Just a Ditch in Forest? Reconsidering Draining in the Context of Sustainable Forest Management

BioScience

Volumn 65, Issue 11, 2015, Pages 1066-1076

  Lõhmus, Asko ^a   Remm, Liina ^a   Rannap, Riinu ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TARTU   (Estonia)

Author keywords

applied ecology; biodiversity; ecosystem engineering; forestry; wetlands

Indexed keywords

EID: 84947605223     PISSN: 00063568     EISSN: 15253244     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/biosci/biv136     Document Type: Article

References (73)

1. Abolina A, Jermacane S, Laivinš M. 2001. Postdrainage dynamics of the ground vegetation in transitional mire. Baltic Forestry 7: 19-28.
2. Ahtikoski A, Kojola S, Hökkä H, Penttilä T. 2008. Ditch network maintenance in peatland forest as a private investment: Short- and long-term effects on financial performance at stand level. Mires and Peat 3 (art. 3). (3 September 2015; http://mires-and-peat.net/pages/volumes/map03/map0303.php)
3. Ahtikoski A, Salminen H, Hökkä H, Kojola S, Penttilä T. 2012. Optimising stand management on peatlands: The case of northern Finland. Canadian Journal for Forest Research 42: 247-259.
4. Bernes C. 2011. Biodiversity in Sweden. Swedish Environmental Protection Agency.
5. Bušs KK. 1989. Expressing the dynamics of drained forests in terms of typology. Pages 168-177 in Melekhov VIS, ed. Dynamic Typology of the Forest. Agropromizdat
6. Ceballos DS, Frangi J, Jobbágy EG. 2013. Soil volume and carbon storage shifts in drained and afforested wetlands of the Paraná River Delta. Biogeochemistry 112: 359-372.
7. Dahl TE. 2011. Status and Trends of Wetlands in the Conterminous United States 2004 to 2009. US Fish and Wildlife Service, Fisheries and Habitat Conservation.
8. Fang S, Xu X, Yu X, Li Z. 2005. Poplar in wetland agroforestry: A case study of ecological benefits, site productivity, and economics. Wetlands Ecology and Management 13: 93-104.
9. Fenton N, Lecomte N, Légaré S, Bergeron Y. 2005. Paludification in black spruce (Picea mariana) forests of eastern Canada: Potential factors and management implications. Forest Ecology and Management 213: 151-159.
10. Futter MN, Keskitalo ECH, Ellison D, Pettersson M, Strom A, Andersson E, Nordin J, Löfgren S, Bishop K, Laudon H. 2011. Forests, forestry, and the Water Framework Directive in Sweden: A trans-disciplinary commentary. Forests 2: 261-282.
11. Greco SE, Larsen, EW. 2014. Ecological design of multifunctional open channels for flood control and conservation planning. Landscape and Urban Planning 131: 14-26.
12. Haapalehto T, Kotiaho JS, Matilainen R, Tahvanainen T. 2014. The effects of long-term drainage and subsequent restoration on water table level and pore water chemistry in boreal peatlands. Journal of Hydrology 519B: 1493-1505.
13. Hain H, Ahas R. 2007. Can forest certification improve forest management? Case study of the FSC certified Estonian State Forest Management Centre. International Forestry Review 9: 759-770.
14. Hájek T, Tuittila E-S, Ilomets M, Laiho R. 2009. Light responses of mire mosses - a key to survival after water-level drawdown? Oikos 118: 240-250.
15. Hargreaves KJ, Milne R, Cannell MGR. 2003. Carbon balance of afforested peatland in Scotland. Forestry 76: 299-317.
16. Harrison ME. 2013. Using conceptual models to understand ecosystem function and impacts of human activities in tropical peat-swamp forests. Wetlands 33: 257-267.
17. Heikurainen L. 1964. Improvement of tree growth on poorly drained peat soils. International Reviews of Forest Research 1: 39-113.
