Techno-economically reasonable mechanization of tree planting has proved to be a difficult task in the Nordic working conditions. Although planting machines and combinations of base machine and planting device have been developed since the 1970s, mechanized planting has not been cost-competitive to manual planting. The aim of this study was to find out work time distributions, productivities, costs and effects of different work difficulty factors on productivities and costs of the state-of-the-art Nordic planting devices, Swedish Bracke and Finnish M-Planter, and to compare the devices with each other. The theory of comparative time studies was the base for the experimental design of this study. In the average working conditions, productivity (E 15 ) of M-Planter (236 seedlings/hour) was 36.0% higher than that of Bracke (174 seedlings/hour). Here, M-Planter performed planting work 23.4% cheaper than Bracke. However, the difference depended greatly on the working conditions; the more stones or stumps the smaller the difference, and the more slash the bigger the difference.

Economic result of forest regeneration chains, based either on spot mounding or on disc trenching and planting of Norway spruce (Picea abies [L.] Karst.) seedlings, were clarified and compared to each other. First, effects of soil preparation method on early development of Norway spruce stands were measured from field experiments. Second, the effects of soil preparation method on stand level management programs were modelled. The modelling was based on growth simulation and investment calculations. The soil preparation methods substantially affected early development of a stand. The density of the removed trees in early cleaning was 56% higher on the disc-trenched area compared to the spot-mounded area. The difference was especially high (120%), close by (<25 cm) the remained spruce seedlings. There was also a difference between the methods in the growth of crop spruces; at biological age of 8 years, the mean height of spruce was 110 cm on the spot-mounded area and 68 cm on the disc-trenched area. The differences led to divergent management programs between the areas. The disc-trenched area needed three young stand management operations whereas two was enough at the spot-mounded area. Although disc trenching is a less expensive method than spot mounding, the total management costs were higher in disc trenching than in spot mounding. Furthermore, incomes from the first commercial thinning were higher when regeneration based on spot mounding. At the interest rate of 3%, the investment in spot mounding had 329 € ha -1 higher net present value than the investment in disc trenching.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract