Effects of Forestry Intensification and Conservation on Green Infrastructures: A Spatio-Temporal Evaluation in Sweden

There is a rivalry between policies on intensification of forest management to meet the demands of a growing bioeconomy, and policies on green infrastructure functionality. Evaluation of the net effects of different policy instruments on real-world outcomes is crucial. First, we present data on final felling rates in wood production landscapes and stand age distribution dynamic in two case study regions, and changes in dead wood amounts in Sweden. Second, the growth of formally protected areas was compiled and changes in functional connectivity analysed in these regions, and the development of dead wood and green tree retention in Sweden was described. The case studies were the counties Dalarna and Jämtland (77,000 km2) representing an expanding frontier of boreal forest transformation. In the wood production landscape, official final felling rates averaged 0.84 %/year, extending the regional timber frontier. The amount of forest <60 years old increased from 27–34% in 1955 to 60–65% in 2017. The amounts of dead wood, a key forest naturalness indicator, declined from 1994 to 2016 in north Sweden, and increased in the south, albeit both at levels far below evidence-based biodiversity targets. Formal forest protection grew rapidly in the two counties from 1968 to 2020 but reached only 4% of productive forests. From 2000 to 2019, habitat network functionality for old Scots pine declined by 15–41%, and Norway spruce by 15–88%. There were mixed trends for dead wood and tree retention at the stand scale. The net result of the continued transformation of near-natural forest remnants and conservation efforts was negative at the regional and landscape levels, but partly positive at the stand scale. However, at all three scales, habitat amounts were far below critical thresholds for the maintenance of viable populations of species, let alone ecological integrity. Collaboration among stakeholder categories should reject opinionated narratives, and instead rely on evidence-based knowledge about green infrastructure pressures, responses, and states.

Potential Recolonization Benefits of Retention Forestry Practices

Tree retention after forest harvest is often used to enhance biodiversity in forests that are otherwise managed using even-aged systems. It remains unclear to what extent scattered trees and residual patches (i.e., retained structures) actually facilitate recolonization of species in logged areas. For assessing recolonization benefits, it is necessary to consider both survival in retained structures postharvest and recolonization in cleared areas. We conducted a literature review to assess recolonization responses of birds, mammals, reptiles, amphibians, vascular plants, invertebrates, lichens/bryophytes, and mycorrhizal fungi. The clearest benefits of retention were for poorly dispersing plants. Seed dispersal type may be a key life-history trait relative to effectiveness of recolonization, with animal-dispersed seeds having the greatest dispersal range. We found that lichens/bryophytes are likely not dispersal limited (with possible exceptions) but are slow growing and require the development of moist microsite conditions. Significant literature gaps exist for amphibians, nonvolant invertebrates, and mycorrhizal fungi. Overall, recolonization success postharvest is taxon specific, where the benefits of implementing retention systems will depend on the region and species within that region. Species that require a long growth period (some lichens) or are poor dispersers (some herbaceous species) may benefit more from the creation of forest reserves than from retention practices.

Partial Retention of Legacy Trees Protect Mycorrhizal Inoculum Potential, Biodiversity, and Soil Resources While Promoting Natural Regeneration of Interior Douglas-Fir

