Opportunities, Constraints and Prospects of the Ethiopian

Orthodox Tewahido Churches in Conserving Forest

Resources: The Case of Churches in South Gonder, Northern

Ethiopia

Alemayehu Wassie

i

DECLARATION

I Alemayehu Wassie hereby declare this thesis is my original work and has not already been presented nor

is being currently submitted for a degree in any university or for publication. It is free for use as far as

proper citation and acknowledgment is made.

__________________ __________________

Alemayehu Wassie Date

This thesis has been submitted for examination with my approval as university main advisor.

_____________________ __________________

Dr. Neil Powell Date

Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences

ii

This Thesis is dedicated to the late Ato Alachew Jemberie with unforgettable memories of professional

dedication, humbleness and generosity, praying for his body to rest in peace under the sacred garden of

EOTC and eternity for his soul in heaven.

I would like also to dedicate to the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahido Church and its scholars for

generations of dedication and faithfulness to the church and its surrounding forests.

iii

Opportunities, Constraints and Prospects of the Ethiopian Orthodox TewahidoChurches in Conserving Forest Resources: The Case of Churches in South

Gonder, Northern Ethiopia

Alemayehu Wassie EsheteP.O.Box 2003 Addis Abeba, Ethiopia (c/o Dr. Demel Teketay)

Telephone 251-1-454452 / 290987 (c/o Dr. Demel Teketay)E-Mail Orda-1@telecom.net.et; Forestrydt@yahoo.com

ABSTRACT

The Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahido Church is one of the oldest Christian Churches in Africa and is afounder member of the World Council of Churches. In addition to its religious activities, it also has longhistory of planting, protecting and preserving trees. If a traveler can see a patch of indigenous old agedtrees in the northern highlands of Ethiopia, most probably he/she can be sure that there is an OrthodoxChurch in the middle. The main objectives of this paper were to study the diversity and regeneration statusof woody species in the church forest, to carry out a socio-economic survey that would enable us tounderstand the philosophy, guiding principles and attitudes of the community. In addition, it was also toassess the opportunity, constraints, and prospects of the church in conserving woody diversity in particularand forests resources in general.

Accordingly, eight churches were selected at different altitudes purposively. Once the study churches wereidentified, 10m X 10m quadrats were laid systematically along parallel transects in the forests forvegetation sampling. For the socioeconomic survey, 122 household heads were selected randomly amongstthe followers and at least three church scholars from each church. Moreover, focus group discussion andkey informant interviews were employed. From vegetation sampling it was found that forests envelopedthe church with an area ranging from 1.6 ha to 100 ha. The total number of species and families in each ofthe eight churches ranged from 22 and 18 to 42 and 22 respectively. The minimum plant density was731/ha and the maximum was 2250/ha while the minimum basal area, calculated from woody plants withdbh ≥ 10 cm was 24.9 m2/ha and maximum 109.7 m2/ha. Different regeneration status was revealed fromthe height and diameter class distribution for some of the woody species. The height and diameter classdistributions for all individuals in each studied church showed that the forests are at different secondarystages of development. The classification of the species group by ordination techniques showed thedifferentiation in species group types has a strong relationship with altitude.

These church forests didn’t come to exist just by mere chance. Results indicated that it is by thecommitment of the church based on strong theological thoughts and a biblical basis. It was found that thelocal community respects and protects church forests, and considers the church as a central institution andplatform. On the other hand, important stakeholders had diverging and converging views on some issuesregarding church forests. In general, from the results, it was concluded that forests conserved by EOTCand its tradition provide an opportunity to establish insitu and exsitu conservation sites for forest resources.They also have greater prospects in implementing forestry conservation, development, research andeducation programs with some avoidable threats and constraints for which recommendations werepresented.

Key words/phrases: Church forests; Indigenous Woody Species diversity; Density; Basal Area;Ordination; Conservation; Sustainability; Indigenous institution; Tradition

iv

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

First and foremost I praise the Almighty God, who favors me to begin and to bring to an end this study.

The Archbishop of South Gonder Diocese Abune Elsa, the Manager Megabe Sirat BirhanuKassa with other staff were so much kind when they gave me permission to go through the holygarden of the churches with their blessing and passion, thus there are no words to thank them.Farta, Laygaynt, Ebinat, Fogera, Dera and Estie woreda church administration offices were socooperative. The able church scholars, Melake-Hiwot Asnake Tsegaw, Melake-Birhan MeleseHailu, Melake-Miheret Wubie Asres, Liqe-Hiruan Admas Tsegaye, and Melake-Miheret TibebuTaye are the ones who gave me special interviews and shared their cumulated knowledge withme. The kind EOTC fathers, students and community who assisted me in identifying woodyspecies to whom I am indebted.

My main Adviser Dr. Neil Powell to whom I am grateful, who went through my paper from draftproposal to the thesis work and from office to the study site that helped me a lot in shaping theframework of the paper and final appearance. Dr Demel Teketay my in land adviser, who alwayswished to see my success has got a special place not only for his unreserved effort in this paperbut also in all my academic endeavors and thus I am very grateful.

I am in dept to Ato Belaineh Legesse and Ato Melaku Bekele who read the draft proposal in Upssala,Sweden and commented on how to shape it in a better way. I am also in dept to Dr Yonas Yemishaw whoassisted me in the socio-economic data analysis and Dr Tesfaye Bekele who assisted me in ordinationanalysis of vegetation data by computer software. Ato Taye Bekele and Ato Tefera Mengistu whocommented on the paper are duly thanked.

My respect should go to the Organization for Rehabilitation and Development for Amhara(ORDA), my employer who assisted and sponsored me to go through the MSc. program. Herealso SLU/SIDA with Wondo Genet College of forestry are grateful. Ato Dagnachew Gebeyehu isalso thanked for his efforts in arranging a vehicle for my adviser field visits. Ato Muluneh (SouthGonder greening program) and Ibinat-Belesa project are thanked for they provided me with avehicle for fieldwork.

From South Gonder Zone department of Agriculture Ato Mekonen Tola, Goshu Worku, Belainehin providing me with field equipment and information and from South Gonder Zone department ofPlanning & Economic development Ato Abebaw in providing demographic data are thankful.From Estie woreda agricultural office Ato Fintie Bisahw, Ato Aschalew and Ato Tigabu Belay arealso thanked in providing information and a motorbike for fieldwork. Ato Destaw Mequanent theadministrator of Estie woreda was so cooperative for discussion and permission to work. AtoMandefro from CARE, South Gonder and Ato Gizachew Sisay from CPAR Gayint should getspecial thanks.

W/zo Muday Abraham with her family and W/t Hibrework who hosted me while I was in field fordata collection are memorable without whom it could have been hard to finish the fieldwork. AtoGebreMeskel Fenta and His wife W/zo Bosena Melese with their family, who hosted me with myfamily during the thesis work with generosity and family-hood, are unforgettable and very muchgrateful. My brother Ato Birhane Wassie and his wife W/zo Tsehay Yesmaw, Ato AyalewMengistu and his wife W/zo Bishat Ayalew were the ones who laid the foundation of my life fromchildhood to university level and to whomI am grateful.

Finally my wife sister Belainesh Melese who carried all of my family responsibility so that I couldfocus on my study is the corner stone in this work. My little children Mahalet and Natinael, whoprovided me with exhilaration when I got fed up during the thesis write up, have contributed a lotand are appreciated.

v

ACRONYMS

BA Basal Area

DBH Diameter at Breast Height

DICAC Development and Inter-Church Aid Commission

EOTC Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahido Church

Fig Figure

Jack1 First-order Jackknife estimator of species richness

masl Meter above sea level

PA Peasant Association

PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal

SGAZ South Gonder Administrative Zone

SGAZDA South Gonder Zonal Department of Agriculture

SGAZDPED South Gonder Zonal Department of Plan & Economic Development

Sobs Observed number of species

WoA Woreda office of Agriculture

vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

DECLARATION........................................................................................................................................... I

ABSTRACT................................................................................................................................................ III

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ......................................................................................................................... IV

ACRONYMS................................................................................................................................................V

TABLE OF CONTENTS .......................................................................................................................... VI

LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................................ VIII

LIST OF TABLES ..................................................................................................................................... IX

APPENDICES..............................................................................................................................................X

1. INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................................................1

1.1. BACKGROUND ..........................................................................................................................................11.2. ETHIOPIAN ORTHODOX TEWAHIDO CHURCH ..........................................................................................11.3. ETHIOPIAN ORTHODOX TEWAHIDO CHURCH AND FORESTS/TREES: PLACED IN A HISTORICAL

PERSPECTIVE ...........................................................................................................................................21.4. RELIGION AND FORESTS/TREES AT GLOBAL LEVEL................................................................................41.5. ETHNOFORESTRY .....................................................................................................................................41.6. PROBLEM STATEMENT AND JUSTIFICATION ............................................................................................5

2. CONCEPTUAL AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKS .................................................................6

2.1. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK .....................................................................................................................62.1.1. Indigenous Institutions .................................................................................................................62.1.2. Religion ........................................................................................................................................72.1.3. Biodiversity ..................................................................................................................................82.1.4. Sustainability and Conservation of Natural Resources ................................................................8

2.2. THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVE ....................................................................................................................9

3. RESEARCH QUESTIONS ....................................................................................................................12

4. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY...........................................................................................................13

5. MATERIALS AND METHODS ...........................................................................................................14

5.1. STUDY AREA..........................................................................................................................................145.2. CHURCHES SELECTED FOR THE STUDY..................................................................................................14

5.2.1. Quar Debre Luel Kidus Michael ................................................................................................145.2.2. Zahara Debre Miheret Kidus Michael........................................................................................155.2.3. Gibtsawit Kidist Mariam............................................................................................................155.2.4. Dengolt Debre Medalhu Kidist Mariam.....................................................................................155.2.5. Mekane Semayat Kidus Gelawdiwos.........................................................................................155.2.6. Hiruy Kidus Giorgis ...................................................................................................................165.2.7. Debresena Kidist Mariam...........................................................................................................165.2.8. Ascha Menbere Luel Kidus Michael..........................................................................................16

5.3. METHODS OF DATA COLLECTION..........................................................................................................185.3.1. Sampling Design ........................................................................................................................18

vii

5.3.2. Area of Forest Cover ..................................................................................................................185.3.3. Vegetation census.......................................................................................................................185.3.4. Socio-economic Survey..............................................................................................................195.3.5. Scope and Limitation of the Study .............................................................................................20

5.4. METHODS OF DATA ANALYSES .............................................................................................................205.4.1. Vegetation ..................................................................................................................................205.4.2. Socio-economic Survey..............................................................................................................24

6. RESULTS ................................................................................................................................................26

6.1. VEGETATION ..........................................................................................................................................266.1.1. Species Composition, Density, Basal Area and Similarity ........................................................266.1.2. Species Diversity: Species Richness, Evenness and Heterogeneity...........................................276.1.3. Regeneration Status....................................................................................................................286.1.4. Species Area Curve ....................................................................................................................386.1.5. Ordination ..................................................................................................................................39

6.2. SOCIO-ECONOMICS ................................................................................................................................406.2.1. Philosophy of EOTC in the Conservation of Forests .................................................................406.2.2. Benefits of Churches from the Forests .......................................................................................416.2.3. Mode of Protection of the Forests by Churches .........................................................................436.2.4. Historical Profile ........................................................................................................................446.2.5. Attitude of the Local Communities ............................................................................................456.2.6. Stake Holder Analysis ................................................................................................................496.2.7. SWOT Analysis..........................................................................................................................49

7. DISCUSSION ..........................................................................................................................................52

7.1. VEGETATION ..........................................................................................................................................527.2. SOCIO-ECONOMY SURVEY......................................................................................................................54

7.2.1. Church Philosophy .....................................................................................................................547.2.2. The attitude of the local community...........................................................................................557.2.3. Stakeholder Views......................................................................................................................597.2.4. SWOT of the Tradition ..............................................................................................................60

8.CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION .....................................................................................61

8.1. CONCLUSION ..........................................................................................................................................618.2. RECOMMENDATION................................................................................................................................62

9. REFERENCES........................................................................................................................................63

viii

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE 1. ALTERNATIVE PARADIGMS FOR THE PROBLEM AND SOLUTION AT HAND...................................12FIGURE 2. MAP OF THE STUDY AREA............................................................................................................17FIGURE 3. HEIGHT CLASS DISTRIBUTION OF INDIVIDUALS OF SOME SELECTED SPECIES AND ALL WOODY

PLANTS ENCOUNTERED IN EACH CHURCH.. ................................................................................33FIGURE 4. DIAMETER CLASS DISTRIBUTION OF ALL WOODY PLANTS IN ALL PLOTS AND SOME OF MAJOR

TREE SPECIES FOR ALL CHURCHES. .............................................................................................38FIGURE 5. SPECIES AREA CURVE OF THE EIGHT CHURCH FORESTS STUDIES.................................................38FIGURE 6. ORDINATION DIAGRAM OF SPECIES FROM THE CORRESPONDENCE ANALYSIS MADE USING THE

SPECIES ABUNDANCE DATA FROM ALL CHURCH FORESTS. .........................................................39FIGURE 7. HISTORICAL PROFILE OF CHURCH FORESTS IN SOUTH GONDER ZONE IN PARTICULAR AND IN

ETHIOPIA AT LARGE. ...................................................................................................................45

ix

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE 1. AREA OF FORESTS (HA), TOTAL DENSITY (INDIVIDUALS/HA), NUMBER OF SPECIES AND PLANT

FAMILIES, BASAL AREA (M2/HA) AS WELL AS NUMBERS OF LIVE STEMS (DBH � 10 CM)

AND DEAD STUMPS FOUND IN THE EIGHT CHURCHES. ..................................................................26TABLE 2. LIST, DENSITIES (INDIVIDUALS/HA) AND BASAL AREAS (M

2/HA) OF EXOTIC WOODY SPECIES

RECORDED IN FOUR OF THE CHURCH FORESTS. ............................................................................27TABLE 3. SIMILARITIES IN SPECIES COMPOSITION AMONG THE EIGHT CHURCHES DETERMINED BY

JACCARD’S SIMILARITY COEFFICIENT..........................................................................................27TABLE 4. DIFFERENT DIVERSITY INDICES OF THE EIGHT CHURCH FORESTS STUDIED. .................................28TABLE 5. POTENTIAL BENEFITS OF FOLLOWERS FROM FORESTS THAT ARE EITHER PERMITTED OR

FORBIDDEN BY CHURCHES. ...........................................................................................................43TABLE 6. RESULTS FROM THE SIGNIFICANTLY DEPENDENT ANSWERS GIVEN TO THE MAIN ATTITUDINAL

QUESTIONS. ...................................................................................................................................48TABLE 7. OPINIONS AMONG THE VARIOUS IDENTIFIED STAKEHOLDERS ON SELECTED ISSUES REGARDING

THE CHURCH FORESTS...................................................................................................................49

x

APPENDICES

APPENDIX 1. ALL SPECIES AND FAMILIES WITH RESPECTIVE ABUNDANCE, DENSITY AND FREQUENCY

FOUND IN ALL THE EIGHT SAMPLED CHURCHES ....................................................................68APPENDIX 2. CHECKLIST OF ALL INDIGENOUS WOODY SPECIES FOUND IN SOUTH GONDER

ADMINISTRATIVE ZONE (SGAZDA, UNPUBLISHED) .............................................................70

1

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background

The speed with which forest resources have been depleted in Ethiopia has brought significant decline in

their biodiversity to the extent that some species are on the verge of local extinction. Though the available

information on the forest resources of Ethiopia is very limited, it is estimated that high forests are

disappearing at the rate of 150,000-200,000 ha annually (EFAP 1994) while the corresponding rate of

plantation, 2000 ha per year, is insignificant and stagnating. The problem of deforestation and decline in or

loss of biodiversity is more pronounced in the northern highlands of Ethiopia, particularly in the South

Gonder Zone, where forests are downscaled to patches and strips on the tops of hills and heads of streams.

As a result, very little of the natural forest of the Northern Ethiopian highlands remains today.

These phenomena are the results of a long-term human occupation of the area, accompanied by sedentary

agriculture and extensive cattle husbandry, spurred by the rapid growth of both human and animal

populations. The deterioration of natural resources not only destroys the environment, but also undermines

the very foundation on which economic growth and long-term prosperity depend. Viswanathan (1986)

noted that “a traveller can see only a very few trees remaining here and there as remnants of the old

vegetation, which once flourished in the area”.

In such devastated areas, conserving and maintaining woody diversity has been a very challenging task,

and most approaches haven’t brought any significant results. The only areas where one can observe

forests/trees in northern Ethiopia are in the surroundings of churches. These patches of natural forest have

survived as a result of the traditional conservation system and protective patronage of the Ethiopian

Orthodox Tewahido Churches (Yeraswork Admassie 1995).

1.2. Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahido Church

The Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahido Church (EOTC), an indigenous and integral Christian Church of

Africa, is one of the oldest Churches in the world and founding member of the World Council of Churches.

The word ‘Tewahido’ is the Ethiopian term meaning ‘made one’, the best expression conveying the faith

of the church. It emphasizes the inseparable unity of the Godhead and Manhood in the Person of Christ.

The EOTC is considered to belong to the One, Holy, Universal and Apostolic Church founded by Jesus

Christ (Aymro Wondmagegnehu and Motovu 1970).

Ethiopia embraced Christianity and maintained the doctrine of Christ from the era of the Apostles to the

present day, as it is narrated in the Holy Bible (Acts 8:26-39). The history of St. Phillip the Apostle

baptizing the Eunuch, who travelled to Jerusalem for prayer, is of great interest for the Ethiopian Church

history. Eunuch was a man of high rank, the Finance Minister of Candace Queen of Ethiopia (Anonymous,

2

1991). The EOTC is numerically the largest of the five non-Chalcedonian Eastern Churches - the Coptic,

the Ethiopian, The Syrian, the Indian and the Armenian, which were historically called “The Oriental

Orthodox Churches” to distinguish them from the “Byzantine Orthodox Churches” (Aymro

Wondmagegnehu and Motovu 1970).

The EOTC believes that the church is a community founded by God in the crucified, risen and glorified

Christ, the incarnate Son of God, and guided and bounded by God and the Holy Spirit. Its members accept

the faith in Jesus Christ and are united under the teaching and administrative rules enjoined by the

Patriarch with the council of Bishops. The Ethiopian Orthodox Church has a system of administration by

which its members are to be guided. Two aspects are discerned in the administration structure: (a)

Religious affairs conducted by the patriarch and the Holy Synod, and (b) Secular affairs managed by an

Administrative Board. It has over 30 million followers, 400,000 clergies and 35,000 churches in Ethiopia.

Moreover, it has several followers and Archbishops in other countries (Aymro Wondmagegnehu and

Motovu 1970; Taye Bekele et al. unpublished).

A church is also a building set apart for worship, and the name is used only for such structures as are for

the general use of the faithful, as distinguished from chapels, which are for some community or family.

Churches are consecrated, but it is the ‘Tabot’ or the Arc of the Covenant, which gives sanctity to the

church in which it is placed. Thus, every Ethiopian church must be honored with ‘Tabot’. Churches are

usually built in pleasant spots and are surrounded with walls of massive stone and patches of trees, which

add to the solemnity, and the quietude of the building. These churches are not only religious spots but are

also biodiversity spots.

The local people call the churches with the surrounding trees as debr or geddam. Debr or Geddam is seen

by the followers as the most holy place religiously as well as a respected and powerful institution socially.

It is also expected from outside to be a viable and a functioning site ecologically from the whole landscape

in the area. They are visible from a great distance, with a majestic appearance, usually built upon a small

hill overlooking the village.

1.3. Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahido Church and Forests/Trees: Placed in AHistorical Perspective

The Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahido Church has long history of planting, protecting and preserving of trees.

If a traveller can see a patch of indigenous old aged trees in the northern highlands of Ethiopia, most

probably he/she can be sure that there is an Orthodox Church in the middle. This observation is not only a

recent phenomenon, but goes back many years as the event of deforestation has been occurring in the area

for centuries. Many travellers on their route have observed and had an impression that old aged indigenous

trees were becoming confined around churches. In his study of Forest History of Ethiopia from early times

to 1974, Melaku (1992) has shown this picture as follows:

3

♦ Bruce who visited Ethiopia in 1769, and who continued his journey to Gonder has observed that in Waldeba(near Gonder) trees were found only around churches.

♦ The British traveller, Charles Beke, who made various journeys to most parts of Gojjam, Gonder, Wello andnorth Shewa from 1841 to 1843, noted that “scarcely a tree being to be seen, with the exception of small groveswhich invariably surround the churches”.

