*

Integrating conservation objectives into forest management: coppice management and forest habitats in Natura 2000 sites

Paola Mairota (1)   , Peter Buckley (2), Christian Suchomel (3), Katrin Heinsoo (4), Kris Verheyen (5), Radim Hédl (6-7), Pier Giorgio Terzuolo (8), Roberto Sindaco (8), Anna Carpanelli (9)

iForest - Biogeosciences and Forestry, Volume 9, Issue 4, Pages 560-568 (2016)
doi: https://doi.org/10.3832/ifor1867-009
Published: May 12, 2016 - Copyright © 2016 SISEF

Research Articles

Collection/Special Issue: IUFRO division 8.02 - Mendel University Brno (Czech Republic) 2015
Coppice forests: past, present and future
Guest Editors: Tomas Vrska, Renzo Motta, Alex Mosseler


Most forest habitats, as defined and listed for their nature conservation importance in the Habitats Directive of the European Union and in the Bern Convention, result from centuries of human intervention. This paper explores the scope for, and the attitudes towards coppicing in Natura 2000 sites in some of the EU28 countries where coppice was historically one of the most important traditional silvicultural systems. A questionnaire survey was circulated to experts involved with Natura 2000 sites and case studies were conducted in Belgium, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Germany, Italy and the United Kingdom, to investigate attitudes to coppice silviculture within the framework of Natura 2000 site management plans. A list of forest habitat types capable of being managed as coppices was compiled and populated with sites at national and regional levels. At the regional level, management plans for the relevant forest habitat types in Natura 2000 sites were critically scrutinised together with other statutory, administrative or contractual measures. The results show that approaches to integrate coppice management into conservation plans differ widely. Examples of disparities are given and the possible causes discussed. A case is made for coppicing to be continued, where appropriate, as an important strategy in site management plans that aim to conserve habitats and improve forest biodiversity.

  Keywords


Habitats Directive, Natura 2000, Forest Habitat Types, Coppice, Biodiversity, Landscape

Authors’ address

(1)
Paola Mairota
Department of Agro-Environmental and Territorial Sciences, University of Bari “Aldo Moro”, v. Orabona 4, I-70125 Bari (Italy)
(2)
Peter Buckley
Peter Buckley Associates, 8 Long Row, Mersham, Ashford, Kent TN25 7HD (UK)
(3)
Christian Suchomel
Chair of Landscape Management, University of Freiburg, Tennenbacher Str. 4, 79106 Freiburg (Germany)
(4)
Katrin Heinsoo
Institute of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Estonian University of Life Sciences Kreutzwaldi 5, Tartu 51014 (Estonia)
(5)
Kris Verheyen
Forest & Nature Lab, Ghent University, Geraardsbergsesteenweg 267, 9090 Melle-Gontrode (Belgium)
(6)
Radim Hédl
Department of Vegetation Ecology, Institute of Botany, Czech Academy of Sciences, Lidická 25/27, 60200 Brno (Czech Republic)
(7)
Radim Hédl
Department of Botany, Faculty of Science, Palacký University, Šlechtitelu 27, 78371 Olomouc (Czech Republic)
(8)
Pier Giorgio Terzuolo
Roberto Sindaco
Istituto per le Piante da Legno e l’Ambiente (IPLA SpA), C.so Casale 476, 10132 Torino (Italy)
(9)
Anna Carpanelli
Regione Autonoma Friuli Venezia Giulia, Servizio tutela del paesaggio e biodiversità, v. Sabbadini 31, I-33100 Udine (Italy)

Corresponding author

 
Paola Mairota
paola.mairota@uniba.it

Citation

Mairota P, Buckley P, Suchomel C, Heinsoo K, Verheyen K, Hédl R, Terzuolo PG, Sindaco R, Carpanelli A (2016). Integrating conservation objectives into forest management: coppice management and forest habitats in Natura 2000 sites. iForest 9: 560-568. - doi: 10.3832/ifor1867-009

Academic Editor

Tomas Vrska

Paper history

Received: Sep 08, 2015
Accepted: Mar 21, 2016

First online: May 12, 2016
Publication Date: Aug 09, 2016
Publication Time: 1.73 months

Breakdown by View Type

(Waiting for server response...)

Article Usage

Total Article Views: 9620
(from publication date up to now)

Breakdown by View Type
HTML Page Views: 6643
Abstract Page Views: 276
PDF Downloads: 2101
Citation/Reference Downloads: 45
XML Downloads: 555

Web Metrics
Days since publication: 1311
Overall contacts: 9620
Avg. contacts per week: 51.37

Article Citations

Article citations are based on data periodically collected from the Clarivate Web of Science web site
(last update: Aug 2019)

Total number of cites (since 2016): 4
Average cites per year: 1.00

 

Publication Metrics

by Dimensions ©

Articles citing this article

List of the papers citing this article based on CrossRef Cited-by.

