indigenous Territories (official), which covered over 58 million hectares as of 2020.

3) Other (that is, all remaining areas outside protected areas and indigenous territories), which covered the remaining 127 million hectares as of 2020.

In addition, we took a deeper look at the Peruvian Amazon and also included long-term forestry lands.

In summary, we found that, averaged across all four years, protected areas had the lowest primary forest loss rate, closely followed by indigenous territories (see Figure 1). Outside of these critical areas, the primary forest loss rate was more than double.

Below, we describe the key results in greater detail, including a detailed look at each country.

 

Key Findings – Western Amazon

Figure 1. Primary forest loss rates in the western Amazon.

Overall, we documented the loss of over 2 million hectares of primary forests across the four countries of the western Amazon between 2017 and 2020. Of the four years, 2020 had the most forest loss (588,191 ha).

Of this total, 9% occurred in protected areas (179,000 ha) and 15% occurred in indigenous territories (320,000 ha), while the vast majority (76%) occurred outside key these land use designations (1.6 million ha).

To standardize these results for the varying area coverages, we calculated primary forest loss rates (loss/total area of each category). Figure 1 displays the combined results for these rates across all four countries.

From 2017-19, protected areas (green) had the lowest primary forest loss rates across the western Amazon (less than 0.10%).

Indigenous territories (brown) also had low primary forest loss rates from 2017-18 (less than 0.11%), but this rose in 2019 (0.18%) due to fires in Bolivia.

In the intense COVID pandemic year of 2020, this overall pattern flipped, with elevated primary forest loss in protected areas, again largely due to major fires in Bolivia. Thus, indigenous territories had the lowest primary forest loss rate followed by protected areas (0.15% and 0.19%, respectively) in 2020.

Averaged across all four years, protected areas had the lowest primary forest loss rate (0.11%), closely followed by indigenous territories (0.14%). Outside of these critical areas (red), the primary forest loss rate was more than double (0.30%). The lowest primary forest loss rates (less than 0.10%) occurred in the protected areas of Ecuador and Peru (0.01% and 0.03%, respectively), and indigenous territories of Colombia (0.07%).

Country Results

Figure 2. Primary forest loss rates in the Colombian Amazon.

Colombian Amazon

Colombia had, by far, the highest primary forest loss rates outside protected areas and indigenous territories (averaging 0.67% across all four years).

By contrast, Colombian indigenous territories had one of the lowest primary forest loss rates across the western Amazon (averaging 0.07% across all four years).

The primary forest loss rates for protected areas were on average nearly double that of indigenous territories (mostly due to the high deforestation in Tinigua National Park), but still much lower than non-protected areas.

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 3. Primary forest loss rates in the Ecuadorian Amazon.

Ecuadorian Amazon

Overall, Ecuador had the lowest primary forest loss rates across all three categories.

Protected areas had the lowest primary forest loss rate of any category across the western Amazon (averaging 0.01% across all four years).

Indigenous territories also had relatively low primary forest loss rates, averaging half that of outside protected areas and indigenous territories (0.10% vs 0.21%, respectively).

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 4. Primary forest loss rates in the Bolivian Amazon.

Bolivian Amazon

Bolivia had the most dynamic results, largely due to intense fire seasons in 2019 and 2020. Indigenous territories had the lowest primary forest loss rates, with 2019 being the only exception, due to large fires in the Santa Cruz department that affected the Monte Verde indigenous territory.

Protected areas had the lowest primary forest loss rate in 2019, but in extreme contrast, the highest the following year in 2020, also due to large fires in the Santa Cruz department that affected Noel Kempff Mercado National Park.

Overall, primary forest loss was highest outside protected areas and indigenous territories (averaging 0.33% across all four years).

 

 

 

Figure 5a. Primary forest loss rates in the Peruvian Amazon. Data: UMD.

Peruvian Amazon

Following Ecuador, Peru also had relatively low primary forest loss rates, particularly in protected areas (averaging 0.03% across all four years).

Primary forest loss in indigenous territories (that is, combined data for native communities and Territorial/Indigenous Reserves for groups in voluntary isolation) was surprisingly high, similar to that of areas outside protected areas across all four years. For example, in 2020, elevated primary forest loss was concentrated in several titled native communities in the regions of Amazonas, Ucayali, Huánuco, and Junín.