♦ Plowden, who was British counsel for Ethiopia from 1848 to 1860, described the vast region from Tigray toGojjam as fertile, but he noted the lack of large timber in the region except "the great sycamore (Ficussycomorus) and species of cedar (Juniperus procera) growing around the church". Adding to his observation,Plowden (1868) noted " The first thing probably that will strike the traveller in Abyssinia is the almost entireabsence of high trees, except immediately surrounding the churches, which nearly all the conspicuous elevations,built on become from this fact, visible at great distances, and generally guide the wearied stranger to some hamletin the neighborhood".

♦ Markham, secretary of the Royal Geographical Society of Britain, who accompanied the British militaryexpedition to Ethiopia in 1867-68, observed trees confined to churchyards in Adigrat (Tigray), and that Wadla(Wello/Gonder) was treeless with the exception of clumps of Kosso (Hagenia abyssinica) and other trees aroundthe churches.

Although the main purpose of churches is as places for worship, burials and meditating religious festivals,

they also provide valuable (and often unique) and secured habitats for plants and animals, as well as

microorganisms and green spaces for people to rest the stressed mind. Church compounds are the

monasteries of trees and other biodiverse resources where one can animate trees escaped from being

destroyed forever under the shelter of the church value and esteem. Many indigenous trees and shrubs,

which in some places were destroyed completely over the last century, are still found standing in the

compounds of remote rural churches (Asseged and Taye unpublished; Taye Bekele 1998). The area of

forest cover preserved by the Ethiopian Orthodox churches in some parts of the country has been

estimated. For instance the very many churches existing in Tigray are estimated to contain about 660

hectares of forest. These patches of forests are used as sources of seeds for raising seedlings in nurseries

(TFAP 1996).

In other words, church compounds are serving as in situ conservation and hot spot sites for biodiversity

resources, mainly indigenous trees and shrubs of Ethiopia, which in turn give prestige for the religious

sites. As a result, these forests are sanctuaries for different organisms ranging from microbes to large

animals, which have almost disappeared elsewhere (Taye Bekele et al. unpublished).

Historically, most of the church forests were destroyed and burned with the churches and other precious

heritages by the anti-Christian expedition led by Ahmed Ibn Ibrahim (generally known as ‘Gragn’ meaning

‘left handed’) in the beginning of the 16th century. After ‘Gragn’ was killed in 1543, most of the churches

and monasteries were reconstructed together with their forests (Aymro Wondmagegnehu and Motovu

1970). Some scholars have written that one third of the land of Ethiopia, with all its resources, used to

belong to the church before the 1974 Revolution (Cohen and Weintraub 1975). Out of that land holding, a

smaller proportion of it was known to be forestland. In the process of nationalization of private properties

during the socialist regime (Proclamation No. 31 of 1975), the EOTC was left without its land holdings,

including the forests, which have been preserved for centuries. The fate of those forests was ruthless

4

exploitation and destruction, which in turn brought a severe reduction in biological diversity and ecological

imbalance as well (Taye Bekele et al. unpublished).

1.4. Religion and Forests/Trees at Global Level

Trees surrounding debr and geddam are synonymous with the term sacred groves in most literature. The

tradition of the sacred grove is well known in Ethiopian tradition as well, be it in the experience of

traditional religion (e.g. the Oromo sacred tree or the adbar) or in the clump of trees that customarily

envelope the Christian Debr (Bahru Zewde 1997).

Sacred groves are smaller or larger ecosystems, set aside for religious purposes. The origin of sacred

groves can be attributed to the slash and burn system of agriculture, where several forest patches were left

standing around farmlands. These groves came to be institutionalized as centers for culture and religious

life (Gadgil and Vartak 1976). Taboos and social sanctions protect the sacred groves from deterioration

due to human interference. These habitat patches may be the only primary forests remaining locally.

Several relict, endemic and endangered species have been recorded from sacred groves. Sacred groves,

which form examples of in situ conservation sites and act as a refuge for species, are becoming

ecologically important in the light of the current rates of deforestation and species loss. They buffer against

the depletion of genetically adapted local variants and overall biodiversity in a region. They can serve as

important recruitment areas to surrounding ecosystems. Sacred groves are of great economic significance

too. Some of the species, so preserved, are already known to be of considerable value for the

pharmaceutical industry, timber, and non-forest products while others could acquire importance in the

future (Colding and Folke 1997; King et al. 1997; Pandey and Kumar 2000).

At the global level, sacred groves are well recognized and have been reported from Afro-Asian countries

like Nigeria, Ghana, Syria, Turkey, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Malaysia and India (Appiah-Opoku and

Mulamoottil 1997; Chandrashekara and Sankar 1998; Sibanda 1997). The doctrine of the religions behind

those sacred groves may vary but ultimately the experience of conserving trees in the name of religion is

apparent worldwide. Thus, trees not only meet the economic and ecological needs of the people, but also

form an integral part of their culture and spiritual tradition.

1.5. Ethnoforestry

Ethnoforestry is the creation, conservation, management and utilization of forest resources by local

communities through traditional practices and belief (Pandey 1999; Pandey and Kumar 2000). It is not to

be confused with participatory forestry or joint forest management. Ethnoforestry represents the traditional

ecological wisdom of indigenous peoples of the world. Protection offered to habitats is classified as

protection (conservation) ethnoforestry. Traditional methods of regeneration of livelihood species by

people are classified as plantation ethnoforestry. While traditional methods of growing trees and crops in

5

farmlands are called ethnoagroforestry. Amongst the different forms of protection ethnoforestry: Sacred

groves, Sacred trees, Temple forests and Sanctified forests are more related to religions and beliefs of the

local community in different parts of the world.

1.6. Problem Statement and Justification

Examination of the contribution of the sacred forests to biodiversity conservation offer perspectives on the

sacred forests as a model for environmental protection (Camara 1994). Thus the role of natural sacred sites,

particularly sacred groves, is attracting increasing interest in international organizations and conservation

organizations such as UNESCO and the WWF. They have significant relevance for the implementation of

Section 15.4.j of Agenda 21 of the Conservation of Biological Diversity which stresses more on the use of

traditional wisdom and practices for conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity (Agenda 21

1992; Chandrashekara and Sankar 1998).

To study and manage human dominated and influenced ecosystems effectively, it is essential to (not just

intuitively) understand human behavior or activity (Dompka 1996). To understand human behavior, it is

necessary to disclose the underlying mechanisms. Many studies have reported that human behavior is

influenced by demographic factors (Liu et al. 1999), social factors (tradition, culture, perception, intention,

choice, value system, wants, needs) (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980), economic factors (production,

consumption) (Ehrlich 1988), and ecological factors (forest conditions and the like) (Pebley 1998). In this

regard Liu (2001) argues that, the lack of integrating ecological-demographic-socioeconomic-behavioral

factors leads to failures in understanding and solving real-world problems.

The sustainable use of environmental resources stems from a combination of two factors: (1) the

possession of appropriate local knowledge and suitable methods or technology to exploit resources, and (2)

a philosophy and environmental ethics to keep utilization abilities in check and to provide ground rules by

which the relationships between humans and environmental systems remain sustainable (Appiah-Opoku

and Mulamoottil, 1997; Sadler and Boothroyd 1993).

Deforestation in the northern highlands of Ethiopia, specifically in South Gonder, is becoming an

unstoppable process dating back many hundreds of years. In fact, nowadays there is no extensive natural

forest cover in the area except remnants and patches mainly around churches and inaccessible areas. In

much of the landscape of northern Ethiopia, the lush vegetation on the hillsides surrounding a church or a

monastery presents a sharp contrast to the surrounding bare ridges and mountain slopes. They are the only

localities covered by tree vegetation and not affected by gully erosion (Taye Bekele et al. unpublished).

The term deforestation may refer to a wider forest area clearance, but can still be applicable for South

Gonder, as the rate is very rapid relative to the existing forestlands. Plantations established with many

efforts were destroyed overnight during the government change and even the remaining ones are under

encroachment at present. Ultimately, the size of the forest patches and the number of trees in the whole

6

landscape is decreasing from year to year, with no regeneration option, rather subsequent soil depletion

and land degradation. Preserving the remnant indigenous woody species in concrete ground before their

entire elimination is, undoubtedly, an urgent task.

The management and conservation of forests and trees in the whole landscape has been a very challenging

task as none of the 'externally' designed systems, approaches and dominant conservation paradigms

imported and tried halted deforestation (Dessalegn Rahmato 2001). Moreover, most of the approaches tried

have been indifferent to the traditional institutions’ principles and customs. In the course of carrying out

environmental conservation activities, important local traditional institutions that should have been taken

into partnership were alienated due to a lack of insensitivity towards them that led to mishandling relations

(Yeraswork Admassie 1995).

Thus, it is time to take the opportunity of the locally and traditionally tested conservation systems in order

to conserve and maintain the vanishing and endangered woody species’ diversity resources and ecosystem

in the area mentioned. In this perspective, this study attempts to look into tree conserving traditions of the

EOTC, which has been successful in resisting the flood of deforestation for many decades in the area.

Despite what the EOTC has done to conserve a significant proportion of the forests in the country, the

church does not receive the recognition and support it deserves (Taye Bekele et al. unpublished). Thus, we

have to recognise this tradition as an opportunity and explore possibilities of using it in future conservation

programs. In order to explore the strength and opportunity of this tradition, the significance of the resource

we have in these churches and monasteries should be known. The philosophy behind conserving these

resources and the prospect of adopting these values and ethics to expand the forest resource base should be

studied and pointed out, which is the main concern of this paper.

2. CONCEPTUAL AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKS

2.1. Conceptual Framework

This section attempts to conceptualize the main concepts involved in the present study.

2.1.1. Indigenous Institutions

In general terms, institutions are a set of complex norms regulating the action of persons in the process of

social interaction. According to the Encyclopedia Americana (1963) they are aspects of the structure of a

social system.

While presenting the issues of institutions in this study, it is strongly focused on the concepts of

‘Indigenous Institutions’. They represent established local systems of authority and other phenomena,

derived from the sociocultural and historical processes of a given society. They originate from local

7

cultures, have firm roots in the past, and are variously referred to as informal, pre-existing, or native

institutions (Appiah-Opoku and Hyma 1999; Appiah-Opoku and Mulamoottil 1997). For the purpose of

this study, indigenous institutions are viewed to occur at the local or community level, reflecting the

knowledge and experiences of the local people. In contrast, ‘Non-Indigenous or Formal Institutions’ are

established via forces external to a given community, and are characterized by functional and structural

arrangements that are fairly standard.

The nature and organization of indigenous institutions revolve around three principles: behavioral

alternatives, goal orientation and social norms (Apter 1968; cited in Appiah-Opoku and Hyma 1999).

Environmental ethics and practices in indigenous societies are often rooted in these abstract principles.

Thus, it is argued here that indigenous institutions can serve as entry points in the search for local options

and broad-based approaches to the management of natural resources.

2.1.2. Religion

Religion doesn't have a universally agreed definition. It may vary from the perspective of background,

profession, attitude, etc. The Encyclopedia Americana (1963) defines religious philosophy as “a rational

reflection on the nature of religion and on the meaning and truth of man's beliefs about a divine reality”.

Whatever definition religion may have, in this paper it is attempted to conceptualize its meaning from a

functionalist approach. As its name indicates, a functionalist definition is one that lays stress on the

functions rather than the belief content of religion. The functionalist contends that what is essential in

religion is the role it plays in society, the way in which religion serves to bind together the members of a

community into one coherent whole. This makes a functionalist definition true to the etymology of

religion, which may stem from the Latin ‘relgiare’ ('to bind'). A recent functionalist definition is found in

the work of J.M. Yinger (Clack and Clack 1998). Yinger's claim is that what distinguishes a religious

institution from a non-religious institution is its concern with the ultimate. These utilitarian (an action is

right from its function and wrong otherwise) and ultimate concerns are perennial factors in the human

condition, which no amount of good governance could achieve. Thus he defines religion as “a system of

beliefs and practices by means of which a group of people struggles with these ultimate problems of life”.

In religion, there are commandments and ethical elements, which are to be observed through which the

salvation is completed. It is a powerful factor in elevating the object of worship, the religious relation and

the religious life. Through the commandments and ethics within the religion, the sphere of the sacred is

enlarged and committing life to these rules is an aspect of the religious vocation, ethical duty and a

religious obligation. On the other hand, when the notion of divine personality or ability to be committed to

the commandments and ethics is weak or lacking, commandments and ethics inevitably assume a worldly

or negative character (Encyclopedia Britanica 1964).

8

2.1.3. Biodiversity

Biodiversity can be defined as the variability among living organisms from all sources and the ecological

systems of which they are a part; this includes compositional, structural and functional diversity at

regional-landscape, ecosystem-community, species-population or genetic level (Gove et al. 1994;

Heywood et al. 1995). As the definition implies, biodiversity is a very wide notion. Not withstanding the

breadth of the concept of biodiversity, diversity of species remains its most frequently and widely applied

measure (Gaston, 1996; Heywood, et al. 1995). Thus this paper focuses on the species level particularly on

woody species diversity level.

The values, driving forces and human influences as well as the measure for the conservation and

sustainable use of biodiversity, vary greatly within and between cultures. This aspect of biodiversity is,

therefore, sometimes referred to as cultural diversity, recognizing the important role of sociological,

ethical, religious and ethnobotanical values in human activities. The importance of this interdependence is

now beginning to be recognized again in traditional resource management systems in many developing

countries (Gaston 1996).

When we deal with biodiversity conservation and management, we do have different methods and tools to

achieve this. One of these approaches is the in situ conservation system around which this paper spines

about. The in situ approach includes methods and tools that protect species, genetic varieties and habitats

within the evolutionary dynamic ecosystems of the original habitat or natural environment. It involves the

establishment or management of protected areas such as strict nature reserves (wilderness areas, national

parks, national monuments) natural landmarks, habitat/species management areas, protected landscapes

and seascapes and managed resource protected areas (IUCN, 1994 in Gaston 1996).

2.1.4. Sustainability and Conservation of Natural Resources

Conservation is the management of human use of the biosphere so that it may yield the greatest sustainable

benefit to current generations while maintaining its potential to meet the needs and aspirations of future

generations. Thus, conservation is positive, embracing preservation, maintenance, sustainable utilization,

restoration, and enhancement of the natural environment. Here, sustainability is a key factor in conserving

and utilizing natural resources such as forest, and refers to the aspiration of the current generation without

compromising the ability to meet the needs of future generations.

Sustainability in natural resource management has three dimensions: Environmental, Economical and

Social. Social sustainability reflects the relationship between development and social norms. An activity is

socially sustainable if it confirms with social norms, or does not stretch them beyond a community's

9

tolerance for change, which entirely needs the genuine participation of the local society and its institutions

(Upton and Bass 1995).

2.2. Theoretical Perspective

The world today is pre-occupied with the search for sustainable development, including the sustainable use

of resources, economic sustainability and social sustainability (Sibanda 1997). As a contribution towards

finding a lasting solution, strategies are being drawn up and many ideas are being tested. National

legislation, international conventions and agreements are being made in an attempt to address

unsustainable consumer patterns and consumerism in general. The world is still far from finding that magic

solution or formula. While some progress is being made, the overall picture remains gloomy.

The main reason for the failure in natural resource conservation is due to the adoption of external

technology with new institutional arrangements and overlooking the existing tradition. For obvious

reasons, policy makers, in developing countries are drawn towards international environmental

prescriptions that have much stronger links with western science and policy, than with the socio-economic

and institutional conditions in their nations. Giddens (1990) refers to this phenomenon as

phantamorgoriscism. In conditions of modernity, places become increasingly phantasmagoric, i.e. locales

are thoroughly penetrated by, and shaped in terms of social influences quite distinct from them (Giddens

1990; Powell 1998). Thus, the potential contribution of indigenous institutions to environmental

assessment in these developing countries has often been overlooked. This is not strange (Appiah-opoku

and Mulamoottil 1997).

In the worst case, the local institutions and traditions with accumulated knowledge and experience, are

considered as hindrance for development and conservation of natural resources. The western concept of

‘‘development’’ is widely interpreted as necessitating change, and it is often characterized as a movement

from the old or archaic to the new, or from traditional to modern ways of life. That which is old and

unchanged is reflexively categorized as underdeveloped. Based on this notion, indigenous institutions and

indigenous life-styles are often regarded as clear signs of underdevelopment and as obstacles to socio-

economic advancement. They are erroneously viewed as excessive baggage that is borne by society with

no relationship to its basic processes of self-preservation except in so far as it disrupts them (Dove 1990).

Views of nature by native or indigenous peoples have too often been unjustly viewed as somehow

inherently simple, primitive, or naive, reflective of an earlier. Therefore, considered as inferior stage in

human cultural progress; and beyond this, however poetic or endearing, as completely irrelevant to our

sophisticated modern needs and times (Knudtson and Suzuki 1992). Accordingly, one ubiquitous element

in development and conservation planning is the depreciation and attempted alteration or elimination of

indigenous cultures or life-styles (Appiah-opoku and Mulamoottil 1997; Dove 1990).

10

In reality, development does not mean a wholesale and blind acquisition of symbols or signs of modernity.

Nor does it imply that everything about indigenous life-styles must be rejected in favor of an alien or

modern system. Instead, development implies building on existing ways of doing things to make the

processes more sustainable. The search for sustainable development and the conservation of natural

resources must consider and examine the role of indigenous institutions and their ecological knowledge in

environmental conservation and local sustainability (Fig. 1).

Hence, there has to be a reversal in thinking and approach in a natural resource conservation and

management from modernist to a social-constructionist paradigm (Fig. 1). The social constructionist

approach is predicated on the assumption that the terms by which the world is understood are social

artefacts, products of historically situated interchanges among people (Gergen 1985 cited in Denzin &

Lincoln 1994). The fact and problem of deforestation is multiple; there is no single reality. Reality is the

result of the social processes accepted as normal in a specific context, and knowledge claims are

intelligible and debatable only within a particular context or community (Fish 1989 cited in Denzin and

Lincoln 1994). The society has constructed a fact about deforestation and has formulated its solution

through the local institution. However, the ultimate outcome is still the same to the modernist approach.

Constructivists are deeply committed to what we take to be objective knowledge and truth is the result of

perspective. Knowledge and truth are created, not discovered by mind. They emphasise the pluralistic and

plastic character of reality- pluralistic in the sense that reality is expressible in a variety of symbol and

language systems; plastic in the sense that reality is stretched and shaped to fit purposeful acts of

intentional human agents (Denzin & Lincoln 1994).

As religion is one of the strong and powerful indigenous institutions, religious perspective towards

conservation, the past and present experience in the field of interest should coincide to our planning and

objective settings if sustainability is to be achieved. If EOTC is taken as an entry point, it can be argued

that success begins there. Because it will have a cumulative knowledge of thousands of years, experiences

of many people, wisdom of the spirit mediums, the wise council of elders and the able leadership of

religious leaders, institutions in managing and conserving resources and strong sanctions and ‘gizet’ for

outliers (Sibanda 1997).

Sibanda (1997) also claims that African philosophy on resource utilisation and environmental protection is

spiritually based. Major conservation efforts and the control of resource use were/are influenced by this

spirituality. Religious beliefs and taboo systems are at the centre of life as a whole. Africans’ spiritual

world-view creates respect for nature, reverence for mountains, forests, animals and rivers. Out of

reverence is born conservation and from it sustainable resource utilisation practices. One can prove how

nature can be respected through religion by looking at the very many EOTC and monasteries in Ethiopia.

11

Therefore, the social constructivist paradigm was employed as the main interpretative to look into the

problem, complementary to this, methodologies belonging to the positivist tradition such as, quantitative

survey data and other forms of statistical analysis were used to diversify perspectives and so in turn make

the overall study more rigorous.

12

Problem PerceptionSocially constructed perspective

Punishment

Consequence

Modern or Ecologist perspective

Solution PerceptionSocially constructed perspective

Religious Customs & NormsLocal Institutions

Tested

Sustainability

Scientific Principles &Legal control

'Formal' Institution

Modern or Ecologist perspective

Figure 1. Alternative paradigms for the problem and solution at hand

3. RESEARCH QUESTIONS

The study attempts to address the following pertinent questions:

♦ What is the extent / size of the Forest area and standing stock under the church?

♦ What is the diversity of the species, i.e. species richness and evenness and what is the regeneration

status of the species?

Deforestation inchurchyards

Super natural GodDisapproval & Anger

EcologicalDisturbance

DroughtDisaster

Trees and other bio-resources in church

yards

Sacred and Holy

Ecologically Viable&

Functional

Preservation&

Conservation

13

♦ What benefits were obtained, and what benefit can be exploited from church groves?

♦ Are there any management practices in tending and utilization of those trees?

♦ What is the significance of EOTC in maintaining the forest resources of the area/country?

