Development of integrated ecological standards of sustainable forest management at an operational scale

Within Canada, and internationally, an increasing demand that forests be managed to maintain all resources has led to the development of criteria and indicators of sustainable forest management. There is, however, a lack of understanding, at an operational scale, how to evaluate and compare forest management activities to ensure the sustainability of all resources. For example, nationally, many of the existing indicators are too broad to be used directly at a local scale of forest management; provincially, regulations are often too prescriptive and rigid to allow for adaptive management; and forest certification programs, often based largely on public or stake-holder opinion instead of scientific understanding, may be too local in nature to permit a comparison of operations across a biome. At an operational scale indicators must be relevant to forest activities and ecologically integrated. In order to aid decision-makers in the adaptive management necessary for sustainable forest management, two types of indicators are identified: those that are prescriptive to aid in planning forest management and those that are evaluative to be used in monitoring and suggesting improvements. An integrated approach to developing standards based on an ecosystem management paradigm is outlined for the boreal forest where the variability inherent in natural systems is used to define the limits within which forest management is ecologically sustainable. Sustainability thresholds are thus defined by ecosystem response after natural disturbances. For this exercise, standards are proposed for biodiversity, forest productivity via regeneration, soil conservation and aquatic resources. For each of these standards, planning indicators are developed for managing forest conditions while forest values are evaluated by environmental indicators, thus leading to a continuous cycle of improvement. Approaches to developing critical thresholds and corresponding prescriptions are also outlined. In all cases, the scale of evaluation is clearly related to the landscape (or FMU) level while the stand level is used for measurement purposes. In this view the forest should be managed as a whole even though forest interventions are usually undertaken at the stand level.

[1]  P. Magnan,et al.  Impact of logging and natural fires on fish communities of Laurentian Shield lakes , 2000 .

[2]  R. Carignan,et al.  Comparative impacts of fire and forest harvesting on water quality in Boreal Shield lakes , 2000 .

[3]  K. Kirby.  MANAGING FORESTS FOR BIODIVERSITY , 2000 .

[4]  M. Côté,et al.  Analysis of the relationship among stakeholders affected by sustainable forest management and forest certification , 1999 .

[5]  Christian Messier,et al.  Thinking and acting differently for sustainable management of the boreal forest , 1999 .

[6]  P. Burton,et al.  Managing forest harvesting to maintain old growth in boreal and sub-boreal forests , 1999 .

[7]  R. Carignan,et al.  Impact of wildfire and clear-cutting in the boreal forest on methyl mercury in zooplankton , 1999 .

[8]  Alain Leduc,et al.  Forest management guidelines based on natural disturbance dynamics: Stand- and forest-level considerations , 1999 .

[9]  S. T. Friedman.  FOREST REGENERATION PRACTICES : HOW REGIONAL CERTIFICATION STANDARDS COMPARE , 1999 .

[10]  D. Paré,et al.  Predicting the effect of forest harvesting on soil nutrient availability in the boreal forest , 1999 .

[11]  F. Chapin,et al.  Sustainable Development of the Boreal Forest: Interaction of Ecological, Social, and Business Feedbacks , 1998 .

[12]  M. Mönkkönen,et al.  Ecological Sustainability of Birds in Boreal Forests , 1998 .

[13]  P. Richard,et al.  Variability in Fire Frequency and Forest Composition in Canada'sSoutheastern Boreal Forest: A Challenge for Sustainable ForestManagement , 1998 .

[14]  B. Shindler.  Does the public have a role in forest management? Canadian and U.S. perspectives , 1998 .

[15]  T. Rotherham,et al.  Canadian progress toward SFM system certification , 1998 .

[16]  T. Erdle.  Progress toward sustainable forest management: insight from the New Brunswick experience , 1998 .

[17]  G. Lapointe.  Sustainable forest management certification: The Canadian programme , 1998 .

[18]  James A. Baker,et al.  Selection of vertebrate wildlife indicators for monitoring sustainable forest management in Ontario , 1998 .

