Dear David, dear Maksym, dear Gyde, dear netters
Thank you for starting this interesting debate on terminology, which,
of course, like most debates on terminology, raises questions of
substance.
We in Geneva (Timber Section of UN/ECE Trade Division and FAO) are
responsible for coordinating work on the Temperate and Boreal Forest
Resource Assessemnt 2000 (TBFRA 2000), which will be published in
1999, but with interim data to the Ministerial Conference in Lisbon in
June 1998. The enquiry, terms and defintions were drawn up after a
widespread process of consultation and we have now received (mostly
excellent) replies from national correspondents, which we are
validating, checking and analysing. Most correspondets are connected
to national forest invenories but have contacted all sorts of other
agencies. They have done a great job. This is a major cooperative
(multi-country, multi-organisation, but unfortunately mini-budget)
effort and we have tried to be open and transparent.
The "naturalness" question has of course been at the centre of much
discussion. The information is of the highest policy importance and
is classified as "must have". However, when we get down to "hard"
definitions, things become much less clear: what is "natural"? How
much disturbance is allowed before a forest ceases to be "natural"?
Can "naturalness" be restored? How intense must management be for a
stand to qualify as a "plantation"? All over the world, but
especially in Europe, there is a continuum of forest types, with no
easy well defined boundaries, so any definition is bound to be
arbitrary and displease some people. Also the definitions chosen must
be applicable world wide and be likely to be stable over the long term
(need to monitor change with constant definitions).
The strategy chosen has been to have 3 classes: "undisturbed by man"
"semi-natural" and "plantation". The two ends of the spectrum are
closely defined, while "semi-natural" is a residual as all forests
must be included in one class or another.
"Forest undisturbed by man" "shows natural forest dynamics such as
natural tree composition, occurrence of dead wood, natural age
structure and natural regeneration processes, the area of which is
large enought to maintain its natural characteristics and where there
has been no known significant human intervention or where the last
significant human intervention was long enough ago to have allowed the
natural species composition and processes to have become
re-established".
The plantation definition is given below by David (so three species
means it is NOT a plantation. It should be stated that the origin of
the stand through planting is only one aspect of the plantation
definition, but management intensity and species origin count a lot).
Semi-natural is everything else (the great majority of forest land in
Europe). The TBFRA information will be provided to the pan European
conference in Lisbon and differs in some respects (but not in the
broad intentions) from the definitions originally drawn up in the
Helsinki process, so the definition quoted below of "semi-natural" has
not been used by TBFRA.
Of course, correspondents had to exercise judgement in applying these
definitions and one important part of the validation process is to
compare these interpretations, and, if necessary correct data in the
light of this discussion (in the published version, all this
background information on data quality will be made available). We
are likely to have further long discussions on the interpretation of
these definitions.
I hope this is useful information for you all, and that TBFRA when it
appears will be used widely.
Kit Prins
Chief, Timber Section
UN/ECE Trade Division
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Forest terminology: plantations, seminatural forests
Author: David South <dsouth@sofserv.forestry.auburn.edu> at INTERNET
Date: 4/13/98 2:42 PM
At 02:58 PM 4/11/98 -0400, you wrote:
>Maksym - the English version of the definition of plantation for the TBFRA
>2000 is "Forest stands established by planting or/and seeding in the
>process of afforestation or reforestation. They are either: - of
>introduced species (all planted stands), or - intensively managed stands of
>indigenous species which meet all the following criteria: one or two
>species at plantation, even age class, regular spacing. Excludes: Stands
>which were established as plantation but which have been without intensive
>management for a significant period of time. These should be considered
>semi-natural." Source: UN-ECE FAO Temperate and Boreal Forest Resources
>Assessment 2000. Terms and Definitions. July 1997. GE. 97-2223I. 13 p.
>
Dear netters:
Is the UN-ECE FAO's definition of "semi-natural" forests (see above) roughly the
same as the definition adopted by the Ministerial Conference on the
Protection of Forests in Europe?
Do both definitions allow some plantations to be classified as
"semi-natural" forests?
(First Expert Level Follow-up Meeting of the Helsinki Conference Geneva,
June 24, 1994)
http://www.mmm.fi/english/minkonf/criteria.htm
Semi-natural forest: A stand which is composed predominantly of native trees
and shrub species which have not been planted. Also, a forest
which has developed gradually or accidentally, as its location or site
quality was not suited for intensive exploitation or production-oriented
management (e.g. in mountainous regions). (13)
13.Schuck, A., Parviainen, J. and Bncking, W. 1994. A review of approaches
to forestry research on structure, succession and biodiversity of
undisturbed and semi-natural forests and woodlands in Europe. EFI
Working paper 3. Draft 15.8.1994. 62 pp.
=================
Also, how would UN-ECE FAO classify a plantation with three planted species?
Does the UN-ECE FAO exclude all 3-species plantations?
David South
School of Forestry
Auburn University, AL 36849-5418
A member of the Forester's Chapter for ZPG
http://www.forestry.auburn.edu/people/faculty//biology/south/zpg/forester.html
dsouth@forestry.auburn.edu
334-844-1022
334-844-1084 (FAX)
As always, views expressed here are my own
(and I am not speaking on the behalf of others).
I use only 100% post-consumer paper in my home printer.
(discarded used office paper printed on one side)
=========================================================================
The world population is expected to double by the year 2100.
Therefore the annual demand for wood for energy (etc.)
will increase and might double (to more than 7 billion m3/yr).
To provide plantation wood for people in the future,
support the planting of trees on pastureland.
Set a goal of converting 8 million ha of pastureland/yr for the next 55 years.
This would increase tree plantations to about 5% of the world's landbase.
=========================================================================
Support Zero Population Growth for the United States
http://www.igc.apc.org/zpg/index.html
Mail converted by
MHonArc 1.1.0