Intensification of forest management and improvement of wood harvesting in Northwest Russia Timo Karjalainen, Timo Leinonen, Yuri Gerasimov, Markku Husso and Sari Karvinen (eds.) Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 110 http://www.metla.fi/julkaisut/workingpapers/2009/mwp110.htm ISBN 978-951-40-2149-7 (PDF) ISBN 978-951-40-2150-3 (paperback) ISSN 1795-150X www.metla.fi – Final report of the research project Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 110 http://www.metla.fi/julkaisut/workingpapers/2009/mwp110.htm � Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute publishes preliminary research results and conference proceedings. The papers published in the series are not peer-reviewed. The papers are published in pdf format on the Internet only. http://www.metla.fi/julkaisut/workingpapers/ ISSN 1795-150X Office Post Box 18 FI-01301 Vantaa, Finland tel. +358 10 2111 fax +358 10 211 2101 e-mail julkaisutoimitus@metla.fi Publisher Finnish Forest Research Institute Post Box 18 FI-01301 Vantaa, Finland tel. +358 10 2111 fax +358 10 211 2101 e-mail info@metla.fi http://www.metla.fi/ Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 110 http://www.metla.fi/julkaisut/workingpapers/2009/mwp110.htm � Authors Karjalainen, Timo, Leinonen, Timo, Gerasimov, Yuri, Husso, Markku & Karvinen, Sari (eds.) Title Intensification of forest management and improvement of wood harvesting in Northwest Russia Year 2009 Pages 151 ISBN 978-951-40-2149-7 (PDF) 978-951-40-2150-3 (paperback) ISSN 1795-150X Unit / Research programme / Projects Joensuu Research Unit / 338401, Intensification of forest management and improvement of wood harvesting in Northwest Russia, 350401 Impacts of changes in Russian national and regional forest policy on forest use in Russia Accepted by Leena Paavilainen, Director of Research, 29.01.2009 Abstract The project aimed to investigate the accessibility of forest resources in Northwest (NW) Russia, the impacts of both Scandinavian and current Russian forest management and wood harvesting on ecologically, socially and economically sustainable forestry, and to enhance the development of sustainable forest management and wood harvesting methods for NW Russia. The research group found both positive trends, but also development needs in forest management in Northwest Russia. Since 1993, the area of lands without forest vegetation needing forest regeneration has decreased to a half. On the other hand, in 1999-2006 almost every fifth hectare of clear felling was left without active forest regeneration measures. Moreover, the extent of intermediate felling has been insufficient being only about fifth of the annual allowable area and 9% of the total timber harvesting volume. Wood harvesting has been rather stable last 10 years in NW Russia, at the level of about 40 million m3 per year. Less than half of the annual allowable cut is utilised and most of the round wood is produced by large and medium sized logging companies. Traditional full-tree and tree-length harvesting methods and systems are still dominating in most of the regions even though use of cut-to-length method is becoming more common. Several factors hamper development of wood harvesting, including for example weak production infrastructure, weak road network, lack of own turnover means in companies, low quality in harvester and forwarder operator trainging, and increasing variable costs. Scenario analysis indicate that mature and over mature forests in NW Russia are able to secure wood supply at the current levels for the next 50 years, but that intensification of forest management would allow to substantially increase annual fellings. The discrepancy between forest resources and their accessibility has been regarded as one main problem of forest management. Good infrastructure is essential for harvesting operations and thus the economic accessibility of forest resources. Keywords silviculture, felling, forest code, wood procurement, logistics, conservation areas, forest resources, economic accessibility Available at http://www.metla.fi/julkaisut/workingpapers/2009/mwp110.htm Replaces Is replaced by Contact information Timo Karjalainen, Finnish Forest Research Institute, Joensuu Research Unit, Yliopistokatu 6 (P.O.Box 68), FI-80101 Joensuu, Finland. E-mail timo.karjalainen@metla.fi Other information – Final report of the research project Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 110 http://www.metla.fi/julkaisut/workingpapers/2009/mwp110.htm � Authors Chapter 1 Vladimir Korotkov, Timo Leinonen, Andrey Filipchuk, Maria Palenova, Evgeny Kuznetsov and Yuri Nesterenko Chapter 2 Chapter 2.1 Vladimir Korotkov, Timo Leinonen, Andrey Filipchuk, Maria Palenova, Evgeny Kuznetsov and Yuri Nesterenko Chapter 2.2 Maria Palenova, Andrey Filipchuk, Timo Leinonen, Vladimir Korotkov and Yuri Nesterenko Chapter 2.3 Sergey Chumachenko, Sergey Pochinkov, Ekaterina Kuhkarkina and Anna Yakovleva Chapter 2.4 Timo Leinonen, Maria Palenova, Vladimir Korotkov, Andrey Filipchuk, Yuri Nesterenko, Sergey Chumachenko, Sergey Pochinkov and Evgeny Kuznetsov Chapter 3 Yuri Gerasimov, Vladimir Siounev, Anton Sokolov, Timo Karjalainen and Vitaly Khljustov Chapter 4 Ari Pussinen, Katja Tröltzsch, Markku Husso, Kaija Saramäki, Bruce Michie and Anne Toppinen Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 110 http://www.metla.fi/julkaisut/workingpapers/2009/mwp110.htm � Contents Authors............................................................................................................................4 Foreword.........................................................................................................................7 Extended abstract..........................................................................................................8 Intensification of forest management......................................................................................... 8 Improvement of wood harvesting.............................................................................................. 9 Future development and economic accessibility of forest resources in Northwest Russia..... 11 1 Introduction..............................................................................................................13 References....................................................................................................................... 18 2 Intensification of forest management....................................................................20 2.1 Principles of forest management....................................................................................... 20 2.2 Development of forest management in Russia.................................................................. 27 2.2.1 Overview to forest management development ..................................................... 27 2.2.2 Forest inventory and planning .............................................................................. 31 2.2.3 Final cutting.......................................................................................................... 33 2.2.4 Thinning................................................................................................................ 38 2.2.5 Forest regeneration................................................................................................ 39 2.2.6 Especially protected natural areas (EPNA)........................................................... 42 2.2.7 Tendencies of changes in forest management organization.................................. 44 2.3 Comparison of different forest management regimes in Lyaskelskoe lesnichestvo in the Republic of Karelia................................................................................................ 46 2.3.1 Background........................................................................................................... 46 2.3.2 Method.................................................................................................................. 47 2.3.3 Assumptions.......................................................................................................... 48 2.3.4 Results................................................................................................................... 50 2.3.5 Net income analyse for 10 years period ............................................................... 55 2.3.6 Conclusions........................................................................................................... 56 2.4 Towards sustainable and intensive forest management ─ some important topics for further development of forest management in Northwest Russia................................... 57 References....................................................................................................................... 61 Appendix 2.1................................................................................................................... 64 Appendix 2.2................................................................................................................... 65 3 Improvement of wood harvesting in Northwest Russia.......................................67 3.1 Development in wood procurement ................................................................................ 67 3.1.1 Analysis of logging companies in the Republic of Karelia.................................... 71 3.1.2 Round wood balance and unreported flows ........................................................... 77 3.2 Development of harvesting methods and machinery....................................................... 80 3.2.1 Wood harvesting methods and systems.................................................................. 80 3.2.2 Forest machinery producers.................................................................................... 82 Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 110 http://www.metla.fi/julkaisut/workingpapers/2009/mwp110.htm � 4. Future development and economic accessibility of forest resources in Northwest Russia..............................................................................................107 4.1 Introduction................................................................................................................... 107 4.2 Future development of forest resources in Northwest Russia....................................... 108 4.2.1 Aim and method ................................................................................................. 108 4.2.2 Data..................................................................................................................... 108 4.2.3 Scenarios............................................................................................................. 109 4.2.4 Results................................................................................................................. 109 4.2.5 Discussion on scenario results............................................................................ 121 4.3 Analysing accessibility of forest resources................................................................... 122 4.3.1 Method of analysis.............................................................................................. 122 4.3.2 Data...................................................................................................................... 123 4.3.3 Input data and methods for analysing economic accessibility in Novgorod region................................................................................................. 124 4.3.4 Results for technical accessibility analysis......................................................... 125 4.3.5 Analysis of economic accessibility in Novgorod region..................................... 132 4.3.6 Case study on locating feasible routes from kvartals to the nearest road in the Novgorod region................................................................................................. 132 4.3.7 Discussion........................................................................................................... 135 4.4 Conclusions and further research needs........................................................................ 