To thin or not to thin: Bio-economic analysis of two alternative practices to increase amount of coarse woody debris in managed forests

European Journal of Forest Research

Volumn 131, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 1411-1422

  Tikkanen, Olli Pekka ^a   Matero, Jukka ^a   Mönkkönen, Mikko ^b   Juutinen, Artti ^c,d   Kouki, Jari ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EASTERN FINLAND   (Finland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF JYVÄSKYLÄ   (Finland)

^c UNIVERSITY OF OULU   (Finland)

^d FINNISH FOREST RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Finland)

Author keywords

Boreal forests; Cost efficiency; Dead wood; Thinning loggings; Tree retention

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; BOREAL FOREST; COMMERCIAL SPECIES; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DEAD WOOD; ECOLOGICAL IMPACT; FOREST MANAGEMENT; FORESTRY PRODUCTION; LOGGING (TIMBER); MANAGEMENT PRACTICE; THINNING;

FINLAND;

PICEA;

EID: 84865827874     PISSN: 16124669     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10342-012-0607-8     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. Ahtikoski A, Melkas E, Horne P, Kokko K (2009) Policy instruments in integrating biodiversity conservation and carbon sequestration as a part of forest management. University of Helsinki, Publications of Department of Forest Economics, vol 56, pp 1-27.
2. Anonymous (2007) Finnish statistical year book of forestry 2007. Finnish Forest Research Institute, Vantaa.
3. Anonymous (2008) Skogstatistiks årsbok 2008. Skogstyrelsen, Jönköping.
4. Anonymous (2009) Finnish statistical year book of forestry 2009. Finnish Forest Research Institute, Vantaa.
5. Baker SC, Grove SJ, Forster L, Bonham KJ, Bashford D (2009) Short-term responses of ground-active beetles to alternative silvicultural systems in the Warra Silvicultural Systems Trial, Tasmania, Australia. For Ecol Manage 258: 444-459.
6. Berg A, Ehnström B, Gustafsson L, Hallingbäck T et al (1994) Threatened plant, animal, and fungus species in Swedish forests: distribution and habitat associations. Conserv Biol 8: 718-731.
7. Cajander AK (1926) The theory of forest types. Acta For Fenn 29(3): 1-108.
8. Cooney TM, Haley D (1982) Determining logging costs for long-term timber-supply projections: estimation of input requirements by phase of logging. Can J For Res 12: 772-779.
9. Dahlberg A, Stokland JN (2004) Vedlevande arters krav pa ° substrat. Skogsstyrelsen, Jönköping, Rapport 7.
10. Daniel TW, Helms JA, Baker FS (1979) Principles of silviculture. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York.
11. Edman M, Möller R, Ericson L (2006) Effects of enhanced tree growth rate on the decay capacities of three saprotrophic wood-fungi. For Ecol Manage 232: 12-18.
12. Esseen PA, Ehnström B, Ericson L, Sjöberg K (1997) Boreal forests. Ecol Bull 46: 16-47.
13. Faustmann M (1849) Berechnung des wertes welchen Waldboden sowie noch nicht haubare Holzbestände für die Waldwirtschaft besitzen. Allgemaine Forst- und Jadg-Zeitung 15: 441-455.
14. Ferguson SH, Archibald DJ (2002) The 3/4 power law in forest management: how to grow dead trees. For Ecol Manage 169: 283-292.
15. Finnish Forest Research Institute (2011) MOTTI stand simulator. http://www.metla.fi/metinfo/motti/index-en.htm. Accessed 17 Mar 2011.
16. Franklin JF, Berg DR, Thornburgh DA, Tappeiner JC (1997) Alternative silvicultural approaches to timber harvesting: variable retention systems. In: Kohm KA, Franklin JF (eds) Creating a forestry for the 21st century. The science of forest management. Island Press, Washington, DC, pp 111-139.
17. FSC (2005) National forest stewardship standard for Finland. The Finnish FSC Association. http://finland.fsc.org/dokumentit.html. Accessed 4 Jan 2011.
