Continuous cover forestry in Europe: usage and the knowledge gaps and challenges to wider adoption

Abstract

Abstract There is increasing interest across Europe in adopting forest management strategies, which promote species and structural diversity through the use of irregular silvicultural systems, an approach often described as continuous cover forestry (CCF). However, there is little information about the proportion of CCF practised across the continent or about the knowledge gaps and other obstacles that limit its use. A survey of respondents in 33 European countries sought to address these issues. The results indicated that the silvicultural systems associated with CCF were single stem, group selection and irregular shelterwood. Rotational forest management (RFM) was more frequent than CCF in about 66 per cent of countries, whereas in 25 per cent the reverse was true. We estimated that between 22 and 30 per cent of European forests are managed through CCF, although good data are lacking. The main knowledge gaps were: uncertainties arising from climate change (e.g. appropriate species choice, carbon storage in CCF), using CCF to increase forest resilience, deployment of mechanized harvesting systems, lack of knowledge about CCF amongst professional foresters and better information on economic implications of this approach. Major obstacles included: little awareness of CCF amongst forest owners, limited competence in CCF within the forestry profession and a scarcity of skilled forest workers to implement this approach, high ungulate populations damaging natural regeneration, a sawmilling sector geared to processing medium-sized logs, subsidy regimes favouring practices associated with RFM and a lack of experience in transforming plantation forests to more diverse structures. Better information on the use of different silvicultural systems is essential to allow policymakers and other stakeholders to monitor progress in diversifying forests. Establishment of a continental network of long-term operational trials (e.g. expanding the existing Association Futaie Irrégulière network) would improve professional understanding of CCF, would demonstrate this approach to forest owners and other stakeholders and could provide a valuable platform for supporting research.