The Nordic countries generally have a longer history of boreal forest utilisation for industrial purposes than elsewhere. In these countries, the earlier old-growth forests have long since been replaced with managed forests that are now being harvested for the second or third time. These forests are managed according to the principle of sustainable yield; a principle that has been accepted in these countries for a long time. As a result of intensive forest management, the growing stock volume contained in these forests has increased by 23% during the past 40 years and increment has increased by as much as 36%. Consequently, sustainable harvesting levels have increased considerably in all the Nordic countries. These increases in forest stocking and growth are due to targeted improvement policies that have been worked out and guided by repeated forest assessments and long-term management programs both at the national and local level in private and public forests. Indeed, current long-term predictions for Sweden's boreal forest show that it may be possible to increase sustainable harvesting levels in the future by 55% over current levels.
Scientific studies of natural processes in boreal forests in the Nordic countries were started during the 1970´s and were partly financed by the forest industry. These resulted in a better understanding of the natural processes in the ecosystems. As a result, during the 1980´s, forest owners started to work out guidelines for combining nature conservation objectives in commercial forest management. For example, one large Swedish forest owning corporation - SCA - published a "Declaration on Nature Conservation" for their forest operations in 1987 (see Box 1). Other Swedish forest companies have started similar forest environmental protection programs.
Box 1: One example of a sustainable forest management initiative currently being promoted by private industry in Sweden
In 1987, a large Swedish forest owning corporation (SCA) published a "Declaration on Nature Conservation" for its forest operations. This was one of the first commitments made by a large forest owner to introduce a modern environmental vision as part of its commercial forestry strategy. The SCA document states that its forestry operations should be conducted in such a way as to: _ avoid permanent adverse effects on soil, surface water and ground water; _ preserve a rich variety of plant and animal life; _ protect all plant and animal species occurring in the part of the country where we operate (although we are aware that this objective cannot always be achieved, this is not an acceptable excuse for failing to pay attention to or take action that has a reasonable chance of succeeding); _ preserve the plants and animals now living in the area in the first instance, with reintroduction of vanished species to take second place; and _ give first priority to species that are unique, with second priority to other species that are locally rare but plentiful elsewhere. The operational consequences of this commitment, including the reservation of production forest areas, leaving trees that could have been harvested and other measures, resulted in a 10 percent reduction in timber harvest at a cost of about US$ 10 million per year. |
During the 1990´s the question of forest certification became increasingly topical. Work on developing certification systems has been conducted separately in Finland and Sweden and has lead to different systems for forest certification in each of these countries. The main approaches to forest certification in each of these countries are briefly described below.
Finland. In Finland, forestry is to a large extent a small-scale or family-owned and managed activity. Small private forest owners, numbering around 440,000 in total, produce about 80% of total industrial roundwood used in Finland. In terms of forest ownership structure, 63% of forest properties are smaller than 20 ha.
In April 1997, a working group on certification standards, with a broad base of members representing many different stakeholders,3 produced the National Criteria for Forest Certification in Finland. The main aim underlying a lot of this effort was the desire to improve the marketing of forest products from Finland, by identifying forests that are managed in an economically, ecologically, socially and culturally sound way.
The system, which is just starting operation in Finland, will be improved as new research results point to new ways in which the management and use of forest resources can be improved. The criteria used as part of the certification system will also be reappraised after five years and any necessary adjustments will be made if they meet with the consensus of all stakeholders.
Certification under this system in Finland is voluntary and forest owners can apply to be certified either individually or as part of a group of forest owners. A random selection of forest holdings will be inspected each year and the inspection process and inspection results will be available for verification by an independent third party. Thirty-seven criteria are listed under the process for group certification, which is the most comprehensive part of the system that has been developed.
Sweden. The Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) established an FSC certification working group in Sweden in 1996, with the purpose of producing a proposal for a Swedish FSC standard to be submitted to the FSC for approval. The participants in the working group represented commercial forestry interests, government forest authorities, research institutions and non-governmental organisations (NGOs). In 1988, consensus was reached on most issues and the working group presented the standard. This has since been adopted by most large Swedish forest landowners,4 although smaller forest landowners have chosen not to participate in the system, for a variety of reasons (see below).
