What are the Environmental Consequences of Using Silviculturally Effective Forest Vegetation Management Treatments?

Abstract

In this paper, we present examples of stand-level consequences of using forest vegetation management treatments in boreal and temperate forest ecosystems in Canada. Specifically, we address several selected indicators: air and water quality, soils and nutrients, plant diversity, and wildlife habitat. For each of these, we discuss direct and indirect effects of five broad categories of treatments: (1) silviculture and harvesting systems and (2) physical, (3) thermal, (4) cultural, and (5) chemical/biological treatments. Our emphasis is on forest vegetation management treatments that are currently used in Canada to manage conifers. By applying regulations and best management practices, conducting landscape-level analyses and developing longer-term monitoring programs resource managers can minimize the effects of FVM treatments on the environmental indicators presented in this paper.

Synthesis of Silviculture Options, Costs, and Consequences of Alternative Vegetation Management Practices Relevant to Boreal and Temperate Conifer Forests: Introduction

“…Swift and Bell (2011) note that herbicide applications affect songbird populations by changing available nesting and foraging habitat. Based on their review of the literature, they also report that vegetation changes resulting from herbicide applications have a transient effect on the composition of songbird communities and that coarse measures of avian community response (e.g., species diversity, overall diversity) often show insignificant or positive responses to herbicide applications.…”

“…Three stand-level analyses were conducted to complement the efficacy information presented by Weinsczyk et al (2011) and two wildlife indicator-related papers supplement the environmental effects information presented by Swift and Bell (2011).…”

“…Some species are adapted to small, highly disturbed conditions while others require large tracts of infrequently disturbed forests. Swift and Bell (2011) recommend that resource managers conduct landscape-level analyses to optimize the size, intensity, and timing of disturbances to accommodate the needs of various plant and wildlife species.…”

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

“…In addition, government agencies rely on the abundance of science suggesting that concerns about negative impacts on human health and the environment are largely unwarranted when registered herbicides are used according to label instructions (Thompson et al 1991, Lautenschlager and Sullivan 2002, Tatum 2004, Swift and Bell 2011. However, from the First Nations viewpoint, this reasoning appears to be dismissive, disrespecting First Nations rights, experiences, and views, and is simply interpreted as a defensive measure to justify herbicide use because it is the most efficient (i.e., least cost) to control competing vegetation.…”

“…These reactions restricting herbicide use in forestry have persisted despite efforts to mitigate the aerial application of herbicides (Thompson et al 2010(Thompson et al , 2012, and an abundance of science suggesting that concerns about negative impacts on human health and the environment are largely unwarranted when registered herbicides are used according to label instructions (Thompson et al 1991, Lautenschlager and Sullivan 2002, Tatum 2004, Swift and Bell 2011.…”