♦ What is the attitude of the church scholars towards the forests in the yards of churches?

♦ What is the attitude of different groups of the local community towards the forests in the yards of

churches?

♦ How/Why does the church preserve the forests?

♦ What are the opportunities of churches in the conservation of forest resources?

♦ What are the threats to churches in their endeavours to conserve forest resources?

4. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The overall objective of this study was to assess the opportunity and prospect of the EOTC in conserving

natural forest resources and the associated woody species diversity in Ethiopia. The specific objectives of

the study were to:

♦ Study the diversity and regeneration status of woody species in forests found around selected

churches;

♦ Carry out a socio-economics survey that would enable to understand the philosophy, guiding

principles, opportunities, constraints and prospects of the EOTC in the conservation of forest

resources in general and woody species in particular; and

♦ Forward recommendations that could help to enhance the role of EOTC in the conservation of

forest resources and the associated biodiversity in the country.

14

5. MATERIALS AND METHODS

5.1. Study Area

The study was conducted in South Gonder Administrative Zone (SGAZ), which is one of the

Administrative Zones in the Amhara National Regional State (Fig. 2). Its geographical location is between

110 02′ - 120 33′ N and 370 25′ - 380 41′ E with an altitude range of 1500-4231 m. The capital town,

DebreTabor is located 600 km North of Addis Abeba. SGAZ has an area of about 14,299 km2 of which

about 9% is classified under ‘Kolla’ (500 –1500 masl), 73% under ‘Woynadega’ (1500-2300 masl), 16%

under ‘Dega’ (2300- 3200 masl) and 2% under ‘Wurch’ (> 3200 masl) Agro-Climatic Zones. SGAZ has 10

Administrative Districts, known locally as ‘Woredas’ with a total population of 2,050,539. Of the total

population, 1,041,373 are male and 1,009,166 female. The average family size is about five (2001 census).

In SGAZ, there are 1404 churches, and 95% of total population is member of the EOTC (SGAZDPED

unpublished).

The rainfall is characterized by a bimodal distribution with the major rainy season being from June-August

and the ‘Belg’ from March-May. The annual average rainfall varies between 400 –700 mm and the annual

average temperature ranges between 9.3 - 23.7o C. The topography comprises uneven and ragged

mountainous highlands, extensive plains and also deep gorges. It is one of the degraded and eroded areas

in the region. The common soil types are Vertisol, Cambisol, Rigosol, Liptosols, Flovisols and Arenosols.

According to the Zonal Department of Agriculture (SGAZDA unpublished) the total forest cover in SGAZ

is 20,882 ha, comprising 16,660 ha of natural forest and 4222 ha of man-made plantations. The forest

cover accounts for only 1.4% of the total area of SGAZ. This figure does not include the forest resources

found in the yards of the EOTC. The common tree and shrub species found in the natural forests are listed

in Appendix 2. The common wildlife found in the area are: hare, duiker, common bushbuck, klipspringer,

anubis baboon, common genet, python, hyena, bush pig, serval, leopard, antelope, porcupine, civets,

vervet monkey, colobus monkey, and common jackal (SGZDA Unpublished).

5.2. Churches Selected for the Study

Eight churches were selected for the actual study from SGAZ in six Woredas. Most of the churches were

found surrounded by forests/trees. From top view position, the churchyards are almost circular in shape.

The churches are immediately surrounded by open space for worship and festivals, which in turn is

enveloped by the forest. In every EOTC, the graveyard is located at the southwestern side of the church in

the forest. Hence, the southwestern part of the forest is, somewhat, disturbed while the rest is intact. The

churches selected for the study are briefly described below.

5.2.1. Quar Debre Luel Kidus Michael

15

This church is found in Fogera Woreda, and was built in the 15th Century in the name of St. Michael. It is

located at 110 51′ N and 370 40′ E at an altitude of 1850 m. The church has 850 Christian household

members. The actual forest covers 3 ha. The church has a very large Eucalyptus woodlot and farmlands

surrounding the natural forest.

5.2.2. Zahara Debre Miheret Kidus Michael

This church is found in Dera Woreda, and was built in the middle of the 16th Century in the name of St.

Michael. It is located at 110 48′′ N and 370 34′ E at an altitude of 1934 m. The church has 250 Christian

household members. The actual forest area surrounding the church covers 8 ha. There is a ‘holy water’ in

the forest blessed by the church supposed to bless and protect those who use it against the powers of

darkness. The church administrator explained that the area was covered by water before the church was

built, which might be the extension of Lake Tana.

5.2.3. Gibtsawit Kidist Mariam

This church is found in Ebinat Woreda, and was built around the year 1620 (Ethiopian Calendar) in the

name of St. Mary. It is located at 120 07′ N and 380 05′ E at an altitude of 2290 m.a.s.l. The church has 350

Christian household members. The actual forest area covers 8.7 ha.

5.2.4. Dengolt Debre Medalhu Kidist Mariam

This church is found in Estie Woreda, and was built around the year 1300 (Ethiopian Calendar) in the

name of St. Mary. It is located at 110 36′ N and 380 04′ E at an altitude of 2500 m.a.s.l. The church has 400

Christian household members. The actual forest area covers 25 ha. This site is highly encroached by the

local and nearby town dwellers. According to the church scholars and dwellers, there are two sections of

the forest. The inner section, next to the church demarcated by a stone fence, is entirely forbidden for

animals while in the outer section of the forest, animals are free to rest under the shade. It is forbidden to

cut down trees. The Eucalyptus woodlot, which belongs to the church, had been established next to the

natural forest to compensate for what had been lost through encroachment.

5.2.5. Mekane Semayat Kidus Gelawdiwos

This church is found in Dera Woreda, and was built around the year 1500 (Ethiopian Calendar) in the

name of St. Claudius. It is located at 110 38′ N and 370 48′ E at an altitude of 2549 m.a.s.l. The church has

800 Christian household members. In this case, the main church is some 300 meters away from the edge of

the forest. The church scholar explained that the church was right in the middle of the forest in the past. A

new church (sub-parish) had been built on the other edge of the forest. The actual forest area comprises

100 ha. There is a ‘holy water’ in the forest blessed by the church supposed to bless and protect those who

use it against the powers of darkness. The local people allow their cattle in the forest to rest under the

shade of the trees to protect them from strong sunshine and storms. Bees produce honey at the main gate of

16

the church without being disturbed since the establishment of the church and the honey is believed to be

medicinal.

5.2.6. Hiruy Kidus Giorgis

This church is found in Farta Woreda, and was built in the year 360 (Ethiopian Calendar) in the name of

St. Gorge. It is located at 110 51’ N and 380 03’ E at an altitude of 2611 m.a.s.l. The church has 350

Christian household members. The actual forest area covers 4 ha, which is well protected by a fence from

outside encroachment. Bees make honey on the window of the church with out being disturbed, and the

honey is believed to be medicinal.

5.2.7. Debresena Kidist Mariam

This church is found in Farta Woreda built in the first half of the 16th in the name of St. Mary. It is located

at 110 51′ N and 370 59′ E with an altitude of 2690 m.a.s.l. The church has got 300 Christian households as

members. The actual forest area is 11.5 ha surrounding a sloping hill. Though the church building is under

maintenance the forest is still well protected.

5.2.8. Ascha Menbere Luel Kidus Michael

This church is found in Lay-Gaynt Woreda, and was built in the year 1940 (Ethiopian Calendar) in the

name of St. Michael. It is located at 110 43′ N and 380 28′ E at an altitude of 3100 m.a.s.l. The church has

200 Christian household members. The actual forest area covers 1.6 ha. This church has large Eucalyptus

woodlot surrounding the natural forest.

17

Figure 2. Map of the study Area

18

5.3. Methods of Data Collection

5.3.1. Sampling Design

The general sampling design for the vegetation census and socio-economic survey was a two-stage

sampling procedure. In the first stage, out of many churches found in SGAZ (referred to as population

here), 8 churches were selected purposively from the different agro-climatic zones (mainly based on

altitude). Since documents that show the distribution of churches in agro-climatic zones was not available,

post-stratification was employed (Shiver and Borders 1996). In the second stage, secondary units (referred

to as working units here) were selected within each primary sampling unit (selected churches/Debr). The

working units for the vegetation sampling were plots in the forested area and for the socio-economic study

the religious scholars and followers were considered.

5.3.2. Area of Forest Cover

The area of the forest cover at each church was calculated by employing traverse lines rounding the outside

border. The traverse was taken by using a compass to get a bearing, measuring tape and clinometer to

obtain the horizontal distance. Then the site was sketched on paper using a scale, and the area was

calculated by using a transparent grid. The area occupied by the church buildings and open spaces was

measured and subtracted from the total area to get the actual forest area. Moreover, the altitude and the

global position (longitude and latitude) were recorded for each church using an altimeter and GPS.

5.3.3. Vegetation census

For the vegetation census, parallel transects were laid out. The first transect was aligned randomly at one

side of the forest using a compass; then the others were laid systematically at 50 m intervals from each

other. Then, along the first transect line a 10 m X 10 m sample plot (working plot) was marked randomly

and then the same size of the plots were marked at 50 m intervals systematically on all other transects. A

compass and measuring tape were used to locate sample plots along the transects. Clinometer readings

were made on slopes to obtain horizontal ground distances between transects and sample plots. Two

measuring tapes bisecting at right angles over the center of the plot were laid out and used as a reference in

locating the four corners of the plot, and the square plot was fenced by using bright ribbon. Since the forest

at Mekane Semayat Gelawdeyus was so extensive, the transects and sample plots were laid at 100 m

intervals.

All woody plants, within the working units, were identified and recorded. However, exotic species data

was excluded from the whole analyses as the objective of the paper was to deal with indigenous woody

species. Plant identification was done by referring to the Flora of Ethiopia and Eritrea: volume 2, part 1

(Edwards, et al. 2000), Flora of Ethiopia and Eritrea: volume 2, part 2 (Edwards, et al. 1995), Flora of

Ethiopia: volume 3 (Hedberg and Edwards 1989) and Useful trees and shrubs for Ethiopia (Azene Bekele

19

1993). For species that proved difficult to identify in the field, herbarium specimens were collected, dried

properly and transported to the National Herbarium at Addis Abeba University for identification. Diameter

(at 1.3 m above the ground unless there is abnormality) of all living woody plants having ≥ 10 cm were

measured using calipers and diameter tape. Trees with multiple stems at 1.3 m height were treated as a

single individual and DBH of the largest stem was taken. If the tree was buttressed and abnormal at 1.3 m,

the diameter was measured just above the buttress where the stem assumes near cylindrical shape. The

numbers of living stems and dead stumps were counted and recorded while the heights of all woody

species were measured using a hypsometer.

5.3.4. Socio-economic Survey

5.3.4.1. Attitude of the local community and Church Scholars

Semi-structured questionnaires were prepared to undertake the household survey. It was pre-tasted before

using it on a wider scale, and some improvement was made to the questionnaire. From each selected

church (primary sampling units) 5% of the church followers (adherents) were randomly chosen and

interviewed. Four churches were selected for the socio-economic survey in light of the short duration of

the study; accordingly 122 household heads, in the four churches, living close to the church forests, were

interviewed.

At least three church scholars were selected randomly and interviewed with open-ended questions. ‘Church

Scholars’ refers to the Priests, ‘Merigeta’ and other scholarly hierarchies and clergy that serve in that

specific church. Moreover, key informant interviews, focus group discussions and other PRA tools

(historical profile) were employed for each selected church.

5.3.4.2. Stakeholder Analyses

Stakeholders are persons, groups or institutions with interest in certain programs, activities or projects

(ODA 1995). Stakeholders analysis is an holistic approach or procedure for gaining an understanding of a

system, and assessing the impact of changes to that system, by means of identifying key stakeholders, and

their respective interests in the system. Accordingly, key stakeholders in forest resource conservation and

sustainable development activities and programs in the study area were:

♦ Administrative Bodies: The Peasant Association (at grass root level), Woreda and Zonal Council;

♦ Bureau of Agriculture: Development Agent (at grass root level), Woreda Office of Agriculture and

Zonal Department of Agriculture;

♦ Religious institutions: Debr/Single Church (at grass root level), Woreda Clergy Office and Zonal

Archbishop Office; and

♦ Elders and the community.

20

The common ground, conflicts and possible trade-offs among these stakeholders were seen in the

conservation tradition of the church and future option of taking this tradition for the development of in situ

conservation sites. Patterns of common ground between stakeholders were identified and shown as a basis

for management and proposal options.

5.3.4.3. SWOT Analysis and Secondary Information

SWOT analysis was also conducted to assess the strength, weakness, opportunity and threats of religious

institutions in biodiversity conservation.

Relevant secondary information for the study was also collected from various sources.

5.3.5. Scope and Limitation of the Study

This study covers only a very few selected churches due to a shortage of time and financial constraints.

Nevertheless, it is hoped to provide valuable information and insight that can be of great importance for the

conservation of forest resources and the associated biodiversity in churchyards.

5.4. Methods of Data Analyses

5.4.1. Vegetation

5.4.1.1. Density, Basal Area, Regeneration Status and Similarity

The quantitative structure analysis was made using data from abundance, density and frequency

distribution of each species in the community. Abundance or density of species is defined here as the

number of individuals per given area basis while frequency refers to the number of times a species is

recorded in a given number of repeatedly placed sample plots or sample points (Kershaw 1964 cited in

Mueller-Dombois and Ellen berg 1974). The population structural analysis was made using data from

height class as well as diameter class distribution, referred to as size class distribution. The purpose of

looking at the size class distributions (height and diameter) was to enable to investigate the regeneration

status of the plants (Peters 1996). The height and diameter data were arranged in classes for convenience.

Basal Area (BA) was also calculated, only from plants with a diameter at breast height of ≥ 10 cm, byusing the formula:

BA = 4

2Dπ ………………………………………..(1)

Where, D is the diameter of the plant at breast height.

To measure the similarity of churches in species composition, the binary similarity coefficient, which

employs presence/absence of species data in a community, was used. In this study Coefficient of Jaccard,

which is one of the most commonly used binary similarity coefficients (Krebs 1999), was employed.

21

The Coefficient of Jaccard (Sj) is expressed as follows:

Sj = cba

a

++ ..……………..………………………..(2)

Where, a is the number of species that occur in both churches 1 and 2 (joint occurrences); b is the number

of species that occur in church 1 but not in church 2; and c is the number of species that occur in church 2

but not in church 1.The range of all similarity coefficients for binary data is supposed to be from 0 (no

similarity) to 1(complete similarity).

5.4.1.2. Species Diversity

Diversity, which is synonymous with heterogeneity (Hurlbert 1971 cited in Krebs 1999), comprises species

richness and evenness. Indices that combine both richness and evenness (Heterogeneity) into a single value

are diversity indices. The total number of species in a community is referred to as species richness while

species evenness or equitability explains as to how species abundance is distributed among species.

Diversity has emerged as the most widely used criterion to assess the conservation potential and ecological

value of a site (Magurran 1996).

A. Species Richness

As a measure of species richness, the number of species in a community or sample, S and also two non-

parametric estimators of species richness, the Chao1 and the first order jackknife were used (Gimaret-

Carpentier et al. 1998; Krebs 1999).

The first Chao index (C) is given by:

C = S + b

a

2

2

…………………..………………………..(3)

The first order Jackknife index (J) is given by:

J = S + k ( )

−

P

1P ……....…..……....……….…..(4)

Where, S is the number of species found when all sample plots are pooled; a is the number of species that

are represented by a single individual (singletons); b is the number of species that are represented by two

individuals (doubletons); k is the number of species that occur in only one sample plot (unique); and P is

the number of plots sampled.

B. Species Evenness

22

Evenness measures attempts to quantify unequal representation against a hypothetical community in which

all species are equally common (Krebs, 1999). The Evenness or Equitability (E) was quantified by

expressing Simpson's index, 1/D (λ) (where D = Index of dominance), as a proportion of the maximum

possible value λ would assume if individuals were completely evenly distributed among the species. In fact

λmax = S.

The Species Evenness or Equitability (E) is given by:

E = maxλλ

= ∑=

s

iiP

1

2

1 X

S

1 = S

λ ……………(5)

Where, S is the number of species found when all sample plots are pooled; Pi is the proportion of total

individuals in the ith species.

Equitability assumes a value between 0 and 1, i.e. it takes a maximum value of 1 when all species in a

sample are equally abundant and then decreases to zero as the relative abundance radiates away from

equitability.

The Shannon-Wiener’s equitability or evenness (J) Index (Krebs 1989) was also quantified for comparison

as follows:

J = maxH

H′′

= S

PiPiS

i

ln

ln1∑=

−

= S

H

ln

′ ……………....(6)

Where, H' is Shannon-Wiener Diversity Index; S is the number of species found when all sample plots are

pooled; Pi is the proportion of total individuals in the ith species.

C. Heterogeneity

The Heterogeneity or Diversity was measured by Simpson’s Diversity Index that is commonly referred to

as the dominance measure and Shannon-Wiener Diversity Index (Begon et al. 1990), which is also referred

to as the information statistic index.

Simpson's Dominance Index (D) is expressed as:

23

D =

2

1∑=

s

iiP .………………………………………………..(7)

Where, S is the total number of species in the community (i.e. the richness); Pi is proportion of total

individuals in the ith species.

Since the communities assessed were finite (because of counts of individuals in the samples), to get an

unbiased estimator (Krebs, 1999), the following formula was used:

D = ( )( )∑

−−

1

1

NN

nini ………………..…………………………(8)

Where, ni is the number of individuals in the ith species and N is the total number of individuals.

D is the Index of Dominance while the Index of Diversity (λ) is the inverse of D, i.e. 1/D. Index of

Diversity (λ) varies from 1 to s (the number of species in the sample). In this form, Simpson's diversity can

be most easily interpreted as the number of equally common species required to generate the observed

heterogeneity of the sample (Krebs 1999).

The Shannon-Wiener’s Diversity Index (H’) is expressed as:

H' = - ∑=

S

i

ii pP1

ln …..……………….……………(9)

Where, H' is the Index of Species Diversity, S is the number of species; Pi is the proportion of total

individuals in the ith species.

The Shannon-Wiener Index (H’) increases with the number of species in the community and, in theory, can

reach a very large value (Krebs 1999). The Shannon-Wiener Index can be interpreted as the average degree

of uncertainty in predicting to what species an individual chosen at random from a collection of S species

and N individuals would belong. It can be zero if there is only one species in the sample and takes a

maximum value of LnS for a given number of species (S), when the same number of individuals represents

all species.

The variance of H’ was calculated (Magurran 1996) by

VarH’= ( ) ( )

N

PPPP iiii∑ ∑−22 lnln

-22

1

N

S − .................................10

24

This allows to test the significance difference between two samples

t= ( )2

1

21

21

''

''

VarHVarH

HH

−

− .................................................11

The Degrees of freedoms (df) were calculated by

df =( )

( )[ ] ( )[ ]22

212

1

221

/'/'

''

NVarHNVarH

VarHVarH

+−

.........................................12

Where, H’1 is the diversity of sample 1; N1 is the number of individuals in sample 1; H’2 is the diversity of

sample 2; and N2 is the number of individuals in sample 2.

5.4.1.3. Species Area Curve

The species area curve was drawn by using the number of species accumulated data versus the number of

quadrats. The purpose of drawing the curve was to check whether sufficient sample was taken to record all

the species of the study site.

5.4.1.4. Ordination

Ordination is the arrangement of vegetation samples in relation to each other in terms of their similarity of

species composition and/or their associated environmental controls (Kent and Coker 1992). The vegetation

data were ordinated into different plant groups by an ordination technique using CANOCO (Canonical

Correspondence) computer software (ter Braak 1985). After looking at alternative analytical techniques,

Correspondence Analysis (CA) was selected and used to get maximum egienvalues and better-stratified

groups. After transformation [with Log10 (x+1)], the abundance data of species from all sampled churches

was subjected to CA (ter Braak 1985). Since Acacia brevispica was an outlier, it was excluded from the

analysis.

In CA, points represent both sites and species, and each site is located at the center of gravity of the species

that occurs there. The data used for ordination was the species data found from all churches. Thus, each

point in the graph corresponds to a species, and the distance between points on the graph is an

approximation to their degree of similarity in terms of distribution with in the quadrats. Then, based on the

indirect gradient analysis technique, the factor altitude in this study was correlated to the distribution of

points (Kent and Coker 1992).

5.4.2. Socio-economic Survey

25

The content of the interviews and discussions with the key informants, focus groups, stakeholders,

observations and other qualitative data collected using the informal survey, were analyzed at the spot with

various groups and also analyzed later after coding and compiling the data. For semi-structured interviews

dependant and independent variables were determined. Accordingly sex, age, main occupation education

status and church affiliation were taken as independent variables and attitude related questions were taken

as dependent variables. Once these important dimensions and variables were determined, the results of the

semi-structured questionnaires were quantified and analyzed by χ2 test using the SPSS software (SPSS

1994).

