The state of forest vegetation management in Europe in the 21st century

McCarthy, Nicholas; Bentsen, Niclas Scott; Willoughby, I.; Balandier, Philippe

doi:10.1007/s10342-010-0429-5

Cited by 54 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Unfortunately this is not possible with the existing state of knowledge, a situation not unique to the Canadian context (e.g., McCarthy et al 2011). Instead, we have sought to assist resource managers to identify potential social concerns that could arise from choices about FVM.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Concerns, Risk and The Acceptability of Forest Vegetation Management Alternatives: Insights for Managers

Wyatt

Rousseau

Nadeau

et al. 2011

The Forestry Chronicle

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although public opinion and social issues have significant influence on policy-making, research on forest vegetation management (FVM) in Canada has a strong focus on biological aspects, with less attention being paid to social concerns. This paper reviews the social context in which FVM occurs. Individual views about FVM reflect a combination of values, beliefs, and attitude while also including differing perceptions of risks. Public views and the broader social acceptability of management decisions can be linked to five key factors: context, risk, aesthetics, trust, and knowledge. Judgements about acceptability will usually change over time and across specific situations and various segments of a population could make opposing judgements. We identify a variety of public concerns related to FVM in Canada, synthesizing research that can help resource managers consider the social impacts of their choices. We also note particular concerns related to Aboriginal peoples and the FVM workforce. Information about the benefits and disadvantages of FVM options can help resolve public concerns, but using technical information to convince the public is rarely successful. Forest management agencies and resource managers need access to reliable information about social values and concerns to make management decisions that will be socially acceptable.Key words: social acceptability, vegetation management, silviculture, forest policy, public participation, forest values, risk management, scenic values RÉSUMÉBien que l' opinion publique et les enjeux sociaux exercent une influence significative sur l' élaboration des politiques, la plupart des travaux de recherche sur le contrôle de la végétation en forêt au Canada ont été consacrés aux aspects biologiques et ont négligé les considérations sociales. Cet article fait la synthèse du contexte social dans lequel s'inscrit le contrôle de la végétation. Les perceptions individuelles du contrôle de la végétation sont le reflet d'une combinaison de valeurs, de croyances et d'attitudes et de perceptions différentes des risques encourus. Les perceptions publiques et, de manière plus large, l'acceptabilité sociale des choix d'aménagement, sont liées à cinq facteurs fondamentaux : le contexte, les risques, l' esthétique, la confiance et les connaissances. Les jugements sur l'acceptabilité vont généralement évoluer dans le temps en fonction des situations. De même, différents groupes dans la population pourront avoir des jugements opposés. Nous identifions une série de préoccupations sociales associées au contrôle de la végétation, sur la base d'une synthèse des travaux de recherche susceptibles d'aider les gestionnaires dans la prise en compte des impacts sociaux de leurs choix. Nous notons également des enjeux particuliers associés aux Premières Nations et à la main-d' oeuvre en contrôle de la végétation. L'information au sujet des bénéfices et des désavantages de différentes approches en contrôle de la végétation peut aider à répondre aux préoccupations du public. Cependant, le re...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Concerns, Risk and The Acceptability of Forest Vegetation Management Alternatives: Insights for Managers

Wyatt

Rousseau

Nadeau

et al. 2011

The Forestry Chronicle

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Peak concentrations of both herbicides were several orders of magnitude lower than Lethal Concentration (LC)50 concentrations for Daphnia and rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss). These results highlight the need to include data from both field and laboratory based trials when assessing ing pressure on forest managers to reduce herbicide use, and to adopt and integrate alternate methods to herbicides McCarthy et al, 2011;Rolando et al, 2011). However, other alternatives such as manual and mechanical methods, prescribed fire and biological control, also have potential negative aspects that need to be taken into consideration such as the risk of increased soil erosion, loss of nutrients, risk of wildfire, air pollution, efficacy and financial cost (Neary and Michael, 1996;Little et al, 2006;Rolando et al, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Herbicides are used in forestry for a range of purposes such as reducing competing vegetation, managing species composition, controlling invasive weeds, managing wildlife habitat, and maintaining facilities and access ways (Richardson, 1993;Shepard et al, 2004;McCarthy et al, 2011). In particular, control of vegetation competing with the planted tree crop is an important management intervention in maximising productivity and maintaining commercial viability of planted forests .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Aquatic Fate of Aerially Applied Hexazinone and Terbuthylazine in a New Zealand Planted Forest