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 5b. Deforestation rates in the Peruvian Amazon. Data: MINAM/Geobosques.

As noted above, we conducted a deeper analysis for the Peruvian Amazon, using deforestation data produced by the Peruvian government and adding the additional category of long-term forestry lands (known as Permanent Production Forests, or BPP in Spanish) (see Annex map).

We also separated the data for indigenous territories into native communities and Territorial/Indigenous Reserves for groups in voluntary isolation, respectively.

These data also show that deforestation was lowest in the remote Territorial/Indigenous Reserves, closely followed by protected areas (0.01% vs 0.02% across all four years, respectively). Deforestation in titled native communities was 0.21% across all four years. Surprisingly, deforestation was higher in the forestry lands than areas outside protected areas and indigenous territories (0.30% vs 0.27% across all four years).

 

 

 

 

Annex – Peruvian Amazon

The following map shows added detail for Peru, most notably the inclusion of long-term forestry lands (known as Permanent Production Forests, or BPP in Spanish).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*Methodology

To estimate deforestation across all three categories, we used annual forest loss data (2017-20) from the University of Maryland (Global Land Analysis and Discovery GLAD laboratory) to have a consistent source across all four countries (Hansen et al 2013).

We obtained this data, which has a 30-meter spatial resolution, from the “Global Forest Change 2000–2020” data download page. It is also possible to visualize and interact with the data on the main Global Forest Change portal.

It is important to note that these data include both human-caused deforestation and forest loss caused by natural forces (landslides, wind storms, etc…).

We also filtered this data for only primary forest loss, following the established methodology of Global Forest Watch. Primary forest is generally defined as intact forest that has not been previously cleared (as opposed to previously cleared secondary forest, for example). We applied this filter by intersecting the forest cover loss data with the additional dataset “primary humid tropical forests” as of 2001 (Turubanova et al 2018). For more details on this part of the methodology, see the Technical Blog from Global Forest Watch (Goldman and Weisse 2019).

Thus, we often use the term “primary forest loss” to describe the data.

Data presented as primary forest loss or deforestation rate is standardized per the total area covered of each respective category. For example, to properly compare raw forest loss data in areas that are 100 hectares vs 1,000 hectares total size respectively, we divide by the area to standardize the result.

Our geographic range included four countries of the western Amazon and consists of a combination of the Amazon watershed limit (most notably in Bolivia) and Amazon biogeographic limit (most notably in Colombia) as defined by RAISG. See Base Map above for delineation of this hybrid Amazon limit, designed for maximum inclusion.

Additional data sources include: National and state/deprartment level protected areas: RUNAP 2020 (Colombia), SNAP 2017 & RAISG 2020 (Ecuador), SERNAP & ACEAA 2020 (Bolivia), and SERNANP 2020 (Peru).

Indigenous Territories: RAISG 2020 (Colombia, Ecuador, and Bolivia), and MINCU & ACCA 2020 (Peru). For Peru, this includes titled native communities and Indigenous/Territorial Reserves for indigenous groups in voluntary isolation.

For the additional analysis in Peru, we used deforestation data from MINAM/Geobosques (note this is actual deforestation and not primary forest loss) and BPP data from SERFOR. We also separated data from titled native communities and Territorial/Indigenous Reserves for groups in voluntary isolation.

Acknowledgements

We thank M. MacDowell (AAF) A. Folhadella (ACA), J. Beavers (ACA), S. Novoa (ACCA), and D. Larrea (ACEAA) for their helpful comments on this report.

This work was supported by the Andes Amazon Fund (AAF), Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (NORAD), and International Conservation Fund of Canada (ICFC).

 

Citation

Finer M, Mamani N, Silman M (2021) Protected Areas & Indigenous Territories Effective Against Deforestation in the Western Amazon. MAAP: 141.

MAAP #140: Detecting illegal gold mining in rivers with specialized satellites

Image: Skysat (Planet). Analysis: MAAP/Amazon Conservation.

Illegal gold mining is a widespread problem in the southern Peruvian Amazon (Madre de Dios region), where it has caused river contamination and the deforestation of more than 100,000 hectares.

This activity has also emerged in the northern Peruvian Amazon (Loreto region), where it is not yet causing deforestation and the main threat is the contamination of rivers and important water resources.

This type of gold mining activity in water bodies (such as rivers) is illegal in Peru (see the “Legal situation” section below).