26

6. RESULTS

6.1. Vegetation

6.1.1. Species Composition, Density, Basal Area and Similarity

A total of 97 different indigenous woody species representing 57 plant families and five exotic woody

species were recorded in the eight forest churches studied (Appendix 1). The total number of species and

families in each of the eight churches ranged from 22 and 18 at Ascha to 42 and 22 at Gelawdiwos,

respectively (Table 1). However, density and basal area did not follow the same trend as the total number

of species and families. Hiruy church had the highest density and basal area while Quar and Gibtsawit

exhibited the lowest density and basal area respectively (Table 1). In terms of the number of live stems,

with more than 10 cm diameter at breast height (DBH), Debresena ranked first and Zahara last (Table 1).

The highest number of dead stumps was recorded at Gibtsawit (130) while Hiruy had the lowest number of

dead stumps (Table 1). It is interesting to note that the lowest number of dead stumps was recorded at

Hiruy, which had the highest basal area, and the highest number of dead stumps was recorded at Gibtsawit,

which had the lowest basal area (Table 1). In four of the churches a total of five exotic woody species were

encountered (Table 2).

Table 1. Area of forests (ha), number of species and plant families, total Density (individuals/ha),basal area (m2/ha) as well as numbers of live stems/ha (DBH ≥ 10 cm) and dead stumps/ha found inthe eight churches.

Church Area ofForest

Species Families Density Basal Area Live Stems DeadStumps

Gelawdiwos 100 42 29 1109 52 352 32Dengolt 25 36 28 1169 35 268 41Gibtsawit 8.7 35 24 1110 25 490 130Debresena 11.5 34 27 2141 45 1003 119Quar 3 34 25 731 100 293 69Hiruy 4 31 26 2250 110 507 29Zahara 8 29 22 1186 50 227 41Ascha 1.6 22 18 1289 28 786 128

The number of species and families common to all churches were only one and three, respectively.

Maytenus arbutifolia was recorded in all the study churches. However, the numbers of common species

and families increased as the churches were stratified in altitude (Table 3). Churches located below 2,300

m, i.e. Quar, Zahara and Gibtsawit, shared nine species and 12 families in common while those located

above 2300 m, i.e. Dengolt, Gelawdiwos, Hiruy, Debresena and Ascha, shared four species and six

families in common (Appendix 1).

The abundance, density and frequency of each species and the contribution of each species to the

community are summarized in Appendix 1. In all the churches, the most abundant individuals were trees

(Appendix 1).

27

Table 2. List, densities (individuals/ha) and basal areas (m2/ha) of exotic woody species recorded infour of the church forests.

Church/Species Density Basal Area

A. Quar 46 5.0Eucalyptus camaldulensisB. Hiruy 314 2.0Eucalyptus globulusC. Ascha 114 3.1Eucalyptus globulusD. Zahara 51 Young individualsCajanus cajanCasuarina equisetifoliaEucalyptus camaldulenisMelia azadrach

The highest similarity (Sj = 0.59) in species composition was found between forests at Dengolt and

Gelawdiwos churches and the lowest similarity (Sj = 0.04) was recorded between forests at Zahara and

Ascha (Table 3). In general, the similarities among the studied church forests were very low, with only five

among the 28 pairs of forests compared scoring Sj values above 0.50 while 15 (ca. 54%) out of the 28 pairs

of forests had Sj values below 0.20 (Table 3).

Table 3. Similarities in species composition among the eight churches determined by Jaccard’sSimilarity Coefficient.

Church Coefficient of Jaccard

Quar Zahara Gibtsawit Dengolt Galawdiwos Hiruy Debersena Ascha

Quar - 0.39 0.23 0.20 0.18 0.12 0.15 0.07Zahara - - 0.17 0.21 0.29 0.16 0.18 0.04Gibtsawit - - - 0.27 0.24 0.18 0.13 0.16Dengolt - - - - 0.59 0.51 0.49 0.18Galawdiwos - - - - - 0.51 0.55 0.12Hiruy - - - - - - 0.57 0.17Debersena - - - - - - - 0.14Ascha - - - - - - - -

6.1.2. Species Diversity: Species Richness, Evenness and Heterogeneity

Both Chao’s and Jackknife Indices overestimated the species richness for all churches as compared to the

observed number of species (Table 4). According to Chao’s estimate, the highest number of species was

expected at Ascha (150), which had the lowest number of observed species (22); and the lowest at

Debresena (35); While Jackknife estimated the highest number of species at Quar, Dengolt and

Gelawdiwos (49) and lowest at Ascha (36) (Table 4). It can be noted that the forest area and number of

observed species have a positive correlation (r=0.73) (Table 1&4). The Simpson’s evenness indices for all

churches were below 0.5, the first rank being 0.46 (Quar) and last 0.18 (Zahara). It is interesting to note

that the Shannon-Wiener evenness Indices, on the contrary, were above 0.5 for all churches, the first being

0.82 (Quar and Gelawdiwos) and last 0.63 (Ascha) (Table 4). The highest Simpson Heterogeneity (15.7)

was recorded from Quar and lowest (5.3) from Zahara and Ascha; while the highest Shannon-Wiener

Heterogeneity (3.1) was recorded from Gelawdiwos and lowest (2.0) from Ascha (Table 4). The highest

and lowest Shannon-Wiener values were significantly different (P=0.0005).

28

Table 4. Different diversity indices of the eight church forests studied.

Diversity Indices Quar Zahara Gibtsawit Dengolt Gelawdiwos Hiruy Debresena Ascha

Species RichnessObserved species (S) 34 29 35 36 42 31 34 22Chao 1 (C) 53 40 52 50 50 67 35 150Jackknife 1 (J) 49 37 48 49 49 43 39 36Species evennessSimpson’s Evenness (E) 0.46 0.18 0.3 0.2 0.35 0.27 0.29 0.24Shannon’s Equitability (J) 0.82 0.70 0.78 0.67 0.82 0.75 0.79 0.63HeterogeneitySimpson Diversity (λ) 15.7 5.3 10.5 7.1 14.7 8.51 9.9 5.3Shannon-Wiener Diversity (H’) 3.0 2.4 2.8 2.4 3.1 2.6 2.8 2.0Variance of H’ 0.01 0.008 0.006 0.0023 0.0022 0.0048 0.0018 0.024

6.1.3. Regeneration Status

6.1.3.1. Height Class Distributions

The height class distributions exhibited different trends from species to species within a church forest and

among church forests, even for the same species (Fig. 3). In all sampled church forests, 12 different groups

of height class distribution patterns of the species recorded were observed:

A. Species having a high proportion of individuals at the lowest class followed by a sharp decline at the nextclass and no or very few individuals at the next higher classes (Fig. 4A); e.g. Bersama abyssinica (Dengolt),Apodytes dimidiata and Prunus africana (Hiruy);

B. Species with the highest number of individuals at the lowest and a sharp decline at the next class followed bya more or less gradual decrease towards the higher classes (Fig. 4B); e.g. Diospyros abyssinica (Quar) andEuphorbia abyssinica (Gibtsawit);

C. Species with no individuals at the lower four classes and gradually increasing numbers of individuals at thenext two higher classes (Fig. 4C); Albizia schimperiana (Quar) and Schefflera abyssinica (Gelawdious);

D. Species with no or a few individuals at the lowest class and a gradual or sharp increase in the numbertowards the medium class followed by sharp or gradual decline towards the upper classes (Fig. 4D); e.g.Juniperus procera (Gibtsawit & Ascha), Olea europaea subsp. cuspidata (Gibtsawit), Euphorbia abyssinica(Hiruy), Apodytes dimidiata, Dovyalis abyssinica, Olinia rochetiana, Pittosporum viridiflorum and Tecleanobilis (Deberesena), Erica arborea and Osyris quadripartita (Ascha);

E. Species having the highest proportion of individuals in the lowest and/or second classes and no individualsat the next two classes followed by a slight/gradual increase towards the upper classes (Fig. 4E); e.g.Millettia ferruginea and Mimusops kummel (Zahara) and Prunus africana (Dengolt);

F. Species having individuals at only one of the height classes (Fig. 4F); e.g. Chionanthus mildbraedii (Zahara)and Psydrax schimperiana (Gibtsawit);

G. Species having fewer individuals at the first class with the number showing a sharp increase at the secondclass followed by a sharp drop at the next class and with no individuals at or above the third class (Fig. 4G);e.g. Acokanthera schimperi (Gibtsawit), Teclea nobilis (Dengolt) and Combretum molle (Gelawdiwos);

H. Species having more or less the same number of individuals at the lower four height classes and a sharpincrease in the number at the next class followed by a decline in the last class (Fig. 4H); e.g. Juniperusprocera (Dengolt);

I. Species having no individuals at the lowest height class and a gradual increase in the number up to the fifthclass followed by a decline at the last class (Fig. 4I); e.g. Chionanthus mildbraedii (Gelawdiwos);

J. Species having no individuals at the lowest class and missing individuals at one or two of the other heightclasses (Fig. 4J); e.g. Ekebergia capensis (Gelawdiwos and Hiruy).

29

K. Species having two individuals each at only the fourth and fifth height classes (Fig. 4K); e.g. Podocarpusfalcatus (Gelawdiwos); and

L. Species having a higher number of individuals at lowest three height classes and a sharp decline to only oneindividual at the next class, no individual at the fourth and only one individual at the sixth classes (Fig. 4L);e.g. Dombeya torrida (Hiruy).

On the other hand, when pattern of the height class distribution of individuals of all the species in each of

the churches is considered, three categories can be recognized:

I. Church forests having a lower number of individuals at the lowest class and a sharp increase at the next classfollowed by a sharp decline in the third class and a gradual decline thereafter; e.g. Quar, Gibtsawit, Dengolt,Galawdiwos and Debresena;

II. Church forests having a higher number of individuals at the lowest class followed by a gradual decline in thenumber towards the successive higher classes; e.g. Hiruy and Zahara; and

III. Church forests having very few individuals at the lowest class and sharp increases at the next two classesfollowed by sharp declines towards the upper classes; Ascha.

30

Quar

Zahara

Albizia schimperana

0

1

2

3

4

1 2 3 4 5 6

Height class

Num

ber

of in

divi

dual

sDiospyros abyssinica

0

5

10

15

1 2 3 4 5 6

Height class

Num

ber

of in

divi

dual

s

All woody plants

0

10

20

30

40

1 2 3 4 5 6

Height class

Num

ber

of in

divi

dual

s

M illettia ferruginea

0

2

4

6

8

1 2 3 4 5 6

Height class

Num

ber

of in

divi

dual

s

M imusops Kummel

0

20

40

60

80

100

1 2 3 4 5 6

Height class

Num

ber

of in

divi

dual

s

All woody plants

0

50

100

150

1 2 3 4 5 6

Height class

Num

ber

of in

divi

dual

s

Chionanthus mildbraedii

024

68

10

1 2 3 4 5 6

Height class

Num

ber

of

indi

vidu

als

C B I

EF

II

E

31

Gibtsawit

Dengolt

Gelawdiwos

Acokanthera schimperi

0

10

20

30

40

1 2 3 4 5 6

Height class

Num

ber

of in

divi

dual

s

Euphorbia abyssinica

0

5

10

15

20

25

1 2 3 4 5 6

Height class

Num

ber

of in

divi

dual

s

Juniperus procera

0123456

1 2 3 4 5 6

Height class

Num

ber

of in

divi

dual

s

Olea europaea

0

2

4

6

8

10

1 2 3 4 5 6

Height class

Num

ber

of in

divi

dual

s

Psydrax schimperiana

0

2

4

6

8

1 2 3 4 5 6

Height class

Num

ber

of in

divi

dual

s

All woody plants

020406080

100120

1 2 3 4 5 6

Height class

Num

ber

of in

divi

dual

s

Bersama abyssinica

0

10

20

30

40

1 2 3 4 5 6

Height class

Num

be

r o

f in

divi

du

als

Juniperus procera

0

10

20

30

40

1 2 3 4 5 6

Height class

Num

be

r o

f in

divi

du

als

Prunus africana

0

5

10

15

20

1 2 3 4 5 6

Height class

Num

be

r o

f in

divi

du

als

Teclea nobilis

0

50

100

150

1 2 3 4 5 6

Height class

Num

ber

of

ind

ivid

ual

s

All woody plants

0

100

200

300

400

1 2 3 4 5 6

Height class

Num

be

r o

f in

divi

du

als

A

IE

GH

G

IFD

DB

32

Hiruy

Debresena

Chionanthus mildbraedii

0

5

10

15

20

1 2 3 4 5 6

Height class

Nu

mb

er

of

ind

ivid

ual

s

Commbretum molle

0

20

40

60

80

1 2 3 4 5 6

Height class

Nu

mb

er

of

ind

ivid

ual

s

Ekebergia capensis

0

1

2

3

4

5

1 2 3 4 5 6

Height class

Nu

mb

er

of

ind

ivid

ual

s

Podocarpus falcatus

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

1 2 3 4 5 6

Height clas

Nu

mb

er

of

ind

ivid

ual

s

Schefflera abyssinica

0

1

2

3

4

1 2 3 4 5 6

Height class

Nu

mb

er

of

ind

ivid

ual

s

All woody plants

0

50

100

150

200

250

1 2 3 4 5 6

Height class

Nu

mb

er

of

ind

ivid

ual

s

Apodytes dimidiata

0

5

10

15

1 2 3 4 5 6

Hight class

Num

ber

of in

divi

dual

s

Dombeya torrida

0

2

4

6

8

10

1 2 3 4 5 6

Height class

Num

ber

of in

divi

dual

s

Ekebergia capensis

0

1

2

3

4

5

1 2 3 4 5 6

Height class

Num

ber

of in

divi

dual

s

Euphorbia abyssinica

0

2

4

6

8

1 2 3 4 5 6

Height class

Num

ber

of in

divi

dual

s

Prunus africana

0

20

40

60

80

100

1 2 3 4 5 6

Height class

Num

ber

of in

divi

dual

s

All woody plants

0

50

100

150

200

1 2 3 4 5 6

Height class

Num

ber

of in

divi

dual

s

Apodytes dimidiata

0

2

4

6

8

10

Nu

mb

er

of

ind

ivid

ual

s

Dovyalis abyssinica

0

10

20

30

40

Nu

mb

er

of

ind

ivid

ual

s

Olinia rochetiana

0

5

10

15

Nu

mb

er

of

ind

ivid

ual

s

I

CK

JG

I

AL

J

IIAD

D D D

33

Ascha

Figure 3. Height class distribution of individuals of some selected species and all woody plantsencountered in each Church. Species or churches with a similar pattern are labeled with the sameletter or number. Height classes: 1= < 1 m; 2= 1-5 m; 3 = 5-10 m; 4 = 10-15 m; 5 =15-20m; 6 = ≥ 20m.

6.1.3.2. Diameter Class Distributions

Erica arborea

0

5

10

15

20

25

1 2 3 4 5 6

Height class

Nu

mb

er

of

ind

ivid

ual

s

Juniperus procera

0

5

10

15

1 2 3 4 5 6

Height class

Nu

mb

er

of

ind

ivid

ual

s

Osyris quadripartita

0

1

2

3

4

5

1 2 3 4 5 6

Height class

Nu

mb

er

of

ind

ivid

ual

s

All woody plants

0

10

20

30

40

1 2 3 4 5 6

Height class

Nu

mb

er

of

ind

ivid

ual

s

IDD

DD

III

D

34

Similar to the height class distributions, the diameter class distributions exhibited different trends from

species to species within a church forest and among church forests, even for the same species (Fig. 4). The

diameter class distributions of species revealed seven patterns (Fig. 4A-F) while diameter class

distributions of all individuals in each of the eight church forests showed a more or less similar pattern

(Fig. 4). The seven categories of diameter class distributions of species are:

A. Species having individuals only at the lowest class or the two lowest classes (Fig. 5A); e.g. Chionanthusmildbraedii (Zahara), Acokanthera schimperi (Gibtsawit), Bersama abyssinica, Teclea nobilis (Dengolt),Combretum molle (Gelawdiwos) and Apodytes dimidiata (Hiruy);

B. Species having a high proportion of individuals at the lowest class and a sharp decline at the nextclass/classes followed by a gradual decline in the number of individuals towards the next classes (Fig. 5B);e.g. Euphorbia abyssinica (Gibtsawit); Teclea nobilis (Deberesena) and Erica arborea (Ascha);

C. Species exhibiting more or less the same pattern as category ‘B’, but with missing individuals at one orseveral of the classes (Fig. 5C); e.g. Diospyros abyssinica (Quar), Millettia ferruginea and Mimusopskummel (Zahara), Juniperus procera (Gibtsawit & Dengolt), Prunus africana (Dengolt); Dombeya torridaand Prunus africana (Hiruy);

D. Species having fewer individuals at the first class with the number showing a sharp increase at the next classor two classes followed by a sharp drop at the next class and a gradual decline thereafter; all species exceptone with missing individuals at one or two of the middle classes (Fig. 5D); e.g. Olea europaea subsp.cuspidata (Gibtsawit), Apodytes dimidiata, Dovyalis abyssinica and Olinia rochetiana (Debresena);

E. Species having very few individuals at the lowest class and with no or fewer individuals in the next classfollowed by a sharp increases at the next class or classes and a sharp decline thereafter (Fig. 5E); e.g.Chionanthus mildbraedii (Gelawdiwos); Euphorbia abyssinica (Hiruy); Pittosporum viridiflorum(Debresena) and Juniperus procera (Ascha);

F. Species having either no or few individuals at the lowest three classes and missing individuals at the nextfour to seven classes followed by few individuals at the upper classes (Fig. 5F); Ekebergia capensis andSchefflera abyssinica (Gelawdious) and Ekebergia capensis (Hiruy); and

G. Species having no or only one individual at the lowest diameter class/classes but a few individuals at onlyone or two of the other diameter classes (Fig. 5G); e.g. Albizia schimperiana (Quar), Psydrax schimperiana(Gibtsawit), Podocarpus falcatus (Gelawdiwos) and Osyris quadripartita (Ascha).

