4.7 Article

Immediate impacts of partial cutting strategies on stand characteristics and value

Journal

FOREST ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT
Volume 250, Issue 3, Pages 148-155

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2007.05.010

Keywords

partial cutting; sawing simulation; financial return

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study evaluated the impacts of partial cutting on stand characteristics, product recovery, and financial return in mature black spruce-balsam fir stands in Quebec. Four harvesting strategies (clearcut with advance growth protection, irregular shelterwood cutting leaving small merchantable stems, and two patterns of selection cutting) were each applied four times in 20 ha harvest blocks representing irregular black spruce-balsam fir stands. Before the four harvesting strategies were applied, there were no significant differences in stand characteristics (i.e., quadratic mean DBH, basal area, and merchantable stem volume) or expected product recoveries (i.e., lumber volume and value, chip volume and value, and total product recovery) estimated using the Optitek sawing simulation package. There was no significant difference in stand characteristics or product recovery values of the harvested stems between the selection cutting approaches (p > 0.05). However, significant differences in stand characteristics and product recovery values of the harvested stems existed between these treatments and both of the two other treatments. After cutting, the two selection cutting treatments had the lowest impacts on stand characteristics, as compared to the two other treatments. The selection cutting approach which used temporary skidding trails and where cutting was initially concentrated over half of the stand resulted in the highest benefit/cost ratio, relatively high net income and high total product value of residual trees. (c) 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available