Improved logging

Question 1

Managing selective logging to better protect tropical biodiversity

Answer 1

Aims and learning outcomes
Define selective logging and its impacts
Identify management methods for reducing impacts on forest and wildlife
Detail conservation options to protect logged forests from conversion

Question 2

Logged tropical forests

Answer 2

Over 400 Million hectares of tropical forest in permanent timber estate (e.g. Blaser et al. 2011 ITTO)

Question 3

‘Selective logging’ in the tropics

Answer 3

Only large marketable trees cut

Question 4

Effect of logging on biodiversity?

Answer 4

Species composition
IUCN Red-listed bird species
% of unlogged species persisting

Question 5

Species composition differs

Answer 5

Edwards et al. (2011) Proceedings B

Once logged is more similar to unlogged than twice-logged

Question 6

Red-listed birds decline

Answer 6

Not significant difference between once-logged and twice-logged but is less than unlogged

Question 7

Most primary forest species persist

Answer 7

75%, in twice or once logged

Question 8

Effect of logging on biodiversity?

Answer 8

Negatives

Changes species composition
Some species apparently extinct in landscape
Logging is harmful, re-logging magnifies harm

Positives
Substantial amount of biodiversity persists
Includes Red-listed species (e.g. orang utan)

Question 9

Managing logging for biodiversity

Answer 9

Key issue is how to best manage logging of primary forests
Emergence of…
Market incentives (FSC, REDD+)
Regulation (e.g. Bolivia, Brazilian Amazon)
We need to understand how best to direct incentives or regulation
What is best approach for biodiversity?

Question 10

Managing logging to reduce biodiversity losses

Answer 10

• Reduced impact logging
• Lower intensity logging
• Land-sharing vs land-sparing logging

Question 11

Reduced Impact Logging (RIL)

Answer 11

Includes a host of strategies designed to:
Reduce damage to forest structure

Reduce release of carbon

Increase viability of timber harvest over time

Prerequisite for timber certification under Forest

Stewardship Council (FSC)

Access to lucrative Western markets (price premium 5-77% above uncertified timber)

Question 12

Pre-harvest inventories

Answer 12

Comprehensive Harvest Plan

Identify, measure and geo-locate all:
harvestable species

Protected species
Protect a number of mature ‘seed’ trees

Question 13

Pre-harvest preparation

Answer 13

Planned roads
Straight
Narrow
To target trees
Limits on log dumps
Vine cutting

Question 14

During harvest

Answer 14

Crews trained in directional felling & extraction

Use of big tracked vehicles

Question 15

Does RIL reduce damage?

Answer 15

Lower residual damage in E. Kalimantan
Bertault & Sist 1997 Forest Ecology & Management

Similar number and volume of trees felled but fewer injured trees and dead trees and less skidding damage

Smaller area of skid trails, with better recovery

Question 16

Biodiversity benefits of RIL?

Answer 16

Conducted a meta-analysis
Compared species abundance changes between primary and CL or RIL
3,474 comparisons from 41 studies
Birds, inverts, mammals & amphibians
Bicknell et al. 2014 Current Biology

Question 17

Lower intensity logging

Answer 17

Farming at lower intensity reduces losses
What about under logging?
Meta-analysis of relative species richness between primary and logged forest
98 comparisons from 48 studies
Birds, inverts, mammals & amphibians
Burivalova et al. 2014 Current Biology

“Mammals & amphibians would suffer a halving of species richness at logging intensities of 38 and 63 m3 ha-1, respectively”

Question 18

Is lower intensity logging viable?

Answer 18

Would offer improved species retention…
But, also reduces timber yields
Could that increase demand for forest?
Also lacked studies of mammals and amphibians from SE Asia
logging intensities of >100 m3 ha-1
Plenty of mammals & amphibs (not quantified)

Question 19

Land-sharing vs land-sparing logging

Answer 19

Lower intensity logging = less biodiversity loss, but less timber
What if must produce a set yield from a concession?
Map this issue onto the land-sharing vs land-sparing framework
Framework currently focused on agriculture (e.g. Phalan et al. 2011 Science)

Question 20

The incentives required to produce either scenario are equal
So which scenario do we want for biodiversity protection?
Use our bird, dung beetle and ant data
All species and primary forest species
Data were sampled at transect levels in the three land-use types

Answer 20

Generate 1000 hypothetical communities for each scenario by resampling transects
-4 low yield vs 3 high yield+1 primary transects
Community level: calculate the overall species richness
Species level: calculate the abundances of each species separately
How many species ‘win’ under each scenario?

Edwards et al. 2014 Global Change Biology

Question 21

Overall species richness

Answer 21

Land sparing is lower than land-sharing

Land sparing gives more winning species

Question 22

Land-sharing vs land-sparing logging

Answer 22

How best to manage logging of primary forest for biodiversity?
Land-sparing logging best
Lesson:  leave some primary forest
Develop policy drivers for land-sparing
Extend to other regions and services
What happens after logging ceases?

Question 23

Managing logging for biodiversity

Answer 23

Several ways of reducing biological harm, but…
Biggest threat is conversion of logged forests to farmland
Especially in over-logged forest
E.g., ~35 Mha logged forest in Indonesia

Question 24

How best to prevent conversion of logged forests?

Answer 24

1) Conservation purchases

RSPB & Birdlife to protect Harapan forest
Primary or degraded forests?
Do degraded lands represent cost-effective conservation? (Fisher, Edwards et al. 2011 Conserv Lett)
Logging records from 300,000 ha of forest
Span first, second and clearance rotations
Net Present Value of timber
Vs. metrics of biodiversity value
Cost-effective conservation?

Question 25

Cost-effective conservation?

Answer 25

Protecting twice-logged forest minimises cost, but retains much biodiversity
1 ha unlogged = 5 ha twice-logged
Protect meta-population dynamics, buffer primary forests & retain connectivity
Explore the relationship between timber profit & biodiversity in other regions
Understand the optimal balance between primary and logged forest purchasing

Question 26

2) Carbon enhancements & REDD+

Answer 26

Carbon sequestered sold under REDD+

Liberation cutting of lianas and shrubs
Enrichment planting of diverse tree spp.

Important opportunity to restore biodiversity?
OR destructive “carbon farming”?					                   (Putz & Redford 2009 Global Env Ch)
11,000 ha forest restored since 1994
Two rounds of liberation cutting
1.2 million seedlings of 52 tree species
Focus on birds
Small recovery of species richness
Minimal impact on composition

Question 27

Species susceptible to logging

Answer 27

12 species declined after logging

7 are IUCN Red-listed
Susceptible species unaltered

Question 28

Avifaunal trends
Recovery of:
Species richness
Insectivores

No difference in susceptible species

Answer 28

Reduction in:
Abundance
Frugivores

Loss of vine tangles for foraging/nesting?
Loss of fruits from vines & shrubs?

Question 29

2) Carbon enhancement & REDD+

Answer 29

Bio-friendly mechanism for funding protection of degraded forest (Edwards et al. 2010b Conserv Lett)
Will intensively logged areas…
Regenerate to approximate a primary forest?
Remain in state of arrested succession?
Predict value of restoration for biodiversity vs costs of management

Question 30

Summary

Answer 30

Logging is widespread & harms wildlife
RIL recover forest & stems biodiversity loss
Lower intensity logging protects more wildlife, but timber yields lower
Land-sparing with intensity logging & matched primary protection is best
Conservation purchases & carbon enhancements options to stop conversion