The diameter class distribution of all individuals in each of the churches followed the patterndescribed in category ‘B’ above (Fig. 4)Quar

Zahara

Albizia schimperana

0

1

2

3

4

1 3 5 7 9 11

Diameter class

Nu

mb

er

of

ind

ivid

ual

s

Diospyros abyssinica

0

5

10

15

1 3 5 7 9 11

Diameter class

Nu

mb

er

of

ind

ivid

ual

s

All woody plants

0

20

40

60

80

1 3 5 7 9 11

Diameter class

Nu

mb

er

of

ind

ivid

ual

s

M illettea ferruginea

5

10

15

er o

f ind

ivid

uals

M imusops kummel

20

40

60

80

100

er o

f ind

ivid

uals

Chionanthus mildbraedii

2

4

6

8

10

er o

f ind

ivid

uals

iCG

CC

A

35

Gibtsawit

Dengolt

Acokanthera schimperi

0

10

20

30

40

1 3 5 7 9 11

Diameter class

Num

ber

of in

divi

dual

s

Euphorbia abyssinica

0

5

10

15

20

25

1 3 5 7 9 11

Diameter class

Num

ber

of in

divi

dual

s

Juniperus procera

0

2

4

6

8

1 3 5 7 9 11

Diameter class

Num

ber

of in

divi

dual

s

Olea europaea

0

2

4

6

8

10

1 3 5 7 9 11

Diameter class

Num

ber

of in

divi

dual

s

Psydrax schimperiana

0

1

2

3

4

5

1 3 5 7 9 11

Diameter class

Num

ber

of in

divi

dual

s

All woody plants

0

50

100

150

1 3 5 7 9 11

Diameter class

Num

ber

of in

divi

dual

s

Bersama abyssinica

0

20

40

60

80

1 3 5 7 9 11

Nu

mb

er

of i

nd

ivid

ual

s

Juniperus procera

0

5

1015

20

25

30

1 3 5 7 9 11

Nu

mb

er

of

ind

ivid

ual

s

Teclea nobilis

0

50

100

150

200

1 3 5 7 9 11

Nu

mb

er

of

ind

ivid

ual

s

A

i

iiGD

a

B C

A AC

36

Gelawdiwos

Hiruy

Chionanthus mildbraedii

0

2

4

6

8

10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Diameter class

Num

ber

of i

ndi

vidu

als

Combretum molle

0

20

40

60

80

1 3 5 7 9 11

Diameter class

Num

ber

of i

ndi

vidu

als

Ekebergia capensis

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.51 3 5 7 9 11

Diameter class

Num

ber

of in

div

idua

ls

Podocarpus falcatus

0

1

2

3

4

5

1 3 5 7 9 11

Diameter class

Num

ber

of i

ndi

vidu

als

Schefflera abyssinica

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

1 3 5 7 9 11

Diameter class

Num

ber

of i

ndi

vidu

als

All woody plants

0

100

200

300

400

1 3 5 7 9 11

Diameter class

Num

ber

of in

div

idua

ls

Apodytes dimidiata

0

5

10

15

20

1 3 5 7 9 11

Diameter class

Num

ber

of in

divi

dual

s

Dombeya torrida

0

5

10

15

20

25

1 3 5 7 9 11

Diameter class

Num

ber

of in

divi

dual

s

Ekebergia capensis

0

1

2

3

4

5

1 3 5 7 9 11

Diameter class

Num

ber

of in

divi

dual

sE

iC

CA

iFG

FA

F

37

Debresena

Ascha

Apodytes dimidiata

0

2

4

6

8

1 3 5 7 9 11

Diameter class

Nu

mb

er

of

ind

ivid

ual

s

Dovyalis abyssinica

0

10

2030

40

50

60

1 3 5 7 9 11

Diameter class

Nu

mb

er

of

ind

ivid

ual

s

Olinia rochetiana

0

5

10

15

20

1 3 5 7 9 11

Diameter class

Nu

mb

er

of

ind

ivid

ual

s

Pittosporum viridiflorum

0

1

23

4

5

6

1 3 5 7 9 11

Diameter class

Nu

mb

er

of

ind

ivid

ual

s

Teclea nobilis

0

20

4060

80

100

120

1 3 5 7 9 11

Diameter class

Nu

mb

er

of

ind

ivid

ual

s

All woddy plants

0

100

200

300

400

1 3 5 7 9 11

Diameter class

Nu

mb

er

of

ind

ivid

ual

s

Erica arborea

0

5

10

15

20

25

1 3 5 7 9 11

Diameter class

Nu

mb

er

of

ind

ivid

uals

Juniperus procera

0

2

4

6

8

10

1 3 5 7 9 11

Diameter class

Nu

mb

er

of

ind

ivid

uals

Osyris quadripartita

0

2

4

6

8

1 3 5 7 9 11

Diameter class

Nu

mb

er

of

ind

ivid

uals

All woody plants

D

iCE

GEB

a

iBE

DD

38

Figure 4. Diameter class distribution of all woody plants in all plots and some of the major treespecies for all churches. Species with similar patterns are labeled with the same letter. Diameterclass: 1=<10 cm;2=10-20 cm;3=20-30 cm;4=30-40 cm;5=40-50 cm; 6=50-60 cm;7=60-70 cm;8=70-80cm;9= 80-90 cm;10=90-100 cm; 11=≥100 cm.

6.1.4. Species Area Curve

The number of species at each church forest showed a relatively sharp increase initially with increasing

number of plots followed by a declining rate of increase (Figure 5). The exceptions to this trend were

forests at Quar and Ascha.

Figure 5. Species area curve of the eight church forests studies.

05

1015

2025

3035

4045

1 5 9

13

17

21

25

29

33

37

41

45

49

53

Number of Plots

Cu

mu

lati

ve N

o.

Of

Sp

ecie

s

Quar

Zahara

Gibstawit

Dengolt

Gelawdious

Hiruy

Debresena

Ascha

i

39

6.1.5. Ordination

The Correspondence Analysis ordinated the species recorded from all the churches into four groups (G1-

G4) (Fig. 6). These groups were:

♦ G1: characterized by the association of Hypericum revolutum- Erica arborea - Gnidia glauca- Myrsineafricana occurring above 3000 m;

♦ G2: characterized by the association of Olinia rochetiana-Ekebergia capensis-Dombeya torrida-Dovyalisabyssinica-Podocarpus falcatus occurring between 3000 and 2300 m;

♦ G3: characterized by the association of Acokanthra schimperi-Euclea divinorum-Psydrax schimperiana-Premna schimperi occurring 2300 and 2000 m; and

♦ G4: characterized by the association of Cordia africana-Croton macrostachyus-Millettia ferruginea-Mimusops kummel-Olea europaea occurring below 2000 m.

The special feature, which is set almost at equal distance from the four communities, is brought by Juniperusprocera.

Figure 6. Ordination diagram of species from the Correspondence Analysis made using the speciesabundance data from all church forests. The Eigenvalues for axis 1 &2 are 0.29 and 0.27respectively. The abbreviations on the figure are the combination of the first two letters of the genusand species name of the plants listed in Appendix 1.-3.0 +9.0

-2.0

+8.0

Rhpr

Meaz

Fiva

Ardo

Pisp

Hiaf

DiabCeaf

AstrMiku

Coaf

Mife

Coar

Fi th

Fivam

Jusc

Ciau

Veam

Grfe

Xiam

RialDrst

Addi

Ptst

Cato

Alsc

Erar

Crma

PhovGngl

Roab

Sesi

Mase

Fisu

Prsc

Clhi

Pivi

Erbr

Rhre

Olro

Rhvu

Alab

Gasa

Apdi

Bupo

DoabUnsp

Nuco

Savi

Fiov

Osqu

Emsc

PrafUrhy

Mysa

Phre

Doto Stab

Clan

Beab

Jagr

Mala

Ekca

Como

Scab

Euab

Pofa

Brmi

Vemy

Segi

Clab

Dipe

Teno

Asae

Phdo

Caed

Jupr

Acpu

Pssc

Olca

Otto

Rune

Maar

Star

AcscOleu

Acab

CaauRhgl

Chmi

Eudi

Bran

Aral

Clmy

Doan

Caol

Hyre

G1

G3

G2G4

40

6.2. Socio-Economics

6.2.1. Philosophy of EOTC in the Conservation of Forests

Church and monastery forests didn’t come in to existence by mere chance. Results from this study suggest

that, it is by the commitment and effort of the holy fathers and mothers based on a strong theological basis

and biblical thoughts. According to the prominent church scholars, including the Archbishop and the Holy

Scriptures of the church (The Holy Bible, King James Version), the main theological bases and religious

perspective in conserving forest resources were stated as follows:

The Church on the earth signifies and symbolizes the new heaven, the holy city, New Jerusalemcoming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride, adorned for her husband. Thus, itshould have the same semblance and appearance as the Eden heaven was. The Holy Bible statesabout Eden as “ And the Lord God planted a garden east-ward in Eden; and there he puts theman whom he had formed. And out of the ground made the lord God to grow every tree that ispleasant to the sight, and good for food…And a river went out of Eden to water the Garden; andfrom thence it was parted, and became in to four heads. ” (Genesis 2: 8-10). Therefore, thechurch like Eden was beautified with many plants, animals and other organisms and the holywater/streams infinitely has been surpassing from these forests that was believed as proceedingout of the throne of God. When the first man was placed in Eden there was a task given for himalong with the freedom and pleasure he had. That task was conservation and development ofnature as “ And the Lord God took the man, and put him in to the Garden of Eden to dress it andto keep it” (Genesis 2: 15). The EOTC followers who are supposed to be the generation of Adamand children of God should respect and exercise this dictate at least in the church compound ifnot possible in the whole landscape.

In the creation history, in the beginning, the earth was without form, and void, before it wasprepared to a habitable state. In the preparation process, the Lord God created green plants in thethird day before he created the man on the sixth day. “And God said, Let the earth bring forthgrass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself,upon the earth: and it was so: ... and God saw that it was good” (Genesis 1: 11-13). The firsthome for the first man was not an ivory house or a palace overlaid with gold and silver but agarden furnished and decorated by nature, populated with flourishing and pleasant trees. Theshadow of the trees was his retirement, under them was his dining room; and this was so goodthat King Solomon was not arrayed like them in his Kingdom. According to this holy statement,forests and other plants were shown how they were necessary for human worldly life andpleasure. It has also shown their right to exist in earth as long as man exists as they were createdin one of the days of the creation week. So, no one has the right to destroy them except the LordGod who made them and armed with the biblical perspective, it would be suicidal to destroythem by man whom they were created for.

Trees have a strong attachment with the failure of the first man and with the process of savinghuman beings by the Lord Jesus Christ. “ And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, ofevery tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: but of the tree of the Knowledge of good and evil,thou shalt thereof thou shalt surely die (Genesis 2: 16-17). Unfortunately, the first personsviolated the commandment and ate the special tree. The consequence was a curse. Later, based onGod’s promise, the Lord and the savior Jesus Christ came to save Adam and his generation. Thiswas done by Jesus’ holy blood, crucified on the holy cross-made of wood/special trees. Moreoverthe ark of Noah by which, he, his family and a pair of female and male animals of all types of theearth were saved from the evil destruction of water, was made of gopher wood (Genesis 6). Thus,trees and other plants are integrated with the Christian’s religious life and their mere existencereminds of all the ups and downs of human beings from creation till the end of this world.

Trees and forests have been symbolized on several occasions both, in the Old and NewTestaments of the Holy Bible, to remind prospects in the spiritual life of human beings with their

41

presence and graceful habitation, and the contrary in their absence. In connection with these,some interesting biblical words can be quoted about trees.

“Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, Nor standeth in the way ofsinners, Nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful. But his delight is in the law of the Lord; and inhis law doth he meditate day and night. And shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water,that bringeth forth his fruit in his season; his leaf also shall not wither; and whatsoever hedoeth shall prosper” (Psalm 1: 1-3).

“O God! Thou art my God; early I will seek thee: My soul longeth for thee, how shall I stretchmy flesh in a dry thirsty land, where no tree and water” (Psalm 63: 1-2).

“And by the river upon the bank thereof, on this side, on that side, shall grow all trees for meat,whose leaf shall not fade neither shall the fruits thereof be consumed: it shall bring forth newfruit according to his months that is twelve times in the year, because their waters they issuedout of the sanctuary, and the fruit there of shall be for food and the leaf for medicine” (Ezek47:12).

“I am the true vine, and my father is the husbandman. Every branch in me that beareth not fruithe taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth morefruit…. I am the vine, ye are the branches” (John 15: 1-5). In this statement it is shown that theLord and Savior Jesus Christ as a vine tree, believers as the branches and his relation to them asthe source of all their fruitful and spiritual life.

“And he showed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throneof God and of the lamb. In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was therethe tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits and yielded her fruit every month; and theleaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations” (Rev 22: 1-2).

Churches and monasteries are holy places as they are houses of God. The forests/trees grown inGod’s compound are therefore considered as sacred. The trees in the compound are symbolic ofthe presence of angels guarding the church. On top of this, they are precious heritages passedfrom many generations with the sacrifice of holy fathers and mothers. They have got blessings ofmany saints beneath their roots where their holy flesh rested in peace. Therefore, trees in thecompound are not to be cut unless for the purpose of the church itself and the land is not to beploughed.

Clearly, in the holy bible, the Lord God commanded to preserve and conserve forests/trees asdescribed in the following statements: “You shall not destroy the trees thereof by forcing an axeagainst them, for thou mayest eat of them, and thou shalt not cut them down. Are trees in thefields men that they should be besieged by you…?” (Deut. 20: 19).

Moreover, in many miracle books of saints and scriptures (the so-called ‘Gedel’, ‘Tamrie Mariam’ and

‘Dersan’) the importance of trees and their holy services are stated.

With the above theological and biblical justifications, trees and other natural resources were much

respected and taken care of for centuries by EOTC. In the natural conservation tradition of EOTC, trees are

much loved and cared for, but this doesn’t mean that trees were worshiped. According to the church

scholars, EOTC has been totally against worshiping trees.

6.2.2. Benefits of Churches from the Forests

Besides the spiritual and theological aspects, trees have several benefits for churches. The main benefits of

churches from the forests can be broadly categorized under products and services.

42

6.2.2.1. Products

Forests around or in the vicinity of churches offer various products summarized below.

The durable and strong woods of church forests are used to maintain and reconstruct the church buildings.Moreover, architectural designs on roofs and walls of the church are made of major and minor products of theforests.

Charcoal required for the internal church services are made of the woody plants in the forests.

Some selected trees and minor products are used for making sacramental and sacred utensils such as wine, oil,incense, drums, crosses, plates, beads and prayer sticks for church services.

The fruits, leaves and other parts of some trees are used as food for monks, hermits and church students.Moreover, some trees and other plants are used as sources of traditional medicine.

The churches generate income by selling dead and fallen trees/branches to the followers at a fair price.

Some of the plants are used to make ink and dyes, which are, in turn, used to write religious scriptures andhymns, including the national history, on skins/hides and to draw holy pictures on the inner wall of churches.Since the ink does not easily fade away, it is possible to read the old church books written many hundreds yearsago. Moreover, the outer cover of these books had been made of wood to increase their durability.

6.2.2.2. Services

The forests also offer a variety of services to churches, which are listed below.

They protect the church building from strong wind, storms and soil erosion since the churches were mostly builton the tops of hills.

Forests serve as classrooms for the traditional church school and provide a quite shady environment.

Forests create privacy and tranquility for hermits and monks who are praying day and night.

They give shade and conditioned atmosphere whenever there are religious festivals and meditations outside thechurch buildings.

Forests provide sweet and pleasant smells around churches, and create beautiful scenery, impression andcontemplation for prayers.

Forests give grace and esteem to churches and play a protective role. The church scholars and followers equate achurch without trees to a naked person. The majestic creation of church forests prompts the followers to fantasizeabout how more beautiful and graceful their creator, i.e. God, could be.

They indicate the presence of churches in the area from a distance, reminding Christians passing by to bow,which signifies the deep respect they have for the church of the Almighty.

Forests serve as platforms for followers to discuss religious and social issues. Moreover ‘Mahabber andSenbetie’ (social institutions for making private feasts in the name of God, Saints, Angels) are enjoyed by thefollowers with the poor and guests under the ameliorated shade of the forest.

Church forests are used as symbols and examples in the teaching and preaching of the Gospel. Moreover, most ofthe church songs, hymns and canonicals (‘Satat’) are symbolized and exemplified with trees.

The church forests are primarily reserved for the church services based on the above stated theological

principles and benefits. However, there are some possible forest benefits allowed for the followers under

43

the permission and recognition of the church administrators where as some benefits are entirely forbidden

(Table 5). The strong remark here is that all possible benefits can be obtained only by permission and the

presence of the church scholars and/or administrators. In rare cases, i.e. whenever trees fall down due to

age or damage, the dead wood is sold to the followers at a fair price and at the same time, generates

income for the church. Similarly, though it is entirely forbidden to collect honey produced in the wild,

followers are allowed to hang their own beehives on the peripheral trees of the church to produce honey.

Table 5. Potential benefits to followers from forests that are either permitted or forbidden bychurches.

Potential Benefit Permitted Forbidden

Fuel wood aConstruction wood aFodder aTree seeds aSeedlings (Wildings) aHoney aMedicine (Tree parts) aFruits aWorldly recreation and enjoyment aSpiritual contemplation and praying a

6.2.3. Mode of Protection of the Forests by Churches

Churches protect and conserve their forest resources by using two different methods, namely religious

sanctions and/or legal protection.

6.2.3.1. Religious sanctions

The main mode of protection is achieved through creating religious commitment and respect among the

followers. As the church is believed to be the house of God, everything in the compound is sacred and

respected. Every follower is expected to respect and protect the house of God together with the forest

enveloping the church. Cutting a tree in the church compound is considered as denying the presence of

God unless it is for the special purpose of the church. It is believed that cutting in and smuggling of trees

from the church compound would bring a curse and the one who did it is considered as a person who has

violated the Kingdom of God and would be alienated from the church communities. A person that cuts a

tree or even a dead branch for personal use would be presented to the church community/church scholars

and asked to repent and be committed not to repeat the mistake again. If the person fails to admit his/her

mistake voluntarily or makes the same mistake again, he/she would be alienated from the church

community and would not be entitled to services from the church. This sanction is known as ‘Gizet’.

Hence, since Orthodox Christians fear ‘Gizet’, they do not dare cut trees in church forests.

44

6.2.3.2. Legal Protections

Since churches and their forest resources are found in the world where there are different attitudes and

perspectives of people, they also use guards and the civil law to protect their forest resources. At present,

demand for wood is increasing, and religious perspectives are diversified. Therefore, since most of the

churches have assigned guards, encroachers and outlaws are caught and brought to the civil courts for the

appropriate measures. It was reported that though churches are primarily houses of God, they are also

houses looked after by the State, which provides the necessary legal protection to their forest resources.

6.2.4. Historical Profile

The EOTC have preserved their forest resources by using the two modes of protection discussed above. In

this conservation task of the forest resources by EOTC tradition, the church scholars claim many hardships

were encountered and sacrifices paid by past generations. The most prevalent events that have affected the

composition and size of church forests are summarized in Fig. 7.

45

??Land redistribution by EPRDF: considerable forest land of the churches wereredistributed for landless individuals. All of those forestlands were immediatelyconverted to farmlands. 11999911

Villagaization program of ‘Derge’ regime: everybody was forcedto construct a new house in a preset period and site. The only constructionwood resource was the church compound that everybody was forced to smuggle from the church compounds and thus much of the forest was affected. 11998877--11998899

Land redistribution by ‘Derge regime’: considerableforest land of the churches was redistributed for land lessindividuals. All of those forest lands were immediatelyconverted to farmlands. 11998855

Transition from imperial to communist regime:before the communist regime came in to power onethird of the of the country’s land used to belong tothe EOTC. Out of that a considerable part of the landwas forestland. When the government launchedthe privatization of land, all of the church landexcept the nearby compounds were nationalizedand redistributed to individuals. Forest lands subsequentlycame under merciless destruction. 11997744--11997766

The expedition of EbrahimAhmed: the Moslem expeditionagainst Christianity starting from the easternpart of Ethiopia to the Northern highlandsof Ethiopia led by ‘Gragn’ Mohamedhad burnt many churches andmonasteries. Together with thechurches, forest resources wereburnt and destroyed. 11552288--11554433

Figure 7. Historical profile of church forests in South Gonder Zone in particular and in Ethiopia atlarge.

6.2.5. Attitude of the Local Communities

46

With the continuous and severe deforestation prevalent in different areas, the church forests have survived

because it is believed that they are sacred (49.2%), as a result of the good will of the communities (39.3%)

and due to legal protection (11.5%). In general, about 93% of the respondents confirmed that the church

forests would not have survived if they were not owned by/associated with the EOTC.

Only 30% of the respondents have utilised the church forests for collecting fuelwood (59.4%), fodder

(24%), construction wood (13.5%) and honey (2.7%). The main reasons forwarded by the respondents who

have never utilised the church forests were a belief in their sacredness (42.2%), possession of other

alternative sources (36.4%), a ban of use by the churches (21.2%). Future benefits expected by the

respondents from the church forests were collection of fuelwood (36.9%), construction wood (19.7%),

fodder (10.7%) and seeds of plants (4.1%), and none (28.7%). The suggestions given on the future

ownership of church forests were to keep them under the ownership of churches (99.2%) and to allocate

them to community members (0.8%). All respondents confirmed that they want to see churches surrounded

by forests since forests provide both products and services to the churches. In the event of encountering

someone cutting trees, respondents indicated that they would try to stop him/her with arguments and

confrontations (56.6%), inform the case to church officials (28.7%), inform the case to leaders of Peasant

Associations and the Police (9%) and do nothing (5.7%).

The major sources of fuelwood for the households were own trees/woodlots (82%), natural forests (9.8%),

market (6.6%) and church forests (0.8%). Similarly, sources of wood for construction were own

trees/woodlots (75.4%), market (18%), community forests (3.3%) and church forests (0%). About 82.8 %

of the respondents perceived that the size of natural forest outside churchyards in their area had decreased

in the past as a result of deforestation. The main solutions forwarded to protect the remaining natural

forests were to launch strict rules (82.8%) and to keep them under the possession of the church (8.2%).

Respondents had perceptions that the size of church forests has decreased (45.9%), increased (31.1%) and

not changed (23%). The reasons given for the increment in the sizes of churches were the planting of new

seedlings by the church community (55.3%) and natural regeneration (44.7%). On the other hand, illegal

cutting (58.9%), improper grave monument construction (14.3%), building construction by the churches

(14.3%) and natural disaster (10.7%) have been held responsible for the decrease in the sizes of churches.

Respondents considered the current sizes of church forests to be enough (54.1%), too small (31.1%) and

too wide (14.8%). It was interesting to note that about 92% of the respondents emphasised that they would

not agree if the State claimed to own the church forests. As to whether the church forests will persist

respected and protected by the people in the future, most of the respondents were positive (77%) and others

were either sceptical (13.9%) or unable to forecast (9%). In this connection, the factors that were projected

to exert pressure/threats on the church forests by the respondents who had negative opinions were the

47

overlooking of church values (64.7%), population increment (23.5%) and prevalent extensive grave

monument construction (11.8%).

