Trading off Species Protection and Timber Production in Forests Managed for Multiple Objectives

We address a multiobjective forest-management problem that maximizes harvested timber volume and maximizes the protection of species through the selection of protected habitat reserves. As opposed to reserving parcels of the forest for general habitat purposes, as most published works do, the model we present, and its several variants, concentrate on the preservation status of each one of the species living in the forest under study. Thus, all of the formulations we propose trade off harvested timber volume against the weighted number of preserved species. Each formulation represents a different management policy. Casting the models in a static setting allows us to analyze the effect of several management policies through computational experience with different forest-stucture — species relationships.

[1]  Amanda T. Lombard,et al.  Reserve systems for limestone endemic flora of the Cape Lowland Fynbos: Iterative versus linear programming , 1996 .

[2]  Marc E. McDill,et al.  Comparing adjacency constraint formulations for randomly generated forest planning problems with four age-class distributions. , 2000 .

[3]  Charles ReVelle,et al.  The grid packing problem : selecting a harvesting pattern in an area with forbidden regions , 1996 .

[4]  J. G. Jones,et al.  Formulating adjacency constraints in linear optimization models for scheduling projects in tactical planning , 1991 .

[5]  Richard L. Church,et al.  Reserve selection as a maximal covering location problem , 1996 .

[6]  Charles ReVelle,et al.  Applying mathematical programming to reserve selection , 1997 .

[7]  Justin C. Williams,et al.  Reserve assemblage of critical areas: A zero-one programming approach , 1998 .

[8]  Andrew R. Solow,et al.  A note on optimal algorithms for reserve site selection , 1996 .

[9]  Alan T. Murray,et al.  Constructing And Selecting Adjacency Constraints , 1996 .

[10]  Atsushi Yoshimoto,et al.  Comparative analysis of algorithms to generate adjacency constraints , 1994 .

[11]  R. Haight,et al.  An optimization approach to selecting research natural areas in National Forests , 1999 .

[12]  José G. Borges,et al.  Impacts of the Time Horizon for Adjacency Constraints in Harvest Scheduling , 2000 .

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

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

[15]  John Sessions,et al.  Designing Compact and Contiguous Reserve Networks with a Hybrid Heuristic Algorithm , 2002, Forest Science.

[16]  Manuela M. P. Huso,et al.  A comparison of reserve selection algorithms using data on terrestrial vertebrates in Oregon , 1997 .

[17]  Mark D. McDonnell,et al.  Mathematical Methods for Spatially Cohesive Reserve Design , 2002 .

[18]  K. D. Cocks,et al.  Using mathematical programming to address the multiple reserve selection problem: An example from the Eyre Peninsula, South Australia , 1989 .

[19]  Richard L. Church,et al.  Understanding the tradeoffs between site quality and species presence in reserve site selection. , 2000 .

[20]  Harry John Betteley Birks,et al.  How to maximize biological diversity in nature reserve selection: Vascular plants and breeding birds in deciduous woodlands, western Norway , 1993 .

[21]  Richard L. Church,et al.  The maximal covering location problem , 1974 .

[22]  Richard L. Church,et al.  Clustering and Compactness in Reserve Site Selection: An Extension of the Biodiversity Management Area Selection Model , 2003, Forest Science.

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

[24]  Charles ReVelle,et al.  Multiobjective grid packing model: An application in forest management , 1997 .

[25]  J. Douglas Brodie,et al.  Adjacency constraints in harvest scheduling: an aggregation heuristic , 1990 .

[26]  Les G. Underhill,et al.  Optimal and suboptimal reserve selection algorithms , 1994 .