The Swedish FSC standard is, perhaps, the most restrictive of all of the certification systems in existence today. Fundamentally, it builds upon the prescriptions for nature conservation in commercial forestry that the large Swedish forest landowners and government forest agencies started to include in their operational manuals during the 1980´s. In the Swedish FSC standard, these prescriptions have been made a compulsory condition for certification. As a result, the scope for implementing measures to increase forest yields and the options for forest utilisation are considerably reduced for any forest operator wishing to be certified.
It is also interesting to note that the aim of achieving high and sustainable levels of roundwood production is only cited in the last paragraph of these Standards (and is also played down in Swedish Forest Policy and its associated legislation). This contrasts markedly with the situation in Finland, where this is stated as a primary goal of sustainable forest management and the certification process.
The Swedish Federation of Forest Owners (Skogsagarnas Riksförbund) originally participated in negotiations about the Swedish FSC standard. However, they could not accept several aspects of the proposed certification system and have become one of the systems strongest critics. Some of their arguments against the current Swedish FSC standard are presented below.
_ The Swedish FSC standard is not appropriate for all types of forest ownership, particularly small-scale and family run forestry operations, which are common throughout Europe and especially in the Nordic countries. The Federation argued that the certification of groups of small forest should be allowed, but this was not accepted during the negotiations.
_ They argued that it is impossible, when dealing with thousands of small forest owners and the widespread trading of forest products, to demand that it must be possible to trace back to source of origin, the wood raw material used in a certain forest product.
_ The forest owners were insistent that the certifying system should be internationally harmonised and that the rules must be more or less identical to the rules applied in other countries. They failed to reach agreement on this with the environmental groups.
_ Generally speaking, the Swedish FSC standard demands enormous economic sacrifices for the private forest owner. According to calculations by the Federation, they estimated that about 14% of the productive forest area would have to be withdrawn from production to meet the requirements of nature conservation. In the south of Sweden the estimated figure is even higher (15-20%). They argued that there is no scientific proof that it is reasonable to reduce the potential production from the forest by this amount.
_ The Federation also felt that the NGOs were only interested in trying to limit forest production.
The Federation also argued that, in reality, there should be greater utilisation of forest products in order to substitute for the use of other non-renewable materials like steel, aluminium, concrete and fossil fuels. They argued that a major environmental achievement would be to sustain high levels of biomass production from forests and that this would be a much more responsible way to utilise the nation's forest resources.
Forest inventories throughout Central Europe have shown that the forests there are steadily increasing both in terms of total growing stock volume and volume increment. In many countries, potential industrial roundwood supply (i.e. sustainable yield) is greater than current demand from the forest products industry, partly due to limited demand for some sizes and species of trees.
The structure of forest ownership in Central Europe is similar to Finland, with many small or very small forest owners. It is estimated that there are about 12 million forest owners in Europe who own, on average, only 8.5 ha of forest each. In some countries, ownership is even more fragmented. In Germany, for example, the average size of privately owned forestland is estimated to be only 3.5 ha.
The basic principles underlying sustainable forest management in Europe, were set-out and agreed during the Helsinki Process (now also called the Pan-European Process) to establish criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management in Europe. According to the Helsinki Process, operational level guidelines for sustainable forest management should be looked upon as being in a state of continuous improvement. Nature conservation groups are encouraged to participate in this process of improvement and, hence, to influence the development of European criteria and indicators.
As noted above, there are a huge number of small private forest owners in Central Europe. This implies that any attempt to introduce a certification system in Central Europe should therefore, if it is to be realistic, consider certifying groups of owners at a regional level. Germany provides a good example of the development of certification in Central Europe.
In Germany, the German Forestry Council (Deutsche Forstwirtschaftsrat) has been involved in a dialog with partners from both industry and the NGOs at national and international levels. They hope to reach consensus about a workable certification mechanism around the end of 1998. They have stated that certification in Germany should be based along the following lines:
_ the process should follow the Pan-European Criteria, Indicators and Operational Level Guidelines for sustainable forestry, formulated in Lisbon in June 1998 by the European forest ministers;
_ in order to be credible, the certification system must cover broad regions, for example in Germany, they should cover a whole Bundesland;
_ the system must be voluntary, with forest management units agreeing to participate in the system by making a commitment to follow the agreed rules; and
_ independent auditors should be used to regularly check adherence to the rules of the system.