135 References..................................................................................................................... 136 Appendix 4.1................................................................................................................. 138 Appendix 1 Researchers........................................................................................................ 141 Appendix 2 Seminars............................................................................................................. 142 Appendix 3 Research training............................................................................................... 147 Appendix 4 Publications........................................................................................................ 148 3.3. Development of wood transport logistics........................................................................ 85 3.3.1 Background and method......................................................................................... 85 3.3.2 Application............................................................................................................. 87 3.4 Sustanability of wood harvesting and procurement........................................................ 89 3.4.1 Economics of wood harvesting .............................................................................. 89 3.4.2 Restrictions for wood harvesting and procurement in conservation areas ............ 91 3.4.3 Environmental impacts of different wood harvesting methods and systems.......... 97 3.5 Development program for improving wood procurement in Northwest Russia based on SWOT analysis............................................................................................... 100 3.6 Conclusions................................................................................................................... 103 References..................................................................................................................... 105 Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 110 http://www.metla.fi/julkaisut/workingpapers/2009/mwp110.htm � Foreword Four year research project Intensification of forest management and improvement of wood harvesting in Northwest Russia was implemented in 2004–2007 with an aim to increase understanding about the development of forest management and wood harvesting in Northwest Russia. Information about the project, including also publications can be found in project web-site http://www.metla.fi/hanke/3384/subproject-2.htm. Nearly 40 researchers from Finland and Russia participated in the project, from the Finnish Forest Research Institute, European Forest Institute, University of Joensuu, Karelian Research Centre (Forest Institute and Institute of Biology), All-Russian Research Institute for Silviculture and Mechanization of Forestry, Moscow State Forest University, Petrozavodsk State University, St. Petersburg State Forest Technical Academy, Rosgiproles, and Russian State Agricultural University. The project was financed by the Russia in Flux research programme of the Academy of Finland (decision number 105379), and participating organisations. The project belonged to a larger research consortium Towards progressive forest sector in Northwest Russia, which has published the final report in Finnish (http://www.metla.fi/julkaisut/workingpapers/2007/mwp062.pdf) and Russian (http://www.metla.fi/julkaisut/workingpapers/2008/mwp083.pdf). We hope that this project has helped moving from notions to more concrete level of understanding about the development of forestry in Northwest Russia. We also hope that the results will serve information needs of different stakeholders and those interested in forestry in Russia. We express our gratitude to the Academy of Finland and organisations that have financed the research, members of the steering group for their feedback during the project, researchers who participated in the project and for those who have contributed in different ways. We thank Leena Karvinen for finalising this report. In Joensuu Timo Karjalainen, Timo Leinonen, Yuri Gerasimov, Markku Husso, & Sari Karvinen (eds.) Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 110 http://www.metla.fi/julkaisut/workingpapers/2009/mwp110.htm � Extended abstract Intensification of forest management In Northwest Russia, larger-scale concentrated clear cutting implemented for decades in the 20th century, with failures in forest regeneration and forest growing have weakened the structure and quality of forests. This development now threatens the sustained availability of wood for the forest industry and increases the pressure to over-cut remaining economically accessible mature and overmature forests, which also have ecological values. The aim of this sub-project was therefore to analyze the development of forest management systems from the beginning of the Soviet era up to nowadays to understand the past development and contribute to the development of sustainable forest management methods for Northwest Russia. The approach was, on one hand, descriptive and comparative by analyzing the past development based on official data and reports of the state forest authorities and the research literature on Russian forestry. On the other hand, the approach was practice-oriented by analyzing alternative forest management strategies for the Lyaskelskoe forest district (Karelia Republic) with the use of the Russian simulation model FORRUS-S. In Northwest Russia, more than half of the total area of coniferous forests and about one third of the soft-broadleaved forests are composed of mature and overmature stands, while the proportion of maturing stands is only 7% and 10%, respectively. This kind of age-class structure describes large current harvesting potential together with a possibility to take care of nature protection and conservation of biological diversity. At the same time, this indicates a small timber yield of forests due to their high age and diminishing harvesting reserves during the coming decades due to the low proportion of maturing stands. Since 1993, the area of lands without forest vegetation needing forest regeneration has decreased to a half. On the other hand, in 1999–2006 almost every fifth hectare of clear felling was left without active forest regeneration measures. Moreover, the extent of intermediate felling has been insufficient being only about fifth of the annual allowable area and 9% of the total timber harvesting volume. In 2000s, the annual allowable cut in final felling has been utilized only by 40%, which describes well the current state of the forest sector in Northwest Russia. The proportion of specifically protected forest areas was 5% of the total forest area varying from 4% in the Republic of Karelia to 11% in the Pskov region. However, in production forests, ecological values of forests are not enough taken into account in forest management planning and in forest use. Simulation modelling of different forest management alternatives for the Lyaskelskoe forest district (učastkovoe lesničestvo) showed that depending on a chosen time horizon, different forest management alternatives gave better results on dynamics of tree species’ growing stock and annual net income. In the short term, the maximum net income was got on the forest management scenario of minimal expenses for planting and assistance to natural regeneration, and felling without undergrowth preservation. However, taking into account the long-term net income, this scenario took only the fifth place falling behind the best scenario for 14%. According to the profitability and stability, the most preferable was the scenario including lower annual allowable cut, age of final felling one age-class lower than regulated by norms, and implementation of thinning operations only in those stands, where the operations were profitable. In the Lyaskelskoe forest district, due to current age-class structure, problems with the available cutting area can appear already in 65–70 years. Until this time, most of the coniferous stands will be cut and planted stands will achieve their rotation age only after 90–100 years. One of the main Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 110 http://www.metla.fi/julkaisut/workingpapers/2009/mwp110.htm � reasons for future decrease in fellings of coniferous stock is a significant decline of coniferous planting in the end of the last and the beginning of this century. When developing the current forest management system, a forest user’s objectives for forest exploitation should be more clearly taken into account in the stage of forest management planning. Moreover, a forest user should know the influence of proposed silvicultural and harvesting operations on future growth and yield, timber-harvesting volumes and assortment structure as well as their economic efficiency. Based on calculations, a forest user should be able to choose the appropriate development alternative best meeting the forest user’s objectives for forest exploitation and the requirements of normative documents. As a significant increase of forest road construction and exploitation of new forest areas will take for years and would be also costly, it is worthwhile to move to a more intensive model of forest management in the areas already having a satisfactory forest road network and other infrastructure. Implementation of intensive methods of forest regeneration, intermediate treatments and final felling can remarkably increase the removals of intended timber-assortments per hectare, improve the profitability of forest-growing and timber harvesting, and decrease the total area needed for commercial cuttings, meaning savings for example in timber-transport costs, but also the conservation of forest territories undisturbed by human development. Although the advantages of intensification become apparent only after decades, strategically intensive forms of sustainable forest management have no alternatives in Northwest Russia. Improvement of wood harvesting Present wood harvesting and procurement practices in Northwest Russia have been studied from the point of view of their efficiency, productivity and safety risks taking into account prevailing conditions. Results and conclusions have been summarized as follows: • After the dropping of wood harvesting in the 1990s from 82 million m3, the period 2000-2006 is characterized by relative stability in logging, about 40 million m3 per year. • The quality of forests has been declining during 50 years: output of sawlogs has decreased by 8%, half of stands have the relative density of 0.6-0.4 and 12% of stands have less than 0.3. Logging companies are working selectively, preferring to cut coniferous stands. • Most of the surveyed logging companies use long-term lease (25 or 49 years) as a method for receiving logging permissions. Logging companies had approximately 40 million ha forests in lease and 47 million m3 of annual allowable cut in 2006, which is approximately 50% of the total annual allowable cut in Northwest Russia. In the Leningrad region and the Republic of Karelia, approximately 80% of forests are in lease. • There are great differences between the Nordic countries and Russia in wood harvesting methods and systems. In the Nordic countries, the cut-to-length method is dominating. In Northwest Russia, full-tree, tree-length, and cut-to-length wood harvesting methods are applied, but traditional full-tree and tree-length harvesting methods and systems are still dominating. Wood harvesting systems are usually partly mechanized. • The unit cost in wood harvesting is high and sometimes exceeds harvesting costs in Finland. The productivity of labor in the companies using traditional Russian machinery is extremely low. • Extraction of short-wood from the harvesting processes is becoming a more common practice in Northwest Russia. It is already common in the Republic of Karelia and Leningrad region, but expected to become more common also in the other parts of Russia. • One of the challenges in wood procurement is forest road construction. The road network Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 110 