Det privata skogsbrukets landskap – En studie av uthålligt brukande i Stenbrohultsområdet
Author
Summary, in English
In this investigation the possibilities to achieve three different goals for sustainable forestry in the landscape of Stenbrohult have been studied: Preserved biodiversity, balanced nutrient budgets, and a valuable production of timber. The consequences for the landscape and for the different estates were studied. The case study area of Stenbrohult is situated in southern Sweden, and is made up of 5200 ha of which 73 % is forest. Most of the forest is managed for timber production, and the area is divided into 89 different estates.
By using a model for preservation of biodiversity and a model for cation budgets, three different management programs were developed: Balance was a management that would preserve all species found in the landscape today, and keep the cation budgets in balance by regulating the level of harvest. Plus was a management that would not only preserve all species, but also get back some species that has been lost during historic times. The nutrient budgets in this program were balanced by adding cations artificially. The third program, bio balance, soil plus was a combination of the two programs previously mentioned. It was designed to preserve all species of today, and the nutrient budgets were balanced by adding cations artificially. In all three management alternatives
the economical production of timber was as high as possible within the limits set up by the other objectives. In many cases this was accomplished by cultivation of pure spruce monocultures on most of the forest land that was not set aside for biodiversity protection.
Two reference alternatives were constructed: Certification, where the forest was managed according to the Swedish standards for forest certification by FSC and PEFC, and forestry board where the forest was managed according to the advices usually given by the Swedish boards of forestry. All five management programs were run
through a projection model that simulated the different
management regimes over a period of 300 years. The economical result from the different programs was analysed, on a landscape level and on two different private estates, and the reference alternatives were evaluated regarding species preservation and cation budgets.
The economical result from bio balance, soil plus at the landscape level was about the same as for the reference alternatives. For plus it was slightly lower, and for balance it was considerably lower.
On the two different estates that were studied the results differed a lot. On one estate the economical result for balance, plus and bio balance, soil plus was higher than for the reference alternatives. On the other estate the result was much lower. The evaluation of the reference alternative showed that none of them reached the sustainability goals regarding the preservation of species and the nutrient balances. We conclude that in the landscape of Stenbrohult it is possible to reach a sustainable forest management when it comes to biodiversity, nutrient balances and economy. This could be obtained by a management like bio balance, soil plus where
large areas are set aside for biodiversity protection while the rest of the forest land is intensively managed with nutrient compensation. The main disadvantage is that it gives very different economical results on the different forest estates. It can also be negative from risk perspective since the timber production is very standardized all over the landscape.
By using a model for preservation of biodiversity and a model for cation budgets, three different management programs were developed: Balance was a management that would preserve all species found in the landscape today, and keep the cation budgets in balance by regulating the level of harvest. Plus was a management that would not only preserve all species, but also get back some species that has been lost during historic times. The nutrient budgets in this program were balanced by adding cations artificially. The third program, bio balance, soil plus was a combination of the two programs previously mentioned. It was designed to preserve all species of today, and the nutrient budgets were balanced by adding cations artificially. In all three management alternatives
the economical production of timber was as high as possible within the limits set up by the other objectives. In many cases this was accomplished by cultivation of pure spruce monocultures on most of the forest land that was not set aside for biodiversity protection.
Two reference alternatives were constructed: Certification, where the forest was managed according to the Swedish standards for forest certification by FSC and PEFC, and forestry board where the forest was managed according to the advices usually given by the Swedish boards of forestry. All five management programs were run
through a projection model that simulated the different
management regimes over a period of 300 years. The economical result from the different programs was analysed, on a landscape level and on two different private estates, and the reference alternatives were evaluated regarding species preservation and cation budgets.
The economical result from bio balance, soil plus at the landscape level was about the same as for the reference alternatives. For plus it was slightly lower, and for balance it was considerably lower.
On the two different estates that were studied the results differed a lot. On one estate the economical result for balance, plus and bio balance, soil plus was higher than for the reference alternatives. On the other estate the result was much lower. The evaluation of the reference alternative showed that none of them reached the sustainability goals regarding the preservation of species and the nutrient balances. We conclude that in the landscape of Stenbrohult it is possible to reach a sustainable forest management when it comes to biodiversity, nutrient balances and economy. This could be obtained by a management like bio balance, soil plus where
large areas are set aside for biodiversity protection while the rest of the forest land is intensively managed with nutrient compensation. The main disadvantage is that it gives very different economical results on the different forest estates. It can also be negative from risk perspective since the timber production is very standardized all over the landscape.
Department/s
Publishing year
2005
Language
Swedish
Full text
Document type
Report
Publisher
MISTRA, Stockholm
Topic
- Ecology
Keywords
- forestry
- biodiversity
- sustainable forest management
- Stenbrohult
Status
Published
Project
- SUFOR
ISBN/ISSN/Other
- ISBN: 91-5766851-5