18. Hobbs RJ, Higgs ES, Hall CM, eds. Novel Ecosystems: Intervening in the New Ecological World Order. Wiley-Blackwell.
19. Holden J, Evans MG, Burt TP, Horton M. 2006. Impacts of land drainage on peatland hydrology. Journal of Environmental Quality 35: 1764-1778.
20. Hollmen A, Välimäki P, Itämies J, Oksanen J. 2008. The value of open power line habitat in conservation of ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) associated with mires. Journal of Insect Conservation 12: 163-177.
21. Homyack JA, O'Bryan CJ, Thornton JE, Baldwin RF. 2014. Anuran assemblages associated with roadside ditches in a managed pine landscape. Forest Ecology and Management 334: 217-231.
22. Hoover JP. 2006. Water depth influences nest predation for a wetland-dependent bird in fragmented bottomland forests. Biological Conservation 127: 37-45.
23. Hotanen JP, Nousiainen H, Paalamo P. 1999. Vegetation succession and diversity on Teuravuoma experimental drainage area in northern Finland. Suo 50: 55-82.
24. Jadwiszczak KA, Jabłońska E, Kłosowski S, Banaszek A. 2015. Genetic variation and habitat conditions in Betula humilis Schrk. populations in Poland, Belarus and Latvia. Plant Biosystems 149: 433-441.
25. Joosten H, Clarke D. 2002. Wise Use of Mires and Peatlands: Background and Principles Including a Framework for Decisionmaking. International Mire Conservation Group and International Peat Society.
26. Jutras S, Prévost M. 2013. Le drainage sylvicole. Pages 178-195 in Larouche C, Guillemette F, Raymond P, Saucier JP, eds. Le guide sylvicole du Québec: Les concepts et l'application de la sylviculture. Les Publications du Québec.
27. Karpechko YV, Bondarik NL. 2010. Hydrological Impact of Forest Management and Forest Industry in the Taiga Region of North European Russia. Karelian Research Centre, Russian Academy of Sciences.
28. Kettridge N, Turetsky MR, Sherwood JH, Thompson DK, Miller CA, Benscoter BW, Flannigan MD, Wotton BM, Waddington, JM. 2015. Moderate drop in water table increases peatland vulnerability to postfire regime shift. Scientific Reports 5 (art. 8063).
29. Kitzes J, Wackernagel M, Loh J, Peller A, Goldfinger S, Cheng D, Tea K. 2008. Shrink and share: Humanity's present and future ecological footprint. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 363: 467-475.
30. Kojola S, Ahtikoski A, Hökkä H, Penttilä T. 2012. Profitability of alternative management regimes in Scots pine stands on drained peatlands. European Journal of Forest Research 131: 413-426.
31. Konovalov VN, Zarubina LV. 2010. Ecophysiological Characteristics of Conifers on Drained Soil. Northern Federal University.
32. Kopeć D, Ratajczyk N, Wolańska-Kamińska A, Walisch M, Kruk A. 2014. Floodplain forest vegetation response to hydroengineering and climatic pressure: A five-decade comparative analysis in the Bzura River Valley (Central Poland). Forest Ecology and Management 314: 120-130.
33. Kozlowski TT. 2002. Physiological-ecological impacts of flooding on riparian forest ecosystems. Wetlands 22: 550-561.
34. Laiho R. 2006. Decomposition in peatlands: Reconciling seemingly contrasting results on the impacts of lowered water levels. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 38: 2011-2024.
35. Laine J, Vasander, H., Sallantaus, T. 1995. Ecological effects of peatland drainage for forestry. Environmental Reviews 3: 282-303.
36. Lamsodis R, Morkunas V, Poškus V, Povilaitis A. 2006. Ecological approach to management of open drains. Irrigation and Drainage 55: 479-490.