Baillie¹,

Neary²,

Gous³

et al. 2017

JSWSM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Herbicides are used to control competing vegetation during tree establishment, and are often critical to the productivity and economic viability of a planted forest crop. Despite increasing public concern over herbicide use in planted forests and potential impact on the environment, there is limited information on the aquatic fate of many of these herbicides when applied in forests according to standard operational procedures. Two herbicides commonly used in New Zealand’s planted forests, terbuthylazine and hexazinone, were aerially applied during two consecutive years at 7.4 kg and 1.1 kg ha-1 respectively, to a 12.5 ha catchment of newly planted Pinus radiata (Radiata pine) in the Bay of Plenty region of New Zealand. One hundred percent of the area was sprayed during Year 1 while 85% of the area was sprayed during Year 2. The highest concentrations of both herbicides were measured in stream water, sediment and algal samples on the day of herbicide application during Year 1 (September 2012 to June 2013), mainly as a result of spray drift, and in stream water during Year 2 (September 2013 to April 2014) at the time of a rainfall event seven days after herbicide application. Terbuthylazine concentrations exceeded New Zealand and World Health Organisation drinking water standards for <24 hours on both occasions. For the remainder of the trial period, concentrations of both herbicides were below safe drinking water standards. Herbicide concentrations in stream flow declined immediately below the trial site and were close to or below detection limits at the bottom of the catchment. The concentrations of terbuthylazine and hexazinone in stream flow during this trial, posed a short-term and low risk to algae. Peak concentrations of both herbicides were several orders of magnitude lower than Lethal Concentration (LC)50 concentrations for Daphnia and rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss). These results highlight the need to include data from both field and laboratory based trials when assessing the aquatic risk of these two herbicides when applied under operational conditions in planted forests.

show abstract

“…However, the use of chemical herbicides has been met with concerns by the public in North America and Europe over the perception of unacceptable human health and environmental risks (Wagner 1994, Buse et al 1995, Wagner et al 1998a, Ammer et al 2011, McCarthy et al 2011. Such concerns have led to requirements to reduce herbicide use on some certified forests (FSCCWG 2004) and in 2001, the ban of herbicides for managing forest vegetation For personal use only.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding First Nations rights and perspectives on the use of herbicides in forestry: A case study from northeastern Ontario

Kayahara

Armstrong

2015

The Forestry Chronicle

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article provides forestry professionals with an improved understanding of why First Nations are opposed to the use of chemical herbicides for silvicultural purposes on their traditional lands, based on a case study in northeastern Ontario. Results were generated using a modified form of a focus group approach. First Nations opposition to herbicide use involved not only concerns over human and environmental health (concerns common among the general public) but also spanned from treaty rights, mistrust, and respect issues to herbicide use being incongruent with traditional First Nations worldviews. The results illustrate that the science-education approach typically used to address public opposition to herbicides is neither adequate nor appropriate for addressing First Nations concerns. Instead, a more in-depth engagement and approach, centred on genuine respect for First Nations rights, culture and history, is needed to arrive at solutions that are consistent with each First Nation community's values and terms.Key words: First Nations, Aboriginal, Indigenous, traditional ecological knowledge, herbicides, forestry, perceptions, risk, worldviews, vegetation management, silviculture, boreal forest RÉSUMÉCet article permet aux forestiers professionnels de mieux comprendre pourquoi les Premières Nations s' opposent à l'utilisation des herbicides à des fins sylvicoles sur leurs terres ancestrales en s'appuyant sur une étude effectuée dans le nord-est de l'Ontario. Ces résultats ont été obtenus à l'aide d'une forme modifiée de groupes de discussion. L' opposition des Premières Nations à l'utilisation des herbicides ne résulte pas que de leur préoccupation pour la santé humaine et celle de l' environnement, qu'ils partagent d'ailleurs avec le public en général; elle repose aussi sur les droits définis par Traité, la méfiance, une question de respect et même sur le fait que l'utilisation d'herbicides va à l' encontre de la vision traditionnelle que les Premières Nations ont sur le monde. Les résultats montrent que l'approche par l' éducation scientifique que l' on adopte souvent pour contrer l' opposition publique aux herbicides n' est ni adéquate ni suffisante pour prendre en compte les préoccupations des Premières Nations. Il faut au contraire une démarche plus approfondie fondée sur un véritable respect des droits, de la culture et de l'histoire des Premières Nations pour trouver des solutions adaptées aux valeurs et aux conditions propres à chaque communauté des Premières Nations.

show abstract

The state of forest vegetation management in Europe in the 21st century

Abstract: COST (COST is an intergovernmental framework for European cooperation in science and technology.

Cited by 54 publications

References 33 publications

Social Concerns, Risk and The Acceptability of Forest Vegetation Management Alternatives: Insights for Managers

Social Concerns, Risk and The Acceptability of Forest Vegetation Management Alternatives: Insights for Managers

Aquatic Fate of Aerially Applied Hexazinone and Terbuthylazine in a New Zealand Planted Forest

Understanding First Nations rights and perspectives on the use of herbicides in forestry: A case study from northeastern Ontario

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About