Of the public instruments governing the local communities, religious rules/beliefs and sanctions were

considered to have the highest respect by most of the respondents (82%) than civil legislation (0.8%) or

both (17.2%). As to which was most feared were religious rules and sanctions (73%), civil legislation

(4.1%) and both (23%). Among the locally based institutions, the level of trust and respect was indicated

that the clergy/churches are more trusted (98.4%) and respected (98%) than the Office of Agriculture or

PAs.

Most of the respondents (92.6%) expressed their willingness to plant seedlings around the church with

94% of them setting a precondition that the newly planted seedlings must be given for their church. The

preferences of respondents for the type of trees/shrubs to be used for planting around the church were

indigenous species (54.9%), Eucalyptus species (32.8%), other exotic species (8.2%) and all types (4.1%).

Moreover, about 57% of the respondents would like to have similar forests as those around churches on

their land holdings, and of the remaining respondents most (94%) indicated that they had a shortage of land

that prevented them from planting trees while others (4%) claimed that such forests must be unique only to

churches.

Some of the answers given to the above main attitudinal questions were significantly dependent on the

independent variables (Tables 6) while others were not. For instance, the answers given for measures to be

taken personally to stop tree cutting in the churchyard were dependent upon the sex of the respondents

with a probability of 0.977 (1- 0.023).

48

Table 6. Results from the significantly dependent answers given to the main attitudinal questions.

Dependant Variable Degrees ofFreedom

P- Value **

A. Sex*Measures to be taken to stop tree cutting personally 3 0.023Perception about change in the sizes of church forests 2 0.023B. Age*Perception on church forests surviving without the churches 3 0.04Interest to develop similar forests as around churches on own holdings 3 0.043C. Main Occupation*Tree species preference to be planted around churches 9 0.02D. Education Status*Perception about dynamics of church forest size 4 0.012Perception to the present church forest size 4 0.039E. Church Affiliation*Perception on why church forests survived 6 0Response on using church forests 3 0Future expectations from the church forests 12 0Suggestions on the future of church forests 6 0.002Measures to be taken to stop tree cutting personally 9 0.011Willingness to plant seedlings around churches 3 0.003Preference of trees/shrubs to be planted around churches 9 0.014Perception to the current size of church forests 6 0.003Response on the future persistence of church forests 6 0.011Interest to develop similar forests as around churches on own holdings 3 0.005* Independent variable ** subjected to 0.05 level of test

49

6.2.6. Stake Holder Analysis

There were similarities and differences in opinion among the various identified stakeholders on selected

issues regarding the church forests (Table 7).

Table 7. Opinions among the various identified stakeholders on selected issues regarding the churchforests.

Stakeholder Opinion

Whoprotectschurchforests?

Who ownschurch forests?

Who has the right to usethe church forests andhow?

What should be done aboutthe future of church forests?

What is expected in the future?

EOTC Churches Churches Churches: only whenneeded

Absolutely important tokeep them under churcheswith full ownership anduse rights

Recognition; legal protection;Development of projects thatwill assist the churches

State Administrators Churches State* Churches: after priorrecognition andpermission of WoredaOffices of Agriculture(WOA)

Advisable to keep themunder churches with closesupervision by therespected bodies

Proper and efficientutilization of the forests bychurches; permission forutilization

Department/Office ofAgriculture

Churches Communities Churches: after priorrecognition andpermission of WOA**

Advisable to keep themunder churches with closesupervision by WOA

Permission for utilization;replace what is cut; activerole of churches in forest taskforces at all levels

Elders andCommunities

Churches Churches Churches: only whenneeded

It is absolutely importantto keep it under the churchwith full ownership andrights of use

Protection assistance from theState

* Like any land and land resources; ** If churches need to cut a tree they are obliged to plant 5 seedlings of the same kind of species one year before cutting.

6.2.7. SWOT Analysis

The results obtained from the SWOT analysis on the conservation tradition, conservation system and the

forest resources of ETOC based on the discussion made with church scholars, administrative bodies,

Woreda Office of Agricultural experts, community elders and field observations are summarised below.

6.2.7.1. Strengths

The strengths of ETOC are their:

Strong ability to resist deforestation of the church forests compared with any other traditional and conservationmechanisms.

Interest and commitment to conserve all types of plants in the churchyards. Though a few trees were morevaluable for the churches, all plant species were allowed to grow in the compound irrespective of their purposesor uses.

Willingness to allow the forests to be used as a source of indigenous tree seeds for local communities and statenurseries.

Customary plans to establish trees/forests in the yards of new churches well ahead of time.

50

6.2.7.2. Weaknesses

The weaknesses of EOTC are associated with the absence of:

No clear and documented border demarcations of the forests, which encourage encroachment by farmers owningland adjacent to the forests.

No scientific forest management practices except conservation since churches have no financial capability fortraining their staff members in the field

No inventories of the forests resources and forest management plan.

6.2.7.3. Opportunity/Prospects

The opportunities/prospects of EOTC include:

Possession of many indigenous species/forests protected in different agro-ecological/climatic zones, which areresources of great actual and potential local, national, regional and global (e.g. germplasm and carbonsequestration) importance.

Recognition and acceptance of their conservation strategy of church forests by the local people.

Potential of their forest resources for: (a) in situ and ex situ conservation of indigenous plants, which wouldultimately serve as sources of seeds/propagules/germplasm for future development of forests; (b) studying thevegetation history of adjacent areas in particular and the country at large; (c) deciding species adapted to the sitesin question in future forestry programs; and (d) serving as field laboratories/centres/sites for practical training,research on biology, ecology, forestry, pharmacology, sociology/anthropology, socio-economics, foresthistory/history, etc.

6.2.7.4. Threats

The threats on church forests owned by EOTC include:

Grazing of seedlings and trampling of the ground by the domestic animals that are allowed access to the forestsfor shelter against the hot sunshine and strong storms in some churches. This may affect regeneration of theseforests.

Encroachment into the church forests by individuals for farmlands and settlement as well as cutting of woodyplants for fuelwood. This may lead to a decline in the sizes and diversity (richness and evenness) of the forests.The encroachment by the local people could be caused by the critical shortage of fuelwood and farmland, whichis spurred by the ever-increasing human and animal populations, or individuals who were pushed and tempted by‘modernist’ and other religious sects to deny the traditional and religious values.

Substitution of indigenous species in church forests by fast growing exotic species. Most of the churches do nothave enough income for church services and other expenses. Hence, there is a tendency of growing eucalyptus inthe churchyards. Moreover, as per the regulation of the Woreda Office of Agriculture mentioned above, churchesare replacing the indigenous trees (for e.g. Juniperus procera) that they cut for various purposes by exoticspecies (mainly Cupressus lusitanica) since it is difficult for them to raise/get seedlings of indigenous trees.

Construction of monuments and improper grave houses in the forests. Many stone and marble made monuments,with an average surface area of 2.5 m X 1.5 m (3.75 m2), and small houses were observed covering considerablesegments of the forest areas of churches. Unlike other traditional grave spots, they affect the regenerationpotential of the forest. Construction of monuments and small houses on graves had never been a tradition ofEOTC, and still is not accepted by the church scholars.

Death of many old trees without being substituted. Almost all of the churches studied have been serving for morethan a century with their forest resources. Thus, many of the trees are aged and dying without any replacement.

51

This may result in complete losses of valuable indigenous tree species in the future, which in turn lead to thedecline of species composition of the church forests.

52

7. DISCUSSION

7.1. Vegetation

The minimum basal area/ha recorded from the eight churches is similar to that of Chilimo state forest (27.3

m2/ha) while the maximum basal area/ha recorded is similar to that of Wof-Washa state forest (100.3

m2/ha) (Tamrat Bekele 1994). The number of live stems/ha and basal area for the eight churches do not

show any trend of relation (Table 1.) because in some of the churches there are few but big trees and in

others many stems but smaller in diameter. Whereas, the trend of inverse relation between basal area and

number of dead stumps may show the exploitation of stems was the main reason for Basal Area variation

and hence, Gibtsawit is most exploited and Hiruy least exploited and the others fall in between.

The only common species to all sampled churches is Maytenus arbutifolia, which has a wide range of

distribution in Ethiopia and the presence of this species may also indicate those forests that have been

disturbed. The number of common species and families increased as the churches were stratified in

altitudinal range, which might indicate the species composition, corresponds to the altitude gradient. The

Jaccard similarity coefficient among the eight churches showed the same trend that higher similarity

recorded in same altitudinal range (Table3). Except for five pairs, the remaining similarity coefficients are

below 0.5, which means less similarity among the churches and that each church has its own unique

species composition (Table 3.). Thus, all the sampled churches are equally important and sensitive from a

conservation point of view and there will not be redundancy if all of them are to be conserved.

The South Gonder indigenous woody species profile was compared as a checklist with the species

recorded in the sampled churches. Accordingly from the total 125 woody species found in the zone, 81

species were recorded in the eight sampled churches and 16 species were recorded which had not been

listed in the checklist (Appendix 2). In eight churches, 65% of the zonal woody species can be found. This

may reveal the significance of EOTC in woody diversity resource conservation of the study area in

particular and the country in general. On the other hand, the presence of exotic species intermingled with

the indigenous species, may show a fast economic return and seedling availability for pushing the church

to give attention to exotic species.

Species richness estimates by Chao’s index for all churches is higher than the observed number of species,

which indicates that there are many species represented by single individuals (rare species) (Table 4.). It is

especially exaggerated for the Ascha church because of the sensitivity of Chao’s index to sudden change in

the cumulative number of rare species as quadrats were accumulated (Fig. 5) (Dagnachew Gebeyehu,

2001). The Jack 1 also overestimates compared with the observed number of species S, which has

indicated that there are more species found only in single plots (unique) (Table 4.). Jack 1, which is good

in ranking species richness among sites (Dagnachew Gebeyehu 2001), displays a similar trend to the

53

observed number of species across the churches. So the cumulative rank of the species richness by Jack 1

and observed species gives Gelawdiwos to be the first and Ascha to be the last, which in turn follows the

size of the forest area. The presence of many rare and unique species, confirmed by the two estimates,

makes those churches sensitive for conservation, as they are the only remnant forests in the area and the

last option to hold those woody species. The correlation between species richness and size of the forest

area suggests protection of the area of those forests is one of the measures to be taken to conserve the

existing species richness.

The Simpson equitability is low for all sampled churches, which indicates there is an unbalanced

distribution of the number of individuals among different species (Table 4). This means, there are few

species represented by many individuals (Appendix 1). The reason for the low evenness or dominance in

abundance can be attributed to excessive disturbance, variable conditions for regeneration, and exploitation

of some species. The domination of a few species with many unique and rare species invites intervention to

conserve the maximum possible woody diversity. On the other hand the Shannon equitability is higher

because of its dependency on the observed number of species (Dagnachew Gebeyehu 2001). Therefore this

measure is unreliable whenever there is a variation between observed number of species and estimated

species richness.

The heterogeneity indices recorded from each church were compared to that of Chilimo forest, which has

Shannon and Wiener’s H’ = 2.77 and Simpson’s λ= 9.18 (Tadesse Woldemariam 1998). The church Quar,

Gibtsawit, Galaowdiwos and Debresena are showing a higher diversity than that of Chilimo, while Zahara,

Dengolt, Hiruy and Ascha are lower than that of Chilimo. This could show the significance of those sites in

preserving and conserving woody diversity of the area in particular and the country in general.

The height and diameter class distribution, which was taken for comparison, varied in the number of

patterns and species allocation to each pattern (Fig. 3 and Fig. 4). This results from the fact that height is

determined by site factor whereas age, management and intervention determine diameter. Therefore, for

the sake of observing regeneration status and human interference, the diameter distribution showed a good

picture.

Accordingly, the first pattern of the diameter distribution includes (Fig 4A) species with good regeneration

but complete failure of further development, may be they are newly dispersed and arrived species. The

species in the second pattern (Fig. 4B) indicate good regeneration with gradual decreases towards the

mature individuals, which has a higher potential of reproduction and are shade-tolerant. There is a large

probability that the death of an adult tree will be replaced by the growth of individuals from the smaller

size classes and seems to be a self-maintaining plant population. The species in the third pattern (Fig. 4C)

indicates good reproduction but a bad recruitment due to disturbance; thus the population of these species

54

may diminish in the future. The fourth pattern indicates (Fig 4D) fair regeneration but many young

individuals with fewer mature individuals, indicating there was a favorable time for higher reproduction,

which later changed to an unfavorable condition that hampered regeneration. The fifth pattern (Fig. 4E)

indicates poor regeneration due to unfavorable conditions and a higher frequency at the middle class, then

a small number of individuals at the higher class, which might be destroyed by natural disaster,

competition, or cutting. The sixth pattern (Fig. 4F) is with poor regeneration, where the medium sized trees

are selectively cut but there are very big and old individuals, which are no longer reproducing or

regenerating and thus, the population of such species may decrease to the extent of disappearing from the

site. The seventh pattern (Fig. 4G) indicates series disturbance that confined them in a limited class with

few numbers of individuals. The seven patterns may give three cumulative patterns that there are species

concentrated at the lower class, then some species at the middle and others at higher classes, which may

show the species in those remnant church forests are in different successional stages (Demel Teketay 1997;

Tamrat Bekele 1994).

The diameter class distribution for all individuals in all sampled churches revealed almost the same trend

that there were many small to medium sized trees and some big individuals, which gives an inverted ‘J’

shape distribution (Figure 4 i, ii and iii). This may indicate that those church forests are at a different stage

of secondary development (Tamrat Bekele 1994).

The trend of plot number- species accumulated curve for all of the seven churches indicates the samples

taken were almost sufficient to represent the whole area that possibly brings new species (Fig. 5). But for

the church Ascha and Quar, most of the compound was dominated by few numbers of species and only a

segment of the compound had many species. By chance, the last quadrat was laid on the rich segment of

the compound and thus the curve behaved differently from others. This also underestimates the species

richness of the two churches, which is confirmed by the Chao’s index (Table 4).

The outcome of CA reveals four groups are stratified according to altitudinal gradient, which shows

differentiation in species group types have a strong relationship with altitude (Tamrat Bekele 1994). The

species Juniperus procera is laid at equidistant from each group because it has been found in all agro-

climatic zones, moreover this species is the first of all species preferred by the church scholars. This is an

indication for species conservation strategy and site selection that altitude is one of the determining factors

in species distribution.

7.2. Socio-economy survey

7.2.1. Church Philosophy

55

The EOTC perceives nature in a holistic manner. Nature includes among others, human beings,

forests/trees, animals, microorganisms, water, other land features and the nation as a whole. This holistic

approach has favoured the respect and veneration of nature, by enriching ecological preservation along

with Humanity and Christianity, which matches to the broader concept of biodiversity conservation.

Accommodating the biblical story of creation and holy verses from other Holy Scriptures to the traditions

of respecting the environment is an important characteristic and strength of the EOTC.

The EOTC philosophy of conserving nature in general and forest resources in particular combines

conservation, proper utilization and development of the resources, which has made the tradition healthy.

Conservation is manifested in the natural resources preserved in the church compound. Proper utilization is

manifested in utilizing the church forest for the church purpose. Where as development is manifested in the

planting habit of seedlings in each church in particular and in national resource development projects run

by one of the structural wing in the church responsible for development and aid named as DICAC

(Development and Inter-Church Aid Commission) in general.

The EOTC philosophy of conserving forests perceives not only the material values of the forests but also

appreciates the services, which can be extracted from the forests. The followers are allowed to benefit from

the minor products and services from the forest with permission. The benefits, which are designated as

permitted and forbidden, are helpful for the sustainability of the resource.

The two modes of protection ‘Gizet’ as a house of God and ‘Legal protection’ as a house of state is a two-

sided blade to protect the resources. Whenever there is a severe shortage of forest resources, people

inevitably overlook religious values and start to violate those values for survival. Moreover, secularism and

the view of other religious sects may degrade the value of the church thus for all of these risks legal

protection is of a paramount importance in addition to the core mode of protection, the religious sanction.

From the historical profile (Fig. 7), it is clear to notice that powerful bodies beyond the church and local

community ignited all of the events. The size of the forest destroyed and the extent of the damage in the

composition is not known/ not documented. However, it can be speculated that especially the recent

damages might have an impact on the population structure of some species, species richness and evenness.

Therefore, the knife of the state should be sharpened to safeguard church forests from such events that may

arise in the future by compensating the church knife, which is blunt for such kinds.

7.2.2. The Attitude of The Local Community

The perception of the community as to how the church forest survived rests on the belief of sacredness and

thus, those church forests could not survive if the churches had not been there. The variable, how the

church forest survived is dependant on church affiliation because from place to place the utility of legal

56

protection to protect the church forest beyond the religious sanctions vary. While the question, could the

forest survive without the church, is dependent on age because younger people probably perceive

deforestation differently to elders due to a lack of experience.

Most of the respondents never utilized the church forest for household uses because they believe they are

sacred and have their own woodlot. The main types of products gained by the local community from the

church forest, for those who utilized are fuel wood followed by fodder. However, the main source of fuel

and construction wood for the community doesn’t include the church forest or it is a very low percentage.

This indicates that the fuel wood they benefited from the church is not considered as a habitual source.

The main expectation of the community in the coming times from the church forest is getting fuel wood

followed by fodder; on the contrary some of the respondents don’t need to utilize the church forest for their

personal use. Where as their suggestion about the future of those forests is to keep under the church and

they always need to see forests enveloping churches, which may indicate the tradition, will continue in the

future whenever new churches are to be built. Thus, their fuel wood expectation seems to depend on if

there are sales by the church as a result of fallen and damaged trees, as was the experience in most

churches. However, the expectation of fodder/practically grazing seems a threat for the future because

there was no permitted experience for grazing. The variables, past benefit, expected benefit and

suggestions about the future of the church forest are dependent on church affiliation because the relation

and utilization arrangement of church forest between the church administrators and the local followers

varies slightly from place to place.

The measures to be taken whenever someone is cutting trees illegally in the church compound, is to stop

the act by argument and confrontation by themselves and secondly to inform the church officials.

However, a smaller portion goes to inform the PA leaders or considers it as none-of their business. This

indicates how the community internalises the tradition and the resources and how a sense of responsibility

is developed. This variable is dependent on the sex of an individual and church affiliation. It is dependent

on gender because females are not physically fit to confront directly so they try to inform the church

officials. It is dependent on church affiliation because the strength of the PA administration and the

availability of church scholars nearby the church affect the decision to stop the illegal cutting.

The perceptions of the dynamics of church forests (as 31% increased, 45 % decreased and 23% no change)

viewed in relation to the perceived decrease of natural forest (82.8%) suggests that the church both

successfully resisted deforestation in the past and at the same time increased the total church forest area.

Moreover, the recommendation given to protect the remaining natural forest suggests retaining the

church’s custodianship as an alternative for conservation in the future. The main reason for the church

forest increment is because new seedlings were planted followed by natural regeneration. But most of the

57

newly planted seedlings were Eucalyptus spp and exotic species due to a lower availability of seedlings for

indigenous species. Therefore, the threat of substitution of indigenous species by others is more

pronounced here. The causes that decrease the church forest on the other hand, (illegal cutting, improper

grave-house and monuments construction, and natural disasters) may continue as a threat in the future. The

variable, dynamics of the church forest, is dependent upon sex and education. The females due to lower

education opportunity and lower engagement in church administration, might perceive things differently to

that of males.

In the perception of the present size of the church forest area, too small means that the area of the church

forest is expected to increase in size. While too wide means that the church has got the maximum possible

forest area, but this doesn’t mean there is a need to decrease the size. This is conformed by the fact that the

community would disagree, if the state tries to shift a portion of the church forest from church ownership

to another form, no matter what the size of their church forest area is. The variable, perception to present

size of the church forest, is dependent on education status and church affiliation. It is dependant on

education status because the more they are educated the more they demand to have forest resources and

perceive the resources as small and vice-versa. It is dependent on churches because the size of the forest

area varies from church to church.

Although a majority of the respondents confirm the persistency of the church forest in the future, it seems

there are issues that the community feels as threats. The threats are the denying and overlooking of EOTC

values, which may increase in the coming generation due to the influence of other religious sects and

‘modernity’ leading to the overlooking of the EOTC values. Moreover, population pressure, leading to a

higher demand of wood and farmland to affect the church forests and lastly improper grave monument

construction will affect the regeneration of the forest. All these risks vary from place to place so this

variable is church affiliation dependent.

