![]() ![]() In some regions, government-supported efforts are trying to avert this spiral of converting Scots pine stands to Norway spruce (SFA 2017), and parallel efforts to increase the availability of alternative forage in the landscape may further help avoid such developments (Bergqvist et al. 2008), with the additional benefit of being relatively unpalatable to browsing herbivores (Lodin et al. A key motivator is that Norway spruce combines high-production volumes, good economy, well-established management regimes, and competitive growth rates (Ekö et al. As a result, Norway spruce is now the most commonly chosen tree species for regenerating sites in most southern Swedish regions, regardless of whether the site is of low, medium or high-soil fertility (SFA 2018c). A specific concern is the regeneration of what were traditionally Scots pine production stands with Norway spruce (SFA 2018a). In this regard since the early 1990s, the Swedish Forest Act gives equal status to environmental and production objectives (Gov. Though successful in terms of biomass production and harvesting efficiency, the widespread uniformity of current silviculture has raised concerns regarding impacts on forest biodiversity, the breadth of ecosystem services provided, and forest resilience (Ulmanen et al. Sweden achieves this primarily by rotationally clear felling even-aged stands of either native Norway spruce ( Picea abies) or native Scots pine ( Pinus sylvestris), which together comprise 80% of Sweden’s standing volume (SLU 2018). Swedish forestry is highly effective, enabling this high-latitude country with just 1% of the world’s forest area, to be the third largest exporter of pulp, paper and sawn timber (SFIF 2018). In Sweden, the majority of productive forest land is used for wood production, whereas approximately 10% is either formally or voluntarily protected (SLU 2018). Whereas intensive production forestry provides large amounts of biomass per unit area, it can have adverse implications for biodiversity and limit the ecosystem services provided, especially if extensive areas are uniformly managed (Felton et al. A key example is the growing global reliance on planted forests, which now comprise 7% of global forest area (FAO 2015), and the majority of forest lands in some European countries (Forest Europe 2011). Alternatively, production forest lands can be managed primarily for wood biomass, using uniform and intensive approaches to silviculture (Duncker et al. Production forests can provide a broad range of ecosystem services, including biomass for materials and energy, habitat for biodiversity, environments for recreation, and non-wood forest products. Our results are directly relevant to forest owners and policy-makers seeking information regarding the uncertainties, risks, and trade-offs likely to result from changing the tree species in production forests. ![]() reduced stand-level browsing damage), we identified a range of negative outcomes for biodiversity, production, esthetic and recreational values, as well as increased stand vulnerability to storm, frost, and drought damage, and potentially higher risks of pest and pathogen outbreak. We provide a condensed synthesis of the available evidence regarding the likely resultant implications for forest biodiversity and ecosystem services from this change in tree species. In Sweden, damage to young production forests by large browsing herbivores is helping to drive a development where sites traditionally regenerated with Scots pine ( Pinus sylvestris) are instead being regenerated with Norway spruce ( Picea abies). ![]() The choice of tree species used in production forests matters for biodiversity and ecosystem services. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |