The effective hydrological neighborhood: A new concept to formulate harvest area constraints

Abstract Forest managers have struggled to develop several measures to mitigate the impacts of logging operations on soil erosion. Two measures have consisted in considering slope restrictions and limiting the size of clearcut harvest areas in timber harvest scheduling models by means of adjacency constraints. However, these constraints build on an externally predefined limit on harvest area valid to all stands regardless of their topographic features. Thus, we present a methodology to formulate maximum harvest area constraints for each stand on the basis of its topographic features and hydrological connectivity. Using a grid-based digital elevation model, we first introduce the concept of the “Effective Hydrological Neighborhood” and propose a method to compute it through the analyses of water flow directions and the LS topographic factor of the USLE. Then, we develop a recursive procedure to compute for each stand the maximum harvest area in any single period and in consecutive periods of the planning horizon. Finally, we formulate a set of maximum harvest area constraints for each stand. The methodology is applied to a eucalyptus plantation in northwestern Spain. The constraints can then be considered in strategic timber harvest scheduling models along with other constraints. In this way, the harvest plans derived at this planning level can be compatible with later solutions considering hydrological connectivity concerns at the tactical level.

[1]  Panos Panagos,et al.  Assessment of the impacts of clear-cutting on soil loss by water erosion in Italian forests: First comprehensive monitoring and modelling approach , 2017 .

[2]  Karl R. Walters,et al.  Spatial and temporal allocation of stratum-based harvest schedules , 1993 .

[3]  R. Moore,et al.  PHYSICAL HYDROLOGY AND THE EFFECTS OF FOREST HARVESTING IN THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST: A REVIEW 1 , 2005 .

[4]  Alan T. Murray,et al.  Scale and Unit Specification Influences in Harvest Scheduling with Maximum Area Restrictions , 2002 .

[5]  Charles ReVelle,et al.  Temporal and spatial harvesting of irregular systems of parcels , 1996 .

[6]  D. H. Van Lear,et al.  Sediment and nutrient export in runoff from burned and harvested pine watersheds in the South Carolina Piedmont , 1985 .

[7]  W. Tych,et al.  Long-term responses of rainforest erosional systems at different spatial scales to selective logging and climatic change , 2011, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[8]  Sedat Keleş,et al.  Spatial forest planning: A review , 2005 .

[9]  Jeffrey J. McDonnell,et al.  Hydrological connectivity of hillslopes and streams: Characteristic time scales and nonlinearities , 2010 .

[10]  Ravi Prabhu,et al.  Factors affecting runoff and soil erosion: plot-level soil loss monitoring for assessing sustainability of forest management , 2003 .

[11]  Andrew C. Whitaker,et al.  Application of the distributed hydrology soil vegetation model to Redfish Creek, British Columbia: model evaluation using internal catchment data , 2003 .

[12]  T. Bernhardsen.  Geographic Information Systems: An Introduction , 1999 .

[13]  Gregory J. McCabe,et al.  Comparison of Single and Multiple Flow Direction Algorithms for Computing Topographic Parameters in TOPMODEL , 1995 .

[14]  John F. O'Callaghan,et al.  The extraction of drainage networks from digital elevation data , 1984, Comput. Vis. Graph. Image Process..

[15]  Kevin Boston,et al.  An economic and landscape evaluation of the green-up rules for California, Oregon, and Washington (USA) , 2006 .

[16]  Louise J. Bracken,et al.  The concept of hydrological connectivity and its contribution to understanding runoff‐dominated geomorphic systems , 2007 .

[17]  Harald Vacik,et al.  Application of a spatial decision support system in managing the protection forests of Vienna for sustained yield of water resources. , 2001 .

[18]  Gerard Govers,et al.  A GIS procedure for automatically calculating the USLE LS factor on topographically complex landscape units , 1996 .

[19]  M. Thyer,et al.  Diagnosing a distributed hydrologic model for two high‐elevation forested catchments based on detailed stand‐ and basin‐scale data , 2004 .

[20]  Jacky Croke,et al.  Runoff generation and re-distribution in logged eucalyptus forests, south-eastern Australia , 1999 .

[21]  Marc E. McDill,et al.  Harvest Scheduling with Area-Based Adjacency Constraints , 2002, Forest Science.

[22]  J. Croke,et al.  Gully initiation and road-to-stream linkage in a forested catchment , 2001 .

[23]  F. S. Ebisemiju,et al.  Sediment delivery ratio prediction equations for short catchment slopes in a humid tropical environment , 1990 .

[24]  K. Beven,et al.  THE PREDICTION OF HILLSLOPE FLOW PATHS FOR DISTRIBUTED HYDROLOGICAL MODELLING USING DIGITAL TERRAIN MODELS , 1991 .

[25]  I. Moore,et al.  Physical basis of the length-slope factor in the universal soil loss equation , 1986 .

