Rethinking Northern Hardwood Forest Management Paradigms with Silvicultural Systems Research: Research–Management Partnerships Ensure Relevance and Application

Abstract

Well-designed, robust partnerships are important for addressing forest resource problems that intersect diverse ownerships, management, and research expertise. Here, we describe a case study of a research–management partnership. First, we describe the rationale and design of a large-scale, long-term experiment focused on increasing the sustainability and resilience of managed northern hardwoods. With the experiment as context, we next discuss details of the partnership contributing to its success, as well as some challenges. The experiment is a Michigan-wide evaluation of silvicultural alternatives to the current paradigm of selection silviculture. Our goal is to identify combinations of silvicultural treatments that increase the diversity and density of sapling recruits over forested landscapes where deer-browsing pressure and other limiting factors are at play. Pretreatment data from our 140-site study bolstered justification for the research, with sapling and pole classes generally lacking adequate stocking and diversity of desirable species over large geographic extents. We anticipate that the wildlife and forestry research–management model used to develop this project will be useful for other rapidly developing challenges that cannot wait decades to be addressed without potentially catastrophic losses to forest function. Key beneficial elements of our partnership include: (1) sensitivity to information needs at all management levels (i.e., policy to practice), (2) capitalizing on differences in strengths and reward systems of managers and scientists, (3) structured, frequent scientist–manager meetings to maintain focus on research and management application outcomes, (4) long-term relations and support that build trust, and (5) explicit wildlife and forestry collaboration on problems requiring joint expertise. Challenges to our partnership generally revolved around communication, workload, and implementation issues, and were partially alleviated by planning.

Tree species size class patterns portend compositional shifts and low resilience in managed northern hardwood forests

“…The results for absolute density relations with key drivers (canopy density, deer, seed source density) from this study and others (Henry et al, 2021; Walters et al, 2022) indicate low density and stocking of sapling stems may also present a future challenge to sustainable management and resilience of NHFs. Eventual dominance is predicated upon successful recruitment beyond the deer browsing zone (Walters et al, 2016), which may be formidable in certain regions; previous analyses of our stands suggest understocking of poletimber in these stands (Walters, Roloff, et al, 2020), which further suggests uncertain canopy recruitment and a potential timber supply gap, making recruitment into the canopy of current advanced regeneration even more critical.…”

“…Our data are from 141 managed NHF stands distributed throughout northern Michigan, which are part of a larger experiment evaluating silvicultural alternatives to STS management (Walters, Roloff, et al, 2020). Here, we focus on pre‐harvest forest structure.…”

“…This is particularly important for developing meaningful assessments of regeneration success following harvest. Several factors, including shrub competition (Kern et al, 2013;Walters et al, 2016), deer browsing (Bradshaw & Waller, 2016;Côté et al, 2004;Henry et al, 2021;Miller et al, 2023;this paper), and light resource limitation (i.e., canopy BA, Henry et al, 2021;Walters et al, 2022; this paper), may assert strong and variable bottlenecks on seedling to sapling transitions such that tree seedlings are poor predictors of regeneration success (Harris et al, 2022;Walters, Farinosi, & Willis, 2020;Walters, Roloff, et al, 2020). Managers should focus on saplings (taller than 1.5 m and <10 cm dbh) for assessment of regeneration success following harvest or other management activity.…”

“…While STS management may contribute to low diversity in NHFs, alternative management systems can play a role in improving future diversity. Alternatives to STS, including more intense harvesting regimes, are being explored to improve regeneration outcomes (Hupperts et al, 2020; Rogers et al, 2021; Walters, Roloff, et al, 2020), including increasing diversity. For example, larger gaps or other more intense harvests (e.g., shelterwood harvests) or variable harvest intensity within stands may promote greater diversity via admixtures of both shade‐intolerant and ‐tolerant tree species (Niese & Strong, 1992; Walters et al, 2016).…”

Integrating Menominee model for sustainable forestry with Systems Thinking competency through 3D virtual tours

“…Forest management faces multiple challenges centered around long-time sustainability issues, such as forest degradation, decreasing natural resiliency, and divergent or conflicting stakeholder objectives (Lundmark et al 2021;Mederski et al 2021;Tang et al 2023;Walters et al 2021). Along with advancements in science and technology to improve forest management and better communicate these conflicts, transdisciplinary approaches, which involve stakeholder communities from the first stages of planning to the decision-making process, are increasingly recognized as essential for ensuring solutions are sustainable (Huang et al 2021;Kask et al 2018;Krätzig et al 2021;Azadani 2022;.…”