The German Forestry Council states that the overall principles guiding the sustainable management of forests in Germany must be based on German forest and environmental legislation. They consider this a fundamental aspect of the system that will eventually be developed. They also note that sustainable forest management means more than sustainable wood raw material supply and should also consider the importance of forests for soil, groundwater, climate, biodiversity and recreation services. However, the Council considers the responsibility for the management of forests to meet economic objectives, to be completely in the hands of the forest owners.
The Council also stresses some other very important points, which they consider must be included in a certification system:
_ the certification system must be voluntary for all participants and in no way interfere with ownership rights;
_ the system must be transparent (i.e. easy to observe) and have credibility;
_ all parties involved in the process, including the environmental groups, must accept the agreed standards;
_ the certificate of sustainability must not be a certificate of origin and should be documented separately so that it does not restrict competition and the free transfer of goods and services;
_ control within the system must be carried out by an independent third party;
_ the process of developing a European certificate of sustainability has to be adapted to the specific conditions that are found in European forests while, at the same time, also be accepted in international markets; and
_ the system should not involve any complicated red tape (e.g. associated with chain of custody monitoring), but rather the process should aim to offer the wood consumer a sustainably produced forest product rather than attempt to distinguish between every single product.
Canada has 417 million ha of forest, of which 220 million ha or more can be considered as commercially viable. About 117 million hectares of this commercial forest is in the boreal forest zone and the remainder is in the temperate forest zone. About 118 million ha, or just over half of the commercial area, is currently managed for timber production. Most forests in Canada are publicly owned (see Figure 1). Some 225,500 private forest owners own the relatively small proportion of the forest estate that is in private hands.
Until a few decades ago, forest harvesting in Canada was carried out with little regard to the concepts of long-term planning and future wood supply. Vast areas accumulated that had been previously harvested and were now in very poor condition.5 Their poor condition was attributed to a lack of silviculture in the past or the use of ineffective silvicultural measures. More effective silviculture programs, aimed at securing forest regeneration and regrowth, now seem to be implemented almost everywhere. In 1996 for example, about 700 million tree seedlings were planted throughout Canada.
Figure 1: The current distribution of forest ownership in Canada
These reforestation programmes have yet to make an impact though and, because of the earlier lack of attention given to reforestation after harvesting, the Canadian forest industry (which largely operates in the boreal forest) must still mostly rely on wood from untouched natural forests to meet demands. In many regions this is likely to be the situation for a very long period of time but, in most provinces, there are still large new areas that can be utilised for industrial roundwood supply (as noted above). However, these areas are becoming increasingly remote. Furthermore, in some eastern provinces, the past lack of attention given to reforestation continued for so long that, given current levels of industrial roundwood demand, future wood supply problems are already foreseen. This situation will last until the recent improvements in reforestation have an impact on final felling volumes at the end of the next harvesting cycle.
In Canada, a group comprising many different stakeholders developed national standards for sustainable forest management during the 1990´s. The result of this was the Canadian Standards Association sustainable forest management system (CSA 808 and CSA 809). Any organisation seeking to register a defined forest area under this system must be periodically audited by certified third party auditors, who will assess whether:
_ the sustainable forest management system in place in the forest has been established with public participation;
_ the sustainable forest management system is being implemented according to the plan and the sustainable forest management objectives agreed for area;
_ progress towards achieving the sustainable forest management objectives is being monitored and new knowledge is being used to continually improve the sustainable forest management system; and
_ the sustainable forest management system is achieving any performance indicators that have been set for the defined area.
An example of one forest management system following this approach is given in Box 2.
