Mölder a (2016). Small Forest Parcels, Management Diversity

Research Article ii FF o o r r e e s s t t doi: 10.3832/ifor1834-009 Biogeosciences and Forestry Vol. 9, pp. 518-528 IUFRO division 8.02 – Mendel University Brno (Czech Republic) 2015 “Coppice forests: past, present and future” Editors: Tomas Vrska, Renzo Motta, Alex Mosseler Small forest parcels, management diversity and valuable coppice habitats: an 18th century political compromise in the Osnabrück region (NW Germany) and its long-lasting legacy Andreas Mölder This study underlines the often under-estimated importance of forest ownership and land tenure in European forest biodiversity studies which are crucial for the management, structure, and tree species composition of woodland. In particular it is assumed that, in regions with both state-owned forests and smaller private forests, the latter contain more relict habitats shaped by historical woodland management practices. A government decree of 1721, a political compromise, was crucial to the present-day woodland ownership pattern and distribution of woodland habitats in the Osnabrück region (northwest Ger- many). It resulted in the privatization of woodlands held in common for cen- turies and created a huge number of small, private forest parcels in the 18th century. These developments are discussed in relation to Europe-wide pro- cesses in forest affairs. Mainly due to the low economic importance of these forest parcels, as well as the individualism of the forest owners, coppice structures providing valuable habitats have persisted until today. For instance, over-aged coppice stands provide important habitat conditions for saproxylic species and unique herbaceous layers. These valuable habitats must be protected while creating new coppice stands to eventually take their place in future decades. Management plans for Natura 2000 sites in the Osnabrück region should address this problem while reconciling any conflict of interests between private owners and nature conservation organizations. Researchers are encouraged to give more consideration to the important relationship between current woodland biodiversity and the history of forest ownership patterns. Keywords: Biodiversity Conservation, Forest History, Forest Ownership, Forest Policy, Historical Ecology, Land Tenure, Nature Conservation, Silviculture Introduction Bobiec 2012). Of particular interest are his- ment, which is frequently demanded by In Europe, the current distribution pat- torical woodland management practices conservationists, diminishes the relevant terns of woodland biotopes in the cultural such as coppicing, coppicing with stan- structures of culturally modified wood- landscape are the result of century-long dards and wood-pasture, which have resul- lands. Consequently, there is a conflict of human impact. Even woodland areas com- ted in woodland habitats that are nowa- interest in nature conservation (Lowenthal monly regarded as “ancient”, “virgin” or days highly valued by nature conservation 2005, Kopecky et al. 2013, Müllerová et al. “old-growth” forests feature a high density due to their rich biodiversity (Buckley 1992, 2015). of remnants of human settlement and acti- Groß & Konold 2010, Müllerová et al. 2015). On the regional scale, the structure of fo- vity (Dupouey et al. 2002, Rackham 2003, However, the cessation of forest manage- rest ownership and land tenure was frequently the main factor influencing the management, structure, and tree species Northwest German Forest Research Institute, Department A (Forest Growth), Section composition of woodland (Steen-Adams et Forest Conservation and Natural Forest Research, Grätzelstraße 2, D-37079 Göttingen (Ger- al. 2015, Rendenieks et al. 2015, Munteanu many) et al. 2016). However, the relationship between forest ownership patterns and @ Andreas Mölder ([email protected]) woodland biodiversity is an often underes- timated factor in European forest studies Received: Aug 31, 2015 - Accepted: Feb 22, 2016 (Lovett-Doust & Kuntz 2001, Schaich & Plie- ninger 2013, Bergès et al. 2013). Especially th Citation: Mölder A (2016). Small forest parcels, management diversity and valuable coppice from the late 18 century onwards, state- habitats: an 18th century political compromise in the Osnabrück region (NW Germany) and its run forest management and management long-lasting legacy. iForest 9: 518-528. – doi: 10.3832/ifor1834-009 [online 2016-03-17] by large land owners frequently led to highly effective, profit-oriented forest use Communicated by: Andrea Cutini (Fritzbøger 2004, Siiskonen 2007, Mölder et al. 2014). In contrast, the management in © SISEF http://www.sisef.it/iforest/ 518 iForest 9: 518-528 Mölder A - iForest 9: 518-528 y r cellent dissertation on the decline and divi- t s sion of the commons in the