Identifying this type of mining (that is, in rivers and not causing deforestation) is difficult because the small mining boats (known as dragas) are mobile and imperceptible to medium and high-resolution satellites.

In this report, we test a novel technique based on tasking very high-resolution specialized satellites (in this case, Skysat with a spatial resolution of 0.5 meters) to detect illegal gold mining in the rivers of Loreto.

Below, we demonstrate how we used Skysat to detect illegal mining boats in the Nanay and Pintuyacu rivers, the main sources of drinking water for the city of Iquitos (capital of Loreto).

It is important to emphasize that this new technique has great potential for public institutions (national and regional levels) and local actors to detect and respond to illegal activity in real-time with appropriate measures (see the “Conclusion” section below).

Base Map: Mining in Nanay and Pintuyacu Rivers (Loreto region)

The Base Map below shows the precise points where illegal gold mining activity was found during 2020 and 2021 in the Nanay and Pintuyacu rivers of the Loreto region. For context, the map also includes the two nearby protected areas (one national, Allpahuayo Mishana, and another regional, Alto Nanay-Pintuyacu-Chambira). All the identified mining activity is illegal because there are no mining concessions in the area, in addition to the fact that it is occurring in bodies of water.

The yellow triangles indicate the illegal activity detected in 2020, based on field data or observations corroborated by specialists.

Based on this information, between March and May 2021, we tasked and analyzed very high-resolution satellite images (Skysat from the company Planet) for various strategic locations along both rivers. For images with possible mining activity, we consulted with field specialists for confirmation. The red triangles indicate the locations of illegal gold mining detected by Skysat and confirmed by the experts.

Base Map. Data: FEMA, MAAP, SERNANP.

Very High-resolution Satellite Images (Skysat)

Next, we show a series of striking images of illegal gold mining detected by Skysat and confirmed by experts. Note that with the very high resolution (0.5 meters), one can actually visualize the detail of a small mining boat. Image 1 shows several mining boats together in the Nanay River (near the town of Puca Urco). There are previous examples from the field of mining boats lining up together during their illegal activity (see the “Annex” section below).

Image 1. Mining boats in the Nanay River. Image: Skysat (Planet). Analysis: MAAP/Amazon Conservation.

Images 2-4 show other examples of likely mining boats in the Nanay River, this time within a national protected area (Alto Nanay-Pintuyacu-Chambira Regional Conservation Area). Note that these cases are also characterized by the presence of several boats lined up together.

Image 2. Mining boats in the Nanay River, in the Alto Nanay-Pintuyacu-Chambira Regional Conservation Area. Image: Skysat (Planet), Analysis: MAAP/Amazon Conservation.
Image 3. Mining boats in the Nanay River, in the Alto Nanay-Pintuyacu-Chambira Regional Conservation Area. Image: Skysat (Planet), Analysis: MAAP/Amazon Conservation.
Image 4: Mining boats in the Nanay River. Image: Skysat (Planet), Analysis: MAAP/Amazon Conservation.

Image 5 shows the presence of illegal mining boats in the Pintuyacu River.

Image 5: Mining boats in the Pintuyacu River. Image: Skysat (Planet), Analysis: MAAP/Amazon Conservation.

Conclusion

Unlike the dire situation in the southern Peruvian Amazon (Madre de Dios region), the illegal gold mining in northern Peru (Loreto region) does not cause deforestation and is caused by small mining boats in the rivers, making it practically invisible to medium and high-resolution satellites. This report presents a novel technique based on the strategic tasking of very high-resolution satellite images (Skysat) to detect this type of river-based illegal mining in real-time. With these images, we demonstrate the unprecedented capability to detect and visualize illegal activity in vast and remote areas, even down to the level of a small mining boat.

This new technique may allow public institutions and local actors to better respond to illegal activity in real-time with appropriate monitoring and control protocols. For example, key actors, such as the Peruvian Special Environmental Prosecutor’s Office (FEMA) can use this type of imagery in the planning and execution of their field interventions.

It is also important to highlight that the neighboring countries of Colombia and Bolivia experience the same problem of gold mining in rivers, so there is potential to replicate this model in other countries of the Amazon.

Annex

Here we show a photo from the field (Nanay River) of how the mining boats may line up during their illegal activity. This photo is for reference only and does not directly correspond to the cases described above.

Reference image of mining boats lined up during illegal activity. Source: ACRANPC.

