Principle – Yield and Quality of Forest Goods are Sustainable

Criterion- Forest management provides for sustainability of goods and services.

Indicator – Silvicultural systems prescribed and appropriate to forest type and produce grown.

Rewritten Indicator– Silvicultural systems are prescribed appropriate to forest type, production of desired products and condition, and assure forest establishment, composition, and growth.

Box B: Definition:

Defining silviculture according to: John D. Matthews, 1989, Silvicultural Systems, Clarendon Press-Oxford, 284 p.

Silviculture: Definition: The art and science of producing and tending a forest; the application of the knowledge of silvics in the treatment of a forest; the theory and practice of controlling forest establishment, composition, and growth.

Silvicultural Practice: Various treatments of forest stands that may be applied to maintain and enhance their productivity.

Silvicultural System: Definition 1: This term is more comprehensive and designates a planned program of silvicultural treatment during the whole life of a stand; it includes not only the reproduction cuttings, but any intermediate cuttings.

Silvicultural System: Definition 2: The process by which the crops constituting a forest are tended, removed, and replaced by new crops, resulting in the production of stands of distinctive form. A silvicultural system embodies three main ideas:

1. The method of regeneration of the individual crops constituting the forest;
2. The form of crop produced;
3. The orderly arrangement of the crops over the whole forest, with special reference to silvicultural and protective considerations and efficient harvesting of produce.

Defining the indicator according to CIFOR Source:

Brief Definition:

Silvicultural systems are long-range harvest and management schemes designed to optimized growth, regeneration, and administrative management of particular forest types, usually with the goal of obtaining a perpetual and steady supply of timber.

Box D: Applicability to Different Landowners. Explain any differences:

Forests have productive, protective, and social functions. The relative value an individual landowner places on each of theses functions influences the selection of silvicultural systems to meet desired goals and objectives.

Federal (Public ownerships) strive to meet a broad range of forest outputs and therefore pay particular attention to social aspects of recreation and protection of resource values.

Where the principle function of the forest is timber production (State & Industrial private), silvicultural systems are selected which maximize the complementary relationship between timber outputs ( revenue) and amenity values.

Non-industrial ownerships objectives vary widely and cannot be easily or accurately categorized. However, two broad objectives are prevalent;

1. Maximum revenue (grazing and timber) often associated with working farms and ranches.
2. Maximum protection, often associated with wealthy land barons.

Since silviculture is the art and science of growing crops of trees, silvicultural systems are not applicable to landowners of grassland or shrub/step communities.

CIFOR 3.2.3 3.2.

Namkoong V2 – Population sizes and reproductive success are adequate to maintain levels of genetic diversity.

Namkoong V3 – Use of scientifically-based seed transfer rules and seed orchard zones in planting native species.

New V4 – Management does not significantly change gene frequencies.

Notes:

Silvicultural prescriptions are aimed at site specific forest stand conditions

Notes:

The judgement of "appropriateness" of a silvicultural system provides the diagnostic measure.

Notes: NA; Structure, function and composition are ecological parameters

Box I: Underlying Concepts:

The immediate foundation of silviculture in the natural sciences is the field of silvics, which deals with the laws underlying the growth and development of single trees and the forest as a biological unit. In silviculture, information from silvics is applied to the production of forest crops, and technical procedures are developed for the scientific tending and reproducing of the crops.

As Muelder (1959) pointed out, knowledge derived from formal research can be put to effective use only by practicing foresters who are alert to local conditions and technology.

The silvicultural system (Smith 1962) should represent the best possible amalgam of attempts to satisfy all of the following major objectives. These basic objectives are as follows:

1. Harmony with goals and characteristics of ownership.
2. Provisions for reproduction.
3. Efficient use of growing space and site productivity.
4. Control of damaging agents.
5. Provision for sustained yield.
6. Optimum use of forest capital.
7. Concentration and efficient arrangement of operation.

The silvicultural system is logically based on a working hypothesis and is altered as it becomes necessary to change the hypothesis.

Once the potential of a tract of forest land is determined, the objectives of the landowner stated and fixed, the next task of a land manager is to decide how the objectives will be achieved. At this point the land manager must determine which silvicutural system or systems (Mathews 1989) are most suitable. There are several economic, ecological, and social factors that affect this decision including;

1. Regulation of yield.
2. Market opportunities.
3. Social considerations.
4. Wildlife habitat requirements.

Steele, 1994 states: "Forest Health is defined here as the capacity for self-renewal…" this is another way of saying: The capacity of the forest to regenerate is assured.