Box 2: Extract from a "Forestry Green Balance Sheet" produced by STORA, Port Hawkesbury, Nova Scotia, Canada
This environmental policy states that, in maintaining an environmental management system, the company through its employees shall: 1. commit itself to a continuos improvement in forestry methods; 2. sustain the long-term production of valuable wood; 3. commit itself to pollution prevention, soil conservation and waste reduction; 4. utilise long-term landscape ecosystem planning, appropriate silviculture systems and operating practices that conserve biodiversity; 5. provide appropriate training to company employees and contractors in relevant environmental aspects of their work; 6. encourage private wood suppliers to comply with forest stewardship and the company's environmental standards; 7. develop and use emergency response plans for environmental emergencies; 8. meet or surpass the requirements of applicable regulations and legal obligations; and 9. regularly report on environmental performance and status to the public. Management activities are based on the principle of landscape ecosystem management, appropriate silvicultural treatments and special conservation measures to protect wildlife habitat, social culture and scenic values. Depending on the different ecosystems present in the managed forest, the wood harvest is carried out in the form of: 1. partial cutting in birch and balsam fir forest; 2. clear cutting in fire adapted forests; and 3. thinning and partial cutting to regenerate red spruce ecosystems. The management practices also consider nature conservation including forest stand level attributes, such as riparian buffers, wildlife corridors, residual tree clumps, coarse woody debris retention, correct forest road construction and careful stream crossing techniques. The nature conservation goal is to preserve the natural occurring plant and animal species in the forest landscapes. The approach is: 1. to maintain connectivity of ecosystems with a system of interconnecting corridors and regionally protected areas, at a landscape or eco-district level; 2. to provide a variety of habitats, forest age class, forest stand shapes and size classes; 3. to employ silviculture management systems that are appropriate considering the natural ecological development sequence of each site; and 4. to employ day to day management practices that protect ecosystem functions at the forest stand level. Ecological landscape planning is carried out to maintain connectivity of ecosystems and provide a variety of landscape elements through: 1. assessing how the landscape currently functions with regard to matrix patches, corridors and pathways, unique habitats, protected areas and genetic flow; 2. describing the natural history of the landscape (natural disturbance, human agents, succession); 3. determining integrated management objectives based on landscape parameters, industrial interests, public interest and other demands from the forest and legislation; and 4. using discretion in the use of non-native tree species. Every year a "Green Audit" is completed, which comprises a 5% random inventory of the current year's harvest areas. Department of Natural Resources employees (two forestry personnel and two biologists) conduct this audit. |
To better judge the industry's views about the current state of sustainable forest management in Canada, a questionnaire was sent to several large Canadian forest product corporations and forest leaseholders. Their opinions about the present sustainable forest management process in Canada are summarised below:
Opinions about the current policy:
_ Legislation and government policy towards sustainable forest management tends only to be focused on forest management for timber production.
_ It is important to consider the demands of First Nations tribes and local communities, but their demands often lie outside the boundaries of forest operations.
_ It is very difficult to obtain public participation because of the wide range of levels of understanding of the concept of sustainable forest management amongst the different stakeholders.
Impact on operations:
_ Reductions in the area of production forest expected to occur as a result of the impact of sustainable forest management varies between 5 and 16%.
_ A big problem is the demand for extensive documentation, public participation and extensive requirements to measure biodiversity under sustainable forest management systems.
_ Respondents were cautious about the effect of the implementation of sustainable forest management on wood harvest. They suggested that, generally, cutting levels may be reduced by 15% and production costs will be higher but, hopefully, there will then be fewer critics of forest operations.
_ Clearfelling is generally practised, but is sometimes modified to protect the soil and regeneration and more closely emulate natural disturbance patterns.
_ There is however, more and more use of partial cutting systems (e.g. shelterwood, thinning and irregular shelterwood systems) in order to simulate natural forest development processes.
_ The use of reforestation methods needed to maintain stand productivity has been reduced.
_ Managers now tend to leave more structural features in the forest such as: snags; patches of trees burned by wildfire; and woody debris.
_ Topics considered when implementing sustainable forest management systems include: biodiversity, fish and wildlife resources, recreation values, forest health, and landscape ecosystem management.
Challenges for the future:
_ There is an inadequate understanding about the concept of sustainable forest management amongst private woodland owners.
