Assessing long-term effectiveness of green-tree retention

Level and spatial pattern of overstory retention impose trade‐offs for regenerating and retained trees

“…Our results are consistent with previous observations that elevated risk of mortality is generally limited to the first few years after harvest (Jönsson et al 2007, Rosenvald et al 2008). Mortality declined by 30–70% during the second decade of sampling (2009–2016) averaging <1% of stems per year.…”

“…Drawing from the literature and earlier results of this study (Urgenson et al 2013 a ), we predicted that survival would benefit from greater retention and retention in aggregates ( H 6a ). Although study‐wide survival (84% over 18–19 yr) was higher than in many systems (Esseen 1994, Busby et al 2006, Rosenvald et al 2008, Lavoie et al 2012), it varied widely among harvest units (66–94%). Survival increased with level of retention, as others have observed (Walter and Maguire 2004, Beese et al 2019 b ).…”

A keystone species, European aspen (Populus tremula L.), in boreal forests: Ecological role, knowledge needs and mapping using remote sensing

“…The retention trees are prone to wind disturbance (Jönsson et al, 2007). The post-harvest mortality rate is high with retained aspens as well, 46 % of them reported fallen after six years of monitoring ) and 52 % after 16 years of monitoring (Rosenvald et al 2019). Hence, not only it is essential to select high ecological value aspens, but they should also have qualities of high survival (e.g.…”

Frontiers of protected areas versus forest exploitation: Assessing habitat network functionality in 16 case study regions globally

“…Three positive factors (protective forests, buffer zones, inaccessibility) were exceptions, and were clearly associated to former USSR countries and regions with legacies of top-down regulation, and to Costa Rica. Finally, approaches to habitat and landscape restoration may be fragile given the increasing wood demand and low survival of retention trees (Rosenvald et al 2019 ), but also promising for the future, if these regulations and other incentives aiming at restoration persist, because forest structures can change to more natural ones, albeit with long delivery time (Roberge et al 2015 ; Crouzeilles et al 2016 ).…”