VIRGIN FORESTS AND FOREST RESERVES IN ... - Natura 2000

More documents

Recommendations

Info

156 Strict forest reserves in Europe 2-3% dead wood of the total growing stock, which in Nordic countries amounts to about 5-8m3 per hectare (PARVIA<strong>IN</strong>EN / SEPPÄNEN 1994; WOLLSCHLÄGER 1996). A similar percentage has also been estimated for central European forests. In the temperate zone, however, a figure of 2-3% means double the amount of dead wood per hectare must be left compared to the boreal forest zone (Naturschutz im Wald 1997). An alternative method is to estimate the share of dead wood in each stand relative to a corresponding natural forest stand and to leave 10-12% of the volume of dead wood normally found in the latter (KORPEL 1997). Research is inconclusive as to what proportions of the total dead timber should be fallen and standing. Most common estimates suggest that the bulk of dead wood should be fallen, decaying wood. Recommendations of the amount of fallen, decaying wood vary from 60 to 80% of the total dead wood component. From the point of view of preserving living organisms and enhancing biodiversity, open areas should also be created in forests. If regeneration in high forests was replaced entirely by selection forests, open areas and their attendant living organisms, would disappear. In Finland, there are dozens of such species. Correspondingly, one of the drawbacks of fire prevention in modern silviculture is the extinction of living organisms, which are dependent on charcoal wood. There are about 40 such species in the Nordic countries. This is why the modern silvicultural guidelines recommend controlled burning in production forests in order to ensure adequate micro-habitats on a small scale for those organisms which are dependent on fire and charcoal wood (ANNILA 1998). Additional costs to modern silviculture as a result of managing biodiversity To date, no detailed economical calculations as to how much additional expenses will be incurred due to the incorporation of biodiversity aspects in silvicultural management, and whether wood production is reduced significantly. In practice, if the deadwood component is made up poor quality timber, useless for logging, it will not cause unreasonable additional costs to maintain the required deadwood volume. Practical guidelines favour fallen dead wood, because manual logging can be dangerous if standing dead trees fall during forest operations. However, if mechanical harvesting is applied, this danger can be averted. According to a report on private forests in Finland, volumes would decrease by 5 to 7% if key biotopes are left, in addition to the required proportion of dead/decaying wood (NIEMELÄ / ARNKIL 1997). Preliminary calculations for Southern Finland suggest that the application of such techniques in modern silviculture would cause a reduction of about 10-12%, at most, in wood production, over the long term (JÄRVELÄ<strong>IN</strong>EN et al. 1997). Similarly, here are no precise, published estimates in Middle Europe or Germany on the differences between ecological- and wood production-oriented silviculture. The city of Lübeck forests are a rare and important example of the implementation of ecological silviculture, which began in 1994. In Germany, a so-called Naturland-certificate may be awarded if ecological silviculture is applied. The requirements are: no clear cutting, no exotic tree species, no chemicals, selective felling only is allowed, 10% of the forest areas
COST Action E4: Forest Reserves Research Network 157 must be set aside as reference areas, i.e. strict reserve areas, and the dead wood component must amount to 10% of the total tree volume. The forest area around the city of Lübeck is an optimal site for European beech (Fagus sylvatica). During previous commercial forest activities, exotic tree species – especially Norway spruce, but also red oak and Douglas fir – were planted in the region. The longterm plan now is to develop the forest into beech dominated stands and to remove Norway spruce stands in favour of mixed forests. Other exotic tree species, such as Douglas fir, will not be maintained. In January 1998, an independent evaluator (BORCHERS) published a report on the forests of the city of Lübeck, which assessed the economic implications as a result of current forest management. According to this report, the reduction in the level of silviculture and the establishment of reference areas created losses in wood production and increased the expenses related to silvicultural management amounting to between 80 and 240 DM /year/ ha. In conclusion, BORCHERS stated that this kind of forest management is only possible in forest parks, where there are no silviculture-related expenses. Thus, this type of silvicultural model is really only applicable in forests which are owned by cities or communities like Lübeck, where the additional costs can be covered by tax revenues. In private forests such silvicultural practices are unprofitable. However, the silvicultural model applied in the city of Lübeck does sets guidelines for ecological silviculture and quantifies the economic losses resulting from its implementation, which is of considerable benefit to the forest community generally. CONCLUSIONS: NO UNIFORM SILVICULTURAL MODEL EXISTS There is no uniform silvicultural model in Europe. In order to maintain biodiversity, different silvicultural and regeneration methods are required. Which methods to choose depends on the following parameters; climate, soil and tree species characteristics. At present, the main trend in European forestry is toward nature-oriented silviculture. The basic elements of nature-oriented silviculture are known for each forest zone, but the quantification of the properties that dictate how ‘natural’ silviculture is, have not been studied sufficiently and are not well understood. Quantification is required of such aspects as the amount of deadwood and the key biotopes that should be left. There is general agreement that by leaving deadwood and micro-biotopes in production forests a proportion of threatened species may be conserved. Nature-oriented silviculture serves both as large-scale protection of biodiversity and timber production, but thus far, the significance of the former remains underestimated in the general debate on forest protection. The feasibility of nature-oriented silviculture must always be evaluated on economic grounds. Experience shows that sustainable forest management has been most successful when forestry is profitable. In order to preserve natural species diversity there must be open areas created in forests. If silvicultural orientation favours selection forests only, those species that live at the edge of forests and in open areas would become increasingly rare. It is necessary to carry out prescribed, controlled burning during regeneration procedures in Nordic countries, in order to conserve those species that are dependent on wood charcoal.
Page 1 and 2:
PROCEEDINGS OF THE INVITED LECTURER
Page 3 and 4:
Published by Department of Forestry
Page 5 and 6:
COST Action E4: Forest Reserves Res
Page 7:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25:
Page 28 and 29:
18 The Forests of Croatia - Country
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
22 Table 2: Special reserves of for
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
26 Forest Reserves Research Network
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
46 Natural Forests and Forests Prot
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
68 Forest Reserves and their Resear
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
88 The Brown Bear in Slovenia - Nat
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116: COST Action E4: Forest Reserves Res
Page 153: COST Action E4: Forest Reserves Res
Page 156 and 157: 146 Strict forest reserves in Europ
Page 182: 172 Strict forest reserves in Europ
show all

VIRGIN FORESTS AND FOREST RESERVES IN ... - Natura 2000

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?