18. Garcia-Gonzalo J, Peltola H, Briceño-Elizondo E, Kellomäki S (2007) Changed thinning regimes may increase carbon stock under climate change: a case study from a Finnish boreal forest. Clim Change 81: 431-454.
19. Gitzen RA, West SD, Maguire CC, Manning T, Halpern CB (2007) Response of terrestrial mammals to varying amounts and patterns of green-tree retention in Pacific Northwest forests. For Ecol Manage 251: 142-155.
20. Gustafsson L, Kouki J, Sverdrup-Thygeson A (2010) Tree retention as a conservation measure in clear-cut forests of northern Europe: a review of ecological consequences. Scand J For Res 25: 295-308.
21. Hanski I (2005) The shrinking world: ecological consequences of habitat loss. Excellence in ecology, vol 14. International Ecology Institute, Oldendorf/Luhe, pp 1-307.
22. Harmon ME, Franklin JF, Swanson FJ, Sollins P et al (1986) Ecology of coarse woody debris in temperate ecosystems. Adv Ecol Res 15: 133-302.
23. Hautala H, Jalonen J, Laaka-Lindberg S, Vanha-Majamaa I (2004) Impacts of retention felling on coarse woody debris (CWD) in mature boreal spruce forests in Finland. Biodivers Conserv 13: 1541-1554.
24. Hotanen JP, Nousiainen H, Mäkipää R, Reinikainen A, Tonteri T (2008) Metsätyypit-opas kasvupaikkojen luokitteluun. Metsäkustannus, Hämeenlinna, p 190.
25. Hynynen J (1993) Self-thinning models for even-aged stands of Pinus sylvestris, Picea abies and Betula pendula. Scand J For Res 8: 326-336.
26. Hynynen J, Ojansuu R (2003) Impact of plot size on individual-tree competition measures for growth and yield simulators. Can J For Res 33: 455-465.
27. Hynynen J, Ojansuu R, Hokka H, Salminen H, et-al (2002) Models for predicting stand development in MELA system. Research Paper 835. Finnish Forest Research Institute.
28. Hynynen J, Ahtikoski A, Siitonen J, Sievänen R, Liski J (2005) Applying the MOTTI simulator to analyse the effects of alternative management schedules on timber and non-timber production. For Ecol Manage 207: 5-18.
29. Hyvärinen E, Kouki J, Martikainen P (2006) Fire and green-tree retention in conservation of red-listed and rare deadwood-dependent beetles in Finnish boreal forests. Conserv Biol 20: 1711-1719.
30. Hyytiäinen K, Tahvonen O (2002) Economics of forest thinnings and rotation periods for Finnish conifer cultures. Scand J For Res 17: 274-288.
31. Ihalainen A, Mäkelä H (2009) Kuolleen puuston määrä Etelä- ja Pohjois-Suomessa 2004-2007. Metsätieteen aikakauskirja 1: 35-56.
32. Jonsson M, Ranius T, Ekvall H, Bostedt G et al (2006) Cost-efficiency of measures to increase the amount of substrate for red-listed saproxylic organisms in managed Norway spruce forests. Biol Conserv 127: 443-467.
33. Jonsson M, Ranius T, Ekvall H, Bostedt G (2010) Cost-effectiveness of silvicultural measures to increase substrate availability for wood-dwelling species: a comparison among boreal tree species. Scand J For Res 25: 46-60.
34. Jönsson MT, Fraver S, Jonsson BG, Dynesius M et al (2007) Eighteen years of tree mortality and structural change in an experimentally fragmented Norway spruce forest. For Ecol Manage 242: 306-313.
35. Junninen K, Similä M, Kouki J, Kotiranta H (2006) Assemblages of wood-inhabiting fungi along the gradients of succession and naturalness in boreal pine-dominated forests in Fennoscandia. Ecography 29: 75-83.
36. Junninen K, Penttilä R, Martikainen P (2007) Fallen retention tree aspen treees on clear-cuts can be important habitats for red-listed polypores: a case study in Finland. Biodivers Conserv 16: 475-490.
37. Juutinen A, Mäntymaa E, Mönkkönen M, Salmi S (2004) A cost-efficient approach to selecting forest stands for conserving species: a case study from northern Fennoscandia. For Sci 50: 527-539.
38. Koskela E, Ollikainen M, Pukkala T (2007) Biodiversity conservation in commercial boreal forestry: optimal rotation age and volume of retention. For Sci 53: 443-452.
