The Effects of Ground Based Skidding on Saplings during Forest Thinning Operations in Summer Season

Year 2018, Volume: 1 Issue: 2, 1 - 7, 29.10.2018

Saliha Ünver Okan

Abstract

Wood harvesting are one of the main activities that directly affect many
elements of ecological forest ecosystem. Especially in terms of silvicultural,
thinning and selection cutting can cause significant damage to the saplings
that are both to the sustainability of the forest and the wood products of the
future. In this study, damage types and grades of uncontrolled ground-based skidding
to the saplings were determined. The study was carried out in harvesting units
applied thinning with an average slope of 65% and main tree species oriental
spruce [Picea orientalis L. (Link)]
and eastern beech [Fagus orientalis
Lipsky.]. In the scope of the study, saplings who were smaller than 10 cm in
diameter around the skidding routes were examined in the harvesting units
during the summer season. Diameters of the damaged seedlings were measured and
the damage types they saw were determined as crushing, lean, top breaking,
uprooting and side-lying. It was determined some damages to saplings as lean
(25%), uprooting (21%), crushed (20%), side lying (19%) and top breaking (15%)
during the skidding activities. As a result of the study, it was determined
that thin-diameter seedlings are more likely to suffer side-lying damage while
thick-diameter seedlings are exposed to lean and uprooting damage. Controlled
skidding on a fixed or artificial route using simple machine power can be
effective in reducing the damage to saplings in harvesting units with high
sapling density.

