Managing forests for multiple benefits Karen Bayne & Graham Coker

Outline Forest structure Broader plantation forestry values Survey of land managers Multiple functions framework

Our forests and values

Our changing forests …. Pre-human Current Native Forest Current Total Forest Land use (2009) Pasture/arable 43% Other non-forest 26% Native forest 24% Plantation forest 6%

Monoculture plantation management

Plantation forested land is increasingly under SFM pressure Regulatory Social Environmental Land use competition Different motivations emerging for planting trees besides timber / fibre production

“Some communities put a much greater dollar value on the recreation they have in local forests than the annual value of the timber the forests produce”

Decision support tools

Multiple functions framework Selected 5 ‘low hanging fruit’ values that were known to be increasingly important in 2011  Amenity value/ recreational purpose  Bioenergy/ biofuels production  Carbon forestry (sequestration and emissions trading)  Diversity (fauna, insects, birdlife as indicators)  Erosion control and water conservation Anecdotal evidence  Workshops  Media articles; journal papers; studies Validated through our survey

How much do these considerations influence why you might plant trees? n = 153

Survey of land managers

Survey methodology Targeted survey of NZ land managers planting trees Online survey : n =186  57% managed land supporting woodlot forestry  52% of participants managed land supporting production forestry  36% of participants managed land supporting agricultural farming. 41% managed over 100ha of land Average age of respondents = 56yrs 95% male respondents Respondents evenly spread throughout nation

Survey instrument Assumption – Increasing resilience to multiple pressures will require species diversity Forced to choose from 22 non-radiata species Purpose twofold:  Assessing land manager perceptions of how different tree species contribute to the five forest functions  Perceptions of how different features of trees (attributes) impact on the ability to deliver each forest function

Survey variables 15 Attributes Attractive Foliage Attractive to Birds Deep Roots Disease Resistance Drought Tolerant Easy Establishment Fast Growth Fire Tolerant Frost Tolerant Insect Habitat Low Spread Nutrient Demanding Quality Timber Shade Tolerant Slow Growth 22 Species Abies grandis Agathis australis Cedrus libani var. libani Cupressocyparis leylandii Cupressus lusitanica Cupressus macrocarpa Eucalyptus bosistoana Eucalyptus fastigata Eucalyptus maidenii Kunzea ericoides Metrosideros excelsa Nothofagus spp. Pinus ayacahuite Pinus pinaster Pinus sylvestris Podocarpus totara Populus spp. Prunus spp. Salix spp. Sequoia sempervirens Sequoiadendron giganteum Thuja plicata

Results – Attributes of importance

Results – Functions of importance

Quantifying the gains of non-productive outcomes

Quantifying the gains of non-productive outcomes

Multiple functions framework

Tree attributes Function Site Silviculture Which attributes does this species possess? What function(s) utilise these attributes? Optimise functional performance through site selection Optimise regime to maximise Functional outcomes Which attributes should we be selecting for/ breeding for What species would be best to plant for this market and site? We have land available here Want to provide x market Future Decision-making framework

2. ID functional criteria (Economic, Social, Environmental, Cultural) Site requirements Silvicultural management 2. ID functional criteria (Economic, Social, Environmental, Cultural) Site requirements Silvicultural management 1. Select Function 3. Relating tree attributes to criteria 5. Weighted attributes for options 4. List alternative species options 6. Decision matrix for Species selection/ species mix

Sir Robert Watson “Valuing Nature” Conference. Wellington New Zealand 10 July 2013.

Species trials  To validate framework  6 species at four sites: Coastal Redwood (Sequoia sempervirens), Eucalyptus fastigata Totara (Podocarpus totara) Red Beech (Nothofagus fusca) Cypress “ovensii” European ash (Fraxinus excelsior)  Radiata pine planted as control spp.  REINFFORCE

Future research needs We have established replicated single species plots in trials.  Need for mixed species trials – interactions Attribute association with function  Surprisingly little published to date for many forest ecosystem services Model measurement framework  Gathering evidence and quantification from trials Decision-making framework and MCDM tools  Refinement and uptake by forest managers and land management consultants

Functions Attributes selection Measure and optimise Providing Regulating Cultural What’s new - is matching species for purpose …and the purpose has been broadened. Multiple functions require an understanding of attribute association with species performance Conclusions

Acknowledgements Thomas Paul Peter Clinton Simeon Smaill Kit Richards Trevor Stuthridge New Zealand Farm Forestry Assn