Skip to main content
Log in

Controlling spatial structure of forested landscapes: a case study towards landscape management

  • Published:
Landscape Ecology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper presents an overview of the landscape management design process and focuses on changes in forest landscape dynamics as a result of different harvesting patterns and initial landscape structure. A case study involved two different forest landscapes, one quite fragmented and the other little fragmented, with both covering the same total area and having similar forest age class distributions. The effects of four different harvesting patterns (scatter, negative edge distribution, edge progressive and nuclei progressive) and two different initial forest landscape structures on landscape fragmentation were explored using a GIS-based landscape management model (LANDMAN). The model suggested that future landscape patterns vary greatly according to initial landscape structure as well as to the four harvesting patterns. The scatter harvesting pattern created fragmented landscapes, while the nuclei progressive pattern significantly reduced fragmentation, regardless of initial spatial structure. Likewise, the negative edge distribution and edge progressive harvesting patterns tended also to reduce fragmentation. The model indicated that for a given harvesting pattern, fragmentation was generally reduced in the initially fragmented forest, whereas the clustered forest became fragmented initially, but later recovered. In conclusion, the case study demonstrated that geographically prescribed harvesting patterns, in combination with indicators of forest performance and landscape fragmentation, provide an opportunity to design management for the creation of alternative forest landscapes of significantly different spatial structure. The prerequisites for on-the-ground forest landscape management are a quantitative description of the forest landscape, a computer model, geographically-prescribed harvest interventions, an understanding of spatial forest dynamics, and a GIS-based management design process.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Baker, W.L., and Cai, Y. 1992. The r.le programs for multiscale analysis of landscape structure using the GRASS geographical information system. Landscape Ecology 7(4): 291–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baskent, E.Z., and Jordan, G.A. 1991. Spatial wood supply simulation modelling. The Forestry Chronicle, 67(6): 610–621.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baskent, E.Z. 1994. Data file designs and computer programs of the LANDMAN landscape management model. Unpublished manuscript.

  • Faculty of Forestry and Environmental Management, University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, iv C135 pp.

  • Baskent, E.Z., 1995. Forest landscape management: concept and practice: Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis. Faculty of Forestry and Environmental Management, University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, x C133 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baskent, E.Z., and Jordan, G.A. 1995. Characterizing spatial structure of forest landscapes: a hierarchical perspective. Can. J. For. Res. 25(11): 1830–1849.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baskerville, G.L. 1991. Concluding comments. Forestry Chronicle, 67(2): 117–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burgess, R.L and Sharpe, D.M. 1981. Forest Island Dynamics in Man-dominated Landscapes. Springer-Verlag, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, J., Franklin, J.F., and Spies, T.A. 1992. Vegetation response to edge environments in old growth Douglas-fir forests. Ecological Applications 2: 387–396.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chou, Y.H., Minnich, R.A,. Salazar, L.A., Power, J.D., and Dezzani, R.J. 1990. Spatial autocorrelation of wildfire distribution in the Idyllwild quadrangle, San Jacinto Mountain, California. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing, 56: 1507–1513.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, J.P., and Evans, F.C. 1954. Distance of nearest neighbour as a measure of spatial relationships in populations. Ecology, 35(4): 445–453.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cliff, A.D., and Ord, J.K. 1973. Spatial autocorrelation. Pion.

  • Costanza, R. 1989. What is ecological economics? Ecological Economics, 1(1): 1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forman, R.T.T. and Godron, M. 1986. Landscape Ecology. John and Sons, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franklin, J.F. 1993. Preserving biodiversity: species, ecosystems, or landscapes? Ecological Applications, 3(2): 202–205.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franklin, J.F., and Forman, R.T.T. 1987. Creating landscape structures by forest cutting ecological consequences and principles. Landscape Ecology, 1(1): 5–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gillis, A M. 1990. The new forestry: An ecosystem approach to land management. BioScience, 40(8): 558–562.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, T.H. 1978. Toward a framework for forest management decision-making in New Brunswick. TR-78. NB Dept. of Nat. Res., Fredericton, NB. 83 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, L.D. 1984. The Fragmented Forest: Island biogeography theory and the preservation of biotic diversity. University of Chicago Press. Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hilditch, J. 1968. An application of graph theory in pattern recognition. Machine Intelligence, 3: 325–347.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunter M.L. 1990. Wildlife, forests and forestry: principles of managing forests for biological diversity. Prectice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laurance, F.L., and Yensen, E. 1991. Predicting the impacts of edge effects in fragmented habitats. Biol. Conserv. 55: 77–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li, H., Franklin, J.F., Swanson, F.J., and Spies, T.A. 1993. Developing alternative forest cutting patterns: a simulation approach. Landscape Ecology, 8(1): 63–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGarigal, K. and Marks, B.J. 1994. FRAGSTATS: Spatial pattern analysis program for quantifying landscape structure. Unpublished report 67 pp, Forest Science Department, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon 97331.