39. Lonsdale D, Pautasso M, Holdenrieder O (2008) Wood-decaying fungi in the forest: conservation needs and management options. Eur J For Res 127: 1-22.
40. Mäkinen H, Hynynen J, Siitonen J, Sievänen R (2006) Predicting the decomposition of scots pine, norway spruce, and birch stems in Finland. Ecol Appl 16: 1865-1876.
41. Martikainen P (2001) Conservation of threatened saproxylic beetles: significance of retained aspen Populus tremula on clearcut areas. Ecol Bull 49: 205-218.
42. Matala J, Hynynen J, Miina J, Ojansuu R et al (2003) Comparison of a physiological model and a statistical model for prediction of growth and yield in boreal forests. Ecol Model 161: 95-116.
43. Metsähallitus (2004) Metsätalouden ympäristöopas. Metsähallitus.
44. Mönkkönen M, Reunanen P, Kotiaho JS, Juutinen A et al (2011) Cost-effective strategies to conserve boreal forest biodiversity and long-term landscape-level maintenance of habitats. Eur J For Res 130: 717-727.
45. Müller J, Bütler R (2010) A review of habitat thresholds for dead wood: a baseline for management recommendations in European forests. Eur J For Res 129: 981-992.
46. Müller J, Engel H, Blaschke M (2007) Assemblages of wood-inhabiting fungi related to silvicultural management intensity in beech forests in southern Germany. Eur J For Res 126: 513-527.
47. PEFC (2009) Metsänomistajakohtaisen PEFC-sertifioinnin kriteerit. PEFC Finland. http://www.pefc.fi/pages/fi/ajankohtaista/standardien-tarkistus-2008-09.php. Accessed 4 Jan 2011.
48. Ranius T, Ekvall H, Jonsson M, Bostedt G (2005) Cost-efficiency of measures to increase the amount of coarse woody debris in managed Norway spruce forests. For Ecol Manage 206: 119-133.
49. Rosenvald R, Lõhmus A (2008) For what, when, and where is green-tree retention better than clear-cutting? A review of the biodiversity aspects. For Ecol Manage 255: 1-15.
50. Sahlin E, Ranius T (2009) Habitat availability in forests and clearcuts for saproxylic beetles associated with aspen. Biodivers Conserv 18: 621-638.
51. Siitonen J (2001) Forest management, coarse woody debris and saproxylic organisms: Fennoscandian boreal forests as an example. Ecol Bull 49: 11-41.
52. Siitonen J, Martikainen P, Punttila P, Rauh J (2000) Coarse woody debris and stand characteristics in mature managed and old-growth boreal mesic forests in southern Finland. For Ecol Manage 128: 211-225.
53. Similä M, Kouki J, Martikainen P (2003) Saproxylic beetles in managed and seminatural scots pine forests: quality of dead wood matters. For Ecol Manage 174: 365-381.
54. Sippola AL, Similä M, Mönkkönen M, Jokimäki J (2004) Diversity of polyporous fungi (Polyporaceae) in northern boreal forests: effects of forest site type and logging intensity. Scand J For Res 19: 152-163.
55. Snäll T, Pennanen J, Kivistö L, Hanski I (2005) Modelling epiphyte metapopulation dynamics in a dynamic forest landscape. Oikos 109: 209-222.
56. Speight MCD (1989) Saproxylic invertebrates and their conservation. Council Eur Nat Environ Ser 42: 1-79.
57. TAPIO (2006) Hyvän metsänhoidon suositukset. Metsätalouden kehittämiskeskus Tapion julkaisusarja 2006(22): 1-100.
58. Tikkanen OP, Martikainen P, Hyvärinen E, Junninen K, Kouki J (2006) Red-listed boreal forest species of Finland: associations with forest structure, tree species, and decaying wood. Ann Zool Fenn 43: 373-383.
59. Tikkanen OP, Heinonen T, Kouki J, Matero J (2007) Habitat suitability models of saproxylic red-listed boreal forest species in long-term matrix management: cost-effective measures for multi-species conservation. Biol Conserv 140: 359-372.
60. Valkonen S, Ruuska J, Siipilehto J (2002) Effect of retained trees on the development of young Scots pine stands in southern Finland. For Ecol Manage 166: 227-243.
61. Work TT, Jacobs JA, Spence JR, Volney WJ (2010) High levels of green-tree retention are required to preserve ground beetle biodiversity in boreal mixedwood forests. Ecol Appl 20: 741-751.