_ There is still a need for a broader discussion about sustainable forest management involving the government, local stakeholders and the general public.
_ There is still a general lack of understanding about forestry amongst the general public, particularly in urban areas (that tend to have the most political influence).
Another source of information about the current implementation of sustainable forest management in Canada is the study on private woodland owners in the Maritime Provinces,6 recently published by the National Round Table of Environment and Economy (NRTEE). The conclusions of the report can be summarised as follows:
_ the main forest management problems in forests that are privately owned, concern the overharvesting of what is becoming a declining resource and a lack of interest in long-term forest stewardship practices;
_ these problems arise partly due to a lack of understanding about the principles of sustainable forest management and the desire to make "fast money"; and
_ there is a lack of silvicultural programs and government planning to address these problems.
To overcome these problems, the report proposes a number of steps towards achieving sustainability including: increasing co-operation; better education and training for forest contractors and owners; and incentives for sustainable management. In summary, it suggests that tax reform, research and development, greater co-operative efforts, better training, a forest certification system and codes of forest practice, are needed.
The total productive forest area in the United States of America is about 195 million ha and is largely privately owned (see Figure 2). Federal timber supply has gradually been reduced throughout the United States of America as federal agencies have worked to meet environmental objectives that entered into legislation in the 1970´s. This has increased the reliance of the forest products industry on wood production from the country's estimated 9 million non-industrial private forest owners, who currently produce more than half of the industrial roundwood in the United States of America.
Forestland owned by the wood processing industry is often intensively managed, particularly the forest plantations in the Southern States. Consequently, the timber harvest is, on average, about three times as higher (per ha) than in private forests. However, this is nowhere near enough to secure adequate future wood supplies for the forest processing industry. As a result of this situation, the forest industry in the United States of America has realised that it is important to help non-industrial private forests owners to both intensify their forest management while, at the same time, meet sustainable forest management standards. This task is a key element in the "Sustainable Forestry Initiative", developed by the American Forest and Paper Association (AFPA) and launched in 1995.
Figure 2: The current distribution of forest ownership in the United States of America
The main focus of activity on the development of sustainable forest management in the United States of America, is the AFPA's Sustainable Forestry Initiative. This program comprises a comprehensive system of principles, guidelines and performance measures that integrate the sustainable growing and harvesting of trees with the protection of wildlife, plants, soil and water quality.
AFPA members have agreed to practise sustainable forest management at all levels of their operations by carrying out a number of activities including the following:
_ following the locally determined Best Management Practices;7
_ protecting stream sites;
_ protecting aesthetic and other special places;
_ educate forest loggers, contractors and suppliers;
_ assisting private land owners; and
_ monitoring and reporting on performance in order to aim for continuous improvement.
As part of the Sustainable Forestry Initiative, a number of guidelines have also been formulated for the implementation of sustainable forest management:
For forest operations in an AFPA member's own forest, the member shall:
_ employ an array of sound practices in the growth, harvest and use of forest;
_ promptly reforest harvested areas;
_ protect water quality in streams, lakes and other waterbeds;
_ promote habitat diversity and the conservation of plant and animal populations;
_ design felling coupes to blend into the terrain and restrict the size of felling coupes;
_ manage lands of ecological, geological or historical significance for their special qualities;
_ contribute to biodiversity, enhance landscape diversity and provide an array of habitats;
_ improve the efficiency of forest resource utilisation; and
_ continue with the prudent use of chemicals in the forest.
When procuring wood and fibre from loggers and other landowners, the member shall:
Broaden the practice of sustainable forest management by involving: non-industrial landowners; loggers; consulting foresters; and company employees who are active in wood procurement, in extension and assistance programs. This includes promoting the training and education of loggers and informing landowners about sustainable forest management practices.
In reporting to the public and involving them in the practice of sustainable forestry, the member shall:
_ report annually on progress to the AFPA, who will issue an annual report to the public;
_ a group of independent experts will validate and draw conclusions from the reported progress; and
_ the public and the forestry community will have opportunities to participate in this process.