The comparison of civil laws & legislation and the religious rules & sanction, which are the two major

governing rules of the community, reveal that the religious rules and sanctions are the main governing

rules in the lifestyle of the local community. This indicates that the main mode of protection for church

forests to be religious sanctions assisted by legal protection.

Among the locally based institutions, results suggest that the church (the clergy) is the one to be trusted

and respected more by the community. This indicates how the church’s beliefs and practices are deeply

imprinted with the lifestyle and personality of the people. Thus, the church can be taken, as an entry point

and platform for any development and conservation programs as it is the central institution among the

community.

58

The willingness to plant seedlings around the churches is very high. But most of the respondents set

preconditions for the planting that the planted seedlings must be given to the church. This is an indication

of how the forest development is strongly associated with the church. As to the type of species to be

planted around the church the main preference was for indigenous species followed by Eucalyptus spp.

The preference of indigenous trees is of great importance from a conservation point of view. However, the

preference of Eucalyptus spp, which seems to be of an economic need to the church, is a threat, which may

entirely substitute those indigenous tree species. These two variables, the willingness and species

preference are church affiliation dependent, that come from the ability of church leaders to motivate the

followers for seedling planting and the income demand of each church could vary. The variable, species

preference is also a main occupation dependent that the handicraft workers preferring more indigenous

species, which are preferable for architectural work than others.

The study area, which is devoid of extensive natural forest, whether it can be reclaimed or not, depends

mainly upon the attitude of the community. The response given to the question ‘whether they would like to

have similar forests as in the churches in their landholdings’ is almost equal in proportion of needing and

not needing. This variable is dependent on age and church affiliation. It is dependent on age because the

lower age classes, that are demanding more agricultural lands, don’t want to see forest reclamation. It is

dependent upon church affiliation because the availability of extra places varies from place to place. In

general almost half of the community responded that they don’t want to develop and reclaim the natural

forest outside of the church compound. Moreover, economical and ecological problems of practicality,

even based on the willing segment of the community, will challenge the reclamation of the natural forest.

Therefore, the church forest will continue being the only remnant of the dry afro-mountain forest in the

area with avoidable threats. This is an alarm that church forests would do well to recognize and protect in

order not to miss the last chance of protecting the indigenous forest of the area.

59

7.2.3. Stakeholder Views

The result of stakeholder analysis shows there are points whereby all stakeholders converge and also

diverge. Regarding the view of who has been protecting the church forest, all of them agree that it is the

EOTC.

The owner of the church forest and the right to use it are the divergent views and interests among the

stakeholders. The church and the community hold the same view that the owner and the one who has the

right to use is it is the church at all times. Whereas, the state representatives believe that the owner is the

state but the church has the right to use with prior recognition of the agricultural office. The agricultural

office claims the owner of the forest to be the community, which doesn’t clarify the ownership. Regarding

the utilization right, the Office of Agriculture takes the full authority to control and with its permission the

church can be given the right to use the forest. The permission that can be given from the office of

Agriculture demands to inform the Office of Agriculture one year before whenever the church needs to cut

trees in its compound. If it is permitted, the church has to plant five seedlings, which are of the same kind

of species as that to be cut. The availability of indigenous seedlings is restricted in the government and

private nursery; thus exotic species end up being planted. The church scholars consider the permission

procedure and requirement as a threat. This make them feel detached from the decision-making processes

associated with forest management.

The view about the future of the church forests also diverges among the stakeholders. The EOTC and the

community argue that the forest should be retained under the church with full ownership and right of use.

They strongly argue it is the church that made the resource available so the church should be given full

responsibility with assistance from the state. On the other hand, the state and Office of Agriculture argue

that it is advisable to keep the church under the protection purpose but under close supervision and

authority of the respected body (Agricultural Office).

The expectation around church forest conservation also varies. The EOTC expects recognition of the

tradition and the approval of the full ownership of the church by the state and respected bodies, legal

protection from the government and fund/project based to manage the resource properly under the values

and norms of the church. The community also expects protection assistance from the state. The state in

turn expects the church to utilise the forest resources effectively and efficiently with the approval of the

respected bodies. The Department of Agriculture expects recognition of its technical rules for cutting by

the church and the church to play a great role in the forest taskforce, set at different levels to conserve the

remaining forest resources outside of the church compound.

60

All these divergent views may lead to mistrust and poor co-operation among the stakeholders as each one

of them tries to go their own way, which in turn leads to complete indifference and failure. Therefore a

trade-off on common grounds seems the remedial and resolution for diverging views.

7.2.4. SWOT of the Tradition

The strengths and opportunities are derived from the theological framework of the tradition and

indoctrinating of this tradition among the community. The opportunity and prospects are to be more

pronounced if all stakeholders give positive recognition to the tradition and the resources, along with

material and technical assistance of scholars and the efforts of the higher officials of the church is to be

added.

The weaknesses of the tradition, which are more of a technical nature, are derived from two sources. The

first is from the land tenure system of the area in particular and the nation in general and the other is from

the economic and financial limitations of the church itself. The threats on the other hand are derived from

population pressure, other religious sects, nature, resource limitation and misapplication of the church

traditions and doctrine. The weakness and threats are avoidable if the state, all stakeholders,

scholars/professionals, the church and the community together exert continuous effort. On the contrary, if

nothing is done, sooner or later those church forests may disappear due to the threats.

61

8.CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

8.1. Conclusion

The diversity of indigenous woody species and the forest area protected by the eight studied churches are

significant and by and large the contribution of the EOTC in forest resource conservation for the zone in

particular and the country in general is considerable. The basal area of all church forests shows those

forests have a good stock as compared to some of the natural state forests. The studied church forests being

found in different agro-climatic zones and having their own unique species composition surrounded by

bare landscape make them sensitive from a conservation point of view.

The patterns of some of the species population structures suggest at least two major types of plants. The

first, are species able to regenerate in the forest understory and the others are plants which have difficulties

reproducing. The poor regeneration and recruitment status of some species subjected to biological

dynamics in the forest without scientific management intervention; aggravated by external influences

mainly grazing and cutting could lead to the disappearance of some of the species. The diameter class

distribution for all individuals from all the eight churches revealed the forests are at different secondary

development stages. Therefore, the current species composition of the forests may be changed through

time.

Theological thoughts and biblical justifications are the frame works of the EOTC tradition to conserve the

forest resources. The tradition seems holistic, which accounts for the care for all forms of life. According

to the tradition, tree seeds collection, traditional medicine and contemplation in the church forests are

permitted, while collection of fuel wood, construction wood and fodder are forbidden for the community.

The local communities do have higher respect and thrust in the EOTC among other institutions, which has

made the church the central institution and platform for socio-economic issues of the people.

The positive attitude to the resources protected by the church and the acceptance of the church tradition is

thus an opportunity for forest conservation. Therefore, the isolated remnant forests of churches, with their

higher woody diversity are a potential for in situ and ex situ conservation sites. Moreover, with formal

legal protection, in addition to the religious protection method, scientific management intervention and

resource investment, church forests may provide greater prospect in implementing and disseminating

forestry resource conservation, development, research, education and extension programs among the rural

community.

On the other hand, the diverging views mainly on ownership and utility rights among the stakeholders may

affect the strength of the tradition. The influence of population growth with poor available forest resource,

62

attitude and perception diversion of some of the community members due to the temptation of other

religious sects and ‘modernity’ are the major threats. Misapplication of the church tradition among the

followers, mainly monument construction, is also a threat. Unless those threats, which are avoidable, are

not hampered, the quality and quantity of the forest resources could be affected sooner or later. This is not

new from experience and the past forest history of the area in particular and the country in general.

8.2. Recommendation

In order to strengthen the tradition and minimize the threats on the forest resources protected by the EOTC

the following recommendations are suggested:

1. There has to be silvicultural intervention to facilitate the regenerating aptitude of some of thespecies in order to assure sustainability of the diversity. The church development commission(DICAC) may do the intervention. Moreover, forest management plan should be prepared andexercised.

2. The legal protection of the church forest should be strengthened to make more sharpened the twosides of the protection mechanisms of the church.

3. The church forest areas ought to be gazetted by the state after a clear demarcation and marked tostop further encroachment and exclude grazing.

4. It would be wise to train and orientate the church scholars about scientific tree propagation (seedcollection, storage and nursery techniques), silvicultural and forest management technique, whichmay diversify their level of knowledge on top of traditional conservation knowledge.

5. The stakeholder divergent views need to converge with consensus and discussion in such awaythat this tradition can be more strengthened and recognized.

6. Exotic species should not be planted intermingled with the indigenous woody species, rather theyshould be encouraged to be planted on the outer border of the indigenous stands as a buffer zone.

7. Monument construction on grave spots should be prohibited per the tradition of the church, and thetraditional burial system must be encouraged.

8. It is advisable to identify those sites as an in- situ and ex- situ conservation sites for indigenouswoody diversity and other biological organisms with some arrangements without contending theresponsibility and use right of the church.

9. To carry out further studies on patterns of age class distribution, degree of isolation of the plantsfrom the surrounding plant population, the potential of the soil seed bank and ethno-botany of eachspecies, to be able to expand the composition and structure of the forest and to extract moreknowledge.

10. Any scientific or outside intervention that may be launched on church forests should be designedand applied in such a way that it will not overlook the tradition’s theological background andbelief connection to the local community. Instead it must be supplementary and not a substitutionto the tradition so that it can be more productive for the church forest and boosting to the outsidelandscape.

63

9. REFERENCES

Agenda 21, 1992. Programme of Action for Sustainable Development .RIO DECLARATION onEnvironment and Development Statement of Forest Principles.UNCED, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

Ajzen, I. and Fishbein, M., 1980. Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. Prentice Hall,Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Anonymous, 1991. The new Oxford Annotated Bible. Oxford University press, Inc., New York, USA.

Appiah-Opoku, S. and Hyma, B., 1999. Indigenous institutions and resource management in Ghana.Indigenous Knowledge and Development Monitor, nov.1999.

Appiah-Opoku, S. and Mulamoottil, G., 1997. Indigenous Institutions and Environmental Assessment: TheCase of Ghana. Environmental Management Vol. 21, No.2, pp. 159-171.

Aymro Wondmagegnehu and Motovu, J., 1970. The Ethiopian Orthodox Church. The Ethiopian OrthodoxMission, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

Ayyappan, N. and Parthasarathy, N., 1999. Biodiversity Inventory of trees in a large-scale permanent plotof tropical evergreen forest at Varagalaiar, Anamalais, Western Ghats, India. Biodiversity andConservation 8: pp. 1533-1554. Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Azene Bekele, 1993.USEFUL TREES AND SHRUBS FOR ETHIOPIA: Identification, Propagation andManagement for Agricultural and Pastoral Communities. RSCU/SIDA.

Bachmann, P.; Köhl, M.; Päivinen,R., 1996. Assessment of biodiversity for improved forest planning:proceedings of the Conference on Assessment of Biodiversity for improved Planning, 7-11October 1996, held in monte Veritä, Switzerland.

Bahru Zewde, 1997. The Forests of wallo In Historical perspective: With a Focus on the Yagof Stateforest. Paper prepared for the Conference on "Environmental and Development" Debre Zeit, 12-14June 1997

Begon, M., Harper, J.L. and Townsend, C.R., 1990. Ecology: Individuals, Populations and Communities.Second Edition. Blackwell Scientific publications.

Camara, T., 1994. Biodiversite et forests sacrees en Casamance, region de Ziquichor. Afrinet Report 10,UNESCO- Rosta, Dakar (Abstract).

Chandrashekara, U.M. and Sankar, S., 1998. Ecology and management of sacred groves in Kerala, India.Forest Ecology and Management: Vol 112, Issues 1-2, pp. 165-177.

Clack,B. and Clack, B.R.,1998.The Philosophy of Religion : A Critical Introduction. Blackwell PublishersInc.

Cohen, J.M. and Weintraub, D., 1975. Land and Peasants in Imperial Ethiopia: The Social Background toa Revolution. Van Goreum & Assen, The Netherlands.

Dagnachew Gebeyehu, 2001. SAMPLING STRATEGY FOR ASSESSMENT OF WOODY PLANT SPECIESDIVERSITY: A STUDY IN TARA GEDAM NATURAL FOREST, ETHIOPIA. MSc. Thesissubmitted to Swedish University of Agricultural Science.

64

Demel Teketay, 1997. Seedling population and regeneration of woody species in dry Afromontane forestsof Ethiopia. Forest Ecology and Management 98 (1997), 149-165.

Denzin,N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S., 1994. Handbook of Qualitative Research. SAGE Publications. London.

Dessalegn Rahmato, 2001. ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE AND STATE POLICY IN ETHIOPIA: Lessonsfrom Past Experience. Forum for Social studies, AddisAbeba.

Dompka, V. (Ed.), 1996. Human Population, Biodiversity and Protected Areas: Science and Policy Issues.Am. Assoc. Adv.Sci., Washington, DC.

Dove, M. R., 1990. The real and imagined role of culture in development: Case studies from Indonesia.Hawaii Press, Honolulu.

Edwards, S., Mesfin Tadesse, and Hedberg, I., 1995. FLORA OF ETHIOPIA AND ERITREA: VOLUME2, PART 2. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia and Uppsala, Sweden.

Edwards, S., Mesfin Tadesse, Sebsebe Demissew and Hedberg, I. (eds.), 2000. FLORA OF ETHIOPIAAND ERITREA: VOLUME 2, PART 1. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia and Uppsala, Sweden.

EFAP, 1994. Ethiopian Forestry Action Program (EFAP): Volume II. The Challenge for Development.Ministry of Natural Resources Development and Protection- Transitional Government of Ethiopia,Addis Abeba.

Ehrlich, P.R., 1988. The loss of diversity: causes and consequences. In: Wilson, E.O., Editor, 1988.Biodiversity, National Academy Press, Washington, DC, pp. 21-27.

Encyclopedia Britanica, 1964. Vol .19, William Benton Publisher, RAYNAL to SARROUT

Gadgil, M. and Vartak, V.D., 1975. Sacred groves of India: a plea for continued conservation. J. Bombay.Natl. History Soc. 72, pp. 314¯320

Gadgil, M., and Vartak, V.D., 1976. The sacred groves of Western Ghats in India. Economic Botany 30:152-160.

Gaston, K.J., 1996. Biodiversity: A Biology of Numbers and Difference. Blackwell Science Ltd. UnitedKingdom.

Giddens, A., 1990. The Consequences of Modernity. Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA.

Gimaret-Carpentier, C., Pelissier, R., Pascal, J-P. and Houllier, F.,1998. Sampling strategies for theassessment of tree diversity. J. Veg. Sci. 9: 161-172.

Gove, J.H., Patil, G.P., Swindel, B.F.,and Taillie, T., 1994.Ecological Diversity and Forest Management.In Patil, G.P. and Rao. C.R. (eds.) handbook of statistics, Vol.12: 409-461.

Hedberg, I. And Edwards, S., 1989. FLORA OF ETHIOPIA: VOLUME 3. Addis Ababa and Asmara,Ethiopia and Uppsala, Sweden.

Heywood, V.H.; Baste, I.; Gardner, K.A., 1995. Introduction. Global Biodiversity Assessment. V.H.Heywood Executive editor R.T. Watson, Chair: Published for the United Nation EnvironmentalProgram; Cambridge University Press.

65

Kent, M. and Coker, p., 1992.Vegetation Description and Analysis: A Practical Approach. Belhaven press,London.

Kerbs.C.J., 1999. Ecological Methodology. Second edition. Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.

Kessis Kefyalew Merahi, 2001. Saints and Monasteries in Ethiopia. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

King James Version, 1989. The HOLY BIBLE: Containing the Old and New Testament. World Publishinglowa Falls, lowa 50126 U.S.A.

King, E.D.I.O.; Viji C.; Narasimhan D., 1997. Sacred groves: traditional ecological heritage. InternationalJournal of Ecology and Environmental Sciences: vol. 23, Issues 4, pp. 463-470. (Abstract).

Knudtson, P., and Suzuki, D., 1992. Wisdom of the elders. Stoddart Publishing, Toronto, Canada.

Krishna, N. and Bhavani Shankar, V., 1997. CONSERVING THE ECOLOGICAL HERITAGE - SACREDGROVES OF TAMIL NADU. XI WORLD FORESTRY CONGRESS. Antalya, Turkey, 13 to 22October 1997, VOLUME 2, TOPIC 7.

Liu, J., 2001. Integrating ecology with human demography, behavior, and socioeconomics: Needs andapproaches. Ecological Modeling, Vol. 140, Issues 1-2, pp. 1-8.

Liu, J., Ouyang, Z., Taylor, W., Groop, R., Tan, Y. and Zhang, H., 1999. A framework for evaluatingeffects of human factors on wild life habitat: the case of giant pandas. Conserv. Biol. 13, pp. 1360-1370. Elsevier BIOBASE Abstract GEOBASE / Cross Ref.

Magurran, A.E., 1996. Ecological Diversity and Its Measurement. Chapmann & Hav Print, London

Melaku Bekele, 1992. Forest History of Ethiopia from Early times to 1974. Walia: Journal of the Ethiopianwildlife and Natural History Society; 1998, No.19, pp.3-9.

Mueller-Dombois, D. and Ellenberg, H., 1974. Aims and Methods of Vegetation Ecology. John Wiley &Sons, London.

Patton, M.Q., 1990. Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods. Second Edition. SAGE Publications,USA.

Pebley, A.R., 1998. Demography and the environment. Demography 35, pp.377-389.

Peters, C.M., 1996. The Ecology and Management of Non-Timber Forest Resources. World BankTechnical Paper Number 322.

Philip, M.S., 1994.Measuring Trees and Forest, Second Edition.

Powell, N., 1998. Co-Management in Non-Equilibrium Systems; Cases from Namibian Rangelands.Doctoral thesis, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala.

Sadler, B., and Boothroyd, P., 1993. Traditional knowledge and environment assessment. A manuscriptreport prepared for the Canadian Environmental Assessment Research Council, March. Ottawa,Canada.

Shannon, C.E. and Wiener, W., 1963. The Mathematical Theory of Communication.

66

Sharma S.; Rikhari H.C.; Palni L.M.S., 1999. Conservation of natural resources through religion: A casestudy from Central Himalaya. Society and Natural Resources: ISSN: 0894-1920, Vol. 12, Issue 6,pp. 599-612.

Shiver, B. D. and Borders B.E., 1996. Sampling Techniques for Forest Resource Inventory. John Wiley &sons. Inc.

Sibanda, B., 1997. Governance and the environment: The role of African religion in sustainable utilisationof natural resources in Zimbabwe. Forests-Trees-and-People- Newsletter (FAO)(Sweden). (Sep1997). (No. 34) Pp. 27-31.

SPSS, 1994. SPSS for Windows, Release 6.1. SPSS Inc. Chicago, U.S.A.

Tadesse Woldemariam, 1998. Diversity of Woody Plants and Avifauna in a Dry Afromontane Forest, Onthe Central Plateau of Ethiopia. SLU: Ethiopian MSc in Forestry Program thesis work.

Taye Bekele, 1998. Biodiversity Conservation: Experience of the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahido Church,MSc in Forestry Graduates Magazine, 1994-1998.

ter Braak, C.J.F., 1985. Correspondence Analysis of Incidence and Abundance Data: Properties in Termsof a Unimodal Response Model. TNO Institute of mathematics, Information Processing andStatistics, Wageningen, The Netherlands. Biometrics 41, 859-873.

TFAP, 1996. Tigray Forestry Action Program (TFAP): Main Report Volume I, Mekelle.

The Encyclopedia Americana, 1963.Vol. 15, INDIA to JEFFERS University of Illinois Press, Urbana.

Upton, C. and Bass, S., 1995. The Forest Certification Hand Book. Earthscan Publications Ltd, London.

Viswanathan, T.V, 1986. Endangered tree species in northern Ethiopia. Environ-Cons. Lausanne: ElsevierSequoia S.A. Spring 1986. Vol.13 (1) pp.71-72.

Yeraswork Admassie, 1995. Twenty Years to Nowhere: Property Rights, Land Management andConservation in Ethiopia. PhD. Dissertation, Uppsala: Uppsala University.

Web sites

Colding, J. and Folke, C., 1997. The Relations among Threatened Species, Their Protection, and Taboos.Conservation Ecology: HRL: http://www.consecol.org/vol1/iss1/art6.

ODA (Overseas Development Administration), 1995. Guidance Note on How to do Stakeholder Analysisof Aid projects and Programs. Social Development Department.http://www.euforic.org/gb/stake1.html

Pandey, D.N. and Kumar, N., 2000. Indigenous Knowledge on Forests.http://www.forestguru.com/Introduction.htm

Pandey, D.N., 1999. ETHNOFORESTRY: Local Knowledge for Sustainable Forestry and LivelihoodSecurity. Himanshu Publications, Udaipur/ New Delhi.http://www.agroforester.com/overstory/overstory76.htm.

