RESUMEN
Meeting food/wood demands with increasing human population and per-capita consumption is a pressing conservation issue, and is often framed as a choice between land sparing and land sharing. Although most empirical studies comparing the efficacy of land sparing and sharing supported land sparing, land sharing may be more efficient if its performance is tested by rigorous experimental design and habitat structures providing crucial resources for various species-keystone structures-are clearly involved. We launched a manipulative experiment to retain naturally regenerated broad-leaved trees when harvesting conifer plantations in central Hokkaido, northern Japan. We surveyed birds in harvested treatments, unharvested plantation controls, and natural forest references 1-year before the harvest and for three consecutive postharvest years. We developed a hierarchical community model separating abundance and space use (territorial proportion overlapping treatment plots) subject to imperfect detection to assess population consequences of retention harvesting. Application of the model to our data showed that retaining some broad-leaved trees increased the total abundance of forest birds over the harvest rotation cycle. Specifically, a preharvest survey showed that the amount of broad-leaved trees increased forest bird abundance in a concave manner (i.e., in the form of diminishing returns). After harvesting, a small amount of retained broad-leaved trees mitigated negative harvesting impacts on abundance, although retention harvesting reduced the space use. Nevertheless, positive retention effects on the postharvest bird density as the product of abundance and space use exhibited a concave form. Thus, small profit reductions were shown to yield large increases in forest bird abundance. The difference in bird abundance between clearcutting and low amounts of broad-leaved tree retention increased slightly from the first to second postharvesting years. We conclude that retaining a small amount of broad-leaved trees may be a cost-effective on-site conservation approach for the management of conifer plantations. The retention of 20-30 broad-leaved trees per ha may be sufficient to maintain higher forest bird abundance than clearcutting over the rotation cycle. Retention approaches can be incorporated into management systems using certification schemes and best management practices. Developing an awareness of the roles and values of naturally regenerated trees is needed to diversify plantations.
Asunto(s)
Conservación de los Recursos Naturales , Árboles , Animales , Humanos , Bosques , Ecosistema , Aves , BiodiversidadRESUMEN
The multi-scale approach to conserving forest biodiversity has been used in Sweden since the 1980s, a period defined by increased reserve area and conservation actions within production forests. However, two thousand forest-associated species remain on Sweden's red-list, and Sweden's 2020 goals for sustainable forests are not being met. We argue that ongoing changes in the production forest matrix require more consideration, and that multi-scale conservation must be adapted to, and integrated with, production forest development. To make this case, we summarize trends in habitat provision by Sweden's protected and production forests, and the variety of ways silviculture can affect biodiversity. We discuss how different forestry trajectories affect the type and extent of conservation approaches needed to secure biodiversity, and suggest leverage points for aiding the adoption of diversified silviculture. Sweden's long-term experience with multi-scale conservation and intensive forestry provides insights for other countries trying to conserve species within production landscapes.
Asunto(s)
Agricultura Forestal , Árboles , Biodiversidad , Conservación de los Recursos Naturales , Bosques , SueciaRESUMEN
The Ecosystem Management Emulating Natural Disturbances (EMEND) project tests the hypothesis that varying levels of green tree retention maintain and retain forest biodiversity better than conventional clear-cutting. We studied epigaeic spiders to assess biodiversity changes 2, 5, and 10 yr following a range of partial retention harvests (clear-cut, 10-75% retention) and unharvested controls in four boreal mixedwood cover types. A total of 56 371 adult spiders representing 220 species was collected using pitfall traps. Lasting effects on forest structure were proportional to harvest intensity. These changes strongly influenced spider richness, abundance, and species composition, as well as assemblage recovery. Distinctive assemblages were associated with disturbance level, especially with partial harvests (≤50% retention), and these were dominated by open-habitat species even 10 yr after harvest. Assemblages were more similar to those of controls in the highest (75%) retention treatment, but significant recovery toward the structure of pre-disturbance assemblages was not detected for any prescription in any cover type. Although early responses to retention harvest suggested positive effects on spider assemblages, these are better explained as lag effects after harvest because assemblages were less similar to those of unharvested controls 5 yr post-harvest, and only minor recovery was observed 10 yr following harvest. Retention of forest biodiversity decreased over time, especially in conifer stands and the lower (10-50%) retention treatments. Overall, retention harvests retained biodiversity and promoted landscape heterogeneity somewhat better than clear-cutting; however, there was a clear gradient of response and no retention "threshold" for conservation can be recommended on the basis of our data. Furthermore, results suggest that retention harvest prescriptions should be adjusted for cover type. We show that low retention ameliorated impacts in broadleaved forests characteristic of earlier stages in mixedwood succession, but only higher retention was associated with less impact in successionally older conifer forests. Although these short-term responses (10 yr) of spider assemblages support use of retention harvests, understanding the true conservation merit of these practices, relative to conventional approaches, requires evaluation over longer time scales, with work more focused on recovery of biodiversity than on its preservation after harvest.