Clearcutting reduces proximity to seed sources and mycorrhizal inoculum potential for regenerating seedlings. Partial retention of legacy trees and protection of refuge plants, as well as preservation of the forest floor, can maintain mycorrhizal networks that colonize germinants and improve nutrient supply. However, little is known of overstory retention levels that best protect mycorrhizal inoculum while also providing sufficient light and soil resources for seedling establishment. To quantify the effect of tree retention on seedling regeneration, refuge plants, and resource availability, we compared five harvesting methods with increasing retention of overstory trees (clearcutting (0% retention), seed tree (10% retention), 30% patch retention, 60% patch retention, and 100% retention in uncut controls) in an interior Douglas-fir-dominated forest in British Columbia. Regeneration increased with proximity to legacy trees in partially cut forests, with increasing densities of interior Douglas-fir, western redcedar, grand fir, and western hemlock seedlings with overstory tree retention. Clearcutting reduced cover of ectomycorrhizal refuge plants (from 80 to 5%) while promoting arbuscular mycorrhizal plants the year after harvest. Richness of shrubs, herbs, and mosses declined with increasing harvesting intensity, but tree richness remained at control levels. The presence of legacy trees in all partially cut treatments mitigated these losses. Light availability declined with increasing overstory cover and proximity to leave trees, but it still exceeded 1,000 W m−2 in the clearcut, seed tree and 30% retention treatments. Increasing harvesting intensity reduced aboveground and belowground C stocks, particularly in live trees and the forest floor, although forest floor losses were also substantial where thinning took place in the 60% retention treatment. The loss of forest floor carbon, along with understory plant richness with intense harvesting was likely associated with a loss of ectomycorrhizal inoculum potential. This study suggests that dispersed retention of overstory trees where seed trees are spaced ~10–20 m apart, and aggregated retention where openings are &lt;60 m (2 tree-lengths) in width, will result in an optimal balance of seed source proximity, inoculum potential, and resource availability where seedling regeneration, plant biodiversity, and carbon stocks are protected.

Boreal Owl (Aegolius funereus) and Northern Saw-whet Owl (Aegolius acadicus) breeding records in managed boreal forests

During the 2016 breeding season we monitored 169 nest boxes suitable for Boreal Owl (Aegolius funereus) and Northern Saw-whet Owl (Aegolius acadicus) in high-latitude (>55°N) boreal forests of northwestern Alberta affected by partial logging. Despite the large number of boxes deployed, the number of boxes used by Boreal and Northern Saw-whet Owls was small. Boreal Owls used nest boxes (n = 4) in conifer-dominated stands with three being in uncut blocks and the other in a 50% green tree retention cut-block. In contrast, Northern Saw-whet Owls used boxes (n = 4) in a broader range of cover types, breeding in boxes placed in stands with at least 20% post-harvest tree retention. Although both species successfully bred in the same landscape, Boreal Owls produced fewer eggs (mean = 2.5) and raised fewer young (mean = 0.5) than Northern Saw-whet Owls (5 and 2.25, respectively). Furthermore, our observed Boreal Owl egg production was lower than has been found for the same species nesting in nest boxes in different regions or forest types. In contrast, breeding parameters of Northern Saw-whet Owls were similar to that found in nest boxes in the eastern boreal region of Canada and in the southern part of its range.

Retention of tree-related microhabitats is more dependent on selection of habitat trees than their spatial distribution

Habitat trees, which provide roosting, foraging and nesting for multiple taxa, are retained in managed forests to support biodiversity conservation. To what extent their spatial distribution influences provisioning of habitats has rarely been addressed. In this study, we investigated whether abundance and richness of tree-related microhabitats (TreMs) differ between habitat trees in clumped and dispersed distributions and whether the abundance of fifteen groups of TreMs is related to tree distribution patterns. To identify habitat trees, we quantified TreMs in temperate mountain forests of Germany. We determined clumping (the Clark–Evans index), size of the convex hull, diameter at breast height, as well as altitude, slope and aspect of sites for their possible influence on TreMs. We additionally determined the difference in TreM abundance and richness among four options of selecting five habitat trees per ha from 15 candidates: (a) the most clumped trees, (b) five randomly selected and dispersed trees, (c) the single tree with highest abundance or richness of TreMs and its four closest neighbors and (d) a “reference selection” of five trees with known highest abundance or richness of TreMs irrespective of their distribution. The degree of clumping and the size of the convex hull influenced neither the abundance nor richness of TreMs. The reference selection, option (d), contained more than twice the number of TreMs compared to the most clumped, (a), or random distributions, (b), of five habitat trees, while option (c) assumed an intermediate position. If the goal of habitat tree retention is to maximize stand-level abundance and richness of TreMs, then it is clearly more important to select habitat trees irrespective of their spatial pattern.