http://www.metla.fi/julkaisut/workingpapers/2009/mwp110.htm 10 density is poor in comparison with Finland and varies from 1.2 km/1000 ha in Komi to 11.6 km/1000 ha in Pskov. • Another challenge is the low utilization of thinnings. In Northwest Russia, only 4.5 million m3, or 12% of the total actual cut, is obtained from thinning operations currently. This is due to poor road network, lack of appropriate technology and lack of intensive forest management traditions and norms. • Accident risk is high, equaling 20 accidents (0.5 fatal accidents) per 1000 employees. • There is also lack of skilled harvester and forwarder operators. Preconditions for implementing modern technology chains and harvesting methods adequate to the new conditions in forest management and logistics in the chain from felling to delivery of round wood have been defined. The analysis shows that • There are several weak points in developing wood harvesting systems in Northwest Russia, including weak production infrastructure, lack of advanced road network, lack of own turnover means in companies, lack of advanced domestically made machinery, low quality of training especially for operators of harvesters and forwarders, and increasing variable costs. • Application of cut-to-length method would allow increasing the productivity of wood harvesting and thus improving economics of the logging operations. At the same time, harvesting of forest resources by cut-to-length method causes less environmental impacts than traditional methods and improves the ecological state of forest sites both in the short and long term. The other reasons for the development of cut-to-length systems include introducing of leasing, high reliability, good ergonomic and ecologic performance of harvesters and forwarders, reducing annual allowable cut in industrial regions and the possibility to introduce thinning operations, attention of society to ecological impacts of wood harvesting, small size of logging areas, reducing frequent moving of machinery, better quality of industrial round wood, possibility for monitoring wood removals in logging area, increasing requirements for using public roads. • Existing wood transport logistic methods and systems applied in Russia do not provide the basis for economic analysis. Approaches are suitable for companies which utilize traditional tree-length technology. However, introduction of the Nordic cut-to-length technology requires more attention to wood transport logistics. • GIS-based decision support program has been developed to assist logging companies in decision making related to planning, utilization and optimization of vehicle fleet. Searching of optimal routes could be used also for other applications, i.e. for forest road planning, fuel supply, seedling transportation etc. Application of the program and comparison of alternative delivery plans show that the efficiency of short-wood transport can be increased by 40%. Application allows processing of delivery plans and thus provides possibilities for producing several alternatives taking into account possible changes both inside and outside the organization. Most importantly, the program allows optimization of transportation operations. Requirements for economically and environmentally sustainable wood harvesting in changing forestry has been investigated and the results show that • The most of round wood is produced by large and medium sized companies which have remained and have been privatized since the planned economy. The importance of small enterprises is growing in Northwest Russia. A significant growth of small enterprises has been observed in the Leningrad region. • The economic, as well as technological, social, and environmental states of the logging companies vary greatly. Logging companies are becoming a part of vertically integrated structures of pulp and paper mills or sawmills that can develop logging. The Nordic cut-to-length method is rapidly being fully established. However, the tree-length method continues to play an important role as long as the old central processing yard equipment is in a good condition. The traditional wood harvesting method is also supported by effective western machinery. The Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 110 http://www.metla.fi/julkaisut/workingpapers/2009/mwp110.htm 11 Future development and economic accessibility of forest resources in Northwest Russia Objective: was firstly, to study the future development of forest recourses in Northwest Russia and secondly to analyse accessibility of forest resources. The methodologies applied were the European Forest Information Scenario (EFISCEN) model and a geographical information system (GIS) network analysis. European forest and growing stock maps by the European Forest Institute and harvesting cost data were applied to estimate available forest resources and their physical and economic accessibility. The EFISCEN model is a timber assessment model which predicts the development of forest resources in terms of standing stock, net annual increment and age class distribution. However, the model does not predict the demand of wood nor evaluate economically feasible felling levels. Future development of forest resources in the Northwest Russia included scenarios of forest resources until 2058. Three scenarios of forest management were applied: 1) Baseline- scenario, in which annual fellings were 85 million m3; 2) Increased felling- scenario, in which supply of wood increased 10% on five year intervals to 2058 and 3) Increased felling and thinning- scenario which follows a Nordic type of forest management after transition of fifteen years with a 30% share of thinnings in annual fellings. results of SWOT analysis predict shortage of forest resources for wood supply development in Karelia in the near future. Implementation of sustainable forest management based on commercial thinning operations and the Nordic cut-to-length method would improve the situation. Implementation of the cut-to-length method based on the modernization of machines or western engineering is an opportunity. Carefully made modernization and introduction of new methods could also improve the status of forest work among the young educated people. This would help to attract more motivated and skilled employees to companies. • The investigation shows the same average wood harvesting cost at road-side for all applied wood harvesting methods - approximately 7-7.5€ per m3. However, in the case of the cut- to-length method, the company has industrial round-wood, but in the case of the tree-length and full-tree methods logs need further processing at a central processing yard and additional production cost of 6-8€ per m3 incur. • The risk of unreported round wood or wood from conservation areas in the wood flow has to be taken into account when tracing the origin of wood for forest industries, as a part of the chain of custody. • Estimated amount of unreported round wood in the wood flow is 23%. The most critical regions are Leningrad, Novgorod and Pskov. In the Republic of Karelia and the Arkhangelsk and Vologda regions, the shares of official conservation areas of the forest fund vary from 6 to 8%. The Republic of Karelia has strict restrictions for wood harvesting. In the Republic of Karelia, all types of fellings are forbidden on a half of protected areas, and in the Vologda and Arkhangelsk regions in 40 and 27% of the protected areas. Wood procurement organizations operating in Northwest Russia are paying more attention to nature conservation than in the past. This increases the need for reliable information on existing limitations to forest use including restrictions for wood harvesting, road construction and other operations. Therefore the collected data for the current state of areas having wood harvesting restrictions, their locations and possible limitations to wood harvesting will be very useful for planning wood procurement activities in Northwest Russia. Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 110 http://www.metla.fi/julkaisut/workingpapers/2009/mwp110.htm 12 Although scenario analyses include numerous uncertainties, the results of the Baseline- scenario clearly indicate that in physical terms mature and over mature forests in Northwest Russia are able to secure wood supply for the next 50 years as well as a steadily increasing growing stock in all regions. The results of the two other scenarios indicate that in Northwest Russia there are enough forest resources to increase annual fellings over to level of 200 million m3. In the Baseline-scenario, the net annual increment decreased from 135 million m3 in 2008 to 127 million m3 in 2058 due to an increasing share of mature and over mature forests. In the Increased felling- scenario, the net annual increment was only three million cubic meters higher than in the Baseline- scenario since fellings increased gradually to 207 million m3 in 2058 and a time span of 50 years is not long enough to generate a large proportion of middle age forests with high net annual increment. However, by increasing thinnings (Increased felling and thinning- scenario), the net annual increment will reach 155 million m3 in 2058, according to the scenario results. When over mature forests form a substantial proportion of forest resources, like they do in many regions of Northwest Russia, fellings exceeded the net annual increment in our scenarios in some regions and thus did not fulfil one of the indicators of sustainable forestry. However, the only way to reach more productive forests is the regeneration of large areas of over mature forests. Long term forecasts for felling scenarios are highly uncertain because the future price movements of roundwood, market opportunities for wood products and harvesting costs in forestry are shrouded in uncertainty in Russia – and globally – for next 50 years. The discrepancy between forest resources and their accessibility has been regarded as one main problem of forest management in Northwest Russia. Within Northwest Russia there are substantial differences between the different regions in the density of road and railroad networks and other infrastructure which is essential for harvesting operations and thus the economic accessibility of forest resources. Due to a low yield of boreal forests of Northwest Russia, long distance transportation infrastructure (roads and railroads) has a significant impact on the economic accessibility of forest resources. In Leningrad and Pskov regions practically all forests (99%), in terms of both total forest area and total growing stock, have a road transportation distance of less than 100 kilometers to the nearest railway station while the corresponding figure in the Republic of Karelia is 82%, in Komi Republic 35 % and in Arkhangelsk region 38% of forest area and 36% of growing stock. However, it should be noted that floating as a timber transportation method was excluded from the GIS analyses and thus the gap in infrastructure between the well and less developed regions of Northwest Russia is not as substantial as the figures indicate. Secondly, all harvesting restrictions of commercial forestry (e.g. conservation areas) were excluded and thus the results indicate more potential related to existing infrastructure. A more detailed economic accessibility analysis of the Novgorod region highlighted the importance of a railroad network for forest management: a railroad network as a cost-efficient long-distance transportation system enables higher revenues for forestry and secures more options for timber allocation. By taking into account the whole logistical chain, which includes transportation from forest to processing facilities and finally to markets of final products, Northwest Russia can be regarded as a prominent area for a more intensive forest management compared to Russian Far East or Siberia. In the long run, a better developed infrastructure together with a more intensive forest management will drive harvesting costs down, or at least compensates the future cost inflation to some extent. Poor availability of data was one the main obstacles, but applied methodologies were found to be solid and worth of further development with more detailed data at the regional level. Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 110 http://www.metla.fi/julkaisut/workingpapers/2009/mwp110.htm 13 1 Introduction Russia is one of the major forest powers in the world. Almost all the forests of the Russian Federation belong to the boreal coniferous forest zone. As of January 1, 2006, the total area of lands managed for forestry purposes (the national forest fund) and forests that are not included in the forest fund was estimated in the Russian Federation at 1.2 billion ha with the growing stock of 82.3 billion m3 (Table 1.1). The Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation controls 97% of the forest fund area and 93% of the total growing stock (Ministerstvo prirodnyh… 2007). The proportion of lands covered with forest vegetation amounts to 65% of Russia’s terrain. After the planning system’s transformation, main tendencies in Russia’s forests and forestry have been the following: forest area, growing stock and the percentage of forest lands have increased forest area under the valid forest management plan, volume of actual harvest and the ratio of harvest size to increment have strongly decreased structure of ownership has not changed (Table 1.1). Table 1.1 General information about the forests of the Russian Federation (Lesnoj… 1990, Ministerstvo prirodnyh … 2007). Parameters 01.01.2006 1988 Forest fund, 1000 ha 1 174 223 1 182 555 Forest lands, 1000 ha 879 380 884 094 Forest area (lands with forest vegetation)*: 1000 ha 775 274 771 109 percentage of land area 45.4 45.2 Growing stock (mill. m3)** 82 346 81 645 Final fellings: mill. m3 overbark 127.6 302.7 Notes: *Forest area available for timber production (thousand ha): 2001 – 331 708.5 (43% of lands with forest vegetation); 1988 – 388 452.5 (50%), ** Growing stock on forest area available for timber production (mill. m3): 2002 – 40 468.4 (49% of total growing stock), 1988 – 47 595.1 (58%) (National report… 2003, Korotkov 2004). The Northwestern Federal District is rich of forest resources, as 16% of the growing stock of the Russian forests, available for exploitation, is concentrated in this region (Fig. 1.1). It is also the most important forest industry district producing 33% of merchantable wood, 28% of sawn wood, and 63% of paper in Russia (Federal’naja služba… 2007). This is a lot compared with the Siberian and Far Eastern Federal Districts, having more than half of the growing stock, where the corresponding proportions were 40%, 36% and 1%. The forests of Northwest Russia make more than half of all forests of Europe (Lesnoj fond… 2003). The forest area of the Arkhangelsk region is equal of that of Finland. More than 70% of the lands with forest vegetation are concentrated in the Komi Republic and the Arkhangelsk region. The northern regions, namely the Republic of Komi, Arkhangelsk region, Murmansk region, Republic of Karelia, and Vologda region, are located mainly in the northern and middle-taiga (boreal) zone, which is characterized by rigorous climate and a growing period of 117–140 days (Fig. 1.2). The northwestern regions, including Leningrad, Pskov, and Novgorod regions, are located in the • • • Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 110 http://www.metla.fi/julkaisut/workingpapers/2009/mwp110.htm 14 southern taiga zone and the zone of mixed forests with moderate climate and a growing season of up to 160 days. The annual precipitation varies from 300 mm in the northern taiga to 600 mm in the southern zone (Kaliničenko et al. 1991). The Vologda region and the Komi Republic have the highest percentage of forest lands in the European part of Russia (Appendix 1). Fig. 1.1 Distribution of growing stock (%) available for exploitation in the Federal Districts (FD) of the Russian Federation in forests belonging to the Ministry of Natural Resources (Federal’noe agentstvo… 2007). Fig. 1.2 Zones and sub-zones of forest vegetation and forest resources (numerator – forest land area, million ha, denominator – growing stock, million m3) in the Northwestern Federal District and for comparison in Finland (Lesnoj fond… 2003, Finnish Forest Research… 2005). NNoorrtthhwweesstteerrnn FFDD 1155..99%% Central FD 4 ..3% Southern FD 0.5% Privol skij FD 8.7 % Urals FD 11.0% Siberian FD 35.2% Far Eastern FD 24.4% ž Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 110 http://www.metla.fi /julkaisut/workingpapers/2009/mwp110.htm 15 In the district, the total area of lands with forest vegetation comprises 87.9 million ha with the growing stock of 10.0 billion m3 and the volume of annual allowable cut 102.4 million m3. The most important tree species are Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.), Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.), birch (Betula pendula Roth. and B. pubescens Ehrh.) (Fig. 1.3). Stands with domination of coniferous species prevail in all the regions with the exception of the Novgorod region (Fig. 1.4). In the Komi republic, about 60% of the coniferous-dominated forests and about 70% of the soft broadleaved forests are possible to exploit. In the Arkhangelsk region, the corresponding shares are about 70% and 80%. The biggest forest-protection categories in the I management group forests1, excluded from exploitation, are pre-tundra forests, restricted forest stripes protecting spawning grounds and forests of national parks and nature reserves. Fig. 1.3 Dominant tree species in Northwest Russia (Ministerstvo prirodnyh …2005, with modifi cations). Fig. 1.4 Area of coniferous and soft broadleaved (birch, aspen, alder) forests in the regions of Northwest Russia (Federal’noe agentstvo… 2007) 1 Include forests whose principal purpose is to perform water protection, protective, sanitation and health-improving functions, as well as forests of specially protected natural areas (Forest Code 1997). Spruce Pine Birch 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 Ko m i re pu bl ic Ar kh an ge ls k re gi on Vo lo gd a re gi on M ur m an sk re gi on Ka re lia re pu bl ic Le ni ng ra d re gi on N ov go ro d re gi on Ps ko v re gi on A re a, 1 00 0 ha Coniferous - total Coniferous - available for exploitation Soft broadleaved - total Soft broadleaved - available for exploitation Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 110 http://www.metla.fi/julkaisut/workingpapers/2009/mwp110.htm 16 More than half of the total area of coniferous forests is composed of mature and overmature stands (Fig. 1.5). Mature and overmature coniferous stands prevail in the Komi republic, Arkhangelsk and Murmansk regions because of the difficult economic accessibility of forest resources and the significant area of low-productivity forests. About 35% of the total area of soft broadleaved forests are composed of mature and overmature stands (Fig. 1.5). We can see a significant share of mature and overmature stands in all the regions of Northwest Russia. This is also connected with low economic accessibility of forest resources. Great political, economic, organizational and social changes in the recent history of the Russian Federation had a huge impact on the Russian forestry and forest industry sectors. Just before the reforms, wood removals peaked with 357 million m3 in 1987 (OAO NIPIEIlesprom 2003). In the shifting sands of the collapse of the Soviet Union, in 1990–1994 the volumes of realized fellings and produced merchantable wood2 drastically decreased by 60% (Fig. 1.6). After 1998, timber harvesting companies could increase their cutting volumes, and especially their wood export, due to the devaluation of the ruble, favorable prices on the world market and more stable functioning of forest industry companies. In 2006, in Northwest Russia the production volume of merchantable wood was still less than half of the level in 1990 indicating that the forest industry has not recovered 15 years after the collapse of the planned economy system. During the last few years, in Northwest Russia the volume of realized fellings has been 42–44 million m3 (Fig. 1.7). A large majority of the timber removal, on average, 84%, was cut in final fellings, while the proportion of intermediate and other fellings was 7% and 9%, respectively. Other felling includes felling along routes, forest path and roads, felling for different kinds of needs, and sanitary felling. The tradition to concentrate fellings to mature and overmature forests, mainly by clear felling, and to neglect intermediate fellings in young and middle-aged stands has continued in Russia for decades (Strakhov et al. 1996, Melehov 2002, Red’ko and Red’ko 2002). Forest management, wood harvesting, logistics, and delivery of wood to consumers are experiencing big changes due to ecological, economic, and social pressures from both inside and outside Russia. Traditional Russian systems are used side by side with imported modern technology. Economic sustainability can be questioned due to weak traditions and expertise of planning and control of systems by an economic basis. A big challenge for Russian forestry is to fulfill the requirements of western quality standards for ecological and social issues as well as for the quality of final products. 2 Round or split wood, excluding firewood, pitchy wood, and technological woodchips. Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 110 http://www.metla.fi /julkaisut/workingpapers/2009/mwp110.htm 17 Fig. 1.5 Forest area of coniferous and soft broadleaved stands by age classes in the regions of Northwest Russia (Federal’noe agentstvo… 2007). Fig. 1.6 Realized felling in Russia and the production of merchantable wood in Russia and Northwest Russia in 1990, 1993–2006 (Gosudarstvennyj komitet... 2001, Pisarenko et al. 2001, Federal’noe agentstvo… 2006, Federal’naja služba… 2006, 2007). Fig. 1.7 Realized fellings in forests managed by the Ministry of Natural Resources in Northwest Russia in 2003–2006 (Federal’noe agentstvo… 2006, 2007) Coniferous 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 Ko m i r ep ub lic A rk ha ng el sk re gi on Vo lo gd a re gi on M ur m an sk re gi on K ar el ia re pu bl ic Le ni ng ra d re gi on N ov go ro d re gi on P sk ov re gi on A re a, 1 00 0 ha Mature and overmature Premature Middle-aged Young Broadleaved 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 Ko m i r ep ub lic Ar kh an ge ls k re gi on Vo lo gd a re gi on M ur m an sk re gi on Ka re lia re pu bl ic Le ni ng ra d re gi on N ov go ro d re gi on Ps ko v re gi on A re a, 1 00 0 ha Mature and overmature Premature Middle-aged Young 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 19 90 19 93 19 94 19 95 19 96 19 97 19 98 19 99 20 00 20 01 20 02 20 03 20 04 20 05 20 06 M ill io n m 3 Realized felling, Russia Merchantable wood, Russia Merchantable wood, NW Russia 35446 36857 37331 34221 3587 4006 3903 3657 3005 3027 2798 4097 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000 45000 50000 2003 2004 2005 2006 10 00 m 3 Final felling Intermediate felling Other felling Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 110 http://www.metla.fi/julkaisut/workingpapers/2009/mwp110.htm 18 This report represents the main results and outcomes of the project “Intensification of forest management and improvement of wood harvesting in Northwest Russia” (2004–2007) being a part of the extensive and internationally oriented research programme “Russia in Flux” launched by the Academy of Finland (www.aka.fi/russia). The objectives of the project were to investigate the impacts of both Scandinavian and current Russian forest management and wood harvesting methods on ecologically, socially and economically sustainable forestry and to enhance the development of sustainable forest management and wood harvesting methods for Northwest Russia in three work packages: Ecological and economic analysis of forest management modes and silvicultural norms and practices in Northwest Russia Evaluation of alternatives for wood harvesting and logistics Analysis on the accessibility of forest resources in Northwest Russia. Altogether 38 researchers participated in the project from the following Finnish and Russian researcher organizations: Finnish Forest Research Institute, European Forest Institute, University of Joensuu, All-Russian Research Institute for Silviculture and Mechanization of Forestry (Pushkino, Russia), Moscow State Forest University, OAO Rosgiproles Institute (Moscow), Moscow Agricultural Academy, Petrozavodsk State University, Forest Engineering Faculty, Forest Institute and Institute of Biology of the Karelian Research Centre of the Russian Academy of Sciences (Petrozavodsk, Karelia republic), St. Petersburg State Forest Academy. The project was a part (subproject II) of a larger consortium project “Towards Progressive Forest Sector in Northwest Russia” focusing on forest policy (subproject I), forest management, wood harvesting and use of forest resources (subproject II), exports of roundwood and sawnwood from Russia (subproject III) and forest industry investments (subproject IV). More information of the consortium project can be obtained from http://www.metla.fi/hanke/3384/index-en.htm . The final report of this larger consortium project in Finnish can be downloaded from http://www.metla.fi/ julkaisut/workingpapers/2007/mwp062.htm . References Federal’noe agentstvo lesnogo hozjajstva. FGUP “Roslesinforg” 2006. Osnovnye pokazateli lesohozjajstvennoj dejatel’nosti za 1988, 1992–2005 gody [Federal Forest Agency. Federal State Unitary Enterprise “Roslesinforg”. Major indicators of forest management activity for 1988, 1992– 2005]. Roslesinforg, Moskva. 