In addition to integrating sustainable forest management practices into the culture of the forest products industry, a key element of the Sustainable Forestry Initiative is to contact private woodland owners, loggers and foresters (who produce more than half of the industrial roundwood supply in the United States of America). Since 1995, more than 20,000 loggers and foresters have completed comprehensive training programs that include elements of sustainable forest management practices and, in 1997, more than 86,000 landowners across the country received information about the Sustainable Forestry Initiative.
In order to reach out to private landowners, loggers and foresters, the Sustainable Forestry Initiative has involved the creation of a network of alliances with other agencies, including: state forest associations; logging associations; government agencies; and universities. AFPA members also co-operate with conservation groups and others to develop and deploy sustainable forest management strategies that promote forest growth and are considered to be consistent with the promotion of biodiversity. They also provide funding for forest research.
In 1997, AFPA members reforested 1.3 million acres by planting, seeding and natural regeneration. This area represents about 2% of their total forest holdings, corresponding to a rotation period of about 50 years.
An example of one company's interpretation of sustainable forest management in the United States of America is given in Box 3. Felling coupes in Weyerhaeuser's forests vary from a few acres to a hundred acres and more and, in some states, the state set limits on the maximum felling coupe area. The size of felling coupes are determined by considering the landscape and surrounding forest and by following the locally determined Best Management Practices. In the mountainous Pacific Northwest, analyses of watersheds are regularly worked out with government agencies, environmental groups, native tribes and other landowners. The results from these analyses are used to prescribe preventive measures, correct past damage and monitor improvements. Wildlife conservation planning in these forests mostly concerns management for mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians, but very little is said about the conservation of plant life.
Box 3: An extract from Weyerhaeuser's strategy for intensive forest management
Weyerhaeuser's intensive forest management includes: _ preparing soil before planting; _ hand planting genetically improved seedlings; _ controlling competing vegetation; _ protecting the forest from fire, insects and disease; _ applying fertiliser to supplement natural nutrients; _ thinning stands when appropriate; and _ pruning trees for higher quality wood. Weyerhaeuser prefers clearcutting because: _ most tree species grow better when exposed to full sunlight; _ other harvesting methods make regeneration more difficult; _ clearcutting requires fewer roads and thus reduces damage to soil; and _ clearcutting is the most cost-effective harvesting method. Weyerhaeuser's goal is to plant one year after harvest. |
A questionnaire about sustainable forest management was also sent to a number of industrial forest owners in the United States of America. A summary of the answers received from various companies are given below:
Opinions about the current initiative:
_ Sustainable forest management and responsible stewardship of forestland are important issues.
_ A major priority should be to consider what is scientifically important, then to take into account other issues such as public opinion.
_ In general, state forest practice laws cover some aspects of sustainable forest management, particularly issues concerning water quality, but there are often few legal requirements to address other sustainable forest management issues.
_ The concept of sustainable forest management within the Sustainable Forestry Initiative goes beyond what is legally required in most states. Even the measures to protect water quality, set under the Best Management Practices, often go beyond what is legally required. The Sustainable Forestry Initiative is comprehensive, in that it covers a wide range of concerns, including: water; wildlife; aesthetics; and protection of special places.
Impact on operations:
_ Many companies reported that it was difficult to establish formal public participation in the process of developing their sustainable forest management policies.
_ All companies reported that they followed Best Management Practices, whether they were legally required or voluntary. Most companies assessed sustainable forest management at the landscape level and used statistically based field inventory surveys as part of their management planning.
_ Sustainable forest management programmes included measures to conserve or improve: reforestation; wildlife habitat; water quality; special areas; recreation areas; and soils, and to examine the cumulative or long-term effects of management.
_ Forest zonation is a widely used tool. For example, one company reported that they divided their forestlands into: intensive management areas; general management areas; restricted areas; and special places. Special places are either completely protected or are managed using special management practices.
_ When attempting to put sustainable forest management into practice, many companies reported that they had to rule out options such as banning clearcutting and the use of herbicides, because they would be too costly and unrealistic. However, some companies reported using selective harvesting systems for up to 50% of production.
_ As a result of implementing sustainable forest management, all companies reported lower harvesting volumes and higher operating costs, but most were not certain of the exact magnitude of these effects. A few suggested that operational costs had risen by 10-15%. Many suggested that it would be nice if these efforts were recognised and would result in fewer conflicts, but they were not sure that this would occur.