Osnabrück re- e r gion from 1927. More recently, Hans-Joa- o chim Behr and Stefan Brakensiek published F relevant papers (Behr 1970, Brakensiek d n 1994, 2002). a In the Osnabrück branch of the Lower s e Saxony State Archive, documents from the c th n 18 century forestry administration were e i obtained, in particular forest descriptions c s and detailed forest maps (indicated by o “Rep” or “K” in Box S1 in the Supplemen- e g tary material). Forest maps have been geo- o i referenced and evaluated using QGIS 2.6 B (QGIS Development Team 2014). – t s Previous history: the management e r of common property resources o F i Rise and height of the Markgenossenschaften Fig. 1 - The Osnabrück region. Woodland that has been continuously wooded since at Origins in the High Middle Ages least AD 1800 is considered as ancient. The ancient woodland data set was provided During the High Middle Ages, when the by the Lower Saxon Forest Planning Agency (NFP). Basic geodata: BKG (2012). population grew and natural resources be- came increasingly scarce in north-western smaller private or communal forests fre- tural woodlands would be dominated by Germany, institutional regulations of the quently kept historical practices up and deciduous tree species, especially Euro- usage of common land (Mark or Allmende was less intensive (Wiersum et al. 2005, pean beech (Fagus sylvatica) (Mölder in German) turned out to be inevitable. Siiskonen 2007, Von Lüpke et al. 2011). 2009). The present-day forest cover of the From the 12th century onwards, the forma- Throughout Europe, small private forests Osnabrück region is 20% (42 878 ha), and tion of so called Markgenossenschaften with a size up to 5 ha are very common the state forest area amounts to 6266 ha (cooperatives of the users of common (Schmithüsen & Hirsch 2010). It is assumed (Landkreis Osnabrück 2014, Mölder et al. land) was the usual solution (Middendorff that in regions with both state-owned 2015). 1927, Brakensiek 2002). Along with the es- forests and smaller private forests the lat- The landscape of the most southern part tablishment of the self-governing Mark- ter nowadays contain more relict species of the Osnabrück region is dominated by genossenschaften, a complex legal system bound to habitats shaped by less intensive the northwest-southeast oriented Teuto- developed, determining the usage rights of and historical woodland management prac- burg Forest hill range reaching an altitude the cooperative members and aimed at tices (Schaich & Plieninger 2013). of 331 m a.s.l. (Fig. 1). About 20 km north of preventing the depletion and devastation But which kind of political decisions in the the Teutoburg forest, beyond a varied cul- of the land. Local courts (Hölting or Mar- past led to the land tenure structures tural landscape and the city of Osnabrück, kengericht) were regularly held and visited which are obviously so important for biodi- the hill ranges of the Wiehengebirge (also by peasants and lords. The judges were lay versity patterns? Were there particular po- northwest-southeast oriented) reach an al- judges (Holzgraf or Holzrichter, literally litical events in the past that are still of titude of 211 m a.s.l. While the low-lying “wood judge”). These lay judges, as well as importance for current woodland manage- parts of the surrounding landscape have other persons who were granted privile- ment and habitat conditions? How were been widely cleared for agriculture and set- ged use of the common land (Erbexen), these decisions justified, and what was tlements, the hill ranges feature a long normally stemmed from the nobility. The their motivation and background? continuity of woodland cover (Herzog local courts examined infringements of To answer these questions, research was 1938, Mölder 2009). In the northern low- regulations and, since not all commoners conducted in the Osnabrück region, which lands of the Osnabrück region, ancient had the same specific rights, controlled the is part of the German federal state of Lo- woodlands are scattered and embedded graduated rights of usufruct. Offences wer Saxony. This region is a very suitable within an agricultural landscape. Many fo- were punished by fines (Klöntrup 1783, study area due to a wealth of historical and rest stands developed from 18th and 19th Stüve 1872, Middendorff 1927, Brakensiek ecological information and a mixture of century (conifer) afforestation of poor 2002). Several legal relationships existed smaller private and larger state-owned fo- quality sites (Herzog 1938, Hesmer & between the lords and the peasants, whe- rests. Schroeder 1963). reby the peasants were not personally free (Eigenbehörigkeit), but were provided with Study area and material Material: literature and historical secure land usage rights and had access to sources

Load more