37. Lindenmayer DB, Hobbs RJ, Likens GE, Krebs CJ, Banks SC. 2011. Newly discovered landscape traps produce regime shifts in wet forests. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108: 15887-15891.
38. Lindenmayer DB, et al. 2012. A major shift to the retention approach for forestry can help resolve some global forest sustainability issues. Conservation Letters 5: 421-431.
39. Lõhmus E. 1981. Anthropogenous forest site types on drained peatlands. Pages 77-90 in Laasimer L, ed. Anthropogenous Changes in the Plant Cover of Estonia. Institute of Zoology and Botany, Academy of Sciences of the Estonian SSR.
40. Maanavilja L, Aapala K, Haapalehto T, Kotiaho JS, Tuittila ES. 2014. Impact of drainage and hydrological restoration on vegetation structure in boreal spruce swamp forests. Forest Ecology and Management 330: 115-125.
41. Macdonald SE, Yin F. 1999. Factors influencing size inequality in peatland black spruce and tamarack: Evidence from postdrainage release growth. Journal of Ecology 87: 404-412.
42. Marks CO, Nislow KH, Magilligan FJ. 2014. Quantifying flooding regime in floodplain forests to guide river restoration. Elementa: Science of the Anthropocene 2: 31. doi:10.12952/journal.elementa.000031
43. Miettinen J, Shi C, Liew SC. 2012. Two decades of destruction in Southeast Asia's peat swamp forests. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 10: 124-128.
44. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. 2005. Ecosystems and Human Wellbeing: Biodiversity Synthesis. World Resources Institute.
45. Minayeva T, Sirin A. 2009. A Quick Scan of Peatlands in Central and Eastern Europe. Wetlands International.
46. Moilanen M, Silfverberg K, Hokkanen TJ. 2002. Effects of wood ash on the tree growth, vegetation, and substrate quality of a drained mire: A case study. Forest Ecology and Management 171: 321-338.
47. Nitsenko AA. 1951. Observations of vegetation cover dynamics under influence of drainage. Botanicheskii Zhurnal 36: 349-355. (17 September 2015; http://www.zooloogia.ut.ee/sites/default/files/nitsenko-1951-vegetation-changes-after-draining.pdf)
48. Paavilainen E, Päivänen J. 1995. Peatland Forestry: Ecology and Principles. Springer.
49. Page S, et al. 2009. Restoration ecology of lowland tropical peatlands in Southeast Asia: Current knowledge and future research directions. Ecosystems 12: 888-905.
50. Päivänen J, Hånell B. 2012. Peatland ecology and forestry: A sound approach. University of Helsinki Department of Forest Sciences Publications 3: 1-267.
51. Posa MRC, Wijedasa LS, Corlett RT. 2011. Biodiversity and conservation of tropical peat swamp forests. BioScience 61: 49-57.
52. Remm L, Lõhmus P, Leis M, Lõhmus A. 2013. Long-term impacts of forest ditching on nonaquatic biodiversity: Conservation perspectives for a novel ecosystem. PLOS ONE 8 (art. e63086).
53. Remm L, Lõhmus A, Rannap R. 2015. Temporary and small water bodies in human-impacted forests: An assessment in Estonia. Boreal Environment Research 20: 1-17. (3 September 2015; www.borenv.net/BER/pdfs/preprints/Remm.pdf)
54. Rempel RS, Andison DW, Hannon SJ. 2004. Guiding principles for developing an indicator and monitoring framework. Forestry Chronicle 80: 82-90.
55. Sakovets VI, ed. 2005. Silvicultural and Ecological Aspects of Economic Activities in Forests of Karelia. Karelian Research Centre, Russian Academy of Sciences.