Keywords

Ground Based Skidding, Damage to Saplings, Residual Stand, Thinning Operations

References

• Acar, H. H. & Unver, S., (2004). Determination of the harmful effects of wooden raw materials regarding technical and environmental aspects and recommendations for the solution. Journal of Bartın Forestry Faculty, 6, 6, 165-173.
• Alahie, H. (1997). The study of skidding in the Hyrcanian Forest of Iran. Tehran University Press, Iran.
• Alder, D., (1980). Forest volume estimation and yield prediction vol. 2-yield prediction. Food and agriculture organization of the United Nations (FAO). ISBN 92-5-100923-6. Rome.
• Anderson, H. W., (1994). Some implications of logging damage in the tolerant hardwood forests of Ontario, 3–28, In. Rice, J.A. (ed.), Logging damage: The problems and practical solutions, Ontario Forest Research Institute, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Forest Resource Report, 117, 69p.
• Anonymous, (2002). Climate datum relating to Trabzon. The report of Trabzon Meteorology General Director, Trabzon, Turkey.
• Badraghi, N., (2013). Productivity, cost and environmental damage of four logging methods in forestry of Northern Iran (Doctorate Thesis). Dresden University Faculty of Environmental Sciences, 77p.
• Badraghi, N., Erler, J. & Hosseini, S. A. O., (2015). Residual damage in different ground logging methods alongside skid trails and winching strips. Journal of Forest Science, 61, 12, 526–534.
• Bertault, J-G. & Sist, P., (1995). The Effect of logging in natural forests, Boist. Forest Tropic, 245, 5-20.
• Buğday, E. & Menemencioğlu, K., (2013). Forest harvesting damages to residual trees and saplings in mixed forests (A case study: Ilgaz Forests, Turkey). Proceedings of International Caucasian Forestry Symposium (pp. 265-270), Artvin, Turkey.
• Eliasson, L., Lageson, H. & Valinger, E., (2003). Influence of sapling height and temperature on damage to advance regeneration. For. Ecol. Manage. 175, 217 – 222.
• Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), (2004). Reduced impact logging in tropical forests - literature synthesis, analysis and prototype statistical framework. Forest Harvesting and Engineering, Forestry Department - Working Paper 1, Rome.
• Franklin, J. F., Berg, D. R., Thornburgh, D. A. & Tappeiner, J. C., (1997). Alternative silvicultural approaches to timber harvesting: variable retention harvest systems. In: Kohm, K. A. & Franklin, J. F. (Eds.), Creating a forestry for the 21st century, Island Press, Washington, DC, 111-139.
• Granhus, A. & Fjeld, D., (2001). Spatial distribution of injuries to Norway spruce advance growth after selection harvesting. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 31, 1903-1913.
• Hosseini, M., (1996). Harvesting operations in the northern forest of Iran. Forest and Range Magazine, 25, 32-38.
• Hosseini, S. M., Madjnonian, B. & Nieuwenhuis, M., (2000). Damage to natural regeneration in the Hyrcanian Forests of Iran: a comparison of two typical timber extraction operations. Journal of Forest Engineering, 11, 2-8.
• Kuramoto, S., Sasaki, S., Abe, S. & Ishibashi, S., (2010). Post-harvest damage and subsequent survival following selection harvesting of small understory trees in a mixed conifer–hardwood forest in Hokkaido Island, Northern Japan. Proceedings of FORMEC 2010 Forest Engineering: Meeting the needs of the society and the environment (pp. 1-4). Padova, Italy.
• Kuramoto, S., Ishibashi, S., Iida, S., Sasaki, S., Takahashi, M. & Takao, G., (2008). Composition and size structure of canopy tree species in conifer-hardwood mixed forests in northern Japan, under the selective logging disturbance. Proceedings of 6th Workshop of "uneven-aged silviculture" IUFRO group in Shizuoka (pp. 83-83).
• Naghdi, R., Bagheri, I., Taheri, K. & Akef, M., (2009). Residual stand damage during cut to length harvesting method in Shafaroud Forest of Guilan Province. Journal of Environmental Sciences, 60, 931–947.
• Newton, M. & Cole, E. C., (2006). Harvesting impacts on understory regeneration in two-storied Douglas fir stands. West. J. Appl. For., 21, 14–18.
• Nyland, R. D., (1994). Logging damages. Central hardwood notes. North Central Forest Experiment Station Note, 3 p.
• Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), (1994). Environmental impact assessment of roads. Report of OECD scientific expert group, Paris, 186 p.
• Ong, R. & Kleine, M., (1995). DIPSIM: A dipterocarp forest growth simulation model for Sabah. Forest Department, Malaysia, Forest Research Center Researches, 2, 94p.
• Pereira, R. J., Zweede, J. C. & Asner, G. P., (2002). Forest canopy damage and recovery in reduced impact and conventional logging in Eastern Para, Brazil. Forest Ecology and Management, 168, 77-89.
• Preuhsler, T. & Jakobi, K. P., (1996). Effects of a shelterwood felling on the natural regeneration. Forst Holz, 51, 205 – 211.
• Rushton, T., Brown, S. & McGrath, T., (2003). Impact of tree length versus short-wood harvesting systems on natural regeneration. Forest Research Report 70. Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources.
• Sikström, U. & Glöde, D., (2000). Damage to Picea abies regeneration after final cutting of shelterwood with single- and double-grip harvester systems. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 15, 274-283.
• Siren, M. & Surakka, H., (2010). Sapling damage in mechanized selection cuttings. Proceedings of FORMEC 2010 Forest engineering: Meeting the Needs of the Society and the Environment (pp. 1-8), Padova, Italy.
• Stuart, W. B. & Carr, J. L., (1991). Harvesting impacts on steep slopes in Virginia. Proceedings of 8th Central Hardwood Forest Conference (145-151). Radnor, Pennsylvania.
• Tavankar, F., Majnounian, B. & Bonyad, A. E., (2012). Felling and winching damages to natural regeneration in the Hyrcanian Forests of Iran. International Journal of Agronomy and Plant Production, 3, 300–305.
• Tiernan, D., Owende, P. M. O., Kanali, C. L., Lyons, J. & Ward, S. M., (2001). Selection and operation of cable systems on sensitive forest sites. ECOWOOD project deliverable D2 (Work package No. 1), quality of life and management of living resources contract, 100.
• Unver S. (2008). Determining environmental and quantitative effects of human power based ground skidding and the damage prediction model (Doctorate Thesis). Available from Council of Higher Education and Theses database. (Thesis No. 233655).
• Unver, S. & Acar, H.H., (2009), Evaluation of residual tree damage in sloping areas due to harvesting operations by manually. Austrian Journal of Forest Science, 126, 3, 119-132.
• Unver-Okan, S., Gumus, S. & Acar, H.H., (2017). Assessment of wood harvesting activities in terms of sustainable forest management. Proceedings of International forestry and environmental symposium (IFES) (pp. 231). Trabzon, Turkey.
• Virdine, C. G., Dehoop, C. & Lanford, B. L., (1999). Assessment of site and stand disturbance from cut-to-length harvesting. Proceedings of 10th Biennial Southern Silvicultural Research Conference (288-292). Shreveport, Louisiana.
• Vorob, V. N., Danchenko, A. M., Bekh, I. A., Panevin, V. S. & Burkov, V. P., (1994). Is it possible to preserve advance growth when using harvesters? Lesnoe Khozyaistvo, 6, 33-34.
• Westerberg, D., (1995). Profitable Forestry methods-maintaining biodiversity as an integral part of Swedish Forestry, In: Bamsey, C.R. (Ed), Innovative silviculture systems in Boreal Forests, Clear Lake Ltd., Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, 61-65.
• Whitman, A., Brokaw, N. & Hagan, J., (1997). Forest damage caused by selection logging of mahogany in Northern Belize. Forest Ecology and Management, 92, 87-96.
• Yigit, N., Colak, E., Ketenoglu, O., Kurt, L., Sozen, M., Hamzaoglu, E., Karatas, A. & Özkurt, Ş., (2002). Environmental impact assessment “EIA”, Ankara, ISBN 975-96176-1-7, 592p.