Consequences of various landscape-scale ecosystem management strategies and fire cycles on age-class structure and harvest in boreal forests

Canadian Journal of Forest Research

Volumn 34, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 310-322

  Fall, Andrew ^a,d   Fortin, Marie Josée ^a,e   Kneeshaw, Daniel D ^b   Yamasaki, Stephen H ^b   Messier, Christian ^b   Bouthillier, Luc ^c   Smyth, Cheryl ^a  

^a SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITÉ DU QUÉBEC À MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITÉ LAVAL   (Canada)

^d University of Toronto ^*  (Canada)

^e UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; ECOSYSTEMS; FIRES; PUBLIC POLICY; SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT;

HABITAT POTENTIAL; STRUCTURAL COMPLEXITY;

FORESTRY;

AGE STRUCTURE; BOREAL FOREST; FIRE; FOREST MANAGEMENT; HARVESTING; SILVICULTURE; STAND STRUCTURE;

CANADA; MAURICIE; NORTH AMERICA; QUEBEC [CANADA];

EID: 2342535115     PISSN: 00455067     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1139/x03-143     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (48)

1. Attiwill, P.M. 1994. The disturbance of forest ecosystems: the ecological basis for conservative management. For. Ecol. Manage. 63: 247-300.
2. Baker, W.L. 1989. Landscape ecology and nature reserve design in the Boundary Waters Canoe Area, Minnesota. Ecology, 70: 23-35.
3. Berg, Å., Ehnström, B., Gustafsson, L. Hallingbäck, T., Jonsell, M., and Weslien, J. 1995. Threat levels and threats to red-listed species in Swedish forests. Conserv. Biol. 9: 1629-1633.
4. Bergeron, Y. 2000. Species and stand dynamics in the mixed woods of Quebec's southern boreal forest. Ecology, 81: 1500-1516.
5. Bergeron, Y., Harvey, B., Leduc, A., and Gauthier, S. 1999. Forest management guidelines based on natural disturbance dynamics: stand- and forest-level considerations. For. Chron. 75: 49-54.
6. Bergeron, Y., Gauthier, S., Kafka, V., Lefort, P., and Lesieur, D. 2001. Natural fire frequency for the eastern Canadian boreal forest: consequences for sustainable forestry. Can. J. For. Res. 31: 384-391.
7. Bissonnette, J. 2000. Cartographic matricielle réalisée à partir du système d'information forestier par tessellation (SIFORT) du ministère des Ressources naturelles. Ministère des Ressources naturelles, Québec, Que.
8. Boychuk, D., and Perera, A.H. 1997. Modeling temporal variability of boreal landscape age-classes under different fire disturbance regimes. Can. J. For. Res. 27: 1083-1094.
9. Burton, P.J., Kneeshaw, D.D., and Coates, K.D. 1999. Managing forest harvesting to maintain old growth in boreal and sub-boreal forests. For. Chron. 75: 623-631.
10. Carson, D.M. 1995. Timber supply analysis: an industrial model from British Columbia. For. Chron. 71: 735-738.
11. Chapin, F.S., and Whiteman, G. 1998. Sustainable development of the boreal forest: interaction of ecological, social and business feedbacks. Conserv. Ecol. 2(2). Available on line at http://www.consecol.org/vol2/iss2/ art12.
12. Cissel, J.H., Swanson, F.J., McKee, W.A., and Burditt, A.L. 1994. Using the past to plan the future in the Pacific Northwest. J. For. 92: 30-31.
13. Côté, M.-A., and Bouthillier, L. 2000. Analysis of the relationship among stakeholders affected by sustainable development and forest certification. For. Chron. 75: 961-965.
14. Daust, D. 1994. Biodiversity and land management: from concept to practice. M.Sc. thesis, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C.
15. Davis, L.S., and Johnson, K.N. 1987. Forest Management. 3rd ed. McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York.
16. Didion, M. 2002. Improving forest management decisions by modelling landscape disturbance impacts on forest age structure dynamics. M.Sc. thesis, School of Resource and Environmental Management, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C.
17. Eng, M. 1998. Spatial patterns in forested landscapes: implications for biology and forestry. In Conservation biology principles for forested landscapes. Edited by J. Voller and S. Harrison. University of British Columbia Press, Vancouver, B.C.
18. Fall, A., and Fall., J. 2001. A domain-specific language for models of landscape dynamics. Ecol. Model. 141(1-3): 1-18.
19. Franklin, J.F., and Forman, R.T.T. 1987. Creating landscape patterns by forest cutting: ecological consequences and principles. Landsc. Ecol. 1: 5-18.
20. Galindo-Leal, C., and Bunnell., F. 1995. Ecosystem management: implications and opportunities of a new paradigm. For. Chron. 71: 601-606.
21. Gauthier, S., Leduc, A., and Bergeron, Y. 1996. Vegetation modelling under natural fire cycles: a tool to define natural mosaic diversity for forest management. Environ. Monit. Assess. 39: 417-434.
22. Graham, R.T., and Jain, T.B. 1998. Silviculture's role in managing boreal forests. Conserv. Ecol. 2(2). Available on line at http://www.consecol.org/ vol2/iss2/art8.
