Comparison of breeding bird assemblages in conifer plantations managed by continuous cover forestry and clearfelling

Calladine, John; Bray, J. R.; Broome, Alice; Fuller, Robert

doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2015.02.017

Cited by 30 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, one benefit of CCF for mature forest species is the less severe temporal fluctuations in habitat quality. However, for early successional species RFM may actually provide more habitats (Calladine et al, 2015). Nevertheless, habitat availability for species dependent on high tree volume and dead wood availability in forests under both CCF and RFM were far from those in unmanaged forests.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…In general, CCF may provide more habitats and resources for species living in mature or late successional forests compared with RFM (Calladine et al, 2015;Kuuluvainen et al, 2012;Pukkala et al, 2012). In boreal forests, CCF has been found to be less harmful than RFM, for example, for understorey vegetation (Jalonen and Vanha-Majamaa, 2001), some invertebrate species (Matveinen-Huju and Koivula, 2008), and soil fauna (Siira-Pietikäinen and Haimi, 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, in comparison to RFM, CCF may provide more resources for dead wood dependent species (Atlegrim and Sjöberg, 2004) as well as for herbivores (Atlegrim and Sjöberg, 1996). However, because different species require differing habitats and resources, it is obvious that no single management can be the best for all species and biodiversity aspects (Calladine et al, 2015;Mönkkönen et al, 2014). Thus, it is important to understand how the different silvicultural practices promote different types of forest structures and species (Felton et al, 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Continuous cover forestry is a cost-efficient tool to increase multifunctionality of boreal production forests in Fennoscandia

Peura

Burgas

Eyvindson

et al. 2018

Biological Conservation

117

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Earlier research has suggested that the diversification of silvicultural strategies is a cost-efficient tool to ensure multifunctionality in production forests. This study compared the effects of continuous cover forestry and conventional rotation forestry on ecosystem services and biodiversity in boreal forests in Finland. We simulated over 25,000 commercial forest stands for 100 years under continuous cover and rotation forest management. Forests without management were used as a reference. We compared the effects of silvicultural practices over space and time on ecosystem services, biodiversity indicators and multifunctionality. Our results revealed that continuous cover forestry was better than rotation forest management in terms of timber net present value, carbon sequestration, bilberry production, scenic beauty and the number of large trees. It provided higher habitat availability for indicator species dependent on deciduous trees and mature forest structure. Rotation forest management was better than continuous cover forestry in terms of harvested tree biomass, cowberries, mushrooms, and species dependent on high tree volume. In general, multifunctionality was higher in continuous cover forests than in rotation forest. Therefore, continuous cover forests may have a greater potential to produce simultaneously multiple benefits from forests. However, unmanaged forests often provided the highest levels of services and biodiversity making their role indispensable in delivering forest related ecosystem services and, especially, in the maintenance of biodiversity. Continuous cover forestry does not itself guarantee the maintenance of all ecosystem services and biodiversity in commercial forests but it can be an important part of a successful progression towards more sustainable forestry.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Continuous cover forestry is a cost-efficient tool to increase multifunctionality of boreal production forests in Fennoscandia

Peura

Burgas

Eyvindson

et al. 2018

Biological Conservation

117

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Unfortunately this change has occurred in the absence of a recognised need for detailed research into the specific habitat requirements of many species of conservation interest (Quine, Humphrey & Watts, 2004). As a consequence there remains a common perception that plantation forests are ecological deserts that do not provide habitat for valued organisms (Brockerhoff et al 2008) despite assemblages of open-habitat taxa occurring in clear-felled and young pine stands worldwide (Barbaro et al, 2005;Wright et al, 2007;Wilson et al, 2009;Uribe & Estades, 2014;Calladine et al, 2015;Sharps et al, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of managed coniferous forest in the conservation of reptiles

Jofré

Warn

Reading

2016

Forest Ecology and Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Regeneration occurs naturally, resulting in a heterogeneous age and size distribution. In comparison to rotation forestry, continuous cover forestry is likely to support more biodiversity and other ecosystem services (Calladine et al 2015, O'Hara 2014 and to be more resilient against threats brought about by climate change (Thompson et al 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Economics of size-structured forestry with carbon storage

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We study the economics of carbon storage using a model that includes forest size structure and determines the choice between rotation forestry and continuous cover forestry. Optimal harvests may rely solely on thinning, implying infinite rotation and continuous cover forestry, or both thinning and clearcuts, implying finite rotation periods. Given several carbon prices and interest rates, we optimize the timing and intensity of thinnings along with the choice of management regime. In addition to the carbon storage in living trees, we include the carbon dynamics of dead trees and timber products. Forest growth is specified by an empirically validated transition matrix model for Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.). The optimization problem is solved in its general dynamic form by applying bilevel optimization with gradient-based interior point methods and a genetic algorithm. Carbon pricing postpones thinnings, increases stand density by directing harvests to larger trees, and typically yields a regime shift from rotation forestry to continuous cover forestry. In continuous cover solutions, the steady-state harvesting interval and the diameter distribution of standing and harvested trees are sensitive to carbon price, implying that carbon pricing increases the sawlog ratio of timber yields. Additionally, we obtain relatively inexpensive stand-level marginal costs of carbon storage.

show abstract

Comparison of breeding bird assemblages in conifer plantations managed by continuous cover forestry and clearfelling

Cited by 30 publications

References 33 publications

Continuous cover forestry is a cost-efficient tool to increase multifunctionality of boreal production forests in Fennoscandia

Continuous cover forestry is a cost-efficient tool to increase multifunctionality of boreal production forests in Fennoscandia

The role of managed coniferous forest in the conservation of reptiles

Economics of size-structured forestry with carbon storage

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About