208 p. (in Russian). Federal’noe agentstvo lesnogo hozjajstva. FGUP “Roslesinforg” 2007. [Federal Forestry Agency. Federal State Unitary Enterprise “Roslesinforg”]. Dokumenty i produkty/ Obščie/Statističeskaja otčetnost’// (in Russian). Available at: http://www.roslesinforg.ru (accessed February 8, 2008). Federal’naja služba gosudarstvennoj statistiki Rossii (Rosstat) 2007. Regiony Rossii. Social’no- èkonomičeskie pokazateli. 2007. Statističeskij sbornik [Regions of Russia. Socio-economic indicators. 2007. Statistical book]. Rosstat, Moskva. 991 p. (in Russian). Federal’naja služba gosudarstvennoj statistiki Rossii, territorial’nyj organ služby po Respublike Karelija (Karelijastat) 2006. Lesopromyšlennyj kompleks regionov Severo-Zapadnogo Federal’nogo okruga Rossii: Sbornik [Forest industry complex of the regions in the Northwestern Federal District of Russia: Collection]. Karelijastat, Petrozavodsk. 168 p. (in Russian). Finnish Forest Research Institute 2005. Finnish Statistical Yearbook of Forestry, 2005. SVT Agriculture, forestry and fishery 2005:45. Finnish Forest Research Institute, Vantaa. 424 p. Forest Code of the Russian Federation 1997. Adopted by the State Duma on January 22, 1997. ARICFR, Moscow. 67 p. • • • Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 110 http://www.metla.fi/julkaisut/workingpapers/2009/mwp110.htm 19 Gosudarstvennyj komitet Rossijskoj Federacii po statistiki (Goskomstat Rossii) 2001. Regiony Rossii. Statističeskij sbornik [Regions of Russia. Statistical book]. Tom 2. Goskomstat Rossii, Moskva. 827 p. (in Russian). Kaliničenko, N.P., Pisarenko, A.I. & Smirnov, N.A. 1991. Lesovosstanovlenie na vyrubkah [Forest regeneration in cutovers]. Ekologija, Moskva. 384 p. (in Russian). Korotkov, V.N. 2004. National report of the Russian Federation // International workshop “Forest management planning status and changes after political and economic transformation in Central Europe”. Workshop proceedings. Bialowieza, Poland, 10–12 March 2004. Warsaw. p. 63–82. Lesnoj fond SSSR (po učetu na 1 janvarja 1988 g.). Statističeskij sbornik. 1990–1991. [Forest resources of USSR (according to the accounting on 01.01.1988). Statistical collection]. Goskomles SSSR, Moskva. Vol. 1: 1005 p., Vol. 2: 1021 p. (in Russian). Lesnoj fond Rossii (po dannym gosudarstvennogo učeta lesnogo fonda po sostajaniju na 1 janvarja 2003 g.) [Forest resources of Russia (according to the state accounting of forest resources on 1 January, 2003)] 2003. Spravočnik. VNIILM, Moskva. 640 p. (in Russian). Melehov, I.S. 2002. Lesovodstvo [Silviculture]. 2-e izd.dop. ispr. MGUL, Moskva. 320 p. (in Russian). Ministerstvo prirodnyh resursov Rossijskoj Federacii. Federal’noe agentstvo lesnogo hozjajstva 2005. Gosudarstvennyj doklad o sostojanii i ispol’zovanii lesnyh resursov v Rossiskoj Federacii v 2004 godu [State report about state and use of forest resources in the Russian Federation in 2004]. VNIILM, Moskva. 82 p. (in Russian). Ministerstvo prirodnyh resursov Rossijskoj Federacii. Federal’noe agentstvo lesnogo hozjajstva 2007. Gosudarstvennyj doklad o sostojanii i ispol’zovanii lesnyh resursov Rossijskoj Federacii v 2006 godu [State report about state and use of forest resources in the Russian Federation in 2006]. VNIILM, Moskva. 199 p. (in Russian). National report on temperate and boreal sustainable forest management criteria and indicators (Montreal process) 2003. ARICFM, Moscow. 84 p. OAO NIPIEIlesprom 2003. Russian Federation forest sector outlook study. A study prepared for the European Forest Sector Outlook Study (EFSOS). Geneva timber and forest discussion papers, ECE/ TIM/DP/27. United Nations, New York and Geneva. 59 p. Available at: ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/009/ ae887e/ae887e00.pdf (accessed February 8, 2008). Pisarenko, A.I., Strakhov, V.V., Päivinen, R., Kuusela, K., Dyakun, F.A. & Sdobnova, V.V. 2001. Development of Forest Resources in the European Part of the Russian Federation. European Forest Institute Research Report 11. Brill. 102 p. Red’ko, G.I. & Red’ko, N.G. 2002. Istorija lesnogo hozjajstva Rossii [History of the Russian forestry]. MGUL, Moskva. 458 p. (in Russian). Strakhov, V.V., Teplyakov, V.K., Borisof, V.A., Saramäki, J., Niemelä, P. & Myllynen, A-L. 1996. On the Ecological and Economic Impacts of Wood Harvesting and Trade in North-West Russia. Oy Feg - Forest and Environment Group Ltd., Joensuu. 152 p. Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 110 http://www.metla.fi/julkaisut/workingpapers/2009/mwp110.htm 20 2 Intensification of forest management 2.1 Principles of forest management The major principles of forest management are defined in the new Forest Code of the Russian Federation (Lesnoj kodeks… 2007) and in the number of other legal documents. Presently, these principles are designed for: 1 Sustainable forest management, conservation of biological diversity in forests, and enhancement of their potential; 2 Maintenance of habitat-forming, water-conservation, protection, sanitation, recreation and other beneficial functions of forests, to ensure that each person could exercise the right for a healthy environment; 3 Use of forests with due regard to their global environmental significance, as well as taking into account the length of their cultivation and other natural properties; 4 Multiple-purpose, sound, continuous, non-depleting use of forests to satisfy society’s needs for forests and forest resources; 5 Renewal of forests, improvement of their quality and yield; 6 Ensured protection of forests; 7 Participation of citizens and civil society associations in decision-making which may affect forests when they are used, protected and renewed, with procedures for and forms of participation to be compliant with the legislation of the Russian Federation; 8 Forest use by methods, which are not detrimental to the environment and human health; 9 Division of forests according to their purpose and establishment of categories of protection forests depending on beneficial functions they perform; 10 Inadmissibility of forest use by public authorities and local self-governance bodies; 11 Payment for forest use. Rules of forest management are defined by the legislative documents “Rules of forest logging”, “Rules of intermediate felling” and other. Before the new Forest Code, the description of a traditional system on forest management was based on the following legislative documents approved by the orders of the State Forest Service of Russia: “Basic regulation of final felling in the forests of the Russian Federation” (1993); “Basic regulation of intermediate felling in the forests of the Russian Federation” (1993); “Basic regulation of forest regeneration and afforestation in the forest fund of the Russian Federation” (1993), regional rules on final felling; regional instructions for intermediate felling; regional instructions for forest regeneration and afforestation and others. The traditional system includes the following types of forest management activities: 1 Final felling; 2 Intermediate felling; 3 Forest regeneration (artificial regeneration, assisted natural regeneration); 4 Fire prevention; 5 Bio-technical measures (among others, felling for feeding game animals); 6 Land improvement for recreation purposes; 7 Secondary forest use. Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 110 http://www.metla.fi/julkaisut/workingpapers/2009/mwp110.htm 21 The objectives for preparation of the Forest Code were to divide the functions of management, control and utilization of forests from each other, to increase the utilization level of forests and to raise forest incomes, to delegate certain powers of the Federation in the area of forest relations to regional authorities, to increase the level of domestic wood processing and to prevent illegal loggings. According to the Code, forest lessees are responsible for forest regeneration and certain fire safety and sanitary safety measures within forest parcels leased out for wood harvesting based on a forest development plan. In other forests, forest administration is responsible for forestry operations which are implemented by an external body on the basis of an action. Felling maturity and yield regulation In Russia, wood logging as the main type of forest exploitation is carried out according to three felling types: final, intermediate and other felling. Ages of final felling are separately set for protection forests and production forests. Age of final felling (age of maturity) is determined according to its environmental, economic, and social function, stand productivity, and biology of tree species (Filipčuk 2003). Ages of felling for the main forest forming species are defined by forest regions (lesnoj rajon) in forestry plans (lesnoj plan) of the subjects of the Russian Federation. Forest regions are defined by natural and climatic conditions and forest vegetation zones, having rather similar conditions for use, conservation, protection and regeneration of forests (Forest Code 15 §). The basic valid optimum ages for final felling are presented in the Table 2.1. Based on the Forest Code 2007, new rules of felling (Pravila zagotovki drevesiny 2007), forest tending (Pravila uhoda za lesami 2007) and forest regeneration (Pravila lesovosstanovlenija 2007) were approved in the summer of 2007. They define general requirements for these operations in all the forest regions of the Russian Federation. Besides, the authorized federal executive authority establishes individual rules for each forest region. In February 2008, these rules were still under preparation. Currently, wood harvesting is the main type of forest use. In final felling, over-aged and ripe trees are cut. Logging is also carried out during thinning, selective sanitation, reconstruction and other fellings connected with removing low-value trees as well as cutting of trees and bushes-type vegetation that looses safety, water protective and other functions. Wood harvesting is regulated in terms of annual allowable cut, whose calculation method state authorities of the Russian Federation determinate and which is indicated in a forestry management regulation (lesohozjajstvennyj reklament) for the territory of every forest district (lesničestvo) and forest park (lesopark). It is prohibited to exceed the annual allowable cut. Table 2.1 Ages of final felling (age of maturity) in the middle-taiga region of Northwest Russia (Federal’noe agentstvo… 2008a). * Parts of Arkhangelsk, Vologda and Leningrad oblasts, Komi and Karelia republics Dominant tree species Stand quality index (Bonitet) Age of final felling (age of maturity) production forests protection forests Middle-taiga region in the European part of Russian Federation* Pine, larch, spruce, fir III and higher 81–100 101–120 IV and lower 101-120 121-140 Birch, common alder All 61–70 71–80 Grey alder, aspen All 41–50 51–60 Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 110 http://www.metla.fi/julkaisut/workingpapers/2009/mwp110.htm 22 Final felling Traditionally, the notion “forest use” implies wood harvesting. In final felling, timber is harvested in mature and overmature stands. In Northwest Russia, in practice most final-felling (over 80%) takes the form of clear felling (splošnaja rubka). Selective (vyboročnaja rubka) and continuous felling (postepennaja rubka) is more widely used in the Murmansk and Leningrad regions. A grounded and reasonable volume of final fellings, which is statistically calculated, is referred to as the Annual Allowable Cut (AAC)3. In the past few years, AAC of Russian forests totaled up to 500 million m3 (2005 – 570.7 million m3), including 300 million m3 for the coniferous category. The ratio of AAC and actualised cut illustrates the “state-of-the-art” in all branches of the forestry sector. In spite of the fact that in 2005, in Russia only 23% of AAC was actually logged. In Northwest Russia, AAC decreased from 95.3 million m3 in 1988 to 92.2 million m3 in 2006 (for the coniferous category, from 67.5 to 52.0 million m3) (Fig. 2.1). It is noteworthy that at the beginning of the 1990s, growing demands for environmental protection and exhaustion of economically accessible forest-resources had resulted in a decrease of AAC, especially for coniferous. Along with the decrease of production, Russia is still going through structural reorganization. However, the forest sector has started to move its production facilities to the regions with higher consumption levels and closer location to foreign markets. Thus, based on the economic reasons, the Northwestern part of Russia has been prioritized for forest use and development. The most favorable economic conditions are created in the Karelia republic and in the Leningrad region, where in the 2000s, of the AAC 50–70% was used (Fig. 2.2). Fig. 2.1 Dynamics of the Annual Allowable Cut and the volume of final felling in Northwest Russia in 1988, 1992–2006 (Federal’noe agentstvo… 2006; http://www.roslesinforg.ru). 3 AAC is computed for each lesničestvo and forest park separately for production and protection forests by tree species groups (coniferous, hard broadleaved, soft broadleaved) dividing the total volume of allowable annual removal of timber for each tree species group by dominant tree species (Ministerstvo prirodnyh… 2007a). 0 20000 40000 60000 80000 100000 19 88 19 92 19 94 19 96 19 98 20 00 20 02 20 04 20 06 T im be r vo lu m e, 1 00 0 m 3 Annual Allowable Cut - total Annual Allowable Cut - conifer Final felling - total Final felling - conifer Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 110 http://www.metla.fi/julkaisut/workingpapers/2009/mwp110.htm 23 Fig. 2.2 Utilization of the Annual Allowable Cut in Northwest Russia in 1988, 1992–2006 (Federal’noe agentstvo… 2006; http://www.roslesinforg.ru). Intermediate felling Intermediate fellings (rubki promežutočnogo pol’zovanija) include thinning, selective sanitary felling (vyboročnaja sanitarnaja rubka), renewal (rubka obnovlenija) and reconstruction felling (rubka pereformirovanija) and other types of felling in low-value stands, as well as removal of shrubs and trees, which are losing their ability in nature protection. These different types of felling are conducted to ensure high productivity of forests, to improve the quality of trees and the sanitary condition of forests. The purpose of sanitary felling is to improve the condition of a stand by removing infected, damaged, dead and perished trees. Thinning represents a system of selective types of felling in a growing forest stand. Thinning ensures favorable growing conditions for retention trees. Common principles of thinning are very similar to those in Finland. However, in thinning rules there are differences with regard to Finland mainly related to defining the intensity of thinning (relative density vs. basal area), low allowed intensity in tending of sapling stands in one go, requirements to mark removed trees more than 8 cm of diameter before cutting and to establish experimental plots in sapling and older stands to define the volume of removed trees (Pravila uhoda za lesami 2007). These kinds of requirements easily increase harvesting costs and can decrease amounts of these essential operations. Depending on the age of a stand and the economic purposes of forest growing, thinning is subdivided as follows: Thinning of sapling stands (osvetlenie) – early cleaning (stand ages up to ten years), for improving species composition and the growth of the retention trees. Thinning of thickets (pročistka) – late cleaning is conducted in a young stand at the age of 11– 20 years to improve growth conditions and regulate the density of the main tree species. Thinning in middle-aged stands (proreživanie) – thinning is conducted in middle-aged stands (21–60 years) to improve the stem and crown form of the trees. Thinning in maturing stands (prohodnaja rubka) – Late thinning is carried out in a maturing stand to provide faster increment of stem diameter by the final felling. • • • • 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 19 88 19 92 19 94 19 96 19 98 20 00 20 02 20 04 20 06 % North-West Federal District Leningradskaya oblast Karelia republic Komi republic Arkhangelskaya oblast and Nenecky AD Vologodskaya oblast Murmanskaya oblast Novgorodskaya oblast Pskovskaya oblast Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 110 http://www.metla.fi /julkaisut/workingpapers/2009/mwp110.htm 24 In Northwest Russia, the actual volume of intermediate felling in comparison with needed volume is insignifi cant (Fig. 2.3). In sapling stands, the actual volumes have annually been less than half of the planned volume (Lesnoj fond... 2003, Federal’noe agentstvo… 2006). Fig. 2.3 Target and actual volume of intermediate felling by types in Northwest Russia (Lesnoj fond… 1999, 2003). Reasons for small amounts of intermediate fellings have been, among others, concentration to more productive fi nal fellings, wood-harvesting technology inappropriate for thinnings, undeveloped forest-road network and lack of demand for pulpwood in many regions. In Northwest Russia, in 2006 the volume of intermediate fellings made up only 3.7 million m3. It was 11% of timber harvested at the fi nal fellings. In fact, higher volumes could be harvested under the conditions of developed pulpwood markets. The volume of intermediate felling can make up at least half of fi nal fellings volume without breaking the rules of sustainable forest management. 0 500 1 000 1 500 2 000 2 500 3 000 3 500 4 000 A re a, 1 00 0 ha Stands needing intermediate felling in 1998 Stands needing intermediate felling in 2003 Actual volume 1993-1997 Actual volume 1998-2002 Sapling stands &thick ets Middle-aged Maturing Renewal fellin g Selective sanitation fellin g Reconstru ction fellin g In Finland, during the rotation timely fellings and the utilisation of the natural drain can increase the total volume of harvested commercial timber by 20–30%, mainly logs, and the profi tability of forest management by one third or even more compared to unmanaged stands (Hynynen and Ahtikoski 2005). Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 110 http://www.metla.fi /julkaisut/workingpapers/2009/mwp110.htm 25 Forest regeneration The main goal of forest regeneration is to timely restore economically-valuable stands on the felling sites, burnt areas and dying-off sites, as well as to decrease the land area of the forest fund not covered with forest vegetation. In Russia, the overwhelming majority of forests are of natural origin, and only 3% of the lands covered with forest vegetation are artifi cially planted. Forest regeneration is closely linked to harvesting. The reduction of harvesting volumes has decreased clear-felled areas being the main type of forest regeneration sites. In Russia, the annual forest-regeneration area has exceeded the clear-felling area since 1989 (see Chapter 2.2.5). According to the state account of the forest fund (Lesnoj fond… 1995, 1999, 2003), in Northwest Russia the area of lands without forest vegetation has decreased signifi cantly. On the other hand, in 1999–2006 almost every fi fth hectare of clear-felling was left without active forest regeneration measures (Fig. 2.4). This development threatens the sustainability of forest management and worsens the quality of forming stands. According to Pisarenko et al. (1992), in 1966–1989 the ratio between regeneration areas and clear-felling areas averaged 0.84 in Northern and Northwestern regions of Russia. Therefore, the level of forest regeneration has not changed in last 40 years. For that reason, securing on-time and qualifi ed forest regeneration should be highly recognized in forest policy, forest legislation and forest management in practice (Leinonen et al. 2008). Fig. 2.4 Dynamic of forest regeneration and clear felling in Northwest Russia in 1988, 1992–2006 (Federal’noe agentstvo… 2006, Ministerstvo prirodnyh… 2007b). 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 19 88 19 92 19 93 19 94 19 95 19 96 19 97 19 98 19 99 20 00 20 01 20 02 20 03 20 04 20 05 20 06 A re a, 1 00 0 ha Forest regeneration Planting and seeding Clear felling Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 110 http://www.metla.fi/julkaisut/workingpapers/2009/mwp110.htm 26 Main differences between forest management in Russia and Finland In Russia and Finland, common principles of forest management are rather similar. However, forest ownership, intensity of forest management and public support on forestry differ remarkably (Table 2.2). Table 2.2 Comparison of forest management between Russia and Finland. * Finnish Forest Research… 2007, ** FAO 2006 Russia Finland Forest land ownership, %: Federal 100 Private 60, state 26, companies 9, others 5* Intensity of forest use: Annual timber removal, m3 ha-1 in 2006 Russia 0.2, Northwest Russia 0.5 2.8 Main felling methods; Proportions of methods from the total area treated with fellings in 2006: Final felling/intermediate felling/other Northwest Russia: 49/39/11 28/71/1 Infrastructure; Density of forest road network, m/ha Russia 1.3, Northwest Russia 2.0 12.3 Public support on funding for forest improvement works and forest road construction State subsidies are not enough. According to the new Forest Code (2007), regional authorities and lessees are responsible for forest improvement work and forest road construction Tax deductions and state subsidies for private forest owners (incl., among others, tending of sapling and pole stands; tending of peatland forests, incl. restoration drainage; health fertilization; forest road construction) Principles of forest management planning In production forests, the ultimate target is timber-production based on the principles of sustainability, while actions for conservation of biological diversity in forests are not enough In commercial forests, more emphasis is laid on ecological sustainability, incl. conservation of biological diversity and important forest habitats, and on landscape factors and demands of multiple-use of forests Designated functions of forest area – primary function in 2005, %**: 1. Production, 2. Protection, 3. Conservation, 4. Social services, 5. Multiple purpose Russia: 1-76.9, 2-8.7, 3-2.0, 4-1.5, 5-10.8 1-91.2, 2-0, 3-7.2, 4-0.2, 5-1.5 Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 110 http://www.metla.fi/julkaisut/workingpapers/2009/mwp110.htm 27 2.2 Development of forest management in Russia At the beginning of an analysis of peculiarities and tendencies of forest-management development in Russia, it is essential to mention two factors, which have had a great influence. Firstly, forestry theory and forest planning appeared only in the first half of the XIX century, based on German roots, and only later Russian regulations were developed. Secondly, due to the vast forest resources and low-density population of Russia, the certain point of view still prevails, saying that it is possible to get enough timber without investments in silviculture. During the last 15 years, Finnish-Russian co-operation in forestry and environmental protection between different stakeholders has been active. Finnish and other western partners including ministries, research and educational institutions, NGOs, forest industry companies need further researched based information about the development of forest management practices for the better planning and implementation of their actions related to Russia. Knowing the history helps to understand better the present and plan the future. Chapters 2.2.1–2.2.5 are mainly based on the publication Knize, A. & Romanjuk, B. 2005. O dvuh toček zrenija na rossijskij les i lesnoe hozjajstvo [About two points of view on the Russian forest and forestry]. WWF Rossii, Moskva. 