[26]  Shoji Noguchi,et al.  Sediment pathways in a tropical forest: effects of logging roads and skid trails , 2004 .

[27]  Reza Jamshidi,et al.  Temporary increases in suspended sediment yields following selective eucalypt forest harvesting , 2012 .

[28]  P. M Cornish.  The effects of roading, harvesting and forest regeneration on streamwater turbidity levels in a moist eucalypt forest , 2001 .

[29]  Jaap Schellekens,et al.  Changes in catchment runoff after harvesting and burning of a Pinus caribaea plantation in Viti Levu, Fiji , 2007 .

[30]  Atsushi Yoshimoto,et al.  Spatially constrained harvest scheduling for multiple harvests by exact formulation with common matrix algebra , 2016, Journal of Forest Research.

[31]  Neil D. Burgess,et al.  Integrated modelling for economic valuation of the role of forests and woodlands in drinking water provision to two African cities , 2018, Ecosystem Services.

[32]  Alan T. Murray.  Spatial restrictions in harvest scheduling , 1999 .

[33]  Jr-Chuan Huang,et al.  Influence of Specific Contributing Area algorithms on slope failure prediction in landslide modeling , 2007 .

[34]  Róbert Marušák,et al.  Time Efficiency of Selected Types of Adjacency Constraints in Solving Unit Restriction Models , 2016 .

[35]  Reza Jamshidi,et al.  Estimating catchment-scale annual soil loss in managed native eucalypt forests, Australia , 2013 .

[36]  Bart Nijssen,et al.  The Distributed Hydrology Soil Vegetation Model , 2002 .

[37]  D. Tarboton.  A new method for the determination of flow directions and upslope areas in grid digital elevation models , 1997 .

[38]  Francisco Barahona,et al.  Harvest Scheduling Subject to Maximum Area Restrictions: Exploring Exact Approaches , 2005, Oper. Res..

[39]  Gordon E. Grant,et al.  LONG-TERM PATTERNS OF SEDIMENT TRANSPORT AFTER TIMBER HARVEST, WESTERN CASCADE MOUNTAINS, OREGON, USA , 1991 .

[40]  Charles B. Moss,et al.  Reply: Ecosystem management or infeasible guidelines? Implications of adjacency restrictions for wildlife habitat and timber production , 1997 .

[41]  I. Moore,et al.  Digital terrain modelling: A review of hydrological, geomorphological, and biological applications , 1991 .

[42]  B. Irvine,et al.  Reducing sediment inputs to Scottish streams: a review of the efficacy of soil conservation practices in upland forestry. , 2001, The Science of the total environment.

[43]  Jacinto González-Pachón,et al.  Using quantitative techniques to evaluate and explain the sustainability of forest plantations , 2016 .

[44]  Jacky Croke,et al.  Modelling runoff and soil erosion in logged forests: Scope and application of some existing models , 2006 .

[45]  P. Bettinger,et al.  Spatial Forest Harvest Scheduling for Areas Involving Carbon and Timber Management Goals , 2015 .

[46]  Jacky Croke,et al.  Soil recovery from track construction and harvesting changes in surface infiltration, erosion and delivery rates with time , 2001 .

[47]  Andres Weintraub,et al.  Forest harvesting and environmental protection based on the goal programming approach. , 2010 .

[48]  Jack Lewis,et al.  Logging and turbidity in the coastal watersheds of northern California , 2012 .

[49]  J. Böhner,et al.  Spatial Prediction of Soil Attributes Using Terrain Analysis and Climate Regionalisation , 2006 .

[50]  P. I. A. Kinnell.  ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES FOR DETERMINING THE USLE-M SLOPE LENGTH FACTOR FOR GRID CELLS , 2005 .

[51]  Carlos Romero,et al.  Optimal harvest scheduling in Eucalyptus plantations under a sustainability perspective , 2013 .

[52]  Pasquale Borrelli,et al.  Assessment of soil erosion sensitivity and post-timber-harvesting erosion response in a mountain environment of Central Italy , 2014 .

[53]  Stuart N. Lane,et al.  Representation of landscape hydrological connectivity using a topographically driven surface flow index , 2009 .

[54]  C. W. Martin,et al.  Clearcutting patterns affect nitrate and calcium in streams of New Hampshire. , 1980 .

[55]  Nick A. Chappell,et al.  Sources of suspended sediment within a tropical catchment recovering from selective logging , 2004 .

[56]  Karl R. Walters,et al.  An Empirical Evaluation of Spatial Restrictions in Industrial Harvest Scheduling: The SFI Planning Problem , 2001 .

[57]  T. Spies,et al.  A hierarchical spatial framework for forest landscape planning , 2005 .

[58]  Xuejun Liu,et al.  Error assessment of grid-based flow routing algorithms used in hydrological models , 2002, Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci..

[59]  Stephen P. Prisley,et al.  Environmental implications of harvesting lower-value biomass in forests , 2018 .