67

Unpublished

Asseged Bezabih and Taye Bekele. The Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church in natural ResourcesConservation. Paper presented on the workshop “Ethiopian Church: Past, Present and Future”organized by Mahibere Kidusan, March 29- April 1, 2000.

Melakeselam Dagnachew Kassahun. The Role of the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church in PreservingTrees.

SGAZDA (South Gonder Zonal Department of Agriculture). General Agricultural Information Document.

SGAZDPED (South Gonder Zonal Department of Plan and Economic Development). GeneralDemographic statistic for South Gonder for2001.

Taye Bekele, Kumulachew Yeshitela, Getachew Berhan and Sisay Zerfu. FOREST BIODIVERSITYCONSERVATION: PERSPECTIVES OF THE ETHIOPIAN ORTHODOX TEWAHIDOCHURCH. Institute of Biodiversity Conservation and Research, Addis Abeba Ethiopia.

Appendix 1. All species and Families with respective Abundance*, Density** andFrequency*** found in all The Eight Sampled Churches

Quar Zahara Gibts

NoFamily Name of Species Local Name Life Form

Ab

un

dan

ce

Den

sity

% F

req

uen

cy

Ab

un

dan

ce

Den

sity

% F

req

uen

cy

Ab

un

dan

ce

Den

sity

1Fabaceae Acacia abyssinica Hochst. ex. Benth. Bazra Girar Tree 1 8 7.72Fabaceae Acacia brevispica Harms Kanto Tree 1 53Acanthaceae Acanthus pubescens (Oliv.) Engl. Kosheshile Shrub 1 5 4.5 4 204Apocynaceae Acokanthra schimperi (DC.)Benth. Merenz Tree 46 235Bombacaceae Adansonia digitata L. Bamba Tree 1 8 7.76Fabaceae Albizia schimperiana Oliv. Sesa Tree 4 31 23.1 1 5 4.57Sapindaceae Allophylus abyssinica (Hochst) Radlkofer Embis Tree8Icacinaceae Apodytes dimidiata E. Mey ex. Arn. Donga Tree9Gramineae Arundinaria alpina K.Schum. Kerkeha Stemmed grass

10Gramineae Arundo donax Shembeko Stemmed grass 1 8 7.711Liliaceae Asparagus aethiopicus L. Yeset- Kesit Shrub 1 512Aspliniaceae Asplenium trichomannes L. Wolenbi Shrub 6 27 18.213Melianthaceae Bersama abyssinica Fresen. Azamir Tree 2 9 9.114Euphorbiaceae Bridelia micrantha ( Hochst.) Bill. Yenebir Tifer Tree 1 5 4.515Simaroubaceae Brucea antidysenterica J.F.Mill. Abalo Shrub 2 15 15.4 5 23 22.716Loganiaceae Buddleja polystachya Fresen. Atquar/Anfar Tree17Fabaceae Calpurnia aurea (Ait.) Benth. Zigtta/Digtta Shrub/Tree 1 8 7.7 8 4018Rubiaceae Canthium oligocarpum Hiern Dingay seber Shrub/Tree 5 23 9.119Capparidaceae Capparis tomentosa L. Gemero Climber/Tree 2 15 15.4 5 23 22.7 1 520Apocynaceae Carissa edulis Vahl. Agam Shrub/Tree 1 8 7.7 2 9 9.1 7 3521Ulmaceae Celtis africana Burm.f. Kawoot Tree 4 31 15.4 1 5 4.522Oleaceae Chionanthus mildbraedii ( Gilg & Schellenb.) Stearn Wogeda Tree 9 41 22.723Rutaceae Citrus aurantifolia (Christm.) Lomi Shrub/Tree 1 8 7.724Rutaceae Clausena anisata (Willd.)Benth. Limich/Limbich Tree/Shrub 1 8 7.725Ranunculaceae Clematis hirsuta Perr & Guill. Yazo-Hareg Climber26Verbenaceae Clerodendron myricoides (Hoechst)R.Br.ex.Vatke Misirich Shrub/Tree 2 1027Euphorbiaceae Clutia abyssinica Jaub. & Spach. Feyele feji Shrub 2 1028Rubiaceae Coffea arabica L. Buna Shrub/Tree 4 18 18.229Combretaceae Combratum mollie R.Br.ex G.Don Kolla abalo Tree30Boraginaceae Cordia africana Lam. Wanza Tree 2 15 15.4 3 14 9.1 1 531Euphorbiaceae Croton macrostachyus Del. Bisana Tree/Shrub 3 23 15.4 3 14 9.1 1 532Solanaceae Dioscopodium penninervium Hochst. Almit Shrub33Ebenaceae Diospyros abyssinica (Hiern)F.White Selechegn Tree 21 162 53.8 16 73 36.434Sapindaceae Dodonaea anguistifolia L.f. Kitkita Shrub/Tree 5 2535Sterculiaceae Dombeya torrida (J.F. Gmel.) P.Bamps Wulkifa Tree 3 1536Flacourtiaceae Dovyalis abyssinica (A.Rich.)Warb. Koshim Tree/Shrub37Agavaceae Dracaena steudneri Schweinf.ex Engl. Itsepatos Tree 6 46 23.138Meliaceae Ekebergia capensis Sparrm. Lol Tree39Myrsinaceae Embelia schimperi Vatke Enkoko Climber/Shrub40Ericaceae Erica arborea L. Asta Tree41Fabaceae Erythrina brucei Schweinf. Kermo Ayderk Tree42Ebenaceae Euclea divinorum Heirn Dedeho Shrub/Tree 3 1543Euphorbiaceae Euphorbia abyssinica Gmel. Kulkual Tree 33 1644Moraceae Ficus ovata (Vahi) Yewof Shola Tree45Moraceae Ficus sur Forssk. Shola Tree46Moraceae Ficus thonningii Blume Chebaha Tree 2 15 15.4 3 14 9.1 1 547Moraceae Ficus vallis-choudae Del. Banbulea Tree 3 23 15.448Moraceae Ficus vasta Forssk. Warka Tree 1 8 7.7 1 5 4.549Rubiaceae Galiniera saxifraga (Hochst)Bridson Yetota Kolet Tree50Thymelaeaceae Gnidia glauca ( Fresen.) Gilg Awura Tree51Tiliaceae Grewia ferruginea Hochst.ex.A.Rich Lenkuata Tree 4 31 23.1 5 23 18.2 3 1552Celastraceae Hippocratea africana (Willd.)Loes Trign Hareg Climber/Shrub 1 8 7.753Hypericaceae Hypericum revolutum Vahl Amija Tree/Shrub54Oleaceae Jasminum grandiflorum L. Tembelel Climber/Shrub 1 8 7.7 5 2555Cupressaceae Juniperus procera L. Yeabesha Tsid Tree 3 23 23.1 18 9056Acanthaceae Justicia schimperiana (Hochst. Ex Nees) T.Anders. Simiza/Sensel Shrub 11 85 84.6 21 95 95.5 1 557Myrsinaceae Maesa lanceolata Forsk Kurava/Kelawa Tree/Shrub58Celastraceae Maytenus arbutifalia (A. Rich.) Wilczek Atat Shrub 3 23 23.1 10 45 45.5 3 1559Celastraceae Maytenus senegalensis (Lam.) Exell Nech Atat Shrub/ Tree60Fabaceae Millitea ferruginea (Hochst.) Bak. Birbira Tree 2 15 15.4 19 86 54.561Sapotaceae Mimusops kummel Bruce ex DC. Ishe Tree 1 8 7.7 110 500 54.5

69

62Myricaceae Myrica salicifolia A.Rich. Shinet Tree63Loganiaceae Myrsine africana L. Kechem Shrub64Oleaceae Nuxia congesta R. Br. ex Fresen. Anfar Tree65Oleaceae Olea capensis L. Damotie Woyra Tree 1 566Oliniaceae Olea europaea L. Woyra Tree 27 1367Santalaceae Olinia rochetiana A.Juss. Tifie Tree68Lamiaceae Osyris quadripartita Decn. Keret Tree/Shrub 2 1069Palmae Otostegia tomentosa A.Rich. Tinjut Shrub 2 1070Euphorbiaceae Phoenix reclinata Zembaba/Senel Tree71Phytolaccaceae Phytolacca dodecandra L'H' erit. Indod Climber 1 572Pittosporaceae Pittospirum spp Enqualit Tree 1 5 4.573Pittosporaceae Pittosporum viridiflorum Sims Ahot Tree74Podocarpus Podocarpus falcatus (Thunb.)Mirb. Zigba Tree75Verbenaceae Premna schimperi Engl. Chocho Tree 2 15 15.4 17 8576Rosaceae Prunus africana ( Hook. f .) Kalkm. Homa Tree77Rubiaceae Psydrax schimperiana Seged Tree 7 3578Fabaceae Pterollobium stellatum (Forssk.) Brenan Kentefa Climber/Shrub 1 8 7.7 4 18 18.2 4 2079Rhamnus Rhamnus prinoides L'Herit. Gesho Shrub/Tree 1 5 4.580Anacardiaceae Rhus retinorrhoea Oliv. Talo/Tilem Tree81Anacardiaceae Rhus glutinosa A.Rich. Embis Tree 1 5 4.5 1 582Anacardiaceae Rhus vulgaris Meikle Kamo Tree 1 8 7.7 6 3083Capparidaceae Ritchiea albersii Gilg Hadesa Tree 1 8 7.7 3 14 13.684Rosaceae Rosa abyssinica Lindley Kega Shrub85Polygonaceae Rumex nervosus Vahl. Embacho Shrub 2 1086Asclepiadaceae Sarcostemma viminale (L.)R.Br. Moider Hareg Climber87Araliaceae Schefflera abyssinica (Hochst.ex.A.Rich.)Harms Getem Tree 1 588Asteraceae Senecio gigas Vatke Shokolo Shrub89Fabaceae Senna singueana (Del.)Lock Bisbisha Shrub 1 590Apiaceae Steganotaenia araliacea Hochst. Yejib dula Tree 1 591Menispermaceae Stephania abyssinica (Dillon &A.Rich.) Walp. Nech hareg Climber 1 8 7.792Rutaceae Teclea nobilis Del. Seheel Tree/Shrub 14 64 45.593 Unidentified Kumbel Tree94Urticaceae Urera hyselodendron (A.Rich.) Wedd. Lanqueso Climber95Compositae Vernonia amygdalina Del. Grawa Tree 1 8 7.796Asteraceae Vernonia myriantha Hook.f. Qotiqoto Shrub 2 15 15.497Olacaceae Ximenia americana L. Inkoy Tree/Shrub 3 23 23.1

Number of quadrats (size of 10mtX 10 mt) assessed for each church was:Quar = 13, Zahara = 22, Gibtsawit = 20, Dengolt = 54, Gelawdios = 46, Hiruy = 14,Debresena = 32, Ascha = 7

*Abundance refers number of individuals per area sampled (Number of quadrats X size of thequadrat)**Density refers number of individuals per hectare derived from Abundance and***Frequency refers percentage of plots in which a species was recorded

70

Appendix 2. Checklist of All Indigenous Woody Species Found inSouth Gonder Administrative Zone (SGZDA, Unpublished)

S/ N Family Scientific Name Local Name Life Form F.ch1 Fabaceae Acacia abyssinica Hochst. ex. Benth. Bazra Girar Tree x2 Fabaceae Acacia brevispica Harms Kanto Tree x3 Fabaceae Acacia nilotica Cheba Shrub/Tree4 Euphorbiaceae Acalypha fruticosa Forssk Nacha Shrub/Tree5 Acanthaceae Acanthus pubescens (Oliv.) Engl. Kosheshile Shrub x6 Apocynaceae Acokanthra schimperi (DC.)Benth. Merenz Tree x7 Bombacaceae Adansonia digitata L. Bamba Tree x8 Fabaceae Albizia amara (Roxb.)Boiv. Sibkana Tree/Shrub9 Fabaceae Albizia schimperiana Oliv. Sesa Tree x

10 Fabaceae Albizia spp. Sendel Tree/Shrub11 Sapindaceae Allophylus abyssinica (Hochst) Radlkofer Embis Tree x12 Icacinaceae Apodytes dimidiata E. Mey ex. Arn. Donga Tree x13 Gramineae Arundinaria alpina K.Schum. Kerkeha Stemmed grass x14 Gramineae Arundo donax Shembeko Stemmed grass x15 Melianthaceae Bersama abyssinica Fresen. Azamir Tree x16 Euphorbiaceae Bridelia micrantha (Hochst.)Baill. Yenebir Tifer Tree x17 Simaroubaceae Brucea antidysenterica J.F.Mill. Abalo Shrub x18 Loganiaceae Buddleja polystachya Fresen. Atquar/Anfar Tree x19 Fabaceae Calpurnia aurea (Ait.) Benth. Zigtta/Digtta Shrub/Tree x20 Rubiaceae Canthium oligocarpum Hiern Dingay seber Shrub/Tree x21 Capparidaceae Capparis tomentosa L. Gemero Climber/Shrub x22 Apocynaceae Carissa edulis Vahl. Agam Shrub/Tree x23 Ulmaceae Celtis africana Burm.f. Kawoot Tree x24 Oleaceae Chionanthus mildbraedii ( Gilg & Schellenb.) Stearn Wogeda Tree x25 Rutaceae Citrus aurantifolia (Christm.) Lomi Shrub/Tree x26 Rutaceae Clausena anisata (Willd.)Benth. Limich/Limbich Tree/Shrub x27 Ranunculaceae Clematis hirsuta Perr & Guill. Yazo-Hareg Climber x28 Verbenaceae Clerodendron myricoides (Hoechst)R.Br.ex.Vatke Misirich Shrub/Tree x29 Euphorbiaceae Clutia abyssinica Jaub. & Spach. Feyele feji Shrub x30 Combretaceae Combratum mollie R.Br.ex G.Don Kolla abalo Tree x31 Combretaceae Combretum aculeatum Zenfok Shrub32 Boraginaceae Cordia africana Lam. Wanza Tree x33 Euphorbiaceae Croton macrostachyus Del. Bisana Tree/Shrub x34 Urticaceae Debregeasia saeneb (Forssk.)Hepper & Wood Shunshuna Tree/Shrub35 Sapindaceae Dodonaea anguistifolia L.f. Kitkita Shrub/Tree x36 Sterculiaceae Dombeya torrida (J.F. Gmel.) P.Bamps Wulkifa Tree x37 Flacourtiaceae Dovyalis abyssinica (A.Rich.)Warb. Koshim Tree/Shrub x38 Meliaceae Ekebergia capensis Sparrm. Lol Tree x39 Myrsinaceae Embelia schimperi Vatke Enkoko Climber/Shrub x40 Fabaceae Entada abyssinica Steud.ex A.Rich Ambelta Tree41 Ericaceae Erica arborea L. Asta/Adale Tree x42 Fabaceae Erythrina abyssinica Kuara/Korch Tree43 Fabaceae Erythrina brucei Schweinf. Kermo Ayderk Tree x44 Ebenaceae Euclea divinorum Heirn Dedeho Shrub/Tree x45 Euphorbiaceae Euphorbia abyssinica Gmel. Kulkual Tree x46 Moraceae Ficus ovata Vahl. Yewof Shola Tree x47 Moraceae Ficus sur Forssk. Shola Tree x48 Moraceae Ficus thonningii Blume Chebaha Tree x49 Moraceae Ficus vallis-choudae Del. Banbulea Tree x50 Moraceae Ficus vasta Forssk. Warka Tree x51 Rubiaceae Galiniera saxifraga (Hochst)Bridson Yetota Kolet Tree/Shrub x52 Rubiaceae Gardenia volkensii K.Schum Gambilo Tree53 Thymelaeaceae Gnidia glauca ( Fresen.) Gilg Awura Tree x54 Tiliaceae Grewia bicolor Sumaya/Sefa Tree/Shrub55 Tiliaceae Grewia ferruginea Hochst.ex.A.Rich Lenkuata Tree/Shrub x56 Rosaceae Hagenia abyssinnica (Bruce) Gmelin Koso Tree57 Celastraceae Hippocratea africana (Willd.)Loes Trign Hareg Climber/Shrub x58 Hypericaceae Hypericum revolutum Vahl Amija Tree/Shrub x59 Oleaceae Jasminum grandiflorum L. Tembelel Climber/Shrub x60 Cupressaceae Juniperus procera L. Yeabesha Tsid Tree x61 Acanthaceae Justicia schimperiana (Hochst. Ex Nees) T.Anders. Simiza/Sensel Shrub x62 Myrsinaceae Maesa lanceolata Forsk Kurava/Kelawa Tree/Shrub x63 Celastraceae Maytenus arbutifalia (A. Rich.) Wilczek Atat Shrub x64 Fabaceae Millittia ferruginea (Hochst.)Bak. Birbira Tree x65 Sapotaceae Mimusops kummel Bruce ex DC. Ishe Tree x66 Myricaceae Myrica salicifolia A.Rich. Shinet/Kalava Tree x67 Loganiaceae Nuxia congesta R. Br. ex Fresen. Anfar Tree x

71

68 Oleaceae Olea capensis L. Damotie Woyra Tree x69 Oleaceae Olea europaea L. Woyra Tree x70 Oliniaceae Olinia rochetiana A.Juss. Tifie Tree x71 Cactaceae Opuntia vulgaris Beles Shrub72 Santalaceae Osyris quadripartita Decn. Keret Tree/Shrub x73 Lamiaceae Otostegia tomentosa A.Rich. Tinjut Shrub x74 Palmae Phoenix reclinata Jacq. Seniel/Zembaba Tree x75 Phytolaccaceae Phytolacca dodecandra L'H' erit. Indod Climber x76 Fabaceae Piliostigma thonningii (Schumach.) Milne-Redh. Yekola Wanza Tree77 Pittosporaceae Pittospirum spp Enqualit Tree x78 Pittosporaceae Pittosporum viridiflorum Sims Ahot Tree x79 Podocarpus Podocarpus falcatus (Thunb.)Mirb. Zigba Tree x80 Portulacaceae Portulaca quadrifida L. Marenta Shrub81 Verbenaceae Premna schimperi Engl. Chocho Tree x82 Rosaceae Prunus africana ( Hook. f .) Kalkm. Homa Tree x83 Rubiaceae Psydrax schimperiana Seged Tree x84 Fabaceae Pterollobium stellatum (Forssk.) Brenan Kentefa Climber/Shrub x85 Rhamnaceae Rhamnus staddo A.Rich. Tedo Shrub/Tree86 Anacardiaceae Rhus retinorrhoea Oliv. Talo/Tilem Tree x87 Anacardiaceae Rhus glutinosa A.Rich. Embis Tree x88 Anacardiaceae Rhus vulgaris Meikle Kamo Tree x89 Euphorbiaceae Ricinus communis Chaqima Shrub/Tree90 Rosaceae Rosa abyssinica Lindley Kega Shrub/Small Tree x91 Rosaceae Rubus apetalus Poir. Enjory Shrub/Tree92 Polygonaceae Rumex nervosus Vahl. Embacho Shrub x93 Salicaceae Salix subserrata Ahaya Tree94 Araliaceae Schefflera abyssinica (Hochst.ex.A.Rich.)Harms Getem Tree x95 Euphorbiaceae Securinega virosa (Roxb. Ex Willd.) Pax. & Hoffm Wenahee96 Fabaceae Senna singueana (Del.)Lock Bisbisha Shrub x97 Bignoniaceae Stereospermum kunthianum Cham Zana/Washta Tree98 Myrtaceae Syzygium guineense Dokima Tree99 Rutaceae Teclea nobilis Del. Seheel Tree/Shrub x

100 Combretaceae Terminalia spp. Akima Tree/Shrub101 Unidentified Alashumie102 Unidentified Albey103 Unidentified Arboji104 Unidentified Birbirta105 Unidentified Dabes106 Unidentified Degdeg Hareg107 Unidentified Dodo108 Unidentified Genbez109 Unidentified Isat-Lash110 Unidentified Kandura111 Unidentified Kezikez112 Unidentified Kumbel Tree x113 Unidentified Sosich114 Unidentified Teji115 Unidentified Tinbilta116 Unidentified Tules117 Unidentified Wanat118 Unidentified Wenbela119 Unidentified Werchebo120 Unidentified Woef kentif121 Unidentified Ybel Genbo122 Unidentified Yedem Kitel123 Unidentified Yederie124 Asteraceae Vernonia myriantha Hook.f. Qotiqoto/Dingurita Shrub/Tree x125 Olacaceae Ximenia americana L. Inkoy Tree/Shrub x

X- found in the eight sampled churches.