"Forestry like any other renewable resource management, involves disturbing natural systems to one degree or another and has a central objective to do so in a sustainable way. For the ecologist, by far the most reliable strategy for achieving sustainability is to understand the historic forces that have shaped ecosystems and to work within the mechanism by which ecosystems sustain themselves." (Perry and Amaranthus, 1997, p.31.).

Underlying concepts according to CIFOR Source are:

Underlying definition and concepts:

Site, composition and structure of the forests and the role that play in inhabitants lives vary greatly from place to place. These variations influence the desired goals and the chose of silvicultural system.

Silvicultural system is generally classified by the method used to harvest and regenerate the stand. These methods vary in cutting intensity, but may be grouped under the categories of even-aged or uneven-aged methods.

Even-aged methods:

In even-aged management the trees are removed over a relatively short period of time, creating open, sunny conditions, and leading to the development of even-aged stands. The even-aged methods are clearcutting, seed tree, and shelterwood. Only in the clearcutting method are all trees removed at once. In the other methods trees are removed over a long period of time.

Uneven-aged methods:

Uneven-aged management is accomplished by the selection method, in which scattered trees or small groups of trees are cut.

Box J: Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Management:

The selection of an appropriate silvicultural system is highly relevant to sustainability of forested ecosystems. Silvicultural system selection is based on biological, social and economic concerns.

Silvicultural system’s aimed at sustained yield will contribute a continuing supply of the desired goods and services to the full capacity of the forest and without imparing the capability of the land. The relevance of silvicultural systems to sustainability can be simply stated as the "means" by which sustainability goals can be achieved.

Relevance to sustainable/unsustainable management (according to CIFOR Source):

To keep the high forest in a natural and relatively stable condition, a silvicultural system was advocated to control the intensity of harvesting sufficiently to open up the canopy to enhance regeneration and growth of young trees of desirable species, whilst operating on a specific years of felling cycle.

Box K: Measurement Methods:

Methods to test "appropriateness" of silvicultural systems include:

1. Professional judgement
2. "Text Book" theory
3. Comparison to other temperate forest management globally.

There is no established standard methodology to measure the appropriateness of the application of any one or combination of silvicultural systems for sustainability. The best measure will be to see if management objectives are met or not.

O’Laughlin and others, 1994 give four steps to measure forest health: "(1) select a representative set of indicators for a particular ecosystem; (2) establish baseline data, such as historical range of variability; (3) develop standards against which to compare current conditions; and (4) establish a monitoring program to assess current conditions and modify baseline data as new trends develop." Pp. 65-66.

Measurement Methods (according to CIFOR Source):

Assessment of silvicultural system must take into account a reproduction method which a stand is established and renewed. The process is accomplished during the regeneration period by artificial or natural reproduction.

Box L: Data Required:

Descriptions of silvicultural systems, forest condition data, lists of desired market products and non-target values, e.g. NTFP lists, wildlife habitat requirements, riparian needs, aquatic habitat requirements and other amenity values.

Data needed to compile the indicator (according to CIFOR Source):

• Topography assessment
• Forest inventory
• Relevant aspect of social and economic

Direct measurement and observation in the field

Box M: Data Used for the North American Test::

BNF vegetation management data forms and reports used to gather, plan implement and report silvicutural activities.

1. Field data collection form – Overstory and understory information.
2. RMSTAND database output form – Summary values for volumes of live and dead trees, sizes, and statistical variables denoting variability and accuracy of data.
3. Silvicultural prescription forms – Summary data and visual analysis of stand and landscape conditions.
4. RMRIS data base forms – Records history of management activities and results information.
5. Annual Accomplishment Report – Summary of annual activities by National forest reported by productivity class.
6. RMRIS Tables – Database output tables of stand characteristics.

