Abstract
Policies that attempt to balance timber production with non-market values that forests provide are common across the United States. Such is the case in northern Maine, USA, where management of critical areas of mature softwood-dominated forest are regulated through the State’s primary wildlife management agency. We use a case study approach with qualitative and quantitative analyses to understand the persistent difficulties encountered by both forest and wildlife managers when implementing this policy. Interviews with foresters and wildlife biologists established the management parameters, and simulated management scenarios compared forest management outcomes with respect to both financial and wildlife habitat provision goals. The model results indicated that there are opportunities for comparable revenues within regulated habitat areas as without, although the returns varied due to legacy of previous management and species composition. More importantly, the interviews revealed that differing habitat metrics used by foresters and biologists are a barrier to communication and management planning, and thus also a barrier to effective policy implementation. We close with thoughts on the applicability of both the methods and results to other situations where an understanding of multiple-use forest policy implementation is desired.
Highlights
Sustained focus on multiple-use forest management in recent decades has inspired creative approaches for balancing conflicting objectives, and models to evaluate tradeoffs have proliferated [1]
In addition to the widespread silvicultural systems identified in the interviews, two other systems implemented within the study area were modeled: Diameter-limit harvesting and “irregular group shelterwood with reserves,” a femelschlag-like treatment first applied in the Penobscot Experimental Forest, a property co-managed by the University of Maine and the U.S Department of Agriculture, Forest Service for silvicultural research
The questions about management inside PDs elicited a greater variety of responses, including infrequent opportunistic harvests in which PDs were harvested if an outside-PD harvest happening nearby; low-intensity single-tree selection systems; group selection; and treatments similar to those applied outside of PDs
Summary
Sustained focus on multiple-use forest management in recent decades has inspired creative approaches for balancing conflicting objectives, and models to evaluate tradeoffs have proliferated [1]. One unique case of balancing wildlife habitat and timber production can be found in northern Maine, USA, where a State policy calls for commercial timberland to maintain, in delineated locations, a forest type that deer rely on to survive harsh winters. Of particular relevance in the context of multiple-use land management is Maine’s policy for white-tailed deer that protects critical areas of winter shelter, referred to locally as deeryards, through restricted timber harvesting. The implications of this policy can inform a wide audience of wildlife biologists, foresters, and policymakers involved in habitat management activities that restrict timber harvesting
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
