Forest damage

Hantula, Jarkko; Elfstrand, Malin; Hekkala, Anne-Maarit; Hietala, Ari M.; Honkaniemi, Juha; Klapwijk, Maartje; Koivula, Matti; Matala, Juho; Rönnberg, Jonas; Siitonen, Juha; Widemo, Fredrik (2025)
 
Avaa tiedosto
Lataukset 

URI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-70484-0_12

Hantula, Jarkko
Elfstrand, Malin
Hekkala, Anne-Maarit
Hietala, Ari M.
Honkaniemi, Juha
Klapwijk, Maartje
Koivula, Matti
Matala, Juho
Rönnberg, Jonas
Siitonen, Juha
Widemo, Fredrik
Toimittajat
Rautio, Pasi
Routa, Johanna
Huuskonen, Saija
Holmström, Emma
Cedergren, Jonas
Kuehne, Christian

Sivut
p. 221-241


Springer
2025

How to cite: Hantula, J. et al. (2025). Forest Damage. In: Rautio, P., Routa, J., Huuskonen, S., Holmström, E., Cedergren, J., Kuehne, C. (eds) Continuous Cover Forestry in Boreal Nordic Countries. Managing Forest Ecosystems, vol 45. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-70484-0_12

doi:10.1007/978-3-031-70484-0_12
Näytä kaikki kuvailutiedot
Julkaisun pysyvä osoite on
http://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi-fe20241213102510
Tiivistelmä
Heterobasidion root and butt rot pose a greater risk in continuous cover forestry (CCF) than in rotation forestry (RF) in conifer-dominated forests, regardless of whether selective, gap or shelterwood cutting is used.
Damage from wind, snow, spruce bark beetle, and large pine weevil are likely to be less severe in CCF than in RF. However, the conversion of RF to CCF may briefly expose stands to windthrow.
Browsing by large herbivores on saplings may limit regeneration of tree species other than spruce in continuous cover forestry and reduce tree species diversity, but alternative silvicultural practices may also increase forage availability in the field and shrub layer. Browsing damage outcomes for saplings in CCF are difficult to predict.
For many types of damage in CCF, substantial knowledge gaps complicate the assessment of damage risk.
Collections