Logging Gulch Evironmental Assessment (EA), IV. -80

Box N: Example Results – 

Reference:

Box O: Assessing the Practicality:

It is not very practical to measure the results of long-term silvicultural system prescriptions. However, elements of a specific prescription can be measured. For example, we could measure natural regeneration 5 – 10 years following the application of management, or monitoring could be done to assess "leave" stand conditions through time. Long-term continuous forest inventory (CFI) plot systems can measure growth, mortality, etc. Special study sites or research areas such as the Experimental Forest found on the Boise National Forest, can highlight and compare the results of application of different silvicultural systems.

These types of measures can be costly, requiring replicated and intensive site measurements.

Box P: Assessing the Information Value:

Monitoring of silvicultural systems can provide information which can be useful in an adaptive management context to modify prescription elements to further achieve silvicultural outcome.

Box Q: Overall assessment :

Accepted

Strengths: Appropriate prescription is the tool to achieve sustainability.

Weaknesses: Bias can influence selection of elements of silvicultural prescriptions. Professional judgement of appropriateness can be considered a strength or weakness, depending on your point of view.

Development needs (according to CIFOR Source):

The disadvantages of selection system can be lessened by modifying the method of harvest

Limitation of the Indicator:

• Artificial regeneration is often preferred over natural regeneration and also no biological restriction on the maximum width of the clearcut
• Clearcutting method will probably be less common in the future than in the past because of the unfavorable aesthetic impact, the limited value of large clearcuts to many wildlife species, and possible erosion hazards
• In selection method, the lack of sizable openings may be unfavorable for certain species of wildlife and also difficult to avoid the injury to some of the standing trees during felling and hauling operations.

Box R: Did you rewrite or revise to a new indicator. If so what?

Yes, to combine ideas represented in CIFOR 2.3 and CIFOR 3.2.2.

Box S: References:

• Hessburg, P.F., B.G. Smith. 1995. Assessing change in vegetation structure and composition at midscale in the interior Columbia River Basin Assessment: Analysis Plan, USDA Forest Service (Draft Report)
• John D. Matthews, 1989, Silvicultural Systems, Clarendon Press-Oxford, 284 p.
• O’Laughlin J. and others, 1994, Defining and Measuring Forest Health, In: Sampson, R.N.;Adams, D. (eds) 1994, Assessing Forest Ecosystem Health in the Inland West, Haworth Press:Bingham, N.Y.
• Perry, D.A. and M.P. Amaranthus, 1997, Disturbance, Recovery, and Stability, In: Kohm, K.A. and J.F. Franklin, (eds.). 1997 Creating a Forestry for the 21^st Century: the science of ecosystem management., Island Press, Washington D.C. 475 p.
• Steele, R. 1994, The Role of Sucession in Forest Health. In., Sampson, R.N.; Adams, D. (eds.) 1994, Assessing Forest Ecosystem Health in the Inland West. Haworth Press: Binghamton, N.Y.

• Husch, B., Miller, C.I., and T.W. Beers. 1993. Forest Mensuration. Krieger Publishing Company. Florida.
• Kohm, K.A. and J.F. Franklin. 1997. Creating a Forestry for the 21^st Century: The Science of Ecosystem Management. Island Press. Washington, D.C.
• Matthews, J.D. 1989. Silvicultural Systems. Clarendon Press. Oxford.
• Philip, M.S. 1994. Measuring Trees and Forest. 2^nd Edition. CAB International. Oxon.
• Plotkin, M. and L. Famolare. (Ed). 1992. Sustainable Harvest and Marketing of rain
• Forest Products. Island Press. Washington, D.C.
• Prahbu, R., Colfer, C.J.P., Venkateswarlu, P., Lay, C.T., Soekmadi, R. and E. Wollenberg. Testing Criteria and Indicators for the Sustainable Management of Forests: Phase 1 Final Report. CIFOR Special Publication. CIFOR. Bogor.
• Stork, N.E., Boyle, T.J.B, Dale, V., Eeley, H., Finegan, B., Lawes, M., Manokaran, N.,Prabhu,R.,and J. Soberon. 1997. Criteria and Indicators for Assessing the Sustainability of Forest Management: Conservation of Biodiversity. Working Paper No. 17. CIFOR. Bogor.
• Young, R. A. and R. L. Giese. (ed.). 1982. Introduction to Forest Science. 2nd Edition. John Willey & Sons. New York.

Please record your notes on evaluating the indicator here:

There are local interpretations and variations of silvicultural systems based on professional judgement. This fact lowered the score for "sensitivity" in our judgement.