    Google Scholar 

  • Methven, I.R. 1992. Forest land management in a hierarchical context: the importance of scale. In Canadian Pulp and Paper Association 73rd annual meeting, woodland section, Sep. 14-16, 1992, pp. E55–E60.

  • Mladenoff, D.J., White, M.A., Pastor, J, and Crow, T.R. 1993. Comparing spatial pattern in unaltered old-growth and disturbed forest landscapes. Ecological Applications, 3(2): 294–306.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, T.G.E., and Lockwood, C.G. 1991. The HSG wood supply model: description and user's manual. Information report PI-X-98, PNFI Forestry Canada 1990, pp 31.

  • Moran, P.A.P. 1948. The interpretation of statistical maps. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, series B 37: 243–251.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noss, F.R. 1989. Indicators for monitoring biodiversity: a hierarchical approach. Conservation Biology, 4(4): 355–364.

    Google Scholar 

  • O'Neill, R V., Krummel, J. R, Gardner, R. H., Sugihara, G., Jackson, B., DeAngelis, D. L., Milne, B. T., Turner, M. G., Zygmunt, B., Christensen, S. W., Dale, V. H., and Graham, R. L. 1988. Indices of landscape structure. Landscape Ecology, 1(3): 153–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Risser, P.G., Karr, J.R., and Forman, R.T.T. 1984. Landscape Ecology: directions and approaches. Special Publication No. 2. Illinois Natural History Survey, Urbana, Illinois.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salwasser, H. 1990. Gaining perspective: forestry for the future. Journal of Forestry, 88(11): 32–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seymour, R.R., and Hunter, M.L. 1992. New forestry in Eastern Spruce-Fir forests: principles and applications to Maine. Miscellaneous Publication 716, April 1992, Maine Agricultural Experiment Station, University of Maine.

  • Simberloff, D. 1993. How forest fragmentation hurts species and what to do about it. In Proceedings of sustainable ecological systems: implementing an ecological approach to land management. July 12-15, 1993, Flagstaff, Arizona. USDA Forest Service, General Technical Report RM-247, pp. 85–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spies, T.A., Ripple, W.J., and Bradshaw, G.A. 1994. Dynamics and pattern of a managed coniferous forest landscape in Oregon. Ecological Applications, 4(3): 555–568.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sprenger, J.C., and Van Veen, F. 1984. On extreme values of Moran's I and Geary's C. Geographical Analysis, 16(1): 17–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, F.J. and Franklin, J.F. 1992. New forestry principles from ecosystem analysis of Pacific Northwest forests. Ecological Applications, 2(3): 262–274.

    Google Scholar 

  • Temple, A.S. 1985. Predicting Impacts of habitat fragmentation on forest birds: a comparison of two models. In Wildlife 2000: Modelling habitat relationships of terrestrial vertebrates, Madison, Wisconson. Edited by M. L. Verner, Morrison, and C.J. Ralph. Wisconsin Press, Madison, Wisconson, pp. 301–304.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, M.G. 1989. Landscape ecology: the effect of pattern on process. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 20: 171–197.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallin, D.O., Swanson, F.J., and Marks, B. 1994. Landscape pattern response to change in pattern generation rules: land-use legacies in forestry. Ecological Applications, 4(3): 569–580.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilcove, D., McLellan, C.H., and Dobson, A.P. 1986. Habitat fragmentation in the temperate zone. In Conservation Biology, The Science of Scarcity and Diversity. Edited by, M.E. Soule. Sinauer Assc, Sunderland, Massachusetts. pp. 237–356.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Baskent, E.Z. Controlling spatial structure of forested landscapes: a case study towards landscape management. Landscape Ecology 14, 83–97 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008071307848

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008071307848

Navigation