Abstract
Mixed mountain forests, primarily made up of Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.), silver fir (Abies alba Mill.) and European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.), cover about 10 × 106 ha of submontane–subalpine altitudes in Europe. They provide invaluable ecosystem services, e.g. protection against avalanches, landslides or rockfall. However, pure Norway spruce stands have, since mediaeval times, been heavily promoted as productive stand types for salt works at sites naturally supporting mixed mountain forests. Damage to these secondary pure spruce stands has been steadily increasing in recent decades. Furthermore, due to their previous limitation due to low temperatures and a short growing season, forest ecosystems in higher elevations are expected to be strongly affected by climate warming. To address these problems, alternative management concepts are being intensively discussed. A possible option to improve the stability and resilience of the stand is the transformation from pure Norway spruce stands into site-appropriate, sustainable and stable mixed mountain forests. In this study, we have tested seven different transformation scenarios (e.g. slit, shelterwood and gap-coupes, strip clear-cutting, do-nothing) and their impact on five evaluation criteria (forest growth, economics, carbon sequestration, (stand) stability and biodiversity). As there are hardly any practical examples for some of the transformation scenarios available, we have used the forest growth simulator SILVA to assess whether the tested transformation scenarios differ in transformation success and to observe trade-offs between the criteria of evaluation. Of the investigated scenarios, we consider the ones with gap or slit-coupes with the most beneficial overall utility values for the portfolio of the five evaluation criteria. However, we showed with our results that it is possible, by means of several trajectories, to return destabilised forests to sustainable and stable systems. We showed that a transformation is realistic, even if sophisticated silvicultural concepts are not strictly pursued.
Highlights
In addition to the often promoted Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst), mixed mountain forests comprise silver fir (Abies alba Mill) and European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.)
In addition to topics in numerous studies on the economic aspects of forest transformation (Knoke et al 2001; Hanewinkel 2001; Knoke and Plusczyk 2001; Knoke et al 2008; Roessiger et al 2011; Messerer et al 2017; Beljan et al 2018), we investigated the effects of forest transformation on the habitat complex of mixed mountain forests taking a holistic approach
Apart from the strip clear-cut and the do-nothing scenario, all the methods were successful for transformation into semi-natural mixed forests at equilibrium
Summary
In addition to the often promoted Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst), mixed mountain forests comprise silver fir (Abies alba Mill) and European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.). European Journal of Forest Research (2020) 139:567–584 in mountainous areas, forests are of great ecological and socio-economic importance in Central and Eastern Europe due to their provision of various ecosystem goods and services The green infrastructure provided by forests is relevant in mountainous countries. Due to their importance in buffering against the consequences of harsh mountain environments, mountain areas frequently have a substantially higher forest share than low-elevation areas (EEA 2010). They constitute regional hotspots of forest C storage (Nabuurs et al 2008) and are estimated to contain 11% of current global biomass stocks (Erb et al 2018). In addition to providing regulating services to local communities, mountain forests are relevant for the global climate system
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
