Response of Ocotea bullata, Curtisia dentata and Rapanea melanophloeos to medicinal bark stripping in the southern Cape, South Africa: implications for sustainable use

Abstract

Tree bark is commonly used for traditional medicine in southern Africa and further afield. Increasing demand and commercialisation have resulted in the overexploitation of many species, posing a major challenge to forest managers to develop mechanisms for sustainable resource use. An experimental bark harvesting research project was initiated in the southern Cape, South Africa, to inform best practices for bark harvesting based on tree response to bark stripping. The species selected for the study, Ocotea bullata, Curtisia dentata and Rapanea melanophloeos, are much sought after and well represented in southern Cape forests. The treatment entailed removing vertical strips of bark, 1 m in length and of different strip widths, covering the full range of tree size classes ≥10 cm DBH. The treatments were applied during two seasons, winter and summer. Evaluations were done every six months to assess tree response to bark stripping in terms of bark regrowth through phellogen edge and sheet development, and susceptibility to insect and fungal damage. The results show a differential response of tree species in terms of phellogen edge and sheet growth, as well as susceptibility to fungal and insect attack. Rapanea melanophloeos was the most vulnerable to fungal and insect damage and displayed little bark regrowth following wounding. Curtisia dentata showed best bark regrowth through sheet development. Only O. bullata, though, showed adequate bark regrowth (through edge development) to allow for sustainable strip harvesting. Bark regrowth is influenced by season of stripping, although this is difficult to define considering the wide range of environmental and other factors affecting tree response to bark removal. Smaller trees are more vulnerable to bark stripping, especially with a wide strip, with poorer bark regrowth than bigger trees.

Keywords: harvesting, medicinal bark, non-timber forest products, sustainable use, wounding

Southern Forests 2012, 74(3): 183–193