 
(1)
Bartha S, Merolli A, Campetella G, Canullo R (2008)
Changes of vascular plant diversity along a chronosequence of beech coppice stands, central Apennines, Italy. Plant Biosystem 142: 572-583.
CrossRef | Gscholar
(2)
Baskent EZ, Keles S (2005)
Spatial forest planning: a review. Ecological Modelling 188: 145-173.
CrossRef | Gscholar
(3)
Bormann FH, Likens GE (1979)
Pattern and process in a forested ecosystem. Springer, New York, USA, pp. 253.
Gscholar
(4)
Buckley GP (1992)
Ecology and management of coppice woodlands. Chapman & Hall, London, UK, pp. 336.
Online | Gscholar
(5)
Buckley GP, Mills J (2015)
The flora and fauna of coppice woods: winners and losers of active management or neglect? In: “Europe’s Changing Woods and Forests: From Wildwood to Managed Landscapes” (Kirby K, Watkins C eds). CABI, Wallingford, UK, pp. 129-139.
Online | Gscholar
(6)
Carey AB, Curtis RO (1996)
Conservation of biodiversity: a useful paradigm for forest ecosystem management. Wildlife Society Bulletin 24: 61-62.
Online | Gscholar
(7)
Chiarucci A, Araújo MB, Decocq G, Beierkuhnlein C, Fernández-Palacios JM (2010)
The concept of potential natural vegetation: an epitaph? Journal of Vegetation Science 21: 1172-1178.
CrossRef | Gscholar
(8)
Chiarucci A, Bacaro G, Rocchini D (2008)
Quantifying plant species diversity in a Natura 2000 network: old ideas and new proposals. Biological Conservation 141: 2608-2618.
CrossRef | Gscholar
(9)
Clarke PJ, Lawes MJ, Midgley JJ (2010)
Resprouting as a key functional trait in woody plants-challenges to developing new organizing principles. New Phytologist 188: 651-654.
CrossRef | Gscholar
(10)
Del Tredici P (2001)
Sprouting in temperate trees: a morphological and ecological review. The Botanical Review 67: 121-140.
CrossRef | Gscholar
(11)
European Commission (2000)
Managing Natura 2000 sites. The provisions of Article 6 of the Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg, pp. 69.
Gscholar
(12)
European Commission (2003)
Natura 2000 and forests “Challenges and opportunities” Interpretation guide. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg, pp. 101.
Gscholar
(13)
European Commission (2013a)
Guidelines on wilderness in Natura 2000. Technical Report 2013/069, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg, pp. 98.
Gscholar
(14)
European Commission (2013b)
Interpretation manual of European Union habitats, version EUR 28. European Commission, DG Environment, Bruxelles, Belgium, pp. 146.
Gscholar
(15)
European Commission (2015)
Regions in the European Union - Nomenclature of territorial units for statistics - NUTS 2013/EU28. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, pp. 140.
Gscholar
(16)
European Environmental Agency (2015)
State of Nature in the EU. Results from reporting under the nature directives 2007-2012. Technical Report 2/2015, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, pp 178.
Gscholar
(17)
Foster D, Swanson F, Aber J, Burke I, Brokaw DT, Knapp A (2003)
The importance of land-use legacies to ecology and conservation. BioScience 53: 77-89.
CrossRef | Gscholar
(18)
Franklin JF, Spies TA, Van Pelt R, Carey AB, Thornburg DA, Berg DR, Lindenmayer DB, Harmong ME, Keeton WS, Shaw DC, Bible K, Chen J (2002)
Disturbances and structural development of natural forest ecosystems with silvicultural implications, using Douglas-fir forests as an example. Forest Ecology and Management 155: 399-423.
CrossRef | Gscholar
(19)
Fuller RJ, Warren MS (1993)
Coppiced woodlands: their management for wildlife. Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough, UK, pp. 29.
Online | Gscholar
(20)
Garadnai J, Gimona A, Angelini E, Cervellini M, Campetella G, Canullo R (2010)
Scales and diversity responses to management in Beech coppices of central Apennines (Marche, Italy): from floristic relevés to functional groups. Braun-Blanquetia 46: 271-278.
Gscholar
(21)
Grohmann F (2005)
Introduction à la gestion forestière en Ombrie et présentation des activitées de la Région Ombrie dans le project RECOFORME [Introduction to forest management in Umbria and presentation of the activities of the Umbria Region within the framework of the RECOFORME Project]. Association Internationale Forêts Méditerranéennes, Cahier de site 5, Marseille, France, pp. 20-22. [in French]
Gscholar
(22)
Grohmann F, Savini P, Frattegiani M, (2002)
La matricinatura per gruppi. L’esperienza del progetto SUMMACOP [Group of standard retention. Experiences from the SUMMACOP Project]. Sherwood - Foreste e alberi oggi 80: 25-32. [in Italian]
