When Active Management of high conservation value forests may erode biodiversity and damage ecosystems

The increase in extent and severity of disturbances such as wildfires and insect outbreaks in forests globally has led to calls for greater levels of “Active Management” (AM), including in High Conservation Value Forests (HCVF) such as old growth stands. AM includes such activities as thinning, selective logging of large trees (that are sometimes fire resistant), post-disturbance (salvage) logging, recurrent prescribed burning, and road building; singularly or in combinations. We urge caution when implementing these aspects of AM, especially in HCVF such as old growth stands, intact areas, and complex early seral forests. This is because AM may have substantial impacts on ecosystem conditions and biodiversity, and could amplify subsequent natural disturbances. We illustrate potential impacts of AM in HCVF in case studies from western North America and south-eastern Australia. AM has overlooked or downplayed collateral ecosystem damages in HCVF, including: (1) habitat needs of at-risk species, (2) thinning effects on ecosystem function, carbon emissions and biodiversity, (3) the role of stand-replacing or partial stand-replacing natural disturbances (e.g. wildfire, insect outbreaks) that produce complex early seral habitats, and (4) extensive road networks with associated impacts. We argue the underlying science to support AM may be lacking in some cases and that more scrutiny is needed to ensure objectives are supported by rigorous science, including transparency in identifying collateral damages and ways to mitigate them. Large reference areas such as extensive old growth stands are needed to assess the cumulative impacts of AM, especially in in HCVF where its potential effects on biodiversity are greatest. • Active Management (AM) is being widely advocated and applied in forests globally. • The potential impacts of AM on forest integrity are often ignored. • Scrutiny is needed in the application of AM in High Conservation Value Forests. • AM may erode habitat suitability, alter disturbance regimes and disrupt recovery. • Large intact reference areas are needed where AM is limited or excluded.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Biological Conservation
Published
2025-03-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2025.111071
Citations
10
Primary Topic
Forest Insect Ecology and Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
17.16
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

When Active Management of high conservation value forests may erode biodiversity and damage ecosystems

Chad T. Hanson, Diana L. Six, David B. Lindenmayer, Philip Zylstra et al.
10 citations
Biological Conservation
Forest Insect Ecology and Management
17.16
article

When Active Management of high conservation value forests may erode biodiversity and damage ecosystems

Chad T. Hanson, Diana L. Six, David B. Lindenmayer, Philip Zylstra, Dominick A. DellaSala
article en
10 citations

Abstract

The increase in extent and severity of disturbances such as wildfires and insect outbreaks in forests globally has led to calls for greater levels of “Active Management” (AM), including in High Conservation Value Forests (HCVF) such as old growth stands. AM includes such activities as thinning, selective logging of large trees (that are sometimes fire resistant), post-disturbance (salvage) logging, recurrent prescribed burning, and road building; singularly or in combinations. We urge caution when implementing these aspects of AM, especially in HCVF such as old growth stands, intact areas, and complex early seral forests. This is because AM may have substantial impacts on ecosystem conditions and biodiversity, and could amplify subsequent natural disturbances. We illustrate potential impacts of AM in HCVF in case studies from western North America and south-eastern Australia. AM has overlooked or downplayed collateral ecosystem damages in HCVF, including: (1) habitat needs of at-risk species, (2) thinning effects on ecosystem function, carbon emissions and biodiversity, (3) the role of stand-replacing or partial stand-replacing natural disturbances (e.g. wildfire, insect outbreaks) that produce complex early seral habitats, and (4) extensive road networks with associated impacts. We argue the underlying science to support AM may be lacking in some cases and that more scrutiny is needed to ensure objectives are supported by rigorous science, including transparency in identifying collateral damages and ways to mitigate them. Large reference areas such as extensive old growth stands are needed to assess the cumulative impacts of AM, especially in in HCVF where its potential effects on biodiversity are greatest. • Active Management (AM) is being widely advocated and applied in forests globally. • The potential impacts of AM on forest integrity are often ignored. • Scrutiny is needed in the application of AM in High Conservation Value Forests. • AM may erode habitat suitability, alter disturbance regimes and disrupt recovery. • Large intact reference areas are needed where AM is limited or excluded.

Biological ConservationVol. 305
Australian National University (AU), Curtin University (AU), Earth Island Institute (US), University of Montana (US)
Life in Land
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Forest Insect Ecology and Management
17.16
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.