56. San-Miguel-Ayanz J, et al. 2011. Criterion 4: Maintenance, conservation, and appropriate enhancement of biological diversity in forest ecosystems. Pages 65-97 in Barbati A, Bastrup-Birk A, Baycheva T, Bonhomme C, Bozzano M, Bücking W, eds. State of Europe's Forests 2011: Status and Trends in Sustainable Forest Management in Europe. Forest Europe, United Nations Economic Commission for Europe and Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations.
57. Sarkkola S, Hökkä H, Penttilä T. 2004. Natural development of stand structure in peatland Scots pine following drainage: Results based on longterm monitoring of permanent sample plots. Silva Fennica 38: 405-412.
58. Sarkkola S, Nieminen M, Koivusalo H, Laurén A, Ahti E, Launiainen S, Nikinmaa S, Marttila H, Laine J, Hökkä H. 2013. Domination of growing-season evapotranspiration over runoff makes ditch network maintenance in mature peatland forests questionable. Mires and Peat 11 (art. 2). (3 September 2015; http://mires-and-peat.net/pages/volumes/map11/map1102.php)
59. Schultz B, De Wrachien D. 2002. Irrigation and drainage systems research and development in the 21st century. Irrigation and Drainage 51: 311-327.
60. Sikkema R, Faaij APC, Ranta T, Heinimö J, Gerasimov YY, Karjalainen T, Nabuurs GJ. 2014. Mobilization of biomass for energy from boreal forests in Finland and Russia under present sustainable forest management certification and new sustainability requirements for solid biofuels. Biomass and Bioenergy 71: 23-36.
61. Similä M, Aapala K, Penttinen J. 2014. Ecological Restoration in Drained Peatlands: Best Practices from Finland. Metsähallitus Natural Services.
62. Stanturf JA, Palik BJ, Dumroese RK. 2014. Contemporary forest restoration: A review emphasizing function. Forest Ecology and Management 331: 292-323.
63. Strack M, ed. 2008. Peatlands and Climate Change. International Peat Society.
64. Sun G, McNulty SG, Shepard JP, Amatya DM, Riekerk H, Comerford NB, Skaggs W, Swift L Jr. 2001. Effects of timber management on the hydrology of wetland forests in the southern United States. Forest Ecology and Management 143: 227-236.
65. Toberman H, Laiho R, Evans C, Artz R, Fenner N, Straková P, Freeman C. 2010. Long-term drainage for forestry inhibits extracellular phenol oxidase activity in Finnish boreal mire peat. European Journal of Soil Science 61: 950-957
66. Tolvanen A, Juutinen A, Svento R. 2013. Preferences of local people for the use of peatlands: The case of the richest peatland region in Finland. Ecology and Society 18: 19.
67. Turetsky MR, Donahue WF, Benscoter BW. 2011. Experimental drying intensifies burning and carbon losses in a northern peatland. Nature Communications 2 (art. 514). doi:10.1038/ncomms1523
68. Van Breemen N. 1995. How Sphagnum bogs down other plants. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 10: 270-275.
69. Vasander H, Laiho R, Laine J. 1997. Changes in species diversity in peatlands drained for forestry. Pages 109-119 in Trertin C, et al., eds. Northern Forested Wetlands: Ecology and Management. Lewis.
70. Vuori KM, Joensuu I. 1996. Impact of forest drainage on the macroinvertebrates of a small boreal headwater stream: Do buffer zones protect lotic biodiversity? Biological Conservation 77: 87-95.
71. Waddington JM, Morris PJ, Kettridge N, Granath G, Thompson DK, Moore PA. 2015. Hydrological feedbacks in northern peatlands. Ecohydrology 8:113-127.
72. Yefremova TT, Yefremov SP. 1996. Ecological effects of peat fire on forested bog ecosystems. Pages 350-357 in Goldammer JG, Furyaev VV, eds. Fire in Ecosystems of Boreal Eurasia. Kluwer Academic.
73. Zhang B, Chang L, Ni Z, Callaham MA, Sun X, Wu D. 2014. Effects of land use changes on winter-active Collembola in Sanjiang Plain of China. Applied Soil Ecology 83: 51-58.