Gscholar
(23)
Hunter ML (1990)
Wildlife, forests, and forestry. Principles of managing forests for biological diversity. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, USA, pp. 370.
Online | Gscholar
(24)
INFC (2005)
Inventario Nazionale delle Foreste e dei Serbatoi Forestali di Carbonio [National Inventory of Forests and of Forest Carbon Pools]. Ministero delle Politiche Agricole Alimentari e Forestali, Ispettorato Generale - Corpo Forestale dello Stato. Consiglio per la Ricerca e Sperimentazione in Agricoltura Unità di ricerca per il Monitoraggio e la Pianificazione Forestale (CRA-MPF). [in Italian]
Online | Gscholar
(25)
Kopecký M, Hédl R, Szabó P (2013)
Non- random extinctions dominate plant community changes in abandoned coppices. Journal of Applied Ecology 50: 79-87.
CrossRef | Gscholar
(26)
Leibundgut H (1981)
The natural regeneration of forests. Verlag Paul Haupt, Berlin, Germany, pp. 107.
Online | Gscholar
(27)
Loidi J, Fernández-González F (2012)
Potential natural vegetation: reburying or reboring? Journal of Vegetation Science 23: 596-604
CrossRef | Gscholar
(28)
Mairota P, Tellini Florenzano G, Piussi P (2006)
Gestione del bosco e conservazione della biodiversità: l’analisi eco-paesistica applicata a territori boscati della Toscana meridionale [Forest management and biodiversity conservation: landscape ecological analysis of wooded lands in southern Tuscany (Italy)]. In: “Selvicoltura sostenibile nei boschi cedui” [Sustainable silviculture in coppice woodlands] (Fabbio G ed). Annali CRA Istituto Sperimentale per la Selvicoltura 33: 187-230. [in Italian]
Gscholar
(29)
Mantau U, Saal U, Prins K, Steierer F, Lindner M, Verkerk H, Eggers J, Leek N, Oldenburger J, Asikainen A, Anttila P (2010)
EUwood - Real potential for changes in growth and use of EU forests. Final report, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany, pp. 160.
Online | Gscholar
(30)
Motta R, Berretti R, Dotta A, Motta Fre V, Terzuolo PG (2015)
Il governo misto [Mixed management]. Sherwood - Foreste e alberi oggi 211: 5-9. [in Italian]
Gscholar
(31)
Müllerová J, Hédl R, Szabó P (2015)
Coppice abandonment and its implications for species diversity in forest vegetation. Forest Ecology and Management 343: 88-100.
CrossRef | Gscholar
(32)
Oliver CD, Larson BC (1990)
Forest stand dynamics. McGraw-Hill, New York, USA, pp. 467.
Online | Gscholar
(33)
Piussi P, Alberti G (2015)
Selvicoltura generale. Boschi, società e tecniche colturali [Silviculture. Forests, societies, and coltural techniques]. Compagnia delle Foreste, Arezzo, Italy, pp. 432. [in Italian]
Gscholar
(34)
Sanderson N (2008)
Status of rare woodland plants and lichens. Plantlife, Salisbury, UK pp. 1-70.
Gscholar
(35)
Spies TA, Franklin JF (1996)
The diversity and maintenance of old-growth forests. In: “Biodiversity in Managed Landscapes: Theory and Practice” (Szaro RC, Johnston DW eds). Oxford University Press, New York, USA, pp. 296-314.
Online | Gscholar
(36)
Spitzer L, Konvicka M, Benes J, Tropek R, Tuf IH, Tufova J (2008)
Does closure of traditionally managed open woodlands threaten epigeic invertebrates? Effects of coppicing and high deer densities. Biological Conservation 141: 827-837.
CrossRef | Gscholar
(37)
Tellini Florenzano G, Campedelli T, Cutini S, Londi G (2012)
Bird diversity in Turkey oak (Quercus cerris) coppices and transitory stands in the northern Apennines. Forest@ - Journal of Silviculture and Forest Ecology 9: 185-197. [in Italian with English summary]
CrossRef | Gscholar
(38)
Tscharntke T, Hochberg ME, Rand TA, Resh VH, Krauss J (2007)
Author sequence and credit for contributions in multiauthored publications. PLoS Biology 5 (1): e18.
CrossRef | Gscholar
(39)
UN-ECE-FAO (2011)
The European forest sector outlook study II (EFSOS II). UN-ECE and FAO, United Nations, Geneva, Switzerland, pp. 111.
Online | Gscholar
(40)
Vild O, Roleček J, Hédl R, Kopecky M, Utinek D (2013)
Experimental restoration of coppice-with-standards: response of understorey vegetation from the conservation perspective. Forest Ecology and Management 310: 234-241.
CrossRef | Gscholar
(41)
Winkel G, Blondet M, Borrass L, Frei T, Geitzenauer M, Gruppe A, Jump A, Koning J, Sotirov M, Weiss G, Winter S, Turnhout E (2015)
The implementation of Natura 2000 in forests: a trans-and interdisciplinary assessment of challenges and choices. Environmental Science and Policy 52: 23-32.
CrossRef | Gscholar
 

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website