Situación legal (in Spanish only)

El Decreto Legislativo N.° 1100 prohíbe, en el ámbito de la pequeña minería y minería artesanal, el uso de dragas y otros artefactos similares en todos los cursos de agua, ríos, lagos, lagunas, cochas, espejos de agua, humedales y aguajales. Por lo tanto, toda actividad enmarcada en este supuesto es considerada minería ilegal.

Mediante el Decreto Supremo N.° 150-2020-PCM se declara en emergencia varios distritos de Loreto por la inminente contaminación hídrica del río Nanay. A raíz de esto, se creó una comisión, cuyas actividades giraban en torno a varios operativos conjuntos, entre la Fiscalía Especializada en Materia Ambiental (FEMA), la Policía Nacional del Perú (PNP), la Dirección Regional de Energía y Minas (DREM) y la Autoridad Regional Ambiental (ARA), con el objetivo final de encontrar dragas en dicho río.

Mediante la Ordenanza Regional N.°  006-2003-GR, el Gobierno Regional de Loreto declaró la cuenca del río Nanay “zona de exclusión para actividades de extracción minera y para aquellas que alteren la cobertura vegetal.”

Acknowledgments

We thank Wendy Pineda from Rainforest US and Paul Lopez from the Satellite Monitoring Unit of the Loreto Environmental Specialized Prosecutor’s Office for their technical opinions regarding the confirmation of mining boats identified in the very high-resolution Skysat images.

We also thank Z. Romero (ACCA), G. Palacios (ACA), and G. Ribadeneyra, D. Torres, A. Felix, K. Nielsen, O. Liao and J. Carlos Guerra from USAID’s PREVENT Project, and J. Jara for their helpful comments on this report.

This report was conducted with technical assistance from USAID, via the Prevent project. Prevent is an initiative that is working with the Government of Peru, civil society, and the private sector to prevent and combat environmental crimes in Loreto, Ucayali and Madre de Dios, in order to conserve the Peruvian Amazon.

This publication is made possible with the support of the American people through USAID. Its content is the sole responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the US government.

Citation

Finer M, Novoa S, Paz L, Saurez D, Mamani N (2021) Detecting illegal gold mining in rivers with specialized satellites. MAAP: 140.

MAAP #139: Using Satellites to Detect Illegal Logging in Peruvian Amazon

Image 1. Illegal logging camp. Data: Skysat, MAAP/ACCA.

Illegal logging, in addition to larger-scale deforestation, is a major problem impacting the Peruvian Amazon.

In 2019, a Global Witness report, based on official information from the Peruvian government, estimated that at least 60% of the inspected timber over the past 10 years had an illegal origin. This problem not only directly affects the forest and its biodiversity, but also contributes to carbon loss (Qin et al, 2021) and forest degradation.

Illegal logging often involves the selective cutting of high-value trees in prohibited areas (whereas deforestation clears an entire area).

While numerous satellites can detect deforestation, only specialized satellites that are very high-resolution (less than one meter) can detect illegal logging.

In this report, we present a new emblematic case of illegal logging in the southern Peruvian Amazon.

It is based on a novel technique of tasking and analyzing very high-resolution images (in this case, with the Skysat satellite fleet from Planet) for a specific target area. Thanks to this new technique, we can tackle the problem of illegal logging in real-time, previously one of the biggest obstacles (see “Conclusion” section below).


Emblematic case

We refer to this as an emblematic case given the strong indicators of illegality (see Legal Status section, below) combined with likely significant impacts on an area of Amazon primary forest important for both indigenous peoples and biodiversity.

First, it is often difficult to confirm illegal logging given the frequent lack of updated technical and administrative information. This case study overcomes both obstacles.

Second, the illegal activity would not only be affecting a forestry concession (operated by the company Wood Tropical Forest), but also threatening important surrounding areas. Adjacent to the concession (to the west) is the Madre de Dios Territorial Reserve, a critical area that protects the territory of indigenous peoples in voluntary isolation. And to the south is the renowned Los Amigos Conservation Concession, a key area for the conservation of biodiversity.

Base Map

As part of our core work of continually monitoring the Los Amigos Conservation Concession, we acquired a series of very high-resolution images that also covered the surrounding Wood Tropical Forest forestry concession. These images, taken between February and April 2021, were obtained by the Skysat constellation (with a spatial resolution of 0.5 meters), operated by the satellite company Planet.