Challenges for the future:
_ The biggest problem at the moment is getting people outside the sector to believe that the companies are making real changes without regulation.
_ When they explained their policies to their critics, it was reported that many of their critics believed that only certification by the Forest Stewardship Council or government regulation would be good enough.
_ The Sustainable Forestry Initiative should be viewed as a living program that will always be modified as new information becomes available. The industry is still at a very early stage in the development of sustainable forest management and the aims and objectives of the initiative will always be changing. As noted above, in terms of redirecting the initiative, the highest priority should be given to new scientific information, followed by changes in public expectations.
_ Many non-industrial private forest owners harvest their forests without any plans for reforestation. They generally don't want to make the long-term investment that this requires.
_ Many of the US Forest Service forests are not currently being managed for timber production, due to a variety of constraints and restrictions. Many of these forests, particularly those at low elevations, are burning regularly and in a way that is not part of the historical disturbance regime.
The Russian Federation contains 23% of the world's forest area and about 55% of the world's growing stock of coniferous species. Although forest management in the Russian Federation was built on classical European forestry traditions and many of the forests there have been managed for more than 200 years, overharvesting in the European part of the Russian Federation has taken place over recent decades. This has led to the depletion of vast forest areas, has damaged the ecology in many places and has led to the loss of many highly productive sites. As a result, secondary birch and aspen forests have replaced over 30 million ha of natural spruce and pine forests and this conversion is projected to increase to between 60 million ha and 70 million ha during the next 15-20 years.
In the Far East of the Russian Federation, the forests have been high-graded for a long time.8 Of the many millions of hectares of the most productive forest that have been clear-cut during the last few decades, one-third is now classified as not regenerating. The general degradation of the forest resource towards low-value secondary forest after harvesting is typical across many of the regions of the Russian Federation.
In spite of the fact that the Russian Federation has made a number of international environmental commitments with respect to forestry, in reality the country has not taken any major steps to conserve biodiversity through improving forest management. The Russian Federation has subscribed to both the Montreal and Helsinki processes and has developed tentative criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management, which have been approved by the Russian Federal Forest Service. However, implementation of sustainable forest management is lacking due to administrative problems and a lack of financial resources. In summary, forest management in the Russian Federation does not yet adhere to even the most basic requirements of sustainable forest management, let alone some of the more advanced requirements.
The interest in establishing forest plantations (often with exotic or non-native tree species that would result in higher yields than natural forests) emerged in Europe during the last century. This interest was followed in a few other areas with, for example, New Zealand establishing Radiata pine plantations during the 1920´s and 1930´s. However, the establishment of large-scale forest plantations did not really take off until after 1945 and the main expansion of the temperate forest plantation area took place in various parts of the world from 1950 to 1980.
The main purpose of most forest plantations is usually to produce industrial roundwood (i.e. sawlogs, veneer logs, pulpwood and pitprops).9 Intensive management of these plantations represents a major investment and, consequently, forest processing companies are, in many countries, the main owners of forest plantations. Industrial plantation forestry is targeted towards producing large quantities of industrial roundwood at a competitive price. In areas where the climate favours rapid tree growth, such as in: Chile; New Zealand; South Africa; the Southern United States of America; and South-western Europe, plantation silviculture resemble the techniques used in agriculture. It includes the use of: genetically improved planting stock; intensive tending and pest control techniques; and fertiliser application (if necessary). The financial profitability of such silvicultural measures is assessed in terms of the impacts that they will have on sustainable crop yields and, eventually, projected timber revenues.
Forest plantations of Radiata pine and Eucalypti, established in the warm temperate climates of New Zealand, Southern Australia and Chile, have been particularly successful. In Europe, major areas of forest plantations have been found in countries with temperate climate on the Iberian Peninsula, in Central Europe and the British Isles. Depending on the location, different tree species are used in European forest plantations: Eucalypti and Pinus radiata in Spain and Portugal; Douglas fir in Central Europe; and spruces and pines in the British Isles. In the Nordic countries, as the result of intensive forest management aimed at increasing the yield of industrial wood, over half a million hectares have been cultivated with Lodgepole pine, which comes from North America but grows much faster than indigenous tree species.
