La demanda de vivienda de la población extranjera

The beginning of forest management in Nigeria dates back to 1887 when the office of woods and forest was opened in the then colony and protectorate of Lagos. The first forest decree came into effect in 1901. The decree was fashioned in 1916 with the aim of regulating the sale of timber and improvement of revenue through taxation. It also regulated the minimum girth allowed for exploitation (only mature trees of 100cm and

25 above girth could be removed) and it mandated users to plant 20 more tree seedlings at each stump site. This was the practice up until 1926 when artificial regeneration through the “Taungya” system (a system of agriculture where crops are produced alongside with trees) was introduced. By 1940, forest reservation areas were completed in the high forest areas in Southern Nigeria, with the exception of Rivers state, where more areas were set up between 1960 and 1980.

The development of the forest area reserves was, however, much later (between 1950 and 1970) in the northern part of the country where savanna vegetation dominates. The slow and late development of forest reserves in the northern part of the country could be due to the unimportance of savanna vegetation to the export trade in forest logs, which was then very popular in the higher forest of the south.

After the country was divided into three administrative regions in 1954, each region was given the responsibility for the administration, monitoring, management and control of its forest resource, while the Federal Government (FG) was responsible for forestry research and institutions. A similar situation persists even today among the thirty six states and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), where each state is tasked with the responsibility of safeguarding and controlling its forest areas. This pattern of control is the reason why the FG has no forest reserves of its own.

Prior to the 1970s, forest reserves embraced the activities of local communities, who were authorised to continue their former use of the forest as long as their practices did not affect timber production and forest management. This helps explain why, in the early period, forests in Nigeria, were managed with a high degree of effectiveness. In recent times, by contrast, especially after the Land Use Decree of the late 1970s (which emphasised that all land belongs to government; see full discussion of Nigerian land tenure system in appendix 4), the efficiency of the sector began to deteriorate like most other public sectors in the country. By the mid 1980s, forest reserves were not properly maintained while management plans were either non-existent or abandoned.

2.2.1.1. The Present System of Forestry Administration in Nigeria

Forestry activities in Nigeria are administered through the three tiers of Government i.e.

Federal, State and Local Government. At the federal level, the Federal Ministry of Environment (FME), which was created in 1999, is responsible for administering forestry

26 at the national level through the Federal Department of Forestry (FDF). The latter was created in 1970 under the Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources (FMANR). FDF was transferred from FMANR to FME in 1999 and mandated with formulating National Forest Policy and supporting the execution of projects funded by the FG. Other mandates of the FDF include advising and assisting the State Forestry Departments (SFDs) on certain national projects and contacts with international development agencies who assist Nigeria with funds and advice. The states are responsible for their forestry administration through the SFDs under the States’ Ministries of Environment. At present, most states have forest reserves maintained by the SFDs , which are responsible for the technical functions of managing timber and wildlife resources, and revenue generation through taxation from the forestry sectors in their states. The smaller forestry departments in the Local Government Areas (LGAs) have the following mandates in the new National Forest Policy (NFP):

A) Setting up of wood lots to protect watersheds and river courses;

B) Protection of forests and farm trees in arable land against fire and illegal felling of trees; and

C) Protection of wildlife against poaching.

Having said earlier that the country operates a unified system of forestry operations through the three tier system of government, in reality there is a difference in the mode of operation between the north and the south. This is because the focus of administrative and forestry staffs in the SFDs and LGAs differs from the north to the south. LGAs in the south have virtually no responsibility for managing their forest resources , but may receive part of the revenue generated from forest produce by the SFDs. In the north, the functions of LGA forestry services include revenue generation and forest preservation.

The staff in the south where the high forests exist focused on log harvesting, while in the north, where a dispersed forest type dominates (savanna vegetation), they concentrate on the importance of forest resources for fuelwood, environmental protection and livestock production. Unfortunately, even with the new NFP that provides guidelines for safeguarding the forest areas and their resources , starting from the smallest unit of administration (LGAs) in the country, both SFDs and LGAs are faced with a lack of funds and personnel to carry out their tasks effectively. The few staff available also lack adequate training and exposure to modern forestry techniques (FAO, 2003 & FAO, 2010b).

27 One key problem in the north is the lack of comprehensive documentation of its forestry activities compared to the south (FAO, 2003). Over emphasise on the south, particularly in most FAO reports, is the result of attention being focussed on the high forest areas of the south, which has left the less vegetated areas in the north neglected despite the pressing need for research there.

It is worth noting that even though there is an NFP in Nigeria (which was revised in 2006), there was no such forest policy at state level. In contrast, the states were allowed to establish their individual forest laws according to their needs (FAO, 2010a, p. 300) - (see example in chapter 4: 4.2.3).