Our analysis revealed a serious situation of probable illegal logging: at least 3 active logging camps and 37 recently cut trees within the Wood Tropical Forest concession and close to both the neighboring Territorial Reserve and Conservation Concession (see Base Map).

Base Map. Data: MAAP/ACCA.

Very High-Resolution Skysat Images

The following images show some of the major findings made by our analysis of the Skysat data. Images 1-2 show examples of the logging camps, and Images 3-5 show examples of the likely selective illegal logging of high-value trees.

Image 2. Logging camp. Data: Skysat, MAAP/ACCA.
Image 3. Illegal logging. Data: Skysat, MAAP/ACCA.
Image 4. Illegal logging. Data: Skysat, MAAP/ACCA.
Image 5. Illegal logging. Data: Skysat, MAAP/ACCA.

Conclusion

This report presents a novel technique, based on the strategic capture of very high-resolution images (in this case, Skysat) and rapid analysis to detect selective illegal logging in real-time. Previously, one of the biggest obstacles to effectively addressing illegal logging was the inability of traditional monitoring methods to detect such small-scale, but widespread, illegal activity in the field. In this report, we demonstrate an important new capablility of detecting illegal logging activity in vast and remote areas in unprecedented detail, down to the level of a logging camp or individual cut trees.

Legal Situation (in Spanish)

La concesión forestal con Contrato N.° 17-TAM/C-J-007-02 fue otorgada en el año 2002 a la Empresa Shihuahuaco Timber S.A.C. y cedió su posición contractual a la empresa Wood Tropical Forestal en el año 2010, quien es titular del contrato de concesión hasta la actualidad.

La presunción de ilegalidad de la tala selectiva, evidenciada por nuestras imágenes satelitales, se debe a que la concesión forestal no se encontraría realizando actividades de aprovechamiento forestal enmarcadas en planes de manejo aprobados por el Gobierno Regional de Madre de Dios.

En efecto, tras realizar la consulta al Gobierno Regional de Madre de Dios, en su calidad de Autoridad Regional Forestal y de Fauna Silvestre (ARFFS), se advierte que la concesión se encuentra vigente. No obstante, no ha presentado a la ARFFS planes operativos para el aprovechamiento forestal desde hace más de ocho años. Incluso, desde el 30 de enero de 2020, cuenta con una resolución de la ARFFS que aprueba la suspensión del derecho de obligaciones contractuales (Resolución de Gerencia Regional N.° 065-2020-GOREMAD/GRFFS).

En ese sentido, y en tanto no se han presentado planes operativos en los últimos años, podemos inferir que en el área de la concesión forestal posiblemente no se estén realizando actividades lícitas de tala, por lo menos, desde hace ocho años.

Aunado a ello, en el Informe de Supervisión N.° 007-2019-OSINFOR/08.1.1, de acuerdo a una supervisión a la concesión para verificar obligaciones contractuales, el OSINFOR da cuenta de que la concesionaria presentó diversas denuncias entre los años 2016 al 2018 a la  Fiscalía Especializada en Materia Ambiental (FEMA), al Organismo de Supervisión de los Recursos Forestales y de Fauna Silvestre (OSINFOR) y al Gobierno Regional de Madre de Dios, en las cuales advirtió la presencia de terceras personas al interior de la concesión que estarían realizando tala ilegal, deforestación, instalación de campamentos ilegales, entre otros.

Acknowledgments

We thank E. Ortiz (AAF), Z. Romero (ACCA), G. Palacios (ACA), and A. Felix, J. Carlos Guerra, K. Nielsen, O. Liao, and R. Suarez from USAID’s PREVENT Project, and J. Jara for their helpful comments on this report.

This report was conducted with technical assistance from USAID, via the Prevent project. Prevent is an initiative that is working with the Government of Peru, civil society, and the private sector to prevent and combat environmental crimes in Loreto, Ucayali and Madre de Dios, in order to conserve the Peruvian Amazon.

This publication is made possible with the support of the American people through USAID. Its content is the sole responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the US government.

This work was also supported by NORAD (Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation), ICFC (International Conservation Fund of Canada), and EROL Foundation.

Citation

Finer M, Yupanqui O, Suarez D, Novoa S (2021) Using Satellites to Detect Illegal Logging in Peruvian Amazon. MAAP: 139.