16 p. (In Russian). This publication summarizes the development of Russian forestry that may not be that familiar to non-Russian readers. 2.2.1 Overview to forest management development On April 5 1918, Sovnarkom (People’s Commissars Council - Soviet government) proclaimed the state property on forests. Forest management governing bodies began to form (Annex 2). After the October revolution 1917 and extraordinary fellings during the Civil War, the woodiness of European Russian dropped down from 35% in 1914 to 23% in 1926 (Strahov et al. 2001). Illegal logging reached the industrial scale. The main purpose of forestry of that period was to protect forests against illegal fellings. During the 1920s–1930s, the aim of management of nationalized forests was felling of maximal amounts of wood using the cheapest methods, in order to maximize the quantity of cut wood. Forest inventory and planning (FIP) was cancelled and its projects were replaced with forest- exploitation plans. Therefore, instead of forest growing, only forest harvesting was practiced, and the dominating point of view was that nature would restore the cut forests by itself, with only minimal amount of silvicultural activities. In 1926, the forestry budget expenditures in the Russian Soviet Federative Socialistic Republic (RSFSR) were 5 kopecks per ha: 3 kopecks were used on leskhozes (forest management unit - FMU) maintain, 1 kopeck - on central and regional administration and only 1 kopeck - on silvicultural activities directly (Koldanov 1992). The Soviet government understood that the assurance of wood export is important for the recognition of the Soviet state. Furthermore, this was a way to get the currency, which was very needful for the state. The restoration of timber export began in 1920, partially by means of granting northern forests into concessions. In 1921, the wood export was 750 000 m3, in 1922 it reached 1 753 000 m3, and in 1924 - 3 584 000 m3. In terms of the sold timber cost, in 1921, Russia exported wood 7% of the pre-war one. In 1925, timber delivery of the whole country hardly exceeded 100 million m3, and in 1927, it reached 136 million m3. In 1932, forest harvesting was doubled, reaching 263 million m3, and to 1937, it was planned to cut 550 million m3 annually (Bobrov 2001). Later ecological distortion made the government divide the forests into two types – exploitable and protection forests. Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 110 http://www.metla.fi/julkaisut/workingpapers/2009/mwp110.htm 28 The final changeover of the Russian economy from market-based “new economic policy” to the socialist command and distributive system, which was completed in the 1930s, led to the cardinal reconstruction of the forest management system. That new structure of forest management in Russia, formed in 1930, remained valid until 1993. Its main elements were: 1 Complex forest enterprises (leskhozes, lespromkhozes and so on), which carried out both forest management and final fellings with timber processing, 2 Absence of market relations; forest resources were distributed by orders, 3 Absolute centralization of forest-lands disposing functions in the ministries and government agencies of the Union of the Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) (and Russia), 4 Priority of the timber industry over forest management (Girjaev 2004). Therefore, while before 1930 the main source of money for forestry was the income from selling of standing wood on forest auctions, in later years, until recently, the main way of covering the forest-management expenses was government funding on leftovers. Before forests, heavily break-up by hyper-intensive cuttings, could recover a bit and restore their ecological functions, the World War II started, and new extraordinary fellings started again. Huge overharvesting of the periodic yield was inevitable in that time. During 1942–1943, almost all- harvestable wood was cut in Povolzhsky, Uralsky, Volgo-Vyatsky and Central regions. After the war, it was decided to increase wood harvesting in the forest-rich northeast of the European Russia. Soon harvesting volumes reached and overpassed the pre-war level. In 1945, 168 million m3 was provided, in 1946–186, in 1947–202 and in 1948–250, which was 1.5% above the pre-war level (Bobrov 2001). Moreover, the structure of harvested wood changed significantly. Before and during the war, the major part of the wood was firewood. The share of merchantable wood, which reached 45–47% in the 1910s–1930s, decreased to 37% during the war (Tehničeskij proekt…, 1980). After the war, there was a massive rebuilding of ruined houses and the whole national economy was in the rebound. All that required a large amount of merchantable wood. Its proportion of the total volume of harvested wood began to increase, reaching 62% by 1950, and 71% by 1961. In 1950, 33% was covered by sawing and sleeper blocks, 25% by merchandise used in round form, and only 3% by pulpwood, peeler block, and match block. In 1960, these figures reached 46%, 20%, and 5%, respectively (Tehničeskij proekt…, 1980). Thus, while before and during the war merchantable wood formed less than a half of all harvested volume and the majority was firewood, after the war the most of harvested wood became merchantable wood. It should be noted that in Russia, the major part of the sawlogs are until now harvested from coniferous species (Federal’noe agentstvo… 2006). The reduction of the need for firewood and the jump of the value of coniferous industrial wood clearly showed that the use of the existed harvesting methods (concentrated fellings), without any compensating silvicultural measures, leads to the significant replacement of coniferous species by hardwood and to the loss of forest resources’ functions (Fig. 2.5). This led to the development of felling rules, instructions for forest inventory and planning (FIP), and regulations on preserving coniferous and hard-leaved understory trees. In addition, more attention began to be paid to artificial regeneration. Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 110 http://www.metla.fi/julkaisut/workingpapers/2009/mwp110.htm 29 Fig. 2.5 In large clear-felling areas, hardwood species have replaced coniferous. Muezeskij district, Karelia republic. Photo: Pavel Čikulaev However, the size of cutover lands, which was far from silvicultural norms and other reasons, prevented the complete stop of the replacement process: during 1961–1966, the coniferous area declined by 4.4% (Koldanov 1992). That process was influenced not only by specific cutting methods, but also by the fact that the forest planting plan was fulfilled only pro forma. The formal completion of the forest-regeneration plan, not the real forest management, was the top priority; as a result, quantitative indicators were reached with prejudice to the quality of forest lands. The appraisal of leskhozes had almost no connection with the final aim of silvicultural activities – the increment of stands’ productivity. Forest administration suffered from a hard pressure of forest industry, and consequently, new felling rules were approved in the 1960s. Based on forest accounting in 1975–1979, it was found out that in the European part of Russia forest resources had significantly exhausted (Gusev et al. 2004). Moving the main timber harvesting into Siberian forests was not possible due to the insufficient working capacity of the Trans-Siberian main railway line. In 1979, the next felling rules approved by the State Silvicultural Committee of the USSR were constituted (Belaenko et al. 1998). This was the first time when such rules were differentiated for regions of the USSR. However, we have to state that according to these rules, the sizes of cutting sites in harvesting units were far from those, which could assure regeneration of coniferous species. In the USSR, harvest volumes began to decrease after 1988. In 1988–1990, they declined by 24%; this tendency continued in the subsequent years. In Russia, the volumes of wood harvesting and production of the main wood products reduced in 2–3 times compared with the pre-reformation period (Belaenko et al. 1998). The decrease of the haulage volumes was determined by the fact that since 1972, disposal of old logging facilities was higher than commissioning the new ones; renovation of the machinery and instrumentation stopped almost completely. Since 1991, the management of the Russian forests, as of the whole forest complex, came into the period of the most radical transformations. Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 110 http://www.metla.fi/julkaisut/workingpapers/2009/mwp110.htm 30 On the 6 March 1993, the Supreme Soviet of the Russian Federation adopted a resolution “About the order of implementation of the Basis of forest legislation of the Russian Federation”. Section 8 of the Basis confirmed the separation of forest management functions from final felling. Therefore, silvicultural units were exempted from the duty of industrial-scale wood harvest and the wood-processing department was exempted from the leskhozes. As a result, the main way left for leskhozes to earn their own money was wood harvesting during intermediate felling. In the situation of insufficient government funding, leskhozes began aggressively thin middle- aged and maturing stands and carry out renewal thinning which provided the high outcome of merchantable wood. While in 1975–1992, the proportion of intermediate fellings in the total volume of harvested wood was 7–9%, in 1994–1996, it reached 14–16% (Belaenko et al. 1998). In practice, those intermediate fellings were selective fellings where the most valuable trees were harvested, and this led to degrading stand quality. The same document (sec. 28) allowed selling standing wood during forest auctions. Thus, the presence of the standing wood cost, which was rejected since the 1930s, was recognized de facto. On the other hand, neither owner’s rights nor his amenability for the forest state and silvicultural level were defined. The Basis of forest legislation was developed before the adoption of the Russian Constitution, which caused several contradictions between the Basis and the Main Law of Russia. That is why on the 4 February 1997, the Basis was repealed and replaced by the Forest Code of the Russian Federation. The new legislation act redistributed the powers between the federal government, the subjects (oblasts, republics), and the municipal administrations. The order of forest lands’ leasing was changed, making forest tenders the main way of extending the lease. It was enacted into law that forest regeneration is funded from the budgets of the subjects of the Russian Federation. According to the Code, the central government of Russia should have defined the minimal rates for wood harvest and the regions the real values of these rates. However, the silvicultural funding system, described in the Code, worked only partially. A leskhoz had no economic interest in its activities, because any income from the mature forest sold went to the budget, then a certain sum was sent from the budget to the leskhoz, and this sum value was not affected by the quality of that unit’s work. After reforms in the beginning of the 1990s, forest industry units moved into the private sector of economy. They took forest lands on lease up to 49 years. Currently, there are regions, where forest lands are almost completely divided between leasers. Auctions where cutover lands are traded are also carried out now. The largest harvesting companies and leasers invested significantly into wood transportation, plant, and equipment. All this motivates the companies for long-term profitable business and investment into forest management. To summarise, it is important to note that misunderstanding of the silvicultural role in the national economy causes the main problems. This is the very reason, why during the Soviet time, all reforms in silviculture affected only the highest levels of forest management of the whole country (see Annex 2). The central forest-management organ of the country many times changed its subordination, got and lost its sectoral independence more than 20 times, i.e. almost each 3–4 years. Chief executives of the branch were displaced 40 times, i.e. each 2 years on the average which could not support sustainable forest management (Vysšie organy… 1971). Currently understanding of this tradition has changed only little. Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 110 http://www.metla.fi/julkaisut/workingpapers/2009/mwp110.htm 31 2.2.2 Forest inventory and planning FIP functions began to restore little by little since 1922. In 1926, “Instruction for inventory, planning, inspection and economic investigation of national forests of RSFSR” was issued (Gusev et al. 2004). In 1923–1928, 61 million hectares of forests were inspected. According to the All-Russian Central Executive Committee decree “About the situation and development perspectives in forestry” from 1929, forest management was completely organizationally united with the timber industry. FIP as an academic subject was excluded from the syllabus of forest colleges. The volume of forest use was settled not by the persistence of forest use, but only by the powers of logging units and by the accepted schedule of forest resource absorption. In the 1930s, the complex of FIP works was in fact replaced with forest-economical surveys and forest inventories. Excessive cuttings in the most populated regions resulted in negative ecological consequences. Therefore, Sovnarkom (The Soviet National Committee) divided all Soviet forests into two types – merchantable and protection. In 1936, 20 km-wide water protection zone was detached along rivers, which made to develop the full projects of forest management. Thus, the normal FIP began to restore, which was concerned with the activity of the Main Administration of Forest Protection and Reforestation (Glavlesookhrana) created under Sovnarkom. The administration personnel developed “Instruction for field FIP works in 1938” and “Temporary rules for silvicultural actions according to FIP scheme in 1937–1938”. The instruction specified the aims of forest management in water protection zones and defined the measures to be fulfilled for the regime of river improvement (Fig. 2.6). This document remained in force until 1946, when Glavlesookhrana approved a new one - “Instruction for inventory, planning, and revision of bank-protection forests” (Gusev et al. 2004). A task was set to increase the volume of intermediate felling and to rectify (put in order) forest sanitation and fire protection. Because of works fulfilled in 1937–1946, 49.5 million ha of forests was arranged. Fig 2.6 In water protection zones along lakes and rives, forest use is restricted. Pečora river, Komi republic. Photo: Vladimir Korotkov Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 110 http://www.metla.fi/julkaisut/workingpapers/2009/mwp110.htm 32 The state inventory of forest resources became regular only after the end of the World War II. The creation of the state inventory system demonstrated the need for uniform the valuation of any forest in the country. In the early 1950s, the Ministry of Forestry of the USSR developed and approved the new “Instruction for the USSR national forest inventory and planning”. Forest management projects began to replace forest exploitation plans. At the regional level, however, FIP, forest management and forest use was carried out according to the rules of state-planned economy, based on generalized numerical indicators, not concerned with factual cartographic materials. As a result, the planning and realization of state forest policy always suffered from the low response rate and sometimes were not adequate. In 1964, the State Committee of Forest, Pulp and Paper, Woodworking Industry and Silviculture under the State Planning Committee of the USSR approved the second “Instruction for national forests inventory and planning”. It was developed taking into account forest groups and site types, in accordance with the principles of expanded reproduction and differentiated organization of forestry on vegetation zones and economic regions. This instruction was oriented to the interests of the forest industry even more than the previous one. While section 10 of the instruction said that FIP projects, after their approval, should be considered as obligatory tasks, this was not realized in practice. The gathering approach dominated: to harvest the naturally grown yield and move on. All forests of Russia were recognized by the beginning of the 1970s. In 1986, Gosleskhoz (State Silvicultural Administration) of the USSR approved the first part of “Instruction for FIP in the united national forest resources of the USSR”. Organization issues and FIP tasks, stated in that instruction, were defined according to the requirements of “Basis of forest legislation of the USSR and united republics”, and constituted in 1977. In 1989, additions and changes to this instruction were approved. According to these documents, all forests, including collective farms, had to be arranged on a single technique. The second part of the instruction, which regulated the cameral work, was approved only in 1990. It was developed based on “Concept of the forestry development in the USSR till 2005”, approved by Goskomles (State Forest Committee) on May 6, 1989. For the revision period, the main task of FIP was to create long-term programs on the rational use and reproduction of forest resources at two levels of forest management – regional one and leskhoz one. Calculation methods for final and intermediate felling were not changed, although the principle of persistent use was approved as the basis, and the methodology for alternative calculations of felling in accordance with long-term forest land dynamics was suggested. In 1994, Rosleskhoz (Federal Forestry Agency of the Russian Federation) approved the next instructions for FIP. The developers’ main aim was to provide the high reliability of FIP data, to specify and define quantity and quality characteristics of forest lands and forest resources as the basis for rent accounting of forest use, to implement the objective cadastral valuation of forests, and to organize rational and not-depleting forest use. The aim to get the high reliability of the data was not achieved due to the bad economic situation and the reduction of the forest-mensuration staff. The current materials of FIP contain a propagated systematic error in forest evaluation, caused by the domination of ocular evaluation methods. Currently, FIP is considered as a middle-term (up to ten years long) program of sustainable forest management and use, which was historically developed on the local level (township, leskhoz, forest district – lesničestvo) in the general system of the federal-wide hierarchy of forest management including federal, regional and local levels. According to the revised forest legislation, FIP tasks include also the development of regional plans of forest use and resource reproduction (Lesnoj Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 110 http://www.metla.fi/julkaisut/workingpapers/2009/mwp110.htm 33 kodeks… 2007, Postanovlenie Pravitel’sva… 2007). The aim of these plans is to define the main strategic trends in forest use and forest management on a long-term basis, taking into account the whole complex of natural resources and economic development factors in every single constituent entity of the Russian Federation (region, republic etc). Summarizing the review, we can state two serious problems in modern Russian FIP. Firstly, in spite of the increased scope of FIP, the related documentation is not updated in time. Secondly, until now, forest planning remains the weak point; contemporary Russian forest management plans do not correspond to business plans, which do not facilitate the investments; only some kinds of silvicultural activities are being planned, while their costs and effectiveness are not estimated at all. Forecasting dynamics of the forest-land areas and economic grounds of silvicultural activities do exist only within pilot projects. 2.2.3 Final cutting In the 1920s, the Soviet government defined the aim of forestry as “to provide timber for working population, state needs, and wood industry”. To achieve this, it was supposed to repeal silvicultural requirements for final cutting. In 1929, Sovnarkom decree allowed clearcut areas larger than 50 ha. Only in 1939, “Rules for cuttings in merchantable part of water-protection zone and for overmature forest cuttings in prohibited belt of water-protection zone” (Janickaja et al. 2003) were approved at last. According to these rules, the main harvesting method was clear-cutting. The width of the cutting area was defined as 50 m in dry lichen pine forests, 100 m in other coniferous forests, and 250 m in soft-leaved forests (Fig. 2.7). Cutting cycles were fixed at three years for pine and spruce and at one year for soft-leaved forests. All these rules were applied to bank-protection forests only, the others were still exploited without restraints. In 1950, the first “Rules for final cuttings in the USSR forests” (Pravila rubok… 1950) appeared; before that, allotment instructions of 1940 were applied for merchantable forests. Those rules set the width of a cutting area for zones 2 and 3 of the II group forests (forests in densely populated or industrial areas) to be 100 m for coniferous species and the cutting cycles were set from three to five years, depending on a species and a stand type. The width of a cutting area could be increased with the permit of the forest-resource base. For the III group forests (the main source of raw material for forest industry), where logging operations were mechanized, the allowed width of a cutting site was 1 km for railroad logging and 500 m for trucking. The length of a cutting site was fixed at two kilometres, and cutting cycles were three years for pine and two years for spruce and soft-leaved species (including the cutting year). These rules did not limit timber harvesters too much. Fig. 2.7 Clear cutting has traditionally been the main harvesting method in Northwest Russia. Muezeskij district, Karelia republic. (Photo: Alexandr Seliverstov) Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 110 http://www.metla.fi/julkaisut/workingpapers/2009/mwp110.htm 34 In the I group forests (forests with water protection, protective, sanitation and health-improving functions), rare at that time, the situation was different. According to “Rules for forest restoration cuttings in the I group forests, prohibited and protection belts along rivers, highways and railroads” (Pravila lesovosstanovitel’nyh rubok… 1952), high cutting ages were set: for pine 161 years, for pine in lichen and sphagnum pine woods of IV - V capacity classes 141 years, for spruce 141 years, for birch and basswood 81 years, and for aspen and alder 61 years. For all species, the width of a cutting area was fixed at 50 m. Cutting cycles were the following: five years for pine, four years for spruce and three years for soft-leaved species. These rules secured forests from depleting cuttings. Merchantable forests were still cut in an extermination way, and the situation only worsened with the appearance of the bucking program, which usually did not correspond to the assortment structure of merchantable volume. It was impossible to fulfil this program without overharvesting of coniferous species and undercut of hardwood ones. This led to the early depletion of resources. The main method of wood transportation was floating. Integrated timber harvesting enterprises (lespromkhozes) rather widely used conditional clear-cutting, absent in the rules. In mixed hardwood-coniferous stands, the conife