23. Hegan, R.L., and Luckert, M.K. 2000. An economic assessment of using the allowable cut effect for enhanced forest management policies: an Alberta case study. Can. J. For. Res. 30: 1591-1600.
24. Hunter, M.L., Jr. 1990. Wildlife, forests and forestry. Principles for managing forests for biodiversity. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.
25. Hunter, M.L., Jr., and Calhoun, A. 1996. A triad approach to land-use allocation. In Biodiversity in managed landscapes. Edited by R.C. Szaro and D.W. Johnstone. Oxford University Press, Oxford, U.K. pp. 477-491.
26. Johnson, E.A. 1992. Fire and vegetation dynamics: studies from the North American boreal forest. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K.
27. Kaufmann, M.R., Graham, R.T., Boyce, D.A., Moir, W.H., Perry, L., Reynolds, R.T., Bassett, R.L., Mehlop, P., Edminster, C.B., Block, W.M., and Corn, P.S. 1994. An ecological basis for ecosystem management. U.S. For. Serv. Gen. Tech Rep. RM-246.
28. Kneeshaw, D.D., and Bergeron, Y. 1998. Canopy gap characteristics and tree replacement in the southeastern boreal forest. Ecology, 79: 783-794.
29. Kneeshaw, D.D., Leduc, A., Messier, C., Drapeau, P., Paré, D., Gauthier, S., Carignan, R., Doucet, R., and Bouthillier, L. 2000a. Developing biophysical indicators of sustainable forest management at an operational scale. For. Chron. 76: 482-493.
30. Kneeshaw, D.D., Messier, C., Leduc, A., Drapeau, P., Carignan, R., Paré, D., Ricard, J.-P., Gauthier, S., Doucet, R., and Greene, D. 2000b. Towards a sustainable forestry: a proposal for indicators of SFM based on natural disturbances. Sustainable Forest Management Network brochure. Available from http://sfm-1.biology. ualberta.ca/english/pubs/PDF/SP-kneeshaw_en.pdf [cited 1 September 2002].
31. Kneeshaw, D.D., Yamasaki, S., Fortin, M.-J., Leduc, A., and Messier, C. 2000c. Développement d'indicateurs et d'outils d'évaluation de GDF à une échelle opérationnelle: un défi d'intégration. Part 1. Aubelle, 134: 20-22.
32. Kneeshaw, D.D., Yamasaki, S., Fortin, M.-J., Leduc, A., and Messier, C. 2000d. Développement d'indicateurs et d'outils d'évaluation de GDF à une échelle opérationnelle: un défi d'intégration. Part 2. Aubelle, 135: 19-20, 25.
33. Landres, P.B., Morgan, P., and Swanson, F.J. 1999. Overview of the use of natural variability concepts in managing ecological systems. Ecol. Appl. 9: 1179-1188.
34. Lertzman, K., Spies, T., and Swanson, F.J. 1997. From ecosystem dynamics to ecosystem management. In The rain forests of home: profile of a North American bioregion. Edited by P.K. Schoonmaker, B. van Hagen, and E.C. Wolf. Island Press, Washington, D.C. pp. 261-382.
35. Levin, S.A. 1992. The problem of pattern and scale in ecology. Ecology, 73: 1943-1967.
36. Messier, C., and Kneeshaw, D.D. 1999. Thinking and acting differently for sustainable management of the boreal forest. For. Chron. 75: 929-938.
37. Oliver, C.D. 1992. A landscape approach: achieving and maintaining biodiversity and economic productivity. J. For. 90: 20-25.
38. Östlund, L., Zackrisson, O., Axelsson, A.-L. 1997. The history and transformation of a Scandinavian boreal forest landscape since the 19th century. Can. J. For. Res. 27: 1198-1206.
39. Parminter, J. 1998. Natural disturbance ecology. In Conservation biology principles for forested landscapes. Edited by J. Voller and S. Harrison. University of British Columbia Press, Vancouver, B.C. pp. 3-41.
40. Payette, S. 1992. Fire as a controlling process in the North American boreal forest. In A systems analysis of the global boreal forest. Edited by H.H. Shugart, R. Leemans, and G.B. Bonan. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K. pp. 144-169.
41. Pothier, D., and Savard, F. 1998. Actualisation des tables de production pour les principales espèces forestières du Québec. Ministère des Ressources naturelles, Forêt Québec, Québec, Que.
42. Rykiel, E.J., Jr. 1996. Testing ecological models: the meaning of validation. Ecol. Model. 90: 229-244.
43. Schoonmaker, P., and McKee, A. 1988. Species composition and diversity during secondary succession of coniferous forests in the western Cascade Mountains of Oregon. For. Sci. 34: 960-979.
44. Spies, T., and M., Turner. 1999. Dynamics forest mosaics. In Maintaining biodiversity in forest ecosystem. Edited by M.L. Hunter, Jr. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K. pp. 95-160.
45. Thompson, I.D. 1991. Could marten become the spotted owl of eastern Canada. For. Chron. 67: 136-140.
46. Van Wagner, C.E. 1978. Age-class distribution and the forest fire cycle. Can. J. For. Res. 8: 220-227.
47. Van Wagner, C.E. 1983. Simulating the effect of forest fire on long-term annual timber supply. Can. J. For. Res. 13: 451-457.
48. Wallin, D.O., Marks, B., and Swanson, F.J. 1994. Landscape pattern response to changes in pattern generation rules: landscape legacies in forestry. Ecol. Appl. 4: 569-580.