[19]  G. Weetman.  A forest management perspective on sustained site productivity , 1998 .

[20]  Thom A. Erdle,et al.  Forest management design for contemporary forestry , 1998 .

[21]  D. N. Roy,et al.  Chemical changes in the stem matrix of three tree species exposed to fluoride emissions from an aluminium smelter , 1998 .

[22]  F. Bunnell.  Operational criteria for sustainable forestry: focussing on the essence , 1997 .

[23]  David J. Rapport,et al.  What is ecosystem health , 1997 .

[24]  D. Gilmore.  Ecosystem management — A needs driven, resource-use philosophy , 1997 .

[25]  C. Binkley.  Preserving nature through intensive plantation forestry: The case for forestland allocation with illustrations from British Columbia , 1997 .

[26]  A. Sizykh,et al.  Sustainable Development of Forests as a Way to Preserve the Natural Basis of Forestry , 1997 .

[27]  Ajith H. Perera,et al.  Modelling the effect of spatial scale and correlated fire disturbances on forest age distribution , 1997 .

[28]  S. Woodley,et al.  Forest management guidelines to protect native biodiversity in the Fundy Model Forest , 1997 .

[29]  James A. Burger,et al.  Limitations of Bioassays for Monitoring Forest Soil Productivity: Rationale and Example , 1996 .

[30]  T. Norton.  Conservation of biological diversity in temperate and boreal forest ecosystems , 1996 .

[31]  P. Corona,et al.  Assessing and Comparing Forest Plantations Proximity to Natural Conditions , 1996 .

[32]  T. More,et al.  Forestry's Fuzzy Concepts: An Examination of Ecosystem Management , 1996 .

[33]  Michael A. Toman,et al.  Sustainable Forest Ecosystems and Management: A Review Article , 1996, Forest Science.

[34]  R. L. Knight.  Aldo Leopold, the land ethic, and ecosystem management , 1996 .

[35]  Bruce Shindler,et al.  Public Judgments of Adaptive Management: A Response from Forest Communities , 1996 .

[36]  Gary J. Roloff,et al.  Using a coarse-filter approach with species assessment for ecosystem management , 1996 .

[37]  Russ Hughes.  Sustainable forest management certification: An auditor's perspective , 1996 .

[38]  T. Rotherham,et al.  Forest management certification — Objectives, international background and the Canadian program , 1996 .

[39]  E. Rawlinson.  CSA sustainable forest management systems: Getting ready , 1996 .

[40]  M. Brunson.  Integrating "Human Habitat" Requirements into Ecosystem Management Strategies: A Case Study , 1996 .

[41]  Alain Leduc,et al.  FOREST DYNAMICS MODELLING UNDER NATURAL FIRE CYCLES : A TOOL TO DEFINE NATURAL MOSAIC DIVERSITY FOR FOREST MANAGEMENT , 2004 .

[42]  R. G. Wright,et al.  Using ecological criteria to evaluate wilderness planning options in Idaho , 1995 .

[43]  L. F. Riley,et al.  Criteria and indicators of sustainable forest management in Canada , 1995 .

[44]  Thomas R. Stanley,et al.  Ecosystem management and the arrogance of humanism , 1995 .

[45]  Therese M. Donovan,et al.  Regional Forest Fragmentation and the Nesting Success of Migratory Birds , 1995, Science.

[46]  K. McGarigal,et al.  Relationships Between Landscape Structure and Breeding Birds in the Oregon Coast Range , 1995 .

[47]  Robert L. Late.  Defining Soil Quality for a Sustainable Environment , 1995 .

[48]  S. Carpenter,et al.  Ecosystem experiments. , 1995, Science.

[49]  D. Finch,et al.  Single-species versus multiple-species approaches for management , 1995 .

[50]  H. Andrén,et al.  Effects of habitat fragmentation on birds and mammals in landscapes with different proportions of suitable habitat: a review , 1994 .

[51]  W. J. Dyck,et al.  Impacts of Forest Harvesting on Long-Term Site Productivity , 1994, Springer Netherlands.