The extensive industrial Yellow pine plantations of the Southern United States of America are notable by the fact that the Yellow pine is native to the area. However, in terms of the objectives of management and the way that these areas are managed, they resemble the exotic fast-growing forest plantations of New Zealand and Chile.
Probably the oldest forest plantations are the Douglas fir plantations that can be found in France and Central Europe. Douglas fir has proved to be a very successful species in this region and grows in stands on rotations of 100 years or more. It is likely that some exotic conifer species, including: Douglas fir; Sitka spruce; and Lodgepole pine, will continue to be cultivated on a large scale in European forest plantations, despite current public demands that there should be a greater use of native species.
By their very nature, forest plantations can have a greater impact on the environment than other types of forests and, consequently, the concept of sustainable forest management in forest plantations is more concerned with this particular issue than in other types of forests.
New Zealand provides one good example of a recent initiative to improve forest management in forest plantations. New Zealand has 1.5 million hectares of forest plantations (mainly Radiata pine). In 1995, the forest owners associations and the country's major environmental groups agreed upon a set of "Principles for Commercial Plantation Forest Management". They state that, in order for forest plantations to be managed sustainably, forest managers must:
_ safeguard stream margins and water bodies;
_ protect indigenous biodiversity in natural areas;
_ recognise and provide for indigenous biodiversity (where appropriate) in forest plantations;
_ conserve threatened species if they are found in the forest plantation;
_ not replace natural forests and other natural areas with forest plantations;
_ protect indigenous vegetation along the margins of water bodies; and
_ facilitate the restoration of depleted indigenous habitat in critical areas.
Ireland presents another example of recent developments in plantation forestry. In Ireland, forest plantations are mainly planted with Sitka spruce and Lodgepole pine. Current Forestry Acts deal with the sustainability of timber production but not with the sustainable production of other forest values. The state forest management company - Coillte - is the major forest plantation owner in Ireland (owning around 433,000 ha). It is at present actively involving stakeholders in the process of agreeing on criteria and indicators, which will enable forest management practices to be monitored and evaluated over time.
The process of establishing Standard Operating Procedures will involve several workshops and these procedures will aim to fulfil the six criteria for sustainable forest management agreed as part of the Helsinki Process. The aim is also that, in addition to the basic sustainable forest management requirements, these procedures will: "allow greater recognition of forest values other than timber production, which are often under-valued or taken for granted". The expected changes in operating procedures include the following:
_ greater diversity in plantations, with 20% of newly planted areas being planted with a different species (preferably broadleaves);
_ greater care with forest operations, particularly: ground preparation; drainage; and fertiliser application;
_ the use of improved harvesting practices that will minimise negative impacts on watercourses; and
_ the introduction of measures to avoid negative impacts on archaeological heritage and landscape.
Similar major initiatives are also under way in other countries with significant forest plantation estates, such as South Africa and the United Kingdom.
3 Representatives of 29 organizations representing different stakeholder interests collaborated in the working group and specialists in ecology and forest management from 8 universities and research institutes were consulted during the process.
4 Large landowners covering about 50% of Sweden's total forest area have adopted the standard.
5 Different estimates of this backlog have been made, suggesting that the area might have been around 15-20 million ha.
6 Around 82,000 small private forest owners, comprising over 30% of Canada's total number of woodland owners, are located in the Maritime Provinces (Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Prince Edward Island). These small woodland owners manage over 4 million ha of land.
7 Best Management Practices are measures to prevent or reduce water pollution caused by runoff as the result of forestry activities. The appropriate measures are determined according to the particular circumstances in each state.
8 High-grading refers to the process whereby the most valuable trees from the forest are repeatedly removed, gradually diminishing the quality of the forest that remains.
9 There are non-industrial plantations that are intended for other purposes, such as the production of wood for local construction activities, fuelwood and charcoal. However, these are mostly found outside the temperate and boreal forest zone and are, therefore, outside the scope of this report.
