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

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...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Mairota P, Buckley P, Suchomel C, Heinsoo K, Verheyen K, Hédl R, Terzuolo Pier G, Sindaco R, Carpanelli A
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Italian Society of Silviculture and Forest Ecology (SISEF) 2016-08-01
Series:iForest - Biogeosciences and Forestry
Subjects:
Online Access:https://iforest.sisef.org/contents/?id=ifor1867-009
id doaj-c7f8dba0e0af4ba5a6c1fe4f20a2011b
record_format Article
spelling doaj-c7f8dba0e0af4ba5a6c1fe4f20a2011b2020-11-24T21:25:53ZengItalian Society of Silviculture and Forest Ecology (SISEF)iForest - Biogeosciences and Forestry1971-74581971-74582016-08-019156056810.3832/ifor1867-0091867Integrating conservation objectives into forest management: coppice management and forest habitats in Natura 2000 sitesMairota P0Buckley P1Suchomel C2Heinsoo K3Verheyen K4Hédl R5Terzuolo Pier G6Sindaco R7Carpanelli A8Department of Agro-Environmental and Territorial Sciences, University of Bari “Aldo Moro”, v. Orabona 4, I-70125 Bari (Italy)Peter Buckley Associates, 8 Long Row, Mersham, Ashford, Kent TN25 7HD (UK)Chair of Landscape Management, University of Freiburg, Tennenbacher Str. 4, 79106 Freiburg (Germany)Institute of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Estonian University of Life Sciences Kreutzwaldi 5, Tartu 51014 (Estonia)Forest & Nature Lab, Ghent University, Geraardsbergsesteenweg 267, 9090 Melle-Gontrode (Belgium)Department of Vegetation Ecology, Institute of Botany, Czech Academy of Sciences, Lidická 25/27, 60200 Brno (Czech Republic)Istituto per le Piante da Legno e l’Ambiente (IPLA SpA), C.so Casale 476, 10132 Torino (Italy)Istituto per le Piante da Legno e l’Ambiente (IPLA SpA), C.so Casale 476, 10132 Torino (Italy)Regione Autonoma Friuli Venezia Giulia, Servizio tutela del paesaggio e biodiversità, v. Sabbadini 31, I-33100 Udine (Italy)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.https://iforest.sisef.org/contents/?id=ifor1867-009Habitats DirectiveNatura 2000Forest Habitat TypesCoppiceBiodiversityLandscape
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Mairota P
Buckley P
Suchomel C
Heinsoo K
Verheyen K
Hédl R
Terzuolo Pier G
Sindaco R
Carpanelli A
spellingShingle Mairota P
Buckley P
Suchomel C
Heinsoo K
Verheyen K
Hédl R
Terzuolo Pier G
Sindaco R
Carpanelli A
Integrating conservation objectives into forest management: coppice management and forest habitats in Natura 2000 sites
iForest - Biogeosciences and Forestry
Habitats Directive
Natura 2000
Forest Habitat Types
Coppice
Biodiversity
Landscape
author_facet Mairota P
Buckley P
Suchomel C
Heinsoo K
Verheyen K
Hédl R
Terzuolo Pier G
Sindaco R
Carpanelli A
author_sort Mairota P
title Integrating conservation objectives into forest management: coppice management and forest habitats in Natura 2000 sites
title_short Integrating conservation objectives into forest management: coppice management and forest habitats in Natura 2000 sites
title_full Integrating conservation objectives into forest management: coppice management and forest habitats in Natura 2000 sites
title_fullStr Integrating conservation objectives into forest management: coppice management and forest habitats in Natura 2000 sites
title_full_unstemmed Integrating conservation objectives into forest management: coppice management and forest habitats in Natura 2000 sites
title_sort integrating conservation objectives into forest management: coppice management and forest habitats in natura 2000 sites
publisher Italian Society of Silviculture and Forest Ecology (SISEF)
series iForest - Biogeosciences and Forestry
issn 1971-7458
1971-7458
publishDate 2016-08-01
description 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.
topic Habitats Directive
Natura 2000
Forest Habitat Types
Coppice
Biodiversity
Landscape
url https://iforest.sisef.org/contents/?id=ifor1867-009
work_keys_str_mv AT mairotap integratingconservationobjectivesintoforestmanagementcoppicemanagementandforesthabitatsinnatura2000sites
AT buckleyp integratingconservationobjectivesintoforestmanagementcoppicemanagementandforesthabitatsinnatura2000sites
AT suchomelc integratingconservationobjectivesintoforestmanagementcoppicemanagementandforesthabitatsinnatura2000sites
AT heinsook integratingconservationobjectivesintoforestmanagementcoppicemanagementandforesthabitatsinnatura2000sites
AT verheyenk integratingconservationobjectivesintoforestmanagementcoppicemanagementandforesthabitatsinnatura2000sites
AT hedlr integratingconservationobjectivesintoforestmanagementcoppicemanagementandforesthabitatsinnatura2000sites
AT terzuolopierg integratingconservationobjectivesintoforestmanagementcoppicemanagementandforesthabitatsinnatura2000sites
AT sindacor integratingconservationobjectivesintoforestmanagementcoppicemanagementandforesthabitatsinnatura2000sites
AT carpanellia integratingconservationobjectivesintoforestmanagementcoppicemanagementandforesthabitatsinnatura2000sites
_version_ 1725982134640836608