[52]  P. Shrivastava.  CASTRATED Environment: GREENING Organizational Studies , 1994 .

[53]  F. Swanson,et al.  LANDSCAPE PATTERN RESPONSE TO CHANGES IN PATTERN GENERATION RULES: LAND-USE LEGACIES IN FORESTRY , 1994 .

[54]  R. Holthausen,et al.  Assessment of Terrestrial Species and Ecosystems , 1994 .

[55]  R. E. Grumbine.  What Is Ecosystem Management , 1994 .

[56]  D. Johnson,et al.  Reasons for Concern Over Impacts of Harvesting , 1994 .

[57]  R. Miller,et al.  EVIDENCE FOR LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY CHANGE AS PROVIDED BY FIELD TRIALS , 1994 .

[58]  T. J. Carleton,et al.  Woody vegetation responses to fire versus clear-cutting logging: A comparative survey in the central Canadian boreal forest , 1994 .

[59]  J. Niemelä,et al.  Forestry and the boreal fauna: matching management with natural forest dynamics , 1994 .

[60]  Y. Bergeron,et al.  Changes in the forest floor of Canadian southern boreal forest after disturbance , 1993 .

[61]  J. Meyer,et al.  The Ecological Basis of Sustainability. , 1993, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[62]  Jyrki Kangas,et al.  Integrating biodiversity into forest management planning and decision-making , 1993 .

[63]  D. Martell,et al.  A decision support system that links short-term silvicultural operating plans with long-term forest-level strategic plans , 1993 .

[64]  Joseph Buongiorno,et al.  Long- and short-term effects of alternative cutting regimes on economic returns and ecological diversity in mixed-species forests , 1993 .

[65]  J. Franklin.  Preserving Biodiversity: Species, Ecosystems, or Landscapes? , 1993, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[66]  D. L. Booth,et al.  Natural forest landscape management: A strategy for Canada , 1993 .

[67]  E. Johnson.  VEGETATION DYNAMICS : STUDIES FROM THE NORTH AMERICAN BOREAL FOREST , 1993 .

[68]  T. Erdle,et al.  Balancing Act: Environmental Issues in Forestry , 1998 .

[69]  Harald Sverdrup,et al.  Calculating critical loads of acid deposition with PROFILE — A steady-state soil chemistry model , 1992 .

[70]  P. Burton,et al.  The value of managing for biodiversity , 1992 .

[71]  R. Doucet.  The influence of stocking of regeneration on the yield of naturally regenerated jack pine and black spruce stands , 1991 .

[72]  D. Sprugel,et al.  Disturbance, equilibrium, and environmental variability: What is ‘Natural’ vegetation in a changing environment? , 1991 .

[73]  H. S. Crawford,et al.  PREDATION BY BIRDS ON SPRUCE BUDWORM CHORISTONEURA FUMIFERANA: FUNCTIONAL, NUMERICAL, AND TOTAL RESPONSES' , 1989 .

[74]  C. S. Robbins,et al.  Habitat area requirements of breeding forest birds of the middle Atlantic states , 1989 .

[75]  Paul G. R. Smith,et al.  Evaluating natural areas using multiple criteria: Theory and practice , 1987 .

[76]  G. Whitney,et al.  Relation of Michigan's Presettlement Pine Forests to Substrate and Disturbance History , 1986 .

[77]  John B. Theberge,et al.  A review of criteria for evaluating natural areas , 1986 .

[78]  P. Helle,et al.  Population trends of North Finnish land birds in relation to their habitat selection and changes in forest structure , 1986 .

[79]  Anne Lohrli.  Chapman and Hall , 1985 .

[80]  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 .

[81]  J. Takekawa,et al.  How Much is an Evening Grosbeak Worth , 1984 .

[82]  R T Holmes,et al.  Bird Predation on Forest Insects: An Exclosure Experiment , 1979, Science.

[83]  Thomas G. Siccama,et al.  Presettlement and Present Forest Vegetation in Northern Vermont with Special Reference to Chittenden County , 1971 .