Quantifying edge effect and patch size for multiple-use silviculture — a discussion paper

Abstract An argument is presented that the essential difference between even-aged and uneven-aged silviculture lies in the proportion of the patch that is influenced by edge effect. These edge effects may extend well beyond the normally accepted boundary between even-aged and uneven-aged stands. Examples are presented to show that there is not one static edge effect but many dynamic edge effects and that the differences between even-aged and uneven-aged stands are represented by a continuum rather than there being a distinct division between them. In the continuing debate on appropriate forest management practices, the differences between even-aged and uneven-aged silviculture have been oversimplified and are often represented in their extremes. In this paper it is argued that research to quantify the magnitude and the extent of these edge effects is necessary to provide the essential data to design patch sizes to meet specific multiple-use management objectives. The integration of these data would provide the basis for objective trade-offs between various forest values and for the objective evaluation of the long-term impact of different silvicultural practices.

[1]  D. Bowman,et al.  Establishment, suppression and growth of Eucalyptus delegatensis R.T. Baker in multiaged forests .II. Sapling growth and its environmental correlates , 1986 .

[2]  G. Peterken,et al.  Silviculture of Broadleaved Woodland. , 1984 .

[3]  J. Opie.  Predictability of Individual Tree Growth Using Various Definitions of Competing Basal Area , 1968 .

[4]  Carolyn Harrison,et al.  The Archipelago Approach to Conservation: Inspiring but Unproven@@@The Fragmented Forest: Island Biogeography Theory and the Preservation of Biotic Diversity. , 1984 .

[5]  Maxwell R. Jacobs,et al.  Growth habits of the Eucalypts. , 1955 .

[6]  J. Ovington,et al.  The woodchip industry: environmental effects of cutting and regeneration practices. , 1976 .

[7]  W. Incoll.  Effect of overwood trees on growth of young stands of Eucalyptus sieberi , 1979 .

[8]  P. G. Murphy,et al.  Disturbance versus edge effects in sugar-maple/beech forest fragments , 1990 .

[9]  T. W. Daniel,et al.  The Practice of Silviculture , 1936 .

[10]  John A. Helms,et al.  Principles of Silviculture , 1979 .

[11]  D. Bowman,et al.  Establishment, suppression and growth of eucalyptus delegatensis R.T. Baker in multiaged forests. III: Intraspecific allelopathy, competition between adult and juvenile for moisture and nutrients, and frost damage to seedlings , 1986 .

[12]  S. Childs,et al.  Effect of shadecards, shelterwoods, and clearcuts on temperature and moisture environments , 1987 .

[13]  R. Burns,et al.  Silvicultural systems for the major forest types of the United States , 1983 .

[14]  R. Florence,et al.  ESTABLISHMENT AND DEVELOPMENT OF REGENERATION IN SPOTTED GUM—IRONBARK FORESTS , 1966 .

[15]  N. Burrows,et al.  Regeneration of Eucalyptus wandoo following fire , 1990 .

[16]  J. Franklin,et al.  EFFECTS OF VARIOUS HARVESTING METHODS ON FOREST REGENERATION , 1973 .

[17]  W. Fairbairn.  Some Observations on Group Regeneration , 1963 .

[18]  I. Rotheram.  Suppression of growth of surrounding regeneration by veteran trees of karri (Eucalyptus diversicolor) , 1983 .

[19]  D. Ratkowsky,et al.  Growth of Eucalyptus delegatensis following partial harvesting of multi-aged stands , 1987 .

[20]  R. Florence.  The silvicultural decision , 1976 .

[21]  R. Ribe.  The aesthetics of forestry: What has empirical preference research taught us? , 1989 .

[22]  C. Pigott,et al.  Man and the Mediterranean Forest. A History of Resource Depletion. , 1981 .